Barnstormers Aerial Advertising

[AirplanesSuck]

Look up the definition of "challenge" avbug.

You're arguing with yourself. You are the waste of time. 7000 posts should have tipped me off. I don't have the time to show you your flawed logic (which is prolific), especially because you obviously don't think anyone else has anything useful to say. I have made some very cogent points... you ignored them. If you didn't, you plainly argued with them, all reason to the contrary. It seems you just like being right, even about something so silly as the semantics of a flying task.

Your comprehension lacks. I asked you to compare comments, not the pilots. You didn't get it. I'm sorry.

Fine.

Well, here you go... "you're right. About everything, I mean. There's no way I could have any idea about what I'm saying."

This is why, it seems, that people make little quips about you. I didn't know... but now I do.

By the way, thanks again for more of the resume. I thought I very clearly said I wanted no more of it, but you provided it anyway.

Again, I'm very impressed.

 

[avbug]

you're right. About everything, I mean. There's no way I could have any idea about what I'm saying.

Yes, I know.

 

[nismo611]

avbug claims nothing is dangerous only the user WTF. So if an unrecoverable wind shear strikes avbug as he is fighting a fire and he ends up dead I suppose that was his fault. If he had an un-commanded rudder hard over on his aircraft resulting from faulty maintenance that was his fault. If wires chaffed and caused a fire that was his fault. If the wing fell off because of structural fatigue then it is his fault. If the pressure vessel failed because of poor design and fatigue it is his fault. All these things have happened I guess according to avbug the pilots did it.

What a moron, it is unbelievable what some people will believe.

 

[AirplanesSuck]

Yes, I know.

Apparently you're not adept at noting sarcasm. Thank you for the entirely predictable response.

 

[AirplanesSuck]

avbug claims nothing is dangerous only the user WTF. So if an unrecoverable wind shear strikes avbug as he is fighting a fire and he ends up dead I suppose that was his fault. If he had an un-commanded rudder hard over on his aircraft resulting from faulty maintenance that was his fault. If wires chaffed and caused a fire that was his fault. If the wing fell off because of structural fatigue then it is his fault. If the pressure vessel failed because of poor design and fatigue it is his fault. All these things have happened I guess according to avbug the pilots did it.

What a moron, it is unbelievable what some people will believe.

I have quickly learned what others apparently already knew about avbug. I doubt he/she is a moron, but he/she certainly needs a different hobby. Avbug may be the safest pilot in the world, but he/she would argue about the color of the sky if it made him/her feel "right." That should trouble avbug, but it probably doesn't.

 

[avbug]

An inability to discuss is quickly followed by insults. nismo611 was put on the ignore list some time ago for his or her failure to have anything worthy to merit a response.

Without a doubt, "airplanessuck" deserves the same consideration, and is therefore so consigned.

 

[AirplanesSuck]

An inability to discuss is quickly followed by insults. nismo611 was put on the ignore list some time ago for his or her failure to have anything worthy to merit a response.

Without a doubt, "airplanessuck" deserves the same consideration, and is therefore so consigned.

There is no discussion with you... no concession. You just talk at people. You may as well block everyone and just blog away.

 

[bizjet800]

An inability to discuss is quickly followed by insults. nismo611 was put on the ignore list some time ago for his or her failure to have anything worthy to merit a response.

Without a doubt, "airplanessuck" deserves the same consideration, and is therefore so consigned.

Ooooohhhh the "Ignore List!!!" You guys are IN for it now!

 

[avbug]

Nobody's "in" for anything. It's a handy site feature reserved for those who have nothing worthwhile to contribute. It simply serves to declutter by wasting time with them. Their name appears, but their post doesn't appear, and they're easily ignored. It's a nice feature.

 

[AirplanesSuck]

Ooooohhhh the "Ignore List!!!" You guys are IN for it now!

I know... I'm ruined!

Actually, if I thought he actually paid any attention to what anyone else said, it probably would bother me.

 

[nismo611]

Ooooohhhh the "Ignore List!!!" You guys are IN for it now!

OHHHHH NOOOOOOO, Bizjet800 do you think if I beg for forgiveness I will unblocked? I really like listening to avbug's lies and BS.

 

[bizjet800]

OHHHHH NOOOOOOO, Bizjet800 do you think if I beg for forgiveness I will unblocked? I really like listening to avbug's lies and BS.

