Maximum weights

I partly agree, that "ask your CFI" is not a very useful response. Its like saying "ask your doctor", and a common answer on multiple choice questions where "check with your supervisor" is the right answer.

But only partly.

The question is vague. Why 30 minutes into the flight? What's special about that 30 minutes? How steep is a steep turn? The difference between 45-deg and 75-deg bank is huge. Will the airplane break is not specific enough. Break, as in will the wing separate from the fuselage, or will the attitude indicator tumble, or will the cupholder fall off the dash?
 
sarangan said:
I partly agree, that "ask your CFI" is not a very useful response. Its like saying "ask your doctor", and a common answer on multiple choice questions where "check with your supervisor" is the right answer.

But only partly.
Click to expand...
Maybe not very useful, maybe rude; but...
Put a different way, "Did you ask your CFI," "What does your CFI say," and/or "Why didn't your CFI explain it" can ferret out whether or not someone actually engaged someone who *should* be able to explain it or if they're just jerking us and themselves around.

flyingcheesehead said:
Ah yes, PoA. Where we can simultaneously complain about all of the inexperienced CFIs who don't know enough and can't teach it if they did, while still pointing posters back to said CFIs for the answer to all their questions. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
...and posting a wrong answer.

Nauga,
and his V-n diagram
 
sarangan said:
I partly agree, that "ask your CFI" is not a very useful response.
Click to expand...
Not only is it not useful, it might seem condescending and/or dismissive. That’s how I read post #2, which brought to mind W. C. Fields telling Baby Leroy, “Go away kid, ya bother me.”

Imagine some young enthusiastic student pilot who, in an effort to show up to his/her next lesson fully prepared, does some research and discovers this deep repository of aeronautical knowledge we call PoA. He/she posts an earnest question about some subject that’s unclear hoping for edification and enlightenment. The very first reply to his/her question is “You should ask your CFI” (translation: bugger off!).

Another proud moment for the GA community, I suppose.

To @dp342b: if you’re still unclear on this subject, I will be happy to help (to the extent that my modest abilities allow). Try re-wording your question in a more precise way and post here, or send me a PM.
 
Last edited:
Roger Wilco said:
Not only is it not useful, it might seem condescending and/or dismissive. That’s how I read post #2, which brought to mind W. C. Fields telling Baby Leroy, “Go away kid, ya bother me.”

Imagine some young enthusiastic student pilot who, in an effort to show up to his/her next lesson fully prepared, does some research and discovers this deep repository of aeronautical knowledge we call PoA. He/she posts an earnest question about some subject that’s unclear hoping for edification and enlightenment. The very first reply to his/her question is “You should ask your CFI” (translation: bugger off!).

Another proud moment for the GA community, I suppose.

To @dp342b: if you’re still unclear on this subject, I will be happy to help (to the extent that my modest abilities allow). Try re-wording your question in a more precise way and post here, or send me a PM.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that the OP brings this on himself to some degree…he asks questions, but never even acknowledges the people who provide answers, so the incentive to expend effort to explain things is pretty low.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Keep in mind that the OP brings this on himself to some degree…he asks questions, but never even acknowledges the people who provide answers, so the incentive to expend effort to explain things is pretty low.
Click to expand...
Good to know. Thanks.
 
OP's profile lists his age as 42. OP's introductory post says he wants to get back into flying after taking a break from over 20 years ago. Can we stop pretending he's a little kid that needs to be coddled? It was a vague, bizarre question with no context and his only update was to insult the intelligence of another user.
 
The question kinda sounds like the question a DPE might ask somebody on the oral part of the test to me. One of those "do you have a pencil?" kind of questions.

So in that context, my answer would be no, the plane won't break. The next question from the DPE might be "how do you know that?" And that answer is - a steep turn is a standard maneuver flown at 45 degrees of bank, and that results in a 1.4x load factor in level flight. That's well under the load limit for a normal category aircraft. Then they might ask "well what if it's a really steep bank, like 60 degrees?" And then the answer is still OK, that's a load factor of 2. But if you go steeper, pretty sure that's an acrobatic maneuver and that's not something you should do in a normal category aircraft, and something I won't do because I have zero acro training.

