Why don't voice radio communications use FM?

What ever happened to the old distinction that was made between
Gliders and Sail planes?

What is the distinction?

Jose
--
There are more ways to skin a cat than there are cats.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Mxsmanic wrote:
"Grumman-581" writes:

And how many times have you crashed your little simulator game?

Occasionally.

Guess what... You don't usually get multiple attempts at life when
you're flying a REAL aircraft...

That's one reason why I don't fly real aircraft.

And the rest of us are thankful for that.

But I'm curious...what makes you an expert on radio communications when
you don't even fly?

On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 00:40:48 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Dave Stadt writes:

The only way to fly IFR or VFRfor hat matter is in an airplane. You are
simulating IFR, you are not by the longest stretch of the imagination flying
IFR.

The I in IFR stands for instruments. You fly just by reading
instruments. In fact, using a simulator that has no motion or scenery
is a good test for IFR flight; if you can't fly without feeling
movement or looking out the window, you don't know how to fly IFR.

No, you can't. Feeling the movement is entirely the point. If you
could fly the airplane by reference to the instruments without feeling
movement, then instrument training would be easy. But it doesn't work
like that in the real world. The airplane inherently imparts
accelerations that are inconsistent with the indications of the
instruments. Part of the training process is learning to ignore the
sensations and trust the instruments. It can be very difficult for the
untrained pilot to make this mental adjustment in the seconds before
making a crater in the ground, which is why getting the training
beforehand is so important.

RK Henry

On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 20:15:40 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

B A R R Y writes:

Sorry, but you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. The
ability to pull in a signal is important enough that radios
incorporate a squelch defeat feature to open the squelch all the way.

That is common for all sorts of radios.

If you ever decide to learn to fly an actual airplane, which is much
more fun than any simulation, you'd see what I mean.

I prefer simulation, for a number of reasons.

Simming is enjoyable and I do a fair amount of it as time and other
constraints prevent me from flying as much as I did in the past, or
would prefer to do.


Real flying is fantastic, exponentially better than simulations (real
is better than virtual in everything I've ever done), so I genuinely hope
that you will!

The parts of flying that I like can be mostly simulated with 100%
accuracy, at much lower cost and much higher convenience than a real
aircraft. For example, I like to fly IFR, and I scarcely need a real
aircraft for that; even a full-motion simulator isn't required,

Although the sim can do a very nice job of ... well... simulating an
IFR cross country and even approach there are a number of things
missing, part of which are psychological and part physical. I love
rolling into a steep turn and feeling 2Gs pulling me down. I love
doing a loop (not in the Deb) while maintaining positive G forces all
the way around. It's almost as if the earth makes a loop around me.

I have a great respect for the airplane, the weather, ATC, and a
certain amount of unpredictability in all. I've had ATC give me a
vector for traffic avoidance and then forget me. I've had them clear
me for a circle to land right in front of departing traffic, and I've
had them tell me to follow the plane ahead when I couldn't see the
wingtips on the Deb. I've also flown directly over automated stations
reporting clear and I was in solid IMC.

It's difficult to describe the feeling of breaking out of the clouds
just above MDA in rain to find the runway right where the instruments
said it would be after a long cross country. The knowledge that if
the runway isn't visible at the MAP I will have to "go around" and
either try again, or go to some other airport is a part of the
challenge I find exhilarating.

Also IRL (for those who don't sim that is sim language for "In real
life") ATC makes mistakes, pilots make mistakes and it's up to you to
maintain situational awareness. You have to know if what ATC just told
you is correct, or what you just told ATC is going to tell them what
they want and need to know.

I love flying VFR on clear days when it seems you can see forever, but
those days are rare here in the central Great Lakes. One of the most
beautiful trips I ever took was IFR where I ended up between layers.
It looked like a scene out of a sci-fi movie with the clouds above and
below tied together with randomly spaced columns of cloud, Then there
were the random small clouds floating around while the whole scene was
lit with a fluorescent green light.

although it would be nice.

