This should settle it!

Gig,

at some point he is going to display the attitude
that he displays here to someone in the real world.


Well, look at his real life as described on his website. The
correlation is obvious.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

We are conditioned to interpret physical sensations in certain ways. Right
from birth. That's why, even in VMC some people get airsick. And that's why
it's so hard to ignore those sensations in IMC.

mike

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...

This only makes a difference if you are conditioned to interpret physical
sensations in certain ways.
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Some people are afraid of dying. Some are afraid of living...

mike

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Mxsmanic,

My attitude won't get me killed.


That remains to be seen. Your life isn't too thrilling as it is, as you
repeat again and again in your blog. And the cause - surprise - may
well be your attitude.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

You can simulate momentary g forces, but not sustained.

mike

wrote in message
ups.com...

I would like to point out that (and most pilots here already
know this) X-Plane has been approved by the FAA for training towards
an Airline Transport certificate, when used in a full motion simulator.

Out of curiosity, what are the limitations of a full motion simulator?
I am guessing it can't simulate G-forces or other extreme manuevers.

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 15:54:03 -0700, C J Campbell wrote:

Or, instead of a mist machine, you have LCD goggles which, the more
current you run through them the more opaque the top half becomes. Or
however it is that LCDs work. Sayyy. That could actually work...

Actually, I'd bet it would work very well, at least for simulating reduced
visibility.

This could be combined with the mixed color trick to permit the entire
goggle surface to be misted in this color (or not). That's simpler (and
therefore cheaper), and it also avoids "peeking out the side" problems.

I'm not sure how well it could simulate cloudscapes, though (ie. for the
leaning horizon illusion). But, perhaps...

- Andrew

P.S. They'd still be less comfortable than "wearing" IMC, though grin.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

C J Campbell writes:

I have a real problem with instructors who begin by running down
other
instructors, the FAA, the manufacturers, etc. It demonstrates a
serious
authority problem, a very dangerous attitude. Apparently he does not
like the instructional techniques that have proven successful for
years.

Invite him to this newsgroup. He'd fit right in.


How would you knoiw fjukktard.

You don't know one thng about real flying .

Not one.


Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Oz Lander writes:

http://overtheairwaves.com/

I refer to the first article on this page.

It's just another expression of opinion, exactly similar to what has been
given here.


You're an idiot., Go back to playing Froggit or space invaders, jerkoff.

Bertie

Mark T. Dame wrote:
That fact is that your insistence that MSFS is a more valuable training
aid than it really is makes me glad that you aren't flying a real plane.

(Dammit, I'm feeding the trolls again. Somebody smack me.)


-m

SMACK!

MSFS is one hell of a simulator. It certainly isn't a training device,
however.

With MSFS I can land a 747 without bouncing or pancaking the damn thing
(which I still do occasionally in a tiny 150). I can also nail the
centerline in a large jet (I'm always off a bit to the left in a 150).

MSFS is great to get started, but just like anything, you HAVE to forget
all the bad habits you've taught yourself with the simulator because
real world flying is much different. A steep turn IRL is easier because
you can feel it in your ass. You can feel and see if it's too steep,
too fast, slow, whatever. In MSFS, you have to stare at the instruments
and watch the horizon and guess. Landing in MSFS is easier because it's
so damn forgiving.

You can go ahead and spend the $2,000-$4,000 on all of that high end
simulator stuff, the yoke, the rudder pedals, the instrument panel. You
can also spend upwards of $2,000 on one of those "real dolls" that will
simulate sex for you. The fantasy and the reality, in both cases (I'm
only guessing about the dolls) are far removed from each other and
should not be mistaken. (I am referring to MSFS and not an actual
training device)

Don't fall in love with your Real Doll, the arguments are bitter, bitter
affairs.

On 2007-04-17 08:11:08 -0700, Andrew Gideon said:

On Mon, 16 Apr 2007 15:54:03 -0700, C J Campbell wrote:

Or, instead of a mist machine, you have LCD goggles which, the more
current you run through them the more opaque the top half becomes. Or
however it is that LCDs work. Sayyy. That could actually work...

Actually, I'd bet it would work very well, at least for simulating reduced
visibility.

This could be combined with the mixed color trick to permit the entire
goggle surface to be misted in this color (or not). That's simpler (and
therefore cheaper), and it also avoids "peeking out the side" problems.

I'm not sure how well it could simulate cloudscapes, though (ie. for the
leaning horizon illusion). But, perhaps...

- Andrew

P.S. They'd still be less comfortable than "wearing" IMC, though grin.

Perhaps Virtual Reality lenses, modified so that only the top half is
LCD, while the bottom half is clear. The instructor could then program
any weather or illusions he wanted.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On Sun, 15 Apr 2007 21:04:35 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

writes:

Incorrect statement. Learning to fly on instruments also entails
learning to firmly shut out the "seat of the pants" sensations. The
"seat of the pants" sensations are not there when flying a desktop
computer so its incorrect to say that instrument flying can be
"accurately simulated" on a desktop.

This only makes a difference if you are conditioned to interpret physical
sensations in certain ways.


my boy you are so wrong that I can only hope that you never ever get
to fly an actual aircraft in those conditions.
the shock of being exposed to reality may be just too much for you.

Stealth Pilot