Originally Posted by
beardy
Perhaps that is something that will be included in the review that sparked this thread. Although I think that the cost of introduction and maintaining the supply chain would mitigate against it, especially when the principle objection so far seems to be comfort and not increased safety and there is an adequate product in use already.
I agree. If I were looking for safety features for Cadets and UAS studes then I would probably look for a Ballistic Recovery System (BRS - basically a parachute for the aircraft), 5-point seat harnesses, flying gloves, FR clothing (which doesn’t have to be a green growbag if we don’t want it to be), ballistic shades and headsets. In fact, there really is no need for aerobatic aircraft for Cadet ‘Air Experience Flights’ (the clue is in the title) and the vast majority of UAS students never get to solo aerobatics (the Core syllabus is only about 25-30 hours within which solo flight at around 10-15 hours is the pinnacle). If you have a few that get past the Core syllabus and the Advanced syllabus towards aerobatics then why not have the cheaper to maintain/operate Extra 200 for the few UAS studes that get to that stage? (I think I can answer that, the vast amount of aeros on the fleet are flown by instructors during SCT and the AEF pilots making Air Cadets sick!)