Visual STARs

It doesn't seem reasonable to me that this information should be discussed
with someone that obviously doesn't fly.......

......duh....

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
If a STAR is marked VISUAL (FUBAR VISUAL APPROACH), and shows
hand-drawn paths and landmarks instead of navaids, does that mean it's
intended specifically for VFR, or for both VFR and IFR, or what? I'm
a bit confused by it because I thought all STARs were instrument
approaches. At the same time, I've heard ATC clear commercial flights
for the XYZ VISUAL approach, which implies that as long as conditions
permit a visual approach, it's okay for IFR, even though it gives only
landmarks on the ground.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

dlevy writes:

It doesn't seem reasonable to me that this information should be discussed
with someone that obviously doesn't fly.......

Is it top secret? Do you have an answer?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Mxsmanic wrote:
dlevy writes:

It doesn't seem reasonable to me that this information should be discussed
with someone that obviously doesn't fly.......

Is it top secret? Do you have an answer?

Yes and I'm not going to share it with you. If you would like to find
out the answer, read the books and follow the suggestions given many
times here for you to learn it.

Mxsmanic wrote:
dlevy writes:


It doesn't seem reasonable to me that this information should be discussed
with someone that obviously doesn't fly.......


Is it top secret? Do you have an answer?


It is not a secret. You will find almost all of the answers to your
questions from here. Bookmark this URL.

http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...ns/atpubs/aim/

All pilots should have a hard copy and I have mine, although I will
admit that it is out of date. But, I do have access to the web.

Just remember that Google is your friend.

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
CPCEL-IA
KSWI

-----Original Message-----
From: dlevy ]
Posted At: Monday, January 29, 2007 3:58 PM
Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr
Conversation: Visual STARs
Subject: Visual STARs

It doesn't seem reasonable to me that this information should be
discussed
with someone that obviously doesn't fly.......

.....duh....


You know, I was thinking the same thing. All of this information is
available in the AIM and other sources, but it would make good sense for
someone who wanted to appear to have been taught (therefore screened) to
fly in the US to get the "real world" info from active pilots.

-----Original Message-----
From: Ross ]
Posted At: Monday, January 29, 2007 4:36 PM
Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr
Conversation: Visual STARs
Subject: Visual STARs

....
It is not a secret. You will find almost all of the answers to your
questions from here. Bookmark this URL.


http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraff...tions/atpubs/a
im
/

All pilots should have a hard copy and I have mine, although I will
admit that it is out of date. But, I do have access to the web.

Just remember that Google is your friend.

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
CPCEL-IA
KSWI

With the added responsibility placed on CFIs and schools to screen their
clients, I wonder if Mr. dlevy doesn't have a valid point?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jim Carter wrote:
From: dlevy ]
Posted At: Monday, January 29, 2007 3:58 PM
Posted To: rec.aviation.ifr

It doesn't seem reasonable to me that this information should be
discussed
with someone that obviously doesn't fly.......

.....duh....


You know, I was thinking the same thing. All of this information is
available in the AIM and other sources, but it would make good sense for
someone who wanted to appear to have been taught (therefore screened) to
fly in the US to get the "real world" info from active pilots.

Funny thing is, even those in the flightsimming world[1] have told
him the same thing that active pilots have said: RTFM. Yet he still
either a) refuses to do so, or b) doesn't take their knowledge and
experience to mind, considers it wrong. Yet he isn't getting respect in
neither world.

BL.

[1] Pilots and ATC in the flightsimming world who happen to be real
world pilots and controllers.

- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFFvosByBkZmuMZ8L8RArAOAJ9WoHSNpuSJUQOdz9TYsX j6q2UirgCcCfeu
G90WJXxY7HvSrrmi5B9v/DA=
=DWvA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Ross writes:

Just remember that Google is your friend.

Unless pilots on the Internet.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Jim Carter writes:

With the added responsibility placed on CFIs and schools to screen their
clients, I wonder if Mr. dlevy doesn't have a valid point?

If so, you may as well shut down the newsgroup.

Security by obscurity doesn't work.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Jim Carter writes:

You know, I was thinking the same thing. All of this information is
available in the AIM and other sources, but it would make good sense for
someone who wanted to appear to have been taught (therefore screened) to
fly in the US to get the "real world" info from active pilots.

You must be joking. "Active pilots?" Nobody here is for real as far
as I'm concerned; I've been on USENET too long for that. You read and
then you verify. The person who answers you might or might not be a
pilot--you cannot trust what he says about that, and in any case it
doesn't matter, as long as the answer is right (or if the answer is
wrong). And so many pilots on these newsgroups have already been
wrong, in a way blatant enough to be obvious even to me, that I
wouldn't trust anything that anyone here says exclusively.

I suppose if someone wanted to appear just as ill-informed as some
real-world GA pilots, trying to get an idea of their mistakes might be
a motivation for coming here. But stupidity and ignorance know no
frontiers, so it wouldn't make anyone seem more like a US pilot.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.