![]() |
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 |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jay Honeck writes:
I call it the "pussification" of America. It's very, very sad, but it's what happens when you have an ever-expanding, all-knowing, all- caring, omnipotent central government. Ah, Jay is back with his simplistic view of the world. Actually, it's the result of trial lawyers getting warning labels on everything. It's the result of many, many Bubbas too stupid to operate a can opener trying to function in modern America. It's the result of both parents having to work--thanks to decades of Republican, favor-the-rich policies--and in exhaustion abandoning their role to video games and TV. -- Great is the art of beginning, but greater is the art of ending. - Henry Wadsworth Longfellow |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 28, 8:57*pm, Bug Dout wrote:
gpsman writes: Practically, I think you have to train and remain proficient in IFR. Eh? Not at all. Even in Seattle or such areas there are plenty of VFR only pilots. Weather clears up in a few days. *Cross country trips are very much possible strictly VFR. Of course, the above assumes flying for a hobby. *Flying for committments and deadlines, yes, IFR is necessary to be safe...or safer. I've given the wrong impression. An instrument rating is my personal standard of practicality/proficiency/saferness... that's tied to my bank account. I've accumulated 500 hours, over 34 years, and I'm just never comfortable because I know I'm not really proficient. So, I think I know more about the rust that forms from not flying than I do actual flying, but the economy has put me 6-7 years from being able to comfortably invest the time and money my definition of proficient requires. ----- - gpsman |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 29, 8:33*am, gpsman wrote:
On Jan 28, 8:57*pm, Bug Dout wrote: gpsman writes: Practically, I think you have to train and remain proficient in IFR. Eh? Not at all. Even in Seattle or such areas there are plenty of VFR only pilots. Weather clears up in a few days. *Cross country trips are very much possible strictly VFR. Of course, the above assumes flying for a hobby. *Flying for committments and deadlines, yes, IFR is necessary to be safe...or safer. I've given the wrong impression. *An instrument rating is my personal standard of practicality/proficiency/saferness... that's tied to my bank account. I've accumulated 500 hours, over 34 years, and I'm just never comfortable because I know I'm not really proficient. So, I think I know more about the rust that forms from not flying than I do actual flying, but the economy has put me 6-7 years from being able to comfortably invest the time and money my definition of proficient requires. *----- - gpsman I concur with gpsman. I am a fairly high time pilot, use a Mooney for business purposes so most often file IFR. Once a year or so I take a trip that pretty much leads me across the country, visitng important customers, and at the end of the trip I am a MUCH sharper pilot than at the beginning. Hands on altitude holding gets to be plus or minus a whisper, ILSs are within a dot, and best of all, towards the end of a multiday trip the cockpit workload seems trivial: staying ahead of the airplane is so much easier. The moral of this story is, to be 'current' may mean certain operations within the last 90 days, to be proficient for me at least the time window is more nearly a week or ten days. Real life precludes staying at that level of proficiency. so probably there is a slight increase in risk. Now here's an interesting question, given the mechanical failure rates of airplanes. Is flying more often to maintain proficiency subjecting the pilot to increased risk because of the exposure to equipment failure? Somewhere there's a minimum or a cusp in that curve, I am not sure where it is. Sorry spammers, this thread is actually aviation related! |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "John Clear" wrote Depends what the local weather is like. I'm VFR only, as is Jay, who flies a lot more then I do. And he has Midwest weather to deal with. Not Midwest, now. He moved to Texas and bought a new hotel... -- Jim in NC |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 29, 8:33*am, gpsman wrote:
On Jan 28, 8:57*pm, Bug Dout wrote: gpsman writes: Practically, I think you have to train and remain proficient in IFR. Eh? Not at all. Even in Seattle or such areas there are plenty of VFR only pilots. Weather clears up in a few days. *Cross country trips are very much possible strictly VFR. Of course, the above assumes flying for a hobby. *Flying for committments and deadlines, yes, IFR is necessary to be safe...or safer. I've given the wrong impression. *An instrument rating is my personal standard of practicality/proficiency/saferness... that's tied to my bank account. I've accumulated 500 hours, over 34 years, and I'm just never comfortable because I know I'm not really proficient. So, I think I know more about the rust that forms from not flying than I do actual flying, but the economy has put me 6-7 years from being able to comfortably invest the time and money my definition of proficient requires. *----- - gpsman The proficiency factor vs the economy is definitely a player in the flight safety area. Quite frankly I'm surprised that there haven't been more instrument proficiency related incidents and accidents due to decreased aircraft use in the GA community. It's absolutely a serious consideration that every instrument rated pilot should be both aware of and concerned about. Dudley Henriques |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 29, 2:20*pm, Dudley Henriques
