Mxsmanic , IFR sensations, and some other stuff

On May 19, 7:41*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
Read my post. *I already said what I fly. *You got my tail number,
it's on that as well.

I'm not familiar with the specific aircraft you fly.

Then for future reference, you shouldn't comment on something you are
not familiar with.

I am in the real world, in a real airplane and experienced a real
world problem.

If you plan to challenge any pilot ESPECIALLY ME, at least read the
post. I gave you everything I had at my disposal in my posting,
including what equipment I had, what kind of plane I was in and the
meteorological environment. Your postings did not even reference or
even pertain to my circumstances, which completely reduces your
credibility to zilch.

MSFS does not simulate what I went through and the decision making
process I had to go through in not being a statistic. All of your
postings clearly show your lack of knowledge of aircraft systems. All
your postings clearly show your lack of handling an airplane in a real
world environment.

Please keep that in mind before you post in a pilot or student
newsgroup NOT RELATED to simulated worlds. Partially correct posting
is worse then completely wrong postings especially to a student who
doesn't know how to weed out the wheat from the chaff.

Again, you are talking to a person who is very familiar with MSFS, and
you just don't scan gauges and identify problems as you make it seem
to be in a REAL PLANE. I know a programmer that made an addin that
completely replicates my aircraft right down the color scheme AND
exact instrumentation of my plane. So again, I talk from experience
from a MSFS and real world experience. The two just does not
intertwine when it comes down to actually flying an airplane.

There are many human factors that come into play that does not exist
sitting in front of a flat screen monitor. How do I know this you
ask? I downloaded all the weather data afterwards and re-flew my
mission failing the vacuum system. And believe it or not, I
identified my problem QUICKER in my real airplane. Why? Because I
had a sensory input that gave me an alert saying something is amiss.
In MSFS, I ended up oscillating in my altitude because I didn't have
sensory input. I was chasing the AI and DG and I was expecting the
vacuum failure!!!!!

Oscillations in IMC does not bode well for traffic separation which is
a safety issue NOT DISPLAYED IN MSFS.

In the real world, you have leans, human physiology, ATC concerns,
turbulence, noise distractions. reading approach planes, comprehending
clearances to what you filed that simply does not exist in a MSFS
environment. We are not robots in a real airplane, we all react
differently even when given the same set of circumstance.

In the MSFS world, I got plenty of time without worrying about
upsetting the plane. And so what if I do. I start over. You simply
cannot compare the two. I am talking about MSFS DESKTOP computers.

In the real world, parts break in flight. That's the reality of it
and I am very meticulous in the maintenance of my plane. So don't
challenge me on saying that I shouldn't have flown my plane as I do
have vested interest in returning to terra firma safely. The plane
was airworthy for IFR flight when I accomplished my preflight
inspections and such. You do not do this in MSFS. You do not walk
around the plane inspecting parts to ensure safe flight do you? You
probably don't even use a checklist and verify that indeed you checked
what is suppose to check do you?

You asked questions and then challenge my experiences, and quite
frankly, you flopped big time in this thread. You had no clue on the
problems and troubleshooting needed to make my flight a successful
outcome.

Bottom line, as stated earlier, it was the training I received that
got me through this "event". Talking with other pilots at my own
airport, they were amazed I didn't declare an emergency.

Truth be known, by me NOT feeling something that should have been felt
was the ticket in me making this NOT an emergency. I reacted based on
feeling, expanded my scan and moved on to flying the plane. After
establishing I am safely flying the plane, I reported to ATC what my
issues were so they could understand if I had any problems with
navigation.

A vacuum failure with the appropriate training is not a life
threatening emergency to the well trained IFR pilot. It is not luck
that brings him back. It's using the skills taught to him and tools
given to him (or her) that brings the pilot, passengers and plane back
safe and sound.

As you can see, NOT EVERYTHING IS IN THE TEXTBOOKS.

The text books do not tell you that you can use sensory feelings in
IFR flight. IN REALITY, you can! It's just how you use them as to
whether it's a tool or a danger.

I choose to use them as a tool in the verification of the response of
an instrument. If that verification fails (as it did with my AI) then
I go to my secondary instruments. If what I feel verifies what the
instrument says, I continue on.

