KCHD to KMYF

Kimmy Boyer wrote:
On Mon, 3 May 2010 07:50:12 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On May 3, 9:36*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
That's because you are simulating, you are not flying a real airplane.

What changes in the real world that would make V66 a poor choice?

I will answer that after you answer my questions.

Here we have two utter morons in a debate...over who is the bigger
moron.

wow isn't RAP great.

No wonder most of us have left.

OK, question for the morons...I'm a pilot and aircraft owner. Altho
I've never flown between Phoenix & Montgomery, but I have flown
in Arizona (and Phoenix in particular), is my recommendation any
less valid or more valid?

And strangely enough (and I can't believe I'm saying this) Mx has
made a perfectly reasonable route suggestion. I checked my charts and
such and agree with his recommendation. I don't say this because I
trust the US Feds on routes but looking at the geography, MOAs and
such, it does make sense.

[I really can't believe that not only am I agreeing with Mx but
supporting him...)

Blanche writes:

And strangely enough (and I can't believe I'm saying this) Mx has
made a perfectly reasonable route suggestion. I checked my charts and
such and agree with his recommendation. I don't say this because I
trust the US Feds on routes but looking at the geography, MOAs and
such, it does make sense.

Thanks.

I really can't believe that not only am I agreeing with Mx but
supporting him...)

It might be easier to believe if you remember that I'm just passing
information on, not making it up. I didn't cook up the route myself. I looked
at the charts, too, and I looked at existing flight plans, and (long ago) I
experimented with trying other routes, etc. Hundreds of flights follow this
route every day, so why should I reinvent the wheel? It jumps out at you from
the chart; it's obviously intended to get you efficiently and safely to SoCal.

It mystifies me that anyone would insist on rejecting what is obviously the
most practical solution. I think that it may be a rejection of authority,
which is a very dangerous trait in a pilot.

As it happens, I'm passing over Dateland at this very minute, FL320 on J2 to
KSAN. Recently the LYNDI2 has replaced the BARET4 as the preferred arrival, so
I filed that.

Mxsmanic wrote:


It might be easier to believe if you remember that I'm just passing
information on, not making it up. I didn't cook up the route myself. I looked
at the charts, too, and I looked at existing flight plans, and (long ago) I
experimented with trying other routes, etc. Hundreds of flights follow this
route every day, so why should I reinvent the wheel? It jumps out at you from
the chart; it's obviously intended to get you efficiently and safely to SoCal.

V66 is no more safe or efficient than any other legal route.

It mystifies me that anyone would insist on rejecting what is obviously the
most practical solution.

Obviously the most practical to you only.

I think that it may be a rejection of authority,
which is a very dangerous trait in a pilot.

Victor airways have no "authority" of any kind. Anyone is free to use them
or not as they desire.

As it happens, I'm passing over Dateland at this very minute, FL320 on J2 to
KSAN. Recently the LYNDI2 has replaced the BARET4 as the preferred arrival, so
I filed that.

Nonsense, you are sitting in front of a computer playing a game.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Blanche wrote:
Kimmy Boyer wrote:
On Mon, 3 May 2010 07:50:12 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On May 3, 9:36?am, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
That's because you are simulating, you are not flying a real airplane.

What changes in the real world that would make V66 a poor choice?

I will answer that after you answer my questions.

Here we have two utter morons in a debate...over who is the bigger
moron.

wow isn't RAP great.

No wonder most of us have left.

OK, question for the morons...I'm a pilot and aircraft owner. Altho
I've never flown between Phoenix & Montgomery, but I have flown
in Arizona (and Phoenix in particular), is my recommendation any
less valid or more valid?

And strangely enough (and I can't believe I'm saying this) Mx has
made a perfectly reasonable route suggestion. I checked my charts and
such and agree with his recommendation. I don't say this because I
trust the US Feds on routes but looking at the geography, MOAs and
such, it does make sense.

[I really can't believe that not only am I agreeing with Mx but
supporting him...)

There is nothing "wrong" with flying Victor airways.

The issue is the assignment by MX of some mystical qualities of "safeness"
to them that doesn't exist.

Flying on Victor airways is no safer than flying any other legal route.

The "best" route depends on your equipment and your goals, and can
include anything from minimum fuel to wanting to see some scenic landmark
from the air.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

Flying on Victor airways is no safer than flying any other legal route.

Then why do they exist?

wrote

There is nothing "wrong" with flying Victor airways.

The issue is the assignment by MX of some mystical qualities of "safeness"
to them that doesn't exist.

MX may be partly right, often.

Thing is, he will always _ _ ALWAYS _ _ end up turning the conversation
around to make you argue a point that is of no importance _ _ JUST _ _ to
prove you wrong.

