Icing conditions

[Mxsmanic]

From what I understand, icing protection should be turned on if the
outside temperature is 5° C or less. However, what is the reason for
not having it on all the time? Does it overheat in normal weather, or
what?

I read that turning on icing protection before "sufficient ice has
accumulated" may prevent the protection from working to remove the
ice. Why?

Also, what types of anti-icing stuff should I turn on? Just
everything that deals with ice (wing, prop, pitot, fuel vent, etc.),
or is there an accepted order or hierarchy for these things?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Gary[_2_]]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> From what I understand, icing protection should be turned on if the
> outside temperature is 5° C or less.
>
> Also, what types of anti-icing stuff should I turn on?

Just turn up the heat in the room where you run your simulator, and
you'll be fine.

[Ron Garret]

In article >,
Mxsmanic > wrote:

> From what I understand, icing protection should be turned on if the
> outside temperature is 5° C or less. However, what is the reason for
> not having it on all the time? Does it overheat in normal weather, or
> what?

No, it just wastes resources and puts unnecessary wear and tear on
things.

> I read that turning on icing protection before "sufficient ice has
> accumulated" may prevent the protection from working to remove the
> ice. Why?

That applies only to boots. If the ice layer is too thin it may remain
adhered to the boot.

> Also, what types of anti-icing stuff should I turn on? Just
> everything that deals with ice (wing, prop, pitot, fuel vent, etc.),
> or is there an accepted order or hierarchy for these things?

Except for boots, the safest policy is to just turn it all on if there's
any possibility of ice.

rg

[Jim Macklin]

Air temperature changes with air pressure changes inside
engines and also around the wing and tail surfaces. Also,
temperature probes are not 100% accurate, so the +5°CF is to
provide a cushion.

Exactly what is turned ON depends on the airplane and the
type of ice protection installed.

It is important, something as simple as a temperature probe
also needs to be anti-iced to prevent any ice accumulation.
Other systems do de-icing, allowing some ice build-up and
then removing that.

King Air using P&W PT6 engines have ice deflector vanes that
deflect water and ice particles from the air going into the
engine. The intake lip on older King Airs had an electric
heating element, newer designs are heated by engine exhaust
being routed through a hot lip which gets hot any time the
engine is running.

Jet engines produce a lot of hot air by compression inside
the engine before the combustion section. Some of that hot
air is bled away and used to heat the air inlet to the
engine, electricity may be used to heat temperature probes
in the inlet. Smaller engines don't have as much hot bleed
air available, so they may use bleed air only for the air
intake and cabin pressure/environmental while a big airliner
probably uses bleed air for engines, wings, tail and other
areas. Some airplanes with multi-disc brakes may use a hot
air distribution manifold to send hot air to the brake
assembly so that the brakes are not frozen, this is turned
on a few minutes before landing and during taxiing in water
and slush/snow and is usually on a timer so it turns off
automatically about 10 minutes after gear retraction [the
switch then needs to be manual turned off to reset the
system for landing].

Pitot and windshield heat, are OK to run all the time in
flight, but if pitot heat is used on the ground for a long
period, the chrome will turn a pretty purple, so test it on
the ground [don't burn your hand] and then turn it on before
take-off.

Too many systems to explain here, read the POH or a good
training manual.




"Gary" > wrote in message
oups.com...

Mxsmanic wrote:
> From what I understand, icing protection should be turned
> on if the
> outside temperature is 5° C or less.
>
> Also, what types of anti-icing stuff should I turn on?

Just turn up the heat in the room where you run your
simulator, and
you'll be fine.

[A Lieberma]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in
:

> Too many systems to explain here, read the POH or a good
> training manual.

Talk about wasted advise.....

Mx doesn't even read the replies, much less anything he's been shown to
read like references or POHs.

Allen

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> From what I understand, icing protection should be turned on if the
> outside temperature is 5° C or less. However, what is the reason for
> not having it on all the time?

Some ice protection equipment uses a fluid that is of limited quantity
on-board, not to mention that it costs money. Other ice protection
devices can put a drain on a smaller aircraft's power. Turbine drivers
might chime in with their reasons, I don't know them.

Ice protection isn't always needed when it's cold, you also need
moisture to create ice.

[A Lieberma]

"Steve Foley" > wrote in news:BRlbh.12790

> He can always pause and go to the fridge for more fluids.

Better yet, use the hot water from his sink.

[Steve Foley]

"B A R R Y" > wrote in message
et...
> Mxsmanic wrote:
>> From what I understand, icing protection should be turned on if the
>> outside temperature is 5° C or less. However, what is the reason for
>> not having it on all the time?
>
> Some ice protection equipment uses a fluid that is of limited quantity
> on-board, not to mention that it costs money.

He can always pause and go to the fridge for more fluids.

> Other ice protection devices can put a drain on a smaller aircraft's
> power.

He's running on 220VAC. Sholdn't be an issue.

[Jim Macklin]

I know, I know, but there are other real students out there
who might benefit. Just think if the Air Florida 737 pilot
had turned his engine anti-ice on before take-off a
Washington National, CNN wouldn't have had all those videos
of the water rescues and dead people.



"A Lieberma" > wrote in message
. 18...
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in
| :
|
| > Too many systems to explain here, read the POH or a good
| > training manual.
|
| Talk about wasted advise.....
|
| Mx doesn't even read the replies, much less anything he's
been shown to
| read like references or POHs.
|
| Allen

[Jim Macklin]

True, cold and in cloud or precip.

BTW, TKS systems make the plane and floor slippery, don't
fall and break a leg.




"B A R R Y" > wrote in message
et...
| Mxsmanic wrote:
| > From what I understand, icing protection should be
turned on if the
| > outside temperature is 5° C or less. However, what is
the reason for
| > not having it on all the time?
|
| Some ice protection equipment uses a fluid that is of
limited quantity
| on-board, not to mention that it costs money. Other ice
protection
| devices can put a drain on a smaller aircraft's power.
Turbine drivers
| might chime in with their reasons, I don't know them.
|
| Ice protection isn't always needed when it's cold, you
also need
| moisture to create ice.

[Jim Macklin]

Maybe he can rig a 200 pound CO2 bottle that can blast him,
simulating flight into a CB at the freezing level.




"Steve Foley" > wrote in message
news:BRlbh.12790$d42.8443@trndny07...
| "B A R R Y" > wrote in message
| et...
| > Mxsmanic wrote:
| >> From what I understand, icing protection should be
turned on if the
| >> outside temperature is 5° C or less. However, what is
the reason for
| >> not having it on all the time?
| >
| > Some ice protection equipment uses a fluid that is of
limited quantity
| > on-board, not to mention that it costs money.
|
| He can always pause and go to the fridge for more fluids.
|
| > Other ice protection devices can put a drain on a
smaller aircraft's
| > power.
|
| He's running on 220VAC. Sholdn't be an issue.
|
|

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> Maybe he can rig a 200 pound CO2 bottle that can blast him,
> simulating flight into a CB at the freezing level.

And end up looking like Dr. Evil's cat? <G>

[N2310D]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> From what I understand, icing protection should be turned on if the
> outside temperature is 5° C or less. However, what is the reason for
> not having it on all the time? Does it overheat in normal weather, or
> what?
>
> I read that turning on icing protection before "sufficient ice has
> accumulated" may prevent the protection from working to remove the
> ice. Why?
>
> Also, what types of anti-icing stuff should I turn on? Just
> everything that deals with ice (wing, prop, pitot, fuel vent, etc.),
> or is there an accepted order or hierarchy for these things?

Once again, you are revealing your stupidity to us by the inane questions
you ask. You are such an idiot.

Since you said in another post (quoting exactly) about the sources of your
information:

"I also get a lot from textbooks, manuals, standard reference materials, and
reliable online resources. In some cases I get it directly from people I
believe to be qualified to provide it (which is not the same as people who
_claim_ to be qualified--there isn't always a lot of overlap)."

I suggest you go to those sources for this information. Few of us are
quailified to answer your questions since most of us possess airmen's
certificates and fly airplanes, not MSFS and the ilk.

[A Lieberma]

"N2310D" > wrote in
news:mImbh.15988$Uz.3908@trnddc05:

> I suggest you go to those sources for this information. Few of us are
> quailified to answer your questions since most of us possess airmen's
> certificates and fly airplanes, not MSFS and the ilk.

FINALLY a reply that makes sense..... Unfortunately, it will fall on the
deaf ears of Mx.....

Soooo, the best reply to Mx would be no reply.....

Allen

[Andrew Sarangan[_1_]]

I am not sure why you guys are beating up the guy. He may not be a real
pilot, but I have not found his questions to be offensive, off-topic or
even ignorant. To the contrary, he has posed several questions in the
past that many of us were unable to answer, or revealed lack of
knowledge on our part. In those cases, it is the real pilots who I have
seen to misbehave. I can't recall Mxsmanic to have lost his cool
despite all the things that poeple call him.