wrote: On Jan 29, 8:33*am, gpsman wrote: On Jan 28, 8:57*pm, Bug Dout wrote: gpsman writes: Practically, I think you have to train and remain proficient in IFR.. Eh? Not at all. Even in Seattle or such areas there are plenty of VFR only pilots. Weather clears up in a few days. *Cross country trips are very much possible strictly VFR. Of course, the above assumes flying for a hobby. *Flying for committments and deadlines, yes, IFR is necessary to be safe...or safer. I've given the wrong impression. *An instrument rating is my personal standard of practicality/proficiency/saferness... that's tied to my bank account. I've accumulated 500 hours, over 34 years, and I'm just never comfortable because I know I'm not really proficient. So, I think I know more about the rust that forms from not flying than I do actual flying, but the economy has put me 6-7 years from being able to comfortably invest the time and money my definition of proficient requires. *----- - gpsman The proficiency factor vs the economy is definitely a player in the flight safety area. Quite frankly I'm surprised that there haven't been more instrument proficiency related incidents and accidents due to decreased aircraft use in the GA community. It's absolutely a serious consideration that every instrument rated pilot should be both aware of and concerned about. Dudley Henriques I'm guessing PICs with not much recent experience are simply monitoring their autopilots as the electronics and servos fly the airplane. The likelihood of electronic failures are pretty low. I get my kicks hand flying the airplane most of the time, but suspect that is not so common among us business owner/pilots these days. It could also be there's less IMC or night or IMC and night flying these days in the complex SEL crowd, although I don't hesitate to fly night IFR. The fact is, if it's to solid minimums I'd rather fly a precision approach at night. Question for the other instrument rated pilots (assuming there are more than a few of us still around) don't you agree a night approach to minimums is easier than a day time one? So long as you don't turn on the landing lights until out of the clouds of course. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Jan 29, 6:17*pm, a wrote:
On Jan 29, 2:20*pm, Dudley Henriques wrote: On Jan 29, 8:33*am, gpsman wrote: On Jan 28, 8:57*pm, Bug Dout wrote: gpsman writes: Practically, I think you have to train and remain proficient in IFR. Eh? Not at all. Even in Seattle or such areas there are plenty of VFR only pilots. Weather clears up in a few days. *Cross country trips are very much possible strictly VFR. Of course, the above assumes flying for a hobby. *Flying for committments and deadlines, yes, IFR is necessary to be safe...or safer. I've given the wrong impression. *An instrument rating is my personal standard of practicality/proficiency/saferness... that's tied to my bank account. I've accumulated 500 hours, over 34 years, and I'm just never comfortable because I know I'm not really proficient. So, I think I know more about the rust that forms from not flying than I do actual flying, but the economy has put me 6-7 years from being able to comfortably invest the time and money my definition of proficient requires. *----- - gpsman The proficiency factor vs the economy is definitely a player in the flight safety area. Quite frankly I'm surprised that there haven't been more instrument proficiency related incidents and accidents due to decreased aircraft use in the GA community. It's absolutely a serious consideration that every instrument rated pilot should be both aware of and concerned about. Dudley Henriques I'm guessing PICs with not much recent experience are simply monitoring their autopilots as the electronics and servos fly the airplane. The likelihood of electronic failures are pretty low. I get my kicks hand flying the airplane most of the time, but suspect that is not so common among us business owner/pilots these days. It could also be there's less IMC or night or IMC and night flying these days in the complex SEL crowd, although I don't hesitate to fly night IFR. The fact is, if it's to solid minimums I'd rather fly a precision approach at night. Question for the other instrument rated pilots (assuming there are more than a few of us still around) don't you agree a night approach to minimums is easier than a day time one? *So long as you don't turn on the landing lights until out of the clouds of course. I think most of these points are relevant. Probably the 3 most unwanted words in all of aviation are "Radar service terminated" :-)) DH |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Depends what the local weather is like. *I'm VFR only, as is Jay, who
flies a lot more then I do. *And he has Midwest weather to deal with. John Not any more. Now I've got tropical South Texas/Gulf of Mexico weather to deal with. Except for tonight. We're experiencing an ICE STORM, on an island in the Gulf of Mexico! This damned global warming is just un-friggin'- believable. :-) -- Jay Honeck Port Aransas, TX Pathfinder N56993 www.HarborInnPortA.com |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Bug Dout wrote: Jay Honeck writes: I call it the "pussification" of America. It's very, very sad, but it's what happens when you have an ever-expanding, all-knowing, all- caring, omnipotent central government. Ah, Jay is back with his simplistic view of the world. Actually, it's the result of trial lawyers getting warning labels on everything. It's the result of many, many Bubbas too stupid to operate a can opener trying to function in modern America. It's the result of both parents having to work--thanks to decades of Republican, favor-the-rich policies--and in exhaustion abandoning their role to video games and TV. BLAME BUSH!!! do you feel better now machogrande? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Are these Pilots Real? | DannyVit | Piloting | 11 | April 17th 11 06:02 PM |
New Blog For REAL Pilots | Missy Roos Walker | Piloting | 5 | November 28th 09 06:29 PM |
New Blog For REAL Pilots | Missy Roos Walker | Piloting | 0 | November 27th 09 09:08 PM |
New Blog For REAL Pilots | Missy Roos Walker | Piloting | 0 | November 27th 09 08:37 PM |
Question for the real pilots | C Booth | Piloting | 122 | June 8th 07 06:24 PM |