KCHD to KMYF

On Mon, 3 May 2010 08:42:26 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On May 3, 10:37*am, Kimmy Boyer wrote:

Here we have two utter morons in a debate...over who is the bigger
moron.

wow isn't RAP great.

Birds of a feather flock together don't they?

Apparently.

Moron.

On Mon, 3 May 2010 10:59:46 -0700 (PDT), Mark wrote:

On May 3, 11:37*am, Kimmy Boyer wrote:

Here we have two utter morons in a debate...over who is the bigger
moron.

Neither is a moron. I should know since I am one.

Dadd(ie) did you tell everyone why you shot me in the head?
--
Tiger Boi - Cold, Dead, Ain't Coming Back
Former Kat Of Mark(ie) The Nutzoid ****sack

Mxsmanic wrote:


It might be easier to believe if you remember that I'm just passing
information on, not making it up. I didn't cook up the route myself. I looked
at the charts, too, and I looked at existing flight plans, and (long ago) I
experimented with trying other routes, etc. Hundreds of flights follow this
route every day, so why should I reinvent the wheel? It jumps out at you from
the chart; it's obviously intended to get you efficiently and safely to SoCal.

V66 is no more safe or efficient than any other legal route.

It mystifies me that anyone would insist on rejecting what is obviously the
most practical solution.

Obviously the most practical to you only.

I think that it may be a rejection of authority,
which is a very dangerous trait in a pilot.

Victor airways have no "authority" of any kind. Anyone is free to use them
or not as they desire.

As it happens, I'm passing over Dateland at this very minute, FL320 on J2 to
KSAN. Recently the LYNDI2 has replaced the BARET4 as the preferred arrival, so
I filed that.

Nonsense, you are sitting in front of a computer playing a game.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

Flying on Victor airways is no safer than flying any other legal route.

Then why do they exist?

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

No, I don't care what frequency, if any, FlightPrep gives since the depiction
on the chart is wrong to start with.

But you apparently didn't care about the frequency before you learned of the
error, either.

Yep, because as I said below checking frequencies is one of the last things
done.

The frequencies are of no interest while doing initial planning and are
irrelevant until the route has been cross checked against the raster charts
and finalized.

Checking the frequency would have told you something was wrong.

Which, if it were a real plan, would have been done at the end like I said
four times now.

And why select NYL if BZA is right next to it and happens to be on V66 and
clear of all MOAs and restricted areas? What does picking a different station
prove?

So would be NYL if it were a VORTAC as shown by FlightPrep and it would
be a shorter VOR to VOR route, if it existed, and you wouldn't be on V66,
you would be close to it.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

You are not required to talk to anyone in Class E ...

Unless you are within the vicinity of an airport, that is.

Certain, selected airports, not airports in general.

... and if you stay below
10,000 feet you don't need to have either a radio or transpoder except
for a few select areas.

Which areas are those? What happens above 10,000 feet?

The Class E area adjacent to selected airports, pay attention.

What happens above 10,000 feet is you need a transponder for any airspace.

You need a clearance to fly IFR.

Not in Class G. You only need a clearance in controlled airspace, which Class
G is not.

So you just fly along in Class G and unilaterally declare yourself to be
flying IFR?

Saying a Victor airway provides obstacle clearance is like saying Class
E airspace provides obstacle clearance as they are both defined as
starting no lower than 1200 AGL.

No, a Victor airway has been surveyed and planned specifically to be clear of
obstacles. Class E in general provides no such assurance.

Class E has the exact same provision by definition since by definition it
starts at 1,200 AGL.

The point is absent a radar altimeter, you can not tell from navaids
whether or not you are above the lower bounds of either Class E or a
Victor airway.

What provides obstacle clearance during the day is looking out the window
and at night paying close attention to the Sectional.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Flying on Victor airways is no safer than flying any other legal route.

Then why do they exist?

Convenience in a pre-GPS world and derived from A-N courses in a pre-VOR
world.

In the VOR world, the ambiguity's in VOR accuracy spreads people laterally
across a Victor airway.

In the GPS world, the accuracy of GPS puts everyone right down the center
line of a Victor airway.

Which situation is intrinsically safer as you near a VOR?


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Am 04.05.2010 19:33, schrieb :
wrote:


It might be easier to believe if you remember that I'm just passing
information on, not making it up. I didn't cook up the route myself. I looked
at the charts, too, and I looked at existing flight plans, and (long ago) I
experimented with trying other routes, etc. Hundreds of flights follow this
route every day, so why should I reinvent the wheel? It jumps out at you from
the chart; it's obviously intended to get you efficiently and safely to SoCal.

Well, sim-boy ... it brings YOU from one end of your monitor to the
other, nothing more. YOU HAVE NO FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE.

Ever sat in a spam can and approached SoCal in VFR and tried 5
frequencies until one ansered, only to hear them call out a traffic
alert to you and your windshield is half full of an airplane in your 10
o-clock position, you staring into the sun?

F*CK! Get a life AND GET OUT OF HERE!

#m
--
"What would I do with 72 virgins? That's not a reward,
that's a punishment. Give me two seasoned whores any day."
(Billy Connolly)

writes:

V66 is no more safe or efficient than any other legal route.

V66, like all Victor airways, place limits on obstacles, whereas off-airway
navigation does not. If you follow an airway at or above the prescribed
minimum altitudes, you won't hit anything. When you are off-airway, terrain
avoidance is your problem.

Victor airways have no "authority" of any kind. Anyone is free to use them
or not as they desire.

That's not at all what I meant. Some people refuse to follow rules or even
suggestions because they perceive it as being told what to do, and they don't
want to be told what to do because it hurts their (typically immature) egos.
It doesn't matter whether the advice or rules make sense or not. People like
this tend to get themselves into trouble, including when they fly airplanes.

Nonsense, you are sitting in front of a computer playing a game.

No, I played chess later. Landed safely in KSAN, parked the Citation over by
Landmark.

Martin Hotze writes:

Well, sim-boy ... it brings YOU from one end of your monitor to the
other, nothing more. YOU HAVE NO FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE.

You don't need it to plan a route. There's nothing magic about actually
flying a real airplane.

Ever sat in a spam can and approached SoCal in VFR and tried 5
frequencies until one ansered, only to hear them call out a traffic
alert to you and your windshield is half full of an airplane in your 10
o-clock position, you staring into the sun?

No. I'm not that prone to mistakes. I've heard others do stupid things,
though.