Despite the shocking turn of events, Rosario managed to… safely bring the Cessna back to the airfield without damaging the aircraft.
What a bizarre thing to say. Well, phew, I guess. Lucky the aircraft wasn’t damaged by the single female pilot who already had her licence and was just building up hours. Me and all other males in the world would have expected her woman-brain to take over and cause her to panic-land while doing a backflip and simultaneously rolling her ankle or some shit apparently.
I’m seriously struggling to understand why “without damaging the aircraft” was added to the sentence.
I suppose. However this line then doesn’t sit right:
[The] student pilot named Rosario already had a private pilot license but was still building up her flying hours
Strictly speaking she was in the role of a student, but it’s not like she didn’t know what she was doing. If she already had a private pilot licence, what else is there to assume?
She was flying with a flight instructor in the role of student. I think that’s enough for a lay person to take those words at face value, not knowing what a PPL means. Even if they searched it up, they’d see 40 hours of flight time, and that’s similar to the requirement to give a teenager a driver’s license, and it may be hard to square that with landing a plane, which is a very intimating task to people who have mostly never flown an aircraft.
I’ve seen similar stories about incapacitated flight instructors and celebration of student pilots making it out safely, and I think the reporting is similarly “surprised” about a mere “student” getting out unscathed whether male or female.
To reinforce the point: This is a very stressful situation to place an experienced pilot in where essentially your copilot commits suicide during the flight. I’m sure there are a lot of experienced pilots who might make a mistake in the shock of that scenario.
Because when you’re a student it’s easy to fuck up and break things. Clipping trees cuz he came in at the wrong angle, landing too hard and fucking up the landing gear, colliding with a telephone wire, you get the idea. Now imagine all of that studentness and also your instructor just committed suicide. Now that’s in your brain too. So yeah it’s irrelevant fact.
Yes this headline is clearly intended to reinforce the patriarchy rather than to get clicks and sound more suspenseful. And everyone was thinking about the pilot’s gender before you brought it up.
What a bizarre thing to say. Well, phew, I guess. Lucky the aircraft wasn’t damaged by the single female pilot who already had her licence and was just building up hours. Me and all other males in the world would have expected her woman-brain to take over and cause her to panic-land while doing a backflip and simultaneously rolling her ankle or some shit apparently.
I’m seriously struggling to understand why “without damaging the aircraft” was added to the sentence.
Making the point about the damage is more relevant tan you making it a gender thing. But agree it was a strange note for a deadly situation.
Simple, people assume “student pilot” means doom without realizing how far along people fly with instructors.
I think it’s much to assume the surprise is about gender instead of the word “student”.
I suppose. However this line then doesn’t sit right:
Strictly speaking she was in the role of a student, but it’s not like she didn’t know what she was doing. If she already had a private pilot licence, what else is there to assume?
She was flying with a flight instructor in the role of student. I think that’s enough for a lay person to take those words at face value, not knowing what a PPL means. Even if they searched it up, they’d see 40 hours of flight time, and that’s similar to the requirement to give a teenager a driver’s license, and it may be hard to square that with landing a plane, which is a very intimating task to people who have mostly never flown an aircraft.
I’ve seen similar stories about incapacitated flight instructors and celebration of student pilots making it out safely, and I think the reporting is similarly “surprised” about a mere “student” getting out unscathed whether male or female.
To reinforce the point: This is a very stressful situation to place an experienced pilot in where essentially your copilot commits suicide during the flight. I’m sure there are a lot of experienced pilots who might make a mistake in the shock of that scenario.
Because when you’re a student it’s easy to fuck up and break things. Clipping trees cuz he came in at the wrong angle, landing too hard and fucking up the landing gear, colliding with a telephone wire, you get the idea. Now imagine all of that studentness and also your instructor just committed suicide. Now that’s in your brain too. So yeah it’s irrelevant fact.
Yes this headline is clearly intended to reinforce the patriarchy rather than to get clicks and sound more suspenseful. And everyone was thinking about the pilot’s gender before you brought it up.
But the headline says nothing about the gender of the pilot.
Could some english native tell me if that sentence was correct? I’m not dure about my usage of “the”
It was sarcasm. Your sentence was fine except the typo which has nothing to do with language skills.
Thanks.