It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training

page: 16
8
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jeff Riff
So for all intensive purposes, at a minimum I am willing to agree that there were Radical Muslim Terrorists that hijacked planes and ran them into buildings. The incompetent people in the white house, spending time on vacation, not really doing thier job, are unable to prevent this incident from happening. Had they been responsible in their leadership and their duty to protect us Americans, it is possible that 9-11 would have not taken place.


Since this happened in 2001 are we talking about Bush or Clinton here?

Bush might have been in office, but was very new to the office and so the years of prep sure happened on Clinton's watch.


[edit on 18-1-2008 by Xtrozero]




posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


What you post is a blatant implication you spend all your time "flying" in a video arcade game flight simulator, facing no actual atmospheric conditions found during actual flying. Claims of pilots sleeping and planes flying themselves is absurd.

Do you not know what atmospheric conditions are? Because you have not indicated you do.

Anymore personal attacks, and you can be talking to yourself or anyone who will respond to you.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 07:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
What you post is a blatant implication you spend all your time "flying" in a video arcade game flight simulator, facing no actual atmospheric conditions found during actual flying. Claims of pilots sleeping and planes flying themselves is absurd.

Do you not know what atmospheric conditions are? Because you have not indicated you do.


Why yes I do Orion, I know all about atmospheric conditions. Is there one you would like to discuss with me? Saying “atmospheric conditions” is kind of a large number of events. Hey, I got a great idea tell me one “atmospheric condition” that a simulator cannot duplicate.

Saying someone is ignorant is not an insult. Ask any pilot what does this mean? "video arcade game flight simulator" It is statements like this that I say the word ignorant. Please ask any other pilot if I'm wrong here.

Oh, you didn't like the one about half a sleep, how about the one where a pilot will take his little maps and cover ALL the windows up with them so no light from a rising sun can shine into the cockpit. Yes, that is right, flying with all the windows covered...



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


Name me the acutal atmospheric conditions any flight simulator can exactly replicate, considering it is attached to the ground.

Do you actually think a simulator can exactly replicate conditions in the atmosphere when flying real planes? Because they cannot, and they never will be able to do that. How about sudden barometric pressure rise or drop? How about gale coming out of nowhere? How about sudden wind shift? Etc. etc. etc.

How about real weight and mass being navigated through air pockets etc? There many of them the closer and lower people fly close to or over the oceans. I know because I have been a passenger in more than a few planes when sudden changes happened in atmospheric conditions.

That pilot better be alert and prepared at all times for that to happen. He or she better be able to read that instrument panel when all visibility is lost through windows. They cannot do that turning on auto pilot and taking a snooze.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 07:50 PM
link   
The fact is, that if someone cannot understand English well enough to tell the differences between and purposes of the many instruments and controls on a commercial jetliner, plus, has never flown in actual atmospheric conditions, with a great deal of weight and mass to control, that person will not be effectively flying anything. Crashing it, yes. But flying it into a specific target. Never.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
Name me the acutal atmospheric conditions any flight simulator can exactly replicate, considering it is attached to the ground.


Why do you ask me the same question I asked you? You are the one who originally said a sim cannot duplicate any atmospheric conditions. I just asked you to name one that a sim cannot do. I’m just asking for one…geez



Do you actually think a simulator can exactly replicate conditions in the atmosphere when flying real planes? Because they cannot, and they never will be able to do that. How about sudden barometric pressure rise or drop? How about gale coming out of nowhere? How about sudden wind shift? Etc. etc. etc.


Well yes I do since I have about 1000 hours in them.

Barometric pressure=very little factor. It has some importance in takeoff performance of the engines and the ability to be at an exact altitude, but this means nothing to the terrorist.

Gale wind out of nowhere? What the hell is that hehe? The jet stream that aircraft fly in is easily 200 to 250 MPH. Is that gale enough for you? No factor for the terrorist and no factor for the sim but it could duplicate it exactly.

Wind is only a factor on distance, fuel and time when your up in the air. Wind is a big factor on landing and a little less of a factor on takeoff. For the terrorist it was zero factor.

Sudden wind shift takes normally a T-storm cell to cause and once again would be the same as above. No factor to the terrorist.

The easiest event to duplicate in the sim exactly like the real world is WIND.



How about real weight and mass being navigated through air pockets etc?


This makes no sense and is zero factor in the aircraft, or in the sim, or with the terrorist.



