need some opinion here...:(
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: HK
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
need some opinion here...:(
Hello...
Hope i am posting this at the right place and I apologize if this is not.
I am currently thinking of learning flying, getting my PPL. However, since the school offers helicopter lessons also, it got me into thinking. I have always been interested in the "fixed-wing" style plane and I really do not know much about helicopter that I will need some opinion here....
Are you flying helicopter or not? what made you make that choice or the other way?
Also, can anyone please give me idea on like what is some strengths or weaknesses of helicopters? or for "fixed wing" small aircraft?
thank you very much...
:
Hope i am posting this at the right place and I apologize if this is not.
I am currently thinking of learning flying, getting my PPL. However, since the school offers helicopter lessons also, it got me into thinking. I have always been interested in the "fixed-wing" style plane and I really do not know much about helicopter that I will need some opinion here....
Are you flying helicopter or not? what made you make that choice or the other way?
Also, can anyone please give me idea on like what is some strengths or weaknesses of helicopters? or for "fixed wing" small aircraft?
thank you very much...
:
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK Bucks
Age: 47
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Helicopters cost a lot more than aeroplanes, I guess about double, so for me it was one of my main reasons for doing fixed wing. But I am sure I will do a rotary licence in a few years.
I think a skilled rotary pilot could put a helicopter down safer and softer if the engine were to fail and he had enough altitude. But I agree, there is so much more to go wrong on a helicopter. Both mechanical and pilot error, I guess and aeroplane is far more forgiving
I think a skilled rotary pilot could put a helicopter down safer and softer if the engine were to fail and he had enough altitude. But I agree, there is so much more to go wrong on a helicopter. Both mechanical and pilot error, I guess and aeroplane is far more forgiving
Originally Posted by cessnasey
if the engin fails on a cessna, there is still hope.
Originally Posted by monkeybdg
Helicopters = engine failure is bad news
Ahhh, the power of ignorance! Don't believe everything that you hear in the 'clubhouse'. I can imagine that cessnasey and monkeybdg haven't even ever sat in a helicopter, let alone flown one.
For the record, the Bell 206 Jetranger is statisically the safest single engine AIRCRAFT in the world. Yep, safer than all of those Pipers and Cessnas etc etc.
My best advice: have an hour's Trial Lesson in both, then make up your mind. I'd start with the fixed-wing first, if I was you. Helicopters might be more expensive, much more challenging to learn to fly but they are more useful (the number of potential landing sites is practically unlimited) and, at the end of the day, much more fun!
Tin hat on.
Hope this helps,
B73
PS Before everyone jumps on my back, yes, I have soloed a Piper Warrior. So, yes, I am in a position to make comparisons...
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bravo Bravo73, the sound of common sense. However, I have never flown a fixed-thing thingy so I cannot make direct comparisons but, if I had a choice of an engine failure (single engine of course) in a helicopter or aeroplane, I'd go for the helicopter!!
Admittedly, during autorotation, you may well be descending at 1,000 fpm and you may well have been only at 2,000 in the first place but that is two whole minutes to pick your space to land! And we don't need much space!! We don't need a runway!! So, large gardens, small fields - that's all we need!
However, the cost per hour to fly even the cheapest R22 is just over double so much more costly. I wouldn't recommend a trial lesson in a helicopter because, if you do, you will be hooked straight away and then there would be no looking back and you would end up spending thousands more on your PPL.
Years and years ago, I had a flight in a small Cessna and I thought, "yeah, that was fun; I'd like to do that someday!" Then, four years ago, I had the opportunity to fly in the back of a Bolkow 105 (Police helicopter - quite military). As soon as I jumped out, grinning ear to ear, I said, "I've got to do that!" And within the year, I got my PPL(H). Fixed wing was fine but it was obviously not enough of a hold on me to make me want to do it. Heli was.
Get a fixed wing licence, build hours on that and do helicopter licence later. If you plan to go commercial and work as a pilot, then hours required for many jobs can be either fixed wing or heli - insurance companies don't seem that fussed!
