Co-pilot gets sick, stewardess helps land airplane

On 22/06/10 12:57, Mxsmanic wrote:
William Black writes:

Have you ever been at the controls of a real aircraft when it has been
in the air?

No.

End of story really, she has...

--
William Black

These are the gilded popinjays and murderous assassins of Perfidious
Albion and they are about their Queen's business. Any man who impedes
their passage does so at his own peril.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Hatunen writes:

That depends on what you're claiming to be an expert at.

I don't claim to be an expert at anything, but I'm quite certain that
I know more about flying a 737 or 747 than the vast majority of
pilots who have flown only Cessna 172s.

Frankly - no, you don't. What you know would be akin to
reading a book on brain surgery and claiming to actually be
a brain surgeon.

Bob M.

Bob Myers writes:

Frankly - no, you don't.

Since you don't know the extent of my knowledge, you are not in a position to
assess it. So why not talk about aviation instead?

On Jun 25, 7:47*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Bob Myers writes:
Frankly - no, you don't.

Since you don't know the extent of my knowledge, you are not in a position to
assess it. So why not talk about aviation instead?

YES WE DO KNOW THE EXTENT OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE TO ASSESS IT

FACT: YOU NEVER FLEW A REAL PLANE

FACT:: YOU HAVE NO REAL WORLD KNOWLEDGE.

The fact is you outright lie when you say you fly. YOU DON'T FLY!!!!
HELLOOOO. YOU SIMULATE FLYING.

FACT: SIMULATION IS THE EXTENT OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Bob Myers writes:

Frankly - no, you don't.

Since you don't know the extent of my knowledge, you are not in a position
to
assess it. So why not talk about aviation instead?

I think that quite a few of the people who have read your postings over the
past few years have a good idea of the extent of your knowledge. My own view
is that you know a little about a lot of subjects, which is dangerous. But,
clearly, you have no in-depth knowledge of anything and in your own view you
have never ever been wrong.
--
JohnT

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
JohnT writes:

Playing a computer game doesn't make you an expert.

Neither does flying a real-world Cessna 172.

Which, of course, you have never ever done.

--
JohnT

JohnT writes:

Which, of course, you have never ever done.

In simulation, often. In real life, never.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
JohnT writes:

Which, of course, you have never ever done.

In simulation, often. In real life, never.

It is a computer game which you play.
--
JohnT

On Tue, 22 Jun 2010 15:42:52 +0100, "JohnT"
wrote:


"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
.. .
JohnT writes:

Which, of course, you have never ever done.

In simulation, often. In real life, never.

It is a computer game which you play.

In some fairness, it should be said that some computer simulators
perform pretty well, but it also has to be said that a simulation
on a PC can never be very realistic. It is far different sitting
in a real cockpit with a real yoke and real pedals operating real
ailerons, elevators and rudders. Nor can it realistically
simulate the feeling of aiming the plane at a real runway and
trying your best to grease the wheels on, but instead coming in a
bit high and trying to force the plne down to the runway without
bouncing too much. A PC can never simulate that feeling in the
pit of your stomache when teh plane hits a downdraft and loses
2000 feet just like that.

A PC can not give you the feel of a plane as it is slowed to
stall speen with the stall warning blaring and the plane
shuddering a little. Andalthough they no longer teach it, a PC
cannot simulate the quiet but scary feeling f being in a spin and
the slight panic as you try to bring it out of that spin.

And the PC can not simulate the visual context of a real plane
where the instruments are spread out; you'd have to keep your
nose pretty close to the monitor to simulate this.

As to Mixie's apparent idea that somehow his PC is a good
emulation of a big-time simulator, where the cockpit layout is
very close to the appearance of the craft's real cockpit and
where the hydraulics on the simulator can create most of the
bumps and jerks of real flight, that is downright ludicrous.



--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

Hatunen writes:

Nor can it realistically
simulate the feeling of aiming the plane at a real runway and
trying your best to grease the wheels on, but instead coming in a
bit high and trying to force the plne down to the runway without
bouncing too much.

Actually it does that rather well.

A PC can never simulate that feeling in the
pit of your stomache when teh plane hits a downdraft and loses
2000 feet just like that.

Like many private pilots, you think of flight in terms of physical sensations.
This is only one of many possible interpretations, however.

A PC can not give you the feel of a plane as it is slowed to
stall speen with the stall warning blaring and the plane
shuddering a little. Andalthough they no longer teach it, a PC
cannot simulate the quiet but scary feeling f being in a spin and
the slight panic as you try to bring it out of that spin.

Since they no longer teach it, doesn't that mean that there are no longer any
Real Pilots? How can you know anything about a spin without spinning in a
real aircraft?

And the PC can not simulate the visual context of a real plane
where the instruments are spread out; you'd have to keep your
nose pretty close to the monitor to simulate this.

Actually, the PC can do this, with the right add-ons.

As to Mixie's apparent idea that somehow his PC is a good
emulation of a big-time simulator, where the cockpit layout is
very close to the appearance of the craft's real cockpit and
where the hydraulics on the simulator can create most of the
bumps and jerks of real flight, that is downright ludicrous.

I guess you haven't been flying or simming much recently. The cockpit layout
of the sim is realistic enough that you may not recognize it as a sim at first
glance. It's not difficult to display photo-realistic visuals, after all.