A Lieberma wrote:
> "Jim Macklin" > wrote in
> :
>
> > Too many systems to explain here, read the POH or a good
> > training manual.
>
> Talk about wasted advise.....
>
> Mx doesn't even read the replies, much less anything he's been shown to
> read like references or POHs.
>
> Allen

[N2310D]

"A Lieberma" > wrote in message
. 18...
> "N2310D" > wrote in
> news:mImbh.15988$Uz.3908@trnddc05:
>
>> I suggest you go to those sources for this information. Few of us are
>> quailified to answer your questions since most of us possess airmen's
>> certificates and fly airplanes, not MSFS and the ilk.
>
> FINALLY a reply that makes sense..... Unfortunately, it will fall on the
> deaf ears of Mx.....
>
> Soooo, the best reply to Mx would be no reply.....
>
> Allen

Hi Allen. Well, I sat back in the shadows and ignored Mx's stupidity for a
long time. In this case, I wasn't really replying to his post, only pointing
out to him what a dullard he is.

[Mxsmanic]

"Jim Macklin" > writes:

> Exactly what is turned ON depends on the airplane and the
> type of ice protection installed.

In the Baron (simulated), I have Pitot Heat, Fuel Vent Heat, Stall
Warn Heat, Prop, Windshield, and Surface. I can figure out what they
all do except "Surface" (leading edge heat or something?), but I'm not
sure which ones can be left on under what conditions.

The manual only mentions "Ice Protection Systems - as required" in a
checklist, but does not explain what they are for (the sim manual is
presumably more limited than the real one, although some portions are
taken directly out of the real one).

I've only experienced icing once in the sim, when the pitot tube froze
up. I haven't really figured out how to configure the sim to
guarantee that I have ice. It's on my list of things to practice.

> Pitot and windshield heat, are OK to run all the time in
> flight, but if pitot heat is used on the ground for a long
> period, the chrome will turn a pretty purple, so test it on
> the ground [don't burn your hand] and then turn it on before
> take-off.

Is there a thermostat or something in ice protection hardware to keep
it from overheating if it isn't really that cold outside?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>I am not sure why you guys are beating up the guy. He may not be a real
> pilot, but I have not found his questions to be offensive, off-topic or
> even ignorant. To the contrary, he has posed several questions in the
> past that many of us were unable to answer, or revealed lack of
> knowledge on our part. In those cases, it is the real pilots who I have
> seen to misbehave. I can't recall Mxsmanic to have lost his cool
> despite all the things that poeple call him.

It's not his questions that we have a problem with. It his responses to the
answers he receives.

[Mxsmanic]

Ron Garret writes:

> Except for boots, the safest policy is to just turn it all on if there's
> any possibility of ice.

And how do I recognize a possibility of ice? Should I assume that any
time I enter a cloud? Is there a safe external temperature above
which ice is never an issue? Logically I'd assume that ice would form
at zero degrees Celsius, but I don't know what margin above that to
provide. At the same time, I don't want to wear things out (even
though they never wear out in the sim) by running them when there's no
real chance of ice.

If ice starts to collect on places like the wings, what's the first
thing I would notice in the way the aircraft behaves? I do have a
light that shines on the wing so I can look at it, but I need to know
what the symptoms are of ice build-up as well.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Mxsmanic]

B A R R Y writes:

> Ice protection isn't always needed when it's cold, you also need
> moisture to create ice.

But without a measurement of humidity on board, how do you know if
there's moisture out there (apart from the obvious case of visible
clouds or fog)?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[A Lieberma]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in
:

> It's not his questions that we have a problem with. It his responses
> to the answers he receives.

BINGO!

Allen

[Ron Garret]

In article >,
Mxsmanic > wrote:

> Ron Garret writes:
>
> > Except for boots, the safest policy is to just turn it all on if there's
> > any possibility of ice.

Correction: TKS should also be used sparingly because the amount of
fluid is limited.

> And how do I recognize a possibility of ice? Should I assume that any
> time I enter a cloud?

Obviously not. It has to be cold too.

> Is there a safe external temperature above
> which ice is never an issue? Logically I'd assume that ice would form
> at zero degrees Celsius, but I don't know what margin above that to
> provide.

Yes you do. You stated it yourself when you first asked the question.

Once again I have to ask: you do this a lot (dropping the context of the
conversation). Why? Do you have some mental deficiency that prevents
you from remembering what you have said previously in a conversation?
Or do you do it intentionally? If so, why? I really want to know.

> At the same time, I don't want to wear things out (even
> though they never wear out in the sim) by running them when there's no
> real chance of ice.

These things are ultimately judgement calls, and depend on the risk
profile you wish to adopt. Since you're flying a sim it's a moot point.
Pick a policy; one is as good as another.

> If ice starts to collect on places like the wings, what's the first
> thing I would notice in the way the aircraft behaves?

In my first icing encounter the first thing I noticed was that less air
was coming through the vent. I didn't realize I had ice for another few
minutes.

> I do have a
> light that shines on the wing so I can look at it, but I need to know
> what the symptoms are of ice build-up as well.

That depends on your sim. I'd consult the manual.

rg

[Stefan]

Andrew Sarangan schrieb:

> I am not sure why you guys are beating up the guy.

It's called the lemmings syndrome. It feels good to be part of a crowd,
it warms the soul to pat on each other's shoulders and last but not leat
it gives a sweet feeling to beat and kick an outsider, especially as
part of a group. Now if you can get all those positive feelings with a
single short post, then Usenet saves you a lot on psychiatrist fees.

Stefan

[Morgans[_2_]]

"N2310D" > wrote

> Hi Allen. Well, I sat back in the shadows and ignored Mx's stupidity for a
> long time. In this case, I wasn't really replying to his post, only pointing
> out to him what a dullard he is.

OK, in my book. Dullard does not even begin, IMHO. <g>
--
Jim in NC

[Bob Gardner]

As reluctant as I am to get involved in a mxmanic thread, the information
you provide is outdated. Goodyear says that it was originally based on the
DC-3, which had large tubes and low air pressure. It is now officially an
Old Wives Tale. The approved procedure today is to turn on the boots at the
first sign of ice.

Bob Gardner

"T o d d P a t t i s t" > wrote in message
...
> Ron Garret > wrote:
>
>>> I read that turning on icing protection before "sufficient ice has
>>> accumulated" may prevent the protection from working to remove the
>>> ice. Why?
>>
>>That applies only to boots. If the ice layer is too thin it may remain
>>adhered to the boot.
>
> To expand upon this (a bit of a play on words here) The
> boots work by expanding outward and breaking the ice. If
> the thin ice adheres to the boot, it can get pushed outward,
> but not cracked and blown off as pieces. The pushed outward
> ice can freeze with the boot inflated forming a cavity
> between the subsequently deflated boot and the ice. The ice
> then builds up on the outside of this ice cavity and the
> boot can't break it off because it doesn't push against the
> inside of the ice cavity. The boot just inflates and
> deflates between the ice and the wing without doing
> anything.
>
> --
> Rule books are paper - they will not cushion a sudden meeting of stone and
> metal.
>
> - Ernest K. Gann, 'Fate is the Hunter.'

[Jay Beckman]

"Stefan" > wrote in message
...
> Andrew Sarangan schrieb:
>
>> I am not sure why you guys are beating up the guy.
>
> It's called the lemmings syndrome. It feels good to be part of a crowd, it
> warms the soul to pat on each other's shoulders and last but not leat it
> gives a sweet feeling to beat and kick an outsider, especially as part of
> a group. Now if you can get all those positive feelings with a single
> short post, then Usenet saves you a lot on psychiatrist fees.
>
> Stefan

And if you think that any of this is possible in Usenet, you're the one who
needs therapy.

IMO, Usenet is the most egalitarian thing I've ever run accross or
participated in. You earn your stripes here. If you've been there and done
that, walked the walk, <insert other hackneyed phrase here>, etc, you'll
encounter nothing but respect, help and appreciation.

But, to come to this newsgroup, a newgroup devoted to the piloting of
aircraft and publicly announce that you:
- Have a disdain for flying (Aircraft are unsafe)
- Distrust the pilots (Only the idle rich can afford to fly)
- Consider GA to be comprised of nothing but "Tin Cans" and/or "Bug
Smashers"
- Have never even wanted to fly anything, anwhere at anytime (I can't afford
it...the medical requirements are too stringent...blah, blah, blah...)
- Consider Microsoft Flight Sim to be superior to real flying (Did you know
Baron's have ejection seats?)
- Are superior both in attitude and inteligence without any taste of the
previous 5 points (How can I trust the answers I'm being spoon fed? Or the
books they come from?)

Then guess what, you're going to be handed your hat and shown the door. And
if you happen to catch a great big size eight in the ass as you go..fine by
me.

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ USA

[Dave[_1_]]

This is where training and experience start to play a part in flight
planning...

If the temperature spread between the air temperature and the "dew"
point get close (like only 3 deg difference) the possibility of the
moisture in the air causing ice at or close to freezing temps becomes
a factor. In air pilot reports (PIREPS) are useful as well. This
information is obtained when you look at the weather forcast for your
intended route, and get a weather briefing from the weather people
before flight.

