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 |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
You have to look at the whole package he brings to the table. Not really Jim.. I have personally met some people I have met "on line" , and have found them to be (fortunately AND unfortunately) to be very different from their "online" personna. In all cases so far, there was MUCH more to the person when I have met them in person. But he has no desire to EVER go flying. And thats OK, _ I have a very good friend who will NEVER get in an airplane, unless it is an air ambulance and he has nothing to say about it! The dude needs serious help. Maybe, but he stil posts some pretty rational thoughts, and has started some interesting discussions . Even a broken clock is right twice per day. He is still only a broken clock, that does not deserve the attention he has stolen here. Agreed.... but when (he) IS CORRECT..... that should be aknowledged, as it should be with anyone of us...... not blazed away at just because he happened to hit the "send" buttton... You represent the few who find him entertaining. Ahhh, my bad. I should have been clearer. I don't find MX all that entertaining, but some of the RESPONSES to his post certianly are! I seriously doubt your ability to make rational judgments, dude. Either that, or you have not been around long enough to get the full measure of his pile of crap. It has to be one or the other. It must be my ability...I have only been here since about , oh, 1993..... I guess that depends on if 17 years is "only a newbe" or "that's long enough" (Dave hangs head and shufles feet) Dave |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 23:21:23 -0800 (PST), terry
wrote: Hmmmm... OK.. first sentence of his first post referrs to the 27 potential lives saved based on the OP's post.... Second post referrs to the potential of increased training etc. reducing the deaths.. I am OK with that. His motivation? Who really knows? And it does not really matter to me. What is _my_ motivation for even being here? To offer insight, to learn from others? To "stirr the pot"? To offer news? To ask a question? Does anyone out there really care what MY motivaton is? Actually, my motivation varies, - right now, its Sunday AM, cold outside, I worked late last night installing a door, and have some time on my hands, now and for the next 45 minutes. (Sorry, best I can do for this session) Does MY motivaton really matter to anybody? ......and I have quoted from books in my posts here as well... to get feedback on the content, or to question the content.... No doubt , some here will question my motivation to defend MX, but I have none other to comment on the entertainment value of the RESPONSES his posts get, and I am not defending him at all. My only comment is that I think that to blast away with multible cannons and machine guns at a gopher just because it popped it's head out of the hole seems a little silly.. (IMHO) Who was that cartoon character anyway... "Yosemitie Sam" ? The one with the big hat, mouth and shotgun that blasted away at anything that moved? Long time ago, I guess my age and immaturity is showing... Buggs Bunny Show ? Cheers! D Dave I expressed a similar view of Mxs some years ago, much to my later embarrassment when I found out what a jerk he really was. Of course much of what he says is accurate, because he will read stuff straight out of a book and post it here to try and get an argument going, or to sound like he actually knows what he is talking about. To get an idea of his modus operandi, have a read of his first 2 posts in the impossible turn thread, namely the first sentence in each, and tell me what you think his motivation for posting is. Terry . |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
Hi Dan!
If thats the case, he sure has learned whose buttons to push and how huh? How long have you been retired Dan? Dave On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 02:58:53 -0600, Dan wrote: Of course much of what he says is accurate, because he will read stuff straight out of a book and post it here to try and get an argument going, or to sound like he actually knows what he is talking about. Terry . Mx has done that in several groups. He gets his jollies being an irritant. Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
Interesting comments Jim.
And probably quite accurate. With todays (cheap) technology, some "artifical intelligence" in the flight controlls is probably possible at an acceptable cost.. This might run contrary to some design philosophies though.. Cirrus perhaps? (flame suit on!) Dave On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 18:32:40 -0600, Jim Logajan wrote: Dana wrote: More opinion: In fact, a review of the Nall Report statistics indicates that a large majority of fatal fixed wing GA accidents could be categorized as due to fundamental "improper use of flight controls." I.e. inadequate or rusty flight skill (or one-time fatal mistakes of otherwise experienced pilots.) Furthermore, since those causes appear to have dropped to a plateau below which they appear not to be improving, and considering the high cost of maintaining and improving those skills, the way I see it the following are probably true: 1) Improvement in skill level of GA pilots is unlikely to improve in the future in any cost-effective way. It seems reasonable to assume that the pilot population already practices its skills as much as it can now afford. Further improvements in piloting can probably only be made if GA becomes more "elite" by raising the skill level required. (Though this winnowing of the pilot population would run contrary to efforts to "Grow GA".) 2) If the GA pilot population is to improve its safety record or to grow in number without compromising its existing safety record, then given what is known of the current pilot population capabilities, the current design of fixed wing aircraft controls must be changed in some fundamental ways. For example, addition of some machine intelligence in the flight control systems that takes into account not just pilot demands, but limits to those demands imposed by the current flight regime, and is active through all phases of flight so that it aids and/or limits controls to controllable regimes. The statistics currently indicate a greater probability of human failure than machine failure, so this seems likely to yield a net reduction in the accident rate. On the other hand the cost aspect is unknown. |
#85
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
Just to throw in .02 re your TCAS comment..................
