Oracle427

I agree, though I'm not 100% sure that selfish is accurate. I think that people in general are not trained or conditioned on how to react in real emergencies. They have no concrete plans in their minds about what they will do right now if something really bad happens. They may know, I have to leave, but how exactly, and where to, which way, how does that door open again? Why can't I breath? Maybe I should get my coat... Hey wait your turn! Panic causes people to do very strange things. I have never experienced or witnessed panic except for on Sept 11th. I worked in tower 7 on the 34th floor and was at my desk from the start. Initially receive thought it was a bomb or an amazing plane crash. No one knew what happened and no one knew what danger we were in. The sights and sounds were completely foreign. The huge hole in the side of the tower where the plane went in that was barely burning yet left is speculating for several minutes. Confusion had set in. No one was thinking of evacuation and some had started to gather their belongings. Next a senior manager suggested we should evacuate. That statement snapped everyone into action and we all started organizing ourselves to find the exit stairwell to head down 34 flights. For the time being everything was okay. I found myself with a 7 months pregnant colleague who I aided until we left the premises and made our way north on foot. Things hit the fan when we reached the downstairs lobby. This was a 3 story glass facade with 2 banks of stairs and escalators facing directly at the World Trade Center. Things were no longer orderly as the press of humanity sought a way out. Unfortunately all the people exits faced the WTC. There was no way out as there was a lot of debris on the street and the doorways were blocked. The crowd was yelling, shoving and had no direction to go. We were frozen and confused once again, but panic had not yet set in. I asked my colleague to place her back against a large column in the lobby for protection whole I stood in front of her. Within a minute or two the lobby lit up and I felt intense heat as if a hot oven had been opened right in my face. This was the fireball from the second aircraft filling the sky over our building 70ish stories above. I heard chilling screams and watched a mass of humanity reeling backwards from the glass lobby entrance. Debris started raining down and striking the glass. Panic began to set in. I watched office workers begin to climb the sides of the stairs and escalators in an attempt to flee. A huge number of people started to rush on to the escalators while the building sector vainly tried to stop them and control the crowd. Suddenly one of the escalator tracks gave way and sent a wave of bodies washing back down head over heels onto the ground floor right in front of the glass entrance. People stood up and immediately started fighting, fist fighting, with each other. The sector guards were being yelled at and physically assaulted. I could hear people yelling and pleading for a way out over the chaos. I don't know for sure how long we were in that lobby, but eventually there was movement toward the west side and there were yells about an exit. That seemed to somewhat calm the crowd and everyone slowly started making their way to the small number of exits in the rear of the building. Once outside most people froze again barely one block away from the buildings. I kept taking my colleague North away from the buildings for about 4-5 blocks and then we parted ways as she met with several other people she knew. I had no intention of going further away at that moment. Everyone around me was clearly as shocked as I was. We were all fortunate that a firefighter that was sprinting toward the towers stopped to tell at all of us to get away from the area and move North as the towers were unstable and dangerous. He yelled at the huge crowd until we started moving and then resumed sprinting to the burning buildings just a few blocks away. I still wonder what happened to him. I reflect on this a lot, and I make it a point to take my mind through the process of finding all the exits, making my way out and where I will go in case of a serious emergency where I may not be able to see or count on all the options. Your body can't go where your mind has not been. I learned that the people around you may be the biggest threat to your safety, and you may need to direct them in simple and clear terms to move to a specific saafe location to get them moving. Pleading for calm or help does no one any good it just sows confusion. All that said, I have no illusions that any of this would have significantly changed the outcome of this particular crash. They were engulfed in flames right from the start and the cabin was supposedly compromised before the evacuation even started. Might another life or two have been saved if everyone moved faster and with a purpose? Some of the witness accounts suggest that could have been the case. Anyone that stopped to retrieve belongings likely did it because that is what one normally does when leaving a plane. Those people just haven't been properly conditioned to otherwise while under extreme stress. I hope never to have to test any of this in a real plane crash scenario. There is no means to get around a tube full of irrational panicked people and you just have to hope that the crew can maintain enough control over the situation to lead the evacuation.

