Last week my wife, son and I rented a campervan for a tour of the Isle of Wight. Not being ones to do things the easy way, we stayed away from those enormous American "RV"s and the European luxury campers and instead rented Huckleberry.

Huc' is a Blue 1979 VW Combi T2 with a Westfalia 4 berth, lifting roof conversion. Huc isn't fast and anyone that has piloted a 40ft narrow boat will know how Huc is to steer and stop. His gear box was like a that of an old farm Land rover stuck in low ratio - imagine changing into third at 15mph and in top by 25mph but don't think of coming down to second above walking pace or into first whilst moving. Frankly put, there are more cost effective, more comfortable and more efficient ways to travel. But we loved him and enjoyed every journey.  
 
In the coming months, my family will be taking a trip from the UK to the USA and I'm really not looking forward to it. I'm really going to enjoy being there, but not the travelling. More specifically, I'm really, really not looking forward to the flight. Now, let us continue on the understanding that I love airplanes and aviation. I have no fear of flying and I even enjoy being in airports. So why did I find myself looking for one way crossings by sea?

Not withstanding that my son at two years old has about as much desire to sit still for 7 hours as a Marine before a fitness exam, my own experience of long haul travel has not presented me with a strong wish to make the event a regular occurrence.

I'm not a frequent traveller and for the purpose of this discussion we will have put to one side a return flight in Business Class with Continental a few years ago that wasn't my money and was a very pleasant experience.

I've flown to Australia on Singapore Airlines which had great service and no leg room. Actually, they are the one airline I have been on that I recommend. The one airline I haven't been on that I recommend is Emirates as they were such a tough customer they MUST be good to fly on.  

Flying Delta to the USA was pleasant enough after their Paris Airport rep decided for himself that even though I'd been in France for three years I had no right to live there and hence no right to board his plane. No I don't have a French passport, no I don't have a Carte d'Habitation this is the EU and you don't need one any more, no I don't have my ID badge from work as I don't work for a French company and I'm on holiday. Yes, you have just kept my 6 months pregnant wife standing for 45 minutes. By the time his boss came over to tell him it was OK, we were last in the queue and my opinion of his airline was ruined.

Continental took my good opinion of them and shredded it too. Coming back from Baltimore they cancelled my connecting flight from BWI to Newark and put me on the Amtrak. No problem, I can understand and I'd rather not fly through a thunderstorm either. What I cant understand is that having taken the earliest train, why did they close the check-in desk for my flight to the UK 5 minutes before the train got in? And why did they treat me like I hadn't bothered to get up in time to get there? I'd like to say that I complained...., what I actually did was spend an hour in the Customer Services queue waiting to complain before I decided to give up and talk my way onto the next flight. That in itself wasn't straightforward and I was amazed just how much suspicion and distain I was met with.

I quite enjoyed my flight with TWA all those years ago, but mostly as they were flying me out to Kansas City for a job interview. That flight was notable for my economy class sleeper seat - the 747 was so empty I had the middle 5 seats to myself so could lift the arm rests and lie down.

I don't want to make it sound like I have something against US airlines, I have had interesting experiences with UK airlines too. A couple of years ago I booked a flight with British Airways from Paris to London and found myself on a British Airways Connect Embraer 145. Now that aircraft is fantastic, a business jet with more seats, but it doesn't have much overhead locker space. So into the hold went my carry-on luggage and in with it went my wallet. On the flight when I asked for a cup of water I was told I could buy a bottle for £1, but they couldn't give me water in a cup. No wallet, no water... on British Airways?

So, I don't want to email myself to the USA and I dont want to sign away my family's right to be human beings in return for being handed a boarding pass. 

I guess that what I'm looking for is the Huckleberry of air travel. Find me a classic airline with DC4s, Britannias, Handley-Page Heralds or better still Empire class flying boats. Fly me in several stops, as this will break up the journey. Much longer of time to get there? No problem, I'm in no hurry. More noisy? OK, I'll live with that, just give me 1950s levels of service. I'd be happy to pay for the privilege as long as there were no hidden fees just for turning up.

This is the journey I'd look forward to for months and I'd never forget once we'd arrived.

