Sad day for Mxsmanic

"Ibby" wrote in message
...

You grow up dumb ass. Just exactly like MX, in your ignorance and
inexperience you missed the whole point.

So how can someone who HAS physically controlled a real aircraft (me)
be compared to MX who HASN'T controlled a real aircraft????????????

You attitude and insistence on arguing things you clearly don't understand.

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

So how can someone who HAS physically controlled a real aircraft (me)
be compared to MX who HASN'T controlled a real aircraft????????????

We both fail to kowtow before the treehouse club, and to the club members,
that's all that matters. Welcome to USENET.

If you must take sides, at least be sure to choose your friends carefully.

No, because you are both inexperience and have bad attitudes.

"Ibby" wrote in message
...

If you must take sides, at least be sure to choose your friends
carefully.

I'm trying to defend aspects of the sim and made that very clear on my
original post and topic change.
It was a partial defense for your comments that simulated knowledge of
aircraft systems and locations of buttons and procedures does bear
accurate resemblance to that on the real flight deck.


You two need to get a room.

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

You delusion continues.

"Ibby" wrote in message news:0bd92fd4-730f-4191-8b44-

Exactly your problem. You don't have enough experience to answer that
question.

On Mar 9, 5:33*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
a writes:
I watched the real time adjustments during the approach, and have
serious doubts that someone alone in the cockpit with over the radio
instuctions could in fact do what the crew did, even if that person
had sim experience.

Any intelligent person could do it with or without sim experience. *And
remember, these aircraft can be flown by one person in a pinch.

In the world of psychology studies regarding open-
loop instruction systems have shown them to be very error prone. It
would take someone very good at giving blinded verbal instructions to
pull it off.

With someone good at following them, and someone good at giving them, things
would work out.

Read what happened in something I just posted about an F18 pilot being
given instructions on bringing his bird home in San Diego -- hardly
inexperienced, and yet the result was a deadly crash.

He was in training.

He was geting 'expert' instructions over the radio, and still people
died. Is the connection too obscure for you?

In article ,
says...


Just go look it up! writes:

Do you not understand that increasing the volume of alarms or
tweaking operating modes of autoflight systems after an accident
caused wouldn't be unusual?

Boeing doesn't wait for accidents before installing alarms.

Pithy. But can you substantiate that claim? A single, salient example?
Of course you can't, because , as usual you claim is nothing more than
testosterone drivel - macho hype.

In fact, most warning systems and most rulemaking decisions are based on
actual accident data, and frequently influenced by specific "lmandmark"
accidents, and rerely by Mxmanic's trademark of testosterone over
intellect.

Ibby writes:

Most of these ppl on here 'have got it in for MSFS' because of your
continual 'I know best attitude' and lack of full and detailed
responses to counter their negative replies.

No. Pilots who engage in knee-jerk dismissals of simulation were doing that
long before I was around. I've seen it frequently in conversations in which I
didn't even participate. Some pilots are just very insecure about anything
that might diminish the prestige they believe that real flying has.

Dudley Henriques is a real pilot too and offers his
techical knowledge to software vendors as far as I'm aware of and
worked closely with the likes of RealAir - but again that means
nothing to these ppl.

I note that Dudley has a far more balanced view of simulation than some of the
more rabid, low-time, small-aircraft pilots on this newsgroup.

a writes:

He was geting 'expert' instructions over the radio, and still people
died. Is the connection too obscure for you?

No, he was not getting expert instructions. He already knew how to fly the
plane, and nobody was telling him how to do so over the radio. The
instructions concerned other matters, such as which airport would be the best
choice for landing.

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

Most of these ppl on here 'have got it in for MSFS' because of your
continual 'I know best attitude' and lack of full and detailed
responses to counter their negative replies.

No. Pilots who engage in knee-jerk dismissals of simulation were doing
that
long before I was around. I've seen it frequently in conversations in
which I
didn't even participate. Some pilots are just very insecure about
anything
that might diminish the prestige they believe that real flying has.

Dudley Henriques is a real pilot too and offers his
techical knowledge to software vendors as far as I'm aware of and
worked closely with the likes of RealAir - but again that means
nothing to these ppl.

I note that Dudley has a far more balanced view of simulation than some of
the
more rabid, low-time, small-aircraft pilots on this newsgroup.

Why, because most do not accept the importance simulation plays in your
fantasy life?

Sim worshipers like you and Ibby would find solace on the sim and game
groups, but then you would have to accept reality.