Not a chance Mismo!!! One screw up and you're out of the circle trust. And once you're out you're out for good!!!!!

 

[doog]

Hi Avbug,

Do you consider a freight job which might require flying a single engine piston at night and in IMC safe & benign too? Just asking because I believe you've said that you feel that night/instrument single engine piston is a bad idea, yet there are jobs which require it, no? (flight express for example) Do such jobs simply require a pilot "up to the task" in terms of training and proficiency?

I'm not claiming banner tow is a safe or dangerous op, just wondering about the apparent contradiction... cheers.

 

[AirplanesSuck]

Hi Avbug,

Do you consider a freight job which might require flying a single engine piston at night and in IMC safe & benign too? Just asking because I believe you've said that you feel that night/instrument single engine piston is a bad idea, yet there are jobs which require it, no? (flight express for example) Do such jobs simply require a pilot "up to the task" in terms of training and proficiency?

I'm not claiming banner tow is a safe or dangerous op, just wondering about the apparent contradiction... cheers.

Careful, Doog... you'll get put on the "ignore list" too.

 

[avbug]

Do you consider a freight job which might require flying a single engine piston at night and in IMC safe & benign too? Just asking because I believe you've said that you feel that night/instrument single engine piston is a bad idea, yet there are jobs which require it, no?

There's no contradiction whatsoever.

Whether the flight carries freight is of course, irrelevant. That it's a night cross country flight in a single engine airplane, or IMC in a single engine airplane, is very relevant, and yes, it most certainly can be a dangerous undertaking. There's really nothing in aviation which creates a greater workload than single pilot IFR/IMC. Add to this single vacum pump, single generator, single engine, in clouds and ice without radar and the potential for embedded weather...yes, it's dangerous, and it's a gamble.

Towing a banner, on the other hand, involves no difficult maneuvering, poses no particular risk beyond what the operator allows, and is a slow, easy job. A problem with the banner? Cut it away. Problem with the aircraft? Make a forced landing. No different than flying around in one's private airplane, or offering flight instruction, for that matter.

You're attempting to draw some kind of parallel between day VFR flying, and single pilot single engine IFR cross country flying at night?

Do such jobs simply require a pilot "up to the task" in terms of training and proficiency?

Most certainly one who is operating single pilot IFR needs to be up to the task in terms of training and proficiency. Is this ever in question?


​

 

[doog]

Whether the flight carries freight is of course, irrelevant. That it's a night cross country flight in a single engine airplane, or IMC in a single engine airplane, is very relevant, and yes, it most certainly can be a dangerous undertaking. There's really nothing in aviation which creates a greater workload than single pilot IFR/IMC. Add to this single vacum pump, single generator, single engine, in clouds and ice without radar and the potential for embedded weather...yes, it's dangerous, and it's a gamble.

Thanks, that is a perfectly logical line of reasoning. To be clear, I was trying to reconcile that with this section:

I don't consider flying dangerous. I do consider many pilots to be dangerous, and they tend to put the risk in certain assignments. Banner towing, for example is not dangerous, unless it is undertaken by a dangerous pilot. It then becomes dangerous: not because the assignment is difficult or full or risk (because it isn't). It's simply that the pilot, doubting his own abilities and unequal to the task, is insufficient to perform his duty, and therefore dangerous. Accordingly, he believes the job to be dangerous in error, and through his belief, makes it so. A self-fulfilling prophesy, where all it takes is an inadequate pilot to turn a safe and benign task such as picking up and dropping a simple banner into a *dangerous* event.

 

[AirplanesSuck]

Avbug must be screwing with people...he argued and argued with me that navy seals placing underwater explosives wasn't dangerous.

Yeesh.

 

[AirplanesSuck]

There's no contradiction whatsoever.

Absolute and utter nonsense.

 

[nismo611]

HAAAAA this is craziness that avbug is a fool. He just likes arguments he doesn't care if he is right or wrong. The sky is purple, grass is red, and avbug is awesome.

 

[CrimsonEclipse]

HAAAAA this is craziness that avbug is a fool. He just likes arguments he doesn't care if he is right or wrong. The sky is purple, grass is red, and avbug is awesome.

You must not be a good enough pilot to appreciate his greatness.

Anyway, whoever thinks single pilot night IFR is dangerous, must not be a good pilot. Probably blames systems failures on banner pilots.

CE