PSA: Don't be rude on the radio

I have looked over your posting as well as my responses and the responses of
others to you and find that I have, along with others, supplied you with
more than sufficient information to satisfy the requests involved with this
post from you. I feel no need to delve into a micro rehash when the macro
has already been discussed.
Suffice to say that on the subject of flight instruction as you have
presented it on these newsgroups, my opinion of you based on these posts is
that I personally have strong issues with what you have presented
here....period.
As you say, it's the information that's important. Rather than engage you
with some kind of back and forth dialog where you begin by telling me to
"get over myself", I think what I'd rather do is pass on this type of post
and instead deal directly with any and all information dealing with flight
instruction ONLY that you post as a CFI on these newsgroups in the future.
Dudley Henriques


"buttman" wrote in message
oups.com...
On May 11, 6:59 am, "Dudley Henriques" wrote:
"buttman" wrote in message

oups.com...

And following Dudley's train of thought - can you prove you're a CFI?

And what would my CFI number add to the discussion? Why does it even
matter? If you don't believe I really have a CFI then you can go right
on ahead and believe that. It doesn't change what I wrote one bit. You
should judge me by my words, not my credentials.

Quite to the contrary, it's your "words" that make some pilots on these
groups question your "credentials".

What are some of these 'words' that makes you think i'm one of the
worlds worst instructors? Just give me an example. I've made less than
100 posts on this group since I started using usenet back in 2005, and
I've made a whopping 5 posts on r.a.s, so finding one shouldn't be
hard.

Although its a fact that you don't have to post your real name on these
groups, its also a fact that many new student pilots frequent these
groups.
For that reason, most of the pilots and instructors who post here are
very
careful with the information they present. Although ALL information
presented on Usenet should be checked for accuracy, there is always a
potential flight safety factor in play here, especially when someone
posts
using a CFI format.

I'm not following you. How does my CFI number have anything to do with
new students reading this group?

I've read your posts and I have serious questions about you. Basically
I'm
concerned not so much about the statements you have made but rather the
questions you have asked.

What questions should a CFI be asking, and what questions shouldn't be
asked? Or do you think CFI's should not ask questions at all? If
you're referring to the fuel valve incident, I thought it was a valid
question. You have 2 miles of runway which was 150 feet wide, a low
horsepower engine (so no huge yaw), and me on board who can take over
if the student locks up. I admit it's pushing some safety boundaries,
but so does completely shutting down one engine in a twin, or a
simulated engine failure (via the throttle) in the traffic pattern...
Hell, TAKING OFF in even a perfectly airworthy airplane is pushing
certain safety boundaries.

In my opinion, if you are indeed a CFI as you have
stated on these groups, you should already know the answers to the
questions
you are asking.
So I have a double problem with you. Your questions are suspect to me,
and
your overall reasoning is suspect as well.
You are correct when you say that credentials on Usenet are not as
important
as the information posted. The pilots here have been reading each other
as
well as newbies for many years. Our opinions on the validity of a post is
based on years of actual experience reading what an individual poster has
to
say.

With this in mind, and based only on the information you have posted to
these groups, I have to tell you that in my opinion you are either posing
as
a flight instructor or a completely ill prepared CFI.
As I have said before, I personally will give you a great deal more
lattitude on the piloting group than I will on the student group. As
someone
who has invested a great deal of time and effort in the instruction
business, I naturally have an aversion to bad information and will say so
when presented with same.

Get over yourself.

This has nothing at all to do with being a "Usenet
Bully".

I never called you or anyone a usenet bully. "Internet tough guy" is
someone who feels the need to act like a tough guy over the internet
over something they wouldn't dare do in real life. It's like me saying
if my piano teacher played a wrong note I'm going to get up and yell
into her face "YOU'RE FIRED". In the real world its a cumulation of
small things, or one big thing that causes someone to get tired.
Accidentally pulling in front of a straight in is not something a sane
person would fire their CFI over. It's just ridiculous.

Again, your reasoning and deduction is suspect.
If you will notice, hardly anyone on these groups stresses credentials.

Are you kidding? Just about everyone has their real name / location /
certificates held in their signature. I've been using internet
discussion forums since the early 2000's, and I've never been part of
a group that does that. I've even been part of professional groups,
with doctors post
about medical matters, lawyers post about legal matters, pilots post
about aviation matters; none of them do that.

I've spoke with real life CFI's, including examiners, very high time
instructors, ex-FAA inspectors, and they all have treated me with
respect. This is the only group that feels the need to jump down my
throat.

