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 |
#131
|
|||
|
|||
Mxsmanic , IFR sensations, and some other stuff
On May 19, 9:21*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
BDS writes: what do you think you will notice first and probably before anything else, and what will you do about it? It will probably sound different if it fails. *In some cases engine indicators on the instrument panel may reveal a problem first. If anything goes wrong with the engine(s), I'll land at the next available airport. ANSWER HIS QUESTION ABOVE. WHICH ENGINE INDICATORS I am sure curious myself on what you say. Or is it you do not know aircraft systems????????????????????? |
#132
|
|||
|
|||
Mxsmanic , IFR sensations, and some other stuff
A Lieberman writes:
ANSWER HIS QUESTION ABOVE. WHICH ENGINE INDICATORS For a piston airplane, tachometer, manifold pressure, CHT and EGT, engine monitor if I have one (I do in the Bonanza). |
#133
|
|||
|
|||
Mxsmanic , IFR sensations, and some other stuff
Well, let's remember it takes one example to refute an absolutist
argument. There is not a rated pilot here who will argue with this: In IMC or VMC, he or she, relies very much on the sensation of the reduction of yoke pressure for trimming the airplane. We of course depend on all available inputs to determine the attitude of the airplane, but we trim entirely by feel. One could also invoke a Clintonism technique: it depends on what you mean by physical sensations -- eyes are a sensory input, too. On May 19, 9:04 pm, Mxsmanic wrote: Tina writes: It seems to me the better pilots use all the clues they have available, the physiological ones as well as those presented by the panel, to maintain a sense of the airplane's attitude. Not under IFR. Under IFR, only the instruments count. It worries me that so many pilots here are trying so desperately to justify an extremely dangerous practice. Dudley is being very diplomatic. Under IFR, sensations don't count at all, ever. Only instruments count. Countless pilots have died because they refused to accept this. All training and literature ceaselessly emphasize the importance of this. And yet some people still argue against it, because they want to believe that they can fly by the seat of their pants in all conditions. These pilots should take care to always remain VFR in VMC, because it is clear that they would endanger themselves under IFR in IMC. We react to 'bumps' and the like long before the instruments indicate their effect. Not if you are doing things right. First, you've been scanning the instruments constantly, so any change they indicate is immediately noticed. Second, the bumps must be ignored, so there is nothing to react to when they occur. No instrument in our airplane will tell us we are picking up ice, but a flashlight out along the leading edge will. That is not a sensation in the context of this discussion. Sensations here clearly mean physical movements, and people here are trying to justify using physical movement sensations in the aircraft to fly it, while giving the instruments only secondary priority. That's not the right way to fly IFR. At night no instrument will tell us we are in a cloud, but the anti-collision lights will. Under IFR, you don't need to know. Your instruments tell you where you are and where you're going. If you're in IMC, you obviously have visible moisture, and you can check the temperature to see if you're at risk for icing. When getting close to MDA, and including the windscreen in your instrument scan so you can transition to visual is not an instrumentation issue. You are not at MDA during most of the flight. If you can see outside, you're not in IMC. If you are in IMC, you use only your instruments. If it were not for the physical effects, the wind noise, the way the control feel changes with airspeed, and the like, we might just as well be flying sims. If you don't like flying by instruments, then fly only VFR in VMC. If you cannot get away from the desire to depend on physical sensations to fly, don't go anywhere near IMC. Yes, it's a lot like a sim, the only difference being that in a sim you feel nothing (unless it's a motion sim), and in real life you feel something. However, whether you feel nothing or something, you still fly by instruments, period. Except of course sims don't take us to other destinations, and it's the going to some other place that really drives our particular use of general aviation. If you don't rely on your instruments in IMC, you'll never reach those other destinations. |