But the smart ass answer would be to ask the question back "Is it a Bonanza? Because if it's a Bonanza, it won't break. Bonanzas are great. Unless it's a v-tail. Then it might break." And the smart ass answer might get you thrown out of the DPE's office.
 
Lindberg said:
You can view a poster's history by clicking on their username and then the numbers under "messages."
Click to expand...
I appreciate the tip, but I'm not much inclined to conduct a background check on members before responding to a post. Call me naive, but I prefer to presume that those who post questions are doing so in good faith.

Of course, not all questions are actually questions.
 
Last edited:
dmspilot said:
OP's profile lists his age as 42. OP's introductory post says he wants to get back into flying after taking a break from over 20 years ago. Can we stop pretending he's a little kid that needs to be coddled? It was a vague, bizarre question with no context and his only update was to insult the intelligence of another user.
Click to expand...
If you are referring to my comments in #43 (and even if not), it is not a matter of coddling the OP--it's a matter of treating others with basic courtesy and consideration. But this thread is just one of several in which a legitimate inquiry was met with, shall we say, a lack of goodwill, and one such case involved an actual new member. Keep in mind that I'm not a PoA regular so my sample size is relatively small.

PoA claims 44,678 members. Perhaps 5,000 of those are active pilots. And of those, maybe 1% or so account for 95% of the posts. Kinda makes one wonder why so few members are active contributors.
 
Last edited:
agree with Wilco above.

i would also add that most current CFIs don't have a through understanding of this concept and many students seek advice from outside sources.

it remains a good question and deserved a good answer. If my answer wasn't sufficient, I have no issue with others adding additional info that may add clarity or even provoke some constructive debate, but all too often this forum seems to divert to baseless criticism or passive ridicue when none due, and find myself on PoA less and less as a result .

there's a lot of good stuff here and members wanting to share ideas, and get informed and ask legit questions , but too often post objectives creep way outside topic for no good reason.
 
Sound to me like a DPE question in which the goal as a CFI candidate, is to figure out what the examiner is getting at. i agree this sting was largely guff and un helpful until AlphaPilot gave it some thought. We collectively can do better.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Keep in mind that the OP brings this on himself to some degree…he asks questions, but never even acknowledges the people who provide answers, so the incentive to expend effort to explain things is pretty low.
Click to expand...
If I had to guess, the OP probably saw the first response which was rude, somewhat condescending, and clearly of no help since it did nothing to answer his original question, of which he replied to accordingly. Following that, I would guess he probably gave up on the quest since his initial attempt to find knowledge was quickly squashed with an un-helpful response. But I can't be certain, just pondering.

It's like there are too many assumptions with his question taken by some of the responses: It's assumed he is a student because of the nature of the question, but there is no way to verify that given the original request. It's assumed he has a CFI, but again, no way to confirm as it was just a question. Some wanted to read his profile, of which it may give some possible clarity on his motivations, but no absolutes. I think it unreasonable for others to go digging up a posters previous POA history to try and ascertain his 'status' as a pilot.

All this makes me wonder why can't this post just be read for what it was...a question in search of an answer?

I see this all the time on POA, and currently am guilty of it with this response (which is no longer focused on the original question, but rather, all the fall out from lack of response to that original question), but if your response doesn't at all address the initial request, then it probably shouldn't be entered and let somebody else who is willing to answer, answer first. Again, i'm fully guilty at this point with thread creep.

But I'm sure somebody on here will take heartache with what I just wrote and fully disagree.
 
Last edited:
BigghHauss78 said:
It's like there are too many assumptions with his question taken by some of the responses: It's assumed he is a student because of the nature of the question, but there is no way to verify that given the original request. It's assumed he has a CFI, but again, no way to confirm as it was just a question. Some wanted to read his profile, of which it may give some possible clarity on his motivations, but no absolutes. I think it unreasonable for others to go digging up a posters previous POA history to try and ascertain his 'status' as a pilot.
Click to expand...
Some people realize that a screen name represents a person and build a picture of that person as they see posts over time.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Some people realize that a screen name represents a person and build a picture of that person as they see posts over time.
Click to expand...

But if it's a condescending arrogant non answer, then negative opinions can form rather quickly.
 
MauleSkinner said:
True. In the flip side, a negative opinion of a poster can result in condescending non answers.
Click to expand...
There is another side, in which members who -choose- to post condescending non-answers leave others with a negative impression by doing so.