Books won't tell you that, but the real world pilots will as being
displayed in this thread.

Instruments fail. To blindly trust them as you would like to have me
do will make me a statistic.

So, I will continue to stick by my original statement. TRUST BUT
VERIFY. You do this, you have a chance in the real IMC world.

BOTTOM LINE:

You don't lose anything in MSFS other then time
You have the potential to lose EVERYTHING if you don't live by the
words TRUST BUT VERIFY

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

A Lieberman writes:

Everything I read on Mx threads, he's traveled the world, from the
Grand Canyon tour to the most complex Bravo airspace we probably
haven't encountered in our lives.

I flew from KSAN to KLAX yesterday


No you didn't. You sat n your chair.


Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

gatt writes:

The action is different in IMC because if you feel a sensory
perception, you have to check the instruments rather than look
outside.

No. In IMC, you are ALWAYS checking the instruments, perception or
not. You don't wait for a sensation to motivate you to look at the
instruments, nor do you allow a sensation to take the place of looking
at the instruemnts. There no sensation is; there only instrument is.


Wrong, fjukkwit.


Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

gatt writes:

That funny buffeting feeling and mushiness of controls on a long
apprach might tell you to that it's time to get your eyes off the
glide slope needle and scan the instrument panel.

If you are flying IFR competently, you're already doing this. If you
wait for a sensation to tell you do to do it, you'll die.

Nope.,

Wrong

Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Steve Foley writes:

POT - KETTLE - BLACK

What extreme examples have I used to justify flying by instruments in
IMC?


That isn't what you are doing. you have no idea of what you are doing.


Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

gatt writes:

If I want the opinion of a non-pilot video-game addict with
absolutely zero hours of actual flight training or time, I'll ask
you.

I don't qualify. Besides, I'll offer my opinion without prompting.

Nobody said anything about "rules," but I did in fact quote the
authoritative FAA Airplane Flying Handbook repeatedly, and you chose
to ignore all of that. Funny how that works out. Anytime anybody
cites something authoritative, you ignore it.

Misinterpretations of the book will not help you in the air.

Don't presume to talk to instrument-rated pilots about flying IMC.

Why not? Some of them have dangerous ideas.


No, they don;t. you do.


Bertie

A Lieberman writes:

Then for future reference, you shouldn't comment on something you are
not familiar with.

I was commenting on aircraft in general. They don't all use exactly the same
instruments.

If you plan to challenge any pilot ESPECIALLY ME, at least read the
post.

I discuss aviation, not personalities.

There are many human factors that come into play that does not exist
sitting in front of a flat screen monitor. How do I know this you
ask? I downloaded all the weather data afterwards and re-flew my
mission failing the vacuum system. And believe it or not, I
identified my problem QUICKER in my real airplane. Why? Because I
had a sensory input that gave me an alert saying something is amiss.
In MSFS, I ended up oscillating in my altitude because I didn't have
sensory input. I was chasing the AI and DG and I was expecting the
vacuum failure!!!!!

In IFR, you rely on instruments, not sensations.

You might want to try practicing IFR in MSFS until you can control the plane
adequately without any sensations at all. Then you'll know that you're
relying entirely on instruments.

Oscillations in IMC does not bode well for traffic separation which is
a safety issue NOT DISPLAYED IN MSFS.

Fly on VATSIM with MSFS.

In the real world, parts break in flight.

In the real world, people who depend on physical movements in IMC flight don't
survive.

You asked questions and then challenge my experiences, and quite
frankly, you flopped big time in this thread.

No. You simply disagree with me. It's your life, not mine.

Bottom line, as stated earlier, it was the training I received that
got me through this "event". Talking with other pilots at my own
airport, they were amazed I didn't declare an emergency.

Failing instruments under IFR in IMC qualifies as an emergency.

Truth be known, by me NOT feeling something that should have been felt
was the ticket in me making this NOT an emergency.

See above.

A vacuum failure with the appropriate training is not a life
threatening emergency to the well trained IFR pilot.

It is a no-go situation, which requires landing at the nearest airport, and
it's entirely acceptable to declare an emergency, although that remains at
pilot discretion.

As you can see, NOT EVERYTHING IS IN THE TEXTBOOKS.

True. Some things are in the NTSB database.

