Advice Rating System... Kinda

[211º]

This might be a little crass, but what the heck.  I'll come forward and mention it.

I've found that when I'm looking at advice and posts and I'm wondering about "how good or accurate" that advice might be, I harvest the commenter's tail number and head over to flightaware to take a look at their recent flight history. 

Shallow - yes.

Invasive - yes.

Illuminating - yes, I think so.

Anyone else do this or am I the only scoundrel?

[N201MKTurbo]

My plane has been down for quite a while. Probably another month or so. Mostly flying other people’s planes. 
 

So by your criteria I’m a total looser 

[211º]

@N201MKTurbo, You did make me laugh out loud!

[carusoam]

My posts are always capped with...

PP thoughts only... not a mechanic or CFI...

So... you know where they are coming From...

How good of a reader are you?

Do you help correct mistakes?

Can you recognize mistakes?

 

What is your skill level as a reader? Or as a poster?

 

Welcome to MS... it is a community of great people...

Some judgment is possible...

But judging all MSers... would be counterproductive...

Same thing if you judge all your neighbors... or every parent of your son’s baseball team...

 

Where do you go from here?

What are you expecting from a community...?

After a while.. you get to know all of the neighbors... everyone has value...

Whatever method of judging you have... probably won’t be very fruitful...

You never know who will have the answer you are looking for tomorrow...

So many MSers have more than aviation experience...

So many people with the most flying skill... don’t post very often... or their tail number is a bit hidden...

or their flight experience comes from their work plane... and isn’t posted here...

 

Maybe, you didn’t mean you were judging people...

Best regards,

-a-

[201er]

Maybe Timmy should rate everyone's credibility while you're at it

[gsxrpilot]

That's actually not a bad idea... 

My plane's been down since end of Sept. so you can ignore everything I post 

[GeeBee]

Your measurement, "recency" has nothing to do with level of experience, or intensity of experience. Some people learn in 200, some never learn in 20,000. 

Further, if you want opinion, that is often situational. I can regale dozens of stories of 20,000 hour four stripers arguing over what is a "suitable airport". Great minds can differ on fundamental issues.

All you have to do is go over to the thread about touch and goes. You can find good arguments on both sides, some are more conservative, others not so much and have some experience they believe to proves their point.

 

 

[RobertGary1]

I guess that kicks out the cfi’s since we fly different n numbers all the time 

[RobertGary1]

You’ll be able to see all the low time honeymooners who just bought a Mooney. 

[kortopates]

I am afraid I am also a looser by that criteria as I fall into the same boat as Rich, Paul & Robert, as my plane just came out of a long annual because I was too busy flying in other Mooney's. But 7 hrs on her in the first week on mine. But when I am not flying mine, I am mostly instructing in other Mooney's; usually longbody's and midbody's. But apparently still a total loser with 250 hrs in the last 12 month, with the majority in Mooney's - but that's okay  

In all seriousness, I do think your very wise though to not blindly take anonymous advice over the internet without lots of skepticism but I don't think flightware is a good gauge of the authors knowledge or experience. I'd put more credence is years of ownership from the registration except we don't know if there is a history of prior Mooney ownership.  Anyway, I don't think there is a easy answer to your dillema, like flight aware. IMO, You really need to know something about the person posting from being here awhile.

[gsxrpilot]

The reason I use FlightAware the most, is when someone asks me about a Mooney for sale. Again, it's not a perfect system, but if I look up the N number on FlightAware and it shows up as flying all over the country, two or three times a month, you know it's flying regularly and that's a good thing.

Otherwise... I really don't use it at all. One problem/reason is that there is some Baron in Mississippi or Tennessee that is squawking my N number on FlightAware all the time. It's really annoying.

[201Steve]

The internet is not for finding answers, it’s for finding clues. You take those clues, test them against your own knowledge or findings, and verify against people/places/things that you trust. 
 

 

[211º]

39 minutes ago, 201Steve said:

The internet is not for finding answers, it’s for finding clues. You take those clues, test them against your own knowledge or findings, and verify against people/places/things that you trust. 
 

 

Brilliant. I like that. 

[Will.iam]

Not mention you can block your tail number in flight aware and i know of at least one system that you can turn off your tracking by squawking 1200. Some people are just paranoid, others like their privacy and others are doing things they don’t want to leave evidence of being there. 

[jlunseth]

Same here. Plane’s been gone. I have forgotten everything I never knew to begin with.

[RobertGary1]

8 hours ago, Will.iam said:

Not mention you can block your tail number in flight aware and i know of at least one system that you can turn off your tracking by squawking 1200. Some people are just paranoid, others like their privacy and others are doing things they don’t want to leave evidence of being there. 

The 978 systems can be turned off but the 1090 cannot as I understand it. 

[ArtVandelay]

The 978 systems can be turned off but the 1090 cannot as I understand it. 

Yes, but only if you don’t have a modern transponder (mode S), if you do then you can not be in anonymous mode.

[Ross Statham]

I often read a poster’s profile, as well as reading their posts going back a bit.  That gives me a sense about their listening skills, currency, and especially their analytical abilities.  Do they simply react, or do they think before responding?  Profiles can help give a few clues to their flight resume.  Viewing their “states flown” also really helps understand experience.  But as others have pointed out, you can always take advice or ignore it.