Having a negative opinion of another member does not, in my opinion, justify being an a____ole. Fortunately, most members on this board behave like grown-ups and, when confronted by an objectionable post for which they have nothing useful to contribute, choose to post nothing at all.
 
Roger Wilco said:
Having a negative opinion of another member does not, in my opinion, justify being an a____ole. Fortunately, most members on this board behave like grown-ups and, when confronted by an objectionable post for which they have nothing useful to contribute, choose to post nothing at all.
Click to expand...
Hence one of my issues with the OP.
 
MauleSkinner said:
So how is that relevant for a Student Pilot?
Click to expand...
if used correctly it prompts a discussion of wing loading and stall speed; the relationship of stall speed to gross weight is not correctly grasped by many students....if used less than correctly it prompts this sort of needlessly snarky string.
 
AlphaPilotFlyer said:
a lot of crummy answers to original question, and a good question at that. I hope PoA doesn't become a safe place to ask a fair question. here's the deal, as capt thrope stated above, aircraft certified under a particular category have to withstand different min loading , such as standard cat +3.8 G's, under the category it's certified for. example being a c172 is certified in both standard and utility (4.4g) categories for loading ...utility categories allow greater than standard loads but may have some conditions such as max weight or cg limits, or other poh limitations,,, as example the c172 has a restriction that no weight be in aft baggage for utility ops such as for intentional spins even though c172 is not approved for aerobatics (6 g) required for exceeding maneuvering like beyond 60 degree banks.

to add more confusion, over stressing airframe is divided into categories other than wings following off. such as deformity but still being structally sound.

so OP answer is more complicated than it seems. but basic answer is if you maintain manueving within its design, such as GW, banking, airspeed , ect., limits , you won't break the airframe.
Click to expand...
Exactly... alot of smart a**es in here imo.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Keep in mind that the OP brings this on himself to some degree…he asks questions, but never even acknowledges the people who provide answers, so the incentive to expend effort to explain things is pretty low.
Click to expand...
Oh I'm sorry... I didn't know i was supposed to be on here 24/7 like some of us.
 
BigghHauss78 said:
If I had to guess, the OP probably saw the first response which was rude, somewhat condescending, and clearly of no help since it did nothing to answer his original question, of which he replied to accordingly. Following that, I would guess he probably gave up on the quest since his initial attempt to find knowledge was quickly squashed with an un-helpful response. But I can't be certain, just pondering.

It's like there are too many assumptions with his question taken by some of the responses: It's assumed he is a student because of the nature of the question, but there is no way to verify that given the original request. It's assumed he has a CFI, but again, no way to confirm as it was just a question. Some wanted to read his profile, of which it may give some possible clarity on his motivations, but no absolutes. I think it unreasonable for others to go digging up a posters previous POA history to try and ascertain his 'status' as a pilot.

All this makes me wonder why can't this post just be read for what it was...a question in search of an answer?

I see this all the time on POA, and currently am guilty of it with this response (which is no longer focused on the original question, but rather, all the fall out from lack of response to that original question), but if your response doesn't at all address the initial request, then it probably shouldn't be entered and let somebody else who is willing to answer, answer first. Again, i'm fully guilty at this point with thread creep.

But I'm sure somebody on here will take heartache with what I just wrote and fully disagree.
Click to expand...
You are 100% correct with your response. I gave up on this thread.
 
dp342b said:
Oh I'm sorry... I didn't know i was supposed to be on here 24/7 like some of us.
Click to expand...
So you’re saying you haven’t been here since you started any of the previous threads?

If you can’t be here enough to note the answers to your questions, maybe you shouldn’t ask them.
dp342b said:
You are 100% correct with your response. I gave up on this thread.
Click to expand...
Before any of the actual answers were posted, apparently.
 
MauleSkinner said:
So you’re saying you haven’t been here since you started any of the previous threads?

Before any of the actual answers were posted, apparently.
Click to expand...
I posted this thread looking for different answers for different airplanes. Thinking pilots are supposed to be professional, i expected professional answers.

If you respond to me with a professional answer, I'll respond with a professional reply. If it's a smart a** answer, expect a smart a** reply from me.