In the other thread I made a
few weeks ago in r.a.s it was the same way. People just came in and
said "I've been an instructor for thirty years and I say its unsafe,
END OF DISCUSSION" without providing any real arguments.

Actually its longer than that, and you received precise and direct
argument
stating exactly why as a CFI you don't turn off the fuel on takeoff.

People compared what I was doing with shutting down one engine in a
twin (which I completely agree is unsafe during takeoff regardless of
the runway length). They posted accident reports where someone stalled/
spun on takeoff and the plane was found to have the fuel valve turned
off; not the same situation.

Everyone just kneejerk reacted to me challenging their already held
beliefs. Instead of acknowledging I had some points, they just all
made me out to be a crazy madman. It's easier to do that, than it is
to change your way of thinking.

Again, your powers of deductive reasoning are in my opinion, suspect.
It is not the purpose of these groups to "argue and debate". The purpose
of
these groups is to SHARE useful and accurate data and information about
flying and aviation.

And what on earth is the difference?

On May 11, 6:11 pm, "Dudley Henriques" wrote:
Suffice to say that on the subject of flight instruction as you have
presented it on these newsgroups, my opinion of you based on these posts is
that I personally have strong issues with what you have presented
here....period..

So in other words, you're saying you think I'm a bad flight
instructor, but don't have any evidence to back this claim up. Mind
you, this is based on my less than 20 posts I've made on usenet from a
CFI standpoint...

I find it funny that the only ones insulting me are doing it with one
liners: "my god you're a terrible instructor", "if you were my
instructor, I'd fire you", "I can't even begin to count the things in
your post that tell me you aren't a real CFI", "I'd like to know the
DE that passed you".

The first few replies to my OP were polite and on topic. As soon as
one person started insulting me, a bunch others else had to join the
bandwagon. I guarantee if my post was made word for word by someone
else more "respected" here, such as CJ Campbell, or Bob Hoover, you
wouldn't see ONE SINGLE negative reply. What if my post was made word
for word by everyone's favorite punching bag mxsmanic? Information is
information, regardless who brings it about. If it can be backed up
then it holds water. If it can't be backed up, no matter who says it,
it don't hold water. The same goes for opinions. An opinion not based
on any facts is not an opinion worth having. At least thats how I
feel...

I don't care if you have 10,000 hours of dual given, if you can't come
up with a compelling argument that I have "serious problems" then you
need to shut up about my CFI ability. And I'm sorry but "I just feel
this way" isn't a compelling argument. Quoting an irrelevant accident
report or personal experience is not one either.

As you say, it's the information that's important. Rather than engage you
with some kind of back and forth dialog where you begin by telling me to
"get over myself", I think what I'd rather do is pass on this type of post
and instead deal directly with any and all information dealing with flight
instruction ONLY that you post as a CFI on these newsgroups in the future.
Dudley Henriques

If it's the information thats important, then why did you feel the
need to bring up my question on r.a.s? Why do you want me to give you
my real name and CFI number?

PLEASE!
Do I REALLY have to reiterate to you that pulling a fuel valve on a student
on takeoff is poor technique for a flight instructor dealing with a
student.....and this goes for having a runway 50 miles long....IT JUST ISN'T
A GOOD SAFE PRACTICE TO DO THIS?
Do I REALLY have to tell you that regardless of a traffic situation in the
pattern, and regardless of your position in that pattern and the position of
another aircraft in or coming into that pattern, YOU as the pilot in
command, and as the instructor flying with a student, should KNOW what to do
in ALL situations and should have done whatever was needed quietly and
professionally without further discussion or incident regardless of the
actions of the other pilot ? This situation should have been a non event for
you as an instructor....period! At the very least, what you SHOULD have done
in the Cirrus situation is avoid the problem by taking whatever action was
necessary to insure the safety of your aircraft. If there was an issue with
the Cirrus pilot concerning his language, this should have been nothing more
to you than a golden opportunity to stress the safety issue with your
student. The language issue should have been another golden opportunity to
stress the need for proper radio etiquette with the student at the moment of
infraction, NOT here on the group as a rant!
In my opinion, just these two examples are quite enough for me to make a
decision about you as a flight instructor.
You asked me for specifics. I have given them to you.
I realize of course that my personal opinion of you as a CFI might not be
exactly to your liking. I have no objection whatsoever if you would like to
print out the entire two threads on pulling the fuel valve on your student
pilot and also the incident in the pattern with the Cirrus and take both of
them down to your local FAA office. Then report back here if you like with
their collective opinion on these two situations involving your decision
making abilities as a CFI.
Sometimes a fresh input from another source will shed much needed light on
an issue.
Dudley Henriques

"buttman" wrote in message
ups.com...
On May 11, 6:11 pm, "Dudley Henriques" wrote:
Suffice to say that on the subject of flight instruction as you have
presented it on these newsgroups, my opinion of you based on these posts
is
that I personally have strong issues with what you have presented
here....period..

