Rich Lee Wrote "High speed, low level pop-ups and/or level deceleration techniques are a valid skill set for military pilots who may be required to operate in that environment. It is hard to justify this training to pilots who have no compelling reason to expose themselves to the risk of either low or high speed low level flight."
Cars, wires, fences, walls, poles, people, animals, bushes, trees, rivers, terrain, etc etc.. All of these are reason to know the performance limitations of your helicopter. Or do you suggest that a pilot just run into something and destroy the helicopter and cause potential injury to themselves when a safe landing could be performed with a cyclic climb? Maybe where you live all the ground is flat and there is always a nice flat open field available, but here the ground is rarely flat. Should a pilot have to land uphill, a cyclic climb is required to match the climbing terrain and prevent the thud of which you speak.
I do many things that other pilots consider unsafe because I know things they do not. For example, I hover at 15 feet in an R-22. #1, I have been taught successful hovering autos from this height, and #2, over 90 helicopters have been destroyed by dynamic rollover and none have been damaged from an engine failure in a hover.
So just because you think its unsafe and you are unwilling to learn something new, does not make it unsafe. I wouldn't attempt a no flare auto, but that doesn't mean I think it is unsafe. I simply wouldn't feel comfortable performing the manuever without a great deal of instruction.
Regards,
C.J.