X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com
Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To:  lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 19:38:44 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-6386375@logan.com>
X-Original-Return-Path: <vtailjeff@aol.com>
Received: from omr-m02.mx.aol.com ([64.12.143.76] verified)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.5)
  with ESMTPS id 6386301 for lml@lancaironline.net; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 18:00:42 -0400
Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.143.76; envelope-from=vtailjeff@aol.com
Received: from mtaomg-ma02.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-ma02.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.41.9])
	by omr-m02.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id A24EC700A2C4A
	for <lml@lancaironline.net>; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 18:00:06 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from core-mnd003c.r1000.mail.aol.com (core-mnd003.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.29.107.9])
	by mtaomg-ma02.r1000.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id 492C4E000081
	for <lml@lancaironline.net>; Wed, 24 Jul 2013 18:00:06 -0400 (EDT)
References: <list-6386209@logan.com>
X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: SFO automation trap
In-Reply-To: <list-6386209@logan.com>
X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: vtailjeff@aol.com
X-MB-Message-Type: User
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
 boundary="--------MB_8D056D04A4781E3_E60_45ADD_webmail-d216.sysops.aol.com"
X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 37893-STANDARD
Received: from 12.110.229.82 by webmail-d216.sysops.aol.com (149.174.188.115) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Wed, 24 Jul 2013 18:00:05 -0400
X-Original-Message-Id: <8D056D04A3939A9-E60-12F8C@webmail-d216.sysops.aol.com>
X-Originating-IP: [12.110.229.82]
X-Original-Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 18:00:06 -0400 (EDT)
x-aol-global-disposition: G
x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d290951f04e666d17

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
----------MB_8D056D04A4781E3_E60_45ADD_webmail-d216.sysops.aol.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


Or a pilot for that matter!

It just seems so unbelievable that a computer=20
wouldn't project the problem, sound bells or throttle up well before the pr=
oblem=20
became unfixable.




-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Miller <pjdmiller@gmail.com>
To: lml <lml@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Wed, Jul 24, 2013 3:40 pm
Subject: [LML] Re: SFO automation trap


Rob, I continue to be baffled.  In our "sophisticated" Honeywell systems yo=
u can=20
command vertical speed into a stall without warning (kfc325 for example). =
=20
Trutrak let's you set a minimum airspeed so it won't do that.  Are we not i=
n an=20
era where the new aircraft have projected speed and paths are clearly shown=
 and=20
stalls are protected against?  It just seems so unbelievable that a compute=
r=20
wouldn't project the problem, sound bells or throttle up well before the pr=
oblem=20
became unfixable.  I can see no reason why a VS profile should ever let you=
 hit=20
the ground except over the runway in a flare and at the right airspeed. =20

Paul

On 2013-07-24, at 15:29, Rob Logan <Rob@Logan.com> wrote:

> plagiarized from http://www.aviationweek.com/  -

--
For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html

=20

----------MB_8D056D04A4781E3_E60_45ADD_webmail-d216.sysops.aol.com
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<font color=3D'black' size=3D'2' face=3D'arial'>
<div><font style=3D"background-color: transparent;" face=3D"Arial, Helvetic=
a, sans-serif">Or a pilot for that matter!</font></div>

<div style=3D"color: black; font-family: arial,helvetica; font-size: 10pt;"=
><blockquote style=3D"padding-left: 3px; border-left-color: blue; border-le=
ft-width: 2px; border-left-style: solid;"><pre><tt>It just seems so unbelie=
vable that a computer=20
wouldn't project the problem, sound bells or throttle up well before the pr=
oblem=20
became unfixable.</tt></pre></blockquote></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div style=3D"color: black; font-family: arial,helvetica; font-size: 10pt;"=
>-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Paul Miller &lt;pjdmiller@gmail.com&gt;<br>
To: lml &lt;lml@lancaironline.net&gt;<br>
Sent: Wed, Jul 24, 2013 3:40 pm<br>
Subject: [LML] Re: SFO automation trap<br>
<br>




<div style=3D"margin: 0px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Tahoma, Verdan=
a, Arial, Sans-Serif; font-size: 12px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255)=
;" id=3D"AOLMsgPart_0_dfcebbfa-2042-48b6-92a3-074343ba0601">

<pre style=3D"font-size: 9pt;"><tt>Rob, I continue to be baffled.  In our "=
sophisticated" Honeywell systems you can=20
command vertical speed into a stall without warning (kfc325 for example). =
=20
Trutrak let's you set a minimum airspeed so it won't do that.  Are we not i=
n an=20
era where the new aircraft have projected speed and paths are clearly shown=
 and=20
stalls are protected against?  It just seems so unbelievable that a compute=
r=20
wouldn't project the problem, sound bells or throttle up well before the pr=
oblem=20
became unfixable.  I can see no reason why a VS profile should ever let you=
 hit=20
the ground except over the runway in a flare and at the right airspeed. =20

Paul

On 2013-07-24, at 15:29, Rob Logan &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:Rob@Logan.com">Rob=
@Logan.com</a>&gt; wrote:

&gt; plagiarized from <a href=3D"http://www.aviationweek.com/" target=3D"_b=
lank">http://www.aviationweek.com/</a>  -

--
For archives and unsub <a href=3D"http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lm=
l/List.html" target=3D"_blank">http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/L=
ist.html</a>
</tt></pre>
</div>
 <!-- end of AOLMsgPart_0_dfcebbfa-2042-48b6-92a3-074343ba0601 -->



</div>
</font>
----------MB_8D056D04A4781E3_E60_45ADD_webmail-d216.sysops.aol.com--