Mxsmanic wrote:
Yes, but they are all in the suburbs.

Oh, call the whaamublance, would ya.

Why would they deny you landing clearance?

Because LAX is one of the busiest airports in the world, which handles
thousands of flights a day, and the controllers may be juggling a
half-dozen aircraft each, which all has to move in a smooth procession.
Sure, a 172 pilot can ASK for clearance, but he's more than very likely
to receive a "thanks, but no thanks".

That's what I ask. The FAA worries excessively about the wrong things.

The point, dear boy, is that YOU worry about it too much.

No, regular check-ups won't pick it up, either. It's often the sort of thing
you must be looking for.

I can't speak for French doctoring, but here this sort of thing is par
for the course.

By the way the lights move in relation to each other.

Which requires that you not only stare at the lights for any given
period of time, it also deducts critical time you may need to:

Adjust the controls
Fiddle a knob
Check your instruments
Move the #*(&@ out of the way of the jumbo jet on a collision course
with your plane.

Sorry, you need to be able to look and KNOW, immediately. Only color
does that.

it is more
difficult for them than it is for normal people (and they see them slightly
differently, although they may still be distinct).

In which case they can apply for a SODA. If they pass, huzzah.

Just make sure you carry a handheld.

Your handheld is burnt out, and all your batteries are dead. And there's
no power port in the plane. And the Mets are playing that evening.

You are well and truly NORDO. What signal did the tower just give you?

Hardly. There are a handful of situations in which it matters. Usually it
doesn't.

Like:

Reading a chart
Reading weather
Checking airspeed
Checking fuel for water and correct grade

Nope, still need it.

There are many
potential attractions to flying, and not everyone is looking for adventure.

Yes, they all are. You don't fly because it's a horrid trudge uphill in
sleet, you do it because you want to experience something you wouldn't
get staying on the ground (not, again, that you would know).

In which case there's nothing special about flying. You undermine your own
argument.

That was never my argument to begin with, fool.

Nobody can.

I can.

It's not part of flight.

That wasn't a condition of it's possibility. Your mistake, again.

No, they don't feel it either, or I should say, they don't feel it any more
than the passengers do. Everyone is in the same aircraft.

Do you not read?

Their sensitivity to it is greater than yours. True, the forces are the
same throughout the aircraft, but their perception is far better than
you or I.

No, I just know that the 737-800 does this for me, thanks to being familiar
with the aircraft. The AFDS turns the aircraft, not I.

Then you haven't learned to fly the aircraft. You've learned to twiddle
a knob, and any ground-pounder can do that.

Take the controls sometime.

Clearly, tin-can pilots predominate here.

Clearly, supercilious bull**** predominates here with you. Don't be so
crass to think a pilot does not know how to fly his aircraft, because
you can twiddle a knob (remember our "murder mystery" argument).

No, it is not.

How would you know?

The pilots typically only fly take-off and landing; and in low
visibility, they may use the autoland feature to have the aircraft land itself
as well.

Pilots typically fly all the way through the initial parts of the
departure, procedure turns and such. It's a bitch to find out George has
gone kaddywompus in IFR traffic.

Large airliners are
only sound to about 2.5 Gs or so.

Care to state a source?

A G force great enough to prevent him from
reaching a switch may well be enough to snap the wings off also

At 2.5G, your 20lbs. head weighs 50lbs. Your 40lbs. arm weighs 100lbs.
And if you were actually flying at max G load (around 4G's for a
passenger aircraft), your arm could weigh 160lbs. Still think you have
the arm strength to hit that switch?

Heaven forbid he should feel the buffet in the controls of the oncoming
stall, which his instrument cluster failed to report to him due to a
blocked static port, eh?

His instruments warn him of critical angle of attack long before he comes
anywhere near it. It is unlikely to ever reach the buffer or even
stick-shaker stage if he is watching his instruments.

Did you not actually read that? Your instruments aren't telling you
anything. They think everything is fine. The plane is approaching a
stall and they can't detect it, and you (Mr. I Don't Need to Feel
Anything), take it all the way through to a full-root stall, because
you're super-confident that your instruments will never ever lie to you.

Congratulations, your worthless pronouncements have killed all aboard.

He won't (read: can't) be making any turns of more than 2.5 Gs or so.
Airliners are not fighter planes.

Read the (two) above.

You can train for that in the sim.

That's not the point.

Your conversion of a mistake to "satire" is noted.

Wasn't a mistake in the least. You need to read it again.

I'm experienced enough to make some statements with a high level of certainty,
but not others.

So your statement "Try me" was just fallacious bluff, then? You are
ready to admit that flying a virtual 737 in no way permits nor prepares
you for the task of taking a real bird to the air?

Normal procedures first; then emergencies.

Emergency procedures are listed first in the POH for a reason.

You may begin to learn some normal procedures first, but once again you
fail to properly read my statement. Emergency procedures are the first
you memorize (which you have clearly failed to do, in the confidence
that your perfect computing environment will never offer up any undue
failure lest you request it).

If you haven't learned to fly an aircraft normally, you won't be able to learn
how to fly it abnormally.

And by all appearances, you haven't learned to fly, period.

I know part of it, but I don't practice it much. I don't have to deal with
failures in simulation, and I don't plan to fly for real, so such exercises
are academic, and I undertake them only out of curiosity.

So again you freely admit that simulation does not prepare you for the
rigors and necessity of flying a real aircraft, and that it's inherent
safety makes you a complacent pilot with sloppy habits?

I think we've made a breakthrough here.

If that were true, you wouldn't have to resort to personal attacks.

What personal attacks? So far as I know, everything I've said is true.

Please take half a second to actually read the post. Most of this crap
is you failing to register what exactly it is you're reading.

Please don't try to run with scissors, naked, through a field of cactus,
backwards.

TheSmokingGnu