Jump to content

Manwell

Members
  • Posts

    159
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Manwell

  1. Correct Nev. Fight or flight are instinctive responses programmed in the reptilian brain, the most basic and oldest part of the brain. They worked when we were living in caves, or during times of conflict, but aren't optimal in modern situations like flying. I think it was the enlightenment period when people first tried to understand the world based on reason, rather than superstition, and behave in accordance with logic, rather than emotion or instinct. An old aviation adage was declared when an aircraft landed safely to reinforce this concept - "Once again, science and skill have triumphed over ignorance and superstition." Unless societies are eternally vigilant, they end up devolving back into ignorance and superstition, and that's usually a precursor to a cataclysm that forces those societies to correct their thinking. Cataclysms like accidents, can be avoided if societies or pilots, simply remain connected to reality and don't allow themselves to be fooled into joining the ignorant and superstitious when they're in the minority. It becomes harder when the majority adopt flawed thinking as true though, and increasingly unpopular for any who dare to warn the deluded. Voltaire put it succinctly - "It's dangerous to be right when established men are wrong."
  2. Cognitive dissonance is when you hear something that doesn't resonate with previously learned "knowledge". Dissonance is the opposite of resonance. When something resonates with you it's in harmony with previous thinking. The Dunning-Kruger effect describes how people who are superficial thinkers are MORE sure of their thinking than deeper thinkers, who can see many alternative explanations that fit. Wikipedia is a good resource for checking out things like that Butch.
  3. That's to be expected kasper. Some instructors I flew with were far more annoying than others, and some of those actually knew what they were doing, but not all. Aviation is extremely unforgiving of personal weakness, and it's never easy to overcome our weaknesses. I remember a sign in a doctor's surgery on Langkawi Island that said, "Winners do, What losers don't..... want to do." In other words, to achieve more in life, we just have to be willing to do the things we really don't want to do, but know are best. In a big picture sense, the world is in it's present state of division and confusion because most of us haven't bothered to do what we know is best. A lot of that is due to individuals not wanting to do what's best in their personal life, which prevents them from caring about the broader community as their own dramas increase. Considered in context, each of us are individually and collectively responsible for all the world's problems, but rather than accept responsibility, we delegate that responsibility to others so we can continue on our merry way through life, leaving a swath of destruction behind us. It's entirely understandable that most don't want to consider that, but that's the difference between children and adults. It's not just age.
  4. Thanks for providing that option kasper. What you've described would also suggest the possibility that a significant number don't know how to fly, and don't even know they don't know. People in that category would exhibit similar responses to those listed, according to research findings that produced the Dunning-Kruger effect. It's also an example of cognitive dissonance if someone finds information that doesn't resonate with previously accepted information, and instead of comparing the new information against the old for validity, takes the easy option and says - yeah.... nah. Very scientific.... For the record, trolls work to stifle effective debate usually by using emotive language. All I'm trying to do is explain something I learned after years of flying and instructing that few people know, that will save lives. Can I ask, would you be more inclined to pay attention if I was selling the information at great cost?
  5. One could say they have always been in aviation onetrack. Considering how tightly their monopolies are controlled, companies like Cessna, Piper, Beechcraft, Boeing, Northrup, Bombardier, McDonnell Douglas, etc. are able to dictate the price of entry into the club, and have never had their monopoly cartel pricing power challenged. If that's not considered a scam, then they've scammed us well. If you or I owned a small charter company and had a Cessna 206 go down in the bush, we'd attract more grief than Boeing has from the recent 737Max saga. In fact, even if we DIDN'T have any prangs but had strong views about safety that differ from the regulator, we'd be driven to bankruptcy. Considered objectively, CASA and other regulatory bodies are designed to perpetuate monopolies, NOT ensure safety. To paraphrase your end quote, "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully, as when they do it from mistaken moral conviction, religiously."
  6. You're too humble Nev, but don't worry too much. That's one of the most difficult virtues to perfect. The art of Government is to amuse the citizens while they steal us blind. "Bread and Circuses" kept the Romans distracted while their ruling classes raped and pillaged, not just other countries, but their own as well. The irony is that they do us the courtesy of providing clues for those "with eyes to see", hidden in plain sight. Here's a couple. Govern = Control. -ment = mind (as in mental). Depart = Leave. You can work the rest out yourself.
  7. Subtle Spooks. Reminds me of the story about the SR71, Radar Check... Besides, any aircraft someone else has bought and is paying you to fly ain't bad, even if it's an overpriced, thirsty, ridiculously expensive to maintain, but fast, pig.
  8. Agreed Happyflyer, but just one question, how do you fly in balance? Yes, I'm serious...
  9. Taking the challenge to define aeros, consider this from Tin Legs Bader, "Rules are for the obedience of fools, and the guidance of wise men." In other words, rules are purely a metric - a rule is a measurement device - nothing more. The whole issue is then neatly simplified, you decide what is aeros in your aircraft, and if you bugger it up, then you might just become wiser.
  10. While it's usual to blame the pilots, even though the buck stops there in every accident, something about this one doesn't add up. Maybe they hesitated on the go-around, as suggested, and maybe the jet didn't respond as they said for some reason. Without further evidence I'd be hesitant to arrive at any conclusions.
  11. Don't you get it derek? That's the whole idea! Council have to spend ratepayers money, so they may as well spend it with their own companies if possible. When they do that, economic activity is created which benefits the feds and the state by generating taxes, so everyone's happy. Except stupid taxpayers.
  12. By the screen shots you posted Derek, total capital is 10 lakhs. About $20,000. I'd guess it doesn't have approvals, but thinking outside the square, what if the company was set up by the company that will get the contract to build the hangar, because they have mates in council?
  13. Yeah, I suppose it is possible. Speaking of this reminds me of a close call at Jabiru by a Citation years ago. I was working for Kak Air, and we happened to be on the ground while a pair of Citations joined the circuit for landing. They were carrying execs from Ranger Uranium mine, and if you've never been to Jabiru, it was basically a banana on it's edge, with the first half bitumen and slightly uphill, and the second half gravel and downhill. The first jet came in hot and didn't touch down until the end of the bitumen, then threw the thing into reverse thrust and barely stopped by the end of the strip. We found out later that was the new guy. Then, the Chief Pilot of the company touched down on the threshold and pulled it up by the end of the bitumen, taxiing off without touching the gravel. For the record, we had trouble doing that in C206, 207, and 210s. Generally, aircraft bounce because they're too hot on approach, and that is usually at the recommended approach speed too.
  14. That's one possibility, but doesn't explain both the bounce and the lack of engine response Nev. Crew with that level of experience would basically do the investigator's job for them unless they were trying to hide something.
  15. No responses? Are we all in agreement, or doesn't that sound worthy enough to justify a response?
  16. The key question is why the aircraft failed to respond in the go-around attempt. They certainly weren't newbies, so you'd have to give them the benefit of the doubt on that, but why the thing bounced with such experienced pilots is also hard to explain.
  17. Trolls are people who are either volunteers, or paid to divide by spreading lies, or by supporting false information. Some are malicious, and others are just gullible. Some of them are very subtle and difficult to define as a troll, but there are ways to identify them. Deciding whether they're volunteers who actually believe the lies or false information they're spreading, or paid to do so is a little more difficult, but not impossible.
  18. By the way, I don't have anything against David at all, in fact, I'm glad I'm not in his shoes. Do you know him, or at least know his story? His life hasn't been easy. All I said was that it's a tax dodge, and it's his hobby. Both true. The inference about us already paying relates to his source of income, and that's certainly not his fault.
  19. It's a tax dodge and it pays for his hobby. If entry into the museum was free, we'd still be paying too much if we knew how much we've paid already.
  20. Manwell

