![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 04:21:38 +0200, Mxsmanic wrote:
Wingnut writes: "Often" is good enough for me. It has not been good enough to prevent crashes. Occasionally a company apparently insufficiently screens its employees to keep out idiots. Nothing to do with what we were discussing. Important to know the plane's orientation, both pitch and roll (while the compass gives you yaw, the third rotational degree of freedom). It's also important to know the current stall angle, the angle of attack, the flight path vector, the airspeed and altitude trends, the V-speeds, the upper and lower airspeed limits, the current track, the current route, the current vertical profile, the current heading, the expected top of descent, and about a zillion other things that a private pilot isn't likely to see in a tiny Cessna. And there goes the Cessna strawman again. When, exactly, did the subject morph from being a commercial pilot to being a private pilot, by the way? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Wingnut writes:
And there goes the Cessna strawman again. When, exactly, did the subject morph from being a commercial pilot to being a private pilot, by the way? Commercial pilots fly Cessnas all the time, including the small ones. The only difference between a private pilot and a commercial pilot is that the commercial pilot can fly for hire. Apparently there is some widespread misconception that all commercial pilots are flying airliners, but that is not at all the case. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 12:21:10 +0200, Mxsmanic wrote:
Wingnut writes: And there goes the Cessna strawman again. When, exactly, did the subject morph from being a commercial pilot to being a private pilot, by the way? Commercial pilots fly Cessnas all the time, including the small ones. Nobody said they don't; just that their experience tends to be broader than *just* Cessnas. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Wingnut writes:
Nobody said they don't; just that their experience tends to be broader than *just* Cessnas. That can be said of private pilots as well. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jun 28, 7:44*am, Wingnut wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 12:21:10 +0200, Mxsmanic wrote: Wingnut writes: And there goes the Cessna strawman again. When, exactly, did the subject morph from being a commercial pilot to being a private pilot, by the way? Commercial pilots fly Cessnas all the time, including the small ones. Nobody said they don't; just that their experience tends to be broader than *just* Cessnas. Well, a commercial certificate means the holder has demonstrated a different level of piloting proficiency, passed a different written and is required to hold a different physical certificate. Not that private pilots can't be as proficient, but they are not required to be. Most would agree the instrument rating is more difficult to get than the commercial license, so long as the pilot can pass the physical. I needed a waiver for the physical (vision). My airplane is a business (ie point to point travel) tool, I simply don't need more than a private pilot certificate since neither the ariplane nor I are for hire. Cessna strawmen and annoying pilots are MX's strong points. It's been pretty clear for a long time he doesn't have much of a real life, spends lots of time in sim and offering his 'wisdom' here. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jun 28, 5:21*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
. Apparently there is some widespread misconception that all commercial pilots are flying airliners, but that is not at all the case. NO, IT's YOUR MISCONCEPTION. The real world knows the difference between commercial pilot and ATP. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jun 28, 5:39*am, Wingnut wrote:
And there goes the Cessna strawman again. When, exactly, did the subject morph from being a commercial pilot to being a private pilot, by the way? Don't know why all the fuss about "Cessna strawmen". :-))))))))))))))))) First of all, the lady in question herself during a televised news interview said quite plainly that her "commercial experience" was limited to light aircraft and Cessna was mentioned. Secondly, there are literally thousands of pilots certificated as commercial pilots in the United States who have never flown anything more complicated than a light complex. I personally know many of these pilots myself. One is a commercial ag operator who has been dusting crops for 30 years and has never flown anything heavier than a 182 Cessna. He makes a good living flying a Pawnee. I know another who runs a banner towing business and flies Citabrias. MANY I know are CFI's in light aircraft holding commercial ratings. You can add to this literally thousands of pilots in the United States who own light aircraft, many not even complex aircraft, who have obtained commercials simply for the added education involved. The lady said she had a commercial and said her experience was limited to light aircraft. I find absolutely nothing inconsistent with her comment whatsoever. The inference by ANYONE that her having a commercial rating indicates she has had experience in heavier aircraft than those she mentioned is totally flawed in my opinion. Dudley Henriques |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 08:13:28 -0700, Dudley Henriques wrote:
On Jun 28, 5:39Â*am, Wingnut wrote: And there goes the Cessna strawman again. When, exactly, did the subject morph from being a commercial pilot to being a private pilot, by the way? Don't know why all the fuss about "Cessna strawmen". :-))))))))))))))))) First of all, the lady in question herself during a televised news interview said quite plainly that her "commercial experience" was limited to light aircraft and Cessna was mentioned. does not say anything like that; it only says she has a commercial pilot's license, with no further detail. Since that is the post that we are debating here, as far as I am concerned everyone bringing up Cessnas is pulling them directly out of their ass. Our givens are solely that she has a commercial pilot's license and was able to successfully assume the copilot's role during the landing of a jumbo jet. Assuming anything beyond that, either negative or positive, seems unwarranted. This "televised news interview" has not been entered into evidence, unlike the content of the original post , so you are assuming facts not in evidence as part of your efforts, in partnership with Mxsmanic, to denigrate me. Assuming facts not in evidence is, of course, an illicit debating move. Secondly, there are literally thousands of pilots certificated as commercial pilots