We have had several days of this here, temps +3 on the ground,- 5 at
alt, dew point -1 on the ground.

Last weekend we had this, and a PIREP from a Dash 8 reporting
moderate Rime Ice decending thriugh 6000 2 hrs earlier...

Ugh!

Dave




On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 23:05:23 +0100, Mxsmanic >
wrote:

>B A R R Y writes:
>
>> Ice protection isn't always needed when it's cold, you also need
>> moisture to create ice.
>
>But without a measurement of humidity on board, how do you know if
>there's moisture out there (apart from the obvious case of visible
>clouds or fog)?

[Mxsmanic]

T o d d P a t t i s t writes:

> To expand upon this (a bit of a play on words here) The
> boots work by expanding outward and breaking the ice. If
> the thin ice adheres to the boot, it can get pushed outward,
> but not cracked and blown off as pieces. The pushed outward
> ice can freeze with the boot inflated forming a cavity
> between the subsequently deflated boot and the ice. The ice
> then builds up on the outside of this ice cavity and the
> boot can't break it off because it doesn't push against the
> inside of the ice cavity. The boot just inflates and
> deflates between the ice and the wing without doing
> anything.

Interesting! I had never thought of that. I was wondering how using
boots too early would prevent them from removing ice later; now I
know.

I don't think small aircraft like a Baron are usually equipped with
boots, though (?).

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Mxsmanic]

Bob Gardner writes:

> As reluctant as I am to get involved in a mxmanic thread, the information
> you provide is outdated. Goodyear says that it was originally based on the
> DC-3, which had large tubes and low air pressure. It is now officially an
> Old Wives Tale. The approved procedure today is to turn on the boots at the
> first sign of ice.
>
> Bob Gardner

Are you the same one who wrote the book on ATC communications that
I've been learning from?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[A Lieberma]

"Jay Beckman" > wrote in
:

> Then guess what, you're going to be handed your hat and shown the
> door. And if you happen to catch a great big size eight in the ass as
> you go..fine by me.

Good to see you in here Jay :-) I was hoping you didn't drop off the radar
due to the mayhem of lete since I haven't seen you post of late.

We need a few size eights to reign in OUR group!

Allen

[Mxsmanic]

Ron Garret writes:

> Obviously not. It has to be cold too.

Yes, but the leading edge of the wing might be colder than the cloud.
When water drops hit it, they solidify, then you have ice on the wing.

This is similar to the problem with cold-soaked wings on airliners
when they land at a warm and humid airport.

> These things are ultimately judgement calls, and depend on the risk
> profile you wish to adopt. Since you're flying a sim it's a moot point.
> Pick a policy; one is as good as another.

Sims crash, too.

> That depends on your sim. I'd consult the manual.

The manual doesn't describe symptoms.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Dave[_1_]]

I have to agree Andrew..

I am convinced thatr somewhere behind "Mxmaniac" must be a tolerant
gentleman...

I "tolerated" a lot of questions from a guy about 6 months ago. He
was flying a sim... And the questions would fall into the "stupid"
category within some opinions here...

So I showed him around our Warrior, let him sit in the left seat...
(1st time in a light plane). He recognised all the instruments,
controls and functions...

I saw him at the airport 3 months later..

He had signed up for pilot training and was working on landings ( at
about 6 hrs).....

So I will take a chance on another who may become a "real" pilot
someday...if they show an interest in aviation...

OK, maybe I just have a thick skin, or I just don't take myself very
seriously...

If anybody offends me, I just ignore them....they fade away after a
while... Mx has not offended me...

And I am NOT going to impress my opinion on others. I am not going to
encourage others to respond to him, and I must confess I am beginning
to tire of others (more than) suggesting that I (we) NOT respond to
him.

If anyone in this group offends me, I will determine it was not a
misunderstanding, make them aware, and move on. I feel no need to
blacklist anyone.

It was 30 some years ago when I was pumping "stupid" questions to a
pilot.. I am glad he was patient and encouraged me to keep
dreaming. But it was still some time before I could afford to train
to become a "real" pilot.

Cheers!

Dave




, I just move on On 29 Nov 2006 13:39:38 -0800, "Andrew Sarangan"
> wrote:

>I am not sure why you guys are beating up the guy. He may not be a real
>pilot, but I have not found his questions to be offensive, off-topic or
>even ignorant. To the contrary, he has posed several questions in the
>past that many of us were unable to answer, or revealed lack of
>knowledge on our part. In those cases, it is the real pilots who I have
>seen to misbehave. I can't recall Mxsmanic to have lost his cool
>despite all the things that poeple call him.
>
>
>A Lieberma wrote:
>> "Jim Macklin" > wrote in
>> :
>>
>> > Too many systems to explain here, read the POH or a good
>> > training manual.
>>
>> Talk about wasted advise.....
>>
>> Mx doesn't even read the replies, much less anything he's been shown to
>> read like references or POHs.
>>
>> Allen

[A Lieberma]

Dave > wrote in
:

> I "tolerated" a lot of questions from a guy about 6 months ago. He
> was flying a sim... And the questions would fall into the "stupid"
> category within some opinions here...
>
> So I showed him around our Warrior, let him sit in the left seat...
> (1st time in a light plane). He recognised all the instruments,
> controls and functions...
>
> I saw him at the airport 3 months later..
>
> He had signed up for pilot training and was working on landings ( at
> about 6 hrs).....
>
> So I will take a chance on another who may become a "real" pilot
> someday...if they show an interest in aviation...

Dave,

What you describe is great above. I have been there and done it myself,
and posted my experiences on a post "Why I fly" to the
rec.aviation.piloting and rec.aviation.student newsgroups.

Here is the difference between what you describe above and Mx.

Your flight simmer went to the airport with you. Your simmer got in the
plane with you. Your simmer signed up for lessons. YOUR SIMMER
APPRECIATED the time vested. The unasked question is the dumb question.

I will take a fence sitter up any chance I get so I can take away the
mystery of the magic of flight and welcome all dumb questions.

Now, let's talk a little about Mx.....

He badgers every reply.
He can't afford flying.
He says it's too dangerous.
The equipment in our planes are unreliable.
He needs to see the pilot fly before he would get in a plane with him
(How this will happen is beyond my comprehension).

His sim doesn't jive up with real world experiences, I.E human physiology
interacting with flight. He has no intention of getting in a plane. He
has no intention of learning the real world experiences, only badger the
repliers to his good questions with sim experiences that doesn't equate.
I.E leans in IMC vs getting so called dizzy sitting in front of a
computer monitor.

Again, questions raised by Mx is not the problem. Simmers posting
questions is not the problem. Arm chair pilots posting question is not
the problem

THE PROBLEM IS THE LACK OF RESPECT SHOWN BY MX for real world experiences
THAT CANNOT BE SIMULATED IN A SIM. I do make the assumption you fly a
real plane and can understand what I am trying to convey.

Why folks are putting up with this disrespect is beyond my
comprehension....

TROLLS NEED TO BE IGNORED....

Allen

[Jose[_1_]]

> To expand upon this (a bit of a play on words here) The
> boots work by expanding outward and breaking the ice. If
> the thin ice adheres to the boot, it can get pushed outward,
> but not cracked and blown off as pieces. The pushed outward
> ice can freeze with the boot inflated forming a cavity
> between the subsequently deflated boot and the ice. The ice
> then builds up on the outside of this ice cavity and the
> boot can't break it off because it doesn't push against the
> inside of the ice cavity.

That's the theory. I've been to several safety seminars at which this
theory was debunked, at least as to modern boots. It is also
discredited in the NASA icing video.

Jose
--
"There are 3 secrets to the perfect landing. Unfortunately, nobody knows
what they are." - (mike).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Judah]

"Jay Beckman" > wrote in
:

> - Consider GA to be comprised of nothing but "Tin Cans" and/or "Bug
> Smashers"

You were right on with all but this one...

We all talk about ourselves as flying Tin Cans and Bug Smashers... It's
hypocritical to condemn someone else (even MX) for using the same language.

(OK - here comes the big controversy...)
It's the same type of hypocrisy that I believe exists among people who
complain about being called derogatory names, and then refer to each other
"jokingly" using the same bad words.

[Judah]

A Lieberma > wrote in
. 18:

> "Steve Foley" > wrote in news:BRlbh.12790
>
>> He can always pause and go to the fridge for more fluids.
>
> Better yet, use the hot water from his sink.


Or pee.

[Jay Beckman]

"Judah" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Jay Beckman" > wrote in
> :
>
>> - Consider GA to be comprised of nothing but "Tin Cans" and/or "Bug
>> Smashers"
>
> You were right on with all but this one...
>
> We all talk about ourselves as flying Tin Cans and Bug Smashers... It's
> hypocritical to condemn someone else (even MX) for using the same
> language.
>
> (OK - here comes the big controversy...)
> It's the same type of hypocrisy that I believe exists among people who
> complain about being called derogatory names, and then refer to each other
> "jokingly" using the same bad words.

The difference?

Our Albatross flies a desk...I actually FLY.

