FADEC = complex

Neil Gould writes:

And, you know this because...?

Because I've done the research, and because I've simmed these
situations as well.

The basis for this notion is...?

See my other post to Thomas for one of many examples of supporting
information for this point of view. It's the sort of thing that
pilots ignore at their peril. But pilots seem to ignore a lot of
things, especially the ones who fly tin cans.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

Neil Gould writes:

(in response to your absurd statement of yours that one does not get
plenty of clues about something going awry prior to a critical situation
related to autopilots)
And, you know this because...?

Because I've done the research, and because I've simmed these
situations as well.

Then, you either don't understand your sim or don't understand the
relationship of your sim to the real world. In the real world, one *does*
get plenty of clues about such things as a change of flight parameters,
regardless of the cause. The reality of flying is that changes in trim or
a control setting results in a trade-off, and these trade-offs are easily
observable and we are trained from day one to do so.

But pilots seem to ignore a lot of
things, especially the ones who fly tin cans.

And, this, Jose, is an example of the kind of insults that come from this
person that doesn't even qualify as a "wannabe". It should not be
surprising that people respond to this kind of garbage with some disdain.

Neil

Neil Gould writes:

Then, you either don't understand your sim or don't understand the
relationship of your sim to the real world. In the real world, one *does*
get plenty of clues about such things as a change of flight parameters,
regardless of the cause.

No, one does not, as many accidents (real-world accidents, not sim
accidents) have proved.

The reality of flying is that changes in trim or
a control setting results in a trade-off, and these trade-offs are easily
observable and we are trained from day one to do so.

No, they are not. When the autopilot is in charge, lots of things can
gradually happen, and you won't know about it unless you _explicitly_
look for it. No magic sixth sense will tell you that anything is
wrong. And when the autopilot finally gives up and disconnects,
you're going to have to catch up and act fast if you don't want to
die.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:
And when the autopilot finally gives up and disconnects,
you're going to have to catch up and act fast if you don't want to
die.

Pure crap, as usual. The autopilot can go to full nose up or down trim
and then let go and you still don't have to act fast. Some autopilots
do not manipulate the trim, they make you do it. There will be a little
light on the instrument telling you to trim up or down. Got any other
wisdom you'd like to pull out of your ass?

"Mxsmanic" wrote

No, one does not, as many accidents (real-world accidents, not sim
accidents) have proved.

Cites, examples.

No, they are not. When the autopilot is in charge, lots of things can
gradually happen, and you won't know about it unless you _explicitly_
look for it. No magic sixth sense will tell you that anything is
wrong. And when the autopilot finally gives up and disconnects,
you're going to have to catch up and act fast if you don't want to
die.

Cites, examples.

Without them, utter bull.
--
Jim in NC

Recently, Mxsmanic posted:

Neil Gould writes:

Then, you either don't understand your sim or don't understand the
relationship of your sim to the real world. In the real world, one
*does* get plenty of clues about such things as a change of flight
parameters, regardless of the cause.

No, one does not, as many accidents (real-world accidents, not sim
accidents) have proved.

In addition to the many other things w/r/t aviation that you are
completely clueless about, you may now include statistics and accident
analysis.

The reality of flying is that changes in trim or
a control setting results in a trade-off, and these trade-offs are
easily observable and we are trained from day one to do so.

No, they are not.

And, you know this, because?

When the autopilot is in charge, lots of things can
gradually happen, and you won't know about it unless you _explicitly_
look for it.

Yeah, well, if you _aren't_ explicitly looking for it, then the problem is
you. One reason that there is more than one instrument on the panel is so
that pilots can explicitly look for such things. It's our responsibililty
to do so, and most (if not all) pilots can do so very easily. Whether or
not one does so is a personal matter, not one of mechanics or electronics
making the task impossible, as you seem to think.

No magic sixth sense will tell you that anything is
wrong. And when the autopilot finally gives up and disconnects,
you're going to have to catch up and act fast if you don't want to
die.

More utter nonsense. As I said before, you don't have any knowledge of
piloting an airplane, so you can't present a valid argument. Why not just
ask a question and sit back and take in the answers?

Neil

"Neil Gould" wrote

And, this, Jose, is an example of the kind of insults that come from this
person that doesn't even qualify as a "wannabe". It should not be
surprising that people respond to this kind of garbage with some disdain.

What is amazing to me, is that anyone will still answer questions, when they
know the dog will bit the hand that feeds it.

Respect; it's all about respect.
--
Jim in NC

On the other hand, if one finds that one cannot resist engaging in a long
drawn out urinating contest, E-mail is always an option. You get to have
your fun without hosing down the whole newsgroup.

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

Mxsmanic,

See my other post to Thomas for one of many examples of supporting
information for this point of view.


Your post to me offers zero support for your POV.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)