A reluctance to take the controls

"Scott Post" wrote in message
...
I think it's because I knew it would be a sham - I wouldn't really be
flying the plane, so why bother? It would have felt patronizing. I'd
flown with my wife enough to know how much is really involved with flying
a plane and I had great respect for her skills. Taking the yoke for a
bit after she'd trimmed for straight & level wouldn't really be flying
so it didn't seem worth doing.

While I'm a strong supporter of your right to your own opinion , I'd still
like to point out that there is a difference between "flying" and
"piloting".

IMHO, the point of offering the controls to a passenger is to allow them to
"fly". That is, there really is something enjoyable about simply being in
control of an aircraft, and this can be shared with passengers. It's not an
act of patronizing on the pilot's part, nor should the passenger feel that
their control of the aircraft is in any way diminished by their lack of
training.

To be a *pilot* does require quite a lot of training, as well as good
judgment and a variety of other personal qualities. But I don't see that as
any good reason for a passenger to not find *flying* "worth doing". And
even as a passenger without all the training and practice required to be a
"pilot", you certainly would have been "flying" the airplane, had you
accepted the opportunity to do so.

It's a moot point now, but I'll point out that you were probably flying the
airplane in your very first lesson (as all students do). The lack of
training should not have diminished the fact that you were flying, and just
as it shouldn't have then, it shouldn't in a non-training situation. The
only real difference between the two situations is that in one, a qualified
instructor is providing training. What *you* are doing is the same, and
that is flying.

Pete