I'm not decrying Jan's efforts at all. I went to a school over that way that gave me a ride to and from sites that was very bumpy and not comfortable at all. Knew all about how to land in the wierdest places, but knew !!!!! about getting there and back - wrong side of the valley, wrong positioning, using too much power and ended up calling the trip off early because he was using too much fuel. It's an extremely useful trick to be able to get nearly 4 hours out of a jetbox or get most of the way up to a site just by using updraughts, and it isn't something you can "just pick up."
Flew with a non-instructor from another place, same area, and it was entirely satisfactory. The Bighorn guys at Springbank are good, as well.
I'm just pointing out to potential students that there's a lot more to flying in mountains than landing or taking off, and that not all instructors know what they are talking about. There is a lot of stuff taught in all areas of this industry that is just plain !!!!!e, and everybody assumes that what is taught in one part of it is valid for all other areas. Just because something's been taught for decades, doesn't mean to say it's right, and I've been questioning things ever since I got to Canada and saw the appalling standard of material available to train pilots with (not including From The Ground Up - being Canadian you will know who I mean
). Since Transport Canada now use my stuff for the exams, I reckon I do know something of what I speak about.
Different techniques are for different situations, and there are times when a certain approach is suitable and when it isn't. To be taught that there is only one type of approach (or rather, that "that's the only one we teach here") is not the mark of a good school in my opinion. You should be shown all the options and left to make your own decisions.
Naturally, I do not include Jan's outfit in these comments (if he's reading this, Hi again, Jan!), but there are one or two round there who could do with a shakeup.
Phil