Mxsmanic , IFR sensations, and some other stuff

gatt writes:

The physical sensations allow a pilot to be proactive rather than
reactive.

Not under IFR.

gatt writes:

The sensations are immediate.

Not always. And they are often wrong.

gatt writes:

Not necessary. I completed an Instrument Proficiency Check three weeks
ago. I wasn't even due for it, just did it anyway. Six different
approaches, radar vectoring, unusual attitude recovery, etc.

What were the weather conditions?

On May 20, 2:27*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
A Lieberman writes:
Hopefully what I say above clears it up. *I really think we are on the
same page, just a matter of how I am wording it :-)

You'll be on the same page when you admit that you are wrong.

WRONG.

Difference of opinion does not make me or Dudley wrong. It's a
discussion.

What makes us both right is THE GOAL OF THE ultimate outcome and that
is a safe landing.

Of course knowing what MSFS is like AND flying a real airplane is
like, you will never know.

GUESS THAT MAKES YOU WRONG.

On May 20, 2:31*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

IMC that does not include impaired visibility is a legal construct and not
relevant to this discussion.

WRONG.

On May 20, 2:33*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

If you disagree with what I say, cite the parts with which you don't agree,
and explain why.

I DID! YOU FAIL TO READ MY POSTS.

On May 20, 2:34*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

Not always. *And they are often wrong.

WRONG. If you disagree with me, tell me why with real time flying
experiences.

MSFS does not give you physical feedback so you have no foundation to
say the above.

On May 19, 9:05*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
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.

ANSWER HIS QUESTIONS ABOVE!!!!!!!!!!!!

There are 4 questions to be answered.

A Lieberman writes:

Difference of opinion does not make me or Dudley wrong. It's a
discussion.

If it were only different wordings for the same concept, there would be no
problem. But there are fundamental differences in what the two of you
believe.

What makes us both right is THE GOAL OF THE ultimate outcome and that
is a safe landing.

What makes Dudley right is his understand of the importance of relying on
instruments and not sensations.

A Lieberman writes:

WRONG. If you disagree with me, tell me why with real time flying
experiences.

What's wrong with just pointing out the facts.

MSFS does not give you physical feedback so you have no foundation to
say the above.

I don't need physical feedback in MSFS, because IFR is all about flying by
instruments alone.