Originally Posted by
Rotorbee
Robbie, glad you'r back. In a way, you are right, but from a FI point of view, one wants her or his students to be clear, what they are talking about. Therefore it is legitimate to talk about the terms, because in the end that saves lifes.
As you can see, I do not agree with using both terms (again, from a FI view), because the whole situation is just too messed up. I recently read an old paper of the Navy (the culprit in this whole mess, apparently), where they use SWP in a slightly different way. This has to stop, just for the sake of new students.
Don't take the crab to serious. He really cares about all that stuff and that is a good thing.
Since we are done with the terms now, we can go back to Vuichard's thing, because if the NTSB finds out, that the R44 chopped it's tail of, because they were training Vuichard's method, we will have a lot to talk about.
You want a term that will chop the tail off? Yell out "add power" to a Robby pilot when you really mean "roll on throttle" as your 500 is approaching the ground while its rpm is decaying.
Anyway, if Vuchard is going to turn into one of those things that causes more accidents in practice than in reality, then maybe we don't need to fix something that wasn't broken.