A few weeks ago a friend of mine, an experienced glider pilot, used his newly acquired National Private Pilots’ Licence to take me for a flight in a Slingsby T61F Venture T Mk2. I'm not very familiar with the NPPL and it interested me that he had needed only 10 hours conversion from his Glider Pilots’ Licence to obtain what seemingly has all the advantages of a full PPL. Ten hours total, including an hour dual instruction in stall/spin awareness and avoidance, not less than an hour dual instrument appreciation and not less than 1 hour supervised solo flight.

It seems a very cost effective way into powered flight, but I was curious about the limitations and so I looked into it more. 

With an NPPL you are restricted to Visual Flight Rules (no bad weather or night flying), to only flying UK registered aircraft and you are restricted to no more than 3 passengers. As with a full PPL, you start with simple aircraft and can move onto more complex aircraft types, so wobbly props and retractable undercarriage are yours for the taking. You'll have to stay with single engine aircraft under 2000kg, but that includes some pretty serious kit including a Cessna 172.

With only 6 hours per year (4 of them as pilot in command) needed to keep you ticket current, keeping your licence shouldn’t be too expensive. A check ride with an instructor is needed every two years and you must have done 3 take-offs and landings within the last 90 days as solo pilot before you can fly with a passenger. None of this sounds too onerous.

The medical requirements? You need to be signed off by your own GP with the standards required similar to a UK Professional Driver's licence and the clearance only needs to be updated when you reach your 45th birthday.

The main restriction seems to be that the NPPL is not an internationally recognised qualification, so no hopping over the English Channel for lunch. For recreational flying in the UK, however, it seems ideal.

Want to convert to a full PPL? You can carry over 30 hours of training. Have a PPL with an expiring medical? You can get an NPPL level medical clearance and carry on flying with NPPL restrictions.

So starting from scratch you would need 32 flight hours plus check-flights, compared to 45 hours for a UK PPL, and you too could be enjoying evenings soaring over the British countryside with your friends. Don't take my word for it, start with nationalprivatepilotslicence.co.uk for more information.

As for the aircraft, the Slingsby is a self Launching Motor Glider mostly used by the gliding club to teach glider pilots how to safely land off-field, without actually landing off-field. Fortunately for me, it also makes a great aircraft for passing an hour suspended between rolling green hills below and imposing grey cloud above.

This is an aircraft the 1980s and I'm sure the interior is mostly the curtains from the house my family had at the time. It feels a world away from the Eurostar Microlight I blogged about before. Generally more stable, heavier in roll, light in pitch, the monowheel undercarriage with outriggers and flying from a grass strip (rather than nose wheel gear flying from tarmac) added to the sense of difference. The patina of use, worn seat pads and lightly scuffed paint on the cockpit rails gave me the warm feeling of familiarity, like a well loved and well used classic car. It seemed a nice contrast to the seemingly factory-fresh Eurostar.

I had great fun taking advantage of my friend's qualification and I had great confidence in his abilities - in my mind any pilot who normally starts the flight with an engine-out (or rather, one not actually fitted) is well equipped to deal with most emergencies our flight might encounter. The flight reminded me again how beautiful our country is and just how varied is our pilot community.

If you are reading this then I can confidently tell you two things. Firstly, that I am grateful for your visit and secondly, that your interest in aviation is matched by your comfort with electronic media; you chose to find Flight Global on the internet.

Ok, I'm not attempting to sell myself a some kind of mystic here and Derren Brown can rest easy knowing that is job is safe and that he could have me empty of mind and pocket as fast as anyone. But the second observation opens a door to a question: Do you, or should you use Twitter?

My friends and colleagues mostly fall into two categories when it comes to Twitter: Those who think it's a way for teenagers to waste away daylight hours and on the other side...., well, seemingly just me actually.

The thing is, it is true that there are a world of people on Twitter who are happy to share with everyone what they are about to eat, or what they think about the bit of navel fluff they have just found. More importantly however, there are the serious journalists, the industry followers, the companies and associations. These are the people in the know.

