multi after private or commercial?
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, Right Seat Captain, lilfssister, North Shore
multi after private or commercial?
Hi guys, im a international student training in Toronto and have just recently got my private im currently doing my night rating but wanted to start my multi, but my instructer said because of my high hours to just go for my commercial and save Multi for later, but i cant get muti out of my head,but dont wanna burn bridges with my instructor. Does anyone have some advice thanks.
-
VeRmiLLioN
- Rank 3
- Posts: 108
- Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2004 12:14 pm
- Location: Express Elevator to Hell, going down!
...
Are you currently ready for a CPL flight test? If you are even close, then get that out of the way and then concentrate on the 10 hours for the multi rating.
If you need time..then sure, go for the Multi Rating.
If you need time..then sure, go for the Multi Rating.
-
rotateandfly
- Rank 5
- Posts: 386
- Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 7:53 am
- Location: right here
If he can't take it solo he can't do the 300 in it.BTD wrote:If you have got money to burn, I suppose you could do the multi first and then take it on your 300 nm cross country.
Secondly, is your instructor the one who will train you on the multi? If not it's obvious why he wants you to do one thing.
Secondly, you're "internaltional" student, what bridges would you be burning? You're not gonna get a job in Canada, and your instructor won't probably ever see you again. If anything he should be on his knees for you.
Yes....Aztecs. We had three to choose from. Sixty bucks an hour...wet! The 310, owned by a private chap, ran about fifty an hour.
No limits on where we went. Or when. Ran a couple of "charters" deep into the states with the old Aztec!
I rented an Apache for thirty bucks an hour! I still think it's a better airplane than a semonhole!
No limits on where we went. Or when. Ran a couple of "charters" deep into the states with the old Aztec!
I rented an Apache for thirty bucks an hour! I still think it's a better airplane than a semonhole!
Despite my interest in the village virgin, provided it is female, you have asked a fair question and I think you deserve a fair answer.
It used to be that when one had a private license it was considered a license to learn. Quite frankly, the twin engine rating usually involves more than just the two engines. (despite some flight schools and instructors not empahsizing anything else). There are usually hydraulic systems, gear, and more complicated electical systems, as well as heavier aiplanes, speeds etc.
The result is that if you are a newly licensed pilot you are loading yourself up rather than learning in a staged process where you get some experience, learn engine management, navigation, weather, and then step up. That is not to say you will not learn how to fly a multi, but it normally will take you more time, and with no overall experience, you have to look at how safe you really would be. Truth be told, it doesnt take much skill to start a light twin, taxi, and fly it when everything is working as it is should be, but when things go a little sideways you can find you have a tiger by the tail.
I know there is a perception by many new pilots that experience is simply a log book entry (as evidenced by resumes that have time logged riding around with a buddy), but the fact is pilots need some real experience
Enjoy the journey, my friend, but learn slowly and learn well.
It used to be that when one had a private license it was considered a license to learn. Quite frankly, the twin engine rating usually involves more than just the two engines. (despite some flight schools and instructors not empahsizing anything else). There are usually hydraulic systems, gear, and more complicated electical systems, as well as heavier aiplanes, speeds etc.
The result is that if you are a newly licensed pilot you are loading yourself up rather than learning in a staged process where you get some experience, learn engine management, navigation, weather, and then step up. That is not to say you will not learn how to fly a multi, but it normally will take you more time, and with no overall experience, you have to look at how safe you really would be. Truth be told, it doesnt take much skill to start a light twin, taxi, and fly it when everything is working as it is should be, but when things go a little sideways you can find you have a tiger by the tail.
I know there is a perception by many new pilots that experience is simply a log book entry (as evidenced by resumes that have time logged riding around with a buddy), but the fact is pilots need some real experience
Enjoy the journey, my friend, but learn slowly and learn well.
