I flew VFR into IFR 2SM, OVC1500

onwards said:
Another one? Sheesh.
Click to expand...

Note that I was not trashing the OP... Unless you are the OP.

I also pointed out several things that were wrong with your assessment, and I see that you have not bothered to disagree with a single one. I come here to discuss, not to post useless taunts. If you disagree with what I said, why don't you say why instead of posting useless nothings like you did here?

Sucks for you, I get to exercise the exact same privileges you do,
Click to expand...

No, you don't. One of us has an instrument rating, and doesn't like the idea of having a mid-air with a scud-runner who isn't obeying VFR cloud clearance requirements.

so like it or not, you are sharing the sky with me.
Click to expand...

You live a long distance from me and I visit your area infrequently enough that it's not likely.

I'm not going to get into a ****ing match here - I'd love to have a discussion if you'd care to actually discuss what I posted. I also sincerely hope that you exercise better judgement than you've shown here, especially if you have any passengers aboard.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
No, you don't. One of us has an instrument rating, and doesn't like the idea of having a mid-air with a scud-runner who isn't obeying VFR cloud clearance requirements.
Click to expand...

macho-man-randy-savage-womens-t-shirt-39992-p.png
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Note that I was not trashing the OP... Unless you are the OP.
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with that. Your comment to me was a classic, careless, "I can say that to someone cause I ain't seeing them in person" type Interwebs attack. I responded in kind.

flyingcheesehead said:
I also pointed out several things that were wrong with your assessment, and I see that you have not bothered to disagree with a single one.
Click to expand...

You obviously did not read all of the arguments posted in this thread, for I have answered your comments in responses to others. And anyway, that doesn't matter; if you want a civil discussion with someone, better probably not to start with an underhanded personal attack!

flyingcheesehead said:
No, you don't. One of us has an instrument rating, and doesn't like the idea of having a mid-air with a scud-runner who isn't obeying VFR cloud clearance requirements.
Click to expand...

Fair enough; in roughly six months, I will be exercising the same exact privileges you do :D
 
Unregistered said:
Then the question becomes, Which is better, outright breaking the rules or merely bending the rules? How far can the rule be bent before it's broken? That is the question of the inexperienced pilot caught in unfamiliar territory. In someways, a too great importance in adherence to the rules can become a liability. The Cory Lidle accident as example.

Of course that is the best decision. The thing is, our judgement is often enough not like a simple flow chart...."If this/than that."

Our judgement may be more like a cloud...all these bits of infromation swirling around, some of more importance, some of less importance. But it gets whack when those of less importance grow to become greater. Getting home became a greater importance than being safe. Remaining legal seemed likely until it wasn't. That's called 'outside of the envelope' since he pushed himself right into the small dark corner.
Click to expand...

Cloudy judgement?? THAT is the point and problem. No, good pilot judgement is not cloudy; it is drilled, thought about consciously in advance, and adhered to unrelentingly. Fix that part.
 
onwards said:
Nothing to do with that. Your comment to me was a classic, careless, "I can say that to someone cause I ain't seeing them in person" type Interwebs attack. I responded in kind.
Click to expand...

No, not really. If you started defending VFR into IMC in an in-person conversation, I'd probably let you have it with both barrels there too. I don't want to see anyone kill themselves in an airplane. I haven't met you in person yet, but I have probably met more folks on this board in person than nearly anyone else - Being a regular at both the central Gaston's fly-in as well as the northeast Wings FlyBQ and the northern 6Y9 fly-in, I have met <looking> 22 of the top 30 posters, and 37 of the top 60 (hell, I've flown with 15 of 'em!). So, I generally treat people here exactly the way I'd treat 'em in real life, as I full expect to meet people in person someday.

But yeah, if you're gonna say there's nothing wrong with VFR into IMC, you're gonna hear about it, whether you're behind a keyboard or a pair of Scheydens across the tent from me at Gaston's.

You obviously did not read all of the arguments posted in this thread, for I have answered your comments in responses to others.
Click to expand...

The only thing I really see you answering WRT the originally quoted post was the tendency of people to attack someone who does something stupid, which is a legitimate concern and I agree with - And I said as much in my post. I don't see any answers to the other questions that I posted.

And anyway, that doesn't matter; if you want a civil discussion with someone, better probably not to start with an underhanded personal attack!
Click to expand...

Underhanded personal attack? Methinks you should grow a thicker skin if you're going to be on internet message boards. I was merely pointing out that the OP's posting here exhibits a desire to learn from his mistakes, while your defense of the OP, condoning extremely poor judgement shows that you should probably be thinking about your own judgement - It appears that the OP's hindsight has led them to question things, whereas even with the benefit of hindsight you apparently aren't recognizing the issues and it sounds like despite having a similar experience yourself you're saying that the OP did the right thing by continuing VFR into IMC.