So thankyouverymuch but I'll refer to light GA aircraft in whatever terms I
choose and I don't give a tinkers damn if I come off sounding high and
mighty.

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

[Jay Beckman]

"A Lieberma" > wrote in message
. 18...
> "Jay Beckman" > wrote in
> :
>
>> Then guess what, you're going to be handed your hat and shown the
>> door. And if you happen to catch a great big size eight in the ass as
>> you go..fine by me.
>
> Good to see you in here Jay :-) I was hoping you didn't drop off the
> radar
> due to the mayhem of lete since I haven't seen you post of late.
>
> We need a few size eights to reign in OUR group!
>
> Allen

LOL...

Hi Allen...

I'm still here and at r.a.p. but I'm just so blown away by where this
tragicomedy is at that I find my fingers are speechless most of the time.

Jay B

[Ron Garret]

In article >,
Mxsmanic > wrote:

> Ron Garret writes:
>
> > Obviously not. It has to be cold too.
>
> Yes, but the leading edge of the wing might be colder than the cloud.
> When water drops hit it, they solidify, then you have ice on the wing.

Yes, that is possible. Nonetheless, it has to be cold. Exactly how
cold depends a lot on the particular circumstances. The first time I
had ice my OAT read 3C (which is why it took me by surprise). YMMV.

> This is similar to the problem with cold-soaked wings on airliners
> when they land at a warm and humid airport.

There is no such problem. (This is not to say that no ice forms under
such conditions, only that it is never a problem, especially not in an
airliner.)

> > These things are ultimately judgement calls, and depend on the risk
> > profile you wish to adopt. Since you're flying a sim it's a moot point.
> > Pick a policy; one is as good as another.
>
> Sims crash, too.

Yes, especially when they run on Windows.

> > That depends on your sim. I'd consult the manual.
>
> The manual doesn't describe symptoms.

Then I'd say you're screwed. It is unlikely in the extreme that your
sim has anything remotely approaching a realistic model of ice
formation. Absent documentation, the only way I can think of to figure
out what kind of crude hack it has it to reverse-engineer the code.

You did say you are a computer expert, right?

rg

[Ron Garret]

In article >,
Mxsmanic > wrote:

> T o d d P a t t i s t writes:
>
> > To expand upon this (a bit of a play on words here) The
> > boots work by expanding outward and breaking the ice. If
> > the thin ice adheres to the boot, it can get pushed outward,
> > but not cracked and blown off as pieces. The pushed outward
> > ice can freeze with the boot inflated forming a cavity
> > between the subsequently deflated boot and the ice. The ice
> > then builds up on the outside of this ice cavity and the
> > boot can't break it off because it doesn't push against the
> > inside of the ice cavity. The boot just inflates and
> > deflates between the ice and the wing without doing
> > anything.
>
> Interesting! I had never thought of that. I was wondering how using
> boots too early would prevent them from removing ice later; now I
> know.
>
> I don't think small aircraft like a Baron are usually equipped with
> boots, though (?).

Allow me to introduce you to Google. Google is your friend.

http://www.google.com/search?q=baron+58+boots

rg

[Kev]

A Lieberma wrote:
> Why folks are putting up with this disrespect is beyond my
> comprehension....

At the very least, you need to notice that you keep turning people off,
with the idea that you can tell them to whom they can respond and how.
And blacklisting people who disagree with your tactics? Talk about
disrespect.

You and Jim and a couple of others are way too obsessed with this.
Your posts are now 90% Mx phobia messages.

Turn off the computer for a couple of days, and get out to the real
world. I know that when you retire, the 'net is a tempting place to
get lost in, but seriously there are better places to go... :)

Kev

[Jay Beckman]

Dave,

With all due respect, you are SOOOO missing the entire point.

<Rant /On>

It isn't the questions. God knows we've all asked hundreds (if not
thousands) of questions of CFIs, Air Show Pilots, Airline Pilots, friends
who fly, etc...
Before I earned my PP-ASEL, any chance I would get to ask questions of real
pilots, I'd barage them. I still do.

I was (and still am to a large extent) an UberFencenHanginAirportenGeek.
For years I'd sit in my car near airports, shoot photos and listen to a
scanner...I still do this from time to time. I have over 10,000 35mm
slides. I have a library with over 3,000 books and magazines related to
flying of all kinds from hang gliding to flying fighter jets. It's one of
my prized posessions. I still build models. I still collect patches, pins,
manuals and antique panel instruments.

The worst part of my job? The fact that I work weekends and can't attend
airshows any more (my personal best was the summer of 1987. I was living in
Philly then and I made it to small airshows and AFB Open Houses from Boston
down to Pax River. IIRC, 12 or 13 shows that summer.)

But, the one thing that would have set me apart from our Albatross back then
and it would do so today (despite having immersed myself in aviation for
seemingly forever):

- I knew that I didn't know jack **** (and as it relates to flying, I still
know that one is constantly learning.)
- I knew how to say THANK YOU!!!

If an honest to gosh, flesh and blood pilot would take the time to answer my
stupid ground-pounder questions, I'd say thank you for your time. I'd ask,
they'd answer, I'd move on.

I wouldn't doubt them to their face - Mx Does
I wouldn't tell them they're wrong - Mx Does
I wouldn't attempt to sound superior - Mx Does
I sure as hell wouldn't try to bull**** them - Mx Does

So I'll say it again. It isn't the questions, it's the intent behind the
questions because if he already knows all the anwers then why is he asking?

<Rant \Off>

So you make the call Dave. You want to feed his addiction? You want to
help him get his jollies? Be my guest. I'm sticking firmly with those who
think he needs a nice long rest in a rubber room.

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

[A Lieberma]

"Jay Beckman" > wrote in news:putbh.163$B42.153
@newsfe12.phx:

> Hi Allen...
>
> I'm still here and at r.a.p. but I'm just so blown away by where this
> tragicomedy is at that I find my fingers are speechless most of the time.

LOL, takes serious self control Jay! You doing the right thing and sitting
back, but step in anytime!

What we need is a few of those size 8's banding together and kicking these
groups back in shape.

Allen

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Jay Beckman" > wrote

> I'm still here and at r.a.p. but I'm just so blown away by where this
> tragicomedy is at that I find my fingers are speechless most of the time.

Great, to have you helping out. I'm taking a small, sort-of break. I'll jump
in again, if needed, I guess - but now, the situation is "trying" to be handled.

Thanks, to those of you being active in dealing with the problem.

To those of you that do not think there is a problem, re-read all of MX's posts.
It is easy to do, on most readers. Group his screen name together, then go at
it. Pay particular attention to how he replies to people giving advise. Think
respect, or lack there of.
--
Jim in NC

[Ron Garret]

In article >,
"Mark Levin" > wrote:

> Then I added a layer of clouds at that altitude with severe icing.

So I guess that answers MX's question about the conditions under which
ice forms. The answer is: it forms when you switch it on.

;-)

rg

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Dave wrote:
>
>
> It was 30 some years ago when I was pumping "stupid" questions to a
> pilot..

Personally, I think some of the questions keep me sharp. Some of the
"stupid" questions make me reach for the AIM or a chart to look up the
info before I post.

[Judah]

"Jay Beckman" > wrote in
:

>> (OK - here comes the big controversy...)
>> It's the same type of hypocrisy that I believe exists among people who
>> complain about being called derogatory names, and then refer to each
>> other "jokingly" using the same bad words.
>
> The difference?
>
> Our Albatross flies a desk...I actually FLY.

Irrelevant to my point. If I walk around calling myself a "dirty cheap
kike", would you call me a hypocrite if I then got offended when you call
me a "dirty cheap kike"?



> So thankyouverymuch but I'll refer to light GA aircraft in whatever
> terms I choose and I don't give a tinkers damn if I come off sounding
> high and mighty.

Yourwelcomeverymuch. You go ahead and refer to light GA aircraft in
whatever terms you want. But then don't be surprised when an outsider uses
the same language. But if that language offends you, then you shouldn't
have used it yourself.

It has nothing to do with high and mighty.

Anyway, it's a big beef of mine (especially the "N word"), and I've said my
peace. So I'll shut up about it now to prevent another MX thread from
evolving into prosperity.

[Judah]

Ron Garret > wrote in
:

>> The manual doesn't describe symptoms.
>
> Then I'd say you're screwed. It is unlikely in the extreme that your
> sim has anything remotely approaching a realistic model of ice
> formation. Absent documentation, the only way I can think of to figure
> out what kind of crude hack it has it to reverse-engineer the code.
>
> You did say you are a computer expert, right?

Perhaps he can send EMail to Bill Gates. If he is as persistent as he has
been here, I bet he'll even get a reply.

[Mxsmanic]

Mark Levin writes:

> The left turning tendencies caused by a single propeller which are
> aggravated by increased pitch (p-factor mainly), are cancelled out
> with a twin as the props counter rotate.

Both props rotate in the same direction on a Baron.

You've made enough other mistakes in your experiment to render it
largely invalid, but since this particular one dealt with the real
aircraft, I thought it salient enough to merit citation.