Now I'm wondering if I should even be a member of this platform with all the responses I get. Some of the members actually answered the question. Some wanted me to clarify the question to the level of an MIT professor in aeronautical physics.

So to answer your question, I haven't been on in awhile due to scheduling my checkride and studying and working and flying maneuvers and perfecting landings.

So if I don't post ever again, you'll know why.
 
POA Thread degeneration, a play in 4 posts.

Post 1: I have a 1973 Frangle-pusher with left handed threads, and I'm not sure if I should use the factory top-fitting groomwhaker or the side-pull fleeble-hop as was indicated in the optional service bulletin SB12345

Post 2: You can use either, but most competent I/A's recommend cutting the pokey-thing to 4.7mm as was standard practice in the Boer-War.

Post 3: Nobody uses top-fitting fleeble-hops unless they are drunk, or left-handed.

Post 4: I said BOER war, you nearsighted side-stick loving jerk. Also your mother dresses you funny.
 
dp342b said:
I posted this thread looking for different answers for different airplanes. Thinking pilots are supposed to be professional, i expected professional answers.

If you respond to me with a professional answer, I'll respond with a professional reply. If it's a smart a** answer, expect a smart a** reply from me.
Click to expand...
I posted a pretty good albeit slightly snarky answer in post 12 only a few hours after the question.

But really this is a question you should actually ask your CFI. Reading an answer is one thing. Understanding the answer is something very different entirely. Which is what @Lindberg said in post 8.

Perhaps if there was some follow up dialogue the responses would be very different. Instead of retorting back and getting defensive. You could have replied any number of ways.
 
dp342b said:
I posted this thread looking for different answers for different airplanes.
Click to expand...

Your question didn't ask that. In fact, it was rather vague.

dp342b said:
Thinking pilots are supposed to be professional, i expected professional answers.
Click to expand...

Most POA pilots are amateur pilots, not pros. Try asking your original question on a professional pilots' forum. We will be interested in hearing how those answers differ from those given by POA.
 
This discussion closely resembles the typical discussions I see between network people, well except the comments here are more self-filtered.

And I feel better now. A question without context gets answers that are random. Go figure.
 
Albany Tom said:
This discussion closely resembles the typical discussions I see between network people, well except the comments here are more self-filtered.

And I feel better now. A question without context gets answers that are random. Go figure.
Click to expand...

Do network people have the equivalent of a CFI to ask network questions of?
 
dp342b said:
Now I'm wondering if I should even be a member of this platform with all the responses I get. Some of the members actually answered the question. Some wanted me to clarify the question to the level of an MIT professor in aeronautical physics.
Click to expand...
You may have read my post advocating courtesy and consideration on this board. I meant it to apply to everyone, if we are to get the most out of this diverse collection of personalities. PoA is a community, and just like all communities of humans, the best and worst of human nature are often on display. Some come to light a fuse and watch the fireworks, others come bearing gifts and good cheer.

We participate at our own free will and pay nothing for the privilege of membership. When we post to the board, we are not entitled to expect others to post replies that please us. Those who reply (with good intentions) have invested a little slice of their personal time to respond to us--in a manner of speaking, they are investing in us--and even if we disagree or find their comments unhelpful, we do owe them a debt of appreciation for their time and effort.

Earlier in this thread I characterized PoA as a deep repository of aeronautical knowledge, and it is. I've been active in aviation, as both a recreational GA pilot and professional, for nearly five decades, and I come here to learn from other members--many of whom truly are experts. And occasionally I try to share something I've learned or experienced that others may find interesting or helpful. That, in my opinion, is what it's all about.

So, should you be a member of this platform? Yes, if you wish to gain from the knowledge and experience of others, and if you can find a way to interact and connect with the community in a positive way. With regard to the latter, a little humility and a less confrontational approach would go a long way toward establishing rapport and motivating others to invest their time in you. Otherwise, there are dozens upon dozens of other resources on the Internet. And of course, you could ask your CFI.
 
dp342b said:
So to answer your question, I haven't been on in awhile due to scheduling my checkride and studying and working and flying maneuvers and perfecting landings.
Click to expand...
From your prior posts I thought you were a low-time student. But if you're actually working on checkride prep and seriously asking this question, then I'll double down on my previous answer. There may be significant gaps in your knowledge base that your CFI is likely better equipped to address than SGOTI.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top