Airplane on a Conveyor - Post-Mythbusters-Mortem

What is your position?

  • I thought it would fly and I was right.

    Votes: 74 62.2%
  • I thought it wouldn't fly but I understand now.

    Votes: 4 3.4%
  • I don't agree with the methodology used. The test was invalid.

    Votes: 10 8.4%
  • I want this stupid question to go away forever.

    Votes: 31 26.1%

  • Total voters
    119
Is there an equivalent to a 709 ride for a CFI that doesn't know their stuff? Or is that all covered in the pass-rates of their students and whatnot? Some of the posts in this thread made me wonder what the procedure for getting help for an instructor who was giving out bad info might be.
 
Is there an equivalent to a 709 ride for a CFI that doesn't know their stuff? Or is that all covered in the pass-rates of their students and whatnot? Some of the posts in this thread made me wonder what the procedure for getting help for an instructor who was giving out bad info might be.
49USC44709 covers all certificates issued under 49USC44703. But, there has to be an incident of some type to trigger a reexamination.

So, what triggers your question?
 
For a while, your posts seemed to indicate a pretty basic failure of understanding of how aerodynamics work. You've suggested that it was just a big troll, but it got me wondering about what would happen out in the real world if some old CFIs heard a new one who had passed his exams and everything but had possible deficiencies and an unwillingness to address them.
 
For a while, your posts seemed to indicate a pretty basic failure of understanding of how aerodynamics work. You've suggested that it was just a big troll, but it got me wondering about what would happen out in the real world if some old CFIs heard a new one who had passed his exams and everything but had possible deficiencies and an unwillingness to address them.
It's funny you should refer to me as a troll. During that time, I had no clue what a troll was. But, yes... I was indeed acting as one.

More than a few people were taking this thing so dang serious, they got royally ticked at me for "believing" differently than they did. There were even a couple personal attacks thrown in along the way between the thread and the chat room. While I didn't appreciate the attacks, I wasn't about to give in to something they appeared to have the foundation of their very existence resting on.

Rest assured, I correctly teach aerodynamics while very carefully following the Jep and FAA books used by my students.

I shall give up any argument on conveyors until there is a means to make a belt out of 20"+ concrete sufficient to handle the weight of a 773ER.

:)
 
It's replaying right now on the west coast on the Discovery Channel, just in case you didn't get enough of it last time. :D :D :D
 
It's replaying right now on the west coast on the Discovery Channel, just in case you didn't get enough of it last time. :D :D :D

You never struck me as the kind of person that would walk past a dog kennel and toss a kitten over the fence just for fun.
 
Scott- I noticed you new user name-

You're going to meet Kathy?
08_kathy-ireland_01.jpg


Ohhhh- shiney!
 
I am lifted by reading this thread. Contrary to most of the thread on this topic most folks here do believe that aircraft will take off. Smart people! I have seen excruciating threads on the subject where most pilots (at least how they described themselves) claimed it won't fly. I am a physicist and for me the problem was ridiculously trivial from the start but I have seen countless engineers, programmers, pilots, medical doctors, etc. who could never grasp this problem.
 
the problem was ridiculously trivial from the start but I have seen countless engineers, programmers, pilots, medical doctors, etc. who could never grasp this problem.
It's ridiculously trivial if you think about it for just one second. I've never understood why this makes for this much discussion....
 
I really wish the MythBusters crew took a page from the "Soprano's" and just went to black as the plane went up to speed.
 
Back
Top