I've read all the conventional wisdom about collective-pitch (CP) vs. fixed pitch (FP) -- training in a FP heli is supposed to be cheaper because of the lower headspeeds, cheaper repairs, and decreased complexity.

That said, I'm getting pretty well frustrated with training in the ground effect (GE) and have a wild hair question that I don't particularly feel like paying to experience (yet) but wanted to ask nonetheless...

If a CP heli is more stable in GE, would it not be simpler to take off slowly and hover LOW with more control than FP (FP seems to need more than a rotor-span's worth of altitude to achieve clean-air stability)? Using Radd's slow and simple controlled exercises, it just seems like you could slowly step up to flight with CP (shorter falls if you get awry and need to cut throttle to drop out of it), instead of first getting accustomed to the way the FP handles on the ground, then jumping through GE. Most FP guys I have seen fly still jump up and down through GE, spending as little time in it as possible, regardless of their skill level -- they take off with a quick throttle-up and land with a quick throttle-chop. How do full-size heli pilots learn? Surely they don't gamble their equipment (and their hides!) with a blast-off-quick, you'll-be-able-to-handle-it mentality?

I know I probably should just suck it up and blast up out of GE, but in my confined living room, that's proving to be a destructive way to learn.

I'm sincerely thinking about putting the heli away for a while, and saving up for a simulator... my learning curve at the sticks of an actual model is frustrating me and beating up the model...

Randii