-
dontbelievethehype
- Rank 0
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 1:50 pm
multi time after private?
to all you up and comming Pilots out there, let me give you the skinny on how it is. there is no point in getting your multi engine rating after your private, regardless how much you are told otherwise. Understand this. The Flight School is a business, and selling multi time to new guys is big bucks. Your Instructor is the one who needs it not you. may I suggest taking the $2000 or what ever and build PIC time. PIC time is the most valuable time of anything. If you are a commercial Pilot with a multi IFR ticket & 200-300 hrs.....guess what???? no insurance company will touch you. PIC time gets you insurable. You guys want to break into the industry as fast as possible? then get your commercial, single IFR and go up north to work the ramp. Sorry if I offend some here but, working the desk at a school is not paying dues, instructing is not paying dues, slug it out building docks, painting or whatever for a year and presto, you're in a Turbine aircraft. Problem is that some people say "but I don't want to go up north, I like the City" well then..............Instruct. But if you want to fly big birds fast and get respect then pack up the car and go. It really depends on how much you want it. Trust me guys, i have been there done that. I am not speaking out my you know, I have 6000 hrs, flew the bush, airline and corporate and what i am saying is fact.. I hope I cleared some stuff up.
Now, there are some people out there who want to get a Private Licence, and just leave it at that. They can become doctors and lawyers, even cowboys! Not everybody wants to be a slave to this industry. And some of them may want to fly with more than one engine. So, where do they go? No school will rent to them? Are they any less a "pilot" than the guys chasing the "pot of gold"? I know several guys with private tickets who fly when, and, where they want.....pretty sweet....and they fly just fine thank-you.
Mr. Kule:
The bar has been raised on this... and I think most of us would agree this is a good thing. I do.
-Guy
PS: I can't emphisize your last statement enough. Good to see.
I am not sure if you may be aware of the new standards, but there is a rather extensive mandatory oral briefing that now occurs with the multi-engine endorsement since April 01, 2005.trey kule wrote:There are usually hydraulic systems, gear, and more complicated electical systems, as well as heavier aiplanes, speeds etc.
Enjoy the journey, my friend, but learn slowly and learn well.
The bar has been raised on this... and I think most of us would agree this is a good thing. I do.
-Guy
PS: I can't emphisize your last statement enough. Good to see.
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
There are some rules in flight training that make me wonder about the mentality of the rule makers.
One of the most frustrating one is the practice of doing full engine shut downs during multi engine training.
Why anyone would require instructors to perform an action that can result in creating an emergency that did not exist before they deliberately caused it just boggels my mind.
I have lost track of the number of times that I have asked if it is common practice to do full engine shutdowns and feathering during the winter months when the temps can be well below freezing for months on end.
This issue of full engine shut downs and restarts in very cold air leads me to believe that the regulator is either naive or deliberately ignoring safety issues by accepting training records that show full feathering and restarts in temperatures that are plainly far outside of the safe parameters of engine handling procedures.
I can guarantee you that if I found any employee of mine shutting down an engine in very cold temperatures just for the sake of practice he/she would be unemployed the very first time that it happened.
Cat
One of the most frustrating one is the practice of doing full engine shut downs during multi engine training.
Why anyone would require instructors to perform an action that can result in creating an emergency that did not exist before they deliberately caused it just boggels my mind.
I have lost track of the number of times that I have asked if it is common practice to do full engine shutdowns and feathering during the winter months when the temps can be well below freezing for months on end.
This issue of full engine shut downs and restarts in very cold air leads me to believe that the regulator is either naive or deliberately ignoring safety issues by accepting training records that show full feathering and restarts in temperatures that are plainly far outside of the safe parameters of engine handling procedures.
I can guarantee you that if I found any employee of mine shutting down an engine in very cold temperatures just for the sake of practice he/she would be unemployed the very first time that it happened.
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Ha, the true advantage of the PT6 for training! You can feather without shutting down the engine.
That said, Cat is 100% bang on. There is NO reason whatsoever to shut down a healthy piston engine..no way, no how!! Unless, of course, it's parked, on the ramp, and the bar is open!
That said, Cat is 100% bang on. There is NO reason whatsoever to shut down a healthy piston engine..no way, no how!! Unless, of course, it's parked, on the ramp, and the bar is open!
LOL... this should be a good one.Cat Driver wrote:There are some rules in flight training that make me wonder about the mentality of the rule makers.
Hmmm... I have heard this argument before. I have to say, I do have a healthy opinion on it. It also (as far as I am aware) is the same resoning of why it is still required.Cat Driver wrote:Why anyone would require instructors to perform an action that can result in creating an emergency that did not exist before they deliberately caused it just boggels my mind.
