A Google Groups alternative to rec.aviation.piloting?

On Aug 15, 10:37*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
buttman writes:
I'm criticizing people not backing up their claims with fact.

Yes, you're criticizing people. *That's not a discussion of aviation.

Well this thread really isn't about aviation. This is one of those
meta-threads that pop every once in a while. It is about the group and
the people who are ruining it.

Think of this thread as a sort of "appeals court" for the discussions
that go one here. A place to criticize and analyze the things that go
on behind the discussions.


Statements made by anyone can be evaluated on their own merits, without any
reference to personalities or the people making the statements. *Facts are
facts; falsehoods are falsehoods. *It doesn't matter where they come from.
Statements can be verified by comparison with other sources of known accuracy.
There is never any need to worry about who made the statements.

No disagreement here.

In that post I'm challenging him to back up his claims with fact.

Either he is right, or he is wrong. *The old saw about backing claims up with
facts is just a diversion tactic, and a poor one at that. *If he is wrong,
correct him. *If he is right, let it stand.

Huh? Claims never need to be backed up? Backing up your claims is
analogous to showing your work on a math problem. It shows the
processes you used to come to your conclusion. Dudley made a claim
that I whole heartedly disagree with, so I asked him to "show his
work" to get a better understanding of why he feels that way.


And his reasons for me being the worlds worst instructor I think is very
aviation related.

No, they are personality related. *Exactly the type of thing that you were
criticizing just a few posts ago.

What I was criticizing "a few posts ago", was arguments hinged solely
on character. This tangent that has popped up may be related to
people's character, but you sure won't find me hinging any arguments
solely on someone's character, if thats what you're implying.

buttman wrote in
:

On Aug 15, 6:51*pm, Dudley Henriques wrote:

Full of crap as usual I see.

Although I have elaborated on this several times before on these
forums, I'll be more than happy to do it again here and now so that
there can be absolutely no misunderstanding as to why I view you as
incompetent as a C
FI.

You posted AS a CFI on these forums asking if shutting down the fuel
on takeoff with a student was a "good idea". You did this by your own
word in your initial post on the issue AFTER you had already done it
with at least one student. So right off the bat, you, posting as a
CFI, were asking a forum of pilots whether or not something you had
already done with a student was a good idea. This in itself
constitutes extremely poor PIC/CFI judgment as it establishes that
you performed a specific procedure with a student in the aircraft
that at the moment you performed that procedure you were not sure was
safe and correct to perfor
m.
This alone would disqualify you with me as a potential CFI hire.

Not quite. What I had already done was not the same thing that I was
asking about.

The day before I made that post, I realized that reaching over towards
the throttle and pulling it back is completely different from the
engine suddenly stopping. I felt that the next step was to try it out
with some students where that particular part of the equation removed.
Instead of reaching over, I will kill the engine by pulling the fuel
valve, since that way it's more realistic to an actual engine failure.
On the takeoff roll, on a 10,000+ ft runway, I pulled the fuel valve,
assuming it would die within a second or two. After 2 or 3 seconds, it
didn't doe, so I pulled the throttle back and aborted the takeoff.
What I did I can't believe is any more unsafe that hundreds of things
CFI's do on a regular basis. I can't accept someone telling me what I
did was attempted murder or whatever people were saying that day.
MEI's pull mixtures and fuel valves all the time in the takeoff roll
in multi-engine airplanes, which in my opinion is way more dangerous
than what I did. But do you see anyone persecuting MEI's who practice
that maneuver?

Later that day I made the thread asking about how long it would take
for the engine to die, and any other ideas about what to expect doing
this maneuver. The response was not what I expected. People were going
berserk, lead by none other than you. If I remember correctly, the
first few responses were pretty mild and well-reasoned, until a few
people such as yourself felt the need to jump in and hulk out. From
that point on, it was you and your sycophants having fun flinging crap
back and forth.

