PDA

View Full Version : to what stend would i be able to land a real plane with the game as aid



raaaid
07-16-2006, 05:18 AM
i use to land at 0 throttle pretty well

if the two pilots ate bad fish and knoked out could i stand up when the airhostess asks "anybody knows how to pilot a jumbo?"

raaaid
07-16-2006, 05:18 AM
i use to land at 0 throttle pretty well

if the two pilots ate bad fish and knoked out could i stand up when the airhostess asks "anybody knows how to pilot a jumbo?"

Taylortony
07-16-2006, 05:25 AM
Anyone could land an aircraft just let gravity do the work............... It is in how many pieces and where that would be, that would be the problem, a 747 can land itself, you just would need talking through it....

StG2_Schlachter
07-16-2006, 05:25 AM
If you try to land a jumbo with 0% throttle it will crash http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

You need to use the flaps, which slow you down very much. If you don't use flaps, you will have a very large angle of attack when you land and you will strike the tail of your jumbo on the runway and die http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

slipBall
07-16-2006, 05:27 AM
No such thing as a "bad" fish, they are just misunderstood. I think that you should stand up, it may be the only chance that you have

Engadin
07-16-2006, 05:29 AM
A WWII fighter and a Jumbo both fly, but one like a bee and the other like a penguin.

If you take the controls and I am among the passengers, I'll jump out! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif as I'll have more possiblities to survive using my shirt as parachute! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

S! pato

slipBall
07-16-2006, 05:33 AM
I recomend the movie "Airport" for some helpfull pointers. Over http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

The-Pizza-Man
07-16-2006, 05:40 AM
landing is the easy part, it's the approach that requires skill. If you can't pull off the approach correctly you might as well forget about the landing.

Taylortony
07-16-2006, 05:42 AM
Go sit at the back, you can watch everyone else die first then http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

carguy_
07-16-2006, 06:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Taylortony:
Go sit at the back, you can watch everyone else die first then http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL a little bonus for working as a stewardess http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

|CoB|_Spectre
07-16-2006, 07:05 AM
A lot of people have fantasized about just such a scenario:

Stewardess with distress in her voice: "Please remain calm, but the pilot and copilot have become incapacitated. Is anyone on board that knows how to fly a airplane?".

A Walter Mitty kind of guy swallows hard, stands and says: "I can do it" and saves the day.

Truth be known, with "jumpseat priviledges" between commercial carriers, there are probably a several qualified ATP licensed, type rated pilots on board. Most have would rather sit in available passenger sections than ride in the cockpit jumpseat. After all, they usually get paid to sit up there.

But, to answer your original question, you have a better understanding of the basic physics involved, but not having actually done it in the specific aircraft type, would be dicey. Knowing the "numbers" (stall speed in various configurations, max flap/gear down velocities, etc.) is very important as is familiarity with which gauges and indicators do what, and where switches, levers and knobs you'll need are located. With absolutely still air (no crosswind, no wake turbulence from the wide-body landing two miles ahead of you, etc.), would certainly help. After touchdown, there are many things that will need to be done to slow that big boy down to avoid dying on the overrun area. If you were probably going to die anyway, it'd be worth a shot. Just hope you've got George Kennedy in the tower to talk you down.

There have been several instances over the years where a passenger with little or no flight training has had to take over control of a light aircraft when the pilot became incapacitated (heart attack, stroke, etc.) and survived the landing with coaching from the ground. Managing a light general aviation airplane, particularly with fixed gear and prop, is probably do-able with good coaching, a clear head, the right conditions and sufficient motivation. The will to survive is a top notch motivator.

Taylortony
07-16-2006, 07:19 AM
I have landed the VC 10 simulator quite a few times when we used to use it on nights for engineering training.......... Some of them were hard, but we would have walked away from it........ some were actually quite good...... had a go on the VC9 merchantman one too when Hunting still had it up and running... struggled like hell to get that round the circuit and back onto the ground........ all I can say is at least the crash services didn't have far to drive.......... tried the Jag one in the RAF and that was quite easy to fly....

One problem you might have post 911 is getting into the cockpit, as the doors are now armoured on all pax planes ( OR SHOULD BE BY NOW) they are bullet proof and designed to withstand the likes of a catering truck and a load of people ramming the door with it.........

WarWolfe_1
07-16-2006, 08:02 AM
I would grab the steward and use her as a matress to land on after I bailed http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Everyman for himself says me http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

willyvic
07-16-2006, 11:26 AM
http://www.geocities.com/mompeepers/willyvic/e6a.jpg



Used to fly the Navy E6A(base on the 707)simulator while attached the the training unit in Tinker AFB. Did quite well with take offs and landings with docile weather dialed in. Taxiing the damn thing drove me nuts though. Would bang the guys around quite frequently trying to get to an from the duty.

To answer the original question, the odds are against you successfully setting a big bird down in one piece. As stated, in a sterile environment you may probably cope . Throw in real weather patterns and stress and it is a different ball game.

WV.

LStarosta
07-16-2006, 12:05 PM
You guys do know that these things land themselves, right?

Scragbat
07-16-2006, 12:17 PM
Surely you can't be serious?

