![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Tue, 9 Feb 2010 14:26:25 -0800 (PST), george wrote:
Mixedup is not and never has been 'reasonable' .. Nor has he ever actually flown a real aeroplane- either a sailplane or a powerplane. He is only here because he has nowhere else to be Of course, you so bored, as many others are, you play with him. Remember this next time you moan about how RAP is "going to the trolls". |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 9, 11:17*am, wrote:
In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote: george writes: And as to 'situational awareness' there's an extremely large blind spot in the modern sailplane right under the nose A Cirrus isn't a sailplane. And a pilot with a blind spot needs to fly in such a way that he makes allowances for his inability to see in that blind spot. All real airplanes have a large blind spot through an arc that starts at the nose, follows the fuselage around to the tail, and continues over the airplane to the rearmost window or top of the windscreen depending on model. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. And still doesn't change the circumstances to with, the tow plane had ROW and that had nothing at all to do with MSXs's non-experience except to allow yet another usenet fjucktard (yes 'George', you) with a chance to chime in and contribute to the noise. Geez, grow up ladies. |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 10, 5:46*pm, Mike Ash wrote:
Funny, I see the cause and effect as backwards: only reason I'm desperate enough to toy with the troll is because there's no legitimate traffic going on. Notice how the on topic traffic has gone up and the kooks have deserted the group... Mixedup may be of some use after all |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Feb 11, 6:59*am, Richard wrote:
And still doesn't change the circumstances to with, the tow plane had ROW and that had nothing at all to do with MSXs's non-experience except to allow yet another usenet fjucktard (yes 'George', you) with a chance to chime in and contribute to the noise. There's a cartoon somewhere in the world of a wrecked car and an ambulance. With the title of "But I was in the right" You might notice that amongst the groups he crossposted his crap to includes rec.aviation.student. Perhaps where you are its okay to bull**** about being a pilot and offer uninformed advice as to what the cause of an accident was before the investigators have done their job. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
george writes:
Perhaps where you are its okay to bull**** about being a pilot and offer uninformed advice as to what the cause of an accident was before the investigators have done their job. What is wrong with advice to see and avoid, or pointing out that tow planes have right of way? |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dave Doe writes:
But hangon, you just said..." The existence of a blind spot does not relieve the pilot of the need to maintain situational awareness, including an awareness of nearby aircraft. Yes, but the probability of conflicting traffic varies with the relative positions of the aircraft concerned. When climbing after take-off, for example, it's much less likely that one will be hit from below than it is that one will hit something above. There will always be blind spots, but a pilot can anticipate the areas where other aircraft are most likely to be and can concentrate his efforts to work around blind spots on those areas, if it is not practical to work around all blind spots. As an extreme example, a taildragger taxiing to a runway needs to worry a lot more about aircraft in a blind spot in front of it than aircraft in a blind spot behind. Really? Yes, really. OK, you are straight and level. An a/c with the same horizontal airspeed is below you and climbing. While they *should* see you, lets assume they do not (sun is where you are, pretty much). What will you do now? Hmm lets see, "If you are in level flight or climbing, traffic below is not necessarily an issue.". Short of constantly turning the aircraft in circles, it's going to be really hard to see below and behind you, and since you are moving forward, it's also unlikely that an aircraft climbing behind you will overtake you. Additionally, if you've taken care to assess the traffic situation in advance, you'll have a good idea about where traffic might be. There's a big difference between worrying about traffic below and behind you and worrying about traffic crossing right in front of your windshield. It's a bit like worrying about a skydiver dropping onto your nose while you're descending towards terrain. If you cannot cover everything, you look towards the area of highest risk. |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
george writes:
Its something real pilots know and compensate for by keeping a good lookout. So how do some real pilots hit tow planes? |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dave Doe writes:
To be honest, your comment is just ridiculous and stupid. Real pilots *do* maintain a procedurally based and trained lookout. How do they manage to collide with tow planes and gliders, then? |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mike Ash wrote:
In article , romeomike wrote: Mike Ash wrote: Ah, there's that famous excessive snip. You said "plausible", not "very probable". All of those scenarios are plausible. Now maybe you are beginning to answer your own question above as to why Mx gets so much heat. I simply don't understand why anyone engages him at all. Learned my lesson a few years back. It's one thing to attack his evasion, quite another to pull your own evasion and attack him for saying something completely reasonable. My observation over many years here is that when he posts something that seems "reasonable" it's his way of subtly drawing people into an escalating and frustrating attack and evade. It's not an educational to- and-fro, just an exercise in "how far do I have to go to **** people off." |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mxsmanic wrote:
writes: Absent rolling inverted, how do you see below? Normally you shouldn't need to see below without advance warning. Typically you see below by anticipating where you will be and checking for traffic before you get there. If you are in level flight or climbing, traffic below is not necessarily an issue. If you are descending, your descent path is in front of you and you can inspect it for traffic before you follow it. So you would be making the same mistake !!! The tug and glider came up from below, right in front of him. Additionally, if you cannot see and avoid, you can try to rule out the presence of traffic in other ways, as by communicating on the radio, obtaining flight following, using on-board equipment to see other aircraft, and so on. If you collide with another aircraft and survive under VFR, you'll generally have to explain why you didn't see the other aircraft. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Ohio midair crash kills 3 | Larry Dighera | Piloting | 33 | May 21st 07 11:38 AM |
Cirrus crash in NYC | SAM 303a | Soaring | 18 | October 16th 06 03:14 PM |
I think I know why so many Cirrus' crash | Ron Lee | Piloting | 103 | January 29th 06 05:32 AM |
Another Cirrus crash | James L. Freeman | Piloting | 42 | April 24th 04 11:21 PM |