I'm not really qualified to express much of an opinion, being a new PPL. But let me ask a question or two and exercise that business degree that paid so much for.
Obviously full training in every emergency procedure is important to all pilots. But from a PRACTICAL stand point, where is the line of cost/benefit between auto the ground, and an auto to a power recovery hover.
I would agree that knowing how to get all the way to the ground is the better way from a non-financial standpoint, but does it A) raise insurance rates? (which I assume increases training costs, rental/operating costs),
and/or
B) cause more accidents in practice then it does save airframes/lives in real EOLs? (Would you rather risk your airframe X times a week in practice, or once every Y years when you have a real engine failure?)
For my PPL, we only went to a low hover (Bell 47-G2). I've never done a full down auto (I hope to learn as I continue my training), so I don't know how difficult that last few feet is. I'm sure it is very difficult to get it smooth, and "pretty". It took a while to get the feel of power recovery, and make it look calm and orderly. In a real EOL, obviously smooth and pretty are secondary to surviving the landing, and reducing airframe damage. Experience leads to confidence and hopefully a calmer state of mind during an emergency, which hopefully leads to a higher survivability rate.
Anyone have numbers on the number of EOL incidents where that final few feet between the hover and a full down were the deciding factor? If you get the aircraft all the way to the hover (i.e. don't botch the entry, landing selection, maintain RRPM etc) what is % of times someone blew it in the final 5 feet?
What's the cost of that final 5 feet?
What's the cost if you're a pax and which pilot would you feel comfortable with?
Mike
Bell 47-G2
Northern Virginia, USA