Sad day for Mxsmanic

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.

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.

No mater how many times you explain it, you still are not getting the point.

My original 'point' was that I could not understand how a pilot could
not know the AP was disconnected based on what is fitted to the
majority of current aircraft.
Now I know that this particular Russian Airbus did NOT have an alarm
but that does NOT give you the right to argue other aircraft also have
NO system of alarm just because ***I*** said it.

I dont have to be a commercial pilot to be aware of this the same as I
don't have to be Neil Armstrong and step onto the surface of the moon
to 'know' it's not made out of cheese. Awareness and knowledge (to a
some degree) can be acquired solely from the written word, videos and
from real pilots of the particular aircraft you are studying otherwise
why have flight manuals, why have detailed manuals about a particular
aircraft when according to you the ONLY accurate and entirely
formidible 'training' MUST be done on a real flightdeck. There is a
cross over of this type of learning for real pilots amongst ANY other
profession - Theory/Practicle

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.
My comments about personally having some flight experience is true but
as I like to sim as well 'I've been tarred with the same brush'

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. Because of this ANY
comment made by ANY simmer means nothing!!!!!!!! I believe if
information has been cross referenced by many accurate sources then
it's deemed, by propabilities, to be true and doesn't physically have
to be experienced by oneself. Even if we got Oskar Wagner on here, a
REAL A320 pilot and a long time FSX fan, to write about what a REAL
Airbus does Maxwell and the rest of them would say CRAP, or bOB to
discuss rotaries. Even if they said the EXACT same as us it would
mean nothing. 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'm sure there a more 'skeletons' in this
'closet' of a forum who keep quiet!!!!!!!!!!

I used to log into this group the odd time and now remember why I
stopped as it's all pathetic. I'm out of here!!!!!!!!!!!

Ibby

In article df56c4f0-02b3-45b8-9331-
, says...

Relevance? (we're (you *were) talking autolands, not approaches or even
cruise flight).

--
Duncan- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

This all stems from earlier posts here on whether a NOVICE pilot
during an emergency could control an aircraft and successfully land
it.

It does not! It stems from YOUR post that "MOST landing are autolands".

They are not.

--
Duncan

"Ibby" wrote in message
...

and you continue driving the wrong direction while increasing your speed.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
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.

You should work for the Microsoft Help Desk.

That answer was completely correct, but totally useless.

"Ibby" wrote in message
...

You are both flying a desk, dumb ass.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Now this is just childish.

Most of this group argue that a simmer has NO knowledge whatsoever of
what occurs inside a real aircraft because he has never set foot
inside that model for which he is 'familiar' with.
When evidence is placed in front of you that a REAL 747-400 has an
audible alarm on autopilot disengagement you still throw insults back
saying 'you are wrong'.

Going back to the original comments on whether a novice could land
this aircraft on an emergency under guidance this entire video clip
clearly shows all that is required. ATC are giving the pilot heading,
speed and altitude commands and he is adjusting the MCP. He is NOT
flying the aircraft, the autopilot is and with adequate instruction
others could adjust the appropriate knobs too as the are ALL on the
Mode Control Panel (as clearly demonstrated on this clip). The AP is
controlling the throttles and elevator trim etc to maintain the course
etc as entered on the MCP. The pilot COULD have done a full autoland
on runway 28L as LAND3, Rollout and Flare were all armed and confirmed
by the pilot. By switching on the autobrakes the autopilot and
autothrottle system would have cut the throttles at 50ft, flared the
aircraft and autobraked whilst keeping the aircraft on the centreline
without the pilot even touching the controls or manual braking. If
you dont believe it go ask a 747-400 captain.

Ibby

But your desk still didn't move.

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

Return at all haste to your 'sim' group and leave we poor real time
pilots to wallow in reality.

Since the behavior of the sim matches the behavior of the real aircraft,
what
reality is lacking in simulation?

You have been give this answer many different way, examples and from
different people yet you continue to ask.

Got a comprehension problem?

"Ibby" wrote in message
...

You are really stuck on this warning bell thing. Have you had your
hearing
tested lately?

Because that is one issue you lot said directly to myself was a LIE.
You lot made out that EVERYTHING we say is utter CRAP. I originally
questioned how I couldn't understand how the russian pilot failed to
notice the AP being switched off as I know from both the sim and
videos on real flightdecks that the Boeing 747 and 737's have them but
according to you lot THEY DONT because the 'desk pilot' says so. But
do I get an educated response saying 'well as we are only GA pilots
and also haven't physically flown a 747 you may be correct but this
particular Russian model didnt have an alarm' we just get a childish
'f@=k you'

Ibby

No, but now you are a liar. I never said any such thing, simboi.