I have spent a long time pondering the pros and cons of "point and power" since this thread began and as I have never been one to condemn something out of hand,I thought I would give it a go.Saturday was the first chance I had to go flying and I decided to try it on my first circuit and what a difference it makes,I am amazed! It was the easiest,stress-free landing I had ever made!No more dificult than driving a car downhill at a constant speed.
I think one of the main points of contention though is that I still believe that power should be the lead control for CHANGING height,be it a climb or descent,but the technique of using elevator to MAINTAIN an approach path is very easy and natural indeed.After all,why should it be any different from flying straight and level?Imagine how difficult it would be to maintain steady straight and level flight if we adopted power for the maintenance of the flight path.
The aircraft seemed to react much more predictably to the use of throttle for speed whereas previously if I was 5 knots too slow on the approach I would lower the nose and wait forever for the speed to rise and when it did,I was undershooting and needing power.I think the elevators can be used almost to an imperceptable degree to attain a steady approach path and it is possible to do it unconciously unlike power.
All in all,I am a convert to this method although I have to say as in my previous postings,students MUST be taught to lead with the throttle if an unexpected sink develops.
I am sure I would have gone first solo in a few hours if I had been taught this method early on,as one of the things I never used to like was the feeling of being a "passenger" on finals,as I used to feel using my old method.This new method is seems much more pro-active in making the plane go where you want it rather than sitting there wondering what it is going to do and only doing something when an error develops.This way gets rid of one of the factors,that of glide slope error and that has got to be a good thing.
El Cid