For the experts here... Which means everybody

Kritchlow

Kritchlow

Final Approach
Joined
Dec 2, 2014
Messages
7,740
Display Name
Display name:
Kritchlow
Everyone here seems to jump on the first hint of the first nuance of the first possible slight variation to a gray rule... Yet, I consistently see the Commercial grade certificate (and others) referred to as "ratings". Nobody since I've been here has ever corrected that. It is NOT a rating, it is a grade of certificate.

Another (very small) inconsistency is when you call a new PP "pilot".

There are six grades of pilot certificates:

Student
Sport
Recreational
Private
Commercial
Airline Transport

Point is, as a student, once they have their medical, indeed have obtained the lowest grade of certificate.

I really and truly don't care about this. It is more just wondering why the anal perfectionists here let certain things go unchallenged.
 
Meh... I guess I just can't bring myself to care too much about the nuances of proper pilot licensure terminology. When I talk to non-pilots it is a "license", pilots usually call it a "rating" or a "certificate", and while a student pilot is technically a certificated pilot, in practice people never really seem to consider someone a pilot until they have either soloed or passed their first check ride (based on individual preferences here).
 
A license is an intangible noun. It's the permission you receive.

A certificate is a tangible noun. It is the document that is evidence that you have been granted your license.
 
I just ignore threads that have anything to do with logging time because I know the scenario the OP presents is going to be rediculous.
 
Kritchlow said:
...I really and truly don't care about this. It is more just wondering why the anal perfectionists here let certain things go unchallenged.
Click to expand...

So many minutia, so little time! :)

Seriously, while arguing minutia may seem pointless, I think it may actually have value as an intellectual exercise. Some of the debates center around things that are unimportant, but I think it's important for pilots to practice their ability to perceive and process details, because there are many situations in flying where details can make the difference between life and death.
 
Well if we're looking for minutia, we all have a slice of green polycarbonate material with some ink on it that claims to have the power over whether or not we can fly, while actually having none.

Various consequences of not having said polycarbonate may or may not occur, depending on your skill at stating both literally and figuratively off the radar.

Just like money, the only thing that makes that chunk of plastic a "certificate" is belief.
 
Last edited:
Kritchlow said:
Everyone here seems to jump on the first hint of the first nuance of the first possible slight variation to a gray rule... Yet, I consistently see the Commercial grade certificate (and others) referred to as "ratings". Nobody since I've been here has ever corrected that. It is NOT a rating, it is a grade of certificate.

Another (very small) inconsistency is when you call a new PP "pilot".

There are six grades of pilot certificates:

Student
Sport
Recreational
Private
Commercial
Airline Transport

Point is, as a student, once they have their medical, indeed have obtained the lowest grade of certificate.

I really and truly don't care about this. It is more just wondering why the anal perfectionists here let certain things go unchallenged.
Click to expand...

Dude. This makes you the first to "jump" on it.
 
Kritchlow said:
Everyone here seems to jump on the first hint of the first nuance of the first possible slight variation to a gray rule... Yet, I consistently see the Commercial grade certificate (and others) referred to as "ratings". Nobody since I've been here has ever corrected that.
Click to expand...
"Ever?" I don't recall whether I've done it on this particular board but I used to correct improper use of "certificate," "rating," and "endorsement." Even pointed out that (quote from a post) "90% of the confusion over Part 61 PIC logging issues can be resolved if people did not use "certificate," "rating," and "endorsement" interchangeably."

But at some point, you simply get tired of it and stop bothering.
 
I think the members have enough intuition to point out when somebody has a bonafide misunderstanding that causes them to use a term "rating" incorrectly, versus using it colloquially.
 
One of the first problems is that there really isn't any coded definitions of the various blessings.
What I have been presented with is often how I refer to them (as I'm sure others do):
--- Certificate --- piece of paper acknowledging an accomplishment (no more, no less)
--- Rating --- demonstrated ability and permission to accomplish a task or endeavour
--- License -- commissioned recognition of responsibility and authority to direct, manage, or act in a certain area of expertise or endeavour

So I really don't give a concern over titles
 
Last edited:
oldShar said:
One of the first problems is that there really isn't any coded definitions of the various blessings.
What I have been presented with is often how I refer to them (as I'm sure others do):
--- Certificate --- piece of paper acknowledging an accomplishment (no more, no less)
--- Rating --- demonstrated ability and permission to accomplish a task or endeavour
--- License -- commissioned recognition of responsibility and authority to direct, manage, or act in a certain area of expertise or endeavour

So I really don't give a concern over titles
Click to expand...

For one of those words, the precise definition matters, and that's "rating," because 61.51(e)(1)(i) says you can log pilot-in-command time when you're the sole manipulator of the controls of an aircraft for which you are "rated." FAR 1.1 narrows the definition of "rating" by specifying that it is a statement that is part of a certificate. That's why you don't need a high performance or complex endorsement to log PIC time in those aircraft, as long as someone who is qualified to act as pilot in command is present and agrees to take that responsibility.
 
If I did not have a good handle on my CDO, I'd starve trying to correct all the incorrect information, spelling and grammar here on them Ynterwebs, I wouldn't have any time to eat or sleep.
So I let it go. Let dumba**es be dumba**es. If they are not smart enough to recognize their mistakes and improve, who am I to call them out on it.
I used to try to improve people's grammar. I met with A LOT of resistance. Imagine that. :)

Now go make mistakes and be proud of them! :D
 
BigBadLou said:
...I used to try to improve people's grammar. I met with A LOT of resistance. Imagine that. :)...
Click to expand...

Some people seem to think it's some kind of put down, or an attempt to prove one's own superiority; however the motivation for me is that the carelessness in writing has gotten so epidemic that I fear that our ability to communicate with each other is becoming endangered.

And contrary to taking offense, when someone points out an error in my spelling or grammar, I thank them. :yes:
 
Don't forget it's Certificated Flight Instructor, not Certified Flight Instructor. A lot of people miss that one.
 
Kritchlow said:
Everyone here seems to jump on the first hint of the first nuance of the first possible slight variation to a gray rule... Yet, I consistently see the Commercial grade certificate (and others) referred to as "ratings". Nobody since I've been here has ever corrected that. It is NOT a rating, it is a grade of certificate.

Another (very small) inconsistency is when you call a new PP "pilot".

There are six grades of pilot certificates:

Student
Sport
Recreational
Private
Commercial
Airline Transport

Point is, as a student, once they have their medical, indeed have obtained the lowest grade of certificate.

I really and truly don't care about this. It is more just wondering why the anal perfectionists here let certain things go unchallenged.
Click to expand...

Is that a question from anal perfectionists?
 
Rex Kramer said:
Don't forget it's Certificated Flight Instructor, not Certified Flight Instructor. A lot of people miss that one.
Click to expand...

Don't be so sure about that...

One of my flight instructors was definitely certifiable!
 
.....
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    42.2 KB · Views: 5
52e054f2b14679fb8493deda669a01ae.jpg


:D
 
Rex Kramer said:
Don't forget it's Certificated Flight Instructor, not Certified Flight Instructor.
Click to expand...

Why do you think so? The official FAA title is simply Flight Instructor, and it's certainly accurate to say that they're certified as such. "Certificated" is a bloated bureaucratic way of saying the same thing. Many dictionaries don't even recognize "certificated" as an English word.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top