Cheers
Whirls
Admittedly, during autorotation, you may well be descending at 1,000 fpm and you may well have been only at 2,000 in the first place but that is two whole minutes to pick your space to land! And we don't need much space!! We don't need a runway!! So, large gardens, small fields - that's all we need!
However, the cost per hour to fly even the cheapest R22 is just over double so much more costly. I wouldn't recommend a trial lesson in a helicopter because, if you do, you will be hooked straight away and then there would be no looking back and you would end up spending thousands more on your PPL.
Years and years ago, I had a flight in a small Cessna and I thought, "yeah, that was fun; I'd like to do that someday!" Then, four years ago, I had the opportunity to fly in the back of a Bolkow 105 (Police helicopter - quite military). As soon as I jumped out, grinning ear to ear, I said, "I've got to do that!" And within the year, I got my PPL(H). Fixed wing was fine but it was obviously not enough of a hold on me to make me want to do it. Heli was.
Get a fixed wing licence, build hours on that and do helicopter licence later. If you plan to go commercial and work as a pilot, then hours required for many jobs can be either fixed wing or heli - insurance companies don't seem that fussed!
Cheers
Whirls
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ivierre,
Ignore our fixed wing bretheren re engine failures, I'd rather be in a R22 looking for a small football pitch rather than trying to find a smooth, firm, long field. But more to the point, engines do not fail very often.
Your choice depends on two things: What you can afford and what you want out of your flying.
Someone more up to date than me will give you an accurate hire rate for an R22, but I think it is around £150+vat, instruction will cost another £50 -60 on top. Budget for at least 50 hours plus the cost of medical, books, exams etc. Once you have a ppl, try and fly at least an hour a month, although I would try for at least an hour a fortnight - it is just too much fun to do any less! Remeber this is just for an R22 (two seater). For greater flexibility a R44 (four seater) rating is well worth it. Helicopters open up a whole load of hotels, race courses, and back gardens (careful here, big back garden not surrounded by houses only) where as fixed wing are bound to airfields.
If you want to go touring long distance and be less affected by weather a fixed wing might be better. Instrument flying (flying in clouds) is relatively cheap in fixed wing, IF for helicopters is in the realms of double lotto winners (if you buy your own aircraft, hiring an IF helicopter is not cheap and availability will be an issue).
If you want a career out of flying, check out the rotorheads forum for a huge thread on becoming a professional helicopter pilot.
Don't forget to look at other options, eg gliding and microlights. Aviation is expensive and it is a shame to spend all your money on training and have none left for flying once you have your license.
Ignore our fixed wing bretheren re engine failures, I'd rather be in a R22 looking for a small football pitch rather than trying to find a smooth, firm, long field. But more to the point, engines do not fail very often.
Your choice depends on two things: What you can afford and what you want out of your flying.
Someone more up to date than me will give you an accurate hire rate for an R22, but I think it is around £150+vat, instruction will cost another £50 -60 on top. Budget for at least 50 hours plus the cost of medical, books, exams etc. Once you have a ppl, try and fly at least an hour a month, although I would try for at least an hour a fortnight - it is just too much fun to do any less! Remeber this is just for an R22 (two seater). For greater flexibility a R44 (four seater) rating is well worth it. Helicopters open up a whole load of hotels, race courses, and back gardens (careful here, big back garden not surrounded by houses only) where as fixed wing are bound to airfields.
If you want to go touring long distance and be less affected by weather a fixed wing might be better. Instrument flying (flying in clouds) is relatively cheap in fixed wing, IF for helicopters is in the realms of double lotto winners (if you buy your own aircraft, hiring an IF helicopter is not cheap and availability will be an issue).
If you want a career out of flying, check out the rotorheads forum for a huge thread on becoming a professional helicopter pilot.
Don't forget to look at other options, eg gliding and microlights. Aviation is expensive and it is a shame to spend all your money on training and have none left for flying once you have your license.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: HK
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thank you very much for the replies!
So helicopter is harder to learn than aeroplane? oh and so fixed wings planes are less affected by weather?
