![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jun 22, 9:45*pm, Wingnut wrote:
On Sun, 20 Jun 2010 11:45:01 +0200, Mxsmanic wrote: Wingnut writes: So, you're sayign that flight experience is irrelevant to flying an aircraft? That depends on the experience, and the aircraft. Flight experience in a Cessna 152 Ah, the Cessna 152 strawman again. I was wondering when that would show up. First sentence of non-quoted text as it just so happens -- which means one of my co-workers owes me ten bucks. :-) Just as experience in driving a Yugo doesn't necessarily help in driving a Formula 1 car. Experience driving versus never having sat behind a wheel should make some difference. It's plain old common sense! A person with experience in a Cessna 152 still has none in a 747, and so he will not necessarily be any more useful in a 747 cockpit than a non-pilot would. There will be some commonalities. Zero experience in a plane will make you worse than having had some experience. I don't claim you'd be proficient; just that you wouldn't actually be *less* capable than someone who knew *nothing*. Again, common sense. Pilots of small private aircraft who believe that they could just slip into a 747 cockpit and fly it are just as naive as non-pilots who believe the same thing. First of all, we weren't talking "pilots of small private aircraft", at least not until you came along and introduced that particular strawman. Second, they may not be able to do a good job, but the total non-pilot will surely do a worse job. Except in your earlier, specific scenario of being talked through a procedure from the ground, where anyone with basic comprehension skills will probably do about as well. (Someone with piloting experience might more quickly be able to find and recognize particular controls or instrument readouts though, and will be able to understand a more compact jargon, so he may be a bit faster though other than that only as good as the quality of the ground instructions.) I don't think anyone here has claimed that. Though the less someone knows about operating an aircraft, the poorer their odds. Yes. I've heard many people claim this, however, and it only shows that they are uninformed. Someone who says that "the less experience a person has at a skilled task, the poorer their odds of completing it successfully" is "uninformed"? In what universe? In the one where I live there is this thing called a "learning curve". It climbs steeply at first, then bends over, but it's monotonic increasing, and it indicates task performance as a function of experience. Performance improves with experience, slowing down and eventually plateauing. For some things (e.g. Tic-Tac-Toe) it plateaus fast and low; for others (e.g. chess) it plateaus much more slowly and higher, because the thing being learned is more complicated. But it does not actually dip down at any point. Since this basic fact (learning curves are monotonic increasing) is disputed by you, I'm forced to conclude that you're insane and thus not really worth debating with any further. Wingnut, I'm going to have to call you on your statement that learning curves are monotonically increasing activities. 1) I have employees whose 10 years of experience can be characterized as 1 year repeated 10 times. (That's OK depending on their job of course.) 2) There are some who have posted here thousands of times and seem to have learned nothing. 3) There are some here who even after repeated experiences have not yet learned engaging others in the 'reality vs sim' experience doesn't add value to the thread. The major reason a non-certificate holder is one of the most frequent posters here is because others of us, including me, took part in the non-learning experience of engaging him on a topic. It would appear MX's major recreation is sim and engaging in these debates,other of his posts suggest he doesn't have much of a life elsewhere. We've all seen literate failures at real life, he is most likely in that class. Too many of us contribute to his recreation at the expense of RAP (although these threads are better than the ****ing contests others seem to enjoy). He is simply a non-pilot who enjoys yanking on pilot's chains and does that fairly successfully. You should note that when you simply reply to him, you postings are also sent to other groups. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pilot nearly crashes in IMC, Controller helps | pimenthal | Piloting | 32 | September 27th 05 01:06 PM |
Aviation Conspiracy: Toronto Plane Pilot Was Allowed To Land In "Red Alert" Weather | Bill Mulcahy | General Aviation | 24 | August 19th 05 10:48 PM |
2 pilot/small airplane CRM | Mitty | Instrument Flight Rules | 35 | September 1st 04 11:19 PM |
non-pilot lands airplane | Cub Driver | Piloting | 3 | August 14th 04 12:08 AM |
Home Builders are Sick Sick Puppies | pacplyer | Home Built | 11 | March 26th 04 12:39 AM |