Experience. Can't get around it. Should people be capable of doing this? I am sure we will all agree on the affirmative. How do we train people to do this? Well, like most of flight training, through simulation. Is this the best way for people to learn valuable skills? Most likely not. However, it is the only way to train people to complete emergency procedures that would be too dangerous to actually do for real.
Kind of like when people used to do Engine cuts just after takeoff in the PA30 Twin Commanche back in the late 60's early 70's. Killed people. No kidding. So, Piper raised Vmc by 10 kts, and we only did them at altitude. Risk reduced.
Is a full feather shutdown in flight a valuable exercise? I believe so... more the experience of actually pulling the prop lever and seeing what happens, and experiencing true single-engine flight ("hmm, my instructor wasn't full of crap after all..."). Can it be done wrong? Darn righs it can. Poor temepratures, poor choice of locations/aircraft loading, etc. Instructors need to be trained how to do this procedure correctly.
Transport Canada does provide some guidance on this subject (no kiddin', Cat, Transport!)
Linkage: http://www.tc.gc.ca/civilaviation/gener ... 5/menu.htm
It does go on and on... but here are the relivant points:
"Advice to Instructors
Density altitude must be considered when working in areas with high terrain during conditions of warmer than standard temperatures.
Altitude for this exercise must be in accordance with the POH or at least 2,000 feet above ground level.
Engine shutdowns should be conducted within 15 miles of an airport. Prolonged manoeuvring with an engine shutdown should be avoided.
Engine temperatures and pressures must be monitored to avoid excessive cooling or overheating while operating on one engine.
Discuss situations in which an in-flight engine failure would call for an unplanned landing at a nearby airport, rather than continuing to the destination airport which might otherwise be more suitable. An example of such a situation would be an engine fire in-flight. "
No arguement there... have to pick and choose when and where you do this exercise. Done wrong, and it WILL significantly increase the risk bad thing happening.Cat Driver wrote:I have lost track of the number of times that I have asked if it is common practice to do full engine shutdowns and feathering during the winter months when the temps can be well below freezing for months on end.
I would always suggest that you operate an aicraft with the safe parameters. Just because you shut it down for a couple of minutes (not long, I used to limit the time based upon observable engine temperatures, but never more than 2-4 minutes).Cat Driver wrote:This issue of full engine shut downs and restarts in very cold air leads me to believe that the regulator is either naive or deliberately ignoring safety issues by accepting training records that show full feathering and restarts in temperatures that are plainly far outside of the safe parameters of engine handling procedures.
I honestly believe that it is not unsafe to do this... have done it many times (many many) and have trained many instructors how to conduct multi-engine training that included specific training on this procedure.
Then tell them NOT to do it in cold temeratures! Train the Instructor to do it right!Cat Driver wrote:I can guarantee you that if I found any employee of mine shutting down an engine in very cold temperatures just for the sake of practice he/she would be unemployed the very first time that it happened.
Anyways... although many of you may not agree, that is it in a nutshell.
Hope this shed some light on this subject.
-Guy
Gosh, I would love that... but those cheap darn students don't wanna pay $700/hour for the King Air. <wink>Doc wrote:Ha, the true advantage of the PT6 for training! You can feather without shutting down the engine.
That said, Cat is 100% bang on. There is NO reason whatsoever to shut down a healthy piston engine..no way, no how!! Unless, of course, it's parked, on the ramp, and the bar is open!
-Guy
-
Cat Driver
- Top Poster
- Posts: 18921
- Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm
First off please understand that I realize that nothing that I may say, suggest or can show compelling evidence to back up my opinions on this subject will have the slighest effect on the people that decide how training should be done in Transport Canada Civil Aviation training department.
However it is in the hope that some of you young instructors and pilots will read and ponder my thoughts on the subject of training for engine out flight in a twin engine airplane.
First this:
" Transport Canada does provide some guidance on this subject (no kiddin', Cat, Transport!) "
It is my beliefe that TC is misguided and wrong in their insistance on shutting down engines in flight just to show a pilot that yes, it will fly with an engine feathered.