> So much for an accurate simulation.

Indeed.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Mxsmanic]

Judah writes:

> Perhaps he can send EMail to Bill Gates. If he is as persistent as he has
> been here, I bet he'll even get a reply.

Done.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Al G[_1_]]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...

crap snipped...

It's been my experience that any aircraft once exposed to ice, will
naturally seek out warmer air below.

Al G

[Bob Gardner]

I would guess that the old rules apply if the boots have not been replaced
since the 1930s, which is highly unlikely. After the Woodlawn accident, the
FAA issued AD's for about 20 turboprops, and the AD called for inflation at
the first sign of ice.

Bob

"T o d d P a t t i s t" > wrote in message
...
> "Bob Gardner" > wrote:
>
>>As reluctant as I am to get involved in a mxmanic thread, the information
>>you provide is outdated. Goodyear says that it was originally based on the
>>DC-3, which had large tubes and low air pressure. It is now officially an
>>Old Wives Tale. The approved procedure today is to turn on the boots at
>>the
>>first sign of ice.
>
> The last aircraft I was in that had boots, and the last
> manual I read about use of the boots was ... you guessed it,
> a DC-3. Thanks for the correction. Do you know if the OWT
> about delaying use a valid one for the DC-3 in view of the
> large tubes and low pressure? I don't actually recall
> anything one way or the other in the systems manual, but I
> wasn't paying a lot of attention to de-icing.
>
> --
> Rule books are paper - they will not cushion a sudden meeting of stone and
> metal.
>
> - Ernest K. Gann, 'Fate is the Hunter.'

[Marco Leon]

Jay Beckman wrote:
[snip]
>
> So you make the call Dave. You want to feed his addiction? You want to
> help him get his jollies? Be my guest. I'm sticking firmly with those who
> think he needs a nice long rest in a rubber room.

I agree with all your points Jay. I just sit back and shake my head at
the Mx posts and replies but it certainly is getting harder and harder.


You see, I think MX is just playing on many pilot's urge to talk about
flying. He gets a kick out of asking questions that he "knows" the
answer to but are "gray" enough to cause controversy to get the most
replies. The more replying posts, the better. The guy gets up in the
morning and asks himself "what can I ask this sorry-ass group today to
get the most responses??" then heads to his computer.

We've all met people who like to chew your ear off with conversation.
You know, the guys that you say "bye" to 5 times before you can
actually leave because you don't want to be rude and cut them off. MX
is just playing on these same folks to generate posts for his own
somewhat dimented ego.

He only gives a **** about what we post as an answer so long as it will
creates more replies. Flames and complaints included. C'mon, do you
really think he honeslty thought Barons have ejection seats??

Unfortuantely, the sad fact is that there will always be flying
conversation-starved pilots who are willing to feed his hunger.

Marco

[A Lieberma]

"Marco Leon" > wrote in
ups.com:

> I agree with all your points Jay. I just sit back and shake my head at
> the Mx posts and replies but it certainly is getting harder and
> harder.

Thus the importance of all of us banding together and NOT replying to his
posts.

Past couple of days, I have seen a reduction in Mx traffic, so this is a
good sign :-)

I know it's hard, 'specially when he directly replies to my own response to
somebody else, but I am determined not to contribute to his trolling ways.

Silent treatment against trolls is the best way to get rid of them. We as
a group can do this and get our group back.

Anybody new that I see popping in that replies to his post, I will let them
know they are dealing with a troll. Hopefully others will give them fair
warning too.

As far as lurkers go, well they certainly have a keyboard to post their own
questions..... They surely don't need Mx to ask their questions.

Questions that have been posted by Mx are not the problems.....

Allen

[Andrew Sarangan[_1_]]

Here are some questions MX has asked in the recent past:

- What is the reason for not having icing protection turned on all the
time?
- Can VFR fixes be used on IFR flight plans? (How many of us know about
VFR fixes?)
- Can you switch VFR to IFR inflight, or do you have to file a full
flight plan?
- When class D overlaps with class C, which one takes precedence?
- Why doesn't the sectional chart legend show the symbol used for
wildlife refuges and national parks?
- How do you tell which side of the chain-link class E border you are
in? (how many pilots have even seen these symbols?)

Now, be honest and ask yourself if these are really trivial questions
with trivial answers. I am a CFII and I get excited when my students
ask such probing questions. I am willing to bet that majority of the
pilot population will not be able to answer the above questions.



A Lieberma wrote:
> Dave > wrote in
> :
>
> > I "tolerated" a lot of questions from a guy about 6 months ago. He
> > was flying a sim... And the questions would fall into the "stupid"
> > category within some opinions here...
> >
> > So I showed him around our Warrior, let him sit in the left seat...
> > (1st time in a light plane). He recognised all the instruments,
> > controls and functions...
> >
> > I saw him at the airport 3 months later..
> >
> > He had signed up for pilot training and was working on landings ( at
> > about 6 hrs).....
> >
> > So I will take a chance on another who may become a "real" pilot
> > someday...if they show an interest in aviation...
>
> Dave,
>
> What you describe is great above. I have been there and done it myself,
> and posted my experiences on a post "Why I fly" to the
> rec.aviation.piloting and rec.aviation.student newsgroups.
>
> Here is the difference between what you describe above and Mx.
>
> Your flight simmer went to the airport with you. Your simmer got in the
> plane with you. Your simmer signed up for lessons. YOUR SIMMER
> APPRECIATED the time vested. The unasked question is the dumb question.
>
> I will take a fence sitter up any chance I get so I can take away the
> mystery of the magic of flight and welcome all dumb questions.
>
> Now, let's talk a little about Mx.....
>
> He badgers every reply.
> He can't afford flying.
> He says it's too dangerous.
> The equipment in our planes are unreliable.
> He needs to see the pilot fly before he would get in a plane with him
> (How this will happen is beyond my comprehension).
>
> His sim doesn't jive up with real world experiences, I.E human physiology
> interacting with flight. He has no intention of getting in a plane. He
> has no intention of learning the real world experiences, only badger the
> repliers to his good questions with sim experiences that doesn't equate.
> I.E leans in IMC vs getting so called dizzy sitting in front of a
> computer monitor.
>
> Again, questions raised by Mx is not the problem. Simmers posting
> questions is not the problem. Arm chair pilots posting question is not
> the problem
>
> THE PROBLEM IS THE LACK OF RESPECT SHOWN BY MX for real world experiences
> THAT CANNOT BE SIMULATED IN A SIM. I do make the assumption you fly a
> real plane and can understand what I am trying to convey.
>
> Why folks are putting up with this disrespect is beyond my
> comprehension....
>
> TROLLS NEED TO BE IGNORED....
>
> Allen

[A Lieberma]

"Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in
ups.com:

> Here are some questions MX has asked in the recent past:

Do the flip side Andrew. Post some of his replies......

I bet you won't have the same raving reviews....

I don't think anybody is having a problems with the quality of the
questions. How many times does this have to be re-iterated????

IT IS his lack of respect for the replies he has gotten.

Allen

[A Lieberma]

A Lieberma > wrote in
. 18:

> IT IS his lack of respect for the replies he has gotten.

The word gotten should be "given"

Allen

[Jay Beckman]

"Judah" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Jay Beckman" > wrote in
> :
>
>>> (OK - here comes the big controversy...)
>>> It's the same type of hypocrisy that I believe exists among people who
>>> complain about being called derogatory names, and then refer to each
>>> other "jokingly" using the same bad words.
>>
>> The difference?
>>
>> Our Albatross flies a desk...I actually FLY.
>
> Irrelevant to my point. If I walk around calling myself a "dirty cheap
> kike", would you call me a hypocrite if I then got offended when you call
> me a "dirty cheap kike"?

Is it true? Are you? In the end it doesn't matter what I think. I'm not a
part of the "user group" so that means my opinion means nothing on the
subject. Same thing applies to Mx and flying.

>> So thankyouverymuch but I'll refer to light GA aircraft in whatever
>> terms I choose and I don't give a tinkers damn if I come off sounding
>> high and mighty.
>
> Yourwelcomeverymuch. You go ahead and refer to light GA aircraft in
> whatever terms you want. But then don't be surprised when an outsider uses
> the same language. But if that language offends you, then you shouldn't
> have used it yourself.

See my point above. If you aren't experienced with the subject, you
shouldn't be casting aspersions at all.

>
> It has nothing to do with high and mighty.
>

Apparently this is problem #1 for some. We pilots are being haughty and
unwilling to help someone who is trying to drink from the fountain of
knowledge. Well bull****. Have you seen the Albatross' website? He's
obviously not stupid, not ignorant and in fact, some of his photography is
pretty damn good. So I'd say he's perfectly capable of devining official
information from reliable sources. So given the established fact that he
has no desire to ever fly, why come here to ask the questions? Someone else
hit the nail on the head: He knows just which questions to ask to spark
debate. Not subjects that are cut and dried/black and white. Practically
all are on what in the sports world would be referred to as "Judgement
Calls."

