I give up, after many, many years!

On May 18, 11:02*am, "F. Baum" wrote:
You on the other hand , claiming that superior sense and
skill got you through an instrument failure, is just macho bravado.

Never said it got me through it, but I did say it was an additional
tool in my took kit. It was a combination of everything, not one
thing. To ignore senses or the seat of your pants in IMC is just in
my opinion not good flying. No different then landing a plane at
night when you are feeling your way down to the ground.

Got a good chuckle by what you consider a low approach, 1000ft ceiling
is VFR man .

Where did I say it was a low approach? I use 1000 foot ceilings as a
benchmark as many pilots don't or will not fly down to minimums in
actual conditions.

Thankfully, I had an instructor in my training, I did go down to ILS
minimums and have made several GPS and VOR Alpha's down to minimums on
my own without any problems.. It becomes a non event at the end, but
thrilling as you slide down the approach path. It's the end result we
all look for but it doesn't just come by tracking needles.

*Furthermore, a sim is a very usefull tool. Why do you
think the airlines use them. All of the sims that I have flown have
been harder to fly than the real A/C. Dont get me wrong, I am glad
that you made it through OK but lighten up G

Airliners us FULL MOTION sims, not a desktop MSFS. HUGE difference.
From what I gather, Jay's simulator is not a full motion sim.

To equate a desktop MSFS to any type of IMC flying is reckless IMHO.

To not depend on senses and totally rely on instruments without an
expectation that **they could fail** is reckless. If you fly a real
plane, you should know this. Nobody expects the unexpected to happen,
but if you fly your plane like **it could happen** then you are better
prepared. I call it an insurance policy that you hope you don't have
to cash in.

On May 18, 11:47*am, " wrote:

*It's the end result we
all look for but it doesn't just come by tracking needles.

Missed one word in my original post....

It doesn't just come by ONLY tracking needles.

writes:

Airliners us FULL MOTION sims, not a desktop MSFS. HUGE difference.

One of the reasons why full-motion sims work is that it's very easy to fool
human senses. Remember, full-motion sims don't actually go anywhere, but to
the people inside, they certainly feel as though they do.

To equate a desktop MSFS to any type of IMC flying is reckless IMHO.

One advantage to MSFS is that it forces you to use instruments in IMC.
Depending heavily on instruments isn't necessarily an advantage for VFR, but
it's very important for IFR.

To not depend on senses and totally rely on instruments without an
expectation that **they could fail** is reckless.

Not at all. If you're unwilling to put complete trust in your instruments,
you shouldn't be flying IFR. If they fail, well, you might never get back
home.

If you fly a real
plane, you should know this. Nobody expects the unexpected to happen,
but if you fly your plane like **it could happen** then you are better
prepared. I call it an insurance policy that you hope you don't have
to cash in.

Given the fact that losing instruments in IMC is extraordinarily dangerous, it
would be better advised to take care to minimize the chances that they will
fail than to fantasize that it will be possible to fly and land safely without
them if they do fail.

On May 18, 1:29*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

Given the fact that losing instruments in IMC is extraordinarily dangerous, it
would be better advised to take care to minimize the chances that they will
fail than to fantasize that it will be possible to fly and land safely without
them if they do fail.

Ummm, there was no fantasy about what happened to me on Friday.

And it's not extraordinary dangerous to lose your HI and DG if you
take the proactive approach in the what if scenario.while flying. I
am here to prove that.

We practice this in our Instrument air training, but you don't know it
since you never have taken flying lessons.

A Lieberman writes:

Ummm, there was no fantasy about what happened to me on Friday.

And it's not extraordinary dangerous to lose your HI and DG if you
take the proactive approach in the what if scenario.while flying. I
am here to prove that.

We practice this in our Instrument air training, but you don't know it
since you never have taken flying lessons.

What's the tail number of your aircraft, so I can recognize it in the NTSB
report?

On May 18, 3:10*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

What's the tail number of your aircraft, so I can recognize it in the NTSB
report?

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N1943L

On Sun, 18 May 2008 13:19:14 -0700 (PDT), "
wrote:

On May 18, 3:10*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

What's the tail number of your aircraft, so I can recognize it in the NTSB
report?

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N1943L


Hey! I know an owner of 1958L, another Sundowner.

I wonder if you plane remembers his from the assembly line? G

wrote:
On May 18, 3:10 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

What's the tail number of your aircraft, so I can recognize it in the NTSB
report?

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N1943L


So, what's the tail number of your aircraft, Anthony?

-c

gatt writes:

So, what's the tail number of your aircraft, Anthony?

I have several, but since I only use them in simulation, they won't appear in
an NTSB report (and some of them are already assigned to other aircraft in the
FAA database).

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

writes:

Airliners us FULL MOTION sims, not a desktop MSFS. HUGE difference.

One of the reasons why full-motion sims work is that it's very easy to
fool human senses. Remember, full-motion sims don't actually go
anywhere, but to the people inside, they certainly feel as though they
do.

To equate a desktop MSFS to any type of IMC flying is reckless IMHO.

One advantage to MSFS is that it forces you to use instruments in IMC.
Depending heavily on instruments isn't necessarily an advantage for
VFR, but it's very important for IFR.

To not depend on senses and totally rely on instruments without an
expectation that **they could fail** is reckless.

Not at all. If you're unwilling to put complete trust in your
instruments, you shouldn't be flying IFR. If they fail, well, you
might never get back home.

Wrong again, fukkwit. And i fly instruments almost every day.


Bertie