Chimbu Chuck
We are in heated agreement. I totally endorse you comprehensive discription.
I do not believe that at any point, I advocated the 20' gear down cut. Appropriate height and time would be a more accurate description. Horses for courses.
What I cannot understand is the oft quoted concept expoused by the likes of Aerocat, wherein they will commit a basically serviceable aircraft to the junk yard, when it is possible to safely salvage the situation.
From memory the certification requirements are, among other things, that the aircraft should be able to achieve 1% at 5000' ISA. Given that level of performance, a properly executed recovery at sea level (or near to) will pose no problems, unless climbing toward rising terrain tree's etc. Granted there may be some airframe degradation, but if the aircraft is damaged bad enough to erode the performance significantly, one should not be putting his signature on the maintenance release.
On the matter of standover tactics.
You and I are about to fly together. You in the LHS me in RHS. This can only be because you want something that I can give you, be that an endorsement, a renewal of an Instrument Rating or Instructor Rating, or the issue of some certification. this would be in my role as an ATO/FOI/Approved person/Chief Pilot/Chief Flying Instructor or any combination thereof. I have been approved and delegated by the regulator to conduct such operation.
Should you choose to dictate to me how I am to conduct such training/test, I will suggest you get someone else to do it for you, cos I will not. Regardless of the terms or what I intend to do/not do, and your considerable experience notwithstanding.
If you choose to take exception to my refusal to fly with you, you may:
1) Take your business elsewhere
2) Take the matter up with my superiors
3) take your complaint to the regulatory authority.
Maui