Think of it like this: I read Flight International for the features and analysis. I take my time with it and go through carefully. I read Flight Global for today's news. I generally do so at lunchtime when I have maybe fifteen minutes to see what's going on in the day. I read the Flight Global blogs, as and when I have a few minutes, to give myself an insight into the stories and for detail that didn't fit the published stories.

Getting the most from Twitter is all about filtering the mass of information generated by the World of Users (the "Tweeple" – yes I'm sorry, but I'm afraid there is a simple Twitter patois that can be learnt in seconds). Don't try to follow everyone. Rather, concentrate only on those consistently providing information (Tweets) that you are interested in.

Flight International: @RunwayGirl, @FlightBlogger, @TheDEWline, @jetwhine, @Hyperbola, @TerminalQ, @FlightGlobal.

Associations: @AOPAonline, @UKSBAC, @NoPlaneNoGain

Corporate: @raytheoncompany, @PrattandWhitney, @GE_Reports

Podcasters: @burnsidej and @jackhodgson (Uncontrolled Airspace), @TFPofFlying, @StephenForce (Airspeed)

Aviation Interests: @XH558 (Vulcan to the Sky), @APilotsStory

Aviation Enthusiasts & Journalists: @apgphoto, @787spotting, @PIBoeing, @AVWeb, @AeroNews

And finally, you are more than welcome to follow me (@GeneralEclectic) especially as I've just found a really, really interesting piece of navel fluff that I'd be really happy to tell you about.

I am completely exhausted. My brain is racing, my body is just not keeping up.

You see, I have just come home from Staverton (Gloucester) Airport where a very nice Flying Instructor by the name of Phil Matthews took me up in Mike India (MI) the Cotswold Aero Club's Eurostar Microlight.

This was a day that reminded me what it is I love about aviation and flying; what a fantastic way to spend an hour.

Forget any images of microlight as open cockpit, hang-glider with a motor. The Eurostar is an all metal two seat, low wing, Rotax powered "Three-Axis" aircraft.  

Now, I'm in no sense an experienced pilot but I have taken flights in amongst others Dh Chipmunks, Cessna 172 and 182s and I have solo'd in a Robin DR400-140. Nothing I have been in leapt off the runway like we did today. It felt like the wheels only turned a couple of times before we we flying and we climbed like a cable-launched glider.

Then up to 3000ft over the South West of the UK with scattered clouds a few hundred to a thousand feet above and traffic in the region varying from Cessna 150 to Citation, the Fairchild Swearingen Metroliner returning from the Isle of Man and several helicopters using the airfield for transport or training.

An hour of flying and the only time I wasn't in control of the aircraft was for take-off, the end of final approach and a simulated engine failure (by retarding the throttle), choosing and setting up for an engine-out landing in a local field before power on and climb-out. Note to self: think hard before asking the Instructor if he has a field picked out if the engine fails.

Cruise-climb, steady turns, clean and full-flap stalls, bouncing around in thermals and ridge wave turbulence, I even had fun taxiing.

So that's the story. I flew, I loved it.

Well, no actually. That's not the whole story.

A short while ago I wrote a preachy post about getting others interested in aviation. I said that I would take my son to the airfield to see if he would enjoy it.

So here he is:

.

My wife says while I was flying he sat still and watched the planes heading off and coming back, moving about the airfield and refuelling. This is a boy that never sits still.

If he never has anything more to do with aviation so be it. Today, like every day, I was proud of him. 

I once spent a week working in what was once the factory of the Martin Aircraft Company. This was company responsible for great flying boats, including the mammoth Martin Mars. The site is just to the east of Baltimore, MD and is right on the shores of Chesapeake Bay. They don't make aircraft there any more, though they are still a major supplier of aircraft systems, but the buildings retain the large doors and you can see the ramp that leads down to the water. I stopped, looked and imagined the aircraft rolling off the production line, down the ramp and into the water for a first flight.

My wife and I once went on holiday in Prince Edward Island, Canada. While we were there I tracked down a pilot with a Cessna 172 on floats and we took a tour of the province starting and ending from Charlottetown Harbour. It was just fantastic.

