r.a.ifr barely alive

Back in 1998 when I got my rating, rec.aviation.ifr was beaming with
activities. There were at least a dozen new threads getting posted
every day.

Where is everybody? I know GA flying is down but the traffic drop in
r.a.ifr is a lot worse than say r.a.piloting. Maybe we all became
dumber after a decade of IFR flying with GPS?

M wrote:
Back in 1998 when I got my rating, rec.aviation.ifr was beaming with
activities. There were at least a dozen new threads getting posted
every day.

Where is everybody? I know GA flying is down but the traffic drop in
r.a.ifr is a lot worse than say r.a.piloting. Maybe we all became
dumber after a decade of IFR flying with GPS?


Unmoderated fight sites with fired ex-FAA racist employees become old
stuff after awhile.

"Bill Watson" wrote in message


Unmoderated fight sites with fired ex-FAA racist employees become old
stuff after awhile.

Yep, what he said.

Add to that the spam that's becoming more of a problem throughout Usenet and
it's no wonder folks are opting for registration-only sites like the AOPA
forums.

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
http://sage1solutions.com/products
NEW! FlyteBalance v2.0 (W&B); FlyteLog v2.0 (Logbook)
____________________

John T wrote:
"Bill Watson" wrote in message


Unmoderated fight sites with fired ex-FAA racist employees become old
stuff after awhile.

Yep, what he said.


Add to that the spam that's becoming more of a problem throughout Usenet and
it's no wonder folks are opting for registration-only sites like the AOPA
forums.


Not all Usenet Groups have this problem. A telecom group I use does not
require registration but it is moderated. The posts don't appear until
the moderation first reads and clears them.

Granted, a registration group works even better.

"Sam Spade" wrote in message


Add to that the spam that's becoming more of a problem throughout
Usenet and it's no wonder folks are opting for registration-only
sites like the AOPA forums.

Not all Usenet Groups have this problem. A telecom group I use does
not require registration but it is moderated. The posts don't appear
until the moderation first reads and clears them.

True, but the only r.a.* group I know is moderated is the .stories group.

--
John T
http://sage1solutions.com/blogs/TknoFlyer
http://sage1solutions.com/products
NEW! FlyteBalance v2.0 (W&B); FlyteLog v2.0 (Logbook)
____________________

M wrote:
Back in 1998 when I got my rating, rec.aviation.ifr was beaming with
activities. There were at least a dozen new threads getting posted
every day.

Where is everybody? I know GA flying is down but the traffic drop in
r.a.ifr is a lot worse than say r.a.piloting. Maybe we all became
dumber after a decade of IFR flying with GPS?


Everytime I ask a question on this group I get an amazingly nasty
response, and often, the new favorite insult is to accuse people of
being flight simulator pilots (vs. real).

When I fly, I run into people who are nicer than average (I just got
invited to a nice tour of a facility where they were rebuilding
ex-military jets the other weekend).

What goes on here, I have no clue for.

Scott Moore wrote:
Everytime I ask a question on this group I get an amazingly nasty
response, and often, the new favorite insult is to accuse people of
being flight simulator pilots (vs. real).


That is a direct response to a plague of postings in the other aviation
newsgroups from a prolific troll. He posts a seemingly reasonable question,
then argues with the people who answer him. That wouldn't be bad in itself
except he's never flown and has stated he never will. The people who answer him
have.

And the newbies can't tell them apart....




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

Scott Moore writes:

Everytime I ask a question on this group I get an amazingly nasty
response, and often, the new favorite insult is to accuse people of
being flight simulator pilots (vs. real).

This helps the person doing the insulting hide the fact that he doesn't know
anything about IFR flight. There are lots of low-time pilots without
instrument ratings on these groups, and many of them are insecure and
aggressive.

When I fly, I run into people who are nicer than average (I just got
invited to a nice tour of a facility where they were rebuilding
ex-military jets the other weekend).

What goes on here, I have no clue for.

Two different populations.

"Everytime I ask a question on this group I get an amazingly nasty
response..."


It's been the opposite for me. Maybe I've just been lucky, but I've asked a
couple of technical questions about IFR procedures and received correct
answers within minutes! And no nasty responses, either. The traffic on
this group is low, but the signal to noise ratio is much higher than on the
other rec.aviation.xxxxxxx groups I read.

Dennis

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Scott Moore writes:

Everytime I ask a question on this group I get an amazingly nasty
response, and often, the new favorite insult is to accuse people of
being flight simulator pilots (vs. real).

This helps the person doing the insulting hide the fact that he
doesn't know anything about IFR flight. There are lots of low-time
pilots without instrument ratings on these groups, and many of them
are insecure and aggressive.

When I fly, I run into people who are nicer than average (I just got
invited to a nice tour of a facility where they were rebuilding
ex-military jets the other weekend).

What goes on here, I have no clue for.

Two different populations.

You're not a pilot. All you do is regurgiate stuff you've read without any
understanding of how it applies in the real world. You've never flown a
real aircraft IFR and have no idea what it is like. You just fantasize.