Confusion about when it's my navigation, and when it's ATC

Mxsmanic wrote:
Newps writes:


BZZT, try again.


Which flight path is followed in a forward slip?

Irrelavant. The point is my dear clueless wonder is that the flight
path is altered by the rudder.

Mxsmanic wrote:

Newps writes:


Steeeeeerike two.


Why? The intended flight path is aligned with the centerline of the
runway, and in fact that is the flight path followed; there is no
deviation.

The rudder changed the flight path from what it would have been.

Newps writes:

Irrelavant.

It's highly relevant, and it proves my point.

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

Newps writes:

The rudder changed the flight path from what it would have been.

The flight path is where you want the aircraft to go, not where it
would have gone.

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

Mxsmanic wrote:

Newps writes:


Irrelavant.


It's highly relevant, and it proves my point.


Once again you are completely lost.

Mxsmanic wrote:

Newps writes:


The rudder changed the flight path from what it would have been.


The flight path is where you want the aircraft to go, not where it
would have gone.


Sorry, once again you are clueless. The flight path is the track over
the ground. Not the desired track, not the aircraft heading but the
actual track. That track can be controlled a number of ways.

Newps wrote:



Mxsmanic wrote:

Newps writes:


The rudder changed the flight path from what it would have been.



The flight path is where you want the aircraft to go, not where it
would have gone.



Sorry, once again you are clueless. The flight path is the track over
the ground. Not the desired track, not the aircraft heading but the
actual track. That track can be controlled a number of ways.

That is correct. But, in most IFR operations desired track and actual
track must be virtually the same. If an engine is failed while actual
track is the same as desired track, and the proper application of rudder
(means no alieron cross-control input) results in continuing the actual
flight track to equal the desired flight track, then the flight path has
remained unchanged.

Sam,

In a Level D simulator in 121 opertions


And the connection to MSFS is?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert wrote:

Sam,


In a Level D simulator in 121 opertions



And the connection to MSFS is?

Zero

"gpsman" wrote in message
oups.com...
Mxsmanic wrote: groups adjusted
Neil Gould writes:

If the real aircraft can't get to a FL, *any* representation of the
aircraft's behavior at that altitude is incorrect.

Not so. The aircraft could be placed there by another aircraft, in
which case it would have some sort of behavior that presumably could
be simulated. It just can't get there under its own power. Slewing
functions in a simulator are the equivalent of carrying the aircraft
to that altitude in real life.

Thus, while there may not be much practical reason to simulate the
aircraft at that altitude, since it is physically possible for it to
be at that altitude

Well, which is it?! Could the aircraft be placed there by another
aircraft, or is it physically impossible for it to be at that altitude?

However, if nobody ever tests the aircraft for real at that
altitude, any simulation of its behavior there remains a matter of
speculation and unverifiable.

spit take Ever hear of physics?
-----

- gpsman

Steven Hawkins he's not!

Slade