On Sun, 18 May 2008 12:34:26 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

Pretty much the same thing applies to you in this regard as you have
only made it to somewhere between second and third base in the IFR
realm. There are a lot of people on this group who are quite
experienced in IFR flight and I might be one of them. But I still
welcome the opportunity to learn from those who have earned my
respect. The IFR virgins should shut up, listen and learn.

Good observation. I usually subscribe to this approach, when the topic of
instrument filght comes up, since I *am* a newbie in that realm. I've only
shot 54 instrument approaches under the hood, and have maybe fifty hours
total simulated IMC, which pales into insignificance when compared with
someone who flies instruments daily.

However, in this case MX is parroting "the book" on instrument flight, while
several others are arguing counter to "the book". IMHO this is a case
where the messenger is being killed despite the fact that the message is
correct.

No, it's a case of applicability and context. You train to ignore
your inner ear, but there are plenty of other sensations and cues
which you do pay attention to whether VMC or IMC. Blanket statements
and inability to accept correction or understand the context of the
book is his issue, and regardless of what name he comes back as (which
he won't do because he's too stubourn to know when to leave) the same
issue will always be there. He needs to go back to the sim groups and
stay where his simulator only posting is on topic.