CNN article on problems in Air Travel, as seen by FAA

Mxsmanic wrote:

writes:


GPS was designed to be a locating system, period.


It's a system that allows users to locate themselves. It doesn't provide any
information to third parties.

Imagine what would happen if the GPS infornmation could automatically be
transmitted somewhere else........... Oh wait, that does happen.

mrtravel writes:

Imagine what would happen if the GPS infornmation could automatically be
transmitted somewhere else........... Oh wait, that does happen.

Not within GPS. There are systems that contain GPS as one component that
transmit such information using other components of the system. But again,
that's independent of GPS.

writes:

Multipath is only a problem in analog systems where the information
is in phase differences, like an ILS system.

All radio systems are analog. In fact, all physical systems are analog.
Multipath is a problem for all sorts of systems.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Multipath is only a problem in analog systems where the information
is in phase differences, like an ILS system.

All radio systems are analog. In fact, all physical systems are analog.
Multipath is a problem for all sorts of systems.

Wrong answer on all counts.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote in
news
writes:

Multipath is only a problem in analog systems where the information
is in phase differences, like an ILS system.

All radio systems are analog.

Oops, surprise, wrong again

Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

mrtravel writes:

Imagine what would happen if the GPS infornmation could automatically
be transmitted somewhere else........... Oh wait, that does happen.

Not within GPS. There are systems that contain GPS as one component
that transmit such information using other components of the system.
But again, that's independent of GPS.


Clueless fjukkwit.

Tell us about banruptcy court!

that's one thing you ought to know something about.

bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

John Kulp writes:

You're completely dense. You change the flight paths. They're in the
AIR not on the GROUND like the runways. Got that?

During take-off and especially approach, the flight paths are
necessarily aligned with the runways, since aircraft cannot instantly
turn after leaving the runway or instantly turn just before touching
down. Thus, there are flight paths that are inextricably linked to
runway positions. The only way to change them is to reposition the
runways.

The pilots don't know how the planes work.

Apart from the most general principles, yes.

They just sit there like robots staring out the window while
some ghost flies them.

No, but during automated phases of a flight (which means most phases,
today), they don't have a lot to do. Still, that's better than
requiring them to keep their hands on the controls for eight hours at
a stretch, in a number of ways.

They use GPS overseas all the time but they don't know how to use
them.

They use GPS everywhere, but they don't have to know how it works to
use it.


More unadulterated bull ****.

Take a look on YouTube and see the 747 landing at the old Kai Tak
airport in Hong Kong. He is turning at the runway numbers to land in the
TDZ.

On an IFR departure, turns can commence at 400' AGL. It is going to
be a short runway on a very hot day at MGTOW not to be 400' AGL by end of
runway. Hell, I fly a small plane out of a 3,000' runway and can be 800'
AGL by the end of runway. I don't have anywhere near the climb performance
of a jetliner.

You don't have to constantly keep your hands on the controls of an
aircraft even a light aircraft without an autopilot. There is a reason
aircraft control surfaces have trim capability, you moron.

--
Marty Shapiro
Silicon Rallye Inc.

(remove SPAMNOT to email me)

Marty Shapiro writes:

You don't have to constantly keep your hands on the controls of an
aircraft even a light aircraft without an autopilot. There is a reason
aircraft control surfaces have trim capability, you moron.

There's a reason autopilots were developed, namely, that it's very tiring to
hold the controls for hours and hours. It's true that you need not grip them
continously, but neither can you ignore them for very long if you have no
autopilot.

On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 04:55:17 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Marty Shapiro writes:

You don't have to constantly keep your hands on the controls of an
aircraft even a light aircraft without an autopilot. There is a reason
aircraft control surfaces have trim capability, you moron.

There's a reason autopilots were developed, namely, that it's very tiring to
hold the controls for hours and hours. It's true that you need not grip them
continously, but neither can you ignore them for very long if you have no
autopilot.

This babbling idiot is going to continue posting this nonsense as long
as anyone keeps responding to his nonsense. So I, for one, am just
going to stop.

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
Marty Shapiro writes:

You don't have to constantly keep your hands on the controls of an
aircraft even a light aircraft without an autopilot. There is a reason
aircraft control surfaces have trim capability, you moron.

There's a reason autopilots were developed, namely, that it's very tiring to
hold the controls for hours and hours. It's true that you need not grip them
continously, but neither can you ignore them for very long if you have no
autopilot.

You are still a babbling, know nothing of the real world, arrogant, idiot.

One of the first things my instructor did during training was to have
me fly a short cross country with my arms folded across my chest
maintaining course with rudder after trimming out the airplane.

Unless in turbulance, I typically have two fingers on the yoke most
of the time.

And I have an autopilot which is seldom turned on.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.