&lt; Scrag wonders if there are any 'Airplane' fans here? &gt; http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif

heywooood
07-16-2006, 12:18 PM
I would rather watch the stew inflate Otto Pilot than see any one of you try to land a loaded 747.

Warrington_Wolf
07-16-2006, 12:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by raaaid:
i use to land at 0 throttle pretty well

if the two pilots ate bad fish and knoked out could i stand up when the airhostess asks "anybody knows how to pilot a jumbo?" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Before I had my trial flying lesson, I decided that i would "start training".
I bought the CH flight sim yoke and pedals and trained for 7 months on FS2004 and IL-2 using bombers.
By the time of my lesson, I could fly a light aircraft in FS2004 quite proficiently.
When I actually went up I found it possible but a lot harder to maintain altitude and heading. The main reason for this was the actual sensation of flight, the turbulence and inertia were fun but I wasn't used to it.
The area that FS2004 and IL-2 did help me was using the instruments. I found using the instruments second nature, my flight instructor also noticed that it gave me an advantage.
To answer your question, I doubt that just sim experience would be enough to control an aircraft. I know that I probably couldn't land an aircraft of any size on my own just yet( a situation I hope to rectify).
It is like saying that playing Call of Duty will make you into a soldier, or that playing Grand Tourismo will make you a racing driver.

In conclusion unless you have real world experience in aircraft operations, it aint gonna happen. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

WarWolfe_1
07-16-2006, 12:37 PM
What about the 14 year old kid that stole and Flew a plane?

heywooood
07-16-2006, 12:38 PM
well - he took off ok...but the landing?...not so good.

WWMaxGunz
07-16-2006, 12:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by |CoB|_Spectre:
But, to answer your original question, you have a better understanding of the basic physics involved, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have -any- idea who raaiiid is?

|CoB|_Spectre
07-16-2006, 01:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by |CoB|_Spectre:
But, to answer your original question, you have a better understanding of the basic physics involved, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have -any- idea who raaiiid is? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not a clue. Someone with sticky "a" and "i" on the keyboard?

Taylortony
07-16-2006, 01:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LStarosta:
You guys do know that these things land themselves, right? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I id say that in the secon post, u must have slept through that one............... would add you need an airport with the aids to do autoland............ A lot of aiports in the world you would be lucky to find a flushing toilet let alone ILS

Taylortony
07-16-2006, 01:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Warrington_Wolf:
[QUOTE]
Before I had my trial flying lesson, I decided that i would "start training".
I bought the CH flight sim yoke and pedals and trained for 7 months on FS2004 and IL-2 using bombers.
By the time of my lesson, I could fly a light aircraft in FS2004 quite proficiently.
When I actually went up I found it possible but a lot harder to maintain altitude and heading. The main reason for this was the actual sensation of flight, the turbulence and inertia were fun but I wasn't used to it.
The area that FS2004 and IL-2 did help me was using the instruments. I found using the instruments second nature, my flight instructor also noticed that it gave me an advantage.
To answer your question, I doubt that just sim experience would be enough to control an aircraft. I know that I probably couldn't land an aircraft of any size on my own just yet( a situation I hope to rectify).
It is like saying that playing Call of Duty will make you into a soldier, or that playing Grand Tourismo will make you a racing driver.

In conclusion unless you have real world experience in aircraft operations, it aint gonna happen. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>



Prob with flight sims is you fly heads down and can lose situation awareness which is a really bad thing...................

If I ever got stuck in the situation for real in a light aircraft all be it a twin or a single, I know I could get us back on the ground in one bit........ purely because I have landed both types no problem, I understand the radios and what is needed to fly the aircraft and land it...... what i would need is instruction from the ground as to speeds, flap settings etc............ the rest would not bother me...... well till i was a quivering wreck post landing.

ploughman
07-16-2006, 03:40 PM
This'sim's got to be better than nothing, but it's not the real thing. As to, 'is this grand tourismo with wings', well I at least know what all the dials and stuff mean which is a bit more than most folk. Although that might just mean I have a decidedly academic appreciation of how doomed I am if I find myself in a cockpit in a sticky situation. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

slipBall
07-16-2006, 04:26 PM
Before you rush into the cocpit, grab a couple of those little bottle's off of the cart,

Taylortony
07-16-2006, 04:30 PM
your gonna need something bigger than that to defacate into

LStarosta
07-16-2006, 04:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Taylortony:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LStarosta:
You guys do know that these things land themselves, right? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I id say that in the secon post, u must have slept through that one............... would add you need an airport with the aids to do autoland............ A lot of aiports in the world you would be lucky to find a flushing toilet let alone ILS </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Why the hell would a 747 be flying to an airport with no toilet?

Airports that are large enough to service a 747 tend to have an ILS.

Or maybe I grew up spoiled flying in the United States.

LStarosta
07-16-2006, 04:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Taylortony:



what i would need is instruction from the ground as to speeds, flap settings etc............ the rest would not bother me...... well till i was a quivering wreck post landing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's why your aircraft is equipped with a POH by law.

ploughman
07-16-2006, 04:49 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">


Why the hell would a 747 be flying to an airport with no toilet?

