Sad day for Mxsmanic

On Feb 28, 3:14*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Varactor writes:
How do you know that if you haven't used a G1000?

By reading the descriptions of the simulations.

Ohhh sure that's a reliable evaluation. What did they say: "perfect
simulation of the G1000" What was the G1000 pixel resolution and
update rate?

Cheers

On Feb 28, 6:30*am, Varactor wrote:
On Feb 28, 3:14*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

Varactor writes:
How do you know that if you haven't used a G1000?

By reading the descriptions of the simulations.

Ohhh sure that's a reliable evaluation. What did they say: "perfect
simulation of the G1000" What was the G1000 pixel resolution and
update rate?

Cheers

Has there been instances where arguments of MX v anyone have been
resolved, except in the mind of the person typing the last message?

Do as Obama did during the primaries -- look down on the combantants
and watch the others chase their tails.

No, and yet the same players keep at it. Makes me wonder more about them
than MX actually.


"a" wrote

Has there been instances where arguments of MX v anyone have been
resolved, except in the mind of the person typing the last message?

Do as Obama did during the primaries -- look down on the combantants
and watch the others chase their tails.

Varactor writes:

Ohhh sure that's a reliable evaluation. What did they say: "perfect
simulation of the G1000"

No.

On Mar 1, 5:53*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Varactor writes:
Ohhh sure that's a reliable evaluation. What did they say: "perfect
simulation of the G1000"

No.

So its not accurate then is it...

LOL

Varactor writes:

So its not accurate then is it...

No, it's not. Fortunately, I'm not interested in the G1000.

In article ,
says...


Varactor writes:

So its not accurate then is it...

No, it's not. Fortunately, I'm not interested in the G1000.

But G1000 is so generalized that now you can no longer buy a small or
medium plane without it. That's going to leave you without an airplane,
isn't it, Pretty soon you're going to be left on the ground, poor fellow,
because you couldn't keep up with the times!

-b- writes:

But G1000 is so generalized that now you can no longer buy a small or
medium plane without it.

I'll worry about that when I'm in the market for an airplane.

I'm sure that more traditional avionics are available for those willing to pay
for them. I'm not willing to entrust my life to a single unproven ball of
software.

In article ,
says...


-b- writes:

But G1000 is so generalized that now you can no longer buy a small or
medium plane without it.

I'll worry about that when I'm in the market for an airplane.

I'm sure that more traditional avionics are available for those willing to pay
for them. I'm not willing to entrust my life to a single unproven ball of
software.


Well, you could at least take a chance - because as soon as you quit the
application you get your life back! But I guess that's not getting much back,
is it?

Technical question : What part of G1000 is unproven, and where's the "ball"?

On Mar 2, 11:51*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
-b- writes:
But G1000 is so generalized that now you can no longer buy a small or
medium plane without it.

I'll worry about that when I'm in the market for an airplane.


SPOLRK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LOL