At this moment, I am not hoping to get a job out of being a pilot since it is very difficult....but no harm to know more....(of course i will visit the rotor head forum) So, usually professional helicopter will flight shorter distance than other fixed wings pilots?
thanks once again and sorry if I am asking some stupid questions here
So helicopter is harder to learn than aeroplane? oh and so fixed wings planes are less affected by weather?
At this moment, I am not hoping to get a job out of being a pilot since it is very difficult....but no harm to know more....(of course i will visit the rotor head forum) So, usually professional helicopter will flight shorter distance than other fixed wings pilots?
thanks once again and sorry if I am asking some stupid questions here
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No such thing as a stupid question, just stupid answers!
The point I was trying to make about the weather is this: We are limited to two types of flying, Visual Flight Rules (look out of the window and use the pretty view to navigate and fly by) and Instrument Flight Rules (nothing to see outside so use a miriad of dials and displays to navigate and fly by). Helicopters can fly VFR in poorer weather than fixed wing, but in reality, the weather that limits VFR in fixed wing is not much fun for helicopter flying.
IFR is much, much cheaper in fixed wing compared with rotary.
If you are merely flying for fun, you need not worry too much about IFR unless you want to do some serious a to b flying (ie have a time constraint).
Most professional helicopter pilots do very short trips (sometimes only a few minutes) although the pilots flying out to the oil rigs in the north sea can do some long sectors. Even so, we are only talking a couple of hundred miles at the most. But you will find with most A to B flying, the arriving and the departing are the most interesting bit, and for a helicopter they can be very interesting.
You will find that pilots fly for very different reasons. Some like the formal pseudo airline type flying, for others it is aerobatics or flying classic aircraft. Take your pick! Some would say helicopter pilots do it because at some stage in their life they became unhinged!!!
The point I was trying to make about the weather is this: We are limited to two types of flying, Visual Flight Rules (look out of the window and use the pretty view to navigate and fly by) and Instrument Flight Rules (nothing to see outside so use a miriad of dials and displays to navigate and fly by). Helicopters can fly VFR in poorer weather than fixed wing, but in reality, the weather that limits VFR in fixed wing is not much fun for helicopter flying.
IFR is much, much cheaper in fixed wing compared with rotary.
If you are merely flying for fun, you need not worry too much about IFR unless you want to do some serious a to b flying (ie have a time constraint).
Most professional helicopter pilots do very short trips (sometimes only a few minutes) although the pilots flying out to the oil rigs in the north sea can do some long sectors. Even so, we are only talking a couple of hundred miles at the most. But you will find with most A to B flying, the arriving and the departing are the most interesting bit, and for a helicopter they can be very interesting.
You will find that pilots fly for very different reasons. Some like the formal pseudo airline type flying, for others it is aerobatics or flying classic aircraft. Take your pick! Some would say helicopter pilots do it because at some stage in their life they became unhinged!!!
The Original Whirly
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Belper, Derbyshire, UK
Posts: 4,326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I fly both so I'm quite well qualified to answer this...would have done so sooner, but just back from three days away.
I got a PPL(A) first, thinking helicopters were too expensive. I flew for about a year, then went for a trial helicopter flight just for something different to do. I managed to hover for about 45 seconds with all three controls on my trial lesson, and I was instantly hooked! I HAD to do more. I said I was only going to do a few hours and learn to hover properly, then it was just a few more hours. Then I realised what I really wanted was to get a PPL(H). But on the day of my Skills Test, I realised I couldn't afford to pay to fly helciopters for ever, so...
"You've passed", said the examiner.
"Can you tell me about getting a CPL", I replied.
"OK," he said, "but shall we do the paperwork for this one first".
Fast forward about five years. I'm instructing part time on R22s and occasionally R44s, although it looks like becoming almost fulltime, at least over the summer. And I love it!
So what is it about helicopters? Where you get in a f/w aircraft and fly it, you kind of strap on a helicopter and it becomes a part of you. You don't need to fly, just hovering and doing manoeuvres close to the ground is fun. You can go anywhere and land practically anywhere, but you really don't need to. It's the most versatile means of transport there is, and the ultimate toy.