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh Lord, whilst wiping wine off my screen. That's just sureal. Please, with your permission, can I put that in my SIG?

Taylortony
07-16-2006, 04:49 PM
?


seen 747's at places you wouldn't dream of landing one. let alone getting it back off..


POH are not mandatory to carry onboard over here period

LStarosta
07-16-2006, 05:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Taylortony:
?


seen 747's at places you wouldn't dream of landing one. let alone getting it back off..


POH are not mandatory to carry onboard over here period </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol omg, we're talking SOP here, not some "omg a 747 could land in a football complex assuming a 150 knot headwind."

Most if not all international airports that service jumbo jets raaid was referring to ARE equipped with an ILS. Fact.

RCAF_Irish_403
07-16-2006, 05:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by slipBall:
I recomend the movie "Airport" for some helpfull pointers. Over http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Do you like gladiator movies?"

Viper2005_
07-16-2006, 05:52 PM
Challenge #1 - alert the authorities to your plight!

Where's the PTT button?

Flying the aeroplane is all very well, but the chances are that an airliner would be on autopilot; as such, you'll need to find the autopilot disconnect if you want to hand-fly it.

Of course if you elect to hand-fly, you may not be able to get the autopilot working again...

If you manage to talk to people on the ground, I suppose that you can hope that somebody can be obtained to talk you down.

Hand flying may well not be involved in this scenario with a modern airliner; faced with an inexperienced stand-in pilot or an automatic ILS approach taken below minima, the authorities might well opt for the latter since a semi-controlled crash in roughly the right place at roughly the right speed offers good odds of getting at least some people out alive (as demonstrated by the Sioux City crash in 1989).

A badly flown approach could easily result in a stall/spin and a total loss.

Personally as the holder of a basic PPL, I just hope that it never happens to me. I'd be confident in my ability to fly the aeroplane around the sky, but that just isn't good enough. If I didn't find the PTT and get plenty of help over the radio I'd be very unlikely to get away with it, as was demonstrated by the Helios disaster in 2005. Chances are that the complexity of the systems would be my undoing...

hunhunter-texas
07-16-2006, 07:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Taylortony:
?


seen 747's at places you wouldn't dream of landing one. let alone getting it back off..


POH are not mandatory to carry onboard over here period </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bruntingthorpe springs to mind.....747 is definitely there, toilet facilities though....near zero!! Chalk that one up to TT http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

TT, if you intend to continue contributing to this debate, please remember that some of the people you are baiting have never been outside of the US and therefore will have a blinkered view on what an "international airport" is. There are international airport's in Africa, Eastern Europe, Far East and former Soviet states that do not have ILS but still get plenty of 747's. Some of these places still think VOR is modern technology!!

And to those that think they could fly and land a plane (manually) with only PC sim experience....dream on!!

LStarosta
07-16-2006, 08:23 PM
Awww schucks lil ol' redneck me's uneduficateds about teh outside worlde!

ILS is a standard in the vast majority of international hubs. Go ahead, sift through your outdated approach plates for exceptions to the rule to prove me wrong.

Which takes me back to my point that if not autoland, then you'd have all the glideslope information you need via ILS to land the plane manually, since chances are your destination will have ILS.

Which is a moot point if raaid doesn't know how to use navigation radios.

WWMaxGunz
07-16-2006, 08:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by |CoB|_Spectre:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by |CoB|_Spectre:
But, to answer your original question, you have a better understanding of the basic physics involved, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have -any- idea who raaiiid is? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not a clue. Someone with sticky "a" and "i" on the keyboard? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How about someone actually working on anti-gravity, perpetual motion and reactionless motors?
That's how well he understands physics.

Friendly_flyer
07-17-2006, 01:46 AM
I think perhaps I'd be able to do something landing-like in a small plane (say a Fokker 50 or something like it), but a big 747 would be something else. I have had the chance of sneaking a look into the cockpits of bout. The smaller turboprop cockpit isn't that dissimilar to what we have in this game. I can make out at least the basic instruments. The 747 cockpit requires a map and a compass just to find the pilots seat.

Playing this sim, we know that there are such things as stall speeds, flaps, propeller pitch etc. But as Ploughman so eloquently put it, it might just mean we€ll get a bit more realistic about or chances should one of us ever get there.

squadldr76
07-17-2006, 02:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Scragbat:
Surely you can't be serious? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, I am serious.



...And don't call me Shirley.

WOLFMondo
07-17-2006, 02:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by raaaid:
i use to land at 0 throttle pretty well

if the two pilots ate bad fish and knoked out could i stand up when the airhostess asks "anybody knows how to pilot a jumbo?" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Landing a WW2 fighter and any Jet is a different kettle of fish. Poweroff landings in jets is not a healthy idea. Your not even supposed to land your WW2 prop fighters on 0 throttle either. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

WWMaxGunz
07-17-2006, 02:15 AM
I could just see ATC trying to explain thrust reversers to a game player trying to bring a
big jet in for landing.

ploughman
07-17-2006, 02:34 AM
Hey, Taylor Tony. Didn't that TNT 737 that you told us about leave it's undercart at East Midlands and its pride at Birmingham Airport after initially trying to land at East Midlands with no ILS (broken) and poor visibility?