So in other words, you're saying you think I'm a bad flight
instructor, but don't have any evidence to back this claim up. Mind
you, this is based on my less than 20 posts I've made on usenet from a
CFI standpoint...

I find it funny that the only ones insulting me are doing it with one
liners: "my god you're a terrible instructor", "if you were my
instructor, I'd fire you", "I can't even begin to count the things in
your post that tell me you aren't a real CFI", "I'd like to know the
DE that passed you".

The first few replies to my OP were polite and on topic. As soon as
one person started insulting me, a bunch others else had to join the
bandwagon. I guarantee if my post was made word for word by someone
else more "respected" here, such as CJ Campbell, or Bob Hoover, you
wouldn't see ONE SINGLE negative reply. What if my post was made word
for word by everyone's favorite punching bag mxsmanic? Information is
information, regardless who brings it about. If it can be backed up
then it holds water. If it can't be backed up, no matter who says it,
it don't hold water. The same goes for opinions. An opinion not based
on any facts is not an opinion worth having. At least thats how I
feel...

I don't care if you have 10,000 hours of dual given, if you can't come
up with a compelling argument that I have "serious problems" then you
need to shut up about my CFI ability. And I'm sorry but "I just feel
this way" isn't a compelling argument. Quoting an irrelevant accident
report or personal experience is not one either.

As you say, it's the information that's important. Rather than engage you
with some kind of back and forth dialog where you begin by telling me to
"get over myself", I think what I'd rather do is pass on this type of
post
and instead deal directly with any and all information dealing with
flight
instruction ONLY that you post as a CFI on these newsgroups in the
future.
Dudley Henriques

If it's the information thats important, then why did you feel the
need to bring up my question on r.a.s? Why do you want me to give you
my real name and CFI number?

On May 11, 9:28 pm, "Dudley Henriques" wrote:
PLEASE!
Do I REALLY have to reiterate to you that pulling a fuel valve on a student
on takeoff is poor technique for a flight instructor dealing with a
student.....and this goes for having a runway 50 miles long....IT JUST ISN'T
A GOOD SAFE PRACTICE TO DO THIS?

'Safe' is a relative term. What is exactly does 'safe' begin and end?
You admit that a practice engine failure on takeoff is perfectly safe
when done by closing the throttle. The only difference between pulling
the throttle instead of the gas valve means you have power if you need
it. With a wide and long runway 50 feet below you, what would you need
the power for?

I admit there could be a perfectly good reason why you losing that
ability to add back power could result in an accident, but I haven't
heard it. I bet if I were to print out this thread and give it to the
FAA office, I'm pretty sure they'd agree with you. I actually would be
surprised if they recommended doing it. But at the very least, they'd
give good reason to not do so (I hope). It's like one of those puzzles
that you know has an answer, and you kind of know the answer, but non
the less is nowhere to be found.

Do I REALLY have to tell you that regardless of a traffic situation in the
pattern, and regardless of your position in that pattern and the position of
another aircraft in or coming into that pattern, YOU as the pilot in
command, and as the instructor flying with a student, should KNOW what to do
in ALL situations and should have done whatever was needed quietly and
professionally without further discussion or incident regardless of the
actions of the other pilot ?

What should I have done? I misjudged the Cirrus. It was a mistake. I
regret that it happened, but it happened. I thought it would be
further out, but apparently he was closer. I wasn't looking right in
front of me, I was looking further out because thats where I thought
he was. I'll say it for the 100 millionth time; I made a mistake. I
don't know what you want me to do...

This situation should have been a non event for
you as an instructor....period!

It sort of was a non-event. I took the controls from my student,
turned back to rejoin the extended downwind until the cirrus passed,
turned final behind the cirrus, then made a call to the CTAF saying I
had re-established on final behind the cirrus. I didn't snap back at
him, I didn't start crying, I didn't end the flight there... It did
bother me a little, but what do you expect? Are you saying that the
comment bothering me means I'm a bad instructor? Is a controller who
is annoyed by a snappy pilot a bad controller?

