Martin wrote:
As far as making you a better pilot, I think anything more demanding makes you better.
The most demanding thing – flying wise – that I have done so far was a trial lesson in a helicopter. But would a helicopter license make me a better pilot for fixed wing? I strongly doubt that.
Martin wrote:
For example a sailplane can make you better.
I started flying in gliders and learned a lot from that. But calling myself, because of my gliding background, a better pilot than my non-gliding colleagues would do them wrong. Maybe I am a better glider pilot. But nothing more.
No. I read every contribution in this thread but remain unconvinced. I will leave it to my employer: If he thinks that I will be a better employee with an aerobatic rating then I will enjoy every minute of the course: At his expenses and during my paid working time.
what_next wrote:
No. I read every contribution in this thread but remain unconvinced.
But wouldn’t you concede that the skills learned during an aerobatics course will make you at least a marginally better pilot because you’re better prepared in case of an admittedly unlikely situation? Wouldn’t you agree that your employer is unlikely to pay an aerobatic course for you because the perceived benefit is not offset sufficiently by the rather high cost and not because there is not benefit at all?
what_next wrote:
But do you also practice ditching itself?
Actually, yes, I do. 
Jacko wrote:
Actually, yes, I do.
And how do you do it? :-)
Just like any tail-high wheel landing, but to be able to re-use the airplane, add power (or make a landfall) before ground speed drops to minimum hydroplaning speed (which is a simple function of tyre pressure).
It’s relatively easy with conventional undercarriage. I believe it’s much harder with a tricycle, but I’m told it can be done.
Martin wrote:
I probably would if it could be done reasonably safely and, well, affordably (trashing planes would make the training quite expensive, not to mention that I’m not keen on polluting the environment).
One aspect of ditching you can train is escape from the cabin underwater.
Airborne_Again wrote:
One aspect of ditching you can train is escape from the cabin underwater.
Yes and I consider it part of the training I mentioned. It’s not really something revolutionary; even in an airliner, I can get to an emergency exit blindfolded. And I’m always strapped in if I’m in a seat. I figured out the basic principles long before then. Problem with this training is that you typically won’t train in the same cabin as you fly in.
@what_next I’m not saying it will make you better or that it’s necessary to be good, I’m saying it can make you better. I slipped up in the first one, it should have been “can make” instead of “makes”. That’s logical, you’re essentially rising the bar. And how do you know how good you’re unless you challenge yourself? Helicopters are more difficult (and fun), but they are too different. You can still learn something, but it’s more difficult to apply it to fixed wing (in general). IMHO.
Yes, competent aerobatic training can make you a better pilot. Underwater egress training will help you save your’s and your passenger’s lives, should you be in a sinking plane. Like many things, something very new your first few times, you’re half blinded by the event, and hardly observing the details, it takes a few times to get the feel of it, so you can refine your skills to be useful. During your first roll, you will not initiate recovery so as to roll out level. On your tenth, you’ll be much closer, ‘cause it won’t be so much a blur. The first time during training you try to get out of an inverted cabin under water – blindfolded – it’ll be difficult, you’ll fumble for the handles and latches. Your tenth time, you’ll know where to feel for the handles and latches, and you’ll make it!