Nice toilets at East Midlands, very nice.

Tusseladden
07-17-2006, 04:00 AM
I've gotten the opportunity once to try out a real F-16 simulator, designed for real fighter pilots. It has a working hud, all working levers and gauges, in all it was as close to reality as one can get!

Anyhow, my background experience came from computer simulators such as FS2000 and CFS type games, maybe even Falcon 4.
So basically I switched on the ILS, managed my throttle, kept a decent airspeed... flew with the HUD instruments and nailed a perfect landing which actually amazed the instructor standing next to me. I was only like... 14 years old http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif That was great.

I'm pretty sure that if you can line up with the runway, you can pretty much land the plane. Same with IL-2... I ask all my friends that come over if they can attempt a landing... nearly everybody fails to find the runway, and once they do, they hit it from the wrong angle which leads to a crash'n burn or a twisted prop or no gear http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif. On the other hand, If I line the plane up for them... at least they hit the runway without breaking airplane parts http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

raaaid
07-17-2006, 05:12 AM
well got it

but at least i should be able to land a war bird or a cesna right?

Friendly_flyer
07-17-2006, 05:19 AM
"Land" in the broader sence of the term, possibly yes. At least you'd stand a decent chance of surviving the meeting with the ground, while someone who have no idea of how a plane work should not.

hunhunter-texas
07-17-2006, 06:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ploughman:
Hey, Taylor Tony. Didn't that TNT 737 that you told us about leave it's undercart at East Midlands and its pride at Birmingham Airport after initially trying to land at East Midlands with no ILS (broken) and poor visibility?

Nice toilets at East Midlands, very nice. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Incorrect. The Pilot initiated a diversion to Nottingham East Midlands airport, where the weather conditions required the crew to plan and conduct a Category IIIA approach to Runway 27. In the late stages of this approach, the autopilot momentarily disengaged and re-engaged, and the aircraft deviated from both the glideslope and localiser. It landed heavily on a grass area to the left of the runway threshold, whereupon the right main landing gear detached from the aircraft. After scraping the right engine, outer flap track fairing and right wing tip on the ground, the aircraft became airborne again and made an emergency diversion to Birmingham Airport. The aircraft landed on Runway 33 on its nose and left landing gears, and the right engine.

I'd say he did pretty good all things considered http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

ploughman
07-17-2006, 06:19 AM
Thanks for the correction there Hunhunter. As you say, good save there by the pilot, looks like he came within a cat's wisker of losing it. Tony posted a photo taken form the air of the gouge the jet made in the grass, it was maybe halfway between the runway and the apron populated with aircraft.

SeaFireLIV
07-17-2006, 07:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LStarosta:


ILS is a standard in the vast majority of international hubs. Go ahead, sift through your outdated approach plates for exceptions to the rule to prove me wrong.

Which takes me back to my point that if not autoland, then you'd have all the glideslope information you need via ILS to land the plane manually, since chances are your destination will have ILS.

Which is a moot point if raaid doesn't know how to use navigation radios. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So it`s not so simple as to say `these things land themselves!" is it? You still need to know what you`re doing, so most people without flying an airliner experience would crash and burn. They don`t land themselves after all. We are not as advance as you think - at least commercially, or we wouldn`t need qualified pilots. We`d just employ bus drivers.

As for Raaiiid flying a 747 in an emergency. Sorry, but if I was aboard I`d render him unconscous and take my own chances at trying to land the thing - wouldn`t be easy, even with the `plane lands by itself ILS`.

Actually, I`d render you unconscous too if you think they would `just land themselves` without some knowledge on your part.

Oh, and flying, landing a jet is far different to flying, landing a WWII plane.

BigC208
07-17-2006, 08:21 AM
If there is an ILS system on the field and the radio is on the right frequency you have a chance. All you have to do is continue letting the autopilot fly. Get instructions from ATC how to use the heading bug and altitude select mode on the autopilot. With the altitude and right heading set you have all the time in the world to get explained how to set the Localizer Frequency in the nav radio, wich buttons to push to make it fly a coupled approach on the autopilot with the auto throttles. After all this is set and done and verified you get radar vectors to intercept the localizer at the right altitude. After it's coupled all you have to do is drop flaps and landing gear when atc tells you and let the aircraft intercept the glideslope. This bird will land itself in zero zero visability so not to many worries about moderate winds or bad visibility. After landing reverse the thrust and aply brakes. You saved the day! If you try to do all this without the autopilot you willl not have had the benefit of instuctions on flap/speed settings or even reading the POH for this info for you will have your hands full keeping the bird in the air. I guess if you are a rabbit FS2004 sim junkie who knows how the systems work in the more complicated airliners that are being simulated pretty closely these days you have a good chance of pulling it off by pushing a bunch of buttons instead of stick flying it into the ground.

triad773
07-17-2006, 08:42 AM
Fascinating thread. Yes I have to admit I had thought of this: I explained it to my daughter when she asked: "is it a computer game, or a simulator?" I simply said that if I or one of those from this community happened to be in an airliner, whose pilots became incapacitated, one of us taking the controls would be better on average then someone with NO flight time, virtual or otherwise taking the controls. So I told her yes this game IS a simulator. But I imagine that the stress of the situation, and the accompanying physical sensations would be plenty to distract me from watching the instruments, or listening to George Kennedy http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

~S~

skabbe
07-17-2006, 09:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by StG2_Schlachter:
If you try to land a jumbo with 0% throttle it will crash http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

You need to use the flaps, which slow you down very much. If you don't use flaps, you will have a very large angle of attack when you land and you will strike the tail of your jumbo on the runway and die http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yes its true.

