Confusion about when it's my navigation, and when it's ATC

Peter R. wrote:
Sam Spade wrote:


I'd add the caveat that the value of listening to tower or TRACON,
although, great, does not give the flavor of listening to center sectors
adjacent to busy terminal airspace. For instance, all the descent stuff
that might include PD clearances will occur on Los Angeles Center
frequenices, high and low sectors, not on SoCal frequencies.


Not sure if you are assuming that LiveATC.net only carries tower or TRACON
frequencies or not, but in case you a LiveATC.net also carries many
centner frequencies.

As an example, LiveATC.net has many Boston and NY center frequencies.

Another point is that LiveATC is made up of volunteers providing scanned
frequencies. There are not a lot of western US frequencies on the site due
simply to the lack of volunteers offering them. If you know anyone...


I missed the center frequencies. To get a good flavor of the east high
and low LA frequenices you would need a volunteer in Barstow and one
somewhere in the Ontario area. ;-)

Newps wrote:



Mxsmanic wrote:


Uh, gee, Einstein, a real rudder DOES control flight path.



Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't.


There is never a case where it doesn't change flight path.

Not so. When an engine fails on a multi, a lot of rudder is required.
Skillfully done, the application of a lot of rudder is mandatory to
maintain the desired flight path.

Mxsmanic wrote:
I'm kind of surprised that ATC so often goes with visual approaches
for IFR flights. Wouldn't it be more straightforward to funnel
everyone into ILS approaches, given that they are already IFR?

Another case of where simulation doesn't match real life. By giving a
visual approach clearance, separation rules change. A controller can
funnel more airplanes into the approach. Otherwise he can't have more
than one airplane on the approach at the same time.

It's also one of those reasons controllers like for you to cancel in
the air for uncontrolled airports (you wouldn't know about that because
thats just "fun" flying) is because they can't let an IFR departure
while your on the approach. Or another approach. Hence, the airport
is "closed" for IFR arrivals/departures.

Real world example, departing Quincy IFR one time (in VMC). Plane
takes off ahead of us on an IFR clearance. We can't take off IFR
because that plane just took off. And radar coverage at KUIN is spotty
below 5000. So I can wait on the ground until said plane gets into
radar coverage, or just depart VFR and pick up my clearance airborne.
We departed VFR.

Sam Spade wrote:

I missed the center frequencies. To get a good flavor of the east high
and low LA frequenices you would need a volunteer in Barstow and one
somewhere in the Ontario area. ;-)

Is that where their antenna farms or just the facilities are located?

--
Peter

On 01/05/07 09:58, Sam Spade wrote:
Newps wrote:



Mxsmanic wrote:


Uh, gee, Einstein, a real rudder DOES control flight path.



Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't.


There is never a case where it doesn't change flight path.

Not so. When an engine fails on a multi, a lot of rudder is required.
Skillfully done, the application of a lot of rudder is mandatory to
maintain the desired flight path.

It is changing the flight path the aircraft would have taken had you
not applied the rudder.

TxSrv wrote:
But I have trouble
believing the typical ATC would regularly spend off-hours directing
nonpilots in a make-believe IFR environment.

So do I.

I also have trouble believing very many real pilots would bother to
participate in that whole shebang.

How do you know that they aren't just agreeing with you in the hope that you
will go away? Seems much more plausible based on your current performance.

Transpose mxsmanic with moron to reach the whining, live in the dark,
trolling buffoon.

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

How do you know who is honest and who is lying?

By knowing their overall personalities.

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

She flies it to get away from you....

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Wade Hasbrouck writes:

I would like to see him tell Patty Wagstaff that her airplane is just a
"fun" plane and not a "serious" plane. :-)

I was talking about the MSFS model of the plane, not the plane itself.

I'm sure Patty Wagstaff considers it fun; otherwise, why would she fly
it?

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

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

Mxsmanic wrote:
Thomas Borchert writes:

That information is rather easy to find on the internet. Look it up.

Information is elsewhere.

And it's up to you to find it, not be spoonfed it. Otherwise,
you will never know how to be self supportive. Like the old saying:

"Give a man a fish, and he'll feed himself for the night. Teach
a man to fish, and he'll feed himself for a lifetime."

BL.
- --
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)

iD8DBQFFnpoGyBkZmuMZ8L8RAsWZAJ9q1kitdOphCPc7yifa12 P0SO+0jgCg1MAt
yQkE81+SQpavYN+cdtpLCw8=
=Win3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

"A Guy Called Tyketto" wrote in message
om...

"Give a man a fish, and he'll feed himself for the night. Teach
a man to fish, and he'll feed himself for a lifetime."


"Build a man a fire, warm him for the night.
Set a man on fire, warm him for the rest of his life."