Co-pilot gets sick, stewardess helps land airplane

Bob Myers wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote:


Tell us: does the simulator simulate a stall?

Yes.

No. The little airplane you see on the screen may stall, but
you have absolutely no insight at all into what a stall *feels*
like.

Bob M.

ever seen a plane crash where every single person died except two people lived?

The Starmaker wrote:

Bob Myers wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote:


Tell us: does the simulator simulate a stall?

Yes.

No. The little airplane you see on the screen may stall, but
you have absolutely no insight at all into what a stall *feels*
like.

Bob M.

ever seen a plane crash where every single person died except two people lived?

the two people were married.

Bob Myers writes:

No. The little airplane you see on the screen may stall, but
you have absolutely no insight at all into what a stall *feels*
like.

I have some insight into it, but what it feels like is not terribly important.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Bob Myers writes:

No. The little airplane you see on the screen may stall, but
you have absolutely no insight at all into what a stall *feels*
like.

I have some insight into it, but what it feels like is not terribly
important.

And that, more than anything else you have said, sums up
quite neatly why you have no idea what you're talking about
here.

Bob M.

Mxsmanic wrote:
William Black writes:

No, it's like saying that anyone who has driven any car knows a
great deal more about driving than someone who has played driving
games on a personal computer, no matter how sophisticated.

But that is also an incorrect statement.

If only real flying experience were important, then nobody would ever
use simulators. In fact, if someone wants to fly a 747, he is better
off flying a simulator of a 747 than he is flying a Cessna 152. While
the simulation isn't the same as flying a 747 for real, it's a lot
closer than the real-world experience of a Cessna 172 would be.

But the simulator experience you're talking about is absolutely
meaningless without real-world flight experience. For that matter,
the "simulator" in your case really isn't one. It's a computer game,
something which is VERY far removed from what the airlines call
a simulator. It is, in fact, absolutely nothing like a real simulator, and
essentially useless for meaningful flight training.

Bob M.

Bob Myers wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote:
William Black writes:

No, it's like saying that anyone who has driven any car knows a
great deal more about driving than someone who has played driving
games on a personal computer, no matter how sophisticated.

But that is also an incorrect statement.

If only real flying experience were important, then nobody would ever
use simulators. In fact, if someone wants to fly a 747, he is better
off flying a simulator of a 747 than he is flying a Cessna 152. While
the simulation isn't the same as flying a 747 for real, it's a lot
closer than the real-world experience of a Cessna 172 would be.

But the simulator experience you're talking about is absolutely
meaningless without real-world flight experience. For that matter,
the "simulator" in your case really isn't one. It's a computer game,
something which is VERY far removed from what the airlines call
a simulator. It is, in fact, absolutely nothing like a real simulator, and
essentially useless for meaningful flight training.

Bob M.

The army uses...simulators. They fight wars with it...you don't even
have to go outside...

On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 16:14:36 -0700, The Starmaker
wrote:

Bob Myers wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote:
William Black writes:

No, it's like saying that anyone who has driven any car knows a
great deal more about driving than someone who has played driving
games on a personal computer, no matter how sophisticated.

But that is also an incorrect statement.

If only real flying experience were important, then nobody would ever
use simulators. In fact, if someone wants to fly a 747, he is better
off flying a simulator of a 747 than he is flying a Cessna 152. While
the simulation isn't the same as flying a 747 for real, it's a lot
closer than the real-world experience of a Cessna 172 would be.

But the simulator experience you're talking about is absolutely
meaningless without real-world flight experience. For that matter,
the "simulator" in your case really isn't one. It's a computer game,
something which is VERY far removed from what the airlines call
a simulator. It is, in fact, absolutely nothing like a real simulator, and
essentially useless for meaningful flight training.

The army uses...simulators. They fight wars with it...you don't even
have to go outside...

And this has to do with flying an airplane how?

Do you suppose your typical lieutenant taking simulator training
will be allowed to become a tank commander without actually ever
having been in a tank?

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

Hatunen wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 16:14:36 -0700, The Starmaker
wrote:

Bob Myers wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote:
William Black writes:

No, it's like saying that anyone who has driven any car knows a
great deal more about driving than someone who has played driving
games on a personal computer, no matter how sophisticated.

But that is also an incorrect statement.

If only real flying experience were important, then nobody would ever
use simulators. In fact, if someone wants to fly a 747, he is better
off flying a simulator of a 747 than he is flying a Cessna 152. While
the simulation isn't the same as flying a 747 for real, it's a lot
closer than the real-world experience of a Cessna 172 would be.

But the simulator experience you're talking about is absolutely
meaningless without real-world flight experience. For that matter,
the "simulator" in your case really isn't one. It's a computer game,
something which is VERY far removed from what the airlines call
a simulator. It is, in fact, absolutely nothing like a real simulator, and
essentially useless for meaningful flight training.

The army uses...simulators. They fight wars with it...you don't even
have to go outside...

And this has to do with flying an airplane how?

Do you suppose your typical lieutenant taking simulator training
will be allowed to become a tank commander without actually ever
having been in a tank?

Why not?

What is a unmanned aerial vehicle, that thing they call a drone? You
gotta be great with a sim to fly that!

On Fri, 25 Jun 2010 17:07:17 -0700, The Starmaker wrote:

What is a unmanned aerial vehicle, that thing they call a drone? You
gotta be great with a sim to fly that!

Oh, great. The Starmaker. And inviting Iraq-war controversy.

I have a feeling this thread just went from bad to much, much worse.

Hatunen writes:

And this has to do with flying an airplane how?

The military also uses desktop flight simulators, including Microsoft Flight
Simulator.

Do you suppose your typical lieutenant taking simulator training
will be allowed to become a tank commander without actually ever
having been in a tank?

It's certainly conceivable, but I don't know if it is actually done.