tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4953008377950396317.post413177038639637187..comments2024-03-28T18:39:59.184-07:00Comments on SearchReSearch: Answer: What kind of pilot doubled in the past decade?Dan Russellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13603209997260423532noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4953008377950396317.post-26316819452769846502012-06-23T09:07:01.099-07:002012-06-23T09:07:01.099-07:00Numbers can lie, liars can use numbers. Happy tha...Numbers can lie, liars can use numbers. Happy that this discussion reveals the faults in this analysis.Steve in POKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00961897626485341587noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4953008377950396317.post-66805437608911367982012-06-22T11:14:23.102-07:002012-06-22T11:14:23.102-07:00It appears as if several other ratings are missing...It appears as if several other ratings are missing from your data, for instance you do not have "Aircraft Single Engine Sea", "Multi Engine", or "Instrument" to name a few.<br /><br />You are freely mixing ratings with certificates, so you will need additional ratings to make up for this.<br /><br />This data also does not account for the fact that a single certificate may hold multiple ratings. For instance I have both an "Aircraft Single Engine Land" and an "Aircraft Single Engine Sea" rating on a Private Pilot Certificate.701 Builderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09664249849051729489noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4953008377950396317.post-33229977123302921162012-06-22T05:45:52.339-07:002012-06-22T05:45:52.339-07:00And another lesson... read your data carefully. (...And another lesson... read your data carefully. (This is what comes of trying to get my post out on a deadline!) LOOK at the data, don't just accept it uncritically.Dan Russellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13603209997260423532noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4953008377950396317.post-74618415845275204102012-06-22T05:44:47.849-07:002012-06-22T05:44:47.849-07:00You know, I think you're right. See my post t...You know, I think you're right. See my post today!Dan Russellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13603209997260423532noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4953008377950396317.post-86580035545692109432012-06-22T05:35:14.752-07:002012-06-22T05:35:14.752-07:00@Tony -- you must be right.. I didn't notice t...@Tony -- you must be right.. I didn't notice that sudden jump in the numbers. This deserves more investigation! <br /><br />Stay tuned.Dan Russellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13603209997260423532noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4953008377950396317.post-37831105637439983062012-06-21T12:28:30.611-07:002012-06-21T12:28:30.611-07:00re: the UAV numbers, on the military side -
"...re: the UAV numbers, on the military side -<br /><i>"By 2012, the Air Force plans to increase the ranks of UAV pilots and air operations staffers to a total of 1,100. That is up from just over 450 Predator and Reaper operators today—and 180 just a couple of years ago."</i><br /><br />who knows if the number are "real"? Certainly it seems that UAV/UAS use domestically is poised to escalate dramatically - in both the governmental and private/commercial arenas. Google & Apple may be using autonomous aircraft to expand their mapping capabilities.<br />The FAA seems to be moving to accommodate the use of UAV/UAS in the air traffic system.<br />The SearchReSearch lesson may be to search within Google before using Google? or call Cupertino - hello SIRI, this is Majel....<br /><a href="http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2009/January%202009/0109UAV.aspx" rel="nofollow">UAV pilot numbers</a><br /><a href="http://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsid=6287" rel="nofollow">FAA UAS sheet</a><br /><a href="http://www.frost.com/prod/servlet/market-insight-top.pag?docid=236443867" rel="nofollow">UAV growth/Europe</a><br /><a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2012/06/11/broad_area_maritime_surveillance_demonstrator_navy_surveillance_drone_crashes_in_maryland_video_.html" rel="nofollow">BAMS-D Maryland - coming to a border near you</a><br /><a href="http://www.slashgear.com/googles-majel-siri-competition-fast-tracked-19234688/" rel="nofollow">Majel 6/27?</a>remmijhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17985809654574916217noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4953008377950396317.post-73387846618884175652012-06-21T11:15:16.312-07:002012-06-21T11:15:16.312-07:00I think that there's another search lesson her...I think that there's another search lesson here - namely to be critical with the data. <br /><br />Although glider pilots more than doubled between 2001 and 2011 this was because of the re-calibration between 2001/2002 when the 13,000 extra pilots were added in the figures. This means that the trend for glider pilots has been like all other categories i.e. pretty flat (small increases or decreases). The ONLY one that has shown real growth is rotocraft - but that didn't actually double although can very close to doubling. <br /><br />Also - it wasn't needed to add two lots of spreadsheet data together. As I and several others commented, all the data was available in one source. The secret was finding it. (Which is why I like Zanran.com - as it allows you to find stuff that other search engines cannot reach easily).Arthur Weisshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10213417718516627413noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4953008377950396317.post-68505102064673925742012-06-21T11:00:16.322-07:002012-06-21T11:00:16.322-07:00After re-re-reading the question and solution, I&#...After re-re-reading the question and solution, I'm definitely willing to retract part of #4. The wording was not as inaccurate as I made it out to be. The question clearly asks for a "category of pilot." However, I still feel the solution gives the wrong impression -- namely, that the total number of glider pilots has "more than doubled." <br /><br />Good stuff!Toast Kinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15462283118332151326noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4953008377950396317.post-72557292312387045682012-06-21T10:52:18.487-07:002012-06-21T10:52:18.487-07:00Just a few comments on this one....