Using the fuzzy logic that you have to actually move the lever or push the feather button to discover that it will in fact feather is disingenuous and and creating a situation that has far more negatives than plusses for the exercise. With that logic why not push the fire extinguisher bottle and activate the fire extinguisher system to show the student that "hey, look it works".
Every airplane has a power setting that will simulate flight in the feathered propeller condition. As well you can demonstrate the behaviour of the aircraft in the propeller windmilling condition and the behaviour between feathered and windmilling as many times as it takes for the student to become confident and profficient in flying the airplane with one engine simulated as failed.
Many moons ago when I was young and in awe of the deep thinkers that insist on full feathering of engines during training I almost lost an airplane and possibly myself and the student demonstrating a feathered engine. The starter motor failed and I was unable to unfeather, and to really make my day the airplane would not maintain altitude and I was lucky enough to get it on a farmers strip that I was familiar with as I could not make it back to the airport. The reason the airplane would not maintain was due to a poorly rigged nose gear door that had not closed completely. ( It was a 150 HP. Apache ).
Many moons later I was inticed to shut down an engine and feather because the pilot I was training wanted to see it feathered, once again I could not unfeather due to the feathering pump motor had failed. In this case I had to tow the damned airplane off the runway because I could not taxi on one engine.
Anyhow the second time it happened was after I had made up my mind not to feather unless there was a mechanical failure that demanded it be feathered, I was trying to accomnodate a pilot upgrading so he could see the thing feathered.
Aside from the possibility of being unable to restart and then really being in a difficult situation there is the undeniable detremental thermal shocking of the cylinders caused by the rapid cooling and reheating of the cylinders as you shut down and restart the engine. This will of course vary wildly depending on many factors the most signifigant being the OAT at the time you are performing said shuit down and restart.
I would like to make several more comments on this subject. The argument that oh, we have been full feathering and restarting for years with no problem only means that you "think" there was nothing determental to the engines when you did these training exercises. To a certain extent there is merit in this as usually these exercises are done in simple four cylinder training aircraft that are less prone to shock cooling problems than larger more sophisticated airplanes. Hell when and if you get out of the training sector of flying you may get to fly a Navajo one of the least complex of light twins and your employer will de nut you ( de tit you if you are female. ) if he finds out you are making rapid power changes with his machine.
Anyhow I have to go to bed and will finish this subject for now but I would like all of you to remember that I have been flying and teaching on multi engine aircraft both fixed and rotary wing for over forty five years of my fifty three years as a pilot and during that time have learned that the easier you can make things for yourself the longer you will live, and shutting down a perfectly good running engine just to gaze in awe at a stopped propeller is just plain stupid in my opinion.
There will be plenty of times during your career that you will be forced into risky and or dangerous situations without going out of your way to tempt fate just for the sake of seeing a stopped prop.
TC Guy::
Further to this.
" Cat Driver wrote:
I have lost track of the number of times that I have asked if it is common practice to do full engine shutdowns and feathering during the winter months when the temps can be well below freezing for months on end.
No arguement there... have to pick and choose when and where you do this exercise. Done wrong, and it WILL significantly increase the risk bad thing happening. "
What is the lowest outside temperature at which you feel that full feathering should not be attempted?
Cat
However it is in the hope that some of you young instructors and pilots will read and ponder my thoughts on the subject of training for engine out flight in a twin engine airplane.
First this:
" Transport Canada does provide some guidance on this subject (no kiddin', Cat, Transport!) "
It is my beliefe that TC is misguided and wrong in their insistance on shutting down engines in flight just to show a pilot that yes, it will fly with an engine feathered.
Using the fuzzy logic that you have to actually move the lever or push the feather button to discover that it will in fact feather is disingenuous and and creating a situation that has far more negatives than plusses for the exercise. With that logic why not push the fire extinguisher bottle and activate the fire extinguisher system to show the student that "hey, look it works".
Every airplane has a power setting that will simulate flight in the feathered propeller condition. As well you can demonstrate the behaviour of the aircraft in the propeller windmilling condition and the behaviour between feathered and windmilling as many times as it takes for the student to become confident and profficient in flying the airplane with one engine simulated as failed.