>Anyway, it's a big beef of mine (especially the "N word")

I assume you mean Black-on-Black use of the "N" word? Do you know what it
means when one African-American calls another by the "N" word? Having grown
up in Detroit, Michigan (making me a part of the user group, trust me), I
can give you a clue: It isn't a racial thing...

>and I've said my peace. So I'll shut up about it now to prevent another MX
>thread from evolving into prosperity.

Best of Luck,

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
Chandler, AZ

[Neil Gould]

Recently, Andrew Sarangan > posted:

> Here are some questions MX has asked in the recent past:
>
> - What is the reason for not having icing protection turned on all the
> time?
> - Can VFR fixes be used on IFR flight plans? (How many of us know
> about VFR fixes?)
> - Can you switch VFR to IFR inflight, or do you have to file a full
> flight plan?
> - When class D overlaps with class C, which one takes precedence?
> - Why doesn't the sectional chart legend show the symbol used for
> wildlife refuges and national parks?
> - How do you tell which side of the chain-link class E border you are
> in? (how many pilots have even seen these symbols?)
>
> Now, be honest and ask yourself if these are really trivial questions
> with trivial answers. I am a CFII and I get excited when my students
> ask such probing questions. I am willing to bet that majority of the
> pilot population will not be able to answer the above questions.
>
As many have said, their problem with Anthony is not about the quality of
his questions. He asks good questions at the outset that are quite
appropriate for this newsgroup. Some group participants are upset with his
rudeness and argumentative nature in consideration of his actual knowledge
and experience. Others are concerned when he posts misinformation
disguised as statements of fact (I'm in this group).

Having met pilots that are at least as rude as Anthony, I find it
difficult to be upset by that aspect of his presentation. We all have
limited knowledge, and at times post incorrect comments that can be read
as statements of fact, so I can't see a reason to single him out on this,
either. So, just as we are willing to do to others, we should do to him.

Neil

[Ross Richardson[_2_]]

A Lieberma wrote:

> "Marco Leon" > wrote in
> ups.com:
>
>
>>I agree with all your points Jay. I just sit back and shake my head at
>>the Mx posts and replies but it certainly is getting harder and
>>harder.
>
>
> Thus the importance of all of us banding together and NOT replying to his
> posts.
>
> Past couple of days, I have seen a reduction in Mx traffic, so this is a
> good sign :-)
>
> I know it's hard, 'specially when he directly replies to my own response to
> somebody else, but I am determined not to contribute to his trolling ways.
>
> Silent treatment against trolls is the best way to get rid of them. We as
> a group can do this and get our group back.
>
> Anybody new that I see popping in that replies to his post, I will let them
> know they are dealing with a troll. Hopefully others will give them fair
> warning too.
>
> As far as lurkers go, well they certainly have a keyboard to post their own
> questions..... They surely don't need Mx to ask their questions.
>
> Questions that have been posted by Mx are not the problems.....
>
> Allen
>

Maybe Mx is a college graduate working on a Ph.D. in psychology and
studying behavior on the internet. And, he just happened to like flying
(sim or otherwise) and is using this as his research. Just a thought.

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

[TxSrv]

A Lieberma wrote:
> ...
> IT IS his lack of respect for the replies he has gotten.
>

It is also his disdain for actual flying, and his considering the
activity dangerous and unwise. One doesn't insult the class of
people who fly, and expect them to kiss his butt with technical
help he doesn't really need. He also doesn't mind being publicly
insulted on the net here and in many other groups, and probably
loves it.

F--

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Neil Gould wrote:
>So, just as we are willing to do to others, we should do to him.

When someone gets unreasonable or argumentative, it's simple enough to
start ignoring the individual at that point.

On the other hand, people learn differently and Usenet mixes many
flavors and cultures, so personality conflicts are bound to happen.

I'll answer on-topic posts that interest me and ignore those that don't.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Andrew Sarangan" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Here are some questions MX has asked in the recent past:
>
> - What is the reason for not having icing protection turned on all the
> time?
> - Can VFR fixes be used on IFR flight plans? (How many of us know about
> VFR fixes?)
> - Can you switch VFR to IFR inflight, or do you have to file a full
> flight plan?
> - When class D overlaps with class C, which one takes precedence?
> - Why doesn't the sectional chart legend show the symbol used for
> wildlife refuges and national parks?
> - How do you tell which side of the chain-link class E border you are
> in? (how many pilots have even seen these symbols?)
>
> Now, be honest and ask yourself if these are really trivial questions
> with trivial answers. I am a CFII and I get excited when my students
> ask such probing questions. I am willing to bet that majority of the
> pilot population will not be able to answer the above questions.
>
>

As I have mentioned to several people who are taking up for Anthony it isn't
the questions we have the problem with it his responses to the answers he
received. I also suggested one or two people Google mxsmaniac and see that
Anthony has the same history of behavior in a number of different groups.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Ross Richardson" > wrote in message
...
>>
>
> Maybe Mx is a college graduate working on a Ph.D. in psychology and
> studying behavior on the internet. And, he just happened to like flying
> (sim or otherwise) and is using this as his research. Just a thought.
>

Interesting theory but his history when searched on Google by doesn't back
it up. Here's his home page if you are interested.

http://www.atkielski.com/

[Mxsmanic]

Jay Beckman writes:

> Someone else hit the nail on the head: He knows just which
> questions to ask to spark debate. Not subjects that are cut
> and dried/black and white.

Questions serve no purpose with respect to subjects that are black and
white. They only arise in gray areas. Why would anyone ask a
question about something that was black and white? All the black and
white stuff is already documented and easy to look up.

> Practically all are on what in the sports world would be
> referred to as "Judgement Calls."

That's why they give rise to questions.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Neil Gould]

Recently, B A R R Y > posted:

> Neil Gould wrote:
>> So, just as we are willing to do to others, we should do to him.
>
> When someone gets unreasonable or argumentative, it's simple enough to
> start ignoring the individual at that point.
>
True, however if the unreasonable or argumentative post presents something
that could possibly be detrimental to learning the facts, I appreciate it
when someone jumps in with the correct information.

> On the other hand, people learn differently and Usenet mixes many
> flavors and cultures, so personality conflicts are bound to happen.
>
> I'll answer on-topic posts that interest me and ignore those that
> don't.
>
Agreed.

Neil

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Ross Richardson > wrote:

> Maybe Mx is a college graduate working on a Ph.D. in psychology and
> studying behavior on the internet. And, he just happened to like flying
> (sim or otherwise) and is using this as his research. Just a thought.

Since before 2002?

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Judah]

"Jay Beckman" > wrote in news:rCFbh.39$un3.18
@newsfe14.phx:

> See my point above. If you aren't experienced with the subject, you
> shouldn't be casting aspersions at all.

Sometimes it's difficult to determine whether a term is derogatory or not
when the people who use it don't use it in a derogatory manner. I have never
heard a pilot on here use the term "bugsmasher" in a way that would be
insulting. So I can't begroan Manic for using the term.

> Someone else hit the nail on the head: He knows just which
> questions to ask to spark debate.

You'll get no argument from me there. I've been saying that for some time
now.

> I assume you mean Black-on-Black use of the "N" word? Do you know what
> it means when one African-American calls another by the "N" word?
> Having grown up in Detroit, Michigan (making me a part of the user
> group, trust me), I can give you a clue: It isn't a racial thing...

When my 11 year old son watches a movie where a Black man is singing proudly
about his heritage using the "N" word, is he supposed to inherently know that
it's not really a term that glorifies the Black man's heritage?

>>and I've said my peace. So I'll shut up about it now to prevent another
>>MX thread from evolving into prosperity.

OK, so I lied.

[Jay Beckman]

"Judah" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Jay Beckman" > wrote in news:rCFbh.39$un3.18
> @newsfe14.phx:
>
>> See my point above. If you aren't experienced with the subject, you
>> shouldn't be casting aspersions at all.
>
>Sometimes it's difficult to determine whether a term is derogatory or not
>when the people who use it don't use it in a derogatory manner. I have
>never heard a pilot >on here use the term "bugsmasher" in a way that would
>be insulting. So I can't begroan Manic for using the term.

I used to work with a guy who was a US Air (the old, original US Air) 1st
officer who also worked in sports TV like I do and he only referred to light
GA as "Bug Smashers," "Spam Cans" and the like. I guess 'cause he had keys
to a DC9, he could do so but he wasn't the first person (nor the last) that
I've heard use such descriptions.

>> Someone else hit the nail on the head: He knows just which
>> questions to ask to spark debate.
>
> You'll get no argument from me there. I've been saying that for some time
> now.
>
>> I assume you mean Black-on-Black use of the "N" word? Do you know what
>> it means when one African-American calls another by the "N" word?
>> Having grown up in Detroit, Michigan (making me a part of the user
>> group, trust me), I can give you a clue: It isn't a racial thing...
>
>When my 11 year old son watches a movie where a Black man is singing
>proudly about his heritage using the "N" word, is he supposed to inherently
>know that
>it's not really a term that glorifies the Black man's heritage?