    Stalls

    Will you be, though Butch, that is the question? Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take up arms against a sea of troubles, and so doing, end them?
  21. Manwell

    Stalls

    Agreed, I've laboured the point more than enough. Apologies to all for my lack of consideration.
  22. Manwell

    Stalls

    That depends how you define productive Nev. The sky, like the sea, is cruelly unforgiving of folly, and human factors are without doubt the largest known cause of accidents. Learning skills and knowledge is easy, but learning the right mindset can be more difficult, especially if people refuse to accept fault. This conversation may seem unproductive in terms of aviation knowledge, but it's invaluable in terms of adopting the right attitude toward criticism. Any old pilot would know that, but fewer would accept criticism graciously, in the manner it's intended. That quality is priceless.
  23. Manwell

    Stalls

    I'd be glad to get back to the topic litespeed. If you recall, the whole reason for this diversion is because a few decided to be insulted because I called one a great guy and I refused to accept one important element in an insult - that it was intentional. Then you decided to weigh in on the action and start insulting me, none of which I've taken to heart simply because none of it is accurate. And now, you're trying to justify your actions rather than apologize like a man. Yes, it is pretty simple really... If people choose to take offence easily and aren't pulled up on it by their friends, eventually they will take offence at everything. If, and when it gets to that stage, it would be classified as a mental illness, but it's simply a case of flawed thinking that hasn't been corrected early enough by their friends. The next person to try is their enemy, and if that doesn't work, then the last resort is the worst of all - the psychiatrist.
  24. This is interesting. David Lowy owns Temora, so this is a cosy political favour for him or his dad. This way, David gets his cake and eats it too.... and we pay the bill.
  25. Manwell

    Stalls

    You can think whatever you like Litespeed, it's your life, but adult conversation is not just for polite chit chat. The only reason anyone would think words have power is if they highlighted a truth they'd rather not accept. Then, as a means of deflecting attention onto the messenger, the latest tactic is to play the victim, acting as if feelings have been "hurt". My sister used that ploy on me years ago, so I learned it well. She's much better at it than you are. I never said it's always the recipient's fault either, in fact, the only time it becomes the recipient's fault is when they have been made aware of a problem and chosen to ignore it. It's entirely your prerogative to not share my view too, litespeed. In fact, I'm glad you don't, but I do wish you'd justify yours instead of simply attacking me or mine.
×
×
  • Create New...