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 |
#261
|
|||
|
|||
*********A DEFENCE FOR MXMORAN***********
No you're not, dumb ass, you have never left your desk. I think he means as a passenger ;-( Ibby |
#262
|
|||
|
|||
*********A DEFENCE FOR MXMORAN***********
"BeechSundowner" wrote As I have posted many, many times, and I have used MSFS X. Flying an approach on the computer just doesn't simulate the physical sensations of IMC. Not sure if you ever been in IMC, not even sure if you are a pilot, but if you never been in IMC, please talk to a IA rated pilot and ask him to take you up. You will never look at a cloud the same way. *********************************** You might as well give it up with this person, too. It is more likely that you will have a real 747 qualified pilot on board, than you would likely find a simmer with the kind of "practiced" on the 747. This one will never concede, either. -- Jim in NC |
#263
|
|||
|
|||
Sad day for Mxsmanic
Varactor writes:
You think they do when IR? No, I think they do when they are not instrument-rated. Most private pilots do not have an IR. The point being, of course, that inadequate familiarity and practice with instrument procedures, and/or inadequate equipment on board the aircraft, can lead to problems. |
#264
|
|||
|
|||
Sad day for Mxsmanic
|
#265
|
|||
|
|||
*********A DEFENCE FOR MXMORAN***********
***********************************
You might as well give it up with this person, too. *It is more likely that you will have a real 747 qualified pilot on board, than you would likely find a simmer with the kind of "practiced" on the 747. *This one will never concede, either. -- Jim in NC Jim Believe me I'm nowhere near as bad as MX!!! Are you saying that all that I have learnt and 'practiced' bears no correlation to the systems and controls of a real 747-400 because it does. I have watched a lot of real tutorial dvds (not talking about little flyby clips on Youtube, but official licensed products on the 747 and 767 flightdecks). The position and behavior of EVERY switch whether it on the overhead panel, radio panel, Mode Control Panel, the glass cockpit, the FMC do EXACTLY as the real thing does. I know if I press 'this' the aircraft will do 'that'. A full procedural checklist MUST be followed (as per the real thing) for engine start including APU, ground power, setting pumps to Aux and Auto, turning off packs etc I know for FACT that if I was to sit down in a 747-400 flightdeck (forgetting all this emergency landing issue) I could name a huge majority of the switches, tell you where they are located and the effect they have on the flight thus giving me some form of advantage to that of a person who has never been on a flight deck OR used a simulator/game. I have openly stated it's a training aid and can successfully compliment flight training for procedures and navigation flight planning etc. I know it's not the be-all-and-end all tool that will give you a PPL after a weeks use which is were MX falls short off. I know there is a LOT more to learn about the dynamics of flight, weather systems, regulations etc etc. I know alot of real life pilots who use it and some are actually prominant members on this forum (but keep quite), there are those with PPL's, instructors, a retired A320 captain and a retired Gulf War veteran who flew rotaries in the Gulf. When I took my first flying lesson I felt I could have solo'd, laugh as you may, but the controls, throttle, pitching, descending, straight and level flight, torque effects of the prop had ALL been experienced by me in the sim so I already knew how to compensate for them. I was turning to certain bearings, climbing/descending to set altitudes, trimming the aircraft, maintaining set speeds - ALL on my first lesson and ALL picked up entirely from the sim. As I've already said we all need real lessons too but the sim CAN help as it has already done for me. Ibby |
#266
|
|||
|
|||
Sad day for Mxsmanic
Mxsmanic wrote:
writes: Look it up. I already have. The FAA has jurisdiction over practically no one, with the exception of pilots and other people who work in the aviation industry. No, you didn't since what you say is puerile and not relevant to the discussion anyway. Thus, anyone can build and/or fly a flight simulator, with or without recognition or approval from the FAA. Microsoft and X-Plane have already done so, of course. Sure anyone can build or fly a flight simulator, but that wasn't the issue. Neither Microsoft nor X-Plane claim to be doing so; both claim to be marketing a game. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#267
|
|||
|
|||
Sad day for Mxsmanic
Mxsmanic wrote:
Varactor writes: You think they do when IR? No, I think they do when they are not instrument-rated. Most private pilots do not have an IR. The point being, of course, that inadequate familiarity and practice with instrument procedures, and/or inadequate equipment on board the aircraft, can lead to problems. No, your point was to attempt to take a shot at the real pilots you hate so much. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#268
|
|||
|
|||
*********A DEFENCE FOR MXMORAN***********
On Tue, 03 Mar 2009 04:59:33 +0100, Mxsmanic
wrote: BeechSundowner writes: Imagine you in seat 20F. The plane you are in is inbound for LAX. The plane is descending through 25000 feet. Sudden lurch in the plane, due to the front row passengers (AKA pilot and copilot) keels over dead. Since the aircraft is on autopilot, there will be no lurch, unless CWS or CWP are enabled by control movements (depends on the aircraft). Which instantly and reinforces the fact that you know *nothing* because even the PMDG and LDS simulations all include the automatic disconnect which happens when enough force is excerted on the control column, a-la what would happen when the pilots keel over on it, or grab it to execute a TCAS commanded evasive manuver (obviously in addition to the AP disco button). |
#269
|
|||
|
|||
Sad day for Mxsmanic
"-b-" wrote To paraphrase, the programs are not completely without usefulness, but they are not simulators. That's not what he said, he said they weren't "flight training devices". The FAA has a definition for what qualifies as a "flight training device", or FTD. They do not have one for "simulator". Webster does, and MSFS seems to fit that very general definition: "A device, data processing system, or computer program for representing features of the behavior of a physical or abstract system." Notice it doesn't say "all features" or "exact behavior" because those are qualitative. MSFS is indeed a flight simulator, albeit a poor one. |
#270
|
|||
|
|||
Sad day for Mxsmanic
"-b-" wrote Yours is the very definition of an out of context post. MX has made it clear that he is not interested in the FAA's definition of a simulator or fligght training device, but focuses on its functionalities. Collins cites functionalities to circumscribe the usefulness of these devices, and you comme back to FAA definitions!! Let's call in Kafka to clarify!! You must be new here. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Apology re mxsmanic | terry | Piloting | 96 | February 16th 08 05:17 PM |
Mxsmanic : Your results are in | Mayo Clinic | Piloting | 13 | May 24th 07 02:01 PM |
I saw Mxsmanic on TV | Clear Prop | Piloting | 8 | February 14th 07 01:18 AM |
Mxsmanic | gwengler | Piloting | 30 | January 11th 07 03:42 AM |
Getting rid of MXSMANIC | [email protected] | Piloting | 33 | December 8th 06 11:26 PM |