C-172 down at HPN - 2 fatalities

On 4/25/05 10:47 PM, in article ,
"Ed" spewed:

George, this is not about common sense, this is about the belief that only
you have common sense and the rest of the world are idiots. The sooner you
get that, the sooner you will stop posting these reasonable posts and get
with the flaming.

"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:Pmhbe.4701$WX.776@trndny01...
BTIZ wrote:

I've never seen a reporter do that... they think they have it right the
first time and are the most stupid people I've seen...

The few with which I've dealt haven't seemed to be stupid -- they're just
in too much of a hurry to double-check things. Gotta make that deadline.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to the
mashed potatoes.


I work at a newspaper. About half of the reporters are concrete stupid. We
had one last year doing an interview with a Navy vet and she asked him what
Pearl Harbor was. Those of us that heard her ask were stunned when he
continued with the interview instead of hanging up on her dumb ass.
Even when we did a story on the flight school I trained at, and I pointed
out a number of glaring errors long before deadline, they were not fixed.
Among other things, it "sounded better" to say "license to fly" when the
student had only soloed.
--
Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino

Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.wizardofdraws.com

More Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.cartoonclipart.com

They're stupid AND lazy. I was in P.R. for about 10 years and reporters just
ate out of my hand. I basically did the work for them on the facts and my
clients paid for it. My biggest successes were stories that I wrote but were
printed whole cloth by the paper. I once was duped by a client. I sent out
press releases, press kits and got the nets, locals, cable and radio to
cover an event based upon a wrong premise. I got ink, video and radio for my
client like there was no tomorrow. Not one of them fact-checked.

The saying used to be: those who can't, teach. Now it's: those who can't,
report.





"Wizard of Draws" wrote in
message news:BE933281.64DF1%jeffbTAKEOUTALLCAPS@TOEMAILwiz ardofdraws.com...
On 4/25/05 10:47 PM, in article
,
"Ed" spewed:

George, this is not about common sense, this is about the belief that
only
you have common sense and the rest of the world are idiots. The sooner
you
get that, the sooner you will stop posting these reasonable posts and get
with the flaming.

"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:Pmhbe.4701$WX.776@trndny01...
BTIZ wrote:

I've never seen a reporter do that... they think they have it right the
first time and are the most stupid people I've seen...

The few with which I've dealt haven't seemed to be stupid -- they're
just
in too much of a hurry to double-check things. Gotta make that deadline.

George Patterson
There's plenty of room for all of God's creatures. Right next to
the
mashed potatoes.


I work at a newspaper. About half of the reporters are concrete stupid. We
had one last year doing an interview with a Navy vet and she asked him
what
Pearl Harbor was. Those of us that heard her ask were stunned when he
continued with the interview instead of hanging up on her dumb ass.
Even when we did a story on the flight school I trained at, and I pointed
out a number of glaring errors long before deadline, they were not fixed.
Among other things, it "sounded better" to say "license to fly" when the
student had only soloed.
--
Jeff 'The Wizard of Draws' Bucchino

Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.wizardofdraws.com

More Cartoons with a Touch of Magic�
http://www.cartoonclipart.com

"A.Coleman" wrote in message
. ..
The damned ceiling couldn't have been more than 500 feet. Temp/dewpoint
spread was zero. Says something about American Flyers that it's taking a
primary student up shooting instrument approaches in low IMC .

Was it _expected_ low IMC? When I was learning to fly, my instructor (13,000
hour ATPL) took me out in IMC with a cloudbase of 800 feet and two potential
diversions to where the weather was nice just in case. The forecast said 800
feet for the rest of the day, and ATC said 800 feet when we started down the
ILS. We went around at 500 feet (still in IMC) on the first attempt, just so
we could resolve the conflict between what we heard and what we saw, and on
the second attempt (at which point ATC's observations had been revised)
popped out of the bottoms at 300 feet.

The experience was most rewarding and educational. At no time was there any
danger, we were well within the restrictions of the instructor's licence,
the instructor was extremely experienced in IMC flying, training and
examining (in fact he was my IMC rating examiner a couple of years later)
and we had diversions just in case everything got foggy.

