View Single Post
Old November 18, 2012, 02:10 AM   #33
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
Last post on validity of specifically tailored instruction: among other things, I am a flight instructor. Instructed for the Navy, and hold CFI and CFII certificates.

Some instructors will not or cannot teach aerobatics. Aerobatic flight is relatively dangerous, compared to point A to point B flying (though it is pretty safe when instructed properly, with correct equipment and procedures). Teaching aerobatics can incur higher insurance premiums, and require more costly aircraft. Add the cost of parachutes and parachute upkeep, and many schools just don't find it profitable.

Does that make aerobatic training worthless? If it did, there would not be schools that specialize in aerobatics training.

Aside from being great fun, aerobatics offer two major benefits: first, they help a pilot develop more precise control of his aircraft; and second, they help a pilot learn upset recovery.

Such training comes in handy if a pilot manages to get into an out of control situation, whether induced by weather or turbulence from another aircraft. Several airline and corporate flight mishaps in the last couple decades could have had much happier endings if the pilots involved had received some aerobatic training. This is why many companies are putting pilots through upset recovery training in simulators, or even sending their pilots to aerobatics schools for upset recovery training.

Some people here, if their thoughts on weapons training were translated over to aviation, would just say "it is potentially risky and requires more specialized training, so obviously it is useless."

After all, it is easier and potentially less expensive to assume and establish training only for lowest common denominator abilities and needs.

Last edited by MLeake; November 18, 2012 at 02:52 AM.
MLeake is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.05265 seconds with 7 queries