I love aquatic aviation. My lottery winnings would go on something that once saw the inside of the Grumman works and my favourite possession is a 1930s book on aerodynamics with a full chapter on Flying Boat hull design.

Of course, none of this information is for your benefit. It's for the attention of Mary Kirby and the Flight International staff. I've never been to the US Virgin Islands. I've never been in a Tw-Otter on floats. Mary Kirby has. She wrote all about it in this week's Flight.

So, Mary and our friends at Flight.., if your next assignment is anything like your last... do you need extra help carrying your laptop or camera? It doesn't have to be somewhere warm, just let it involve the words "Amphibious" or "Float". I'd be happy to write about the experience and my family would willingly provide their perspective. What do you say?

Or have I missed the boat…, so to speak.

It amazes me how different an experience one can have trying to do the same thing at two locations.

The "thing" was trying to investigate the how to book a trial flying lesson that my wife (will have) got me for Christmas.

My first attempt was at Kiddlington Airport in Oxfordshire. It's a very professional airport with a big flight training school and a small school for private pilot training. Except, try turning up on a grey Saturday at 4pm (2 hour's daylight left) and you'll not get in. The security staff were courteous, well informed and helpful. But I stayed out outside the walls and left with nothing but a phone number. My little lad looked bemused when I pointed through a gap between hangars and said "Aeroplane".

OK, so my son is only 17 months old, but the baby-signing sign for Aeroplane is his favourite, helped by the fact that our village is under the climb-out from RAF Brize Norton so the C17s give him plenty of chance to practice (Point, Aeroplane sign, "whoosh", Point, "That!", stare). I digress....

So Monday evening after work I headed to Gloucestershire Airport (Staverton, Cheltenham) and what a great experience. The staff in the Terminal Building were welcoming and helpful. A very nice lady in the flight training school did just the perfect job of welcoming a potential new recruit. "Trial Lesson? Sure. Book when you like or just call on the day to see if an instructor is free. Want a specific aircraft type? No problem, here are the registrations and just ask when you phone us to see if it is free. Microlight? Yes, we have one of those as well and it would be cheaper for you".

Add to this a good view of the apron and the runway threshold being right next to the entrance gate and a really good airport cafe / bar with a good view over the field and you have a really pleasant experience.

Now all that's left to do is take my son to see the aeroplanes..., oh, and there's the small matter of that flight.

I'm looking for some good news. The shine seems to have come off, you see, and I think we need some positive stories. What I am thinking is.... when was the last time you were gripped by a story about aviation? Did it involve something going wrong?....and what did your non-aviation friends say about it?

Think airports and the big stories are the proposed runway at Heathrow (or any alternative) and Terminal 5. Didn't it used to be about the promise of holidays and new locations? Or the efficacy of business travel for all?  Now I think airports and I think queues, eye-wateringly expensive carparks, walking miles through dingy corridors (Heathrow or Paris CDG) .

Think Airlines and do you think of glamour and excitement? Or fuel surcharges, delays or even aircraft not quite making it to the runway. It's great to think that our airliners are flown by heros (when they're not falling asleep), but people generally prefer not to have to swim to the terminal building.

The latest headline aviation programmes aren't exactly showering us all with glory in the press. Mentioning no names.

Of course, I might just be upset because I had a ticket to the Fairford Airshow on one of those days that was rained off. And the next time I watch an in-depth documentary about this or that near or actual plane crash my wife may well refuse to travel with me.

What I'm looking for is more aircraft racing and less aircraft disasters on TV. Go to the EAA website and watch the video about EAA: Airventure (otherwise known as Oshkosh), That's what I'm talking about. I would love to capture an ounce of that excitement and pass it on. There's a short scene in the film - it lasts for merely seconds - where a US military pilot is explaining something to an attentive young lad. I can't wait to share that kind of interest with my son. It might not be his thing, but here's hoping.

So what can we do? How about making a choice to go visit an aviation museum this year, like Coventry, Duxford, Hendon or Cosford and take someone who hasn't been yet? Start downloading the "Uncontrolled Airspace" podcast and let Jack, Dave & Jeb's entertaining (mostly) aviation ramblings entertain you and anyone who'll listen. For hardened aviation enthusiats there's always "One Six Right" to stir your soul, but for a more subtle approach there's a list of great and not so great movies on the forum thread here.

