|
I think your idea of offering a discount for annual training is a good one. When FlightSafety had a 210 simulator, I went there annually to take their training. Not required, but my plane was a family transportation device and I wanted to lessen the pilot induced risk . Training does that. You could argue about the 'nanny" state and requiring it, but there is plenty of evidence that annual recurrent training results in safer flying, for ANY airplane and ANY pilot. Staying current is important. How many pilots take regular training sessions with an instructor? Not enough in my opinion and the accidents I read about support this. I am going to San Diego this week. Just to brush up, took three flights with a local instructor who also flies an MU2 to get in some IFR practice in actual conditions in the past 3 weeks just to be sure I am where I need to be. It was fun, I learned a few things and feel better about my upcoming trip. No one likes to have areas they need to work on pointed out to them, but they are areas that need improvement! Pressurized piston twins including the P337 have lousy safety records and as I said earlier, pilots don't take them seriously enough. The worst thing you can have in a plane is a pilot who thinks everything is "safe". It isn't and we owe it to our passengers to prepare for things that might lead to "not safe". Any incentive that leads to keeping current and/or more training is a good thing in my opinion.
|