Landing without flaps

Robert Moore wrote:
buttman wrote
But quite frankly, I don't know why I even waste my time.

And without a real name and identity, you ARE just wasting
your time. We all know that Dudley is a real person even though
I personally disagree with much that he has to say.

Since I don't post a lot pure bull****, I have no need to
hide my identity behind some childish name.

Robert Moore (PanAm, retired)
ATP 1450645 ASMEL B-727, B-707, L-188
CFI 1450645CFI ASEL, IA
Naval Aviator V-15753 S-2F, P-2V, P-3B

39820 US Hwy 19 North #256
Tarpon Springs, FL 34689
(727) 934-3811

Interesting. Why not discuss right here exactly what it is you don't
agree with? I'm friendly and willing :-))) Let's see where we differ on
things related to flying.
Can't be more fair than this?


--
Dudley Henriques

buttman wrote:
On 7 Mar, 19:22, Dudley Henriques wrote:
How's that? Learned something?:-)

--
Dudley Henriques

No because you did not teach anything. "This is how it is" is not
teaching, it's telling.

Anyways, the topic of discussion has never been about "is it OK to
starve fuel on takeoff". Even if it was, its not a matter of "yes" or
"no"

Safety is, in my opinion, never a "yes" or "no" kind of thing. Its
like discussing abortion or something. It's never as simple as "yes"
or "no".

I see. Well, how about this for a lesson. You take my post that you just
answered down to the nearest FAA office and show it to them. Then come
on back here and post exactly what they told you along with the phone
number of that office.
Can't be more fair than this. If they agree with you that simply telling
you not to do this is not lesson enough , I will publicly apologize to
you in front of this entire forum. If they agree with me, come on back
and we'll try again.
Your call!
--
Dudley Henriques

On 7 Mar, 19:31, Dudley Henriques wrote:

Interesting. Why not discuss right here exactly what it is you don't
agree with? I'm friendly and willing :-))) Let's see where we differ on
things related to flying.
Can't be more fair than this?

--
Dudley Henriques

OK. For starters, I believe there is only one thing in the world that
can be objectively considered "unsafe". And that one and only thing is
being unprepared. No matter what it is, it can be done safely as long
as the peoper precautions are made. Whether it be doing aerobatics
10ft above the ground, barrel rolling a 737, flying over max gross,
cleaning a loaded gun, jumping the grand canyon on a morotcycle, etc
etc. You seem to believe safety is determined by who-the-hell-knows-
what.

Theres more, but thats a good starting point.

Robert Moore wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote
OK. Fair enough. You DON'T starve an engine of fuel on a student on
takeoff to teach him about engine failure on takeoff.
How's that? Learned something?:-)

Sorry Dudley....so YOU say.... I've done it as a routine procedure and
given a long enough runway (mine was 6,000') I see nothing wrong in
doing it.
It's about time that you stopped preaching "your" flight instructing
dogma. Perhaps some of us are more confident in our abilities than
others.

Bob Moore

Sorry Moore; Air Florida Chief Pilot not withstanding (Larry Wheaton
remember), I don't have to defend this procedure to you or anyone else
for that matter, and if you were doing it, I can well understand how
Wheaton put hat bird in the Potomac.
Now YOU march your butt down to the local FAA office with what I have
said about doing this and get their opinion, then come on back here and
let us all know what they have to say about it.
I wouldn't have believed what you have just written if i hadn't seen it
myself.
If you believe that starving an engine in a single engine airplane with
a student is acceptable procedure, you are a damn idiot and right up
there with Butthead!

--
Dudley Henriques

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
Robert Moore wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote
OK. Fair enough. You DON'T starve an engine of fuel on a student on
takeoff to teach him about engine failure on takeoff.
How's that? Learned something?:-)

Sorry Dudley....so YOU say.... I've done it as a routine procedure and
given a long enough runway (mine was 6,000') I see nothing wrong in
doing it. It's about time that you stopped preaching "your" flight
instructing
dogma. Perhaps some of us are more confident in our abilities than
others.

Bob Moore

Sorry Moore; Air Florida Chief Pilot not withstanding (Larry Wheaton
remember), I don't have to defend this procedure to you or anyone else for
that matter, and if you were doing it, I can well understand how Wheaton
put hat bird in the Potomac.
Now YOU march your butt down to the local FAA office with what I have said
about doing this and get their opinion, then come on back here and let us
all know what they have to say about it.
I wouldn't have believed what you have just written if i hadn't seen it
myself.
If you believe that starving an engine in a single engine airplane with a
student is acceptable procedure, you are a damn idiot and right up there
with Butthead!

--
Dudley Henriques


Why don't you guy take it off line. We got it! You are way down in the
noise now and we don't want to hear it anymore.

--
BobF.

buttman wrote:
On 7 Mar, 19:31, Dudley Henriques wrote:
Interesting. Why not discuss right here exactly what it is you don't
agree with? I'm friendly and willing :-))) Let's see where we differ on
things related to flying.
Can't be more fair than this?

--
Dudley Henriques

OK. For starters, I believe there is only one thing in the world that
can be objectively considered "unsafe". And that one and only thing is
being unprepared. No matter what it is, it can be done safely as long
as the peoper precautions are made. Whether it be doing aerobatics
10ft above the ground, barrel rolling a 737, flying over max gross,
cleaning a loaded gun, jumping the grand canyon on a morotcycle, etc
etc. You seem to believe safety is determined by who-the-hell-knows-
what.

Theres more, but thats a good starting point.