ALWAYS ! ! !

Can anyone disagree with that?

The point is, why bother, when you know it is coming? Can anyone think of
one good reason? Just one?
--
Jim in NC

On May 4, 11:16*am, Blanche wrote:

And strangely enough (and I can't believe I'm saying this) Mx has
made a perfectly reasonable route suggestion.

While the route suggestion is perfectly reasonable, his response to
VOR DME was not.

He types in as if he is flying the route, he is not. I mean really he
says (these are HIS words) "I'm not into daring things. I'm into
safety and simplicity". What is daring about going off a victor
highway in MSFS???? What is unsafe about going off a victor highway
in MSFS. Does the computer reboot if he busts airspace? And to my
knowlege even if the computer rebooted, there is nothing unsafe about
a reboot of a computer. Now, if he said his G1000 rebooted while in a
REAL plane, Houston we have a problem. Heck I don't have any glass
cockpit time so maybe it's not a problem. Simply put, if one didn't
catch all the responses, you would never know he has never set foot in
a cockpit.

VOR DME's thoughts were more along what I would have done. Use GPS as
primary navigation not the airway. GPS way more accurate and as long
as you stay out of airspace, you don't belong in, keep the airplane
on the magenta line and maintain VFR with the ground? Nothing risky
or unsafe at all about doing this as long as you are on top of your
game. If you are not, then you shouldn't be flying in complicated
airspace anyway.

I think that when I ask a question that I get answers from qualified
people. I would hope that you would not count Mx as qualified to
answer real world question from MFSX experience.

Routing and flight planning I don't go to MSFS for scenarios. I use a
real bonified flight planner and fly it in the real bonified world
that expands beyond a computer monitor (or two)

All the flight planning in the world doesn't change the fact when you
plan something and something uhhhh, like a cloud (understand not
likely in Phoenix but a scenario) is between you and your
destination. In all my MSFS sim time, this has never happened to me,
yet in the real world, I have had to deviate to avoid the cloud while
VFR several times while ensuring I remain clear of airspace while
enroute. So, I am pretty safe to say Mx is NOT qualified to answering
questions about flight planning.

I think that Mx's background needs to be brought front and center to
those that step into this newsgroup (I have never seen RT12 post
before) so they understand that he is not qualified to respond to real
world situations when he isn't even a student pilot.

I was simply surprised that the proposed answer to a not very specific
route question was that the "only" viable route involved a VOR and an
airway, when the OP had not said anything about the type of flight or
their preferences. This is simply not true, and as such could not be
considered good advice. I should not have been surprised, because the
response came from a non-pilot, so by definition one who is not used to
flying.

While there’s nothing "wrong" with the route proposed (the whole
argument being a complete fabrication by MX) a more complete response
might have been something like :
"What kind of flight do you wish to make? If VFR, and not enthused about
scud running under 1500’ over missile-firing ranges, you’ll want to plan
to remain south of the Restricted areas west of Phoenix, or give a call
to get cleared through them. Don’t assume you’ll get cleared though, as
some of them have 'continuous' status, so you may have to just avoid
them. Same goes for IFR and GPS-Direct. You can file it, but you may get
the airway V66 instead. If you don’t want to bother with the restricted
areas, just file the airway, or if VFR, keep south of these areas, or
fly the airway."

So, while there’s nothing wrong with V66, there is just everything wrong
with MX’s initial response, and his ensuing vituperative argument. No
wonder of it - those who do not fly airplanes and whose only references
to aviation are a computer screen and some out of date textbooks will
clearly not develop the reflex and practices of pilots.




In article
,
says...


On May 4, 11:16*am, Blanche wrote:

And strangely enough (and I can't believe I'm saying this) Mx has
made a perfectly reasonable route suggestion.

While the route suggestion is perfectly reasonable, his response to
VOR DME was not.

writes:

Routing and flight planning I don't go to MSFS for scenarios. I use a
real bonified flight planner and fly it in the real bonified world
that expands beyond a computer monitor (or two)

I don't use MSFS for flight planning, either, as its planning features are
very primitive and not very realistic. I plan as I would for a real-world
flight and then fly that in the sim.

All the flight planning in the world doesn't change the fact when you
plan something and something uhhhh, like a cloud (understand not
likely in Phoenix but a scenario) is between you and your
destination. In all my MSFS sim time, this has never happened to me,
yet in the real world, I have had to deviate to avoid the cloud while
VFR several times while ensuring I remain clear of airspace while
enroute.

Then you don't have your sim configured correctly. Try Active Sky.

So, I am pretty safe to say Mx is NOT qualified to answering
questions about flight planning.

Individual clouds are not part of flight planning, since you don't know where
they are or what they will be like until you encounter them.