Larry said, > "Am I missing something here???????????"
No. You are finding just what you were looking for . . . some odds and ends of poorly wrought criticism supporting a position you are/were predisposed to have regarding a book that has somehow escaped your notice. You've done fine without it, clearly. For many pilots though, that book is a close friend. I know when I was first trying to learn how to get my KR on the ground safely in the early 80's, re-reading Langewische's chapter on "Landing" was of critical help. I had been afraid of hitting the prop by holding forward stick upon touchdown. Reading that chapter cured me of that fear and, in fact, stirred in me a subsequent passion for landing my taildraggers in all sorts of wind and runway conditions. Mike T. said, > . . . "but most modern cfi's would already have Incorporated a lot of the things he discovered." I think if you'll think about it a moment, you'll agree that most modern cfi's come out of flying school factories and are cfi's only because it's their only path to building time. None of them that I've had an opportunity to talk with over the years know anything about aviation history or aviation literature. They've never heard of St. Exupery, Langeschwische, Beryl Markham, or read anything by Lindbergh. In far too many instances they're an illiterate bunch of time builders who when placed in an airline cockpit haven't the common sense to deal with situations such as the Korean Airlines debacle at SFO (couldn't land without the autopilot on) or the Q400 crash in Buffalo (reduced power on approach when already partially stalled) or even the Air France Flight 447 where three supposedly top-notch pilots watched like robots for over five minutes as they descended from 38K to the ocean surface without understanding they were holding the aircraft in a stall all the way down. The senior pilot of the three pilots did finally understand the situation . . . just before they hit the water. These and many other examples are all a result of mass-production training procedures and pilots who never develop an intuitive "flying sense". If they had ever had any innate interest and love for flying, their training had ruined it and turned them into robots unable to deal with situations that require airmanship - precisely what Langeschwiche was trying to teach with his book . . . and the reason why it is loved by so many pilots. I don't think Langeschwische "discovered" anything. The reason his book is a classic is because he spoke to the reader in common sense terms, going around the tedious blather of what has become an obtuse "FAA approved" training syllabus. Anyone looking at an F-104 wing can only chuckle at the word Bernoulli. Happy Easter everyone, Mike Stirewalt KSEE ____________________________________________________________ Popcorn Does This To Your Brain (Proof) clearstateofmind.com http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/5cbcd5312691a5531327fst04vuc _______________________________________________ Search the KRnet Archives at https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/. Please see LIST RULES and KRnet info at http://www.krnet.org/info.html. see http://list.krnet.org/mailman/listinfo/krnet_list.krnet.org to change options. To UNsubscribe from KRnet, send a message to [email protected]
