What's the deal with anti-Leather jackets?

I thought a toolbag was more of someone who spends all their off time on forums worrying about what other people are wearing...

Hair gel and my grey hair just don't mix....
 
Doug Taylor said:
Ayyyy! Mista CEE!
Click to expand...

:D

cover-fonz.jpg
 
PCL_128 said:
You're supposed to look like a pilot, not like the Fonz.
Click to expand...

Why can't a pilot look like the Fonz?

Besides, weren't pilots wearing leather jackets BEFORE the Fonz?

Which means the Fonz, to look hotsexy, TRIED to look like...


a leather-jacket-wearing pilot!
 
SeatClutcher said:
Why can't a pilot look like the Fonz?
Click to expand...

Because perception is reality, and the flying public's perception of what a pilot should look like is blazer, trousers, shirt, tie, and hat. It's been the same uniform for three-quarters of a century. Stop trying to mess with it. It works, and it's what the public expects to see.

Besides, weren't pilots wearing leather jackets BEFORE the Fonz?
Click to expand...

You have to go back to the airmail days to find pilots with leather jackets. It was the same time they were wearing leather scarfs and goggles. They were wearing these things because they were flying open-cockpit biplanes that left them exposed to the elements. I don't know about you, but I'm not exactly exposed to the elements at FL370 in my Boeing. PanAm changed the uniform to what is now the traditional pilots' uniform back in the 30s because they wanted something that appeared elegant and professional for their flying boat pilots. Every other airline followed suit, and it's been the traditional uniform ever since.

Which means the Fonz, to look hotsexy, TRIED to look like...
Click to expand...

The Fonz wore a leather jacket because it was supposed to show the audience that he was a "rebel." Remember Marlon Brando and his leather jacket from "The Wild Ones?" Leather has always been a symbol of rebellion. It's certainly not a symbol of tradition and professionalism. Passengers don't want to see a rebel or a maverick flying their airplane. They want to see a professional. The traditional uniform conveys that image. The leather jacket does not.
 
PCL_128 said:
You have to go back to the airmail days to find pilots with leather jackets. It was the same time they were wearing leather scarfs and goggles. They were wearing these things because they were flying open-cockpit biplanes that left them exposed to the elements. I don't know about you, but I'm not exactly exposed to the elements at FL370 in my Boeing. PanAm changed the uniform to what is now the traditional pilots' uniform back in the 30s because they wanted something that appeared elegant and professional for their flying boat pilots. Every other airline followed suit, and it's been the traditional uniform ever since.
Click to expand...
Sleep thru aviation history class, did ya?

Military aviators--whose uniforms those of airline pilots are modeled after--have worn leather jackets since the dawn of aviation, and continue to do so to this day. The US Air Force dropped them for awhile, but the US Navy never did.

Me, I'd rather look like a traditional aviator than a money-grubbing suit, but suit yourself. (pun intended)
 
We aren't talking about military aviation, we're talking about air line pilot uniforms. If you want to look like an F-18 driver, then go to OCS. If you want to fly airliners for a living, then look like an air line pilot.
 
Are we seriously having this discussion again?

Associating a professional pilot who wears a leather jacket with the Fonz? That is quite a stretch.

I'll be happy to continue wearing my leather jacket, feeling comfortable and professional.

:rolleyes:
 
PCL, you're full of it.

Professional pilots wear EITHER the leather jacket or the blazer. One is not more "professional" than the other. They are BOTH approved uniforms by almost every airline in the land, and will continue to be so for the forseeable future.

It really just comes down to personal preference. I prefer the blazer and overcoat, because in the Northeast, a leather jacket alone is inadequate to deal with the weather. Guys in more temperate climates prefer the leather. I'm going to LA next month. I'll let you know if I switch. I just might.
 
PCL_128 said:
Because perception is reality, and the flying public's perception of what a pilot should look like is blazer, trousers, shirt, tie, and hat. It's been the same uniform for three-quarters of a century. Stop trying to mess with it. It works, and it's what the public expects to see.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that the customer could care less whether the pilot wears the "traditional" uniform or a "modernized" uniform. What they would like is a comfortable ride, friendly employees and an on-time arrival. Problem is, we focus on a jacket when this industry is tanking quickly in each of those other areas.