Good point about the factor of the aircraft being overweight for the landing.

Video shows the airline was not on fire until it landed hard. It porpoised and touched down very hard the second time and then erupted in flames. I wonder if the pilots were having serious control issues. A terrible tragedy.

Stable for a while now, looks good. Fingers crossed.

It works on and off. I can usually get a couple of posts in and read some messages and then it goes offline for a day or two again. Hope they can get the issue sorted ASAP because it can't be good for their business.

Down all weekend

Oh no you didn't!

Wow, what a real standup guy here! He asks for help, people try to help. Then he seems insulted about being asked to provide information and now refuses to share what was the solution so that others may learn. Good luck getting help in the future with this attitude of yours flyswiss. On top of that you've directed your ire at the forum moderator. Not a "genius" move! 🙂

This gives me an idea for a future adventure... The Railroad Museum of Pennsylvania. 🙂 I've been there once, and decided I must come back with more time to truly explore the exhibits.

Speaking of smoking and cleaning inside your computer. Many moons ago when I worked at a service desk where we repaired client pcs there came in a Hewlett Packard that was not booting. The gray case was yellowed, and reeked of cigarette smoke. Judging by yellowing on the outside of the case, it seemed likely that an ashtray was positioned directly in front of the case. When we popped the case open we found that everything was caked in a layer of sticky tar. We put our gloves on attempted to remove parts to reseat everything on the motherboard. As we inspected the motherboard we eventually found a capacitor that had blown open. From the looks of it, the tar had bridged the gap on the terminals and perhaps some condensation had finished the job. These boards in the 386 days weren't using surface mount components without exposed legs. We called the client to break the news that his pc mainboard was toast and he decided to come pick it up without repair. When he came to the store we opened the case and did him what it looked like inside as we rendered the diagnosis. We explained, "Sir, your has computer died of cancer, perhaps you may want to quit smoking." The man chuckled and then turned pale when he saw the inside of the case. He thanked us for work and then took his pc and left the store. I still wonder if we made a difference in his life. - I'm always amazed at how much dust comes out of my PCs when I clean them, and I clean them quarterly, more or less.

I wouldn't expect a jet to have any significant turning tendency, but I have exactly zero hours of experience in them. 🙂 I did have the opportunity to fly multiple times right seat in a Citation Bravo, but was just for fun and couldn't log the time. During one flight while in cruise I asked the pilot about what would happen if an engine failed. He proceeded to pull back the throttle on the left engine to idle and increased the throttle on the right engine, then turned to me said, "There you go." I don't recall him adding any aileron or rudder input. On a 182, if you don't apply rudder on the takeoff, you'll be turned 45 degrees to the left before you even go forward 100 feet. Prop aircraft are a completely different beast!

Yes, they usually will begin to roll if I take my hands off the controls, yes both in IRL and in the sim. The behaviors in the sim will depend on quality of the simulated model, so that does introduce variability that is hard to predict without knowing which products. I don't have many add-ons, so i will not be able to comment on most. I also can't speak for X-Plane behavior as it's been many years since I last used it. X-Plane could be a little squirrelly at times, but that is how flight can be when the air isn't smooth, as it rarely is. I was just flying RW in a 172 in the evening in very calm air. I tried taking my hands off the yoke for a little while. I'd say in about 10 seconds I had rolled somewhere up to 5 degrees to the left. That's just the way it is and I did have a right seat passenger and about 17 gals of fuel per side at that moment. I wouldn't use rudder to correct a yaw until the ball is not centered. The rudder is to keep the aircraft coordinated. If you use the rudder to correct roll, you will cause the aircraft to become uncoordinated. It will eventually roll in the direction of the yaw, but this isn't good technique, so use the aileron and the rudder together as required to maintain coordination. Too much rudder into a turn will cause the airplane to skid and can lead to an accelerated stall. Generally when at cruise speeds and power settings you aren't using the rudder very much. When you roll into and out of a turn at those speeds and power settings you may need rudder if you roll aggressively. Exception to the above about not using rudder to stop roll is when stalling. Ailerons are not effective in a stall and may aggravate the stall and induce a spin, but that isn't what we are talking about here. I would not hold rudder in cruise at all unless the aircraft was uncoordinated. If it is uncoordinated in level cruise, you might be out of trim, or flying with too much power if the ball is off to the right. Like I said earlier, get rid of all null zones if you have any. Zero them out and you will need much less input to correct the tendencies. The lightest touch will solve the problem. The difference again is that ailerons don't self center in these aircraft. They aren't rigged to do so and aerodynamic forces don't take care of it either. You need to just keep a hand on it to keep it where the plane wants to fly straight. I have a Sidewinder 3d Precision Pro and with no null zone, just resting my hand on it gently is more than enough pressure.

