Simulators

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Statistics from real life, obviously, though you are starting from the
false premise that there is such a thing as "a dangerous maneuver" that
requires training to perform.

What would you call a spin?

An acrobatic maneuver; nothing more, nothing less.

Is it a dangerous maneuver? Does it require training?

All maneuvers require training.

No maneuver (in the civilian world) when done in an aircraft certified for
the maneuver, performed by a pilot trained to do the maneuver, and done
under accepted conditions, is dangerous.

And before you ask, the accepted conditions are formed from the real
experience of real pilots flying real airplanes for about a hundred years.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

All maneuvers require training.

No maneuver (in the civilian world) when done in an aircraft certified for
the maneuver, performed by a pilot trained to do the maneuver, and done
under accepted conditions, is dangerous.

Why isn't spin training part of the PPL?

And before you ask, the accepted conditions are formed from the real
experience of real pilots flying real airplanes for about a hundred years.

That's why spin training isn't part of the PPL.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

All maneuvers require training.

No maneuver (in the civilian world) when done in an aircraft certified for
the maneuver, performed by a pilot trained to do the maneuver, and done
under accepted conditions, is dangerous.

Why isn't spin training part of the PPL?

Because it is no longer concidered necessary for the type of flying done
by someone with a PPL in modern airplanes, just like chandelles and lazy
eights.

And before you ask, the accepted conditions are formed from the real
experience of real pilots flying real airplanes for about a hundred years.

That's why spin training isn't part of the PPL.

Yep, but not because they are dangerous.



--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

Because it is no longer concidered necessary for the type of flying done
by someone with a PPL in modern airplanes, just like chandelles and lazy
eights.

Because it is more dangerous to train for it than it is to not train for it.

Yep, but not because they are dangerous.

They were dangerous enough to kill people attempting to recover from them in
training.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Because it is no longer concidered necessary for the type of flying done
by someone with a PPL in modern airplanes, just like chandelles and lazy
eights.

Because it is more dangerous to train for it than it is to not train for it.

Nonsense.

There is also the small problem of a lot of modern airplanes not being
certified to do spins.

Yep, but not because they are dangerous.

They were dangerous enough to kill people attempting to recover from them in
training.

Just about anything in life can become "dangerous" if someone screws up.



--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Am 17.05.2010 22:46, schrieb :
wrote:
writes:

Nonsense.

Will you PLEASE move your private discussion with MX to email or
elsewhere but RAP?

Thanks!

#m
--
"What would I do with 72 virgins? That's not a reward,
that's a punishment. Give me two seasoned whores any day."
(Billy Connolly)

On Sat, 22 May 2010 14:46:57 +0200, Martin Hotze wrote:

Am 17.05.2010 22:46, schrieb :
wrote:
writes:

Nonsense.

Will you PLEASE move your private discussion with MX to email or
elsewhere but RAP?

Thanks!

#m

Not a chance.

Pennino and Liebmann are in this for all the attention they can get.
--
A fireside chat not with Ari!
http://tr.im/holj
Motto: Live To Spooge It!