Comment Re:Nope... Still irrelevant... But thx for the str (Score 1) 468
I'm talking about airplanes the size of an airplane this system was designed for. I.e. It's an AIRBUS.
You're talking about not being able to see out of windows when there is fog, rain, snow, or night. I hate to break this to you, but aircraft other than Airbus have windows, and the Airbus windows are not not as useless as you are claiming them to be. When you make patently stupid statements like "pilots will never be able to see the ground" because there is fog, you're not limiting yourself to just one kind of airplane. You made a blanket statement about pilots.
While you rant on about "single engine GA aircraft", "airport departure" and ILS and VOR conditions under which you WON'T attempt landing - though I clearly talk about LANDING AN AIRPLANE THE SIZE OF A 747.
And I hate to break up yet another ignorant rant, but the same rules for flight conditions apply to a 747. There are visbility rules for instrument approaches, and they aren't "10 meters", at least not for the vast majority of airports on this planet. I was even pretty specific in referring to a 747 when I pointed out that the category D visibility for a non-precision approach was 1 mile. So, had you bothered to read what I wrote instead of try to show how smart you are, you'd have seen I was also talking about 747s. As well as a very very very large number of other aircraft.
I also didn't talk about conditions where I won't attempt landing, I talked about federal regulations that apply to commercial operations, which I am not. So, you got it exactly backwards. When I say that ground visibility has to be at least 1/2 mile for a pilot to attempt the approach, I was talking not about MY limit (because, as I said, it isn't the limit I fly under) but the limit the 747 pilot flies under.
By the way, you first claimed you were talking about an Airbus, now you say you were talking about a 747. You do realize that Boeing makes the 747 and not Airbus, right?
You are either an idiot who thinks that 747 is a "single engine GA aircraft",
Or you are an idiot who cannot see a discussion about visibility and flight rules that apply to a very large number of aircraft and think that it might apply to a very large number of aircraft, INCLUDING your specific Airbus. Or 747. Whichever it is at the moment.
landing is same as taking off,
Where the hell did you get that from? Now I know you're making things up.
I could never on my own present so adequately how fundamentally wrong your understanding of the situation being discussed really is.
And you still haven't. All you have is insult and nonsense. You have no understanding of the weather condition known as "fog", since you seem to think it comes in only one style and density, yet you'll yap about how pilots won't be able to see the ground if it is foggy.
By the way, the landing speed according to Boeing for a 747 is not 194 knots (100m/s), it is a measly 150 or so (various versions have different speeds.)
And the fact that you have not yet admitted, but seem to have given up denying, is that flying an airplane is not all instruments. The landing part is (other than the cat III I mentioned) always visual. The instruments get the pilot to where he can see the runway. The rules DEMAND that he be able to see it. Otherwise he'll be stuck at 100 AGL. I cited the rule, can you debate it?