1. I don'...Just a few comments on this one....<br /><br />1. I don't believe the glider-only numbers cited from 2001 are comparable to those cited from 2002-2011 due to a change in the counting methodology as indicated in one of the footnotes, which reads as follows:<br /><br />"Glider pilots are not required to have a medical examination. Beginning with 2002, glider pilots with another rating but no current medical are counted as 'Glider (only).'"<br /><br />I interpret this to mean that the numbers for 2002 include a population of glider-only pilots that are *not* counted in the 2001 numbers. Therefore, it's apples and oranges.<br /><br />Furthermore, you can see this in your raw data: All of the increase in glider-only certifications basically occurred between 2001 and 2002. In fact, the glider-only numbers have actually *decreased* (overall) since 2002. <br /><br />2. And while the *total* helicopter-only numbers don't quite meet the "more than doubled" threshold, the certification *classes* of "private helicopter-only" and "airline transport helicopter-only" do, in fact, each meet it. (The class of "commercial helicopter-only" certifications does not meet it.) This data is contained in the spreadsheets for "Table 7" on the same pages referenced in the solution post.<br /><br />3. I think it is important to emphasize that we're talking about the number of pilots who hold ONLY a rotocraft or glider certification. The number of pilots holding one or the other of these certifications IN COMBINATION WITH ONE OR MORE OTHER CERTIFICATES is much larger regardless of which certificate you're talking about. And by that standard (which is how I interpret the wording of the both the question and solution), *neither* type of license has "more than doubled" over the period in question.<br /><br />4. This gets to the wording of the original question. It asked to identify a "specific kind of... *license*," but the solution (intentional or otherwise) actually identifies something more akin to a "type of pilot" (i.e., one who holds *only* a particular type of license). I think the solution inaccurately suggests that the *total* number of glider pilots (i.e., pilots that hold a glider certificate, possibly in conjunction with other certificates) has more than doubled. If you look at the spreadsheets for "Table 8" for the years in question, you'll see that the *total* number of glider piltos has only increased by about 60% (17,885 in 2001 to 28,556 in 2011). <br /><br />I've really been enjoying these challenges, including the occasional (and intentional) false lead or inaccuracy in the initial question. That's part of search in the real world afterall! But in this case, I think the inaccuracies may have been unintentional.<br /><br />Thank you, and please keep the challenges coming!Toast Kinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15462283118332151326noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4953008377950396317.post-15734875952158637642012-06-21T10:36:42.455-07:002012-06-21T10:36:42.455-07:00As a glider pilot myself, this conclusion does not...As a glider pilot myself, this conclusion does not seem plausible. Doesn't it seem odd to you that all the growth purportedly occurred in one year?<br /><br />Apparently prior to 2002, the database you are using only included glider pilots with active medical certificates. <br /><br />See the discussion on rec.aviation.soaring<br />http://groups.google.com/group/rec.aviation.soaring/browse_thread/thread/b4a6e7be1ff88451#Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03828511278105683388noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4953008377950396317.post-28743673349232162912012-06-21T10:29:09.495-07:002012-06-21T10:29:09.495-07:00There a fatal problem with your data wrt glider pi...There a fatal problem with your data wrt glider pilots in 2001. See discussion<br />https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/rec.aviation.soaring/tKbnvh_4hFEPaul Khttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17617571205682853231noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4953008377950396317.post-46275017058978964652012-06-21T10:26:28.538-07:002012-06-21T10:26:28.538-07:00The jump in "glider pilots" from 2001 to...The jump in "glider pilots" from 2001 to 2002 comes from the FAA correcting a mistake they made in 2001. See discussion.<br /><br />https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!topic/rec.aviation.soaring/tKbnvh_4hFEPaul Khttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17617571205682853231noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4953008377950396317.post-17338369514433574302012-06-21T10:11:22.108-07:002012-06-21T10:11:22.108-07:00I suggest you return to the FAA web site and go to...I suggest you return to the FAA web site and go to Data and Research>US Civil Airmen Statistics, then pick a couple of years, 2011, and say 2003, so you can the full picture. Then refer to tables 8, and 17, and 18. Pay attention to the foot notes in table 8, 2003. You will get quite a different picture regarding glider pilots. There are approximately 35,000 glider pilots holding US ratings, but about 7900 are foreign nationals. The US total is dying off at the rate of several hundred per year. We are adding about 240/year.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18434991537351011266noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4953008377950396317.post-32842686768140121862012-06-21T10:06:14.864-07:002012-06-21T10:06:14.864-07:00I seem to recall that between 2001 and 2002 the FA...I seem to recall that between 2001 and 2002 the FAA changed their metrics for what constitutes a licensed glider pilot. Previously, they only considered as "licensed" pilots who had valid medical certificates of Class III or better. That obviously didn't work for glider pilots, since our licenses don't require a medical certificate. They later changed their metrics to include glider pilots who did not hold a medical certificate.<br /><br />Thanks, Bob K.BoKuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02095792838948887202noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4953008377950396317.post-7150014954386392852012-06-21T09:53:48.289-07:002012-06-21T09:53:48.289-07:00Either the data is wrong or the FAA changed the wa...Either the data is wrong or the FAA changed the way they count active glider pilots between 2001 and 2002. After 2002 the largest annual increase in certificated glider pilots was on the order of 200. There is no way that 13,000 new glider pilots earned their certificates between 2001 and 2002.Tonyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05997727369498806267noreply@blogger.com