Search results

I'm impressed you had the patience to read all that.

There's no "100% of the time" in the LOI. That's clickbait/rage bait. The question was whether supervision had to be in person or whether it could be virtual, e.g. through Facetime. Considering the reg says "in person", I don't know why there would be an expectation that it wouldn't actually...

Courses are horizontal, altitudes are vertical. It's plain English. It is possible the controller could forget about your requested altitude or that you had been assigned one, in which case, a gentle reminder may be prudent.

If the aircraft is weightless then there is no "down" as far as it is concerned. It's just a change in direction. Imo the speed would not change.

Very interesting. I always thought the interpretation was a little bit sketchy and could be used to justify more egregious interpretations of other regs.

I often accompanied the gate agent down to the jetbridge as the plane was pulling up. As the gate agent was connecting the jetbridge to the plane, I was already doing the walkaround and usually finished by the time the pax had deplaned.

Are you talking about the exterior walkaround or everything that goes on until ready to taxi? Never flown a business jet but an RJ walkaround doesn't take much longer than a piston single. Yes, it's bigger and more complex, but think of the things you check on a piston single that take the...

More likely to be high when flaps are not being used. Therefore, it would be more common to slip to landing without having flaps deployed.

Cost-benefit analysis. I can recall going missed one time in 3 years because the RNAV minimums were too high. But we were able to get on an ILS for the opposite runway with a tailwind right at our limit.

What airframe change occurred between the H and I models?

We do RNAV but no WAAS.

Yes, but why would you pay for something that's free? Download the AIM to your tablet or laptop: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/ The FARs are constantly updated, it's best to access them on demand: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14 But you can download them...

It was changed from prohibited to avoided for the "I" (pronounced "eye") model in 1968.

Prohibiting slips is a problem because it's almost impossible to land without slipping a little, even if by accident. Did the aerodynamics of the 172 actually change or did they just realize that a prohibition was impractical? Deliberately performing a slip-to-a-landing doesn't sound like...

Is this still available?

You might be thinking of this the wrong way...I think a high-end product like this could create its own demand. And it's not another Airbus or 737 so the product will stand out more.

That sounds a lot like having 2 wires.

The line is there to protect THE RUNWAY. It is NOT there to protect the TAXIWAY behind it.

Dunning-Kruger at its finest.

The other electrical items are usually grounded adjacent to where they are located, having a switched ground would defeat the purpose of using the airframe as ground.