Steering on the taxiway

As a man gets older, you get more sympathy for curmudgeons and limited
income and disabilities. In my 50's and fighting cancer for the past
year, I am particularly sensitive to this kind of situation, and
clearly I find it abhorent that some pilots (?) find it necessary to
make personal attacks on anyone. I hope these immature types never end
up in a similar situation, but they'd sure deserve it.

Your point is well taken, and I certainly empathize for various reasons.
All the same, for the foressable future, I plan to confine my participation
in this series of threads to (at most) lurking.

Peter

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

So the way you see things is objectively valid, whereas the way I see
things is not? Do you see a contradiction here?

Not at all. Objectivity is not relevant. The charter indicates that this is a
newsgroup for discussions pertinent to Pilots.

It's not a religion.

Respect does not apply only to religion.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Do you really expect me to accept every answer I get unconditionally?

No. Yet you seem to expect the rest of the group to accept every answer you
give unconditionally, even when you do not include sources, citations,
relevant experiences, or any other forms of support for your ideas.

I can't even get coherent answers from more than one person at a time
in some cases. The answers are contradictory, or bizarre, or conflict
with other sources I've consulted. I'm not stupid enough to just
swallow whatever I'm given. I may actually have to apply this
knowledge someday.

Clearly not all pilots have the same opinions about all things. And
certainly, as pilots posting on a newsgroup, not all answers are accurate.

No one would fault you for asking for more details or for support regarding
an answer that you received. But many of your responses seem to be
inflammatory, belittling the people who tried to genuinely help you.

I have _consistently_ found that people who know exactly what they are
talking about can explain every answer they give in exhausting,
grueling detail if necessary. Furthermore, ...

If you really only wanted correct answers, you would read the appropriate
documentation. Some of your questions evidence the likelihood that you may
have read the documentation, and are specifically looking to bait pilots so
you can prove that pilots are humans who make mistakes.

I haven't the money or time to fly. The medical requirements are
(unnecessarily) strict. Given all this, the obstacles to flying are
simply too high to make it a consideration. Perhaps if they didn't
exist, I might be more willing to try it out.

I'm not sure what the rules are in France, but in the US, you can fly
certain types of aircraft with little or no licensing or medical
requirements... Perhaps there is something similar in France. The cost to
fly these types of planes is also lower.
However, disregarding your current income and medical situation (which
perhaps could change someday), you have made comments implying or
indicating that you have no interest in flying anything other than a sim.
So I have trouble believing your last statement.

I don't have a disdain for pilots, only for stupid people.
Unfortunately, being a pilot doesn't prevent someone from being
stupid.

Stupid people can increase their intelligence through learning.

Flying _is_ risky--the numbers prove it.

There are _many_ things in life that are risky.

It's easy to manipulate people; it doesn't provide much for the ego.

So then why do you keep doing it?

MX,

Flying _is_ risky--the numbers prove it.

That is definitely a landmine waiting to be stepped on.....
I'm going to have to agree with Judah- many things are risky.

I haven't the money or time to fly. The medical requirements are
(unnecessarily) strict. Given all this, the obstacles to flying are
simply too high to make it a consideration. Perhaps if they didn't
exist, I might be more willing to try it out.

They aren't obstacles- IT IS A LOT OF WORK to be a safe pilot.
I'm curious which parts you find to be unnecessary? Flying has inherent
risks, but I wouldn't say it is risky. Very few serious accidents are a
result of airplane mechanical problems, meaning that training and
decision making skills are as crucial as a working airplane. It's more
often the pilot than flying that can be called risky, I think most
pilots are competent safe people. True, there are dumb ones too....
Let me ask you this- would you let a friend who was a pilot take you up
in a small airplane?

On Sun, 26 Nov 2006 01:03:04 +0100, Mxsmanic
wrote:


As far as I can tell, the Baron has a direct connection from rudder to
nose wheel. The part I don't understand is how an aircraft can
overshoot in a turn if the rudder is connected directly to the nose
wheel. Either the wheel stays put, in which case it must skid a bit
as the aircraft continues to turn, or the nose wheel turns and forces
the rudder pedals to move in consequence (which I would not be able to
feel in a simulator). Do you know which way it works?

Hmmmm.... I have not seen any nose wheels "skid" sideways while
taxying on dry pavement.. one would have to be taxying way to fast...
I guess I would look to the sim software or a possibly misadjusted
"null" in the rudder pedal input parameters...

I'm getting better at turns. I try to anticipate enough in advance
that I don't keep turning past the centerline. Oddly enough, it seems
to be more difficult to turn on the ground than it is in the air.

Actually, this is true sometimes... Tailwheel aircraft especially....

Maintaining speed is irritating, too. Sometimes I hit it just right
and the aircraft just putts along at about 11 kts, but finding that
sweet spot consistently is difficult. And with long runways and large
airports, one is rolling about for quite a while at 11 kts.