#134
|
|||
|
|||
Mxsmanic , IFR sensations, and some other stuff
"Tina" wrote in message ... Well, let's remember it takes one example to refute an absolutist argument. There is not a rated pilot here who will argue with this: In IMC or VMC, he or she, relies very much on the sensation of the reduction of yoke pressure for trimming the airplane. We of course depend on all available inputs to determine the attitude of the airplane, but we trim entirely by feel. One could also invoke a Clintonism technique: it depends on what you mean by physical sensations -- eyes are a sensory input, too. Very well put. This whole thread sounds like nothing more than a word game, fueled by nit pickers. Who flies anything, especially IMC, without making use of all input. If the sound of the engine is laboring, the wind noise is low and the controls are mush - a ASI reading 150 knots should be ignored. Much to do about nothing. Just a bunch of folks feeding MX. |
#135
|
|||
|
|||
Mxsmanic , IFR sensations, and some other stuff
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 in my sim, in zero visibility, and I lived. Obviously I had no physical sensations to count upon, and yet somehow I managed to get to my destination and land. All you did is set the autopilot and stroke your joy stick. And I'm not talking about the joy stick attached to your computer, moron. |
#136
|
|||
|
|||
Mxsmanic , IFR sensations, and some other stuff
Mxsmanic wrote in
: 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. You don't know **** from shinola about any REAL aircraft. |
#137
|
|||
|
|||
Mxsmanic , IFR sensations, and some other stuff
Mxsmanic wrote in
: You are not at MDA during most of the flight. If you can see outside, you're not in IMC. If you are in IMC, you use only your instruments. Wrong again, dip ****. You don't even know the definition of IMC. Go back to your simulator groups, asshole. |
#138
|
|||
|
|||
Mxsmanic , IFR sensations, and some other stuff
On May 20, 11:05*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
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 in my sim, in zero visibility, and I lived. Obviously I had no physical sensations to count upon, and yet somehow I managed to get to my destination and land. Next time you go there Mx do you reckon you could get me a souvenir cloth badge, Ive been collecting them for years, and I havent got KLAX. I'll pay of course and add $5 for your trouble. Was that the 2 or 4 seat sim? Terry |
#139
|
|||
|
|||
Mxsmanic , IFR sensations, and some other stuff
"Maxwell" luv2^fly99@cox.^net wrote in
: "Tina" wrote in message news:eaef0ada-6038-4a16-9f1c-d9dfeecf6bb5 @w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com.. . Well, let's remember it takes one example to refute an absolutist argument. There is not a rated pilot here who will argue with this: In IMC or VMC, he or she, relies very much on the sensation of the reduction of yoke pressure for trimming the airplane. We of course depend on all available inputs to determine the attitude of the airplane, but we trim entirely by feel. One could also invoke a Clintonism technique: it depends on what you mean by physical sensations -- eyes are a sensory input, too. Very well put. This whole thread sounds like nothing more than a word game, fueled by nit pickers. Who flies anything, especially IMC, without making use of all input. How would you know, wannabe boi? Bertie |
#140
|
|||
|
|||
Mxsmanic , IFR sensations, and some other stuff
Mxsmanic wrote in
: BDS writes: In your simulated Baron, what is the first indication you are likely to notice if an engine begins to fail, regardless of the reason for the failure? I am not talking about after the failure, but rather as the failure begins to occur - what do you think you will notice first and probably before anything else, and what will you do about it? It will probably sound different if it fails. In some cases engine indicators on the instrument panel may reveal a problem first. If anything goes wrong with the engine(s), I'll land at the next available airport. What a maroooooon. Bertie |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Apology re mxsmanic | terry | Piloting | 96 | February 16th 08 05:17 PM |
I saw Mxsmanic on TV | Clear Prop | Piloting | 8 | February 14th 07 01:18 AM |
Mxsmanic | gwengler | Piloting | 30 | January 11th 07 03:42 AM |
Getting rid of MXSMANIC | [email protected] | Piloting | 33 | December 8th 06 11:26 PM |
Feeling aircraft sensations | Ramapriya | Piloting | 17 | January 12th 06 10:15 AM |