Fair enough; in roughly six months, I will be exercising the same exact privileges you do :D
Click to expand...

No, then you can start on the next rating... You've got a ways to go yet.
 
iASCIIart, appreciate the lengthy response, and I will refrain from further comment since this feels kinda tired by now, to me. But I'll say this: I never "defended flying VFR into IMC". And I still feel like your comment was out of line. As for ratings, I don't really know what your point is; since what I was reacting to was the whole condescending dismissive "willing to share the sky with" comment, your subsequent responses were and continue to be evasive. Since you don't seem willing to even address it anymore, I will cease our discussion, just as I would do in real life.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Ted,

I agree with everything you've said except the bolded statement - Can you explain what you meant? Clearly there are plenty of benign IFR conditions that can make a trip viable with an instrument rating and a basic IFR airplane that you'd otherwise be grounded by weather for. :dunno:
Click to expand...

Oops, bad wording. Thanks for catching that.

What I meant is that having the IFR is not your instant "get-out-of-jail-free" card. I.e. just having it doesn't mean you can go flying anytime.

There are many conditions where the instrument rating makes the trip doable, and in many cases also easier.
 
onwards said:
iASCIIart, appreciate the lengthy response, and I will refrain from further comment since this feels kinda tired by now, to me. But I'll say this: I never "defended flying VFR into IMC". And I still feel like your comment was out of line. As for ratings, I don't really know what your point is; since what I was reacting to was the whole condescending dismissive "willing to share the sky with" comment, your subsequent responses were and continue to be evasive. Since you don't seem willing to even address it anymore, I will cease our discussion, just as I would do in real life.
Click to expand...

Fair enough... But please do take some time to reflect on what's been said in this thread, even the things that are or are perceived as attacks on you or the OP. The tone may sometimes seem hostile, but I think it gets that way because people see inexperienced pilots making classic mistakes and not necessarily learning the proper lessons, which puts them and their future passengers at risk. There's a certain amount of :mad2: that goes on in our minds when we see these things happen repeatedly, which causes the message to be lost due to frustration.

That doesn't mean that the message isn't valid - The OP made several bad decisions on that flight that could easily have led to a fatal crash. Get-home-itis is a powerful force. Hope doesn't change weather.

Fly safe.
 
I am still in the early stage of training and I am sure that most, if not all of you have forgotten more than I know. And based on my limited knowledge, the OP certainly used poor judgement. With that said, I will NEVER POST EVEN THE SLIGHTEST MISTAKE THAT I MAY MAKE on here for fear of the pummeling that would certainly ensue. So just to be clear, I am that inexperienced pilot that has been mentioned. So far all that I have really learned is don't admit to a mistake on this board.
 
mikeinbama said:
I am still in the early stage of training and I am sure that most, if not all of you have forgotten more than I know. And based on my limited knowledge, the OP certainly used poor judgement. With that said, I will NEVER POST EVEN THE SLIGHTEST MISTAKE THAT I MAY MAKE on here for fear of the pummeling that would certainly ensue. So just to be clear, I am that inexperienced pilot that has been mentioned. So far all that I have really learned is don't admit to a mistake on this board.
Click to expand...


That's a really poor conclusion, Mike.

:(

There's a difference between admitting a mistake and defending a mistake. This post was mostly about the latter.
 
Hmm... Whatever happened to the attitude that confessing your sins and getting a pummeling was a good thing?

Maybe it's remnants of my Catholic-school indoc.

Oh, one other point, the pummeling is really a function of whether the sinner accepts that he sinned. I've seen threads that go like this:

OP: Boy did I screw up today! <description of errors> I'll never do that again!
POA: Yep, glad you're ok and learned the lesson.
 
TMetzinger said:
Hmm... Whatever happened to the attitude that confessing your sins and getting a pummeling was a good thing?

Maybe it's remnants of my Catholic-school indoc.

Oh, one other point, the pummeling is really a function of whether the sinner accepts that he sinned. I've seen threads that go like this:

OP: Boy did I screw up today! <description of errors> I'll never do that again!
POA: Yep, glad you're ok and learned the lesson.
Click to expand...

And this is the guy that will not only learn from his mistake but will also get a thorough understanding of the chain of errors. Much learning. Stay humble.
 
TMetzinger said:
Hmm... Whatever happened to the attitude that confessing your sins and getting a pummeling was a good thing?

Maybe it's remnants of my Catholic-school indoc.

Oh, one other point, the pummeling is really a function of whether the sinner accepts that he sinned. I've seen threads that go like this:

OP: Boy did I screw up today! <description of errors> I'll never do that again!
POA: Yep, glad you're ok and learned the lesson.
Click to expand...