No, you should explain to him that when a Black man calls another Black man
that, he's calling him lazy and stupid (something you shouldn't call anyone
to begin with) but that it does not have the same connotation when it's used
by someone who is not Black.

>>>and I've said my peace. So I'll shut up about it now to prevent another
>>>MX thread from evolving into prosperity.
>
> OK, so I lied.

LOL...

Jay B

[Jay Beckman]

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Ross Richardson > wrote:
>
>> Maybe Mx is a college graduate working on a Ph.D. in psychology and
>> studying behavior on the internet. And, he just happened to like flying
>> (sim or otherwise) and is using this as his research. Just a thought.
>
> Since before 2002?
>
> --
> Bob Noel


Professional Student?

Jay B

[Kev]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> "Ross Richardson" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Maybe Mx is a college graduate working on a Ph.D. in psychology and
> > studying behavior on the internet. And, he just happened to like flying
> > (sim or otherwise) and is using this as his research. Just a thought.
> >
> Interesting theory but his history when searched on Google by doesn't back
> it up. Here's his home page if you are interested.
>
> http://www.atkielski.com/

Well, his website is certainly far more interesting than those who put
him down. I've hardly ever responded to him, but now I think I'll
join those who do answer him.

Someone else mentioned that he might be a teenager. If so, then I have
to laugh myself silly at the macho types who got their panties all tied
up in a wad over his answers. How can anyone waste their lives
throwing hatred at a know-it-all teen?

Moreover, I just realized something crucial. Mx is in France, where
people aren't just rude to foreigners, they're rude to each other. So
it's no wonder he posts the way he does. He's a product of his
environment.

I might be in my fifties, but I can admire a kid with such a strong
(albeit weird) personality. And I can see why he'd ruffle the feathers
of weaker souls and those with sticks up their pompous you-know-whats.

Kev

[Jim Macklin]

A businessman was in the hotel restaurant when a very
attractive and well dressed young woman approached him. She
asked him some general questions, such as why he was in the
hotel and was he married. Then in a loud voice she shouted,
"I'm calling the manager, What kind of a girl do you think I
am?"

The man was embarrassed and moved to a table in a dark
corner as the other people in the room stared at him.

A little while later the girl came over and apologized,
saying, "I'm a doctoral student and my thesis is human
emotions. I was studying crowd reactions to shocking and
private events, sorry if I caused you any trouble."

He said, "$500, your out of your mind!"



"Jay Beckman" > wrote in message
...
|
| "Bob Noel" > wrote in
message
|
...
| > In article >,
| > Ross Richardson > wrote:
| >
| >> Maybe Mx is a college graduate working on a Ph.D. in
psychology and
| >> studying behavior on the internet. And, he just
happened to like flying
| >> (sim or otherwise) and is using this as his research.
Just a thought.
| >
| > Since before 2002?
| >
| > --
| > Bob Noel
|
|
| Professional Student?
|
| Jay B
|
|

[Judah]

"Jay Beckman" > wrote in
:

> I used to work with a guy who was a US Air (the old, original US Air)
> 1st officer who also worked in sports TV like I do and he only referred
> to light GA as "Bug Smashers," "Spam Cans" and the like. I guess 'cause
> he had keys to a DC9, he could do so but he wasn't the first person (nor
> the last) that I've heard use such descriptions.

Certainly the term "Bug Smashers" and "Spam Cans" are typically reserved
for light GA. But when he said it, I suspect he wasn't intending to
belittle light GA. He might have been poking some slight fun at it, or he
might have just been referring to it in a manner that he heard other pilots
refer to it.

> No, you should explain to him that when a Black man calls another Black
> man that, he's calling him lazy and stupid (something you shouldn't call
> anyone to begin with) but that it does not have the same connotation
> when it's used by someone who is not Black.

Perhaps in New York or on NY TV and Radio the term is used differently than
in Detroit, but I hear Black men calling other Black men "My N*****" in a
manner that does not in any way imply lazy or stupid, or in fact have any
negative connotation whatsoever. I frequently hear the word used in a
manner that I might substitute the word "friend".

Ice T uses the term in his rap music that way, as well as in his own
epithet. And Eminem, who is not Black, uses the term in much of his rap
music as well. So somehow I don't believe this to be restricted to use
based on the color of one's skin, either.

[Steve Foley[_2_]]

"TxSrv" > wrote in message
> He also doesn't mind being publicly insulted on the net here and in many
> other groups, and probably loves it.

Type his 'name' into google groups. You get over 120,000 hits! Of course he
loves it. He's been doing the same thing for a long time, and is very good
at it.

[Jay Beckman]

"Judah" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Jay Beckman" > wrote in
> :
>
>> I used to work with a guy who was a US Air (the old, original US Air)
>> 1st officer who also worked in sports TV like I do and he only referred
>> to light GA as "Bug Smashers," "Spam Cans" and the like. I guess 'cause
>> he had keys to a DC9, he could do so but he wasn't the first person (nor
>> the last) that I've heard use such descriptions.
>
> Certainly the term "Bug Smashers" and "Spam Cans" are typically reserved
> for light GA. But when he said it, I suspect he wasn't intending to
> belittle light GA. He might have been poking some slight fun at it, or he
> might have just been referring to it in a manner that he heard other
> pilots
> refer to it.

No, compared to the DC9 he drove for a living, he meant "Bug Smasher." ie:
Light GA flies so low you're down with the bugs. I can attest to this being
true considering how much "blech" is on the leading edges and cowl of our
club 172 when I've been out practicing ground reference or simply doing
pattern work at Casa Grande Muni south of Phoenix. There is a lot of
agriculture down that way and plenty of bugs get smashed...

>> No, you should explain to him that when a Black man calls another Black
>> man that, he's calling him lazy and stupid (something you shouldn't call
>> anyone to begin with) but that it does not have the same connotation
>> when it's used by someone who is not Black.
>
> Perhaps in New York or on NY TV and Radio the term is used differently
> than
> in Detroit, but I hear Black men calling other Black men "My N*****" in a
> manner that does not in any way imply lazy or stupid, or in fact have any
> negative connotation whatsoever. I frequently hear the word used in a
> manner that I might substitute the word "friend".
>
> Ice T uses the term in his rap music that way, as well as in his own
> epithet. And Eminem, who is not Black, uses the term in much of his rap
> music as well. So somehow I don't believe this to be restricted to use
> based on the color of one's skin, either.

In that regard, it's more akin to Japanese where the inflection and context
determine the actual meaning. I've heard it used as "friend" also in the
manner in which you describe, but with a little more "venom" and in a more
aggressive conversation it can also mean as I described.

Jay B

[Judah]

"Jay Beckman" > wrote in
:

> No, compared to the DC9 he drove for a living, he meant "Bug Smasher."
> ie: Light GA flies so low you're down with the bugs. I can attest to
> this being true considering how much "blech" is on the leading edges and
> cowl of our club 172 when I've been out practicing ground reference or
> simply doing pattern work at Casa Grande Muni south of Phoenix. There
> is a lot of agriculture down that way and plenty of bugs get smashed...

Certainly. But what is derogatory about that? It's just a statement of fact
that light GA planes smash bugs, hence the nickname "bug smasher". I don't
get insulted by the use of the term by Manic any more than your friend the
DC9 pilot.

> In that regard, it's more akin to Japanese where the inflection and
> context determine the actual meaning. I've heard it used as "friend"
> also in the manner in which you describe, but with a little more "venom"
> and in a more aggressive conversation it can also mean as I described.

Just ask Kramer...

[Dave[_1_]]

Well stated Todd!

Dave


On 30 Nov 2006 09:27:15 -0600, T o d d P a t t i s t
> wrote:

>B A R R Y > wrote:
>
>>Personally, I think some of the questions keep me sharp. Some of the
>>"stupid" questions make me reach for the AIM or a chart to look up the
>>info before I post.
>
>Me too. Yesterday I posted something that was wrong, or at
>the least outdated and incomplete. Bob Gardner corrected
>me, and now I know something more than I did before. Would
>Bob have known of my error if not for this thread? Would he
>have managed to transfer his knowledge to me if I had not
>posted a reply? What benefit would there be to the pilots
>here if Bob had tried to engage in some form of thread
>boycott?
>
>I don't post for Mx. I never reply just for the person who
>originally posted. I post for the information I can give to
>those who read the thread and the information I can receive
>from those who know more.
>
>Sure, I hope Mx will eventually see the light, but it
>bothers me not if he never flies and uses the information
>just for simming. Maybe his love of accuracy in the flight
>sim will transfer an interest in flying to another sim pilot
>who just can't wait to come out to the airport and put some
>of that accurate knowledge to use. I've got a detailed book
>on aerial combat tactics. I'll never fly a fighter in
>combat, except perhaps in a sim, but I still want to know
>about such things.

[Dave[_1_]]

No argument on that!

Dave



On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 08:31:16 -0800, "Al G"
> wrote:

>
>"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
>
>crap snipped...
>
>It's been my experience that any aircraft once exposed to ice, will
>naturally seek out warmer air below.
>
>Al G
>
>

[Dave[_1_]]

I just had a look at his site...

