Visual STARs

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jim Carter wrote:
From: dlevy ]
Posted At: Monday, January 29, 2007 3:58 PM
Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr

It doesn't seem reasonable to me that this information should be
discussed
with someone that obviously doesn't fly.......

.....duh....


You know, I was thinking the same thing. All of this information is
available in the AIM and other sources, but it would make good sense for
someone who wanted to appear to have been taught (therefore screened) to
fly in the US to get the "real world" info from active pilots.

Funny thing is, even those in the flightsimming world[1] have told
him the same thing that active pilots have said: RTFM. Yet he still
either a) refuses to do so, or b) doesn't take their knowledge and
experience to mind, considers it wrong. Yet he isn't getting respect in
neither world.

BL.

[1] Pilots and ATC in the flightsimming world who happen to be real
world pilots and controllers.

- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFvosByBkZmuMZ8L8RArAOAJ9WoHSNpuSJUQOdz9TYsX j6q2UirgCcCfeu
G90WJXxY7HvSrrmi5B9v/DA=
=DWvA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Jim Carter writes:

You know, I was thinking the same thing. All of this information is
available in the AIM and other sources, but it would make good sense for
someone who wanted to appear to have been taught (therefore screened) to
fly in the US to get the "real world" info from active pilots.

You must be joking. "Active pilots?" Nobody here is for real as far
as I'm concerned; I've been on USENET too long for that. You read and
then you verify. The person who answers you might or might not be a
pilot--you cannot trust what he says about that, and in any case it
doesn't matter, as long as the answer is right (or if the answer is
wrong). And so many pilots on these newsgroups have already been
wrong, in a way blatant enough to be obvious even to me, that I
wouldn't trust anything that anyone here says exclusively.

I suppose if someone wanted to appear just as ill-informed as some
real-world GA pilots, trying to get an idea of their mistakes might be
a motivation for coming here. But stupidity and ignorance know no
frontiers, so it wouldn't make anyone seem more like a US pilot.

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

Mxsmanic wrote:
Jim Carter writes:

You know, I was thinking the same thing. All of this information is
available in the AIM and other sources, but it would make good sense for
someone who wanted to appear to have been taught (therefore screened) to
fly in the US to get the "real world" info from active pilots.

You must be joking. "Active pilots?" Nobody here is for real as far
as I'm concerned; I've been on USENET too long for that. You read and
then you verify. The person who answers you might or might not be a
pilot--you cannot trust what he says about that, and in any case it
doesn't matter, as long as the answer is right (or if the answer is
wrong). And so many pilots on these newsgroups have already been
wrong, in a way blatant enough to be obvious even to me, that I
wouldn't trust anything that anyone here says exclusively.

I suppose if someone wanted to appear just as ill-informed as some
real-world GA pilots, trying to get an idea of their mistakes might be
a motivation for coming here. But stupidity and ignorance know no
frontiers, so it wouldn't make anyone seem more like a US pilot.

So clearly you can't believe anything you see here. Just go away.

John Theune wrote in
news:SWyvh.1787$q86.574@trndny01:

Mxsmanic wrote:

So clearly you can't believe anything you see here. Just go away.

The problem is there is a Mx cult club out there that like feeding trolls (

As long as trolls keep getting fed, they keep coming back. :-(

Allen

John Theune writes:

So clearly you can't believe anything you see here.

I can believe it after verifying it. Also, a consensus of opinion
increases the credibility of some types of information.

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

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Mxsmanic wrote:
John Theune writes:

So clearly you can't believe anything you see here.

I can believe it after verifying it. Also, a consensus of opinion
increases the credibility of some types of information.

So when the consensus is telling you to go RTFM, it increases
its credibility.

So do as the masses say. RT F'n M.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFvuzeyBkZmuMZ8L8RAtuVAJ9u6m/CIKDpKoYJDoF4nhJRKdCrSQCgwVyO
lsY2D2ii/15OxRHxSuRNUKc=
=dCtM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Mxsmanic wrote:

John Theune writes:


So clearly you can't believe anything you see here.


I can believe it after verifying it. Also, a consensus of opinion
increases the credibility of some types of information.

I, too, believe in consenus of opinion; especially that you are an
aggravating troll. Since you have been around the Internet for a long
time, you should take a look at yourself in the mirror.

Mxsmanic wrote:

Jim Carter writes:


You know, I was thinking the same thing. All of this information is
available in the AIM and other sources, but it would make good sense for
someone who wanted to appear to have been taught (therefore screened) to
fly in the US to get the "real world" info from active pilots.


You must be joking. "Active pilots?" Nobody here is for real as far
as I'm concerned; I've been on USENET too long for that. You read and
then you verify. The person who answers you might or might not be a
pilot--you cannot trust what he says about that, and in any case it
doesn't matter, as long as the answer is right (or if the answer is
wrong). And so many pilots on these newsgroups have already been
wrong, in a way blatant enough to be obvious even to me, that I
wouldn't trust anything that anyone here says exclusively.

If you were actually an instrument pilot you would be able to separate
the wheat from the chaff here.

Sam Spade writes:

If you were actually an instrument pilot you would be able to separate
the wheat from the chaff here.

How do you know that I'm not?

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

Mxsmanic wrote:

Sam Spade writes:


If you were actually an instrument pilot you would be able to separate
the wheat from the chaff here.


How do you know that I'm not?


Yes, I do.