It's not fair, then, to suggest that taking a student out in IMC was a bad
thing to do. In my case it taught me how to not kill myself by inadvertently
flying into a cloud (something that I'm not convinced you can learn properly
on a nice day with foggles on). The only caveat here, though, is that the
zero spread between temperature and dewpoint would have made me think twice.

D.

"Peter R." wrote in message
oups.com...
It's worth noting that the student was NOT an instrument student. He
was still working on his private ticket.
If that is truly the case, then it would seem more probably that the
instructor were flying the approach from the left seat. I cannot
imagine any student pilot being able to, nor a primary instructor
allowing the student to fly an approach in actual low IFR conditions.

It's quite possible that the student flew a chunk of the approach and then
the instructor took over when it started to go a bit askew. When I was a
student I flew a vectored rejoin, established (sort of) on the localiser and
got down to about 600 feet with my instructor giving instructions all the
way ("left a couple of degrees, take off about 100rpm, ..."). Only when the
needles started to drift about did the instructor take over (and isn't it
annoying when you've been slaving for five minutes to keep them vaguely
right and the instant he takes over they hammer back to where they should be
and stay there ? :-)

Of course, the sign of a good instructor is that (a) he/she knows to take
over while all is not lost; and (b) he/she realises that if he/she takes
over a bit late, the direction to go in is up.

D.

"BTIZ" wrote in message
news:rIgbe.19158$%c1.12969@fed1read05...
I've never seen a reporter do that... they think they have it right the
first time and are the most stupid people I've seen... seeming to be
experts at things they no nothing about... they don't even know enough to
ask the question..

Having worked in publishing, I've seen good reporters and bad ones. I'd
never try to be a reporter because I hate interviewing people for 80-word
stories - I'm more a features writer who wants to explore the subject more
thoroughly. So I've tended to reside in the tech-editor slot in the
magazines I've worked for.

The bad reporters I've worked with have never asked me anything about
technology. The good ones have come to me daily and said: "I think this is
what this means, but can you explain it?".

D.

What he was doing was putting IMC time in the CFI's logbook.


It's worth noting that the student was NOT an instrument student. He
was still working on his private ticket. It was a pretty low day for a
student pilot to be shooting instrument approaches, in fact I have no
idea what they were doing out there that day. I can't imagine my
primary instructor allowing me out in such low weather.

Tom Fleischman wrote:

Believe me, by the time he got to his final position he would have been
handed off long ago. Normally NY App does the handoff shortly before
clearing for the approach, certainly outside the HESTER (the outer
makrker/FAF). He went down less than a half mile from the threshold.

How is the approach clearance delivered *after* the handoff?

Tom Fleischman wrote:
In article
250420051652421759%bodhijunkoneeightyeightjunkatm ,
Tom Fleischman k
wrote:


Normally NY App does the handoff shortly before
clearing for the approach, certainly outside the HESTER (the outer
makrker/FAF).


DOH!!

That would be "after".

Oh. Disregard my earlier question. DGB

"Wizard of Draws" wrote in
message news:BE933281.64DF1%jeffbTAKEOUTALLCAPS@TOEMAILwiz ardofdraws.com...
I work at a newspaper. About half of the reporters are concrete stupid. We
had one last year doing an interview with a Navy vet and she asked him
what
Pearl Harbor was.



That's where Germany attacked the US and drew us into the Spanish-American
War.

Everyone know that!

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 04:35:27 GMT, "H.P." wrote:

They're stupid AND lazy. I was in P.R. for about 10 years and reporters
just
ate out of my hand. I basically did the work for them on the facts and my
clients paid for it. My biggest successes were stories that I wrote but
were
printed whole cloth by the paper. I once was duped by a client. I sent
out
press releases, press kits and got the nets, locals, cable and radio to
cover an event based upon a wrong premise. I got ink, video and radio for
my
client like there was no tomorrow. Not one of them fact-checked.


Let's see if I understand this...

YOU were duped, and the newspaper reporters were the ones at fault for
not fact-checking?

No he was given false info by his client who paid him to get it out in the
press. He had no responsibility to prove everything that he gave the press
was true. If PR people had to do that they would all be out of business in a
week. Their job is to spin information to put their client in the best
light.

On the other hand the press has a responsibility to check facts. ESPECIALLY
when it comes from a PR firm.