Primary training in a Hi Perf complex acft

Eeyore wrote:


For one thing you can't start by flying multi-engined aircraft.


Why not?

Newps wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
For one thing you can't start by flying multi-engined aircraft.
Why not?

You could, technically speaking. But it would be a lot of gravy on your
mashed potatoes, y'know?

A bit like learning to drive a stick in a Ferrari; sure, it can be done,
but you'll probably miss out on a lot of the finer technique, and man oh
man are you going to be sorry if you screw up (and you will ).

TheSmokingGnu

TheSmokingGnu writes:

A bit like learning to drive a stick in a Ferrari; sure, it can be done,
but you'll probably miss out on a lot of the finer technique, and man oh
man are you going to be sorry if you screw up (and you will ).

But it's a lot easier to go from a Ferrari to an Escort than the other way
around.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

TheSmokingGnu writes:

A bit like learning to drive a stick in a Ferrari; sure, it can be
done, but you'll probably miss out on a lot of the finer technique,
and man oh man are you going to be sorry if you screw up (and you
will ).

But it's a lot easier to go from a Ferrari to an Escort than the other
way around.


You're a complete idiotoooooo


Bertie

Newps wrote:

Eeyore wrote:

For one thing you can't start by flying multi-engined aircraft.

Why not?

Because they're more demanding. And I don't just mean they have 2 power levers.

Have you ever heard of the phrase 'trying to learn to run before you can walk' ?

Same goes for night flying and instrument flying.

Graham

Eeyore writes:

Because they're more demanding. And I don't just mean they
have 2 power levers.

I'm sure you don't just mean two power levers, because that's not very
demanding at all.

Have you ever heard of the phrase 'trying to learn to run
before you can walk' ?

Yes, but it doesn't apply here. Multiengine aircraft just aren't that
complicated. I don't know how this folk mythology developed, but it seems to
be part of a lot of unconditionally accepted "wisdom" that afflicts aviation.
I see it constantly asserted with religious fervor, but I don't see it proved,
and that's a bad sign.

Does it occur to anyone that the way pilots usually learn to fly today may not
be the _only_ way?

Same goes for night flying and instrument flying.

See above.

I don't see why you can't learn instrument flight, multiengine, complex, or
whatever, all at the same time. Of course it takes longer, but the overall
path to the final objective (PPL with the corresponding ratings) would be the
same. And I'm not convinced that HP or complex aircraft are more difficult to
fly, they are just different.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Eeyore writes:

Because they're more demanding. And I don't just mean they
have 2 power levers.

I'm sure you don't just mean two power levers, because that's not very
demanding at all.

Have you ever heard of the phrase 'trying to learn to run
before you can walk' ?

Yes, but it doesn't apply here. Multiengine aircraft just aren't that
complicated. I don't know how this folk mythology developed, but it
seems to be part of a lot of unconditionally accepted "wisdom" that
afflicts aviation. I see it constantly asserted with religious fervor,
but I don't see it proved, and that's a bad sign.

Does it occur to anyone that the way pilots usually learn to fly today
may not be the _only_ way?

Same goes for night flying and instrument flying.

See above.

I don't see why you can't learn instrument flight, multiengine,
complex, or whatever, all at the same time.

Of course you can't, fjukkwit. You can't learn anything...


Berti e