At the very least, what you SHOULD have done
in the Cirrus situation is avoid the problem by taking whatever action was
necessary to insure the safety of your aircraft.

What makes you think I didn't "ensure safety of my aircraft"? You are
making things up.

If there was an issue with
the Cirrus pilot concerning his language, this should have been nothing more
to you than a golden opportunity to stress the safety issue with your
student. The language issue should have been another golden opportunity to
stress the need for proper radio etiquette with the student at the moment of
infraction,

What makes you think I didn't use this as an opportunity to teach my
student proper radio technique? If I remember correctly, my student
(who is a native Chinese speaker, who can hardly speak English in the
first place) even commented "what was that guy's problem" as we were
heading home.

I also think that way I didn't snap back (something I'd never EVER do)
goes to teach my student more than I could ever tell him on the
ground.

NOT here on the group as a rant!

Why? People here made threads ranting about little stuff like this all
the time. I remember a thread about tower induced go-arounds lot too
long ago. How is that any different? Or any of the other 10,000
threads that are made here every year. What exactly makes this thread
so intolerable? I seriously want to know so I won't make anymore.

In my opinion, just these two examples are quite enough for me to make a
decision about you as a flight instructor.

And those "two examples" are completely ridiculous. So your opinion is
worthless.

You asked me for specifics. I have given them to you.
I realize of course that my personal opinion of you as a CFI might not be
exactly to your liking. I have no objection whatsoever if you would like to
print out the entire two threads on pulling the fuel valve on your student
pilot and also the incident in the pattern with the Cirrus and take both of
them down to your local FAA office. Then report back here if you like with
their collective opinion on these two situations involving your decision
making abilities as a CFI.
Sometimes a fresh input from another source will shed much needed light on
an issue.
Dudley Henriques

buttman wrote:
On May 11, 9:28 pm, "Dudley Henriques" wrote:
PLEASE!
Do I REALLY have to reiterate to you that pulling a fuel valve on a student
on takeoff is poor technique for a flight instructor dealing with a
student.....and this goes for having a runway 50 miles long....IT JUST ISN'T
A GOOD SAFE PRACTICE TO DO THIS?

'Safe' is a relative term. What is exactly does 'safe' begin and end?
You admit that a practice engine failure on takeoff is perfectly safe
when done by closing the throttle. The only difference between pulling
the throttle instead of the gas valve means you have power if you need
it. With a wide and long runway 50 feet below you, what would you need
the power for?

When the maintenance truck drives onto the runway ahead of you by
mistake. When the (deer, moose, etc.) runs onto the runway ahead of
you. I can probably think of others, but these two have happened to me
personally. Cutting the fuel is simply an unnecessary risk in this
situation.

Matt

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...

buttman wrote:

The only difference between pulling
the throttle instead of the gas valve means you have power if you need
it.

This single sentence is enough for me . It says it all :-))

Dudley Henriques

Matt Whiting wrote:
buttman wrote:

You admit that a practice engine failure on takeoff is perfectly safe
when done by closing the throttle. The only difference between pulling
the throttle instead of the gas valve means you have power if you need
it. With a wide and long runway 50 feet below you, what would you need
the power for?

When the maintenance truck drives onto the runway ahead of you by
mistake. When the (deer, moose, etc.) runs onto the runway ahead of
you. I can probably think of others, but these two have happened to me
personally.

I think these situations have happened to many people. The airports I
fly out of have a lot of deer (and groundhogs) that like to play on the
runway. They also have other airplanes and from time to time someone
who isn't paying attention does something stupid. I'm not trying to win
the "stupid act of the day" award, so I think I'll stick to pulling the
throttle instead of the mixture (it's too hard to reach the fuel shutoff
from the right seat of a Piper).

Regardless, I'll be taking my CFI checkride in a couple of weeks. I
don't think I'll mention that procedure. I want to actually pass the
checkride.


-m
--
## Mark T. Dame
## CP-ASEL, AGI
## insert tail number here
## KHAO, KISZ
"Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by
stupidity."
-- Hanlon's Razor

You are either an imposter posing as a flight instructor or a CFI who uses
the worst deductive reasoning I have ever seen posted on these forums. You
in fact might simply be a teen age troll.
I suggest you either quit instructing before you kill someone or disconnect
your little plastic stick from the computer and put it away for the night.
Dudley Henriques


"buttman" wrote in message
oups.com...
On May 11, 9:28 pm, "Dudley Henriques" wrote:
PLEASE!
Do I REALLY have to reiterate to you that pulling a fuel valve on a
student
on takeoff is poor technique for a flight instructor dealing with a
student.....and this goes for having a runway 50 miles long....IT JUST
ISN'T
A GOOD SAFE PRACTICE TO DO THIS?

