Stability augmentation promises to give you even less control

On Aug 5, 10:28*pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

The ONLY accurate measure of value on any Usenet forum is the accuracy
of the information posted proven over time. Posters are usually found
to be who they claim to be or not who they claim to be over time and
posting history based on the above.

So, where do I fall in this accurate measurment??? I would hope I
have proven my own experience over 10 years.

On Aug 6, 8:04*am, " wrote:
On Aug 5, 10:28*pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

The ONLY accurate measure of value on any Usenet forum is the accuracy
of the information posted proven over time. Posters are usually found
to be who they claim to be or not who they claim to be over time and
posting history based on the above.

So, where do I fall in this accurate measurment??? *I would hope I
have proven my own experience over 10 years.

Some, including you and hopefully me, have as aviators actually
included aviation related comments in our postings. My checklists have
grown based on ideas suggested here, as have some flying habits. Those
are the golden needles in this sometimes frustrating haystack.

Dudley Henriques writes:

Asking for experience, flying hours, qualifications etc are a total
waste of bandwidth on Usenet. The person being challenged could be a
trained Chimp with a keyboard or the King of Siam. They could also be
quite legitimate.

Which means I could also be working in aviation safety for a living. I could
even be working for the FAA.

The ONLY accurate measure of value on any Usenet forum is the accuracy
of the information posted proven over time. Posters are usually found
to be who they claim to be or not who they claim to be over time and
posting history based on the above.

I agree. However, I don't care who the posters are. They are either right or
wrong. I don't trust names or credentials. Someone who is consistently right
will gradually earn my respect; someone who is too often wrong will be
promptly written off.

My most interesting Usenet experience occurred when someone accused me
of NOT being Dudley Henriques as he knew Dudley Henriques and I wasn't
him.
My wife promptly answered his private email to me stating that if he
knew the real Dudley Henriques, would he be kind enough to ask him to
come home immediately as the impostor she had been living with for
over 40 years didn't like to do yard work.

Perhaps the one he knew was the imposter.

I don't worry about that, as I've said above. So whether you are the real DH
or not doesn't matter. Only the things you post matter.

On Aug 6, 9:44*am, Mxsmanic wrote:

I could even be working for the FAA.

WRONG.

DID YOU FORGET WHERE YOU LIVE?????????????

writes:

What difference does it make to you. You already don't take my
answers for any value.

Yes, but I was calling your bluff. It worked.

What difference does it make to you.

I was curious because you sound so inexperienced. Everyone thinks he's an
expert during the first hundred hours or so of doing something new. Your
knee-jerk, vehement rejection of just about anything I say about aviation
indicates that you've invested much of your self-esteem in your PPL and are
correspondingly insecure about it, characteristics that are also correlated
with a lack of experience.

writes:

It has been around since at least '87 and has been implemented by about every
car maker out there world wide.

I did some research and it turns out to be more prevalent than I thought;
however, it is far from universal (but apparently some governments have
required or will require it). I don't pay much attention to cars and I haven't
driven a car in ages. I'm disappointed that gadgets like this are becoming
prevalent.

writes:

DID YOU FORGET WHERE YOU LIVE?????????????

Obviously, if I could work for the FAA and pretend not to, then I could also
live somewhere other than where I might appear to live. Indeed, I could be
someone different entirely. Believability would be enhanced if I simply
pretended to be another person who also happens to be real.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

It has been around since at least '87 and has been implemented by about every
car maker out there world wide.

I did some research and it turns out to be more prevalent than I thought;
however, it is far from universal (but apparently some governments have
required or will require it). I don't pay much attention to cars and I haven't
driven a car in ages. I'm disappointed that gadgets like this are becoming
prevalent.

Once again, since 1987, so it isn't "are becoming prevalent", they have
been prevalent for over 20 years.

The only downside to such systems that I have seen is when a very old
driver first encounters them, as in very old drivers were taught not to
press the brakes as hard as you can in a panic stop yet the anti-skid
systems "want" you to do exactly that.

Even then it takes only once to adjust to the new reality (for me that was
more than 15 years ago) and since pilots train for other than normal
circumstances while drivers do not, I see no problem with such a system
in aircraft.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Dudley Henriques writes:

The ONLY accurate measure of value on any Usenet forum is the accuracy
of the information posted proven over time. Posters are usually found
to be who they claim to be or not who they claim to be over time and
posting history based on the above.


A friend of mine used to have a saying..."If you have to tell them you are,
then you ain't".

On Aug 6, 10:08*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
DID YOU FORGET WHERE YOU LIVE?????????????

Obviously, if I could work for the FAA and pretend not to, then I could also
live somewhere other than where I might appear to live.

So in other words YOU LIVE A LIFE OF LIES.

FINALLY I AGREE WITH YOU.