dark light

Whiskey Delta

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,951 through 1,965 (of 2,215 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Dual Engine Failure #401781
    Whiskey Delta
    Participant

    I’m just confused by your post where you show individual failure rate for one engine being 12.5%. The individual engine failure rate doesn’t change with 2 engines, it’s still 50%.

    in reply to: Safety on board #707366
    Whiskey Delta
    Participant

    On a similar note I don’t know why everyone wants to be able to use their cell phones inflight. I’ve tried numerous times to get a signal inflight and never been able to do so even in densely populated areas. I think if the ruling changes on this a lot of people are going to be disappointed that they don’t work.

    in reply to: Dual Engine Failure #401953
    Whiskey Delta
    Participant

    Originally posted by GarryB
    The calsulation is correct but your conclusion is wrong. With a 50% failure rate the chance that with two engines both will fail is halved… and half of 50% is 25%. If the chance of both engines failing was reduced by 1/4 then the result would need to be 1/4 of the failure rate for one engine, which is given as .5 … 1/4 of .5 is 12.5% or .125.

    :confused: :confused: :confused:

    Multiplying the odds together gives you the odds for both failures occuring at the same time. I don’t know where you get process of mulitplying the result against each engines failure rate. What kind of statistic rules are you using? I think you’re over complicating a simple process.

    I did a quick search and came up with this website that gives these simple examples of the probability calculation:

    http://www.mathgoodies.com/lessons/vol6/independent_events.html

    Perhaps you can quote a source for your process.

    MoggyC: This is just one of those stats I’ve seen run in publication editorials that states that multiengine aircraft are more likely to crash as they have more engine and therefor more likely to lose an engine. They always see to use false stats to show their point so I’ve spent some time looking into this one.

    in reply to: Dual Engine Failure #401973
    Whiskey Delta
    Participant

    The Rules of Statisical Probablity show that mutually exclusive events (not dependant on the other) are multiplied.

    Say you have a coin and a dice. What are the chances that the coin will land on heads?

    1 in 2

    What are the chances that the dice while land on 3?

    1 in 6

    What are the chances that tossing both will have the coin land on heads and the dice land on 3?

    1 1 1
    _ x _ = _
    2 6 12

    …one in 12.

    The same can be said for 2 engines to fail. If the had a 50% failure rate what would the chances be that both will fail?

    1 1 1
    _ x _ = _
    2 2 4

    ….1 in 4 or 25%.

    in reply to: C152 Formation Flying #401978
    Whiskey Delta
    Participant

    Do you have fly-in’s at small fields where an airport puts on an event to draw in local pilots and airplanes?

    in reply to: To Spin…or Not to Spin #401983
    Whiskey Delta
    Participant

    Originally posted by weasel
    I can’t believe that you would seriously be mentioning hands off recoverys. If you’ve spun C152s then yes they probably will recover very easily, maybe even hands off but I suspect that is more to do with their forward c of g than because they’ll come out every time.

    It has to do with the inherent Postive Static Stability of the aircraft not CG. Your apprehension is fed by poor education and demonstation.

    You can’t be sure that the aircraft is going to come out. We’re not talking a 1 in 7 chance here, the odds are much much longer, but they’re still there.

    Ah, more fabricated stats. Again, 60 years of training spins at my flight school and there are no fatalities or accidents as a result. Allow for a enough altitude to complete a 4 turn spin and you’ll be fine. Please quote me your source for accidents ratios.

    As an example take the ex-RAF trainer the Bulldog. If the recovery is botched, ie stick back-pressure relaxed before rudder input, the aircraft goes high-rotational.

    Release of back pressure before addition of rudder? I’ve never heard of a recovery even close to that. Isn’t it neutralize controls, opposite rudder, forward yoke and recover? I’ve never heard of an addition of back pressure as that will extend the stall state.

    All actual in flight shutdowns are usually done under VMC at a safe altitude in easy reach of a suitable airfield. It contains an elememt of risk but that risk is properly managed.

    Funny that you would consider a intentional emergency an suitable risk as long as it’s properly mananged yet you are arguing to no end that doing the same for spin training is unacceptable.

    Instructors are taught to teach spinning because it’s in the syllabus, but your “instructor” instructor obviously didn’t give you the health warning mine did to me. And, incidentally, that health warning was given by my instructor examiner and has been re-inforced during a renewal by an ex-RAF “instructor” instructor.

