As stated, I think that Andrew's original question was fair, and appropriately cast to the internet aviation world for comment. Andrew is not asking for specific guidance or detail which would subvert the training efforts of his instructor, he's asking a question which is well agreed to be out of the norm.
As it is out of the norm, how could Andrew expect that his instructor would have answers as detailed, and broad as those he has received thus far on this forum? Maybe Andrew's instructor is super knowledgeable, but every bit as likely, that instructor is learning along with the rest of us. Instructors are certainly not the ultimate end source for information, particularly when it is beyond the scope of the required training.
stevenstokeroll's suggestion that Andrew look for a better instructor, simply based upon this learning effort on Andrew's part, is, in my opinion, silly! It seems to me that with 1270 views, and only 32 replies, to this thread, that a lot more people have a question about this, than an answer to offer! To expect an instructor to have all of these answers is unreasonable, and to suggest a change because they might not is even more so. There are few instructors who also have a detailed maintenance or certification background, so expecting them to know these design rationale is expecting way too much! Yeah, if they go to "look it up" that's good. They will probably end up asking on PPRuNe! The kind of aviation professionals who most likely have this experience, and these answers, cost a lot more by the hour than your average instructor, and there's a reason for that!
Andrew, ask away, that's what the forum is for, and don't start looking for a new instructor because of what a few nay sayers say here. 10,000 hour grey haired instructors are great if you can find them. But sometimes, you have to work with who you get. As an instructor, they may be new, but they demonstrated the required skills in pilot training, and understanding the deep down details of control systems are beyond those skills!
IF you make a normal turn in the C172 and the ailerons jammed, you would have a decent chance of stopping the turn with the rudder. But you would have to watch your airspeed as there will be much more drag slowing you down.
Well, yes. But if you ever had the 172 ailerons jammed, and the rudder keeping you straight, you'd have a heck of a time landing the aircraft, and that is an important final element of the flight!
Yes, they can be flown with the doors, but it would require a considerable amount of practice to get to the point where a landing would work out well. Despegue, have you tried this? Which way will a Cessna 1XX turn if you open the left door part way during cruise flight?
Aside from the aforementioned terrifying experience in the C206, I have had C 180 flaps jammed at 20 degrees (later found to be a track broken right off), a completely misrigged C 150 rudder, which became useless once airborne, a bent C 182 aileron pushrod, which dramatically changed the way he 182 flew, a runaway stabilizer on a C 185, elevators in a C 150 which were partly jammed, so as to prevent a normal flare to land, flaps which could not be retracted in a C 150, C 172, and C 177, and a spoiler which could not be retracted simultaneous with flaps which would not extend in a Mooney.
I'm not trying to say that all flight control problems can be managed, but many can. But then I do a lot of maintenance test flying - the most dangerous type of flying, I think. Today, one of the Thielert engines I was flying was very grumpy. The other one was fine though - I only really
needed one of them to run well!
Inquire, but don't worry about this Andrew, you'll be fine...