Getting confused with ATC order...Violation?

writes:

In the real world, all these things are called distractions.

Distractions in the real world lead to errors in the real world.

As I've said, most of these things have no significant effect on
communications with ATC.

Mxsmanic plays with toys writes:

How can you make that statement?

When it's true.

When have you experienced the real thing?

It is the real thing. It's all just words. The words in simulation are
identical to the real thing. ATC communication is one of those things that
can easily (very easily) be simulated with 100% realism.

How many private pilots do you know?

Probably half a dozen or so.

How do you measure their ATC knowledge?

I can ask them questions and count their errors.

JGalban via AviationKB.com writes:

How exactly would you know this?

Exactly by listening and studying the real thing, and comparing.

The fact that you think a readback keeps you safe from the FAA
would lead me to believe that you don't really know much about
it at all.

As I've said, I know a lot more than many VFR pilots (who know even less about
what keeps them safe from the FAA than I do).

Much as you protest, things in the real world are not the same
as they are in your fantasy land.

As much as you'd like to believe otherwise, I know a lot more than you care to
admit.

VFR pilots have actually communicated with ATC.

Some have. It's possible to fly VFR without ever talking to ATC.

You have never done so.

I've done the equivalent.

Excuse me if I'm not impressed with your self assesment.

No need to excuse yourself; your opinion is not important.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

In the real world, all these things are called distractions.

Distractions in the real world lead to errors in the real world.

As I've said, most of these things have no significant effect on
communications with ATC.

Are you hoping a lie repeated often enough will become the truth?


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

In the real world, all these things are called distractions.

Distractions in the real world lead to errors in the real world.

As I've said, most of these things have no significant effect on
communications with ATC.


You're a moron. Try taking your dick out of your mouth before rapping it
on your keyboard.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Mxsmanic plays with toys writes:

How can you make that statement?

When it's true.

When have you experienced the real thing?

It is the real thing. It's all just words. The words in simulation
are identical to the real thing. ATC communication is one of those
things that can easily (very easily) be simulated with 100% realism.

How many private pilots do you know?

Probably half a dozen or so.

How do you measure their ATC knowledge?

I can ask them questions and count their errors.


Yeah, sure you would know their errors. Just like you knew that a Barron
has an ejector seat, you ****ing nitwit.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Mxsmanic plays with toys writes:

How can you make that statement?

When it's true.

When have you experienced the real thing?

It is the real thing. It's all just words. The words in simulation are
identical to the real thing. ATC communication is one of those things that
can easily (very easily) be simulated with 100% realism.

Most people understand the effects of external distractions which aren't
simulated in your game simulators.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

JGalban via AviationKB.com writes:

How exactly would you know this?

Exactly by listening and studying the real thing, and comparing.

The fact that you think a readback keeps you safe from the FAA
would lead me to believe that you don't really know much about
it at all.

As I've said, I know a lot more than many VFR pilots (who know even
less about what keeps them safe from the FAA than I do).

Much as you protest, things in the real world are not the same
as they are in your fantasy land.

As much as you'd like to believe otherwise, I know a lot more than you
care to admit.

VFR pilots have actually communicated with ATC.

Some have. It's possible to fly VFR without ever talking to ATC.

You have never done so.

I've done the equivalent.

Excuse me if I'm not impressed with your self assesment.

No need to excuse yourself; your opinion is not important.


You have NOT done the equivalent, you lying piece of ****. You play
games while stroking yourself. MSFS is NOT flying, you moron. VATSIM is
not ATC, you moron.

You don't know **** from shinola about flying or ATC communication.

Asshole.

On Apr 4, 9:25 pm, C J Campbell
wrote:

Sorry. You are right. It was the NTSB in the Merrell case, 1999.


The NTSB ruled in Merrel's favor, that ruling was overturned by the US
Court of Appeals. Here's the report that appeared on AvWeb:


"Merrell v. FAA: A Readback Is No Defense

U.S. Court of Appeals Rules Against Pilot In Altitude Bust...

A U.S. appeals court has agreed with the FAA that Capt. Richard L.
Merrell,
of Northwest Airlines, was to blame for an altitude bust, despite an
earlier
NTSB decision that exonerated him. The FAA prosecuted Merrell after he
mistakenly complied with a climb clearance intended for another
aircraft.
Merrell read back the clearance in question, but his readback was
"stepped
on" by the aircraft for which the clearance was actually intended, and
ATC
never heard it. Merrell requested a hearing before an NTSB
administrative
law judge, who upheld the FAA's position.

Merrell then appealed his case to the full NTSB, who ruled in his
favor and
dismissed the FAA order. Merrell's victory was short-lived, however.
The FAA
appealed the NTSB ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals, which in
September
upheld the FAA's violation against Merrell. No further appeals are
expected.
This appears to be the case that prompted the FAA to issue its
"interpretive
rule" on pilot readbacks earlier this year."

Benjamin Dover wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Mxsmanic plays with toys writes:

How can you make that statement?
When it's true.

When have you experienced the real thing?
It is the real thing. It's all just words. The words in simulation
are identical to the real thing. ATC communication is one of those
things that can easily (very easily) be simulated with 100% realism.

How many private pilots do you know?
Probably half a dozen or so.

How do you measure their ATC knowledge?
I can ask them questions and count their errors.


Yeah, sure you would know their errors. Just like you knew that a Barron
has an ejector seat, you ****ing nitwit.


What's a Barron? :-)