Primary training in a Hi Perf complex acft

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 message
...
Bertie the Bunyip writes:

No, they don't.

What else do they require besides pushing buttons and
turning knobs?

No they can't.

Anyone can push buttons and turn knobs.

Which is pretty much all you do here - push people's buttons
and twist their knobs, trying to elicit yowls.

Your only redeeming value is that you're a fat, slow-moving
target who continually leads with your chin, making it easy
to kick you around. How does it feel to be the ideal
Internet chew toy?

MaxManiac obviously was lying when he said he admits his
mistakes.

I'm sure that comes as a great revelation to readers here.

"John Mazor" wrote in message
news:WS0Oh.2911$yo3.372@trnddc04...

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
John Mazor writes:

Wrong again. That's been around for years.

http://www.golimbs.com/offer_index.p...FSBhgQodyC2pRA

http://www.haptica.com/

They're sophisticated enough to provide force feedback:

http://www.ercim.org/publication/Erc...elingette.html

They even have their own expositions:

http://www.surgery.arizona.edu/expo/...ulatorExpo.htm

which specifically compares them to flight simulators.

I'm aware of these. They make Flight Simulator look like
a holodeck.

Now you're aware of them, but before I outed your
ignorance and showed you the links, you said (but deleted
from this post):

" Doctors can't perform surgery on simulated human
beings, at least not yet."

You recently claimed here that you admit all your
mistakes. We're waiting.

Not for your apology. For whatever contrived BS you
conjure up to avoid having to admit your error. Tomorrow
is Tuesday, most of us will be in the mood for a good
laugh.

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

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

No, they don't.

What else do they require besides pushing buttons and turning knobs?

Well, knowing why they are pushing them and turning them for starters..



No they can't.

Anyone can push buttons and turn knobs.


Well we al know which knob you like to turn.


Bertie

To the list of pluses for the Tomahawk add Fuel Capacity. It has
nearly 2 hours more range than most 150/152's.

As an interesting note if you research the NTSB reports for Spin
Accidents in Pa38's you will find that for the most part only Flight
Instructors and Examiners seem to have issues with the Stall spin
Charateristics.

I have taught a lot of pilots to fly in Tomahawks and I think they are
great. My biggest pluses are, in no particular order,the Switchable
fuel tanks, Large Cockpit, and Fuel Capacity.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

I couldn't find those reports. In fact, I found only a dozen reports
overall for the PA38. And only one of those was a stall/spin -- a
student pilot who ran out of gas on takeoff and tried to turn back to
the airport at too low an altitude.

Apparently I am doing something that limits the search too much. The
only parameter I have is PA38 and any time from 1950 to the present.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

There are a lot more reports when requested as PA-38.

However, there is certainly a better way to access and sort on the probable
cause that actually opening and reading all of the reports from the Accident
Database on the web site. Regretably, I don't know the efficient way to
accomplish it; but I really doubt that stall/spin will be a significantly
more frequent cause than other aircraft. More likely, it just scared a lot
of people away from practicing spin training.

Perhaps Ron W. will contribute--and possibly even hint at his research
technique.

Peter

On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 00:27:27 GMT, "John Mazor" wrote:


Your only redeeming value is that you're a fat, slow-moving
target who continually leads with your chin, making it easy
to kick you around. How does it feel to be the ideal
Internet chew toy?

Is Ralphie back?

Shill #312
--
Ears on the loon go round and round, round and round, round and round...
theobviousgcashman

"Shill #312" wrote in
message ...
On Wed, 28 Mar 2007 00:27:27 GMT, "John Mazor"
wrote:

Your only redeeming value is that you're a fat,
slow-moving
target who continually leads with your chin, making it
easy
to kick you around. How does it feel to be the ideal
Internet chew toy?

Is Ralphie back?

We wish. MaxManiac is a poor imitation. You can't always
bash the loon you want, so you have to bash the loon you
have.

On Mar 28, 11:11 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote :

george writes:

But you claimed that these rapid transit trains were fully automated.

As I recall, that was the original design intention.

Backpedallign fjukkwit

Like most of his claims it is all so easily refuted :-)
He should stick to games and childrens groups

"george" wrote in
ups.com:

On Mar 28, 11:11 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote
:

george writes:

But you claimed that these rapid transit trains were fully
automated.

As I recall, that was the original design intention.

Backpedallign fjukkwit

Like most of his claims it is all so easily refuted :-)
He should stick to games and childrens groups



I don't think the children would be so easy on him


Bertie