The funny part, Mark, is that you've proven my point in your first post. Your entire post is one, big example of pilots not wanting to know objective measurement of their piloting skill. You said it yourself, that "measuring one's airmanship is a HORRIFIC practice", and then go on to explain all of the ways that the airlines train and evaluate around it. You state that as if it is undisputed fact, rather than simply your opinion on the matter.
I don't agree that measurement of individual merit is "horrific". I believe quite the opposite, that measurement of individual merit is crucial to knowing one's individual professional deficiencies. Only when you know your personal limits can you personally try to improve on them. One must be individually capable as an airman before they can be an effective member of a team. And yes, training to the point of failure rather than to the point of adequacy is how you find your limits. If you don't set the bar high, you don't know how high you can jump.
I would think that you, of all people, with your history in NCAA sports, would understand that concept. If one member of the team isn't individually competent, the team can make up for that weak point, but it doesn't advance the capability of the team or ensure there is a solid foundation for that team's performance. By the same token, my guess is that your team also did not set an "acceptable" level of performance and then practice weekly only just hard enough to achieve it.
If the airlines don't feel it is necessary to measure individual merit, and rather want to train and evaluate using all of the techniques you mention, I don't have an objection to that, and that's not my point anyway.
Sure, most airline pilots want to be really good at their job -- I completely agree with your statements on that. Pretty much everyone I know in the airline industry is a proud professional. Unfortunately, that is not an analog to wanting to be objectively highly skilled as an aviator. The mistake, in my opinion, is in the belief that that the skills required to succeed in the airlines are the outermost limits of the continuum of airmanship and skill. Ergo, pilots believing that passing training and successfully operating in the 121 environment is some sort of validation of being at the peak level of airmanship. The (false) belief that success in 121 training and operations is the end-all, be-all of aviation capability.
It isn't.
And -- here's the shocker -- neither is my previous career, either. I'm not claiming some kind of skill high ground here. I am, however, saying that there is a much larger world of aviation achievement out there other than 121 airline operations, and the "objective" measure goes out to those levels and beyond.