It usually takes constant adjustment of power to maintan a constant
taxi speed. ..unless the surface is perfectly level and smooth, and it
is perfectly calm. Think about this, - a power setting produces thrust
in a calm situation, the aircraft settles in at a constant speed. The
wind gusts, impacting your plane from the front - this will reduce the
effective thrust, and add drag - you will slow down.

You have to nudge the throttle up....to compensate.



If that is your circumstance, I hope it is temporary, and you may
experience the thrill of piloting a real aircraft someday.

I hope so, too, but I'm not very optimistic at the moment.

Don't give up on it, if it is really what you want to do...

I am a pilot, have lots of hours in sims, and I am fortunate to have a
clean medical and my own plane, - at this time in my life.

I hope you didn't have to wait long.


Got lucky, could afford to start at 33, still at it , now 58.....


Hmm. It seems so slow. How about 11 knots? I go faster than that on
a bicycle ... why do aircraft have to taxi so slowly?

11 knots is fast. Notice , few aircraft tires have a tread suitable
for traction on other than dry, hard surface runways... and the
landing gear/steering geometry is not set up to handle turns at
higher speeds...

Some have a narrow track, and will tip easily and scrape a wingtip,
or worse...

For large aircraft, even more caution.. many tons of aircraft will
NOT stop on a dime!

One of my hangar mates is an "Alpha Jet" ,- out weighs my car by 4
times, has 1/3 of the rubber friction surface of the 4 car tires.

Dave

Judah writes:

Objectivity is not relevant.

Then your view is just as subjective as mine, and is thus no more
valid.

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

Dave writes:

Hmmmm.... I have not seen any nose wheels "skid" sideways while
taxying on dry pavement.. one would have to be taxying way to fast...
I guess I would look to the sim software or a possibly misadjusted
"null" in the rudder pedal input parameters...

Since the overshoot has to be explicitly simulated, I assume that it
corresponds to some real-world behavior of the aircraft, but I'm not
sure of the details.

Don't give up on it, if it is really what you want to do...

There are many obstacles right now.

11 knots is fast. Notice , few aircraft tires have a tread suitable
for traction on other than dry, hard surface runways... and the
landing gear/steering geometry is not set up to handle turns at
higher speeds...

Points taken.

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

Judah writes:

Yet you seem to expect the rest of the group to accept every answer you
give unconditionally ...

I don't specify any expectations. Their interpretations are their
own.

No one would fault you for asking for more details or for support regarding
an answer that you received. But many of your responses seem to be
inflammatory, belittling the people who tried to genuinely help you.

I am probably one of the few in this group who does _not_ personally
attack other people.

If you really only wanted correct answers, you would read the appropriate
documentation.

You're saying that nobody here would have the correct answers?

Some of your questions evidence the likelihood that you may
have read the documentation, and are specifically looking to bait pilots so
you can prove that pilots are humans who make mistakes.

So if I read up, I'm bad. And if I don't read up, I'm bad.

I'm not sure what the rules are in France, but in the US, you can fly
certain types of aircraft with little or no licensing or medical
requirements...

I want to fly the type I choose, not necessarily the types available
to me.

And I'm worried only about the U.S. I don't care much about flying in
France.

However, disregarding your current income and medical situation (which
perhaps could change someday), you have made comments implying or
indicating that you have no interest in flying anything other than a sim.

Currently, I have lots of fun flying a sim, and I wonder whether the
time, expense, and trouble of flying for real would be offset by any
additional enjoyment I might get from real flight.

Stupid people can increase their intelligence through learning.

Intelligence and acquired knowledge are two different things. Stupid
people can acquire knowledge (in time), but they cannot become more
intelligent.

So then why do you keep doing it?

I don't. If I were manipulating people, they certainly wouldn't be
aware of it (that would defeat the purpose).

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

Cirrus writes:

They aren't obstacles- IT IS A LOT OF WORK to be a safe pilot.
I'm curious which parts you find to be unnecessary?

The disparity between regulations and practice, and outdated medical
requirements.

Let me ask you this- would you let a friend who was a pilot take you up
in a small airplane?

Just because he was a pilot? No. I'd have to know what type of pilot
he was.

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

Good job for seeing the light Peter... It won't take too much longer to
flush MXIdiot away... I see that his "Various ATC Questions" post had no
takers from regular posters... Yea!! The beginning of the end is near...

Jon

Peter Dohm wrote:
Thus simulating nothing.

Not quite. Some things that are time-consuming in the sim would be
extremely fast and easy in real life. Thus, pausing the sim to carry
them out is actually more realistic than doing them in real time.


I have been a long time proponent of simulation as a safer and more cost
effective method to practice and prepare for a variety of operations.
However, you have finally convinced me that Allen, Jim, and several others
have been correct in their assessment--that this series of threads is a huge
waste.

Therefore, Mx, fairwell to you and I hope that you are finding enjoyment in
almost simulating.

Peter