Is it possible to switch from VFR to IFR and back?

In article ,
Mxsmanic wrote:

Ron Garret writes:

I don't fly a baron, but I guarantee you that you will be dead.

Well, I simulated it.

I hate to be the one to break this to you kid (and I say this with a
certain irony because I know I'm not the first person to tell you this)
but your sim is not an accurate model of reality.

575 hours of flying real airplanes.

How much time have you spent with a simulator?

What difference does that make? This is not rec.aviation.simulators.
Context, son! Why so you have so much trouble with context?

Lousy excuse. You can fly round trip from Paris to LA for less than
$650.

That's a month's net pay, if things go well.

Really? That surprises me. You're obviously a bright person, and you
live in a modern industrialized country where the average annual income
is well over $20,000. And yet you make less than $8,000 a year? Even
more surprising, although your income places well below the poverty
level, you can still afford a computer, a flight simulator setup with
rudder pedals, internet access, and a whole lot of spare time to post to
newsgroups and play with your sim?

It's hard for me to believe that you couldn't scrape together $650
somehow. Take half the hours you spend on usenet and your sim and go
work at a McDonald's and you'll have $650 saved before you know it.
I'll wait.

rg

Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

Neil Gould writes:

If the IMC is a cloud, there is a good likelihood that it isn't
stable.

Yes, but the IMC I have in mind is mostly low visibility. Fog, mist,
haze, that sort of thing. Flying into a big and angry cloud isn't a
good idea no matter what type of rating you and your aircraft have.

Flying into fog is an even worse idea, given that fog is usually pretty
close to the terrain.

OTOH, a good deal of IMC requires that you fly into the clouds, many of
which are turbulent, though I wouldn't call them "big and angry" as in
cumulo nimbus, and most situations where one goes from VMC to IMC will put
you in the clouds.

Neil

"Ron Garret" wrote in message
...
Really? That surprises me. You're obviously a bright person, and you
live in a modern industrialized country where the average annual income
is well over $20,000. And yet you make less than $8,000 a year? Even
more surprising, although your income places well below the poverty
level, you can still afford a computer, a flight simulator setup with
rudder pedals, internet access, and a whole lot of spare time to post to
newsgroups and play with your sim?

It's hard for me to believe that you couldn't scrape together $650
somehow. Take half the hours you spend on usenet and your sim and go
work at a McDonald's and you'll have $650 saved before you know it.
I'll wait.

rg

He also owns at least 2 domains. One at mxsmaniac.com and the one below
which I assume is his real name.


Visit http://atkielski.com/ for everything you ever wanted to know about mxs
but were afraid to ask.

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

Visit http://atkielski.com/ for everything you ever wanted to know about mxs
but were afraid to ask.



Interesting site...

B,

Interesting site...


Interesting blog...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Ron Garret writes:

I hate to be the one to break this to you kid (and I say this with a
certain irony because I know I'm not the first person to tell you this)
but your sim is not an accurate model of reality.

List the relevant differences in the context of this discussion.

What difference does that make?

A great deal, especially since you seem to underestimate them.

If I am unqualified to speak of real flight because I don't have some
arbitrary number of hours of experience as a real pilot, what
qualifies you to speak of simulation if you don't have some equally
arbitrary number of hours working with simulators?

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

Mxsmanic wrote:

Ron Garret writes:


I hate to be the one to break this to you kid (and I say this with a
certain irony because I know I'm not the first person to tell you this)
but your sim is not an accurate model of reality.


List the relevant differences in the context of this discussion.


You've got to be kidding.





What difference does that make?


If I am unqualified to speak of real flight because I don't have some
arbitrary number of hours



Nothing arbitrary about zero.






of experience as a real pilot, what
qualifies you to speak of simulation if you don't have some equally
arbitrary number of hours working with simulators?


We've all played on a flight sim.

Newps writes:

You've got to be kidding.

I don't kid.

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

In article ,
Mxsmanic wrote:

Ron Garret writes:

I hate to be the one to break this to you kid (and I say this with a
certain irony because I know I'm not the first person to tell you this)
but your sim is not an accurate model of reality.

List the relevant differences in the context of this discussion.

Real airplanes roll (sooner or later) if you take your hand off the yoke.

What difference does that make?

A great deal, especially since you seem to underestimate them.

If I am unqualified to speak of real flight because I don't have some
arbitrary number of hours of experience as a real pilot, what
qualifies you to speak of simulation if you don't have some equally
arbitrary number of hours working with simulators?

I have a reliable source of information about sims: you. You told me
that your simulated plane does something that I know from personal
experience real planes don't do. I don't have to have any experience
with sims to know that there are only two possibilities: either your
simulator is not realistic or you are lying. I have no reason to
believe you are lying.

rg

In article ,
Ron Garret wrote:

Real airplanes roll (sooner or later) if you take your hand off the yoke.

Unless you use the poor man's wingleveler (the rudder pedals).

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate