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 |
#201
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
Ron Lee wrote:
That seems to be an overly broad statement. I have put "VFR GPS" in Remarks when filing /U for an off-airways (random) route and had controllers specifically refer to using my VFR GPS to proceed direct to an intersection. Whether they should have done so is another issue. But is sure seemed to make a difference. Your non-IFR GPS has intersections in it? What model is it? I didn't know there was any such thing as a VFR aviation GPS that didn't have intersections. All of Garmin's certainly do. No airways, though. All the best, David |
#202
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
Jose has a large ego and an aversion to admitting an error. "Hello, Pot? This is kettle." -m -- ## Mark T. Dame ## VP, Product Development ## MFM Software, Inc. (http://www.mfm.com/) "Forget the Joneses, I keep us up with the Simpsons." |
#203
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
|
#204
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
|
#205
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
"Mark T. Dame" wrote in message ... "Hello, Pot? This is kettle." If you do a search on Google Groups you'll find I have admitted all of my errors. |
#206
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
wrote in message oups.com... The controller's attention might be elsewhere (have you never been sent right through a localizer?). There's no similarity. There's a window of a few seconds for the turn to intercept the localizer. It would take at least several minutes for the controller to notice an enroute aircraft drifting off course unless the GPS was erroneously calling for a significant turn. If it did that the pilot should notice the error before the controller. |
#207
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message nk.net...
"Mark T. Dame" wrote in message ... "Hello, Pot? This is kettle." If you do a search on Google Groups you'll find I have admitted all of my errors. Instead of that, I did a Google search on "McNicoll errors". It said it found "about 29,100" results. :-) |
#208
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
In article t,
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: "Ron Garret" wrote in message ... Yes, I knew that actually. I see that subtlety is lost on you. I see you're a poor judge of character. I was not judging your character, I was stating an objectively observable fact. Subtlety is, at least occasionally, lost on you (a fact that you continue to demonstrate by failing to comprehend the point that I am (subtly) making.) You are mistaken. I am completely correct. When idiots say idiotic things do you think that they realize that they are being idiots or do you think that they believe themselves to be completely correct? Really? How do you know that? I see no indication in the discussion that Jose has changed his position. Have you been having an off-line discussion with him? Or perhaps you are psychic? Jose has a large ego and an aversion to admitting an error. If he could show a hazard and thus prove me wrong he would do so. Just because you lack the imagination to think of another possible reason for Jose's reluctance to engage you in debate is not proof that he is incapable of doing so. Why would I want to do that? To establish a bit of credibility in this forum. My credibility would matter if I were attempting to make an argument from authority, but I am not. I prefer to let facts speak for themselves. rg |
#209
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
"John R. Copeland" wrote in message ... Instead of that, I did a Google search on "McNicoll errors". It said it found "about 29,100" results. :-) http://makeashorterlink.com/?Q27922B2C |
#210
|
|||
|
|||
IFR with a VFR GPS
"Ron Garret" wrote in message ... I was not judging your character, I was stating an objectively observable fact. Subtlety is, at least occasionally, lost on you (a fact that you continue to demonstrate by failing to comprehend the point that I am (subtly) making.) No, you only think you were stating an objectively observable fact. When idiots say idiotic things do you think that they realize that they are being idiots or do you think that they believe themselves to be completely correct? Now you're touching on why your observation is incorrect. Peter R. said something that was idiotic. He doesn't realize it was idiotic because he is an idiot. I haven't said anything idiotic, everything I've said is supported by facts and logic. Just because you lack the imagination to think of another possible reason for Jose's reluctance to engage you in debate is not proof that he is incapable of doing so. Jose is incapable of showing Cumulo Granite to be a hazard because Cumulo Granite is not a hazard. My credibility would matter if I were attempting to make an argument from authority, but I am not. I prefer to let facts speak for themselves. As do I. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|