Many moons ago when I was young and in awe of the deep thinkers that insist on full feathering of engines during training I almost lost an airplane and possibly myself and the student demonstrating a feathered engine. The starter motor failed and I was unable to unfeather, and to really make my day the airplane would not maintain altitude and I was lucky enough to get it on a farmers strip that I was familiar with as I could not make it back to the airport. The reason the airplane would not maintain was due to a poorly rigged nose gear door that had not closed completely. ( It was a 150 HP. Apache ).
Many moons later I was inticed to shut down an engine and feather because the pilot I was training wanted to see it feathered, once again I could not unfeather due to the feathering pump motor had failed. In this case I had to tow the damned airplane off the runway because I could not taxi on one engine.
Anyhow the second time it happened was after I had made up my mind not to feather unless there was a mechanical failure that demanded it be feathered, I was trying to accomnodate a pilot upgrading so he could see the thing feathered.
Aside from the possibility of being unable to restart and then really being in a difficult situation there is the undeniable detremental thermal shocking of the cylinders caused by the rapid cooling and reheating of the cylinders as you shut down and restart the engine. This will of course vary wildly depending on many factors the most signifigant being the OAT at the time you are performing said shuit down and restart.
I would like to make several more comments on this subject. The argument that oh, we have been full feathering and restarting for years with no problem only means that you "think" there was nothing determental to the engines when you did these training exercises. To a certain extent there is merit in this as usually these exercises are done in simple four cylinder training aircraft that are less prone to shock cooling problems than larger more sophisticated airplanes. Hell when and if you get out of the training sector of flying you may get to fly a Navajo one of the least complex of light twins and your employer will de nut you ( de tit you if you are female. ) if he finds out you are making rapid power changes with his machine.
Anyhow I have to go to bed and will finish this subject for now but I would like all of you to remember that I have been flying and teaching on multi engine aircraft both fixed and rotary wing for over forty five years of my fifty three years as a pilot and during that time have learned that the easier you can make things for yourself the longer you will live, and shutting down a perfectly good running engine just to gaze in awe at a stopped propeller is just plain stupid in my opinion.
There will be plenty of times during your career that you will be forced into risky and or dangerous situations without going out of your way to tempt fate just for the sake of seeing a stopped prop.
TC Guy::
Further to this.
" Cat Driver wrote:
I have lost track of the number of times that I have asked if it is common practice to do full engine shutdowns and feathering during the winter months when the temps can be well below freezing for months on end.
No arguement there... have to pick and choose when and where you do this exercise. Done wrong, and it WILL significantly increase the risk bad thing happening. "
What is the lowest outside temperature at which you feel that full feathering should not be attempted?
Cat
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
Cat...
You and I both know that we will have to agree to disagree on this particular point.
I will agree that their is an element of risk associated with it. You don't need to beat me over the head with that one. I get it. I also get the fact that you have had personal experience with the situation that makes you particularly cognicent of it. Fair enough. I could point to several patterns of behavior that I exhibit that have gestated from my near misfortune.
Having said that... I can point to a statistic that I have personal knowlege of... after 35 years in business, a particlular flight training insitution in Canada (after operating light multi-engine aeroplanes for multi-engine and IFR training) has had no incidents of failures during the restart-- in fact, this is one of many companies that is time-trialing their engines from 2000 hours TBO to 2600 hours, based on maintenance and operational history.
Now, I don't expect that to convince you.
I have seen no instances (in my recollection, please correct me) of any training instances that have developed from this practice. In fact, I would suggest that they are rare, at very best.
Absolutely! Thats what we do the other 49 times during the student's multi-engine training.
I do admit, I shudder to think why someone in Winnipeg in the dead of winter would attempt this. Wait for a better time.
-Guy
You and I both know that we will have to agree to disagree on this particular point.
I will agree that their is an element of risk associated with it. You don't need to beat me over the head with that one. I get it. I also get the fact that you have had personal experience with the situation that makes you particularly cognicent of it. Fair enough. I could point to several patterns of behavior that I exhibit that have gestated from my near misfortune.
Having said that... I can point to a statistic that I have personal knowlege of... after 35 years in business, a particlular flight training insitution in Canada (after operating light multi-engine aeroplanes for multi-engine and IFR training) has had no incidents of failures during the restart-- in fact, this is one of many companies that is time-trialing their engines from 2000 hours TBO to 2600 hours, based on maintenance and operational history.
