Sad day for Mxsmanic

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com writes:

For the same reason I'm really good at killing zombies on my computer, it
isn't real life you nitwit.

Unfortunately, that's not an answer. The reality is that there is no
basis
for your assertion.

It has long been taken as gospel that a non-pilot could never land an
airliner, and as long as one sticks to the outdated assumption that he'd
have
to actually take the controls, that's probably true. But today's
airliners
are so heavily automated that they can be flown and landed without ever
touching the flight controls, so the dogma of yesteryear is no longer
applicable.


Dude, I wouldn't guarantee that I could land an airliner, even if I did it
wouldn't be pretty. But don't let reality get in the way of your delusion of
saving the day. If you want to pretend that pushing a few buttons that you
are told to push and the thing autolanding as "really" landing an airliner
then that is hardly landing an airliner. Now if you want to talk hand flying
the plane onto the runway with just MSFS experience as your background then
I think you live in fantasy land.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Steve Foley writes:

It has not been demonstrated to my satisfaction that any other outcome is
possible.

That is not the same as demonstrating that it would end in disaster.

I do not accept your conjecture as proof.

Likewise.

When you have evidence that someone with nothing but simulator experience
has successfully landed an airliner full of passengers, let me know.

The non-pilot would not need simulator experience. He would only need the
ability to follow instructions, along with a cool head.


Having someone instruct you set the plane up to autoland is not you flying
an airliner to landing.

"Maxwell" #$$9#@%%%.^^^ wrote in message
...

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Mike Ash writes:

When it's tested, either with an actual in-flight crisis or by having
somebody set it up as an experiment, then I will believe it. Until then,
please do not act as though the unknown is certain.

And no, I don't mean testing it in a simulator.

The simulators are good enough for the FAA and the airlines, so they're
good
enough for me.

Anything is good enough for you. You are satisfied to live in a hole in
France.

Sez the inbred who is satisfied to live in the ******** called Okieland.

What a moran.
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/n/U/moran.jpg

"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com writes:

If you want to pretend that pushing a few buttons that you
are told to push and the thing autolanding as "really" landing an airliner
then that is hardly landing an airliner.

The airliner ends up on the ground, stopped, undamaged, with all passengers
safe. That's as real as it gets.

Now if you want to talk hand flying
the plane onto the runway with just MSFS experience as your background then
I think you live in fantasy land.

Hand-flying isn't necessary, as I have explained.

"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com writes:

Having someone instruct you set the plane up to autoland is not you flying
an airliner to landing.

By whose definition?

The question was whether or not a non-pilot could land an airliner safely.
The answer is yes. Restricting the scenario to hand-flying only--something
that even the regular pilots don't normally do--is excessively artificial and
irrelevant, rather akin to saying that the pilots aren't really controlling
the airplane unless they turn off the hydraulics and move the control surfaces
with muscle power alone.

Mxsmanic wrote:
"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com writes:

Having someone instruct you set the plane up to autoland is not you flying
an airliner to landing.

By whose definition?

The question was whether or not a non-pilot could land an airliner safely.
The answer is yes. Restricting the scenario to hand-flying only--something
that even the regular pilots don't normally do--is excessively artificial and
irrelevant, rather akin to saying that the pilots aren't really controlling
the airplane unless they turn off the hydraulics and move the control surfaces
with muscle power alone.

Babbling nonsense.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Feb 23, 6:29*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com writes:
Having someone instruct you set the plane up to autoland is not you flying
an airliner to landing.

By whose definition?

The question was whether or not a non-pilot could land an airliner safely..
The answer is yes. *Restricting the scenario to hand-flying only--something
that even the regular pilots don't normally do--is excessively artificial and
irrelevant, rather akin to saying that the pilots aren't really controlling
the airplane unless they turn off the hydraulics and move the control surfaces
with muscle power alone.

It seems to me it is a safe assertion for MX to make, since he does
not fly and therefore never exposes himself to the 'risk' or
opportunity of demonstrating his claim. Now, consider for a moment
those circumstances where both pilots were rendered unable to fly. The
most probable thing is probably some very serious physical accident in
the cockpit. It would not be 'neat', would it? The call would be for
someone who can fly a very likely crippled airplane, with no "stop-
reset-start" provision.

On Feb 24, 3:29*pm, a wrote:
Now, consider for a moment
those circumstances where both pilots were rendered unable to fly. The
most probable thing is probably some very serious physical accident in
the cockpit. It would not be 'neat', would it? The call would be for
someone who can fly a very likely crippled airplane, with no "stop-
reset-start" provision.

Such a scenario that both pilots are impaired doesn't bode well for
the pax or the hull insurance

"Mxsmanic" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
Mike Ash writes:

The bit in the article where he talks about a simmer being asked to land
a passenger plane after the pilots have been debilitated is pretty
funny. Absolutely no mention whatsoever of the difficulty or
improbability of actually pulling off such a feat. It is simply assumed
that it could be done.

It can easily be done.

[snip further brabble]

For what it is worth, I have taken a go in an A320 simulator (I have a
PPL/IFR license for 8 years now) some time ago. Expensive pleasure but well
worth the experience. I have indeed tried to hand land it w/o autopilot
because I wanted to experience the difference in controls (I usually fly a
172 Rocket).

It actually took me three tries to get the damn thing to the ground safely.
The problem was neither tracking the glide slope nor fiddling around with
the speed control, these were pretty simple actually. But I could not so
easily get the flaring scheme out of my head which made me land the bird on
its nose wheel twice as I flared well too late. You have to flare the
******* at an altitude where I do not yet spend a single thought on flaring
in my Cessna.

But, and that's the actual point, while I was busy keeping the bird on track
the FI who was acompanying the situation did actually push a whole lot of
switches which seemingly were necessary also to land safely. And once I got
her to the ground safely I was actually surprised how difficult it was to
keep her on the RWY during the landing run. Can someone with no or FS
experience only do it safely? From the experience I doubt it ...

Just my 2 cents.

Herbert

Clark writes:

You hope it includes stopped. Not all autoland systems have auto-braking much
less automatic deployment of spoilers and thrust reversers.

The person flying the aircraft can be instructed on applying the brakes.

Dream on. You've never hand flown anything so how could you possibly know?

By reading and learning, something that many people never attempt.