Can someone tell me how split-flaps can give so much lift? is it only good for propellerplanes?

rnzoli
07-17-2006, 09:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hunhunter-texas:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ploughman:
Hey, Taylor Tony. Didn't that TNT 737 that you told us about leave it's undercart at East Midlands and its pride at Birmingham Airport after initially trying to land at East Midlands with no ILS (broken) and poor visibility?

Nice toilets at East Midlands, very nice. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Incorrect. The Pilot initiated a diversion to Nottingham East Midlands airport, where the weather conditions required the crew to plan and conduct a Category IIIA approach to Runway 27. In the late stages of this approach, the autopilot momentarily disengaged and re-engaged, and the aircraft deviated from both the glideslope and localiser. It landed heavily on a grass area to the left of the runway threshold, whereupon the right main landing gear detached from the aircraft. After scraping the right engine, outer flap track fairing and right wing tip on the ground, the aircraft became airborne again and made an emergency diversion to Birmingham Airport. The aircraft landed on Runway 33 on its nose and left landing gears, and the right engine.

I'd say he did pretty good all things considered http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, getting airborne again with a damaged airplane... Reminds me of a Tu-154 that touched down wheels up on Thessaloniki airport. Crew from the aircraft waiting near the runway threshold shouted on the radio, so they pushed the throttle forward and took off again after scraping the bottom for ~200 meters. Then they made another circle, extended the gear and landed "normally".

That aircraft was damaged beyond economical repair. Very experienced captain discharged from the airline, never allowed to fly again. There were ugly scenes in the media, when the cocpit crew was trying to sort out the blame.

hunhunter-texas
07-17-2006, 09:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rnzoli:
Yeah, getting airborne again with a damaged airplane... Reminds me of a Tu-154 that touched down wheels up on Thessaloniki airport. Crew from the aircraft waiting near the runway threshold shouted on the radio, so they pushed the throttle forward and took off again after scraping the bottom for ~200 meters. Then they made another circle, extended the gear and landed "normally".

That aircraft was damaged beyond economical repair. Very experienced captain discharged from the airline, never allowed to fly again. There were ugly scenes in the media, when the cocpit crew was trying to sort out the blame. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I gather that the problem with the TNT plane occurred at a very low altitude. The pilot initiated a go around but before the engines could spool up to full power, the plane hit the ground.

Under the circumstances the pilot did the right thing in initiating the go around. I don't suppose for one moment he planned to make contact with the ground, do you?? Maybe he should have just let it sink into the deck without attempting to arrest the decent rate?? Certaily wouldn't have the worry of a damaged plane getting airbourne again.

TT will have more knowledge of this incident than myself, I am only reading it from the official AAIB document.

rnzoli
07-17-2006, 10:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Under the circumstances the pilot did the right thing in initiating the go around. I don't suppose for one moment he planned to make contact with the ground, do you?? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol, similar disputes were raging for weeks after the Tu-154 accident on local internal forums http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

What I suppose is that he may be partly responsible for "the circumstances" (momentary autopilot fault = crash land? I don't buy this), but he did the right thing to try going around, he also followed the procedure correcly for not raising the gear before positive rate of climb. What can be debated is the willingness to fly to another airport, raising the risk of structural damage during flight. But maybe there was no other choice due to weather. Care to link the investigation report?

ploughman
07-17-2006, 10:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by rnzoli:


Care to link the investigation report? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here you go. (http://www.aaib.dft.gov.uk/publications/special_bulletins/s5_2006_boeing_737_301sf__oo_tnd.cfm)

Link to ILS stuff. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instrument_Landing_System#ILS_categories)

"Category III A - A precision instrument approach and landing with: a) a decision height lower than 30 m (100 ft), or no decision height; and b) a runway visual range not less than 200 m."

rnzoli
07-17-2006, 12:30 PM
thanks for the link, the "no decision height" explains it a bit

ironically, the Tu-154 accident was debated also for the merits of having the engines mounted up, at the aft of the aircraft, certain experts argued that a B737 would not have survived such a weels-up landing due to extensive damage to engine on the wings contacting the ground, although one hydraulic system was knocked out in this case, this accident may have proved them wrong... Let's see the final report, will be interesting.

|CoB|_Spectre
07-17-2006, 02:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by |CoB|_Spectre:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by |CoB|_Spectre:
But, to answer your original question, you have a better understanding of the basic physics involved, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have -any- idea who raaiiid is? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not a clue. Someone with sticky "a" and "i" on the keyboard? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How about someone actually working on anti-gravity, perpetual motion and reactionless motors?
That's how well he understands physics. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And? So while he has academic knowledge of the laws of physics and the mathematical skills to work on said projects, the question he asked indicates certain reservations about his ability to land a real airplane based on his experience with this sim. My point was this simulation can provide a hands-on understanding of the physics of flight and that would certainly give an edge over someone who had none.