If the engine failed in either f/w or rotary, I wouldn't be at all happy, to be honest. In a f/w aircraft you've got more time, but you've got to find a big flat field, and it if there isn't one, you won't make it. In a helicopter you've got to get that lever down quickly, but you can land anywhere that's flat, and it doesn't have to be very big. Quite often I have students on trial lessons who think if the engine fails they'll drop like a stone; I show them an autorotation, and they're always surprised by how non-scary it is, how relatively slowly you descend, how much control you have. And, by the way, all trial lesson students come down to earth with an ear to ear grin...where else can you have fun and get paid for fulfilling people's dreams?
All I can say, is, go and give both a try. I almost guarantee you'll go for helicopters. And yes, it costs more, but not that much more. I don't really think it's more difficult, just different. And if you really want to do it....well, you only live once.
I got a PPL(A) first, thinking helicopters were too expensive. I flew for about a year, then went for a trial helicopter flight just for something different to do. I managed to hover for about 45 seconds with all three controls on my trial lesson, and I was instantly hooked! I HAD to do more. I said I was only going to do a few hours and learn to hover properly, then it was just a few more hours. Then I realised what I really wanted was to get a PPL(H). But on the day of my Skills Test, I realised I couldn't afford to pay to fly helciopters for ever, so...
"You've passed", said the examiner.
"Can you tell me about getting a CPL", I replied.
"OK," he said, "but shall we do the paperwork for this one first".
Fast forward about five years. I'm instructing part time on R22s and occasionally R44s, although it looks like becoming almost fulltime, at least over the summer. And I love it!
So what is it about helicopters? Where you get in a f/w aircraft and fly it, you kind of strap on a helicopter and it becomes a part of you. You don't need to fly, just hovering and doing manoeuvres close to the ground is fun. You can go anywhere and land practically anywhere, but you really don't need to. It's the most versatile means of transport there is, and the ultimate toy.
If the engine failed in either f/w or rotary, I wouldn't be at all happy, to be honest. In a f/w aircraft you've got more time, but you've got to find a big flat field, and it if there isn't one, you won't make it. In a helicopter you've got to get that lever down quickly, but you can land anywhere that's flat, and it doesn't have to be very big. Quite often I have students on trial lessons who think if the engine fails they'll drop like a stone; I show them an autorotation, and they're always surprised by how non-scary it is, how relatively slowly you descend, how much control you have. And, by the way, all trial lesson students come down to earth with an ear to ear grin...where else can you have fun and get paid for fulfilling people's dreams?
All I can say, is, go and give both a try. I almost guarantee you'll go for helicopters. And yes, it costs more, but not that much more. I don't really think it's more difficult, just different. And if you really want to do it....well, you only live once.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are limited to two types of flying, Visual Flight Rules (look out of the window and use the pretty view to navigate and fly by) and Instrument Flight Rules (nothing to see outside so use a miriad of dials and displays to navigate and fly by).
Not really correct, and I would suggest it may be unhelpful to those pilots whose license privileges (which is another way of saying time and money) limit them to VFR flight rules.
What I would call "smarter VFR pilots" navigate using instrument methods even if flying under visual flight rules.
Obviously I don't know everything but in 600+ hours over 4-5 years have never been lost, "uncertain of position", scared (except when scared by a mad instructor), etc etc so I guess I know a little bit about this stuff, and this is what I've been doing since the day after my PPL skills test.
Also, a lot of UK pilots are limited to VFR only when flying outside the UK.
As regards IFR, actually the name of the game is to get into VMC, below cloud or above cloud. Nobody likes to sit in cloud; it's usually bumpy and there is the risk of airframe icing.
Not really correct, and I would suggest it may be unhelpful to those pilots whose license privileges (which is another way of saying time and money) limit them to VFR flight rules.
What I would call "smarter VFR pilots" navigate using instrument methods even if flying under visual flight rules.
Obviously I don't know everything but in 600+ hours over 4-5 years have never been lost, "uncertain of position", scared (except when scared by a mad instructor), etc etc so I guess I know a little bit about this stuff, and this is what I've been doing since the day after my PPL skills test.
Also, a lot of UK pilots are limited to VFR only when flying outside the UK.
