buttman wrote:
On Mar 7, 3:04 pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:
Your right. the whole idea of instructing is to teach people to deal
with a potentially dangerous environment. The idea is to do the
"teaching" in such a way that the danger level of the lesson isn't more
than the danger you're trying to teach the student to avoid.
In this vein most of the sane among us have found the way to do this
with some air under our butts :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

But if "doing it in a way that is safer than the actual situation"
changes the event all together, then whats the point? An extreme
example would be saying, "full stalls are unsafe, so we'll do all
stall maneuvers until Vs + 20 kts then recover" Doing this, you're
missing out on a lot of things that needs to be taught regarding
stalls.

The biggest thing that gets lost when instructing is the practicality
of things. For instance when I was doing my instrument training, not
never once did I actually land coming off an instrument approach.
Every time we'd do a missed approach. It wasn't until I became a CFII
and started instructing at an airport with an instrument approach that
I realized landing from a VOR approach at 400' AGL .2 miles out is a
lot different than landing from a traffic pattern.

The same thing occurred to me when I was doing my multi-engine
training. Every single flight me and my instructor would do, the
instructor would grab the throttle and say to me "do your thing". I
would then go through the motions, resulting in one engine being
pretend feathered. I knew that if an actual engine failure were to go
down, it wasn't going to be like that at all. There would be a lot
more things to consider. I've never had a real engine failure, but I
doubt it'll go exactly as how my instructor would do it with me.

The reason I thought up this fuel valve on takeoff thing, was to add
back into the equation an element that has been removed by doing it
the "safe" way. I even mentioned in my thread a few months ago that if
there was a way to do this with a hidden throttle behind my seat, I'd
do that instead. And I never insinuated I would do this with primary
students, at least not primary students who have demonstrated to me
that they know how to handle the plane very well.

But quite frankly, I don't know why I even waste my time. Even if I
were to recant everything I've ever said that you don't agree with,
you'll still have the personality flaw that will cause you to reply to
everyone of my posts to remind everybody how better than me you think
you are. I now see why you and Bertie make such a nice couple.

You know Butts, I was actually reading through this post thinking for
the first time since "meeting" you, I'd consider dealing with you on a
discussion level; perhaps making a professional attempt to reach through
to you. That is until I got to your last paragraph.
You seem to have a personality trait that gets you ever deeper into
trouble as you attempt to explain things. This is really undesirable in
an instructor.
You just can't seem to engage me without slipping "off the wagon" and
denigrating into some personal thing that voids everything that came
before it.
It's a shame really, and I fear that this will perpetually interfere
with you and I ever getting in formation on anything.
Too bad.
You almost had an honest shot with this post :-))


--
Dudley Henriques