You have to go back to the airmail days to find pilots with leather jackets. It was the same time they were wearing leather scarfs and goggles. They were wearing these things because they were flying open-cockpit biplanes that left them exposed to the elements. I don't know about you, but I'm not exactly exposed to the elements at FL370 in my Boeing. PanAm changed the uniform to what is now the traditional pilots' uniform back in the 30s because they wanted something that appeared elegant and professional for their flying boat pilots. Every other airline followed suit, and it's been the traditional uniform ever since.
Click to expand...

So what you are saying is, the airline uniform evolved over time due to changing conditions and perceptions? Interesting.

Leather has always been a symbol of rebellion. It's certainly not a symbol of tradition and professionalism. Passengers don't want to see a rebel or a maverick flying their airplane. They want to see a professional. The traditional uniform conveys that image. The leather jacket does not.
Click to expand...

So the pilots of the 20's and 30's who were wearing the leather jackets to fight off weather and working conditions were any less concerned with professionalism? They were rebels and mavericks who put fear into their passengers because of their attire?

At what point in this conversation should we address the changes in terms of airline service and amenities, as well as the changing attire of our customers?

See how foolish this argument is?
 
FlyChicaga said:
I'd argue that the customer could care less whether the pilot wears the "traditional" uniform or a "modernized" uniform. What they would like is a comfortable ride, friendly employees and an on-time arrival. Problem is, we focus on a jacket when this industry is tanking quickly in each of those other areas.
Click to expand...

They care about every one of those areas. If you think that the passengers aren't looking at you and "sizing you up" when you walk up to the gate, then you're dreaming. After they've made that initial first impression of you based on your appearance, all the good customer service in the world isn't going to do much to improve their perception of you. First impressions are very hard to change.

So what you are saying is, the airline uniform evolved over time due to changing conditions and perceptions? Interesting.
Click to expand...

So, exactly what environmental changes have occurred for air line pilots in their line of work during the last couple of decades to cause this change to a leather jacket? As soon as pilots got out of their open-cockpit biplanes, airlines changed the uniform to something that looked more professional than the leather. Unless your job has changed back to the old days of flying in the elements and getting pelted with rain and ice and the occasional bit of engine oil, there's no reason to go back to the less professional look of the leather jacket.

So the pilots of the 20's and 30's who were wearing the leather jackets to fight off weather and working conditions were any less concerned with professionalism? They were rebels and mavericks who put fear into their passengers because of their attire?
Click to expand...

Most of them weren't even flying passengers, and the passengers they did have were the risk-taking type for the most part. Flying in the early days of passenger airlines was considered a very risky mode of transportation by the general public. Pilots were mostly known from "barnstorming" airshows. They weren't exactly regarded as highly paid professionals.

At what point in this conversation should we address the changes in terms of airline service and amenities, as well as the changing attire of our customers?
Click to expand...

As far as I'm concerned, those issues aren't relevant to this debate. This debate is about the appearance of professional air line pilots. Amenities and customer attire are separate issues.

See how foolish this argument is?
Click to expand...

Yes, it's very foolish that decades of pilots have worn the traditional uniform without a problem, but the new generation of pilots think that they are too "cool" to put on a blazer or mess up their gelled hair with a hat.
 
[/QUOTE]Yes, it's very foolish that decades of pilots have worn the traditional uniform without a problem, but the new generation of pilots think that they are too "cool" to put on a blazer or mess up their gelled hair with a hat.[/QUOTE]

Well I guess my Dad who writes 25,000+ hours on his medical (he stopped counting about 10 years ago), can be lumped in with 20 year old RJ F/Os. He's been wearing the leather jacket for about 15 years and hasn't worn his hat in about 10. He'd probably spike his hair also if he didn't keep cutting it shorter as it gets grayer.

:D
 
CapnJim said:
If you don't wear a lether jacket with sewn-in epaulets, a hat, aviator sunglasses, an american flag tie, moustache, and have a Batman-syle utility belt of little gadgets and electronic devices strapped to your hips, and use CEO's first names like you two are old fishing buddies, then you're a complete toolbag IMO.

Bonus points for wearing your sunglasses in the terminal while talking on the cell phone, or, of not wearing them, then hanging them off your epaulets. Yeah. That's kickass.
Click to expand...

:rotfl:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top