Redundant skills

[WrongWayCorrigan]

A flying club close to my heart in the Far East has just gone into print to the effect that

"tail wheel flying skills are redundant" and pointless

and that ab initio students should be taught in aeroplanes with auto pilots and advanced GPS gizmos.

Am I a stick in the mud?

[foxmoth]

Depends what you want to do with your flying, for those that can afford these sort of machines and just want to fly from A - B this is the right way to go, but there are others who fly for fun rather than as a means of transport, and for those this attitude is totally wrong:rolleyes:

[FlyingForFun]

A car analagy.... learning to double de-clutch is redundant and pointless.

Well, yes it is if you only drive anything remotely modern. Many millions of drivers get around quite happily and safely without knowing how to double de-clutch, or even what it means.

But if you're interested in older cars, you might find the technique useful for changing into first gear while your old car is moving. And if you're into very old cars, you might find you can't get very far at all if you can't double de-clutch. For the modern car owner, learning the technique might be interesting and fun, and might help understand how things work, but it's certainly not essential.

I think tail-dragger skills are very similar. If you only fly tricycles, tail-dragger flying is a fun, interesting thing to have a go at. It will probably improve your landings in your tricycle, too. But there are thousands of pilots who manage quite safely without knowing the difference between a 3-pointer and a wheel-landing.

Personally, I think they're missing out on something. The same as I think that anyone who's never driven a car more than 25 years old is missing out on something. That's just my personal view, and I respect the views of others. But for a school to say something like that is, in my opinion, rubbish!

FFF
--------------

[18greens]

Tailwheel (or skid) skills are redundant if you never want to fly anything interesting.

If you are an 'I've got 50k and I need to fly a jet cigar tube' then the skill of flying is of no interest to you so the saying is true.

However the deep joy of a Piper cub in the evening cannot be surpassed. Additionally the Extra 300, Su29, Pitts , CAP 232 etc etc all fall into the same category and will be of no interest.

And FFF wrt...
The same as I think that anyone who's never driven a car more than 25 years old is missing out on something.

Have any of us flown anything that is less than 25 years old?

Who is this flying school anyway?

[WrongWayCorrigan]

Thank you, 18. One might as well say "flying skills are redundant. Let's just all push buttons".

[RVR800]

Its true to say that there is technological divergence when one compares airliners and the single crew light aircraft with the six-pack display that pilots traditionally train on to get their frozen 'airline' pilots licence.

That is why ICAO are launching the MPL rating in Nov 05 that will allow such ab-initio trainees to spend most of their flying training on multicrew airliners and sims rather that light aircraft. (its deemed a more relevant training environment)

[Say again s l o w l y]

A load of rubbish! Tailwheel skills are not redundant if there are still tailwheel a/c around and some still being produced. As said before, they are usually a lot more intereting than your average 'spamcan'. Hmmm Extra 300 or C150? I know which I'd rather fly!!

Learning to fly is not about learning to use advanced gizmo's such as GPS and auto pilots. They should be learnt only when you can do the basics competently.

What happens if all the electronic toys fail? It has happened before and will happen again.

I can't believe any school wouldn't equip it's students with the basic skills needed.

[WrongWayCorrigan]

Yes, SAS. There appears to be an increasing preference towards GPS over map reading skills.

These new Cessnas come with a sort of autopilot that holds your heading. What a laugh.

Why some-one would pay huge dollars to rent a single engined Cessna which flies itself? Why bother going flying at all?

I dunno. Beats me.

[MadamBreakneck]

Am I a stick in the mud? Less likely in a taildragger, I would have thought.

MB
:ok:

[unfazed]

I will Kick off with an essential skills checklist for wannabees regardless of where they gain the bit of paper ! These should be in your toolbox whatever you fly (YES I MEAN WHATEVER YOU FLY !)

1 - Sideslip
2 - grass field performance take-off
3 - Soft field take off
4 - Short field landing onto grass
5 - Spin recovery

[foxmoth]

(YES I MEAN WHATEVER YOU FLY !)

Don't have a lot of use for these when I am flying an A330 - especially not 2,3 and4. :uhoh:
(mind you they are all in my toolbox for when I fly lighter machines :cool: and I have used 1 in a B757 ;) )

[WrongWayCorrigan]

What a cocky person: how about no. #5

[unfazed]

Sorry but I was under the impression we were talking about ab initio students here, I don't think there are many who train on Airbus A320's for their initial license.

For spinning an A320 have you tried it in a SIM? If not why not?

Short field / performance etc in larger aircraft - what about emergencies ?

"Cocky" - what a brilliant word !

Just recalled that Airbus computer won\'t allow you to screw up by stalling / spinning !

Anyway the original post used the words AB INITIO !

Not cocky just honest !

[Onan the Clumsy]

Not exactly on topic, but why is the insurance requirement for t/w a/c set at a number of hours and not a number of cycles?

That doesnt' exactly make sense to me, in fact, have there not been tailwheel a/c that stayed aloft for > 24 hrs, even if only by having fuel passed up in milkl churns and a catwalk built around the engine for maintenance purposes? :ooh:


sorry for the thread drift.

[foxmoth]

Anyway the original post used the words AB INITIO !

Yes, but to then EMPHASISE- "YES I MEAN WHATEVER YOU FLY !" is IMHO expanding it beyond the origional post.

[unfazed]

Foxmoth - let me clarify

I MEAN WHATEVER YOU FLY (DURING YOUR AB INITIO TRAINING)

Apologies for applying a bit of logic and to those who were lucky enough to start flight training on Airbus and the like - well done to you all !!!

[Malcolm G O Payne]

Although it is not strictly relevant to the subject of this thread, th e reference by RVR800 to the proposed Multi Pilot Licence should be qualified by the fact that it will cost considerably more than the present CPL/IR and upon completion of the course the holder will not have the relevant experience for issue of a CPL. For further information see www.ainonline.com and enter MPL in the search box.

[stillin1]

Getting back to the question:cool:

Is it not simply the case that:

If you are going to / could find yourself needing to / could find yourself doing............

Have the relevant skills: ;)

KISS, live longer and be nice:ok: