Knowing when you are overflying something

Gig 601XL Builder writes:

I know you aren't going to like this answer Anthony but it just isn't that
critical that you pass over a specific point. Close enough is good enough.

No, that sounds fine to me, if it's fine to everyone else. In general I don't
think I'd worry too much about what is exactly beneath me as long as I know
what's directly in front of me (since it will soon be beneath me, and anything
now beneath me was in front of me a short time ago). If I'm directly over
something, I'm either hitting it or it's not a concern.

So how do you get close enough you ask. Let's say you are flying from A to C
you want to pass over B. As you are approaching B you notice that D is
pretty much perpendicular to your course in line with B. So you head towards
B and keep D the same distance away.

I'll keep this in mind.

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

Maxwell writes:

Why would a pilot care?

When reporting position, or when following instructions to "cross XYZ at
6000," or whatever. Or when giving the location of a family in distress next
to their SUV below.

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

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Erik writes:

If I really need to know if I'm directly over something, I take into
account the wind and my velocity and start dropping golf balls and
watch where they land. Of course, by the time they hit the ground,
I've probably moved a couple hundred feet or so which then requires
more golf balls. It's a never-ending battle.

Seriously?

idiot

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Erik writes:

If I really need to know if I'm directly over something, I take into
account the wind and my velocity and start dropping golf balls and
watch where they land. Of course, by the time they hit the ground,
I've probably moved a couple hundred feet or so which then requires
more golf balls. It's a never-ending battle.

Seriously?


Idiot

Mxsmanic wrote:
Gig 601XL Builder writes:

I know you aren't going to like this answer Anthony but it just
isn't that critical that you pass over a specific point. Close
enough is good enough.

No, that sounds fine to me, if it's fine to everyone else. In
general I don't think I'd worry too much about what is exactly
beneath me as long as I know what's directly in front of me (since it
will soon be beneath me, and anything now beneath me was in front of
me a short time ago). If I'm directly over something, I'm either
hitting it or it's not a concern.

Then I really have to ask, "Why in God's name did you ask the fraking
question?"

Mxsmanic wrote:

Maxwell writes:


Why would a pilot care?


When reporting position, or when following instructions to "cross XYZ at
6000," or whatever. Or when giving the location of a family in distress next
to their SUV below.


Reporting position is all about just letting people know what direction
to look for you. I'm not IFR, but I've never heard anyone get a request
to cross a particular point, I have heard them tell pilots to turn
left/right to a particular heading.

If I tell an airport that I'm 6 miles east inbound and will enter a 45
for downwind, they know what direction to look, they generally know the
area and what approach I'm going to use to enter the pattern. I never
say my altitude unless I'm crossing over an airport or in a situration
where there's a high likelyhood of having company close by. Coming into
a pattern, your altitude changes a lot. Do not be one of these people
that call every damn thing you do.

I don't care if you were at 3000 and are going to 2000. If you call
that you're entering the pattern, I care where you are and how you're
entering. I already know your altitude (should be) is at TPA by the
time you get there. If you call that you're leaving the pattern, I
don't care where you're going. You can say that you're departing to the
north or whatever, but there's plenty of people out there that make
completely useless calls. I'm departing to the north. Now I'm heading
north at 2500. Now I'm 5 miles north of the airport. Now I'm at 3000.
I DON'T CARE GO AWAY.

If you were directly overhead of an SUV and a family, you wouldn't see
them. You'd really make a turn around a point and look for landmarks
around them.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Erik writes:

If I really need to know if I'm directly over something, I take into
account the wind and my velocity and start dropping golf balls and watch
where they land. Of course, by the time they hit the ground, I've
probably moved a couple hundred feet or so which then requires more golf
balls. It's a never-ending battle.

Seriously?


Yeah, seriously, who cares?

"Erik" wrote in message
...


You don't want to pelt noncombatants with errant golf balls!


I suppose. As long as I can miss farmer John's house with a sick sack, I'm
good to go.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Maxwell writes:

Why would a pilot care?

When reporting position, or when following instructions to "cross XYZ at
6000," or whatever. Or when giving the location of a family in distress
next
to their SUV below.


It's never that critical if you are reporting a position to some form of
ATC. Anything within a couple miles will do on VFR. IFR you have VOR and
DME, and ATC understands their accuracy.

Estimating a ground position would usually be given from a ground reference.
Using road section lines you can estimate to a 1/2 or 1/4 mile pretty well.
Just report something like 2.5 miles west of the river, railroad tracks,
general store, etc.

The only time you need to look straight down is while skydiving. Then you
are looking through an open door, and with very little experience you can
judge to a couple hundred feet from 10,500. The parachute does the rest.

[Crap snipped]

Your tenacity is astounding, second only to your inventiveness to bait the
unsuspecting.
What do you do in real life?
Nevermind, just a rhetorical question.