![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Ron Garret" wrote in message ... shrug So make the scenario on-airway. On-airways flight doesn't require any VOR twiddling either. Or have the radar fail. Then the controller will issue a route on-airways or within normal navaid usable distances. Or have the controller not paying attention. If you're not prepared to trust the controller to pay attention you're not prepared to operate IFR in controlled airspace. Or have the pilot file /G. Radar monitoring is still required. Off-airways IFR flight was not made possible by the advent of GPS, it was made possible by ATC radar. There are myriad possibilities. It's clear there are many things which you believe are possibilities but actually are not. Yes I did, though as I suspected it hasn't done any good. You seem to have a different definition of "risk" than most people. Ya think? State your definition so we can compare it to the dictionary definition. If handheld GPS is not a risk then neither is AI failure. The two differ only in their likelihoods; structurally the two situations are identical. Both GPS and the AI provide information that can be wrong. Both have backups that are supposed to kick in if the information is in fact wrong. In both cases the backups can fail, or the pilot can fail to use them properly. I don't see a lot of similarity. The most difficult aspect of an AI failure can be determining that it is the AI that has failed. If you're in solid cloud and the AI and TC are providing conflicting information, how do you determine which is incorrect? In a study done some years ago in a simulator that situation resulted in a loss of control by most pilots in less than a minute. If your GPS fails and you drift off course the controller alerts you to the situation, you don't have to figure out anything on your own. And in both cases if the pilot does realize that the information is wrong and act accordingly the results can be catastrophic. Does that constitute a risk? I think most people would say yes. (We could take a poll.) We could, but if facts and logic wont sway you it seems unlikely that poll results will. I stopped at two because extrapolating from those two examples to many others is an elementary exercise in applying some imagination (which you seem to lack). Also because, as I suspected, it would be futile. Additional examples will not convince you. You will simply dismiss them as not being risks. Of course. I'd look pretty foolish if I didn't dismiss non-risks as not being risks. Do you realize you haven't answered any of my questions correctly? No. No surprise there. Do you realize that that was another stupid question? Not at all. It's purpose was to determine whether you were feigning stupidity or if it was genuine. Assuming you answered it honestly, we now know you're genuinely stupid. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|