It worries me, am I understanding what is written as it is intended? For a "Standard graduate" ICON pilot, that pilot might consider maneuvering +- 45 in bank, and +- 10 in pitch below 300 feet in a water flying environment?!! The bank angles worry me, the pitch angles worry me a lot! I'm not even thinking about the "above soft deck limits" just yet!Soft-Deck Maneuvering
The use of a soft deck is central to ICON's Lowalt flying philosophy. The idea is that when in the low altitude environment, the PIC should shift a significant portion of their attention to terrain and obstacle avoidance (like towers, power lines, etc.) while also maneuvering more benignly. This conscious shift should be observed below a prescribed altitude or "soft deck." While good judgment and airmanship always takes precedence over any guidelines, the following maneuvering limits should generally be observed:
Above Soft Deck: Normal, non-aerobatic maneuvering (+/- 60° bank +/- 30° pitch)*
Below Soft Deck: Benign maneuvering (+/- 45° bank +/- 10° pitch)
*60/30 is a reference. The current FAA definition is ambiguous. In the past, the definition of aerobatic included these 60/30 limits. FAR 91.303 currently states "For the purposes of this section, aerobatic flight means an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude, an abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for normal flight." Today, parachute FAR 91.307(c) still states, "Unless each occupant of the aircraft is wearing an approved parachute, no pilot of a civil aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember) may execute any intentional maneuver that exceeds- (1) A bank of 60 degrees relative to the horizon; or (2) A nose-up or nose-down attitude of 30 degrees relative to the horizon."
ICON Soft-Deck Training Qualifications
Standard (300' AGL): Appropriate for all ICON graduates. ICON SPL, TXL, TXS, ICON IP, or higher
Advanced (100' AGL): Requires advanced ICON Lowalt training and ICON check ride
Yes, I know that very skilled and well trained aerobatic pilots can prove their skills in this type of maneuvering, so it is possible to fly with some measure of safety. However, to me, mixing that type of extreme maneuvering with varying terrain, and perhaps the loss of good situational awareness due to a water only reference, would demand even more skill than the advanced aerobatic training over a more planned and benign surface. Would I accept this type of maneuvering during water training? Never! I cannot train a water pilot to fly with an adequate reserve of safety with such extreme attitudes and low altitude. If the pilot has flown into a circumstance where such maneuvering is required, that pilot has blundered a long way back - more training to avoid those conditions much further back. If the pilot is flying that maneuvering for their own entertainment, they're in the wrong type of plane, and wrong environment.
After where it has been written:
it seems to me that all that is written is really poor judgement and airmanship. Don't think of this type of flying as acceptable, particularly if you would like to impress an employer with your professional attitude!While good judgment and airmanship always takes precedence .....