I would interpret hands off as, "You are not applying a constant control force to maintain the desired aircraft attitude". So if you are applying a constant pressure to keep the aircraft in some attitude, whether it be straight and level or in a constant speed climb or descent, then something is out of trim. The thing is that with the control systems these light GA aircraft have, you aren't getting much feedback in the roll axis through the yoke. You would certainly be applying some force in the pitch are yaw axis. The ailerons generally don't feel much heavier as you input more roll on the yoke or stick. They will feel heavier as your airspeed increases and feel very light at low airspeeds. It isn't uncommon to find the yoke or stick commanding a very slight input to one side or the other. This could be a function of the slipstream, torque, fuel imbalance or even rigging of the aircraft. Our joysticks are unfortunately unable to mimic this at all. You might need to hold the most gently pressure on the stick to counter this tendency, while in the real aircraft, the yoke or stick will generally remain wherever you command the ailerons to be. Keep in mind that this is true for all aircraft, but has been for the majority of the types I have flown. You wouldn't notice that you are holding ever so slight a roll input. I would strongly recommend taking out all the dead/null zone on your controls if you have any as this will reduce the magnitude of the input you must make. It will more closely reflect the real behavior. I raised autopilot as this is the only tool that will get you "true" hands off flight.

If you are asking if an airplane without an autopilot can be flown "hands free" the answer is no. Regular input is going to be required by the pilot to maintain attitude, altitude and course. Generally speaking the trim will make the airplane fly coordinated or hold a general pitch setting, but you can't set it up so that you can let go of the controls for more than several seconds to a minute depending on the conditions you are flying in, even in totally smooth air. I regularly fly a 172 and two different 182s and while each handles a little different from the other, they all demand constant attention from the pilot from the moment you turn that engine on until the moment you shut it off and tie it down. Every other type of piston powered single I have flown is the same way.

In a no wind situation, the ground speed will rarely be the same as the indicated airspeed. Assuming the indicated airspeed has no error and is the same as calibrated airspeed, the true airspeed will be a factor of pressure, temperature and humidity. In other words the density altitude. In theory, the only time that the indicated airspeed will be the same as the true airspeed and the groundspeed is in the ideal standard atmosphere at sea level in perfectly calm conditions. The fact is that pilots have to accept that the perception of the speed over the ground at a particular airport will vary from day to day and especially from season to season when approaching the airport at the proper indicated airspeed for their aircraft. This is the reason why high altitude airports require significantly longer runways. On hot days in the summer where my local temps go up to 37C and drive the density altitude to 3000 feet, I have to double check my plan takeoff and landing. As a general rule of thumb, the true airspeed increases by 2% for each 1000 feet of density altitude.