We have the ZAON XRX on board our Cherokee in a VERY busy environment (100,000 operations /yr) I cannot begin to tell you how useful this tool is in tracking trafffic around us For $1500 ! Dave On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 13:39:48 +0100, Mxsmanic wrote: writes: My point is you cannot eliminate mid air collisions no matter what training is given that you insist will eliminate mid airs. I don't recall insisting that any training would eliminate midair accidents. Training is likely to reduce them, however. ... human factor will contribute to UNAVOIDABLE collisions or errors in flying an airplane. Human beings who become careless or reckless and rationalize it by saying that it's impossible to eliminate accidents, anyway, will surely be involved in new accidents. "Unavoidable" is a strong word. There haven't been many incidents that were truly unavoidable. Just because a human being messes up doesn't mean that the messing up was impossible to avoid. But you don't know this since you sit behind a desktop simulator USING TCAS that most of us don't have. One advantage of simulation is that you can afford better avionics. However, only one of my small aircraft (the Baron) is equipped with TCAS, and the very same instrument (a Sandel ST3400) is available to anyone with a small aircraft who is prepared to pay for it (about $35,000 for the real-world version, and 1000 times cheaper for the sim version). Could there be a better process to improve safety, possibly and probably, but I don't have that answer. Safety improvements tend to be incremental, not revolutionary. |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
Dave wrote:
Hi Dan! If thats the case, he sure has learned whose buttons to push and how huh? How long have you been retired Dan? Dave Since 1994. Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
TCAS (was: If all midair collisions were eliminated...)
Dave schreef:
We have the ZAON XRX on board our Cherokee in a VERY busy environment (100,000 operations /yr) I cannot begin to tell you how useful this tool is in tracking trafffic around us For $1500 ! But it will only show planes with certain non-mandatory equipment, if I got it right? Is it not like radio at a non-controlled aerodrome, a nice extra source of info but nothing to really count on? |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
TCAS
In rec.aviation.piloting jan olieslagers wrote:
Dave schreef: We have the ZAON XRX on board our Cherokee in a VERY busy environment (100,000 operations /yr) I cannot begin to tell you how useful this tool is in tracking trafffic around us For $1500 ! But it will only show planes with certain non-mandatory equipment, if I got it right? Is it not like radio at a non-controlled aerodrome, a nice extra source of info but nothing to really count on? If by "certain non-mandatory equipment" you mean a mode C transponder, yes. However, there is hardly any place in the US with significant traffic that most people don't have a mode C transponder. The places were there are few transponders tend to be well removed from major urban areas and full of things like gliders, sky divers, ultra lights and such. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
If all midair collisions were eliminated...
Dave writes:
Just to throw in .02 re your TCAS comment.................. We have the ZAON XRX on board our Cherokee in a VERY busy environment (100,000 operations /yr) I cannot begin to tell you how useful this tool is in tracking trafffic around us For $1500 ! The Sandel ST3400 is a TAWS/RMI display that also includes TCAS capability, with a fancy back-projected LCD display. That's probably why it is so expensive. I suppose TCAS alone is a lot cheaper. I looked at the ZAON XRX on their Web site and it looks like a pretty practical gadget. |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
TCAS
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mid Air Collisions | Sukumar Kirloskar | Soaring | 2 | July 3rd 08 02:42 PM |
FAA Soaring Forecasts being eliminated? | David Neptune | Soaring | 6 | July 15th 06 05:47 AM |
Kids and Aviation records. I thought these were supposed to be eliminated. | Roger Halstead | Piloting | 2 | September 27th 04 07:20 PM |
Mid-Air Collisions | JJ Sinclair | Soaring | 26 | April 19th 04 08:52 AM |
MID AIR COLLISIONS | Vorsanger1 | Soaring | 2 | April 16th 04 04:17 AM |