![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In rec.aviation.student Mxsmanic wrote:
Michael Ash writes: What a total non sequitur. The idealism was referring to your statement that it would be great if pilots could just concentrate on the flying and ignore the engine. Well it's true, it would be great, but there's this little thing called reality which gets in the way. Reality didn't seem to get in the way of simplification in airliners. You don't see too many flight engineers these days. There's a difference between simplifying something and eliminating it. Airliners may have better engine management systems but it's still there. Yes, but it's done by computer, not the pilots, and design improvements have made management less necessary. Not all of it is done by the computer. The pilots still have to know how the stuff works and how to run it. It is largely to the point where they can push the lever and get the power, but not 100%. If you believe otherwise, just look at the circumstances surrounding the recent 777 crash at Heathrow. The computers didn't save those pilots from a dual flameout on short final. And don't paint all private pilots with the same brush. I don't. There are plenty of smart ones around. I really have to wonder if you realize just how unbelievably insulting that statement is. If I didn't already view you as being an arrogant and useless idiot I might get mad.... From what I've seen, for a significant proportion of these guys, getting maximum performance out of the engine, minimizing fuel burn, holding CHT to the exact right value, and tweaking that last few miles of range out of the engine is an enormous thrill. I don't share in that enthusiasm myself but it's definitely there in some guys. So flying isn't really their purpose, it's just incidental. Your obsession with people's "purpose" is bizarre and nonsensical. Anything you do while piloting an airplane is "flying", whether it's cruisng steadily or endlessly fiddling with the engine levers. People fly for many reasons, and they don't have to meet your insane ideas of "purpose" to do it. By your definition, my purpose isn't "flying", it's interpreting weather, finding lift, planning routes, etc. By your definition, someone who uses his airplane to fly to meetings doesn't have "flying" as his purpose, it's just incidental. Someone who flies around to look at the scenery, ditto. Or enjoys the challenge of IMC, or chatting with ATC, or the feeling they get from performing aerobatics. So, I ask you: what does one have to do in order for "flying" to be their purpose? And why should anyone care? -- Mike Ash Radio Free Earth Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Full Stalls Power Off | w3n-a | Soaring | 5 | December 4th 08 10:29 PM |
Full Stalls Power On | w3n-a | Piloting | 0 | December 4th 08 02:30 PM |
Can hydraulic lifters cause inadequate full power? | [email protected] | Owning | 13 | October 23rd 08 07:40 PM |
Radio protocol regarding full stops on full stop only nights | Ben Hallert | Piloting | 33 | February 9th 05 07:52 PM |
4--O-470 pistons,used | jerry Wass | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | August 17th 04 05:07 PM |