Primary training in a Hi Perf complex acft

"John Mazor" wrote in message
news:A4hNh.2386$xE.1804@trnddc08...

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message By your benighted
standards, brain surgery is just a matter of drilling and cutting. A
butcher, or for that matter, a carpenter, armed with a few anatomy
diagrams ought to be able to do it, right?


He equates it like this: http://www.dmartstores.com/opboargambym.html

On Mar 24, 3:02 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Bertie the Bunyip writes:
You couldn't do it, but that, of course, doesn't mean it's
complicated. Bottom line, a crewless airplane with you as their only
hope is going to end up a smoking hole in the ground...

I notice that you still haven't explained the complicated parts. Very well.
If you're unwilling to do that, then perhaps you can at least explain the
"parts I couldn't do." What parts are those?

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

For the 1st part it is complicated which is why you won't get a good
answer here.

Since you know it is so easy here are a couple things you should be
able to answer

1. What is the difference between a CAT II approach and a CAT III?

2. How many airports have CAT III approaches?

Brian

Brian writes:

Since you know it is so easy here are a couple things you should be
able to answer

1. What is the difference between a CAT II approach and a CAT III?

Just minimums and stuff; the differences are regulatory. You can use just
about any ILS for either category, but technically your supposed to have the
approach certified for a maximum category.

In the context I was discussing, though, a non-pilot takes control in an
emergency. In an emergency, you can configure autoland for any ILS approach,
whether it is certified as IIIc or not (I'm not aware of any differences in
the actual ILS hardware from one category to another). So you could do an
autoland anywhere with an ILS runway, even though it would be preferable to
find a IIIc runway.

2. How many airports have CAT III approaches?

I haven't counted them. Airports in areas with frequently poor visibility
seem to have them often enough, as do many large airports. Thus, you see
several CAT III approaches at KSEA or EGLL, with their miserable weather, but
not at KPHX, where mist and fog are almost unknown.

Anyway, the formal distinctions aren't important in an emergency. Even if you
have an approach that isn't certified for autoland, you're still better off
autolanding if you don't have a type-certified pilot in the aircraft.

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

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

You couldn't do it, but that, of course, doesn't mean it's
complicated. Bottom line, a crewless airplane with you as their only
hope is going to end up a smoking hole in the ground...

I notice that you still haven't explained the complicated parts.

You gonna pay me to do so? I get about 400 bucks an hour for that.



Bertie

On Mar 23, 11:11 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Robert M. Gary writes:
What?? I've never flown a 747 but I teach TAA (technically advanced
aircraft). It is **WAY** more difficult to fly the plane on automation
than to just hand fly it.

No, it is not. It's pushing buttons and turning dials; that's it.

Flying the aircraft (or any aircraft) by hand is an acquired skill, like
riding a motorcycle, skiing, or painting. But running the automated systems
is just a series of procedures. Once you have the procedures memorized,
there's not much to it.

This is why the actual skill requiremens for airline pilots are diminishing.
FBW systems that try to second-guess the pilot and restrict his actions even
when he is flying by hand reduce the required skill even further. The
unstated objective is to make it possible for relatively unskilled technicians
to fly planes safely. One day that goal will probably be achieved; we are far
from it today, but far closer to it than we were even a few decades ago.

The biggest problem we have is pilots
shutting off the system and just hand flying all the time. If I found
myself in the cockpit of a 747 I certainly wouldn't try to learn all
the automation in 5 minutes, I'd probably shut most of it off (maybe
just use heading and altitude hold).

That might be your fatal mistake. It's a lot easier to follow simple
instructions over the radio and set the automation to fly to your destination
and land than it is to try to learn to hand-fly the aircraft in the heat of
the moment. It's not a Cessna, and it's not close enough to one to permit a
smooth transition in ten minutes under extreme duress.

This is one reason why I think a small-aircraft pilot might not be the best
choice as an emergency pilot for a large airliner. He would be too tempted to
try to fly the plane by hand, and he'd end up impacting a mountainside at high
speed, simply because flying by hand is the _last_ thing he should be doing in
that aircraft.

He'd more than likely do a better job of it that you would you
fjukkwit.

I've had private pilots in airoline sims and they were able to get the
airplane down with a minimum of instruction. In fact i once got a
model airplane pilot to do it in a 737 sim and he'd never even been a
passenger in an airliner, and he was only 16.

you otoh, wouldn' have a chance because you wouldn't even be able to
see the MCP with your head up your ass.



Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

I've had private pilots in airoline sims and they were able to get the
airplane down with a minimum of instruction. In fact i once got a
model airplane pilot to do it in a 737 sim and he'd never even been a
passenger in an airliner, and he was only 16.

Then why do you maintain that it's difficult?

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

On 24 Mar, 22:03, Mxsmanic wrote:
Bertie the Bunyip writes:
I've had private pilots in airoline sims and they were able to get the
airplane down with a minimum of instruction. In fact i once got a
model airplane pilot to do it in a 737 sim and he'd never even been a
passenger in an airliner, and he was only 16.

Then why do you maintain that it's difficult?


I didn't say it's difficult, fjukkwit. That's the point. It's not.
It's just beyond you.



Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote:

This is one reason why I think a small-aircraft pilot might not be the best
choice as an emergency pilot for a large airliner. He would be too tempted to
try to fly the plane by hand, and he'd end up impacting a mountainside at high
speed, simply because flying by hand is the _last_ thing he should be doing in
that aircraft.

He'd more than likely do a better job of it that you would you
fjukkwit.

I suspect he means they might be tempted into 'overcontrolling' but lacks the
vocabulary or brains to say so. I doubt it myself. PPLs probably understand that
issue quite well.

Graham

Eeyore writes:

I suspect he means they might be tempted into 'overcontrolling' but lacks the
vocabulary or brains to say so.

What I mean is that they simply have no experience flying such an aircraft,
and experience with a tin can will not help to any significant extent.
Indeed, it may only hurt, by giving them the dangerous and incorrect belief
that they can fly anything because they can fly a tin can. They will tend to
try what is familiar (flying by hand), instead of what is necessary (flying
with automation), potentially with tragic results.

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

Mxsmanic wrote:

Eeyore writes:

I suspect he means they might be tempted into 'overcontrolling' but lacks the
vocabulary or brains to say so.

What I mean is that they simply have no experience flying such an aircraft,
and experience with a tin can will not help to any significant extent.

LMAO !

Have you ever flown ? As in PIC that is ?

Graham