Scudrunners

[left][i][color=black][font=arial][size=1.45em]"I’ve been flying since 1973 with no accidents."[/size][/font][/color][/i][/left]

[color=#001000][font=arial][size=1.45em]Well, seeing as we're doing some long-cocking:[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#001000]
[font=arial][size=1.45em]First flight              16 Dec 57[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#001000][font=arial][size=1.45em]Most recent flight  10 Jan 19[/size][/font][/color]
[color=#001000]


[font=arial][size=1.45em]And, no accidents.  Well, that's not quite correct. There were two.  BUT not MY fault!!!  [/size][/font][/color]


[font=arial][size=1.45em]Well, maybe I should not have said "Watch this" prior to the second one...  ;) [/size][/font]


[font=arial][size=1.45em]In any event, let me ask:[/size][/font]


[font=arial][size=1.45em]Does the installation and use of a radio in an aircraft enhance or diminish flight safety?[/size][/font]


[font=arial][size=1.45em]What do you call someone who has access to an aircraft radio but refuses to use it?[/size][/font]




[font=arial][size=1.45em]PS  I don't think you're stupid.  [/size][/font]


[font=arial][size=1.45em]Opinionated?  Yes.  [/size][/font]


[font=arial][size=1.45em]Stupid?  No.[/size][/font]

Here's a perfect Pitts approach and landing, flown by yours truly.

[url=[/url]

I turn base at 0:22.  Note that at 0:29 I perform the crucial BELLY
CHECK which Budd Davison and I emphasize so strongly, is required
for a safe landing.  I interrupt the continuous-descending U base
to final approach, with a wings-level look to the RIGHT to clear the
long final flown by Cessnas and Cherokees, etc.

I only have 2,000 hours in Pitts which makes me a pretty low-time
Pitts pilot compared to most Canadians, but I know a little bit about
how to operate them safely.  I have flown all sorts of really weird stuff
in really weird places with a PERFECT safety record over the last
46 years which I'm sure is considered merely a coincidence, and in
no way resulted from the knowledge and skill which I have obtained
in my last nearly half-century as a pilot, because that would lack
egalitarianism, a fatal flaw in Canada.

[quote]Does the installation and use of a radio in an aircraft enhance or diminish flight safety?[/quote]

At an uncontrolled airport, I have seen the comm [u]decrease[/u] safety.

Do you not bother reading what I post?  Are you an output-only device?

[quote]What do you call someone who has access to an aircraft radio but refuses to use it?[/quote]

I call them, "Busy".

You clearly don't understand Aviate/Navigate/Communicate.  At all.  Which
is incredible, given your experience.

Let's say I am on final at an uncontrolled aiport and another aircraft is just taking off. 
No problem - lots of separation.  But he has an engine failure at 50 feet - could just
be fuel starvation from the selector - so all he has time to do, is lower the nose
to maintain airspeed, keep the wings level (Aviate) and land on the remaining
runway (Navigate).

I would be very upset if this pilot, with an engine failure at 50 feet, neglected
flying his aircraft to Communicate on the radio that had a problem.

Can you see that Aviate/Navigate/Communicate is a set of decreasing priorities?

Remember, I'm on final.  If I'm relying on my comm and not LOOKING OUTSIDE
I won't notice anything.  But I can't land - there's another aircraft on the runway
and I need to overshoot.  This information will only be provided to me if I
LOOK OUTSIDE and don't rely on my VHF comm for separation at an
uncontrolled airport.

But what would I know.  I'm stupid compared to a virtue-signalling Canadian,
so as punishment I should have more of my personal property stolen if I make
the mistake of visiting the country of which I am a citizen.

[quote]Well, seeing as we're doing some long-cocking:[/quote]

Barney has been flying longer than anyone else here so he must have a real big one.  :)

I am not a fan of dogma aka religion.  See above.

Not sure what anyone’s penis has to do with VHF
comm usage.  I always used my hands to tune a
freq, hold a mike or push a PTT but maybe I’m
doing it wrong.

No radio = look out dependant only.
Radio    = look out plus communication


There's a downside?

Obviously, yes.  For all too many low-time pilots
at uncontrolled airports,

Radio = dangerous distraction and false confidence leading to poor lookout

[quote author=Colonel Sanders link=topic=9454.msg26430#msg26430 date=1547657156]
Radio = dangerous distraction and false confidence leading to poor lookout
[/quote]
I like your Darwinian approach to flight training and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

Moment of Irony:

Sometimes, [u]Safety Equipment Isn’t[/u]

See latest Red Arrow fatality - ejection seat misfire:  https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42773834

See Lion Air 737 crash - (anti-stall) safety system kills hundreds.  Irony is not comprehended.

This is blindingly obvious.

I remember flying in an air show in New York State.

Air boss had chosen a freq which was quiet on the ground.

But airborne, it was hideous.  The same freq was
used in the Toronto TCA for a PPL wankfest.  They
never shut up, and droned on endlessly.  Freq was
unusable.  It was embarrassing to be a Canadian.

PPLs can barely fly an airplane, so they spend what
tiny mental capacity they have, trying to sound like
some stupid fucking airline pilot with ridiculously
long and irrelevant radio calls.

PS I was an Industry Canada delegated Restricted
Radio Telephone Operator Certificate Examiner for
over 20 years.  Anyone else?  I let it lapse this fall
because TC doesn’t like me to live in Canada any
more, so no point in keeping it.

NB Stuck mike buttons used to bother me, but I learned
to embrace the madness.  It made it official that the
freq was totally useless, and with a bit of luck the
offender’s transmit circuitry would overheat and burn
out.  And the cockpit chatter was sometimes hilarious.