As regards IFR, actually the name of the game is to get into VMC, below cloud or above cloud. Nobody likes to sit in cloud; it's usually bumpy and there is the risk of airframe icing.
Hovering AND talking
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Propping up bars in the Lands of D H Lawrence and Bishop Bonner
Age: 59
Posts: 5,705
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540, Droopy was talking from the helicopter point of view for which an IMC rating does not exist; it is VFR (yes, of course you scan the instruments) or IFR in a twin-engined, stabilised, £1,000 per hour helicopter!
An IFR rating for a helicopter would cost around £40,000 and so is probably irrelevant to this this thread!
Cheers
Whirls
An IFR rating for a helicopter would cost around £40,000 and so is probably irrelevant to this this thread!
Cheers
Whirls
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry for hijacking the thread.....
I deliberately avioded the IMC rating issue because a) i know very little about it and b) it is beside the point. If one wants to be able to have some flexibility with weather for touring then go for fixed wing because instrument flying is more attainable. The fact remains there is only VFR or IFR.
I too had 600+ hrs after 4 years of flying, but I have been lost on one or two occasions and I have been scared once or twice. All of them were quality learning experiences.
Originally Posted by IO540
Not really correct, and I would suggest it may be unhelpful to those pilots whose license privileges (which is another way of saying time and money) limit them to VFR flight rules.
What I would call "smarter VFR pilots" navigate using instrument methods even if flying under visual flight rules.
Obviously I don't know everything but in 600+ hours over 4-5 years have never been lost, "uncertain of position", scared (except when scared by a mad instructor), etc etc so I guess I know a little bit about this stuff, and this is what I've been doing since the day after my PPL skills test.
Also, a lot of UK pilots are limited to VFR only when flying outside the UK.
As regards IFR, actually the name of the game is to get into VMC, below cloud or above cloud. Nobody likes to sit in cloud; it's usually bumpy and there is the risk of airframe icing.
What I would call "smarter VFR pilots" navigate using instrument methods even if flying under visual flight rules.
Obviously I don't know everything but in 600+ hours over 4-5 years have never been lost, "uncertain of position", scared (except when scared by a mad instructor), etc etc so I guess I know a little bit about this stuff, and this is what I've been doing since the day after my PPL skills test.
Also, a lot of UK pilots are limited to VFR only when flying outside the UK.
As regards IFR, actually the name of the game is to get into VMC, below cloud or above cloud. Nobody likes to sit in cloud; it's usually bumpy and there is the risk of airframe icing.
I too had 600+ hrs after 4 years of flying, but I have been lost on one or two occasions and I have been scared once or twice. All of them were quality learning experiences.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't speak for rotary from personal exp (only had a few trial lessons in some truly bottom end ones) but it's obvious that if you want the ultimate capability to fly from A to B no matter what the conditions are, and you have ba11s made of solid brass, not to mention disregard for rules, a helicopter will beat fixed wing anytime.
I see them flying under OVC002, in thunderstorms, in fog, in fact anytime anywhere. If the pilot loses his nerve, or comes up against a solid wall of fog, he can just put it down somewhere, go for a wee, and eat his packed lunch.
Obviously it's also a good way to get killed but I think that a clever and very good rotary pilot will have a much greater all-weather mission capability than an equally clever fixed wing pilot.
To get comparable ability to go anywhere in a fixed wing one would need to be doing seriously hairy DIY instrument approaches on the GPS, and then you still have to find a runway.
If I wanted to be able to travel around the UK in all weather (say, had a business where I was on a constant call-out and the work was of very high value) I would buy a turbine helicopter, probably a Gazelle, and get a military instructor to train me to fly it. Or something newer with an autopilot - I believe there are some American single engine turbine helis that have an AP even though very few singles are approved for IFR (of course this is entirely N-reg context). A friend of mine sells a lot of this stuff.
I don't think my IFR-navigation comparison was entirely irrelevant - helicopters must be a very good example of a case where most pilots have to fly under VFR, and for basic safety reasons have to remain VMC, but I am sure all but the most hardened part-timers will be using GPS. Whereas in fixed-wing flight there is a large community which regards that as doing a pact with the devil.