There many of them the closer and lower people fly close to or over the oceans. I know because I have been a passenger in more than a few planes when sudden changes happened in atmospheric conditions.


Zero factor in anything, can be duplicate in the sim (if anyone would even want to), was zero factor for the terrorist.



That pilot better be alert and prepared at all times for that to happen.


He is, for he is tightly strapped in a four point harness, and that is why their throats were easily cut. First big factor for the terrorist, but in their favor.



He or she better be able to read that instrument panel when all visibility is lost through windows. They cannot do that turning on auto pilot and taking a snooze.


I'm sure the bumps when they happen will cause them to open one eye look around quickly then close it again..yawn...



[edit on 18-1-2008 by Xtrozero]



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


I did not say duplicate. I said replicate. Not the same. Please name every actual atmospheric condition a flight simulator can replicate. Yes, it definitely makes a difference between being in a flight simulator firmly attached to the ground, and being off the ground in an actual airplane.

Since I have been caught in the middle of those moment notices atmospheric changes, I know it made a difference between being in something firmly attached to the ground vs. something off the ground, with a great deal of bulk and mass to control.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 10:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
I did not say duplicate. I said replicate. Not the same. Please name every actual atmospheric condition a flight simulator can replicate. Yes, it definitely makes a difference between being in a flight simulator firmly attached to the ground, and being off the ground in an actual airplane.


A sim is not on the ground but ten feet up on 6 massive hydraulic cylinders. They can simulate turbulence to the point that you cannot stand up in them. They can bank sharply left, right, up or down.

Whatever my friend...your word "replicate" has no meaning here.

You are not making any sense here. Turbulence is about the only condition a pilot can feel like you do. Everything else he can only see in his instruments and in a sim the instruments can act just like the real thing under any real condition. If they want to induce 100 kt headwinds it is like the real thing, if they want to cause a wind shear on landing it acts just like the real thing and the recovery in the sim would also recover the real airplane. If they want to have moderate turbulence they can rock your world with it in the sim. If they want fog you see fog. If they want a sunny day you have it.

IT IS ALL THERE, PEROID!

Geez, what is you deal? This doesn’t even have a thing to do with the post here and you will not agree on anything.



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


Which are securely fastened to the ground. Try again for replication.



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


Which are securely fastened to the ground. Try again for replication.


Dude, put me on ignore for I am tired of this with you. You are a clueless idiot to what an aircraft, sim or pilot does. I hope you find your answers, but it is obvious you are not looking for any here.

Your answers are in the 100s posts across many topics on this that I and many other professional fliers have tried to tell you the real deal on how the aviation world really works that you have not agreed with on a single point from ANYONE!

So continue, but continue without me.

Please do not reply for I cannot take you mindless blabbering anymore.



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 01:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 



Why don't you hit the ignore button? Do not order me to do it. Or stop responding to my my posts, and do not refer to me again in any of your posts. The choice is yours.



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 06:30 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


Sorry to say but orionstar simply doesn't get it and he/she won't. I've gone around and around with him/her on other threads and this will never end because O.S. keep changing the argument when you prove him/her wrong and his/her responses will continue to be vague so you must guess at what he/she means.

I think O.S. must be a kid or something that just doesn't understand the logical process yet. Orionstars statements show his minimal lack of life experience so it's simply not possible for O.S. to relate to what you're saying. Although it is very annoying, I actually feel a bit bad as O.S. simply doesn't understand how silly and childish he/she is looking on the threads.

My best advice is take everything O.S. says with a grain of salt.

[edit on 19-1-2008 by jfj123]



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
Sorry to say but orionstar simply doesn't get it and he/she won't. I've gone around and around with him/her on other threads and this will never end because O.S. keep changing the argument when you prove him/her wrong and his/her responses will continue to be vague so you must guess at what he/she means.


I tried to give him information the best way I can, but it is usless for he just wants to argue everything. LOL even the point that I tell him to put me on ignore and he argues back for me to put him on ignore...LOL that is so funny, but down right sad too.

Even his nomenclature drives me up the wall and shows his total lack of understanding. It is just like everyone would use the word "car" and he comes along and instead of saying "car" he says “four wheel human transportation device". This is what all his nomenclature sounds like to me in every post of his. This shows his level of understanding is nothing more than a Google click away, but still can’t quite get any of it right.

I do not like to use the ignore button, but I will not reply to him or anymore.