Ares_336sqn
07-17-2006, 03:33 PM
That scenario happened in real life in 2005 over Greece and did not end well.It was the "Helios" flight 522 accident And the person who tried to land the plane was not an armchair pilot but a qualified private one.
"....it was determined that a body found in the cockpit area was that of a female flight attendant , suggesting that she was indeed trying to prevent a crash. DNA testing revealed that the blood on the aircraft controls was that of flight attendant Andreas Prodromou, a qualified private pilot, suggesting he was the other person the F-16 pilots saw in the pilot's seat. Autopsies on the crash victims showed that all were alive and maintained cardiac and respiratory function upon impact, but it could not be determined whether they were conscious at the time."
He did not manage to talk to the ground control and did not respond at all to the F-16 pilots hand signals. One should not underestimate the "fear factor"
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20050814-0

WWMaxGunz
07-17-2006, 06:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by |CoB|_Spectre:
And? So while he has academic knowledge of the laws of physics and the mathematical skills to work on said projects, the question he asked indicates certain reservations about his ability to land a real airplane based on his experience with this sim. My point was this simulation can provide a hands-on understanding of the physics of flight and that would certainly give an edge over someone who had none. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nuh-huh. You read his threads and you should see. He doesn't have much grounding in science
at all and doesn't feel it is neccessary, that there is some other way based on "I feel" and
"it seems like it should" principles with no discipline of conditions or actual logic to make
things difficult.

Perhaps you might invest in his scheme to lower a very small diameter pipe to the ocean floor
and thereby reap the near unlimited power it will give? Or maybe the boat propelled by spinning
gyros elliptically with respect to each other since the small model moved slightly?
I have a neighbor who swears that all vehicles especially motorcycles should be taken out of
gear when turning any kind of fast corners, just before you jump up onto the telephone wires
to smooth out the curve. He is perhaps a bit more 'advanced' in his views if you take advanced
to by farther along the trail.

Just read his past posts if you have any kind of understanding of say, HS physics or maybe even
can work out Newtons laws of motion.

raaaid
07-18-2006, 09:41 AM
im quitting smiking but after reading this answer i had to smoke

so what if im working in gyro propulsion and post it here

so what if i dont believe the gestapo propaganda about the imposibility of energy amplification

yes i said gestapo do you know of anybody else making swastica like navy buildings:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VblRmsgemAE&search=denver%20airport

watch second 57 of this video

nazis won the time travel race and this world is the consequence

raaaid
07-18-2006, 09:49 AM
they destroy forest in germany because they shape a swastica and then they build swastica shape army buildings

plz somebody tells me why i dont even understand newton so...

raaaid
07-18-2006, 09:58 AM
thank god info is so porked that veterans dont know of this building

WWMaxGunz
07-18-2006, 10:00 AM
And that car on the hemp site is from 1910... the first Ford you say looking slicker than
any model-T ever did with a sloped, windowed back and fat 30's tires.

Now it's time-travelling Nazis from WWII and the LAWS of thermodynamics are propaganda from
them!

How else to follow up on blowing off the LAWS of motion?

WTH, it's not like rigid proof is required to make a scientific LAW is it? All you need to
do is say it isn't and it isn't and then substitute what you want and viola, free power for
the world!

Riiiiiiiight.

Well you can call me beotch AFTER you succeed and till then please stay off real aircraft
just in case every qualified pilot aboard dies or takes deathly ill. The reason is that
with my luck the plane will also be headed about where I live.

45k dialup here so pardon me for not watching someone's crass BS.

raaaid
07-18-2006, 10:08 AM
my father has written 14 book on maths created by him my mother is a doctor in chemistry and maths teacher i have a degree on filology and im almost done with a degree on nautics engineering

and of course i use i feel more than i think the subcouncious is more powerfull

and in my thoughts i consider the world is perfect to get conclusions about it

thats why i think horror is faked or dreamt

you dont like me, you dont like a good person, wonder why

raaaid
07-18-2006, 10:10 AM
id apreciate an answer for the swastika building after having destroyed al germany and all its swastikas whats the point of building a huge one, besides in a navy building

mortoma1958
07-18-2006, 10:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Warrington_Wolf:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by raaaid:
i use to land at 0 throttle pretty well

if the two pilots ate bad fish and knoked out could i stand up when the airhostess asks "anybody knows how to pilot a jumbo?" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Before I had my trial flying lesson, I decided that i would "start training".
I bought the CH flight sim yoke and pedals and trained for 7 months on FS2004 and IL-2 using bombers.
By the time of my lesson, I could fly a light aircraft in FS2004 quite proficiently.
When I actually went up I found it possible but a lot harder to maintain altitude and heading. The main reason for this was the actual sensation of flight, the turbulence and inertia were fun but I wasn't used to it.
The area that FS2004 and IL-2 did help me was using the instruments. I found using the instruments second nature, my flight instructor also noticed that it gave me an advantage.
To answer your question, I doubt that just sim experience would be enough to control an aircraft. I know that I probably couldn't land an aircraft of any size on my own just yet( a situation I hope to rectify).
It is like saying that playing Call of Duty will make you into a soldier, or that playing Grand Tourismo will make you a racing driver.

