Old, but interesting topic

Maxwell writes:

Well then, by all means. Tell us what you have actually flown.

Spaceships and nuclear submarines.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Iain Smith writes:

You bet they are! All engine manufacturers do.

Where can I find this information?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Flydive wrote in :

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Global Express? Would that be th eGlobal Express X3000A2, or the
Global Express X3000C5? That's a modern derivit\ive of th eold
Speedbird 500, isn't it?





Bertie


That would be the Bombardier Global Express, long range business
aircraft.


OOoW kewl. Pinstripes? Big boombox inside?

Bertie

Flydive wrote in :

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Flydive wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

ILS freqs won't autotune on anything I know of..
Then you don't know of all FMCs, because some FMCs will definitely
autotune the ILS. The 747-400 will do this (in fact, it autotunes
all the navaids, although you can override this).
All FMCs tune navaids fjukkktard, but none do autoapproaches,
fjukkwit.


Bertie

Sorry to disagree again, but the latest FMS can tune the ILS
frequency and set the imbound track.


RTFP. If you set up your FMC, clever as you like, punched your toga
switches and jumped out of the airplane, would it land at your
destination?

I'm guessing "no".


Bertie




Bertie

Well I believe we were not talking about take off here.
But once airborne, lets say in cruise........if FMS programmed,
including RWY and APPCH, set on VNAV, APPCH preselected and altitude
selector set to RWY elevation..... well I guess pretty much yes.
Of course gear and flaps will not be set by the aircraft itself, so it
would be a pretty interesting landing ;-) but it would definetely hit
the runway at destination.


Mm, don't think so. Haven't flown on of your fartboxes, but I've flown
'Busses and everythign but the very latest boeing (777) and haven't seen
anything that would do that even onm a good day without a lot of
assistance from a pilot.


Bertie

Flydive wrote in :

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Why not?

It autotunes the frequency and selects the inbound course of the
approach you have selected, it does about 20 miles out.

You can override it anytime, you check it during your approach
briefing.
It does not follow it unless you arm the approach on the panel.


I don't see any problem with it, as with anything on the aircraft
you
have the ultimate control, I let the autopilot fly the aircraft most
of
the time, but I always monitor what it does.

Well, you have to.. obviously. They do strange things from time to
time..

Didn't mean to suggest you didn't. But the way you said it sounded
like
you would let it nav onto the ils and fly it off it's own bat not
using
the ILS at all, just it's own input like an LNAV non precision.
We don't even allow LNAV intercepts of ILS's. We always intercept
from
heading select, though we do allow a glidepath intercept from vnav
from
below. I wouldn't trust the fjukkwit to do that, though. I wouldn't
let
him use a toaster, in fact.



Bertie

Well I agree not to trust it blindly, computers are computers.

True that most of the time you intercept using heading mode, most of
the
time you are on radar vectors.

But when you are not on vectors and you are using the nav fuction to
follow the STAR, you can leave the panel on NAV, the FMS will autotune
the ILS frequency, set the imbound track, as the LOC comes alive the
flght director will switch to "green data" intercept the LOC and the
Glide path using the navaid. All that can be done on autopilot.
As I said, all the time the pilot will monitor it, and of course
manual
intervention is still needed to configure the aircraft and ultimately
to
land it.

No, I can't do that. For one thig, it's company policy we don't do it in
any of our airplanes, and for another, the possibility of a parralell
intercept due to even a minute amount of map shift is too great, so I
just wouldn't..

Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Maxwell writes:

No you haven't. You are a simmer, or gamer, you have never flown a
damn thing but your desk.

How do you know?

Because you said so.

All I see here is names on a screen, some of them
making extravagant claims. Historically, claims made on USENET have a
very low probability of being truthful.


Oh hear hear. Like most of what you say, for instance.



Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Maxwell writes:

Well then, by all means. Tell us what you have actually flown.

Spaceships and nuclear submarines.


Fjukkwit


bertie

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

Because you said so.

I said that I fly spacecraft and submarines, too.

Oh hear hear. Like most of what you say, for instance.

Then how do you know what is true and what isn't?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Iain Smith writes:

You bet they are! All engine manufacturers do.

Where can I find this information?


What's it to you, fjukkwit?


You don;t fly. The engines on your airplane don't exist because there is no
airplane, no flying and no real skill involved.

Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

Because you said so.

I said that I fly spacecraft and submarines, too.

Oh hear hear. Like most of what you say, for instance.

Then how do you know what is true and what isn't?


How do you think?


Bertie