Well yes, Greenals 3 Fines, we do have the right to hold our own views but I think its dangerous for Static to use the argument that its dangerous for student/low hour pilots not to use his 3 degree approach (even in Cessna/Piper PA-999 Prentendaliners).
I would say its dangerous for student/low hour pilots:
(a) Not to know their aeroplanes in terms of speeds, rates of descent & climb, behaviour at low speed, trim, etc etc etc ad nauseam
(b) To be taught that one approach method is the only approach method
(c) Not to be able to reach the airfield or a suitable safe landing area in the event of power failure in the circuit
(d) Not to be able to make safe controlled approaches & landings in all flap configurations available
(e) Not to know how to effect extra height loss on finals with good speed control
(f) Not to be able to land on short runways
(g) Not to be able to fly non-standard approaches where local conditions (ie obstructions, housing) dictate.
(h) To think that Cessna & Piper light single engines are different to any other light single engined aircraft - I dont remember reading anywhere that the laws of aerodynamics differ in any way on these types.
(i) To think they are the only aircraft that matter in a crowded circuit
(j) To think that all airfields have people in the tower who will get you down safely with clever whizzbang technologies and lights.
Sorry Static, I went quiet on this previously but as you can see I'm not the only one who thinks this. In addition, you've now started to qualify your argument by bringing specific types into it.
It would be grossly misleading for students to take your views on board - at the end of the day let's entrust the arguments of safety down to the students' instructors, who I am sure are qualified and experienced enough to teach all the aspects covered above.
Whatever some cynics may say about instructors, all those I have met would, I am sure, agree with the above sentiments (a) to (j).