    Health warning? First I didn’t realize that there was a health risk involved with spinning. Perhaps if one is at risk for health related issues they shouldn’t be flying. Second, you spin apprihension is perpetuated from one pilot to the next just as you “stats” that prove it’s a fatal training procedure. Also just because someone was in the military doesn’t make them the be-all and end-all of pilot information. There are just as military idiot pilots as there are private sector pilots. Trust me, I’ve ended up flying with most of the idiots.

    Why be a dinosaur and persist with your macho stuff with spinning.

    A dinosaur? What changed in the last 20 years that made spin training outdated? The laws of physics didn’t shift did they?

    By taking your arguments to a logical conclusion we should all be taking our aircraft into the circuit and stalling and spinning them right there because that’s how it’s going to happen.

    I never said that this is where it’s going to happen. Through a 15 hour student into an airplane for a solo practice of stalls and other manuvers and their inexperience can easily lead to them in advertantly spinning an aircraft. I’ve personally been there as have my students. It happens. Improper rudder or wind shift and send a power-on stall into a spin before you know it. If you haven’t experienced that yet as an instructor then it’s a matter of time.

    The training cycle puts every student pilot into many stituations that if not handled properly can put them in a spin. I’ve talked to plenty of FAA inspectors that have found themselves staring at the spinning earth as a result of the pilot applicant (both the fault of the pilot and as a result of outside factors). While performing power-on stalls with an Instrument student in a C172 we suddenly entered a spin with no corrolating input from myself or the student. I took the aircraft(As he was under the hood) and recovered from the spin. Assuming that the student had done something to cause our spin we did attempted the stall again with the same result but with the student recovering. It seems an unnoticeable inadvertant adjustment to the fixed rudder trim tab had thrown off our ability to control the aircraft in slow flight even though the ball was centered.

    It can happen, and believing other wise is fooling yourself and your student. Not preparing your student for every possiblity is cheating them.

    Rubbish. Emphasise the basics (aviate- navigate-communicate, etc) and to react quickly to the first sign of a stall. After all, how many aircraft will actually stall if you ease the back pressure on the stick anyway.

    “Teach them to fly only on calm, clear, smooth days and during daylight hours and equip them with only enough knowledge so they don’t kill themselves?”

    in reply to: Northwest A330 #714107
    Whiskey Delta
    Participant

    Originally posted by steve rowell
    It looks bloody awful in that new livery

    Man I hate that new livery also. What was wrong with the old one? Plus for a company that losing money hand over fist every quarter the last thing they should do is spend more painting their entire fleet.

    My guess for the A330 is that it was a proving run for Northwests certification.

    in reply to: Biggest fleet in Europe #714111
    Whiskey Delta
    Participant

    Ah, OK. Sorry but I don’t know the answer, I was just curious about the wording. 🙂

    in reply to: C152 Formation Flying #402043
    Whiskey Delta
    Participant

    It has its place though like the little airshow at the local airport here. It was always a crowd pleaser to see a fleet of the schools own C152’s take to the sky and do some formation flying. At a larger, more professional gathering it wouldn’t really fit.

    Someone did use to do a C-150 Aerobat aerobatics routine at the big annual airshow up the road here. They pretended that the instructor forgot to remove the wheel chocks and when he got out the “student” pilot rumbled down the runway and started do all sorts of crazy manuvers once airbourne. It was a great show but I haven’t see it in 5 years.

    in reply to: To Spin…or Not to Spin #402049
    Whiskey Delta
    Participant

    Originally posted by mike currill
    Even though he’s 20 years old?

    Compared to the 20 year olds I know, YES! 😀

    in reply to: Boeing to discontinue 757 #714115
    Whiskey Delta
    Participant

    It’s not like the 757 will disappear out of the skies if production stops. The 727 and DC-9 are all over the place and they haven’t been made for decades. Heck, I still see a DC-3 in operation at least once a month. 🙂

    in reply to: Which Airline Would You Like To Fly With #714116
    Whiskey Delta
    Participant

    By “fly with” do you mean as a passenger or an employee?

    in reply to: Biggest fleet in Europe #714118
    Whiskey Delta
    Participant

    What’s the difference between your Largest and Biggest fleet definition?

    in reply to: To Spin…or Not to Spin #402094
    Whiskey Delta
    Participant

    He’s wise beyond his years.

    in reply to: C152 Formation Flying #402156
    Whiskey Delta
    Participant

    You definately don’t, I wonder why?

Viewing 15 posts - 1,951 through 1,965 (of 2,215 total)