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 |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Stability augmentation promises to give you even less control
"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk @See My Sig.com writes:
Then you probably won't be buying an aiplane with this feature. Unless manufacturers start installing it in everything, or the government requires its presence. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Stability augmentation promises to give you even less control
Mxsmanic wrote:
writes: True in general but this has nothing whatsoever to do with the system under discussion. It has a lot to do with it. A system that decides to "stabilize" the aircraft because it thinks you have "lost control" is indisputably related to this. Nope, your statement was blatent nonsense. The system in question is not "making decisions behind your back". It depends on how smart that silent copilot is. When the silent copilot is a computer, that depends on the barely-tested, bug-laden software that it is running. Your posted nonsense asked how useful would a silent copilot be and the answer to that is exactly what I said above and that holds no matter whether the silent copilot is human or a computer. It is only your opinion as self declared, unemployed software engineer that the software of the system in question is "barely-tested" and "bug-laden" and you have zero evidence that such is true. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Stability augmentation promises to give you even less control
Mxsmanic wrote:
writes: LOOK UP CRM. There is no CRM with a computer. Ice cream has no bones. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Stability augmentation promises to give you even less control
On Aug 4, 12:45*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes: LOOK UP CRM. There is no CRM with a computer. So stop playing computor games and get into a real aeroplane |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Stability augmentation promises to give you even less control
On Aug 3, 7:45*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes: LOOK UP CRM. There is no CRM with a computer. LOOK UP CRM. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Stability augmentation promises to give you even less control
On Aug 3, 10:36*am, "Stephen!" wrote:
wrote : Someone who doesn't fly for a living. OK, then single pilot in real IMC. * You haven't lived until you've piloted an SEL over the mountains in solid IMC without an autopilot. *I logged 2 hours IMC in a 182 over Montana a few weeks ago. *That was a LOT of fun! * -- RCOS #7 IBA# 11465http://imagesdesavions.com There was something in the literature recently about using a/p in IMC is safer, but from my point of view I am much more aware of what's going on hand flying (and have done so over the Rockies) than sitting back and 'managing' the airplane while it's on auto pilot.. A sad confession is the a/p does do a better job of keeping the needles crossed on an ILS than I do, but the correct interpretation of that is, I need more practice at it than the a/p does. A huge 'and moreover' is, I want hands on near minima, don't want to mess with the a/p if I have to fly a miss, and don't want to transition from a/p to manual when I decide conditions are not right for a landing. Aviators understand this stuff. |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
Stability augmentation promises to give you even less control
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Stability augmentation promises to give you even less control
a writes:
There was something in the literature recently about using a/p in IMC is safer, but from my point of view I am much more aware of what's going on hand flying (and have done so over the Rockies) than sitting back and 'managing' the airplane while it's on auto pilot.. The workload for single-pilot IFR is substantial, particularly in actual IMC. This is an important argument favoring the suggestion that autopilot be heavily used for IFR. With two pilots, things are easier, although an autopilot might still be preferable. At least the autopilot only does what it is told. At the same time, it does encourage a certain amount of complacency, which has even bit airline pilots on more than one occasion. A sad confession is the a/p does do a better job of keeping the needles crossed on an ILS than I do, but the correct interpretation of that is, I need more practice at it than the a/p does. There's no shame in an automated system doing better than a human being at something it is designed to do. A huge 'and moreover' is, I want hands on near minima, don't want to mess with the a/p if I have to fly a miss, and don't want to transition from a/p to manual when I decide conditions are not right for a landing. Aviators understand this stuff. It depends on the aircraft and the type of flying. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Stability augmentation promises to give you even less control
On Aug 4, 9:19*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes: LOOK UP CRM. No need, I know what it stands for. NO YOU DON'T. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Stability augmentation promises to give you even less control
Mxsmanic wrote:
writes: LOOK UP CRM. No need, I know what it stands for. You may know what the words of the acronym are but you obviously don't know what it means or you wouldn't have written what you wrote. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Promises to be a good show this year! | PLMerite | Aviation Photos | 0 | May 3rd 08 12:43 PM |
Stability variation | WingFlaps | Piloting | 2 | April 28th 08 03:45 AM |
Towing stability studies | Dan G | Soaring | 27 | February 21st 08 08:38 PM |
Tow vehicle -- electronic stability control | Greg Arnold | Soaring | 4 | June 8th 06 12:31 PM |
Atmospheric stability and lapse rate | Andrew Sarangan | Piloting | 39 | February 11th 05 05:34 AM |