How many instruments can I use for VFR?

In article ,
A Lieberma wrote:

Cirrus,

Check out the posting history of Mx. You will see very quickly

A. He has never flown a plane
B. Never plans to fly a plane

C. is a troll

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

Mxsmanic wrote:

BT writes:


both


Well, now I have answers of none and both. One of these answers must
be incorrect.

One of them is.

On Sat, 04 Nov 2006 16:45:47 +0100, Mxsmanic wrote:

both

Well, now I have answers of none and both. One of these answers must
be incorrect.

well, the correct answer is 42.

as always.


#m
--
Enemy Combatant http://itsnotallbad.com/
... because a President says so ...

Save your quality replies for those that will fully appreciate your input.

Allen

Allen and others,

Thanks for thinking of me
I had no idea that this guy was going to waste my info. That was 10
minutes I could have spent doing something else...I'm new in these
forums, so thanks guys!

Cirrus writes:

All these "replies", and I can see how you are still confused. It's
been a while since my Prive checkride, but be expected to demonstrate
pilotage, dead reckoning, and use of navaids. Notice on the PTS that
both areas are listed.

I looked in the FAA guide and it didn't unconfuse me much.

Flying for any distance with just landmarks or by dead reckoning would
be extremely awkward and potentially tiring (especially for dead
reckoning). I use something similar to that in many VFR flights, but
I still resort to VORs. With VORs you can mentally figure out things
and plot your course without having to do much in the way of
calculation. For example, in my last flight this afternoon I just
looked at the sectional and saw that when I was about 23 miles west of
the Imperial VOR on its 255 radial, I could turn to 295° towards the
Julian VOR and go northwest on the latter's 115 radial. No calculator
needed for that. Doing it by landmarks would be a lot more
troublesome.

The reality is that it will depend on your
examiner. Most VFR cross country flight will involve some combination
of navigation skills- you have to get on that airway somehow, right?
On your checkride, note your time when you takeoff, and explain to the
examiner how you are getting from the runway onto course. Make all your
turns from point A to point B, and update your flight log times as you
go.This might satisy him/her that you have the skills. You are the one
planning your cross country, so make sure you know what you have
planned- examiners have a sixth sense for knowing what you don't
know,lol.

Are examiners smarter than instructors? Are examiners experienced
pilots, or just bureaucrats, or what?

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

Gary Drescher writes:

Just to clarify: Mx has said repeatedly that he has no intention of ever
flying a plane (even for a single intro flight, let alone a checkride).
Hence, the terse replies to his question.

How does that change the answer?

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

"Cirrus" wrote in
oups.com:

Thanks for thinking of me
I had no idea that this guy was going to waste my info. That was 10
minutes I could have spent doing something else...I'm new in these
forums, so thanks guys!

Not a problem. Keep contributing *smile* as there are pleny (like myself)
that do appreciate the time spend.

Now if I survive the cost of my current annual and get back in the air
myself.... The ugly word of corrosion came up.....

Allen

Don't sweat it Jamie. If you're at all interested in the psychology of human
behavior, the whole thing...the postings and the answers to the postings
are a hoot and a half :-)
The best way to handle it is simply to lay back and watch in the background.
It actually makes my day really. I know many of the people who post here
from many years of exposure to their personalities and their knowledge of
aviation, which in many cases is quite extensive. The fun part is to watch
the thread start, then from simply viewing the names of those who respond,
take a mental shot at what the responders will be saying BEFORE looking at
the response. I'm getting quite good at it. My wife (the psychologist) is
REALLY good at it.
I have to admit however in my defense, that she so far is two "dinners at
the Outback"and a bottle of Jack Daniels down :-))))
Dudley Henriques


"Cirrus" wrote in message
oups.com...



Save your quality replies for those that will fully appreciate your
input.

Allen

Allen and others,

Thanks for thinking of me
I had no idea that this guy was going to waste my info. That was 10
minutes I could have spent doing something else...I'm new in these
forums, so thanks guys!

I love the replies that point out how MX is such a waste of time, while if
you did a count of the posts, a vast majority of them do nothing more than
jump down MX's throat. Talk about a waste of time.

But you're definitely right...it is entertaining. And I've even figured out
how to make my filters work.;-)

mike

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
...
Don't sweat it Jamie. If you're at all interested in the psychology of
human behavior, the whole thing...the postings and the answers to the
postings are a hoot and a half :-)
The best way to handle it is simply to lay back and watch in the
background.
It actually makes my day really. I know many of the people who post here
from many years of exposure to their personalities and their knowledge of
aviation, which in many cases is quite extensive. The fun part is to watch
the thread start, then from simply viewing the names of those who respond,
take a mental shot at what the responders will be saying BEFORE looking at
the response. I'm getting quite good at it. My wife (the psychologist) is
REALLY good at it.
I have to admit however in my defense, that she so far is two "dinners at
the Outback"and a bottle of Jack Daniels down :-))))

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
"Cirrus" wrote in message
oups.com...
All these "replies", and I can see how you are still confused...
Hope this helps. Good luck and have fun on the checkride!

Just to clarify: Mx has said repeatedly that he has no intention of ever
flying a plane (even for a single intro flight, let alone a checkride).
Hence, the terse replies to his question.

How does that change the answer?

It changes the motivation to provide an answer. Your wording gave the
impression that you have an impending checkride, thus tricking a helpful
person into spending time assisting you with it.