We've lost Steve Fossett, that great generator of positive aviation stories, but let us continue to support Virgin Galactic, Red Bull Air-Racing and the Rocket Racing League. For Christmas my wife got me a trial aircraft lesson (to be redeemed when the weather improves). Not that I intend to launch myself into a new career, I just haven't been in a light aircraft in a while. If pilot training is too much then how about a historic flight? Or if budget is the issue try gliding.

Just take someone with you.

The dawning of a New Year is traditionally a time for reflection and self examination. With this in mind, I find myself at a point where someone recently categorised me as "the one that's worked in lots of different places".

When I graduated, things in the Aerospace industry looked bleak. At the time I really had no expectations about entering what seemed a very limited (or should I say, "specific" or "focused") industry.

I'm a very nervous blogger. I've read too many horror stories of people being sacked for inadvertently saying the wrong thing. As a consultant / contractor the decision would be an easy one for my customers - no tribunal, no notice period, just "Your services are no longer required".

So, sorry folks but you won't be getting any inside track on any industry programmes, there will be no dirt dished and if I could find a whistle it would stay unblown. As it says on the sidebar of the blog, I am open to criticism, correction and abuse. Ask me nicely and I'll remove posts, ask me nastily and I'll fold like a pack of cards. Take offence at my username and I'll point out that I have no affiliations, that I'm generally eclectic in my outlook and that's really all it says about me. No-one should read anything else into it all..., family to feed and all that. Getting the picture?

So I was heartened to see that the IT policy of my current customer included a section on Blogging that was neither dismissive or prescriptive. Not in company time, don't talk about us or your work. That was about it. Sensible stuff.

I hope this doesn't count as talking about them..... Ah. Someone let me know if I need to find the delete button will you?

What working environment do you prefer to operate in? Do you prefer a rigid structure, rules and regulation..., or would you rather be left to get on with it? Now, obviously we're talking about the Aerospace industry so it's all relative and I'm not offering completely free reign. But have you ever thought about it?

I worked for one company where I had my first Design Review submission rejected because it wasn't printed on yellow paper. I was asked to modify one unit to include a shallow channel in the surface to reduce the risk of another part touching it - the drawing took half a day, the justification took nearly six months on and off. When I talk of Design Review I mean one opportunity a week to enter a room to face the great and the good. They regularly sent people packing, me included, for insufficient preparation. It was deeply, deeply frustrating.

I then moved to a company where much more complicated changes could be signed off in a day. Want to get a drawing signed off? Well, then you needed to walk round and persuade each of the signatories in turn and that meant that they didn't gang up on you. Designers were responsible for their own work and it was up to them, more or less, to ensure procedure was followed, justification was sufficient and everything was in place.

So which would you prefer?

The thing is, it's the first company that I remember the fondest and it was there that I did the better work. At the second, whilst the freedom to "do" seemed liberating, the effect of mistake was very time consuming - lots of investigation and lots of unpicking and studying of what had gone before. And therein lay the problem: there was always a faint suspicion that something wasn't as good as it could be. The free hand became partially paralysed by the lack of clarity and the consequence of going wrong.

Again, let me be clear that I'm talking in degrees here and the work was always robust. This is Aerospace and was always well regulated. But I still prefer to have had the reassurance that there is no way I could have done it better. The lessons I learnt at the first company, from each time I was sent packing, continue to stand me in good stead for my working life and give my customers confidence in my work.

A new personal record.

I started a new contract at a new company, at a new site, in a new town and on a product of which I have no specific experience. And on that very first day of work I was met by eight people I knew by name of and two or three more I know by sight.

They had been my customers, my colleagues, people who have worked for me and people I have worked for in various teams and various companies.

So the moral of this post is the same as the last: be aware of how you treat people and how you behave as sooner or later, if you work long enough in the Aerospace industry, you're bound to meet these people again.