Impressive! Fab pix, tons of info.....

Dave




)On Thu, 30 Nov 2006 13:39:32 -0600, "Gig 601XL Builder"
<wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote:

>
>"Ross Richardson" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>
>> Maybe Mx is a college graduate working on a Ph.D. in psychology and
>> studying behavior on the internet. And, he just happened to like flying
>> (sim or otherwise) and is using this as his research. Just a thought.
>>
>
>Interesting theory but his history when searched on Google by doesn't back
>it up. Here's his home page if you are interested.
>
>http://www.atkielski.com/
>

[Jose[_1_]]

> Impressive! Fab pix, tons of info.....

Is the info correct?

Jose
--
"There are 3 secrets to the perfect landing. Unfortunately, nobody knows
what they are." - (mike).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jay Beckman]

"Jose" > wrote in message
et...
>> Impressive! Fab pix, tons of info.....
>
> Is the info correct?
>
> Jose
> --
> "There are 3 secrets to the perfect landing. Unfortunately, nobody knows
> what they are." - (mike).
> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

As long as it's correct to him, that's all that matters...

:O/

Jay B

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Kev" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>> "Ross Richardson" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > Maybe Mx is a college graduate working on a Ph.D. in psychology and
>> > studying behavior on the internet. And, he just happened to like flying
>> > (sim or otherwise) and is using this as his research. Just a thought.
>> >
>> Interesting theory but his history when searched on Google by doesn't
>> back
>> it up. Here's his home page if you are interested.
>>
>> http://www.atkielski.com/
>

>
> I might be in my fifties, but I can admire a kid with such a strong
> (albeit weird) personality. And I can see why he'd ruffle the feathers
> of weaker souls and those with sticks up their pompous you-know-whats.
>

If you can admire a guy that can barely make a living and that attacks women
because of their breastfeeding decisions you have some pretty damn low
standards.

[Marco Leon]

My 4 year old keeps asking "why" about everything too. Eventually one
of his "whys" will make me think but that doesn't mean he'll understand
or care about the answer.


B A R R Y wrote:
> Dave wrote:
> >
> >
> > It was 30 some years ago when I was pumping "stupid" questions to a
> > pilot..
>
> Personally, I think some of the questions keep me sharp. Some of the
> "stupid" questions make me reach for the AIM or a chart to look up the
> info before I post.

[Kev]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> "Kev" > wrote in message
> > I might be in my fifties, but I can admire a kid with such a strong
> > (albeit weird) personality. And I can see why he'd ruffle the feathers
> > of weaker souls and those with sticks up their pompous you-know-whats.
> >
> If you can admire a guy that can barely make a living and that attacks women
> because of their breastfeeding decisions you have some pretty damn low
> standards.

Someone barely making a living doesn't bother me, since that's a
relative thing. Any anti-breastfeeding opinion would bother me if he
were older or had kids. Actually, it's hard to find anyone without
kids who is enlightened on that topic. Where was that on his website?

So are we also now going to have to ask each person on this group what
their breastfeeding opinions are? Might as well start a political
debate too. Sigh.

Kev

[Mxsmanic]

Kev writes:

> Someone barely making a living doesn't bother me, since that's a
> relative thing. Any anti-breastfeeding opinion would bother me if he
> were older or had kids. Actually, it's hard to find anyone without
> kids who is enlightened on that topic. Where was that on his website?

I once was involved in discussions on lactation in a forum on
pediatrics, as I recall. Some people have many misconceptions
concerning lactation, including many lactation women. Pregnancy and
childcare, like dieting, are overrun by superstition.

The topic, as I recall, was actually someone aviation-related.
Someone asserted that a baby cannot go for the duration of an entire
airplane flight without being fed, and that is simply not true. Even
drinking is not strictly necessary, but certainly food intake
(including breastfeeding) is not.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Kev]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
> If you can admire a guy that can barely make a living and that attacks women
> because of their breastfeeding decisions you have some pretty damn low
> standards.

Not such low standards that I have to resort to half-truths.

Did you mean the thread in rec.travel.air in 2001? Where the topic
was a woman whose bottled breastmilk was thrown away by an airline
before boarding? Where Mxsmanic finally suggested (as did others)
that she breastfeed? Where when it was revealed that she wouldn't
breastfeed because she was too embarrassed, that Mxsmanic suggested
water to keep the baby hydrated since she refused to breastfeed over a
12 hour flight? Where people jumping in the middle of the thread with
no clue how it started, got this all mixed up?

If that was the "attacks" you meant, then I have no problem with them,
since they weren't attacks at all.

Kev

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Kev" > wrote in message
ps.com...
> Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>> "Kev" > wrote in message
>> > I might be in my fifties, but I can admire a kid with such a strong
>> > (albeit weird) personality. And I can see why he'd ruffle the feathers
>> > of weaker souls and those with sticks up their pompous you-know-whats.
>> >
>> If you can admire a guy that can barely make a living and that attacks
>> women
>> because of their breastfeeding decisions you have some pretty damn low
>> standards.
>
> Someone barely making a living doesn't bother me, since that's a
> relative thing. Any anti-breastfeeding opinion would bother me if he
> were older or had kids. Actually, it's hard to find anyone without
> kids who is enlightened on that topic. Where was that on his website?
>
> So are we also now going to have to ask each person on this group what
> their breastfeeding opinions are? Might as well start a political
> debate too. Sigh.
>
> Kev
>

Just Google mxsmaniac and spend about 20 minutes exploring. Until you've
done that you really won't understand Anthony's MO in all discussion groups.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> Kev writes:
>
>> Someone barely making a living doesn't bother me, since that's a
>> relative thing. Any anti-breastfeeding opinion would bother me if he
>> were older or had kids. Actually, it's hard to find anyone without
>> kids who is enlightened on that topic. Where was that on his website?
>
> I once was involved in discussions on lactation in a forum on
> pediatrics, as I recall. Some people have many misconceptions
> concerning lactation, including many lactation women. Pregnancy and
> childcare, like dieting, are overrun by superstition.
>
> The topic, as I recall, was actually someone aviation-related.
> Someone asserted that a baby cannot go for the duration of an entire
> airplane flight without being fed, and that is simply not true. Even
> drinking is not strictly necessary, but certainly food intake
> (including breastfeeding) is not.
>
> --
> Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

That may well be one of the MANY threads you were involved in but not the
one I was talking about. I'd look it up but I don't have time on this Friday
afternoon.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Kev" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>> If you can admire a guy that can barely make a living and that attacks
>> women
>> because of their breastfeeding decisions you have some pretty damn low
>> standards.
>
> Not such low standards that I have to resort to half-truths.
>
> Did you mean the thread in rec.travel.air in 2001? Where the topic
> was a woman whose bottled breastmilk was thrown away by an airline
> before boarding? Where Mxsmanic finally suggested (as did others)
> that she breastfeed? Where when it was revealed that she wouldn't
> breastfeed because she was too embarrassed, that Mxsmanic suggested
> water to keep the baby hydrated since she refused to breastfeed over a
> 12 hour flight? Where people jumping in the middle of the thread with
> no clue how it started, got this all mixed up?
>
> If that was the "attacks" you meant, then I have no problem with them,
> since they weren't attacks at all.
>
> Kev
>

No that's not it. I don't have time this afternoon to find the post but if I
get some time this weekend I will and I'll post a link. But to sum it up he
attacked a women because she was upset that the hospital didn't let her
breastfeed because of a problem with the child.

[Newps]

Mxsmanic wrote:


>
>
> I once was involved in discussions on lactation in a forum on
> pediatrics, as I recall.






Now that's funny. You have no more business being in that forum than
this one.

[Steve Foley[_2_]]

"Marco Leon" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> My 4 year old keeps asking "why" about everything too. Eventually one
> of his "whys" will make me think but that doesn't mean he'll understand
> or care about the answer.

Your four year old does that to get Daddy's attention.

Just like Anthony

** Note - MXX is a flag for anyone wishing to ignore my replies to Anthony

[A Lieberma]

"Steve Foley" > wrote in
:

> ** Note - MXX is a flag for anyone wishing to ignore my replies to
> Anthony

Better yet, just don't reply to Mx at all..... :-))

Then we don't have to ignore any of your replies AND we get a better chance
of getting rid of a troll.

Allen

[Dave[_3_]]

Some of the stuff I read appears accurate, as best as my ability to
judge..

Lots of stuff I am not able to pass judgement on due to lack of
training , knowledge or experience. (never been to Paris)

Site is well assembled, the links work and interesting topics.

I have seen lots worse.. :)

Dave


On Fri, 01 Dec 2006 03:36:28 GMT, Jose >
wrote:

>> Impressive! Fab pix, tons of info.....
>
>Is the info correct?
>
>Jose

[Matt Barrow]

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Mxsmanic wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>> I once was involved in discussions on lactation in a forum on
>> pediatrics, as I recall.
>
>
> Now that's funny. You have no more business being in that forum than this
> one.

Not at all! I find breastfeeding is entirely something within his frame of
reference...as a recipient.