I see them flying under OVC002, in thunderstorms, in fog, in fact anytime anywhere. If the pilot loses his nerve, or comes up against a solid wall of fog, he can just put it down somewhere, go for a wee, and eat his packed lunch.
Obviously it's also a good way to get killed but I think that a clever and very good rotary pilot will have a much greater all-weather mission capability than an equally clever fixed wing pilot.
To get comparable ability to go anywhere in a fixed wing one would need to be doing seriously hairy DIY instrument approaches on the GPS, and then you still have to find a runway.
If I wanted to be able to travel around the UK in all weather (say, had a business where I was on a constant call-out and the work was of very high value) I would buy a turbine helicopter, probably a Gazelle, and get a military instructor to train me to fly it. Or something newer with an autopilot - I believe there are some American single engine turbine helis that have an AP even though very few singles are approved for IFR (of course this is entirely N-reg context). A friend of mine sells a lot of this stuff.
I don't think my IFR-navigation comparison was entirely irrelevant - helicopters must be a very good example of a case where most pilots have to fly under VFR, and for basic safety reasons have to remain VMC, but I am sure all but the most hardened part-timers will be using GPS. Whereas in fixed-wing flight there is a large community which regards that as doing a pact with the devil.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 425 Likes
on
224 Posts
"If I wanted to be able to travel around the UK in all weather (say, had a business where I was on a constant call-out and the work was of very high value) I would buy a turbine helicopter, probably a Gazelle, and get a military instructor to train me to fly it. Or something newer with an autopilot - I believe there are some American single engine turbine helis that have an AP even though very few singles are approved for IFR (of course this is entirely N-reg context). A friend of mine sells a lot of this stuff."
IO540, The belief that a non-IFR helicopter such as a Gazelle is an "all weather" way of getting around UK on "high value work" is a recipe for getting a low-time pilot killed, and has done on many occasions in the past. 
IO540, The belief that a non-IFR helicopter such as a Gazelle is an "all weather" way of getting around UK on "high value work" is a recipe for getting a low-time pilot killed, and has done on many occasions in the past.
IO540:
"Obviously I don't know everything but in 600+ hours.........."
I started instructing in 1963 and I have sent pilots solo in just about everything from gliders to 4-engined jet aircraft. I beseech you to continue to fly safely and to realise just how relatively inexperienced you really are.
I would hate you to become a statistic.
"Obviously I don't know everything but in 600+ hours.........."
I started instructing in 1963 and I have sent pilots solo in just about everything from gliders to 4-engined jet aircraft. I beseech you to continue to fly safely and to realise just how relatively inexperienced you really are.
I would hate you to become a statistic.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Funny how some people here pick on some phrase I use and turn it around out of context, rather than take the time to write something that makes a positive contribution to knowledge on the topic.
I think that if somebody is flying a helicopter they will probably know that they can get killed in it.
I think that if somebody is flying a helicopter they will probably know that they can get killed in it.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After a hundred hours you know you are still learning.
After two hundred hours you just start feeling comfortable.
At four hundred hours you think you know it all.
At 600 hours you know you know it all.
At 1,000 hours you realise you still don’t know everything, but the bits you don’t know are coming more slowly.
At 5,000 hours you are grateful that none of those bits you didn’t know has caught you out.
At 10,000 hours you just hope there are no more bits!
If you review the statistics I seem to remember the serious gotchas seem to come between 200 hours and 600 hours - makes sense.
You should be safe now IO540!!!
and there we all go but for the grace of God, 200 hours or 10,000 hours.
After two hundred hours you just start feeling comfortable.
At four hundred hours you think you know it all.
At 600 hours you know you know it all.
At 1,000 hours you realise you still don’t know everything, but the bits you don’t know are coming more slowly.
At 5,000 hours you are grateful that none of those bits you didn’t know has caught you out.
At 10,000 hours you just hope there are no more bits!
If you review the statistics I seem to remember the serious gotchas seem to come between 200 hours and 600 hours - makes sense.
You should be safe now IO540!!!
and there we all go but for the grace of God, 200 hours or 10,000 hours.