It's been quite a while since I've posted anything on this blog and much has changed in the interim. Firstly, the contract I was working on in France ran to its conclusion, putting to an end a very enjoyable and educational three years in France. My wife, my son and I took the opportunity to tour Europe in a rented camper-van for (5 weeks, 4200 miles, 10 countries and 14 frontier crossings) before I started a new contract in the UK one day after the camper-van was handed back. You may imagine the logistical exercise that has been taking my attention up to now.

A quick observation about my time in France:-

My role was totally new to me. Representing an American aerospace company (the customer) and permanently based at the French supplier's factory, I was there to culturally and linguistically translate, to communicate, to chase, to cagole, to represent Programmes, Quality and Engineering. Outside work I joked that it was a perfect role because everyone around me was paid to keep the customer (me) happy, though often this was far, far from the truth. Before I took the contract, I had worked very closely with this French supplier in another role - I had been employed by one of their suppliers in the UK and they had been MY customer. Funnily enough it is better being the customer than the supplier and here's the lesson: don't mistreat your suppliers as in a small industry you never know how things might change.

Just to say, I had a good relationship with the French company as supplier and customer and I tried ever so hard not to be too smug in those first weeks when our roles reversed.

For all those who have never worked in an Aerospace Manufacturing environment, and surely there must be some out there, here is a quick beginners' guide to "Traceability".

When aircraft are assembled the aircraft manufacturer needs to know that the finished product conforms to the definition he Certified. That is to say, the everything in the aircraft is the same as the aircraft that passed the original certification - or individual component certification - and has been manufactured using the same processes. This is a HUGE simplification that doesn't mention the Modification process, variations due to the combined effect of drawing tolerances, accepted alternate processes and accepted non-conformances following a Concessions / Materials Review Board (MRB) / Dérogation procedure. (Pauses to catch breath).

To simplify this for all, purchased components are supplied with a magic piece of paper called a "Certificate of Conformity" (CofC) and if the supplier is authorised to do so they will also issue a Certificate of Release to Service (an EASA Form 1 or FAA Form 8130). The CofC is the link that forms the chain of evidence that helps the aircraft manufacturer to demonstrate to the authorities that all is well with the everything that goes into the aircraft.

These are important, powerful documents.

Except, of course, they're not. They are just bits of paper. What makes them so important is the regulation and control, the vigilance and the best practice of you and of all your suppliers. By accepting the value of the CofC you are accepting the ability of any given supplier and sub-supplier to promptly identify when things have gone awry during the manufacturing and assembly processes, to have isolated all other hardware with the same issue and to rectify by rework or repair every part supplied before each of the CofC's are signed. You are accepting that your supplier will not make changes to his or your design without supporting documentation and testing if required or without informing you. You are trusting that everything that goes into his component and everything that has happened to his component is exactly what he believes it to be. You are trusting that he has read, understood and complies with all of the possibly hundreds of specifications you have quoted as your requirements.  It starts to become clear how it could be that a CofC could be signed in good faith for non-conforming hardware.

I am in no means trying to undermine or undervalue this system; it is long tested and robust. The system works because the Industry expends a lot of energy to manage it. Suppliers gain contracts only after they can demonstrate that they have a working Quality and Concessions System. Manufacturers that purchase hardware have themselves a Quality process that includes review and periodic audit of their suppliers.

It suffices to say how important it is that these systems work and work well.

It might be considered easy enough to pass an audit if there are enough documents available to demonstrate the Quality system is active; but that would be the big picture and I am talking about details..., that would be the structure and I am talking about the attitude. Once the hardware is delivered, the magic of the paper starts to work and the aura of conformity can have the tendency to stick even to hardware that has since been identified as non-conforming. More than once I have heard "But it must be conforming, it has a CofC". Lips moving, eyes glazed by the power of the paper.

"Supplier Quality" is sometimes a small and orphaned department. They are often not directly related to their sibling "Manufacturing Quality" and their cousin "Concessions / MRB". They regularly come under great pressure from their more powerful relation "Manufacturing" or the sometimes overbearing parent "Programmes".  When things work well, their employees are quite difficult to track down as they are out visiting one supplier or another. If not then their people are mostly fire-fighting Quality "Escapes" discovered once the supplier parts have already made it to your production line. On their shoulders rests the responsibility of keeping the CofC system working.

