Dear Burt

I think a "simulated off-field landing"
flight portion with standards isn't a bad idea.

But keep in mind the reason I advocate this is to
standardize the examiners. Having some examiners
require 8 feet and others require 400 feet as the
tolerance for an off-field (minimum-energy) landing
isn't standardized.

I'm not sure a PTS change is absolutely required.
There are newletters and such for examiners that
can discuss this and come to a "consensus" that
within 200 feet, or 400 feet or whatever of a designated
point for simulated off-field landings is a reasonable idea.

And if this is only in the commercial PTS, then
maybe that is ok. I know plenty of private pilots who
follow the X-C stuff in the GFH and are always within glide
of long runways and never, ever put themselves in an
off-field situation. If they want to fly this way, good for them...

In article ,
T o d d P a t t i s t wrote:
Martin Eiler wrote:

Todd I think your opinion is that normal glider landings
should mirror what the Private asel standards describe
as touching down smoothly at approximate stalling speed,
at or within 400 feet beyond a specified point.

I don't have any strong opinions about where in the PTS to
put an accuracy landing test (Normal Landing Task or
elsewhere) but I do think if the PTS is going to have an
accuracy landing test it should be similar to the test
above. If they want to have two tests, then the stopping
point test is fine.



--

------------+
Mark J. Boyd