Are you back from the FAA office yet Butts? Then we'll talk flying, and
not before.
Avoiding the task I gave you by changing the subject and trying to
engage won't work.
You DON'T starve an engine on takeoff on a student...EVER!!
Now go see what the FAA says about this and I'll discuss anything you wish.

--
Dudley Henriques

Bob F. wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
Robert Moore wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote
OK. Fair enough. You DON'T starve an engine of fuel on a student on
takeoff to teach him about engine failure on takeoff.
How's that? Learned something?:-)

Sorry Dudley....so YOU say.... I've done it as a routine procedure and
given a long enough runway (mine was 6,000') I see nothing wrong in
doing it. It's about time that you stopped preaching "your" flight
instructing
dogma. Perhaps some of us are more confident in our abilities than
others.

Bob Moore

Sorry Moore; Air Florida Chief Pilot not withstanding (Larry Wheaton
remember), I don't have to defend this procedure to you or anyone else
for that matter, and if you were doing it, I can well understand how
Wheaton put hat bird in the Potomac.
Now YOU march your butt down to the local FAA office with what I have
said about doing this and get their opinion, then come on back here
and let us all know what they have to say about it.
I wouldn't have believed what you have just written if i hadn't seen
it myself.
If you believe that starving an engine in a single engine airplane
with a student is acceptable procedure, you are a damn idiot and right
up there with Butthead!

--
Dudley Henriques


Why don't you guy take it off line. We got it! You are way down in
the noise now and we don't want to hear it anymore.

Trim your posts! :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

Bob F. wrote:
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
Robert Moore wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote
OK. Fair enough. You DON'T starve an engine of fuel on a student on
takeoff to teach him about engine failure on takeoff.
How's that? Learned something?:-)

Sorry Dudley....so YOU say.... I've done it as a routine procedure and
given a long enough runway (mine was 6,000') I see nothing wrong in
doing it. It's about time that you stopped preaching "your" flight
instructing
dogma. Perhaps some of us are more confident in our abilities than
others.

Bob Moore

Sorry Moore; Air Florida Chief Pilot not withstanding (Larry Wheaton
remember), I don't have to defend this procedure to you or anyone else
for that matter, and if you were doing it, I can well understand how
Wheaton put hat bird in the Potomac.
Now YOU march your butt down to the local FAA office with what I have
said about doing this and get their opinion, then come on back here
and let us all know what they have to say about it.
I wouldn't have believed what you have just written if i hadn't seen
it myself.
If you believe that starving an engine in a single engine airplane
with a student is acceptable procedure, you are a damn idiot and right
up there with Butthead!

--
Dudley Henriques


Why don't you guy take it off line. We got it! You are way down in
the noise now and we don't want to hear it anymore.

Your probably right Fry. I'll make an attempt to disengage on this.
Thanx

--
Dudley Henriques

On 7 Mar, 19:56, Dudley Henriques wrote:
buttman wrote:
On 7 Mar, 19:31, Dudley Henriques wrote:
Interesting. Why not discuss right here exactly what it is you don't
agree with? I'm friendly and willing :-))) Let's see where we differ on
things related to flying.
Can't be more fair than this?

--
Dudley Henriques

OK. For starters, I believe there is only one thing in the world that
can be objectively considered "unsafe". And that one and only thing is
being unprepared. No matter what it is, it can be done safely as long
as the peoper precautions are made. Whether it be doing aerobatics
10ft above the ground, barrel rolling a 737, flying over max gross,
cleaning a loaded gun, jumping the grand canyon on a morotcycle, etc
etc. You seem to believe safety is determined by who-the-hell-knows-
what.

Theres more, but thats a good starting point.

Are you back from the FAA office yet Butts? Then we'll talk flying, and
not before.
Avoiding the task I gave you by changing the subject and trying to
engage won't work.
You DON'T starve an engine on takeoff on a student...EVER!!
Now go see what the FAA says about this and I'll discuss anything you wish.

--
Dudley Henriques

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi

buttman wrote:
On 7 Mar, 19:56, Dudley Henriques wrote:
buttman wrote:
On 7 Mar, 19:31, Dudley Henriques wrote:
Interesting. Why not discuss right here exactly what it is you don't
agree with? I'm friendly and willing :-))) Let's see where we differ on
things related to flying.
Can't be more fair than this?
--
Dudley Henriques
OK. For starters, I believe there is only one thing in the world that
can be objectively considered "unsafe". And that one and only thing is
being unprepared. No matter what it is, it can be done safely as long
as the peoper precautions are made. Whether it be doing aerobatics
10ft above the ground, barrel rolling a 737, flying over max gross,
cleaning a loaded gun, jumping the grand canyon on a morotcycle, etc
etc. You seem to believe safety is determined by who-the-hell-knows-
what.
Theres more, but thats a good starting point.
Are you back from the FAA office yet Butts? Then we'll talk flying, and
not before.
Avoiding the task I gave you by changing the subject and trying to
engage won't work.
You DON'T starve an engine on takeoff on a student...EVER!!
Now go see what the FAA says about this and I'll discuss anything you wish.

--
Dudley Henriques

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignoratio_elenchi
Butts;

Another poster said it and I agree. It's getting out of hand. I'm as
guilty as you are. It's drawing in old advasaries on all sides and isn't
healthy for the forum. Let's end this right now with no further comment
good or bad.
I'm sorry for my part in it. Neither one of us is going to solve
anything flight safety wise going this route.
Let's just end it and let it go.
Best to you


--
Dudley Henriques