Cessna 172R from Telluride to Aspen

On 2008-05-12, Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
As a nurse, I can assure you it is possible to shove a grenade up Anthony's
butt.

Yes, but is it possible for the handle to fly open and make it go boom once
it's been inserted?
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

Tina writes:

The point tht is being made is your simulation did not test the
concept of flying the route in a 172, but did demonstrate how unwise
it is to fly without suitable planning.

Actually, all it demonstrated is the danger of icing, as far as I can tell.
Things were going well prior to that.

Would there be room for a grenade? Isn't his head usually up there?

On May 12, 7:50 am, Clark wrote:
Jay Maynard wrote om:

On 2008-05-12, Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote:
As a nurse, I can assure you it is possible to shove a grenade up
Anthony's butt.

Yes, but is it possible for the handle to fly open and make it go boom
once it's been inserted?

Look, you'll have several seconds to complete the insertion and take cover
after activating the grenade. Just practice the procedure until it is
completed in a reliable manner.

Oh, be sure to remove the gerbil first - wouldn't want PETA to get
involved...

--
---
there should be a "sig" here

So, now the question is not if one could fly a 172 on that route, but
if it could be flown in icing conditions?

Why don't you change the title of the thread to reflect that, or are
you trying to somehow cover up the point 'Tina' had made, that real
pilots 'simulate' a flight first by planning it, and you didn't do
that?

JFK Jr to Saint Peter: "Gee, things were going really well right up to
the crash"

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

"Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea Hawk At Wow Way D0t C0m writes:

I've crossed the Rockies on 85hp in a Cessna 120.

Under what conditions?


Above the hard bits, obviously

Bertie

writes:

So, now the question is not if one could fly a 172 on that route, but
if it could be flown in icing conditions?

Well, the original question was whether or not a 172 would be adequate on that
route. Obviously it should not be flown in icing conditions.

JFK Jr to Saint Peter: "Gee, things were going really well right up to
the crash"

He was a licensed pilot.

Weather at Aspen was low IFR so I had planned to divert to Garfield
County, but I lost control of the aircraft about 20 miles southeast at
12500 feet and impacted terrain.

MSNTSB Report: 'Probable cause of accident: Pilot disorientation caused
by hypoxia due to lack of simulated oxygen'


-c

The JFK example was probably given to show what lack of careful
planning might cause, You choose to ignore the lesson, You chose to
not simulate a reality, but to play a computer game, and continue to
give us evidence you have little interest in learning.

We knew that of you, but appreciate that you have now abandoned the
charade.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Your choice of words is childish at best. Computer games don't end
"tragically", they just end.

A crash in simulation is a tragedy within the context of that simulation.

So did you hold a simulated service with simulated mourners and simulated
flowers?

For a real pilot to attempt a flight under the conditions you describe
with the total lack of preperation you describe, that person would have
to be extremely stupid and ignore a huge pile of regulations and have
absolutely no common sense.

Simulation and real life are two different things, as so many here are fond of
saying. Odd that they are more than willing to confuse the two when it suits
their purpose.

You might as well have posted "I simulated shoving a hand grenade up
my butt and I got blown to hell. Is it really possible to shove a hand
grenade up my butt?"

Aircraft manufacturers spend a great deal of money on simulation of normal and
extreme situations, involving things that nobody would ever attempt in real
life. Why do you think they do that?

Nonsense.

Manufacturers do simulations to avoid cost.

What you simulated was what happens when an ignorant individual attempts
a flight without doing the legally required preparation, finds their
self in over their head, and continues on anyway instead of turning
back.

No mystery there.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

So, now the question is not if one could fly a 172 on that route, but
if it could be flown in icing conditions?

Well, the original question was whether or not a 172 would be adequate on that
route. Obviously it should not be flown in icing conditions.

No ****?

Few GA airplanes can be legally flown in icing conditions.

Part of the preparation for flight is to check for icing conditions.

Again, all you've simulated is what happens when the preflight requirements
are ignored.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.