ATC Handling of Low-Fuel American Flight

Mxsmanic wrote:
snip
I just finished a nice little trip from Phoenix to Payson, which taught me
that I'm not very good at recognizing landmarks, even in areas I know well. I
guess I'll have to practice that more. I know how to use all the fancy
navigation stuff, but I'm rather awkward when I have only a VOR/DME to guide
me (plus visual information).


You mean you can "navigate" with the little airplane pictures on the
simulated moving map gps but you have no idea how to navigate without
one (a gps). "only a vor/dme" to guide someone is all you need for
instrument flight. It is all I have in my plane. I do just fine.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Sam Spade writes:


As they have a simulator at OKC to model and simulate TERPs criteria.

These types of simulators are carefully crafted, then certified in
accordance with professional protocols before they are used for
in-service purposes.

Bill Gates does not exactly do that for his PC game. ~


The main difference is certification, and certification is arbitrary.

MSFS is not certified for most uses because there's no market for it, it would
impose arbitrary and not necessarily useful or desirable constraints on the
product, and it would multiply the price by at least a factor of ten.

Certification doesn't mean realism, utility, or completeness. It just means
certification.


I bet you are certifiable.

Tim writes:

You mean you can "navigate" with the little airplane pictures on the
simulated moving map gps but you have no idea how to navigate without
one (a gps).

No, that's not what I mean. I can navigate with a chart and a single VOR/DME
receiver, or two VOR receivers (a single VOR without DME is more difficult).
That's what I did today.

However, I usually use more elaborate navigation, especially when flying IFR.
Today's flight was VFR, and so it was mostly trying to follow highways and
recognize mountains and stuff on the ground. I resorted to tuning a VOR when
it became evident that I had become somewhat lost, after mistaking one valley
for another.

"only a vor/dme" to guide someone is all you need for
instrument flight. It is all I have in my plane. I do just fine.

It's adequate, but perhaps not ideal. In instrument flight, the more you have
to help you, the better. The purpose of real-world instrument flight is not
to prove how well you can navigate with how little, but to get you home
safely.

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

Mxsmanic wrote:
snip The purpose of real-world instrument flight is not
to prove how well you can navigate with how little, but to get you home
safely.


What the F do you know about "real-world" instrument flight?

Mxsmanic wrote:

Sam Spade writes:


A $11 million Level D flight simulator is sufficently faithful to the
actual aircraft that no aircraft time is required to train and acquire a
type rating or conduct periodic training to maintain qualifications.


As soon as I have $11 million, I'm going to get me one of those.


You seem to keep insisting that MSFS does good enough to be considered a
simulator not unlike a CERTIFIED Level D simulator.


It all depends on what type of simulation you want.

Well, not exactly, at least for FAA-approved flight simulation.

In your case, since you invent your own rules, a 48 Desoto might be a
good flight simulator for a Boeing 777.

And certification does not equate to realism, it just equates to ...
certification.

Lots of folks who know a WHOLE lot more than you do who work for the FAA
and other nations' aviation authorities that would strongly disagree
with you.

You love to argue in generalities; the argument of a intellectual coward
and bully.


Nonetheless, you insist in proclaiming MSFS as a faithful flight
simulator on some level, which is absolutely NOT!


It absolutely is. It depends on the level you choose.

It is not even a good game.

Why such hostility towards PC simulators, I wonder? Something tells me that
no matter how good they get, someone will always find a reason why they aren't
"good enough." I've been using them for a long time, and they've come a long
way.

PC simulator is an oxymoron in the world of compentent aviation operations.

There are some PC training programs that have some value, such as the
Elite product line. MSFS is useless, for specific reasons I have
previously mentioned to you and which you have chosen to ignore in your
usual ignorant (if not stupid) manner.

I just finished a nice little trip from Phoenix to Payson, which taught me
that I'm not very good at recognizing landmarks, even in areas I know well. I
guess I'll have to practice that more. I know how to use all the fancy
navigation stuff, but I'm rather awkward when I have only a VOR/DME to guide
me (plus visual information).

Was that in a 48 Desoto?

Tim wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote:
snip

I just finished a nice little trip from Phoenix to Payson, which
taught me
that I'm not very good at recognizing landmarks, even in areas I know
well. I
guess I'll have to practice that more. I know how to use all the fancy
navigation stuff, but I'm rather awkward when I have only a VOR/DME to
guide
me (plus visual information).


You mean you can "navigate" with the little airplane pictures on the
simulated moving map gps but you have no idea how to navigate without
one (a gps). "only a vor/dme" to guide someone is all you need for
instrument flight. It is all I have in my plane. I do just fine.


The different is you are a trained, *certificated* pilot.

Tim wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote:
snip The purpose of real-world instrument flight is not

to prove how well you can navigate with how little, but to get you home
safely.


What the F do you know about "real-world" instrument flight?

Zip

"Tim" wrote in message ...

You mean you can "navigate" with the little airplane pictures on the
simulated moving map gps but you have no idea how to navigate without
one (a gps). "only a vor/dme" to guide someone is all you need for
instrument flight. It is all I have in my plane. I do just fine.


And the DME is purely luxury, you know.
I've taken VOR cross-bearings with a single working VOR receiver.

John R. Copeland wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message ...

You mean you can "navigate" with the little airplane pictures on the
simulated moving map gps but you have no idea how to navigate without
one (a gps). "only a vor/dme" to guide someone is all you need for
instrument flight. It is all I have in my plane. I do just fine.



And the DME is purely luxury, you know.
I've taken VOR cross-bearings with a single working VOR receiver.

You guys are spoiled. My cross-countries for my private where without
any nav equipment.

And, until GPS came along, a typical day, VFR cross-country from the Los
Angeles area up to Idaho or Montana was without nav aids much of the way.

Good old pilotage, which works pretty well in the western non-urban areas.

Tim writes:

What the F do you know about "real-world" instrument flight?

More than some people, apparently, particularly the tin-can pilots who have
never done it or studied it.

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