Basic Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


midlifeflyer last won the day on November 14 2015

midlifeflyer had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

643 Excellent

About midlifeflyer

  • Rank
    Won't Leave!
  • Birthday July 26

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Chapel Hill NC
  • Model

Recent Profile Visitors

1,905 profile views
  1. midlifeflyer

    Ovation performance charts in XL

    This is excellent! Gotta try it with some of my spreadsheets!
  2. If the question is pure "legality" there are no rules or regulations I am aware of prohibiting a pilot from taxiing onto the runway and just sitting there with his or her back to landing traffic. There is of course, 91.13 careless and reckless operation, which would come into play in the right, or rather, wrong, circumstances.
  3. "I'm lining up and waiting" has no place at a nontowered airport. Trying to get an extra 10 seconds is not worth the risk.
  4. midlifeflyer

    Line up and wait

    IOW it means exactly the same thing as "taxi into position and hold." It was a change in standard US verbiage to match the rest of the world, not a change in procedure..
  5. midlifeflyer

    Line up and wait

    You should not be hearing "position and hold." ATC is required to use standardized language. What airports?
  6. midlifeflyer

    Ovation performance charts in XL

    Nice work
  7. I will pass on what a friend (coincidentally a Mooney pilot) said to my wife after our adventure losing power in the clouds over the Rockies that same day: "Well, you can cross that one off." It was exactly what she needed to hear. (Not sarcasm). Good job!
  8. midlifeflyer

    lawsuit in Philly

    Why would the "shame" factor only work in one direction? To use your example, wouldn't it have been helpful to produce an NTSB report concluding the crew screwed up so persons injured and the family of those killed could be compensated without the enormous cost of litigation eating into their recoveries?
  9. midlifeflyer

    lawsuit in Philly

    In 40 years, I don't think I have ever seen a situation in which, assuming the motion by a party seeking to win the case is accurate, the other side's theory did not look suspect
  10. midlifeflyer


    So do ForeFlight and FlyQ. IFlyGPS does a similar thing with its RealView charts. Others too. On the rest, personal preference again. I have a total of about a dozen EFBs roughly divided between iOS and Android. I never could get into Avare.
  11. midlifeflyer


    The chances are you are missing nothing. Most things about personal preferences is, well, personal. For me, 7 years of ForeFlight has made the flow of both preflight planning and in flight use so natural, even those I like better for certain things won't replace it for IFR. You would probably feel the opposite. if I had to point out one personal annoyance in FlyQ it would be what-if planning. Putting a route in the FlyQ map page search box, even just two airports, brings you directly to the flight plan page and generates a route. I don't want that. Ever. I want to see the two points on the map and work from there. I guess it goes back to the time when FF and WingX were the only two and wags could comment FF was stronger for planning and WingX stinger in flight.
  12. midlifeflyer


    I personally find FlyQ a bit weak for IFR, but highly recommend it for VFR pilots because of the excellent taxi diagrams ForeFlight charges extra for.
  13. midlifeflyer

    lawsuit in Philly

    Since I have not read all the deposition transcripts and expert reports, I don't have an opinion one way or the other.
  14. midlifeflyer

    lawsuit in Philly

    There are a couple of reasons, some interrelated. The most-often mentioned ones are goal, manpower and representation. Goal: although there is a probable cause determination, the primary goal of NTSB investigations is not to assign blame to individuals or corporations; it is to find accident causes so recommendations can be made on correcting them. That's the exact opposite the primary goal of litigation. Manpower: The NTSB does not investigate every accident fully. It can't. Some get a pretty cursory examination, but still get a probable cause determination. Part of the concern is the weight a judge or jury would be likely to give the report (just as you are probably inclined to) regardless of the depth or completeness of the NTSB's investigation. Representation. The NTSB was designed as a neutral body. It strives to maintain that neutrality and there are rules ion place for that. When the NTSB, in an accident, brings the manufacturer, for example, into an investigation to get the benefit of its expertise. Actually, it doesn't bring the "the manufacturer." It brings in specific people who work for the manufacturer who have subject expertise to assist the NTSB, with strict limitations, such as "Persons responsible for managing litigation or insurance interests, members of the media, and, generally, corporate executives who will not be providing needed technical expertise as participants on an NTSB investigative group are not permitted to participate in an NTSB investigation." You can read the agreement those folks have to sign here. Put those three together and you have a lot of the rationale for keeping the NTSB's fault determination away from the courts. You might even add a 4th - subjecting NTSB investigators to cross-examination by an attorney who has had far more research done into the causes of a single accident than the NTSB can, after repeated attacks, affect that process and the enormous credibility the agency has because of its zealous protection of its litigation neutrality.
  15. midlifeflyer

    Student pilot training tips?

    Good point, Ron. Another reason I'm glad I also have a Cherokee available for training.