in the United States who have never flown anything more complicated than a light complex. This claim *might* have been more credible had it come from someone who could spell "certified" correctly. In the meantime, the important matter here is not the absolute number but the percentage, about which no claim has yet been made by you. I personally know many of these pilots myself. Personal anecdotes are a notoriously poor substitute for actual evidence. Small, uncontrolled, biased samples are the bane of every statistician. One is a commercial ag operator who has been dusting crops for 30 years and has never flown anything heavier than a 182 Cessna. Aside from the time he flew an FA-18 straight up into the nozzle of an alien superweapon, of course. Sorry, fictional characters make particularly poor evidence. :-) totally flawed in my opinion. Dudley Henriques Yes, your opinion of me is unfortunately quite clear to all, as is the fact that you're the type of person to air such opinions, about people who have done nothing offensive to you to provoke you, in public. You should grow like an onion with your head in the ground. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jun 29, 12:34*am, Wingnut wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jun 2010 08:13:28 -0700, Dudley Henriques wrote: On Jun 28, 5:39*am, Wingnut wrote: And there goes the Cessna strawman again. When, exactly, did the subject morph from being a commercial pilot to being a private pilot, by the way? Don't know why all the fuss about "Cessna strawmen". :-))))))))))))))))) First of all, the lady in question herself during a televised news interview said quite plainly that her "commercial experience" was limited to light aircraft and Cessna was mentioned. does not say anything like that; it only says she has a commercial pilot's license, with no further detail. Since that is the post that we are debating here, as far as I am concerned everyone bringing up Cessnas is pulling them directly out of their ass. Our givens are solely that she has a commercial pilot's license and was able to successfully assume the copilot's role during the landing of a jumbo jet. Assuming anything beyond that, either negative or positive, seems unwarranted. This "televised news interview" has not been entered into evidence, unlike the content of the original post , so you are assuming facts not in evidence as part of your efforts, in partnership with Mxsmanic, to denigrate me. Assuming facts not in evidence is, of course, an illicit debating move. Secondly, there are literally thousands of pilots certificated as commercial pilots in the United States who have never flown anything more complicated than a light complex. This claim *might* have been more credible had it come from someone who could spell "certified" correctly. In the meantime, the important matter here is not the absolute number but the percentage, about which no claim has yet been made by you. I personally know many of these pilots myself. Personal anecdotes are a notoriously poor substitute for actual evidence. Small, uncontrolled, biased samples are the bane of every statistician. One is a commercial ag operator who has been dusting crops for 30 years and has never flown anything heavier than a 182 Cessna. Aside from the time he flew an FA-18 straight up into the nozzle of an alien superweapon, of course. Sorry, fictional characters make particularly poor evidence. :-) totally flawed in my opinion. Dudley Henriques Yes, your opinion of me is unfortunately quite clear to all, as is the fact that you're the type of person to air such opinions, about people who have done nothing offensive to you to provoke you, in public. You should grow like an onion with your head in the ground. I have no opinion of you at all really. You simply come with Usenet. No problem at all. You have as much right to an opinion here as anyone here. :-)))))))) Dudley Henriques |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Wingnut writes:
does not say anything like that; it only says she has a commercial pilot's license, with no further detail. Since that is the post that we are debating here, as far as I am concerned everyone bringing up Cessnas is pulling them directly out of their ass. Patti DeLuna herself indicated that she only had about 300 hours of experience, and has only flown small Cessna aircraft (specifically, a Cessna 210). Our givens are solely that she has a commercial pilot's license and was able to successfully assume the copilot's role during the landing of a jumbo jet. She did not "assume the copilot's role," an assertion that many first officers might resent. She merely sat in the copilot's seat and followed the pilot's instructions. ... as part of your efforts, in partnership with Mxsmanic, to denigrate me. Nobody is in partnership with me. Assuming facts not in evidence is, of course, an illicit debating move. Looking things up, on the other hand, is pretty effective. This claim *might* have been more credible had it come from someone who could spell "certified" correctly. "Certificate" is a real word. It is slightly different in meaning from "certify." To certify means to attest to something. To certificate means to issue a certification. However, the FAA and others use certificate mainly because it contains more syllables and therefore sounds more important. In the meantime, the important matter here is not the absolute number but the percentage, about which no claim has yet been made by you. The majority of commercial pilots fly little planes. Remember that airline pilots generally hold airline transport pilot certifications, which are not the same as commercial licenses. Personal anecdotes are a notoriously poor substitute for actual evidence. But research goes a long way, and so does an understanding of how the FAA certifies pilots. Yes, your opinion of me is unfortunately quite clear to all, as is the fact that you're the type of person to air such opinions, about people who have done nothing offensive to you to provoke you, in public. You should grow like an onion with your head in the ground. Why not discuss the topic, instead of other people? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Pilot nearly crashes in IMC, Controller helps | pimenthal | Piloting | 32 | September 27th 05 01:06 PM |
Aviation Conspiracy: Toronto Plane Pilot Was Allowed To Land In "Red Alert" Weather | Bill Mulcahy | General Aviation | 24 | August 19th 05 10:48 PM |
2 pilot/small airplane CRM | Mitty | Instrument Flight Rules | 35 | September 1st 04 11:19 PM |
non-pilot lands airplane | Cub Driver | Piloting | 3 | August 14th 04 12:08 AM |
Home Builders are Sick Sick Puppies | pacplyer | Home Built | 11 | March 26th 04 12:39 AM |