Jay Honeck wrote:
What people are asserting here is 180 degrees different from what I
read in all the literature. You cannot fly by the seat of your pants.
You can't fly based on sensations. They are too unreliable.
Conversely, you can fly without sensations, as long as you have visual
and/or instrument information.


You're a moron. You're not competent to read with comprehension.
Anthony, you don't know **** from shinola.

Presuming we're talking about IFR flight, what, precisely, do you find
incorrect in MX's paragraph, above?

Well, for starters, you cannot fly without sensations unless you're
defying gravity and centrifugal/centripetal force. Fighter pilots
would probably think it very cool if they could ignore stuff like tunnel
vision and brownout.

Jay, I mentioned this to him earlier and he ignored it.

There's a difference between gravitational forces acting on a body and
inner-ear and other physiological effects such as somatogravic illusion.

The pilot feels the same forces acting on an airplane, so if you feel
G-forces and you are compressed into your seat, you know you're pulling
G's.

If your chart suddenly flies off the dashpanel and your luggage starts
floating around behind the rear seats, are these items experiencing
sensations, or physics?

As I told him, if you jump off of a building you will quickly learn the
difference between physiological illusion and physical sensation. It is
the latter that cannot be denied.


-c