Originally Posted by
RetiredBA/BY
Another turnback fatality. In the JP environment, ( where I was trained and instructed) back in the late 60s we stopped them after a number of accidents practising for an exceptionally unlikely event, in fact I can’t recall a single efato. .
Time to consign such practice, but not PFL, to the sim. ?
This case is not a turnback if, as I think, it is defined as an attempt to land on the reciprocal of the take-off runway.
Never mind. It is a serious exercise of skill, not as seriously risky as the late, long and expensive habit of practising for the loss of a Meteor or Canberra engine.
Yours is an answer to the existential question for a dedicated military pilot. I felt it was my business to be completely on top of my aircraft. Poking about in the dodgy corners of its performance was part of my job. That is an alternative answer.
I regret my feeling that the modern RAF thinks it can legislate away risk. The Hawk SI seems to be more concerned with its "contract" parameters than with failures of essential airmanship. Do its senior officers believe that its fighting assets will never be at risk ? As a civil transport pilot, do you really think that is a valid military policy ?