AviationBanter - View Single Post

**Maxwell[_2_]** · May 1st 08, 01:50 AM posted to rec.aviation.student,rec.aviation.piloting

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in news:1ffcebed-9f5e-4e37-8f73-
:

On Apr 29, 3:00 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"Robert M. Gary" wrote in news:c269afe4-4bb2-45e6-

Airliners are different. Very different. They're not very speed stable
and they generally ahve more than one engine! There realy is no
comparison and it's this old saw that is usually drug up first when this
argument crops up. The other thing with airliners, though not so much
these days, is spool up times which is not a problem with small pistons.
Less busy, easier, cal it what you like, the stabilised approach in
general aviation has degraded skills.

As has nosewheels, GPS, etc. However, I see no movement to increase
insurance claims just to increase skills. I've done several primary
students in Mooneys. I certainly don't want them doing yank-n-bank
approaches on short final.

Well, do what you like. Also, someone who's done his initial training in a
Mooney would be missing out on his education as well.
I'm seeing more and more of the products of modern teaching methods in
professional aviation and the results are often not too pretty. Having
said
that, I'm not advocating a strictly stick and rudder approach to
education,
but I'm seeing it excluded more and more these days and I've seen several
accidents occur locally as a direct result.

Stabilised approaches are here to stay, but they are not safer nor are
they
superior in any way. That's not to say there isn't a movement agin 'em,
though.

Bertie

You apparently don't know jack **** about the safety of the traffic pattern.
What a dinosaur.