Anthony, question about IFR / IMC

writes:

If the real pilots flying real airplanes with real IFR ratings don't
fly exactly like someone who has never flown a real airplane under
any conditions says, they will all die.

If real pilots don't heed the wisdom that I am simply repeating from other
sources, yes, they will sometimes die.

The interesting thing about this newsgroup (and many other similar venues) is
that I can copy and paste statements literatim out of respected sources and
people here will reject them simply because they see my name on the post. It
proves that they are so obsessed with me that they cannot think objectively.

If I didn't have a strong conscience, I'd be tempted to take advantage of
this.

On Aug 13, 10:43*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
If the real pilots flying real airplanes with real IFR ratings don't
fly exactly like someone who has never flown a real airplane under
any conditions says, they will all die.

If real pilots don't heed the wisdom that I am simply repeating from other
sources, yes, they will sometimes die.

The interesting thing about this newsgroup (and many other similar venues) is
that I can copy and paste statements literatim out of respected sources and
people here will reject them simply because they see my name on the post. *It
proves that they are so obsessed with me that they cannot think objectively.

If I didn't have a strong conscience, I'd be tempted to take advantage of
this.

I think if you posted valid information it would not be as challenged
as the crap you have been posting. Not by me, in any event.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Ricky writes:

Flying in IMC with visual reference is not dangerous.

That's what John Kennedy thought.


Puleeeze... inexperience flying a Saratoga in marginal VFR results in
exactly what happened. He was simply not competent in flying that mission.
This was a case of a person flying having more money than brains.

--
Regards, BobF.

On Aug 13, 9:43 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
If the real pilots flying real airplanes with real IFR ratings don't
fly exactly like someone who has never flown a real airplane under
any conditions says, they will all die.

If real pilots don't heed the wisdom that I am simply repeating from other
sources, yes, they will sometimes die.

The interesting thing about this newsgroup (and many other similar venues) is
that I can copy and paste statements literatim out of respected sources and
people here will reject them simply because they see my name on the post. It
proves that they are so obsessed with me that they cannot think objectively.

If I didn't have a strong conscience, I'd be tempted to take advantage of
this.

The problem with information gleaned from the internet is the good is
mixed in with the bad and knowing which is which is difficult. You
(MXSMANIC) have no credibility based on your lack of flying
credentials so when you answer a flying question, your response has no
credibility and exacerbates the problem with internet information.
Now if you answered and credited a reliable source for the
information, it might be useful but I doubt you will. Just parroting
things you read somewhere and are unwilling or unable to cite where
means it is worthless at best and dangerous if believed at worst, Do
everyone a favor and STFU.

writes:

I think if you posted valid information it would not be as challenged
as the crap you have been posting.

If it's valid in the book that it comes from, it remains so when posted here.

What exactly is your quarrel with relying on instruments?

150flivver writes:

The problem with information gleaned from the internet is the good is
mixed in with the bad and knowing which is which is difficult. You
(MXSMANIC) have no credibility based on your lack of flying
credentials so when you answer a flying question, your response has no
credibility and exacerbates the problem with internet information.
Now if you answered and credited a reliable source for the
information, it might be useful but I doubt you will.

The information I provide is either correct, or it isn't. It doesn't matter
whether I'm personally credible or not; people should not be judging the
utility and correctness of what I say on the basis of my credibility alone.
If I copy and paste something from a highly reliable source, that information
remains valid even though my name is on the post.

The difficulty some people have is separating their emotional reactions to
others from objective reality.

Just parroting
things you read somewhere and are unwilling or unable to cite where
means it is worthless at best and dangerous if believed at worst ...

If it's correct, it's not dangerous.

Mxsmanic wrote:

The interesting thing about this newsgroup (and many other similar venues) is
that I can copy and paste statements literatim out of respected sources and
people here will reject them simply because they see my name on the post. It
proves that they are so obsessed with me that they cannot think objectively.

So where is the copy and paste from the regulations that confirms your
statement that one is legally required to be on instruments when in IMC?


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On Aug 13, 9:43*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

The interesting thing about this newsgroup (and many other similar venues) is
that I can copy and paste statements literatim out of respected sources

Anthony, a request.
Cite one, single "respected source" that you have used.

Ricky

On Aug 13, 9:43*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

The interesting thing about this newsgroup (and many other similar venues) is
that I can copy and paste statements literatim out of respected sources and
people here will reject them

Oh, hey, Anthony, remember me? I'm the instrument student. I really
appreciate the way you've been helping me.
Would you do me a favor and tell me what respected source you've been
using so I can go and learn more from it?

Thanks!

Darrell

On Aug 13, 9:40*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

Ricky writes:
Flying in IMC with visual reference is not dangerous.

That's what John Kennedy thought.

Was John Kennedy instrument rated?
Anyone, seriously.

Ricky