I give up, after many, many years!

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
gatt writes:

The ones that are ignored are different sensations and typically have to
do with equilibrium and the inner ear. Examples are somatogravic and
coriolis and inversion illusions. If your ass leaves the seat or
compresses into it, however, it's not something you ignore.

Yes, it is, because it is no more reliable than any other sensation.

If you enter a coordinated turn at constant altitude, your buttocks will tell
you that you are climbing ... but you aren't. Your inner ear will tell you
the same thing, and it will be just as wrong.

Point totally missed yet again.

That sensation tells you that you are coordinated, which is the point.

There aren't many/any RC pilots who haven't catastrophically augured an
RC plane.

Of those who have, how did they manage, without sensation? Indeed, how do
they ever manage on any flight, without sensation?

Irrelevant.

The sensation in real airplanes allows you to fly more precisely and
safer.

UAV systems are much more sophisticated than those in the
average single-engine piston airplane, and--I've not flown a UAV so I'm
guessing here--they're not doing things like steep-bank turns or
short-field approaches.

But aviation is more than single-engine piston airplanes ... much more.

Irrelevant to the topic at hand.

Those are different sensations and you have to know the difference and
also what to reject or ignore. VFR pilots are subject to similar but
different sensations such as visual autokinesis, reversal of motion and
black hole approaches.

Can you fly safely with your eyes closed, relying only on sensations, and
selectively ignoring or accepting the sensations you feel?

A blazingly stupid comment that shows you know nothing about real
flight.

You can have those sensations while remaining perfectly still in normal
flight. When your ass is sliding toward the inside or outside of a
turn, or getting compressed into the seat or lifted into the lap belt,
those are not illusions.

But they may not be what you think they are, either.

It only takes a couple of hours in a real airplane to learn to interpret
what they are and what they mean.


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.

Bull****.

That's not what the "literature" says.

Get a dictionary from someone who owns one and look up the word "context".


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.