Now, I don't expect that to convince you.
I have seen no instances (in my recollection, please correct me) of any training instances that have developed from this practice. In fact, I would suggest that they are rare, at very best.
Okay, here you have a point. I believe it has merit, you do not. We could debate this (as we have been) for some time. Fair enough. You nor I could show this has increased the level of safety. Safety though training practices (at least when dealing with something this specific) is one difficult thing to measure. In my experience, it is valuable.Cat Driver wrote:It is my beliefe that TC is misguided and wrong in their insistance on shutting down engines in flight just to show a pilot that yes, it will fly with an engine feathered.
I am sure you can provide me with a better example to make your point. The fire bottle is a bit irreversable. Unfeathering/restating is not.Cat Driver wrote:Using the fuzzy logic that you have to actually move the lever or push the feather button to discover that it will in fact feather is disingenuous and and creating a situation that has far more negatives than plusses for the exercise. With that logic why not push the fire extinguisher bottle and activate the fire extinguisher system to show the student that "hey, look it works".
Cat Driver wrote:Every airplane has a power setting that will simulate flight in the feathered propeller condition. As well you can demonstrate the behaviour of the aircraft in the propeller windmilling condition and the behaviour between feathered and windmilling as many times as it takes for the student to become confident and profficient in flying the airplane with one engine simulated as failed.
Absolutely! Thats what we do the other 49 times during the student's multi-engine training.
Holy crap! That must have been rather high on the pucker factor there. I would sugggest that the Apache is not the best aircraft demonstrate this with. I am glad all turned out well.Cat Driver wrote:Many moons ago when I was young and in awe of the deep thinkers that insist on full feathering of engines during training I almost lost an airplane and possibly myself and the student demonstrating a feathered engine. The starter motor failed and I was unable to unfeather, and to really make my day the airplane would not maintain altitude and I was lucky enough to get it on a farmers strip that I was familiar with as I could not make it back to the airport. The reason the airplane would not maintain was due to a poorly rigged nose gear door that had not closed completely. ( It was a 150 HP. Apache ).
This is an unfortunate situation. I can understand your feelings here. I would also believe that with all your experience, things do happen.Cat Driver wrote:Many moons later I was inticed to shut down an engine and feather because the pilot I was training wanted to see it feathered, once again I could not unfeather due to the feathering pump motor had failed. In this case I had to tow the damned airplane off the runway because I could not taxi on one engine.
Interesting question. Great, in fact. I can say, I was blessed with the situation that I would be doing it in temperatures that would be no lower than freezing. I would also not let the oil temps go lower than the lowest green arc limit (at the most). CHT was also a factor, if it was close to freezing... not more than 100 degree drop (sometimes that wasn't a lot of time). I used that as a general rule.Cat Driver wrote:What is the lowest outside temperature at which you feel that full feathering should not be attempted?
I do admit, I shudder to think why someone in Winnipeg in the dead of winter would attempt this. Wait for a better time.
-Guy
Re: multi time after private?
dontbelievethehype you hit the nail right on the head with this statement. "Flying the desk" at a flight school was the dummest thing I ever did. My immediate superior at dispatch had to be tip-toed around on the best of days. There was plenty of abuse, everything was a 'crisis' and I wasn't allowed to build a student clientele while I was working dispatch. All this for $8.50 an hour. To add insult to injury my friends and I were never allowed to teach instruments let alone Multi-IFR. This is still going on today.dontbelievethehype wrote:Sorry if I offend some here but, working the desk at a school is not paying dues, instructing is not paying dues, slug it out building docks, painting or whatever for a year and presto, you're in a Turbine aircraft. Problem is that some people say "but I don't want to go up north, I like the City" well then..............Instruct. But if you want to fly big birds fast and get respect then pack up the car and go.
There is one point that I disagree with. You've counseled the reader to get their Group 3 IFR and then go up north. What if the company they work for only has a twin? Although considerably more expensive I think it's advisable to get your Multi-IFR. If you do go up north a Group 1 IFR opens up more possibilities. Does anyone have a different viewpoint they would like to share?
