I give up, after many, many years!

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

Did you read my post? Did you forget the fact my vacuum system
wasn't working? How can I trust the instruments?

You don't need vacuum for electric instruments.

No, you need electricity, fjukktard, even less eliable than vacuum.

If you have no instruments and you're in IMC, you have a big problem.

Not when the vacuum system is broke. I just experienced it
yesterday.

Don't fly IFR until it's fixed.

You are a moron.

Uh, did you forget climb is pretty close to stall buffet?

Is it? You mean "pretty close" as "within 45 degrees"?


Good grief, You know less about flying than a cinder block does.

A couple of degrees pitch up and you will get close to stall buffet.
Of course you don't feel that in the simulator.

If you're a good pilot, you should never feel it at all.

Wrong. I have been there. You have not.

Maybe next time you're there, you won't come back. Trust your
instruments.


Idiot.

The ABSENSE of a feeling is
more important then defective instruments (see above, hint vacuum
failure).

I'm not talking about defective instruments. You should never fly IFR
with defective instruments.

They go defective while you are flying sometimes, fjukktard.

WRONG Re-read what I said above. You got to use your senses to get
to minimums.

No, you can use instruments to get to minimums. After that, you use
your eyes and instruments.

Again, you are talking to a pilot, who just experienced IMC and a
vacuum failure.

You're a very lucky pilot, then, if you're here posting to this
newsgroup.

Everything on a sim doesn't even come close to what I experienced.
Oh yeah, it wasn't straight and level flight, instrument approaches
require turns. Using an attitude indicator that displays level
flight and a DG that doesn't move and my GPS shows degrees ticking
off, doesn't bode well for survival if I don't trust my senses ALONG
with the backup instruments.

You were lucky.



Sounds to me like he knew what he was doing, actually.


Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

As has happened so many times in the past, your tunnel vision along
with your black and white viewpoint lead you to make pronouncements
that are not only wrong but laughable.

Show the errors.


Only one big one, you thought you were flying when you weren't.

Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Nomen Nescio writes:

A plane is flown by sensations.

Explain autopilots.

they don't fly airplanes any more thna you do, fjukktard.

When you catch an updraft coming over a ridge, do you wait for the
altimeter to tell you you're climbing? Or do you slightly lower the
nose based on FEELING the additional lift?

I look out the window to see what has
changed.


What, so looking over at the boulangerie across the road tells you what,
exactly?

How about landing. Are you FLYING visually or by feel? Do you NEED to
look at the airspeed indicator to tell if you're trending faster or
slower?

Yes.

I fly by feel. I orient myself visually, either looking out the
window or looking at the instruments. I navigate visually. But I FLY
by feel.

How many seconds can you fly by feel before you get into trouble.


So far? Many many millions.


Bertie

gregvk wrote in
:

Buster Hymen wrote in
02:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote in
:

Buster Hymen wrote in
02:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote in
:

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in
news:4df208ad-4920-4f77-93c1-
:

On May 17, 9:30 am, Nomen Nescio wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

From: "Jay Honeck"

What people are asserting here is 180 degrees different from
what
I read in all the literature. You cannot fly by the seat of
your
pants.
You can't fly based on sensations. They are too
unreliable.
Conversely, you can fly without sensations, as long as you
have visual and/or instrument information.

You're a moron. You're not competent to read with
comprehension.
Anthony, you don't know **** from shinola.

Presuming we're talking about IFR flight, what, precisely, do
you find incorrect in MX's paragraph, above?

Many years ago, on a bet, I did a pretty fair 4 point
roll.......BLINDFOLDED! I got lunch and a half dozen beers out
of
the
deal.

A plane is flown by sensations. In the short term, it's quite
reliable. In the long term, slight errors start to compound and
need
to be eliminated by squaring things up with the instruments or
horizon. When you catch an updraft coming over a ridge, do you
wait for the altimeter to tell you you're climbing? Or do you
slightly lower the nose based on FEELING the additional lift?
How about landing. Are you FLYING visually or by feel? Do you
NEED
to
look at the airspeed indicator to tell if you're trending faster
or slower? I fly by feel. I orient myself visually, either
looking out the window or looking at the instruments. I navigate
visually. But
I
FLY by feel. Humans are hard wired with a decent inertial nav.
system. MX is a few wires short of a complete circuit.

I pretty much agree with MX, the human inertial nav
is clumsy, we didn't have the evolution of birds.
An example is a "spiral dive", it's actually quite benign
from the standpoint of inertial inputs, it's better to use
instruments.
Ken

Like you could.