'Safe' is a relative term. What is exactly does 'safe' begin and end?
You admit that a practice engine failure on takeoff is perfectly safe
when done by closing the throttle. The only difference between pulling
the throttle instead of the gas valve means you have power if you need
it. With a wide and long runway 50 feet below you, what would you need
the power for?

I admit there could be a perfectly good reason why you losing that
ability to add back power could result in an accident, but I haven't
heard it. I bet if I were to print out this thread and give it to the
FAA office, I'm pretty sure they'd agree with you. I actually would be
surprised if they recommended doing it. But at the very least, they'd
give good reason to not do so (I hope). It's like one of those puzzles
that you know has an answer, and you kind of know the answer, but non
the less is nowhere to be found.

Do I REALLY have to tell you that regardless of a traffic situation in
the
pattern, and regardless of your position in that pattern and the position
of
another aircraft in or coming into that pattern, YOU as the pilot in
command, and as the instructor flying with a student, should KNOW what to
do
in ALL situations and should have done whatever was needed quietly and
professionally without further discussion or incident regardless of the
actions of the other pilot ?

What should I have done? I misjudged the Cirrus. It was a mistake. I
regret that it happened, but it happened. I thought it would be
further out, but apparently he was closer. I wasn't looking right in
front of me, I was looking further out because thats where I thought
he was. I'll say it for the 100 millionth time; I made a mistake. I
don't know what you want me to do...

This situation should have been a non event for
you as an instructor....period!

It sort of was a non-event. I took the controls from my student,
turned back to rejoin the extended downwind until the cirrus passed,
turned final behind the cirrus, then made a call to the CTAF saying I
had re-established on final behind the cirrus. I didn't snap back at
him, I didn't start crying, I didn't end the flight there... It did
bother me a little, but what do you expect? Are you saying that the
comment bothering me means I'm a bad instructor? Is a controller who
is annoyed by a snappy pilot a bad controller?

At the very least, what you SHOULD have done
in the Cirrus situation is avoid the problem by taking whatever action
was
necessary to insure the safety of your aircraft.

What makes you think I didn't "ensure safety of my aircraft"? You are
making things up.

If there was an issue with
the Cirrus pilot concerning his language, this should have been nothing
more
to you than a golden opportunity to stress the safety issue with your
student. The language issue should have been another golden opportunity
to
stress the need for proper radio etiquette with the student at the moment
of
infraction,

What makes you think I didn't use this as an opportunity to teach my
student proper radio technique? If I remember correctly, my student
(who is a native Chinese speaker, who can hardly speak English in the
first place) even commented "what was that guy's problem" as we were
heading home.

I also think that way I didn't snap back (something I'd never EVER do)
goes to teach my student more than I could ever tell him on the
ground.

NOT here on the group as a rant!

Why? People here made threads ranting about little stuff like this all
the time. I remember a thread about tower induced go-arounds lot too
long ago. How is that any different? Or any of the other 10,000
threads that are made here every year. What exactly makes this thread
so intolerable? I seriously want to know so I won't make anymore.

In my opinion, just these two examples are quite enough for me to make a
decision about you as a flight instructor.

And those "two examples" are completely ridiculous. So your opinion is
worthless.

You asked me for specifics. I have given them to you.
I realize of course that my personal opinion of you as a CFI might not be
exactly to your liking. I have no objection whatsoever if you would like
to
print out the entire two threads on pulling the fuel valve on your
student
pilot and also the incident in the pattern with the Cirrus and take both
of
them down to your local FAA office. Then report back here if you like
with
their collective opinion on these two situations involving your decision
making abilities as a CFI.
Sometimes a fresh input from another source will shed much needed light
on
an issue.
Dudley Henriques

On Sat, 12 May 2007 09:30:58 -0400, "Dudley Henriques"
wrote:

With a wide and long runway 50 feet below you, what would you need
the power for?

When at a high AOA at Vx? G

A stall @ 50 feet would really, really hurt.

"B A R R Y" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 12 May 2007 09:30:58 -0400, "Dudley Henriques"
wrote:

With a wide and long runway 50 feet below you, what would you need
the power for?

When at a high AOA at Vx? G

A stall @ 50 feet would really, really hurt.

I didn't write this.
Dudley Henriques