I guess the easiest way to sum it up: I like siming, but I love flying
IRL.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 20:20:42 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote in :

If you want to fly military aircraft, you're out of luck
unless you started at age 20 and ...

Not really:

http://www.combataircraft.com/aircraft/tl39.aspx
Designed and built by Aero Vodochody in Czechoslovakia, the L-39C
is a tandem-seat, single engine jet warbird, originally designed
to be a pilot trainer. The L-39 Albatros has been flown by
numerous Eastern European air forces since 1974. Many L-39s are
now owned privately throughout the world. The L-39 is considered
to be one of the most popular jet warbirds in the world.


http://aviasales.com/
General information about L-39 Albatross aircraft
Basic and advanced trainer, the largest jet training fleet around
the world in service. Manufactured byAero Vodochody, Czech
Republic.

L-39 main features:

Excellent handling characteristics within the whole flight
envelope
Operation capability on grass strips and semi-prepared airstrips
Excellent visibility from both cockpits
Easy to maintain and service
Low operational cost
High reliability
Model L-39C is best for basic and advanced jet training

The practical suitability of L-39 aircraft for training tasks is
demonstrated daily in military service of more than 30 Air Forces
in Europe, Asia, Africa and America. The entire L-39 fleet,
covering more than 2,800 delivered L-39 aircraft worldwide, has
accumulated over 4,000,000 flying hours.

Information from official Aero Vodochody web site



Aircrafts for sale

1981, L-39C Albatros, 132131 for information about the price
please contact us
view detailed information


1981, L-39C Albatros, 132019 for information about the price
please contact us

This is a nice L-39C Albatross aircraft. It was manufactured in
1981, and was used by Ukrainian army as a trainer. It was well
maintained by military personel, which were trained by manufactured.

view detailed information


1982, L-39C Albatros, 232208 for information about the price
please contact us

S O L D

on 07/28/06
Delivered to USA 06/12/06

This is a nice L-39C Albatross aircraft. It was manufactured in
1982, and was used by Ukrainian army as a trainer. It was well
maintained by military personel, which were trained by manufactured.

view detailed information


1982, L-39C Albatros, 232201 for information about the price
please contact us

This is a nice L-39C Albatross aircraft. It was manufactured in
1982, and was used by Ukrainian army as a trainer. It was well
maintained by military personel, which were trained by manufactured.

view detailed information

"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
...
Low operational cost

Compared to other military jet aircraft... Assuming $3 per gallon for Jet-A,
you're probably looking at a best economical fuel consumption of about $1
per nm... 130 gph at 360 kts at 25K ft, for what I understand... Damn, that
even makes my pickup's fuel consumption look good... grin

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
The I in IFR stands for instruments. You fly just by reading
instruments. In fact, using a simulator that has no motion or scenery
is a good test for IFR flight; if you can't fly without feeling
movement or looking out the window, you don't know how to fly IFR.

No, real instrument flying is learning to believe what the instruments are
telling you even though your body is telling you something completely
different... I remember in one of my first instrument lessons (in actual
solid IMC) that even though I had the instruments perfectly centered for
straight and level flight, my butt was telling that I was in a turn... If I
had followed my feelings, I would have probably ended up in a descending
spiral...

Grumman-581 wrote:
"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
The I in IFR stands for instruments. You fly just by reading
instruments. In fact, using a simulator that has no motion or scenery
is a good test for IFR flight; if you can't fly without feeling
movement or looking out the window, you don't know how to fly IFR.

No, real instrument flying is learning to believe what the instruments are
telling you even though your body is telling you something completely
different... I remember in one of my first instrument lessons (in actual
solid IMC) that even though I had the instruments perfectly centered for
straight and level flight, my butt was telling that I was in a turn... If I
had followed my feelings, I would have probably ended up in a descending
spiral...


Are you really wasting energy trying to explain this to him?

Emily writes:

But I'm curious...what makes you an expert on radio communications when
you don't even fly?

Nothing. Who has called me an expert?

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

B A R R Y writes:

You're not "flying". You're playing a computer game.

It's odd how many real pilots become soaked with sweat while playing
such computer "games."

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