Jump to content

rangerx

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    962
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

154 Excellent

1 Follower

About rangerx

  • Rank
    Protist

Recent Profile Visitors

5584 profile views
  1. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/17/us/politics/trump-impeachment-lawyers-starr-dershowitz.html This will be the greatest display of Republican hypocrisy in human history. Let's start with a Trump quote: https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-called-ken-starr-freak-lunatic-disaster-impeachment-2020-1
  2. Okay, this is interesting. Near straight out departure. Everything set according to the plan for departure except one thing. I set the autopilot 8000 instead of the assigned flight level. That way both engines drop to idle at the last known point of flight. In a steep climb out shortly after takeoff, it will stall quickly. (so long as you don't disengage and put the nose down like a good pilot would) Ok, takeoff roll normal, vr, rotate, climb, gear, atc transition (listening), flaps, request flight following, got squawk 0167, (6200ft) acknowledged radar contact (6800 ft) Engines idled, wings stalled under 2 seconds. Crashed 10 miles from the airport. I was set to 1200, so I expect ATC saw me. I will try it again on takeoff, with the transponder set at something else. BRB Ran the scenario a couple of times. A little quicker on the draw with ATC, managed the squawk from 5400 to 5900ft. It's a simulator, it didn't mind the transponder in the off position. ATC carried on as usual. I turned it on and entered the code. Acknowledged ATC. Requested post takeoff checklist from second officer, but didn't get to start. I'm not sure, but expect transition would be shortly thereafter... around 8500, so they didn't get that far. You never (or at least not supposed to) respond to ATC without doing checklists first. The black box and CVR, if serviceable will have that data. This was a "Sully" moment for the pilots, except with parts of the plane missing and who knows what else. Seems they tried none the less. Heroic, really. In the hypothetical, if it were a transponder issue, it probably occurred or was already failed to TX, on the ground and missed in the pre-flight checks. Entry error or no signal would be borne out after take off when they ID the new squawk code. If the SAM was expecting 1200 someone got an itchy finger? Scary thought.
  3. Yes, since 1995. Only endorsed for VFR single engine, no tail draggers (yet), low hours. I fly a lot of VOR/IFR/ILS in the sim though and do a lot of 3D model/reskin and advanced simulations. I'm just doing the flight plan for the Ukraine flight as we speak. I grabbed the texture too and tweaked the ID's to the scenario. Just getting clearance from ground to push from Stand 118 as Flight 752 for taxi to Runway 29R. Six and a half hours late. BRB...
  4. I should add to "nobody will see it". Actually ATC will see it, just not under any assigned code. When they assign the code, the aircraft returns the assigned code for ID purposes as well as carrier/flight number/course/alt/speed info (from radar). This where incorrect codes or inoperative transponders on civil airlines can get into trouble. You have to go out of your way to change the settings, because the moment a pilot confirms a squawk code, ATC requests affirmation of the position as they see it on radar before completing a flight following. Let's say the pilot turned off the transponder. I'm not sure you can actually do that on a modern jetliner. I'm pretty sure it comes on with the flight computer as opposed to a separate unit in the radio stack of a small plane. Okay, perhaps it failed to transmit kind of scenario. ATC would still see the plane as a blip, but no ID parameters. They'd likely already know the ID and ask accordingly for a failure or incorrect setting. I suppose, if the 737 transponder operated correctly through the after takeoff checklist then failed shortly thereafter, they could have inadvertently deceived the SAM site. If there were flaws or errors in that system, heaven forbid... Interesting thought. I'm going to run this scenario on the flight sim. When departures transitions me to flight center, I'll shut down or otherwise alter the squawk code (to anything other than 1200) We'll see what center has to say about that?
  5. ATC assigns a squawk code then tracks the aircraft using that code. It's pointless to merely enter an unassigned code because no one will see it. And different modes means a different frequency and signal parameters as to be distinct from each other.
  6. A misreported squawk code would make them 50% at fault.
  7. The whole "imminence" thing seems to be collapsing on itself. Given how they've dropped the ball on that re-visitation, there's little if no other reason to not notify the gang of eight other than to be fascists.
  8. Which one? The Deep State one or the other one?
  9. All Trump could do was blame Obama. Target of opportunity. Not imminent threat. In other words, an assassination.
  10. 63 from Canada https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/iran-ukraine-air-crash-canadians-tehran-1.5418610?fbclid=IwAR0tbaUXV0Ge3mWP2zYPbeZ7ZFkjRGR1qKzpEFxn00Ci_uuA7ISO2Im-Yk0
  11. Indeed they should and of course, imminent threats command special attention. That said, though we know Soleimani is a bad guy, imminence is yet to be disclosed. Good governance provides for that, if not arranged prior to the undertaking but near immediate after execution to follow up. I want to see hard evidence of imminence. You'd think if they had it, they be blowing their horns at a deafening db. And I'm talking about a tangible conspiracy and paper trail against the USA, not some amateur appointee's opinion.
  12. Do you think it might be prudent to discuss this with congress?
  13. Soon we'll know, but I suffixed an additional question. Is the Iranian "response" and act of war in response to an act of war? Seems to me we have a war going on here. A unilateral one as far as the US goes at this point.
  14. What did you expect? Or the very least a response to what? An act of war?
  15. Yeah, it wasn't directed at Raider, who's point stands. It was in the broader sense that the discussion invariably ends up there. For distraction, and little else. I'm sure after Trump's gone, his antics will resurface and in typical fashion, Republicans will dismiss it as ancient history or in otherwise revisionist form.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.