When I served in the Army I came to understand that the ribbons and badges on another’s uniform were generally indicative of their experiences and achievements.  I came to respect most opinions from those who had really “been there, done that”.  Someone with a Combat Infantry Badge and a Bronze Star or Silver Star, or a Command Pilot insignia (2000+ hours) merited my attention and respect and my ears.  I have seen similar experiences and advice often given here, and it’s been helpful. 

[MISSILEFLYER]

19 hours ago, 201er said:

Maybe Timmy should rate everyone's credibility while you're at it

Serious question from a serious guy.  My name is Scott Thompson.  I have been around aviation owning two Mooney’s that were little flown when purchased.  I have gained a lot of experience in the process through lessons learned.

I started the Timmy thread.

Are you saying that a fictional child that grew up in the 21st century and didn’t care much about General Aviation because he/she has other interests is not credible?

Are you saying I am not credible?

Are you just being flippant?

Seriously haven’t a clue what your words mean 201er/parrot guy/new father (My wife and I raised two to adulthood...They are a Civil Engineer and a Speech Pathologist.  Both are homeowners.  One has a child of their own).  Credible?

If credibility comes from experience.  I would like to think I have some.  

If credibility comes from where your politics lie...Perhaps not in your view of what is basis for “credibility”?

Thanks for clarification of what you are talking about?

Was there “credibility” in the recent mask thread?

I think yes...and no.

I know when it comes to talking about parrots I don’t do so, because I lack experience/interest/desire/passion.  When it comes to really long flights over water or mountainous terrain, ditto, not your guy.

I do always welcome discussion (some would call it debate) when someone uses words that I question.

Your words are an example.  I challenge your “credibility” on your post.

Thanks for your clarification. Or from the response from those that emoted...

[MISSILEFLYER]

20 hours ago, 211º said:

This might be a little crass, but what the heck.  I'll come forward and mention it.

I've found that when I'm looking at advice and posts and I'm wondering about "how good or accurate" that advice might be, I harvest the commenter's tail number and head over to flightaware to take a look at their recent flight history. 

Shallow - yes.

Invasive - yes.

Illuminating - yes, I think so.

Anyone else do this or am I the only scoundrel?

Shallow?  Agree.  Invasive?  Not really content is out in public domain.  Kind of creepy like looking at tax rolls to gain insight...but legal.  Illuminating?  Not particularly.  What if the plane is owned by multiple people?  Doesn’t just represent poster.  Judge you as a scoundrel?  Laugh at that one.  No.  Whatever floats your boat.  

All information right or wrong should not yet determined is just data.  Some is just entertainment.  Some is dangerous.  Some is flat out wrong.  Humans are fallible.  Humans have emotions and triggers and bias and opinion.

Listen and learn.

What to do. 

What NOT to do.

Wisdom can be gained from those that lack credibility.

All good in da hood.

[skydvrboy]

When I contacted flight aware they informed me that 978 systems usually only show up  when on flight following. My flights ONLY show up when on flight following. They explained the technical reasons and if you want those contact me. 

Bottom line, lots of flight aware data means the plane flies often, but lack of flight aware data does not necessarily mean the plane sits. 

[skydvrboy]

As for the quality of advice, stick around a couple years, read thousands of posts, and you'll have great idea of who is giving you advice you can trust. 

[RLCarter]

Since it was brought up, I’ve flown roughly 45~50 hrs since Aug. 2020 and NONE of those flights show up on Flight Aware. These flights have been VFR and about half with flight following in 2 different aircraft, my Mooney shows its last flight as Jan. 2020. There are times I would like to email first timers a flight track but I haven’t been able too, so I guess my point is Flight Aware isn’t all it use to be 

[Mooneymite]

18 minutes ago, RLCarter said:

...., so I guess my point is Flight Aware isn’t all it use to be 

I live under ATL's Class B, Mode C veil where ADS-B is a fact of life.  Virtually everyone shows up on someone's screen.  The exceptions are the scofflaws and the planes without electrical systems.  Privacy?  What's that?

[gacoon]

32 minutes ago, RLCarter said:

Since it was brought up, I’ve flown roughly 45~50 hrs since Aug. 2020 and NONE of those flights show up on Flight Aware. These flights have been VFR and about half with flight following in 2 different aircraft, my Mooney shows its last flight as Jan. 2020. There are times I would like to email first timers a flight track but I haven’t been able too, so I guess my point is Flight Aware isn’t all it use to be 

From Flightaware FAQ's:

What is a position-only flight? SHARE | BACK TO TOP
A position-only flight is a flight for which FlightAware has not received a filed flight plan (for example an airline flight that doesn't report its flight schedule to FlightAware or a VFR flight).

In those cases, if we receive position reports via ADS-B or another source, the flight can be trackable as a position-only flight.

Note that position-only flights do not have a filed origin, destination, or route, and the aircraft may enter and leave areas of coverage throughout the flight.

Are you ADSB out, if so run an ADSB check and see if its working.  I have a J model and fly in both SEA and PHX are and all flights are tagged by Flightware