We got talking about experience vs. excellence. In the aviation industry, the former
I couldn't help but wonder about the legitimacy of this. I mean, sure, to a certain extent, experience is a necessary precursor to excellence, and yet, the more experience one has... well, I'm just saying that in my experience, it has not always been the case that the most experienced among us are necessarily the most excellent. I am thinking of many fine, younger or middle aged teachers who are incredibly committed and have a wealth of instructional repertoire at their fingertips, whereas their senior colleagues are, shall we say, not so in tune with what works for students and learning. (Of course, I also know many veteran teachers are are indeed excellent educators, I'm just saying that one does not necessarily equal the other in teaching.)
Perhaps the experience = excellence equation, while not ideal for teachers or other professionals, works well for pilots only.
And yet, I am tempted to consider the validity of such a simple equation. Surely not all 10 000 hours in a cockpit are equal. Take the example of the instuctor, who may spend more time flying in cicles (circuits) than actually gleaning the broad experience that someone who has flown a wide variety of aircraft for diverse airlines in different situations. Or consider two pilots who have both attained a rich diversity of experience, but one takes courses, reads aviation magazines, and often reflects on various incidents, and how they might have played out differently, dependent on pilot decision making. Are these two pilots, with the "same" experience, really at the same level of expertise?
I have noticed that the aviation industry tends to move a bit slowly.... whereas some industries are defined by change, it may take commercial airlines some time to research and realise that experience, while a necessary quantitative ingredient in defining pilot excellence, can only be truly used to determine same if it is examined from a qualitative perspective also.