It boggles the mind to see such an "error" being committed given the amount of emphasis placed on producing a weight and balance before each and every single flight. With today's technology, it takes less than a minute to do. As noted by Scott, failure to do it or ignore the reality can result on one paying a very high price. It is awful that all those passengers lives were taken, probably all completely unaware of the die that had been cast before they set foot in the aircraft. I witnessed an accident several years ago where a 172S was loaded with 4 adults, a portable BBQ grill, food and full tanks. The temp that day was 37C and I had just returned in my 172 from the beach at Montauk. It was very hazy and visibility want all that great. Density altitude was around 3000 feet at sea level. The only reason the occupants of this aircraft survived was because they never got off the ground. The aircraft barreled down the runway and the takeoff was aborted too late causing the aircraft to crash into the perimeter fence. All escaped unhurt. The surrounding area is all residential and industrial property with essentially no spots to land in an emergency. Worse yet the pilot has been recently certificated. I don't understand, they both should have known better. It can't be ignorance...

The pilots are reducing the rate of descent before making contact with the ground. By increasing the angle of attack, they increase the lift generated by the wings and thereby make the touchdown gently. That said, I believe that the majority of heavy aircraft, don't try to keep the nose up for as long as possible in the same way that many light aircraft would. In light aircraft it is advantageous to maximize aerodynamic braking by rolling with the nose up even after ground contact In heavier aircraft, I see that most promptly lower the nose and extend braking surfaces and reverse thrust. There are plenty of specialized tools to aid in braking and it helps to steer with the nose wheel on the ground. There are exceptions that immediately come to mind such as many fighter aircraft. The F16 uses the aircraft as a large aerodynamic brake on rollout. So the answer depends on the aircraft, but I would argue as a general point that tubeliners don't maintain a noise high attitude during landing any longer than necessary to control the rate of descent on touchdown acc then to lower the nose wheel to the ground in a controlled fashion.

For A2A, there is a patch available on their forums. Not sure about the rest.

Are you launching from a saved flight or the default trike at Friday Harbor scenario? Saved flights may include some parameters that cause initialization issues with sophisticated add on aircraft.

Top right of their website. Contact Us

At KCDW, it is very common to have both 22 and 28 in use at the same time with 5-7 aircraft in the pattern or approaching to land with several more in the airspace either transitioning or departing. The instructions usually are to follow the aircraft ahead, and the routing is typically to fly to a point that enters the pattern at midfield downwind for the runway you are given. Exceptions are when you are better positioned to enter on base or straight in for a runway. They may also ask to extend downwind or make a 360 to fit in some other traffic ahead of you depending on their speed and position. It is very common to have aircraft climbing out from 28 underneath you as you fly downwind on 22. You sometimes came face to face with traffic outbound from 28 as you on the 45 for 22. It is the pilot's responsibility to see and avoid the other traffic. Tower does not provide separation service for VFR traffic. They are concerned with the runway and maintaining the orderly flow of traffic. They do provide advisories, but that depends on their workload. When is very busy, all you may get is a caution for many VFR targets in your vicinity. It is a team effort and the pilots need to make sure they maintain separation and position and make timely reports to help the tower crew do their job.

There are contact cleaner/lubricants for electronics that you can buy at most hardware stores. One can will probably last the rest of your life.

I have my doubts that you will get this answer in a flight simulation forum. Maybe the odd commercial pilot in here may know. Have you checked Pilots of America?

Yes, just look at the job listings on their career sites. Many good opportunities there. I have a friend at a senior level in IT at a major airline. Also look at the training outfits like Flight Safety International. Lots of programming roles there and room for growth.

It won't cause bad habits if you are aware of the limitations. Like any tool, it can be used incorrectly. I use it all the time to practice procedures and flows when I am not flying and it definitely helps to keep me sharp. It's no substitute for practicing actual takeoffs and landings nor basic maneuvers like steep turns, or stalls, simulated engine failures or emergency descents. It is great for practicing instrument scans, though that won't be happening in a J-3! Unfortunately, FSX does not model forward and side slips well. That is one limitation of the engine. In a J-3 I will usually slip in a curving base to final to maintain visibility of the runway, but in FSX this doesn't behave close to reality. I do like the excessively squirrelly grind handing of the default J-3. It is much less forgiving than the real thing, but that's not a bad thing when practicing.