The text books do not tell you that you can use sensory feelings in
IFR flight. IN REALITY, you can!

No, you cannot. If you think otherwise, your next flight into IMC may be your
last.

I choose to use them as a tool in the verification of the response of
an instrument.

You're making a dangerous mistake. You don't use sensations to verify
instruments. You don't use sensations at all. You trust your instruments.
You detect instrument failures by correlation of all information from all
instruments. If all instruments fail, you're doomed.

Books won't tell you that, but the real world pilots will as being
displayed in this thread.

Real-world pilots who believe this are much more likely to die in the air.
The books don't say it because it's incorrect.

Instruments fail. To blindly trust them as you would like to have me
do will make me a statistic.

In IFR, you blindly trust your instruments. The only way to detect a failure
of one instrument is by comparing it with other instruments.

So, I will continue to stick by my original statement. TRUST BUT
VERIFY. You do this, you have a chance in the real IMC world.

As I've said, it's your life. Do what you want.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

A Lieberman writes:

Then for future reference, you shouldn't comment on something you are
not familiar with.

I was commenting on aircraft in general. They don't all use exactly
the same instruments.

If you plan to challenge any pilot ESPECIALLY ME, at least read the
post.

I discuss aviation, not personalities.

There are many human factors that come into play that does not exist
sitting in front of a flat screen monitor. How do I know this you
ask? I downloaded all the weather data afterwards and re-flew my
mission failing the vacuum system. And believe it or not, I
identified my problem QUICKER in my real airplane. Why? Because I
had a sensory input that gave me an alert saying something is amiss.
In MSFS, I ended up oscillating in my altitude because I didn't have
sensory input. I was chasing the AI and DG and I was expecting the
vacuum failure!!!!!

In IFR, you rely on instruments, not sensations.

You might want to try practicing IFR in MSFS until you can control the
plane adequately without any sensations at all. Then you'll know that
you're relying entirely on instruments.

Oscillations in IMC does not bode well for traffic separation which
is a safety issue NOT DISPLAYED IN MSFS.

Fly on VATSIM with MSFS.

In the real world, parts break in flight.

In the real world, people who depend on physical movements in IMC
flight don't survive.

You asked questions and then challenge my experiences, and quite
frankly, you flopped big time in this thread.

No. You simply disagree with me. It's your life, not mine.

Bottom line, as stated earlier, it was the training I received that
got me through this "event". Talking with other pilots at my own
airport, they were amazed I didn't declare an emergency.

Failing instruments under IFR in IMC qualifies as an emergency.

Truth be known, by me NOT feeling something that should have been
felt was the ticket in me making this NOT an emergency.

See above.

A vacuum failure with the appropriate training is not a life
threatening emergency to the well trained IFR pilot.

It is a no-go situation, which requires landing at the nearest
airport, and it's entirely acceptable to declare an emergency,
although that remains at pilot discretion.

As you can see, NOT EVERYTHING IS IN THE TEXTBOOKS.

True. Some things are in the NTSB database.

The text books do not tell you that you can use sensory feelings in
IFR flight. IN REALITY, you can!

No, you cannot. If you think otherwise, your next flight into IMC may
be your last.

I choose to use them as a tool in the verification of the response of
an instrument.

You're making a dangerous mistake. You don't use sensations to verify
instruments. You don't use sensations at all. You trust your
instruments. You detect instrument failures by correlation of all
information from all instruments. If all instruments fail, you're
doomed.

Books won't tell you that, but the real world pilots will as being
displayed in this thread.

Real-world pilots who believe this are much more likely to die in the
air. The books don't say it because it's incorrect.

Instruments fail. To blindly trust them as you would like to have me
do will make me a statistic.

In IFR, you blindly trust your instruments. The only way to detect a
failure of one instrument is by comparing it with other instruments.


Wrong.

Bertie

On May 19, 8:08*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

An alert IFR pilot is constantly scanning his instruments, so funny feelings
are irrelevant.

WRONG

Viperdoc writes:

Anthony, were all of your pronouncements based upon your instrument
training? Who was your instructor? What did you get on the written exam?
How much time do you have in IMC (real, not simulated?)

All of my statements are based on study.

Which of my statements do you disagree with, if any, and why?