I give up, after many, many years!

On Sat, 17 May 2008 07:30:55 -0700 (PDT), A Lieberman
<atlieb@**********> wrote:
>
>ILS minimums, it's only 20 seconds. The more you use your senses WITH
>instruments in IMC, the better chance your outcome will be.

I think that was very well said. <G>

A Lieberman <atlieb@**********> wrote in news:239a8887-7f34-42e4-b1c1-
02263746bc9a@34g2000hsf.************.com:

> With your attitude, I am glad you are using a simulator, as you
> wouldn't survive the basic 180 turn for VFR pilots much less slogging
> along in the clag for a couple of hours to terminate that flight with
> an approach that required procedure turns and circle to land that was
> one of my major accomplishments in my small corner of the world..

This newsgroup would be much better off if Anthony did try his piloting
skills in a real airplane. He'll be dead and we'll be rid of him.

On May 19, 8:55 am, Benjamin Dover <BenDo...@BOHICA.com.tw> wrote:

> This newsgroup would be much better off if Anthony did try his piloting
> skills in a real airplane. He'll be dead and we'll be rid of him.

No. That would mean that he's destroyed an aircraft.

george <gblack@hnpl.net> wrote in news:0dca79db-786f-471b-beec-
88619c826ea5@w4g2000prd.************.com:

> On May 19, 8:55 am, Benjamin Dover <BenDo...@BOHICA.com.tw> wrote:
>
>> This newsgroup would be much better off if Anthony did try his piloting
>> skills in a real airplane. He'll be dead and we'll be rid of him.
>
> No. That would mean that he's destroyed an aircraft.
>

As bad as that is, it would be worth the price.

terry <tfmann@iprimus.com.au> wrote in news:88672a1c-768d-451b-88d9-
e124f2b8d6ac@u12g2000prd.************.com:

[snip]
> ( and you are not allowed to
> ask why I had more than one test :<) )

Obviously the weather was bad and you took a continuance...

or

The DPE was in a foul mood and downed everyone that day...

or

The instructor taught the wrong engine out glide speed...
(yes, I had instructor and school check pilot argue about it)

or

Choose any one of a long list of a bunch of possible screw-ups, it's amazing
that we actually get through the process...


I survived my PP check ride but the DPE was extremely generous that day...
--
---
there should be a "sig" here

On May 17, 7:59 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" <dynam...@vianet.on.ca> wrote:

> I was a fairly good gymnast, so my orientational
> skills are likely a bit better than average.
> Ken

Your superior orientational skills are just as useless as
everyone else's ordinary orientational skills when in IMC.

Dan

On May 18, 3:19 pm, terry <tfm...@iprimus.com.au> wrote:

> Would love to know what your sources are on that information MX. in
> all the aircraft I have flown both the AI and DI were powered from the
> same vacuum pump and the pump is the most common cause of failure of
> gyroscopic instruments. How do I know that? not from any books I have
> read, and I have many on aviation, but from first hand advice from
> several flying instructors, and actually had a vacuum pump failure in
> a Warrior on one of my PPL flight tests ( and you are not allowed to
> ask why I had more than one test :<) )

We have no vacuum pump failures anymore. Just gyro failures.
Cessna now requires a pump replacement every 500 hours, or a pump with
an inspection port that can be replaced when the vanes wear to certain
point, which takes around 1100 hours on a Lyc, less on a Continental
because of the higher rotational spped of the pump on the Cont. It's
almost always vanes worn beyond limits that cause pump failure, or
rotten and breaking-up vac hoses that release junk into the pump and
lunch it. Cessan wants those hoses replaced every 10 years. Now you
know why.
Of course, so many owners and mechanics ignore the
manufacturer's requirements that pump failures will continue to be a
major problem.

Dan

"B A R R Y" <DwightSchrute@dundermifflin.com> wrote in message
>
> Do we have to undershoot or overshoot the cat on north or south
> headings?

Don't shoot the cat, or someone will call the SPCA

On Wed, 21 May 2008 13:44:34 GMT, Jay Honeck wrote:

> The argument has gone Clinton-esque, by nuancing the meaning of "sensation"
> down to the subtlest level. Now, of course, MX has gone off on a zillion
> tangents since then, and the signal/noise ratio here has gone back to
> unintelligible levels.
>
> I don't know what strange power MX wields over so many here, but it's
> creepy.

He hasn't got any power, no more than a person pushing a perfectly round
rock down a completely flat 45 degree grade.

On May 22, 10:16 am, gatt <ad...@godhateskansas.com> wrote:
> If this were rec.surgery.brain and some philosophy student was arguing
> with brain surgeons all day, every day, and then admonishing them for
> their answers, I wouldn't for a second expect the surgeons not to remind
> the student they're they're doctors and that he's not qualified to
> contradict literally ALL of them.   (Not to mention ignoring their
> authoritative references and dodging any challenge to cite sources for
> him own information.)
>
> But I never said anybody "wasn't allowed" to disagree with me simply
> because of my credentials.

Hmm..point of view is valid except for one important fact:

Many of the pilots in this group have not spoken with the same
objectivity that one would expect from an expert who expects his
opinion to supersede that of a novice.

I am reading a parallel thread in which someone claims that the theory
of lift often exists incorrectly in the minds of those who think they
understand it.

When I, as a novice, made this same statement a few months ago when I
joined the group, most of the responding pilots said, "It is
understood. You are the one who does not understand." When I showed
examples of actual experts (university professors in aero/astro, books
by pilots with 20,000+ hours, respected educators in aviation, the
NASA link given by Jim Logajan, etc.", the pilots still said, "You are
still wrong."

Note that it was not a few obstinate pilots making these claims, but
most of them.

When pilots take this position, refuting people whom one would imagine
has even greater understanding of the subject, it becomes difficult to
lend credibility simply because they have a pilot's license.

-Le Chaud Lapin-