Primary training in a Hi Perf complex acft

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

They don't do primary training in a jet airliner, you moron.

Only because it is not conventional to do so; but there is no technical
obstacle that prevents it.

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

John Mazor wrote:

One sufficiently bad pilot screw up = one smoking hole.

Talking of which, what's your current observation of the fallout from AA587 ?

Graham

"Eeyore" wrote in
message ...

John Mazor wrote:

One sufficiently bad pilot screw up = one smoking hole.

Talking of which, what's your current observation of the
fallout from AA587 ?

The flying pilot overcontrolled the rudder, leading to
aerodynamic forces that caused the structural failure.

This was a revelation to most airline pilots, who thought -
with good reason - that as long as you were at or below
maneuvering speed, you could make any control inputs you
want without breaking your airplane. It turns out that the
FAA certification standards only addressed one rudder input,
not multiple inputs as occured in AA587. The engineering
crowd was aware of this limitation, but nobody bothered to
communicate it to the people who actually fly the damn
things. Plus, there was the problem that at that speed, a
rudder pedal depression of only an inch or two would cause
maximum deflection. Not much margin for error there.

The issue of laminates wasn't resolved one way or the other,
except to say that there was no compelling reason to forbid
their use. Of course, that doesn't stop ambulance-chasing
lawyers from looking for some deep pockets into which to
thrust their bony fingers with their claims, but what else
is new?

The conspirowacko crowd's goofy theories will continue to
exist as long as there is a paying market for their
products.

Mxsmanic wrote:

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

No, they aren't. that problem was recognised over twenty years ago and
we hand fly whenevr possible, fjukktard.

You may hand fly, but many do not. Some countries are producing airline
pilots with extremely limited skills, and yet they still manage to fly the
aircraft, most of the time.

I thought the FAA still held autoland in contempt.

Graham

Eeyore writes:

I thought the FAA still held autoland in contempt.

I don't know what the FAA thinks of autoland, but the FAA governs only
aviation in the United States. The world is a big place, and some countries
have extremely casual standards for airline pilots.

The FAA requires that crews and aircraft with autoland capability periodically
engage in it, for currency.

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

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Eeyore writes:

I thought the FAA still held autoland in contempt.

I don't know what the FAA thinks of autoland, but the FAA governs only
aviation in the United States. The world is a big place, and some
countries have extremely casual standards for airline pilots.

none casual enough to even use you as a chock, fjukkwit.



Bertie

Eeyore wrote in
:



Mxsmanic wrote:

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

No, they aren't. that problem was recognised over twenty years ago
and we hand fly whenevr possible, fjukktard.

You may hand fly, but many do not. Some countries are producing
airline pilots with extremely limited skills, and yet they still
manage to fly the aircraft, most of the time.

I thought the FAA still held autoland in contempt.


Fjukkwit.


bertie

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

Fjukkwit.

You disagree with him, then. So what _is_ the FAA attitude towards autoland?

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

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

Fjukkwit.

You disagree with him, then. So what _is_ the FAA attitude towards
autoland?


I didn't say I disagreed with him you idiot. Don't you know how to read? I
said he was a fjukkwit, fjukkwit.


Bertie