At the time, you and your retard buddies saying I was the world worst
instructor really got to me. I was fairly new to instructing and
didn't have a lot of confidence. I may have had a hard time explaining
myself and it got a little out of hand. But now that I've been at it
for a while, I see it this way: I have never had a complaint from a
student, an examiner, a fellow instructor, etc. etc. The only people
who have any qualms with me are people from Usenet. And it's not like
I'm any different online as I am when talking to people in real life.
After all the dust from that thread settled, I brought the issue up
with my boss, and we had a long discussion about it. No one lost their
temper, and no one accused of being the worlds worst instructor. I
explained to him as best as I could the precautions I made before
doing the actual maneuver (which I may not have made enough effort to
explain to the group when I made the thread). He understood that I
made an honest effort to assure safety and he even understood where I
was coming from when it came to the differences between a student
reacting to the instructor pulling the fuel valve which is hidden
under the seat, as opposed to reaching over and grabbing the throttle.
It was an enlightening and educational experience. We basically came
to the conclusion that it does have some instructing benefits (he said
his instructor back in the 70's used to pull the fuel valve all the
time on him in the C150), but you must be really really careful
because a lot of stuff could go wrong. The main thing I remember from
that conversation was he most definitely *did not* tell me it was
attempted murder or even something he wouldn't do if the conditions
were right (including a long runway, a proficient student, an empty
traffic pattern, among a few others) Too bad the same constructive
conversation couldn't have happened here...


Now, on to the rest of it.

When the fallacy of what you did was pointed out to you not only by
myself, but several other CFI's, instead of accepting the fact that
what you did might have been unsafe, you instead have consistently
and ever since not only attempted to defend the procedure with
statements about the length of the runway etc, but have actively
engaged in an open attempt to portray me as a know it all with some
kind of a superiority complex.

The reason I didn't accept your "criticism" (I say "criticism" because
it was more like "flaming"), was because you were either choosing to
ignore what I had done to ensure safety, or I hadn't explained myself
clear enough and instead of giving me the benefit of the doubt, you
decided to breakdown any chance of meaningful discussion by assume the
worse.


In summation, what you did by shutting down the fuel on take off with
a student was bad enough, as it's not necessary to do this to stress
a point and/or demonstrate an engine failure on takeoff. The reason
for this is quite simple. NO good instructor EVER deliberately puts a
student in a situation that purposely reduces or alters the existing
flight safety options. By selecting the fuel selector valve to OFF on
the takeoff roll, you deliberately put the student in unnecessary
danger by altering the escape option if power was needed to extricate
the aircraft from any unsafe condition that might arise on that
takeoff.

And how exactly is this outlandishly more unsafe that pulling the
mixture on takeoff in a multi-engine airplane? Or any other teaching
technique that pushes safety margins?

What you did was not only unnecessary, it was unsafe!

The fact that you have chosen to challenge rather than simply thank
the instructors who have attempted to set you straight is an
indication of a personality trait I find freightening in a CFI.

I am not going to thanks people who do nothing but flame me. I thanked
the people who added to the thread, and I thanked the head CFI at the
flight school where I worked at the time. But I'm sure as hell not
going to thank you or anyone else there for replying to me the way you
did. I don't praise deconstructive *anything*.

Safety is not a "yes" or "no" question. There are factors that make
something safe, and factors that make it unsafe. One would think a
person who claims to be a safety expert like you would know this.
Anyone who treats it as such, I'm sorry, but I'm not going to accept
them as a source of accurate, useful advice. I don't care how many
decades you've been investigating plane crashes, or how many students
you've soloed.


I hope this post has answered any questions both you and others might
have had concerning this issue.
As you can see, I have addressed it quite clearly.

And I have addressed myself quite clearly, I feel. But will you ever
let up? Will you ever accept that I have done even one thing right?
Will you ever maybe consider that you may have been wrong about me?


I consider it all the time, but you continue to post idiocy in a never
ending stream that pretty much closes off the door to the possibility
that you may actually have any sense whatsoever.

Bertie

buttman wrote in news:1c4ae31e-cc53-474d-8af3-
:

On Aug 15, 8:41*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
buttman writes:
Also, just to put this out there, Dudley has, for months claimed me to
be "the worst CFI I've ever seen", "the type of person I've spent a
lifetime to try to correct", etc. But he has never elaborated on this,
ever. He just repeats these weasel phrases over and over again. If he
claims to be such an expert on CFI attitudes and aviation safety, then
why doesn't he make the case without resorting to smokescreen tactics
and weasel words?

Now you're engaging in the very behavior you just criticized. *Care to
discuss
aviation?

I'm criticizing people not backing up their claims with fact.

Your repeated idiocy is all the fact required.....