In conclusion unless you have real world experience in aircraft operations, it aint gonna happen. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I got my PPL in 2000 after years of fake flying MSFS and X-plane. I found that my sim experience did in fact help me in all phases of learning to fly, including learning to land. Just think a little bit here.
Don't you think someone who has landed simulated planes on a PC thousands of times is going to have some advantage over someone who has not done anything even remotely like landing an aircraft?? Of course they are and it helped me a lot. After all, as a sim pilot, you have to be able to control your approach fairly well, especially as far as controlling speed. No, my sim experience did not help much in real world cross-wind landing but I was prepared for every facet a bit better than someone with no simming background. You are correct to say that your instrument familiarity is helped a huge bunch by sim experience. I found that already being a veteran at all three types of navigation, helped a lot. I was flying to NDBs and VORs without even thinking about it the first time I tried. Also my dead reckoning and pilotage navigation ability was awesome due to my simming. Yea, landing in the real world was the thing that simming helped the least but it did help.

My instructor was a FAA examiner and had over 25,000 hours in the air in both helos and fixed wing, dating back to Viet Nam, where he flew mostly helos but also light observation fixed wing too for a stint. He thought I was one of his best students ever and one of his earliest solos. Also I was the only student he ever checked out on three different airplanes, Piper Cherokeee 180, C-172 Shyhawk II
( with STOL kit ) and a C-152.

He attributed my success to my simming background, at least highly probable in his opinion. He had taught so many students to fly in 30 years he no longer kept track of how many.

Bottom line here:
Imagine you were a passenger in an airplane and the pilot collapsed and died and you had to land the plane. Wouldn't you be better off with some sim experience rather than none at all?? I think
so, and if I were a passenger in the back I'd feel better if you had some simming too!!!

Warrington_Wolf
07-18-2006, 04:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma1958:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Warrington_Wolf:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by raaaid:
i use to land at 0 throttle pretty well

if the two pilots ate bad fish and knoked out could i stand up when the airhostess asks "anybody knows how to pilot a jumbo?" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Before I had my trial flying lesson, I decided that i would "start training".
I bought the CH flight sim yoke and pedals and trained for 7 months on FS2004 and IL-2 using bombers.
By the time of my lesson, I could fly a light aircraft in FS2004 quite proficiently.
When I actually went up I found it possible but a lot harder to maintain altitude and heading. The main reason for this was the actual sensation of flight, the turbulence and inertia were fun but I wasn't used to it.
The area that FS2004 and IL-2 did help me was using the instruments. I found using the instruments second nature, my flight instructor also noticed that it gave me an advantage.
To answer your question, I doubt that just sim experience would be enough to control an aircraft. I know that I probably couldn't land an aircraft of any size on my own just yet( a situation I hope to rectify).
It is like saying that playing Call of Duty will make you into a soldier, or that playing Grand Tourismo will make you a racing driver.

In conclusion unless you have real world experience in aircraft operations, it aint gonna happen. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I got my PPL in 2000 after years of fake flying MSFS and X-plane. I found that my sim experience did in fact help me in all phases of learning to fly, including learning to land. Just think a little bit here.
Don't you think someone who has landed simulated planes on a PC thousands of times is going to have some advantage over someone who has not done anything even remotely like landing an aircraft?? Of course they are and it helped me a lot. After all, as a sim pilot, you have to be able to control your approach fairly well, especially as far as controlling speed. No, my sim experience did not help much in real world cross-wind landing but I was prepared for every facet a bit better than someone with no simming background. You are correct to say that your instrument familiarity is helped a huge bunch by sim experience. I found that already being a veteran at all three types of navigation, helped a lot. I was flying to NDBs and VORs without even thinking about it the first time I tried. Also my dead reckoning and pilotage navigation ability was awesome due to my simming. Yea, landing in the real world was the thing that simming helped the least but it did help.

My instructor was a FAA examiner and had over 25,000 hours in the air in both helos and fixed wing, dating back to Viet Nam, where he flew mostly helos but also light observation fixed wing too for a stint. He thought I was one of his best students ever and one of his earliest solos. Also I was the only student he ever checked out on three different airplanes, Piper Cherokeee 180, C-172 Shyhawk II
( with STOL kit ) and a C-152.

He attributed my success to my simming background, at least highly probable in his opinion. He had taught so many students to fly in 30 years he no longer kept track of how many.