Bertie




You're a moron!



You're a moron!


Bertie

Sorry, Bertie. That last response was meant for Ken "****head"
Tucker, the wannabe mother ****er.

Moron.


IKYABWAI?

Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

That sensation tells you that you are coordinated, which is the
point.

No, it does not. Other things can produce the same sensation. You
have no way of knowing which movement produced the sensation unless
you cross-check against instruments or the world outside the window.

The sensation in real airplanes allows you to fly more precisely and
safer.

The sensation in real airplanes gives some pilots a false sense of
security.

A blazingly stupid comment that shows you know nothing about real
flight.

I'll ask again: Can you fly safely with your eyes closed, relying only
on sensations, and selectively ignoring or accepting the sensations
you feel?

It only takes a couple of hours in a real airplane to learn to
interpret what they are and what they mean.

Sometimes it takes an accident to learn that you can't trust those
sensations.

That's not what the "literature" says.

That's exactly what it says. Trust your instruments, ignore your
sensations.


No, it doesn't.

Fjukkwit.


Bertie

On May 17, 3:25*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

You don't need vacuum for electric instruments.

I don't have electric instruments along with the majority of the
world. What is your answer to this?

Uh, did you forget climb is pretty close to stall buffet?

Is it? *You mean "pretty close" as "within 45 degrees"?

No, within a few knots.

A couple of degrees pitch up and you will get close to stall buffet.
Of course you don't feel that in the simulator.

If you're a good pilot, you should never feel it at all.

Having never flown a plane, what gives you the position to say this?

Wrong. *I have been there. *You have not.

Maybe next time you're there, you won't come back. *Trust your instruments.

Did you read anything I posted? They failed AFTER liftoff. .
HELLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

The ABSENSE of a feeling is
more important then defective instruments (see above, hint vacuum
failure).

I'm not talking about defective instruments. *You should never fly IFR with
defective instruments.

I didin't launch knowingly. It failed after take off. How am I to
survive? Guess senses will be one of your answers?

No, you can use instruments to get to minimums. *After that, you use your eyes
and instruments.

WRONG did you read my post on the absence of a feeling being more
important then a failed instrument?

You're a very lucky pilot, then, if you're here posting to this newsgroup.

NOPE. Used my senses along with every tool I had in my tool kit that
brought me home. No luck about it, that is what training is for and I
took it to heart.

You were lucky.

NOPE. See above.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

A Lieberman writes:

So, in this case the simulator fails in teaching the real world as
engine sounds are not consistent or predictable.

They are very consistent and predictable. So much so that they can be
used for analysis of accidents.

No, they can't.


Bertie

Le Chaud Lapin wrote in news:83f0f162-79f7-4cd9-
:

On May 16, 11:04*pm, "Jay Honeck" wrote:
There has to be something that a simulator can offer that does not
require the instructor to be present.

Much depends on the level of your simulator. *If you have something
like
our
Penguin (see it
hehttp://www.alexisparkinn.com/flight_simulator.htm)
you can learn a lot. *If you're flying a mouse in front of your
laptop,
not
so much.

Hah...I must have come full circle.

Last year, when I decided to get into flying, everything was new, and
so I just went to Google and jumped in, then took ground school, etc.

Your link you give is one of the first one's I saw. I remember
thinking, "That simulator is soooo coool...and the idea of a flying-
themed hotel. Maybe one day..."

Going to reread your site, now that I have some idea of what I'm
looking at.

-Le Chaud Lapin-


There ya go Jay, you should put the rabbit's endorsement in your
pamphlets. Sums you up perfectly.



Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

On the contrary, it's important. Can you really be sure that your
turn is perfectly coordinated and that you are holding altitude
without ever looking at the instruments?

Yes.

How?

Looking out the window. It is a VFR turn, remember from the stuff you
cut?

Looking out the window is no longer flying by the seat of your pants,
which disproves your assertion.


Wrong

How do you tell
the difference between an uncoordinated turn and being pushed by
the wind?

Once again a blazingly stupid comment that shows you know nothing
about flying.

How do you tell the difference between an uncoordinated turn and being
pushed by the wind?


Oh god, soooo wrong.



You are safest spending as much time as possible looking out the
window.

Why? I thought you could fly by the seat of your pants?


Fjukkwit.

Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

You haven't a clue what a FMC is, what it does, or how it is used.

I know quite a bit about how a FMC works.


No, you don't. You dopn;'t know thing one about how it works.

Do tell us about the FMC in your Baron.

There is no FMC in the Baron.

There is no baron, fjukkwit.



Bertie