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


That is laughable, considering I have hinted at my age on occasion in these discussions. I have had many, many long years to study any and everything I wanted to study - by reading, observation and experience. I enjoy learning for the sake of learning. Always have. I have always taken my formal and informal education, and applied it to real life not virtual reality.

I have never been satisfied to know something works. I have to know how it works. That means making the effort to find out through experience. Most, if not all, type A personalities are no different than myself in that respect.



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by jfj123
 


That is laughable, considering I have hinted at my age on occasion in these discussions.

Your responses also hint at your age.


I have had many, many long years to study any and everything I wanted to study - by reading, observation and experience.

And?


I enjoy learning for the sake of learning. Always have. I have always taken my formal and informal education, and applied it to real life not virtual reality.

I have never been satisfied to know something works. I have to know how it works. That means making the effort to find out through experience. Most, if not all, type A personalities are no different than myself in that respect.

And?



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


Do you have anything relevant to address in the topic "The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training"? If not, I am becoming highly suspicious you are harrassing me, for personal ulterior motives having nothing to do with the topics of these discussions.



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by jfj123
 


Do you have anything relevant to address in the topic "The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training"? If not, I am becoming highly suspicious you are harrassing me, for personal ulterior motives having nothing to do with the topics of these discussions.


Oh my god you are freakin funny
No disrespect but trust me, you're simply not that important.

How about this for relavent- It's not impossible to fly a heavy aircraft without training. This is of course my opinion but like I posted awhile ago, if the mythbusters can land a commercial jet in a hyper-realistic simulator, with ZERO training but with guidance from the ground, then it makes sense that an inexperienced pilot could fly a commercial jet good enough to hit a huge building or the ground. Flying is obviously a lot easier then taking off or landing.

Also keep in mind that if flight simulators weren't of any use, they wouldn't be used for flight training.



[edit on 19-1-2008 by jfj123]



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


And you are certainly entitled to your opinion. However, you are not staying on topic and not making it clear your comments are only your opinions. You engage in harrassing other posters by relying on red herring and ad hominem. That is selective stalking and harrassment, when not relentlessly stalking and harrassing all posters. Which you are not doing.



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
reply to post by jfj123
 


And you are certainly entitled to your opinion. However, you are not staying on topic and not making it clear your comments are only your opinions.

This statement is completely false. Isn't deliberately posting false statements a violation of ATS rules? So before you go making false claims of harassment, you really need to look at your own posts.

Here is my last statement:

It's not impossible to fly a heavy aircraft without training. This is of course my opinion but like I posted awhile ago, if the mythbusters can land a commercial jet in a hyper-realistic simulator, with ZERO training but with guidance from the ground, then it makes sense that an inexperienced pilot could fly a commercial jet good enough to hit a huge building or the ground. Flying is obviously a lot easier then taking off or landing.

Also keep in mind that if flight simulators weren't of any use, they wouldn't be used for flight training.


Here's another statement about the subject matter

No just saying it's not as hard as some people are making it out to be. If you want to see for yourself, there are a few perfect simulator software packages on the market with exact control replication. Go buy one and try it for yourself that way you don't need to take anyones word for it.


and here's yet another on topic statement

I don't know why so many people are saying that it's impossible for an inexperienced pilot to fly a plane.

A good example of this was recently on mythbusters where jamie and adam landed a 747 flight simulator with zero training with only the instructions of a ground person. Yes I know it's just a flight simulator but NASA has some pretty accurate stuff.


Any off topic statements I've made have been in response to other posters who have pulled the thread off topic. I at no time have started an off topic discussion.


You engage in harrassing other posters by relying on red herring and ad hominem.

OK you better prove this statement or retract it.


That is selective stalking and harrassment, when not relentlessly stalking and harrassing all posters. Which you are not doing.


I respond to many posters on many threads. I will say I do have a pet peave for those who post false information.

Feel free to review all the threads I have visited and you'll see I respond to quite a few posts. I have praised people I have previously disagreed with and the other way around. I am only looking for real, verifiable information.

Please keep in mind if you're going to continue making false claims, I will continue responding as it's only fair if you are going to accuse me of something I did not do.

And no, you can't bait me into blowing up at you, and get myself banned




[edit on 19-1-2008 by jfj123]



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by jfj123
 


Either prove me wrong or drop it. That is what a reasonable person would do all the time.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join