It is for this reason I read with great interest the item in Flight by Lori Ranson, "FAA willing to improve oversight of manufacturer-supplier relationships". I will definitely be watching for how this subject develops.

In their day the Aerospace Industry was better...  ...they swear it regularly and tell me what a shame that I missed it.

I have two colleagues here with whom I regularly pass a lunchtime. Not being employed by the owner of the factory means that we're socially isolated from those around us, so we talk to each other about this and that. But there is a difference between us, apart from our three different nationalities, and that is my colleagues have a significantly longer history in the Aerospace Industry than I have, each in their own way.

So what is it that I missed? What I am told, forthrightly and with nodded confirmations, is that sometime around the late 80's or early 90's the Aerospace Industry became different: the halo faded, the mystique evaporated, it became less fun and more serious. That's a coincidence - I graduated in the early 90's.

I had assumed it was true for airline pilots and cabin crew; the difficulties in recruiting increasing now that the magic of the 50's and 60's has worn thin and people have realised that the expense and inconvenience of becoming and being an airline pilot or that cabin crew essentially spend long hours on their feet working in confined spaces for often unappreciative people. Gone the glow of Pilot as portrayed by Leonardo DiCaprio in "Catch Me if You Can", replaced by discussions about pilot workload and "Did they / didn't they both fall asleep whilst overflying their destination?".

But is the same true of the manufacturers and engineers? What could have changed that eroded this warm feeling? When I applied for university in the UK in the late 1980's, the number of people headed to engineering courses was dropping, but the number of people going into aerospace related courses was actually increasing. (note: this is a recollection, I have no evidence to present to support this). My university did add several other Aerospace related courses to their portfolio whilst I was studying there.

I can say that in my working career, such as it is, I have seen acquisitions and consolidation. The end of McDonnell Douglas in 1997 was a tough thing to watch as a recent aerospace graduate. Evolving techniques, sharp competition and cost reduction have been present along the way, but has this not always been the case? 

So were my fellow graduates and I really all too late to benefit from being in Aerospace? Can anyone tell me what changed?

I don't know if you've noticed, but everyone is getting younger. Yes, it might just be me getting older but I'm not so old as to be ready for my mid-life crisis just yet.

What I mean to say is the average age in the various engineering offices in which I have worked has been dropping considerably. When I was 28 I was in charge of an engineering team facing one of my then employer's biggest customers. And by "In charge" I mean the Lead Engineer and Engineering Team Leader. I was responsible for all the technical decision and the management of the people day to day, including doing their annual appraisals. I answered to the Head of Engineering and a Programme Manager, sure, but I calculated the team staffing levels, made the day to day engineering calls and signed off the drawings. I had already spent over a year running a team of 15.

OK big deal, I mean RJ Mitchell was the Chief Engineer at Supermarine before he was 30. Thing is, I'm not RJ Mitchell, Sir Frank Whittle, Barnes Wallis or Sir Sydney Camm. I love the aerospace industry but I am not the driven, focused, all or nothing character that designed the revolutionary. I am not Isambard Kingdom Brunel, driving great programmes against great odds. I am good at what I do, but not exceptional.

So it sets me thinking: where are these people? Or, just as importantly, where are the people that were apprentices in their offices. Where are the people that sat and watched an engineer draw out the springs and bellows and levers that made up the early jet engine fuel controls, or took down the readings from the gauges next to Sir Frank.

What perturbs me is that I'm afraid of is that they've all retired or passed on. At one company I know (and excuse me for being cryptic but I am operating a policy of not mentioning company names) a departing CEO bemoaned in the press that the average age of his engineering staff was in the late 20s. Their materials expert is only a handful of years out of university. That's the expert!

I have appreciated the opportunity that a young workforce has always given me, the progression I have made, but I know we make the same mistakes again and again. The world is changing, the products and techniques are changing and therefore the skills needed are changing, but have we enough people left that hold on to the feel for the subject?

Have we retained enough of the greatness now that the link is broken?