Bottom line here:
Imagine you were a passenger in an airplane and the pilot collapsed and died and you had to land the plane. Wouldn't you be better off with some sim experience rather than none at all?? I think
so, and if I were a passenger in the back I'd feel better if you had some simming too!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is what I was saying, simming gives us all a distinct advantage.
I was probably being a bit pessemistic when I said that I couldnt land any plane.
When we were aproaching the runway at Liverpool, I could see that the VASI was "white over white". Most simmers and real pilots will know what that means, we were in a Cessna 150 so it wasnt a problem. I live near Liverpool so I also knew when we were near Warrington and I could recognise landmarks, that too gave me a huge advantage. I knew that if the pilot krapped out, I could find the river Mersey and follow that all the way to Liverpool airport.
The only problem would be fear, could I do it all for real like I practiced and not get rattled?.
Im hoping that I will get the chance to find out if I can land a C150, Im saving to take flying lessons http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.

WWMaxGunz
07-18-2006, 05:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by raaaid:
you dont like me, you dont like a good person, wonder why </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Where you get this?

I just totally disagree with what you say about behaviour of physical objects.

It is not the same as dislike of person. I never said you are a bad person.

Possibly you have a problem with thinking straight since hey you have posted about such
trouble for yourself and from other posts it is somewhat clear.

You have a degree in word study?
And almost finished an engineering degree yet thermodynamics is beyond you?

What your parents do or did is not about you. My Mother's father did vetrinary work on
farms and yet when our dog was sick she was able to do nothing. Bye-bye dog.

Just be real. I don't have to agree with you or it is dislike. I just don't trust your
judgement in matters physical or logical.

WWMaxGunz
07-18-2006, 05:29 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma1958:
He attributed my success to my simming background, at least highly probable in his opinion. He had taught so many students to fly in 30 years he no longer kept track of how many. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

By the title of the thread, would you have been able to land the plane without further
instruction beyond your sim experience?

Not better chance or any hedging please. Real thing.

mortoma1958
07-19-2006, 03:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mortoma1958:
He attributed my success to my simming background, at least highly probable in his opinion. He had taught so many students to fly in 30 years he no longer kept track of how many. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

By the title of the thread, would you have been able to land the plane without further
instruction beyond your sim experience?

Not better chance or any hedging please. Real thing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>A small single engine plane for sure. May not have been pretty but I would have been able to do it. My first landing I made without the intructor touching anything was not too bad.

rnzoli
07-20-2006, 02:31 AM
I am not sure if this aspect was mentioned before, but if you have a serious PC simulator experience, you also have a higher chance to recognize abnormalities during flight. For example, when you have a rough idea about normal descent rates, dangers of stalling, mimimum speeds, you really have a much higer chance to abort your landing attempt and go around (out of fear), in case something goes wrong. A person without that may just committ to a landing (out of the same fear) when it would be safer to go around and try again.

So let's not get stuck on the idea of landing a real aircraft first time. Consider that a sim-only pilot may have to go around and try the approach 3-4 times to make it work, but he/she at least can recognize when there is a need to go around. A total outsider wouldn't have that chance.

I have followed a few debates around this subject and most conclusions point to an advantage of having a sim background in basic flight terms and concepts and instrument handling, but also a definite disadvantage of the 'refly button' mind-set.

WB_Outlaw
07-20-2006, 09:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by raaaid:
they destroy forest in germany because they shape a swastica and then they build swastica shape army buildings

plz somebody tells me why i dont even understand newton so... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

When I doodle on my notepad in meetings I often times draw swastikas. According to raaaid I'm now a card carrying Nazi bent on the destruction of the world. I also hate and want to kill all Jews (I guess the reason I once asked one to marry me was so I could bring them down from the inside). What sucks the most is that I now have to kill 3 of my good friends b/c they are black. Thanks for letting me know though, I guess I've been repressing these feelings all my life.

Here's a hint raaaid. You are so ignorant (note that ignorant does not mean stupid) it's not even funny. I believe you are flat out lying about getting any type of technical degree. Why? Because no one who believes that drawing a free body diagram would, "make no sense b/c you would have to draw ALL THE FORCES ACTING ON THE SYSTEM", could possible have ANY education in physics AT ALL. If you even TRY to defend that statement you only prove mine.

By "they" you must mean the U.S. government since they are the ones who bulit the Coronado Naval Base. My question is, when did the U.S. Navy start cutting down forests in Germany?

If Hitler had chosen a star to put on his flag would the U.S. now be 50 times worse than the Nazis? The swastika was around before Hitler thought it was cool. It is absolutely STUPID to associate something with Nazi-ism JUST BECAUSE it looks like a swastika or it can somehow be warped into a swastika.


--Outlaw.

WWMaxGunz
07-20-2006, 12:54 PM
The Swastika is an ancient good luck symbol that got grabbed by the Nazis.

Cripes, I've always liked rainbows and I'm not homosexual.
It used to be that the word gay only meant happy.

Why is it that when a reprehensable group attaches themselves to something good it is
supposed to turn into them only? Why can't they make up their own symbols and names?

Akronnick
07-20-2006, 02:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Scragbat:
Surely you can't be serious?

&lt; Scrag wonders if there are any 'Airplane' fans here? &gt; http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

He is serious, and don't call him Shirley

Irish_Rogues
07-20-2006, 02:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Why can't they make up their own symbols and names? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That would be to much work and many groups wouldn't ever get of the ground or have lame symbols and names.