Yep. If you truly want to learn from your mistakes as a pilot, there's no better way to learn than to share them with other pilots. Who cares about the pummeling, its better to get a lashing in the spirit of learning than to be caressed like a baby...lol. We've all done idiotic things while learning and sometimes we still make mistakes. I'll never forget my first stall recovery lesson when I pushed both the yoke and throttle to the firewall because I was so afraid of stalls. Did that two times in a row...levitated my CFI :yikes: I felt like the biggest idiot in the world and thought I was the only student that ever did that, til I talked to other pilots :rofl:
 
Au Contraire, mon frere! There is a valid reason to unload the airframe!

Trivia question: what is the stall speed of an airplane at 0G?
 
redtail said:
I'd have to say it's the same as in 1G correct?
Click to expand...


It's a trick question and the reply is somewhat academic.

You can have a momentary =<0g condition.

But eventually you must reap what you sow.

So don't worry about 0g stall recoveries until you do upset or some other more advanced training that helps you understand the answer in context.
 
redtail said:
I'd have to say it's the same as in 1G correct?
Click to expand...

Stall speed is directly proportional to the square root of the load on the wings. At .25 g the stall speed would be half the 1 g stall speed for the same airplane at the same weight. At 0g the stall speed is 0. Same relationship exists for weight although the range of stall speeds for that is considerably less since the range of possible flying weight is fairly small for most light airplanes.

The very notion of a "Stall Speed" is kinda misleading as you can stall any airplane at any speed if the wings are strong enough to survive the load just prior to stalling.
 
gismo said:
Stall speed is directly proportional to the square root of the load on the wings. At .25 g the stall speed would be half the 1 g stall speed for the same airplane at the same weight. At 0g the stall speed is 0. Same relationship exists for weight although the range of stall speeds for that is considerably less since the range of possible flying weight is fairly small for most light airplanes.

The very notion of a "Stall Speed" is kinda misleading as you can stall any airplane at any speed if the wings are strong enough to survive the load just prior to stalling.
Click to expand...

"At 0g the stall speed is 0"
Funny thing is, I was going to say this but thought it sounded too simple to be true...lol
 
Jaybird180 said:
At 0g a wing cannot stall regardless of AoA.
Click to expand...
That's not correct unless you are flying in outer space. As long as there is air flowing over the wings the wing will stall at the critical AoA. And just to confuse the issue there's only one AoA which will result in 0 g (again assuming you're not flying in outer space).
 
gismo said:
That's not correct unless you are flying in outer space. As long as there is air flowing over the wings the wing will stall at the critical AoA. And just to confuse the issue there's only one AoA which will result in 0 g (again assuming you're not flying in outer space).
Click to expand...


There's a video at APS (upset recovery training) that works through the math on this concept, but it was all I needed to know. The video was about explaining why unloading the aircraft lowers stall speed and that if you got it precisely at 0G, ANY stall would break (-G stalls notwithstanding).
 
gismo said:
Jaybird180 said:
At 0g a wing cannot stall regardless of AoA.
Click to expand...

That's not correct unless you are flying in outer space. As long as there is air flowing over the wings the wing will stall at the critical AoA. And just to confuse the issue there's only one AoA which will result in 0 g (again assuming you're not flying in outer space).
Click to expand...

These could be read as just a hair confusing... But if you put them together, the full picture is that there is only one AoA which will result in 0g, and that AoA is always below the critical AoA, thus the wing cannot stall at 0g.

Jaybird180 said:
There's a video at APS (upset recovery training) that works through the math on this concept, but it was all I needed to know. The video was about explaining why unloading the aircraft lowers stall speed and that if you got it precisely at 0G, ANY stall would break (-G stalls notwithstanding).
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean by "ANY stall would break" at precisely 0g... You can't stall at 0g, so... :dunno:
 
Push forward you reduce load. Push just hard enough and you can momentarily get 0g.
 
Jaybird180 said:
Push forward you reduce load. Push just hard enough and you can momentarily get 0g.
Click to expand...
If you build some upward momentum you can maintain 0g for a "fairly" long time. A high speed, high g pullup to a high pitch attitude followed by a ballistic trajectory that's terminated when there's still sufficient altitude to level off without excessive g force does the trick nicely (technically you can maintain 0g all the way to the ground but that's not recommended). I've done this a number of times in various aircraft. IIRC gliders are especially good for this. The "Vomit Comet" utilizes the concept:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2V9h42yspbo

BTW, the reporter in the video mistakenly states that high g is felt until the airplane reaches the top of the climb, in reality 0 g is maintained for a significant portion of the climb as well as part of the descent.
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top