Bertie

buttman wrote in
:

On Aug 15, 10:37*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
buttman writes:
I'm criticizing people not backing up their claims with fact.

Yes, you're criticizing people. *That's not a discussion of aviation.

Well this thread really isn't about aviation.

In your case, that's a public service.


Bertie

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in news:a9221727-dff4-4309-
:

On Aug 15, 10:32 pm, skym wrote:
This whole topic discussion is why I and many others have pretty much
quit reading it, and left this group, except for the occasional check
back. I think the OP had a sincere suggestion, but the response
quickly deteriorated. DH used to have good advice on flying but,
unfortunately, his rants in this thread demonstrate his recent descent
into the gutter with the likes of BtB and his ilk. Too bad. It was
good while it lasted. MX is a charactor, but not remotely as
offensive as the bitter crowd who have taken over this group.

Well I think a fella using a handle like "Buttman",
which advertises his homosexuality is hardly
someone I'd wanna be in cockpit with. I'm ok
with the homo's but do they need to advertise in
a piloting group. Not everyone is as open minded
as I am.


"Open minded" is not a mainstream expression for having a hole in your
head, Kenny.



Bertie

Dudley Henriques schrieb:
Doesn't really get any simpler than "Go **** yourself" now does it? :-))

first you argument the group has gone south because of people like
mxmaniac, then you propagate a web forum, then you come here and "argue"
with one of the posters you see as a reason of the noise ration in this
group.

STOP ANSWERING HIM!!!!!!
You jus put yourself to the same low level by answering him.

#m

On Aug 16, 5:28*am, Martin Hotze wrote:
Dudley Henriques schrieb:

Doesn't really get any simpler than "Go **** yourself" now does it? :-))

first you argument the group has gone south because of people like
mxmaniac, then you propagate a web forum, then you come here and "argue"
with one of the posters you see as a reason of the noise ration in this
group.

STOP ANSWERING HIM!!!!!!
You jus put yourself to the same low level by answering him.

#m

There are times when Mx was amusing, but I agree it's past time trying
to engage him in meaningful discussions. He is clearly clueless
regarding the realities of general aviation: if he assumed his correct
role as a mostly ignorant student there might be some benefit to his
presence.

The good news is this is not a professional environment where there
is a requirement to interact with people we don't like or more
importantly don't respect. I've joined with the few who have decided
he's best ignored.

Martin Hotze wrote:
Dudley Henriques schrieb:
Doesn't really get any simpler than "Go **** yourself" now does it? :-))

first you argument the group has gone south because of people like
mxmaniac, then you propagate a web forum, then you come here and "argue"
with one of the posters you see as a reason of the noise ration in this
group.

STOP ANSWERING HIM!!!!!!
You jus put yourself to the same low level by answering him.

#m

I'm no longer interested in maintaining any so called "level" on this
forum. If and when I drop in here which won't be often, I'll post as I
see fit. You are free to filter me and indeed I encourage you to do just
that, or do you wish to continue this idiotic dialog with me that you
just created?
Let's see if you can resist the temptation.
--
Dudley Henriques

skym wrote:
DH used to have good advice on flying but,
unfortunately, his rants in this thread demonstrate his recent descent
into the gutter with the likes of BtB and his ilk. Too bad. It was
good while it lasted.

It still exists, on ANY other forum but this one.

You can register on POA, The Purple Forum, or any other moderated web
forum you choose and you will find me as well as other pilots there
dealing with aviation issues in a professional and friendly atmosphere
that no longer exists here.

--
Dudley Henriques

skym wrote:
This whole topic discussion is why I and many others have pretty much
quit reading it, and left this group, except for the occasional check
back. I think the OP had a sincere suggestion, but the response
quickly deteriorated. DH used to have good advice on flying but,
unfortunately, his rants in this thread demonstrate his recent descent
into the gutter with the likes of BtB and his ilk. Too bad. It was
good while it lasted. MX is a charactor, but not remotely as
offensive as the bitter crowd who have taken over this group.

You know, idiots like you really kill me :-)) You'll read and use all
the unpaid for information and expertise that a lifetime in aviation by
someome else can give you, then sneak in behind the person's back who's
supplying you that information and expertise and take a cheap shot at
them, telling them how YOU think they should be giving you all that free
information.
God I just LOVE Usenet!!!
Get a life!!!
--
Dudley Henriques