Originally Posted by Katamarino
So, if a rule (to take an example) is demonstrably detrimental to flight safety in a particular circumstance (say, total radio failure, and you need to contact ATC on your phone...), you're saying that because it would be breaking a rule, you should plow on regardless into a hillside? Or maybe an pilot with a lapsed IR should scud-run when he hits bad weather, and then a cliff, instead of climbing to a safe height and using his instrument skills, because it's against the rules?
If you can show me anywhere that I've actually said that I would be grateful. But I've actually NOT said that, nor would I.
I can quite see circumstances in which it would be really quite sensible to use a mobile phone whilst airborne. Not in the above circumstances, no. In the first place, R/T failure is covered by other actions - perhaps you might like to read up on them to refresh your memory - or don't you brush up your skills with an instructor from time to time? In the second place, why would he be scudrunning in the first place? Sounds like piss-poor planning and preparation to me.
IO540, you will find if you take the trouble to look in a dictionary, that
licence is a noun and
license is a verb. Hence the different spellings. Sorry if that confused you.
Actually, CS, I can tell you I am entirely satisfied with my attitude
Yes, I think we could work that out. Nice to have low standards and know you'll reach them, isn't it?
In the meantime, if all you can do is throw insults, this conversation is over. In the meantime, thank you to all the people who have PM'd me about this thread, including the studes who, unlike a few of the contributors, value their safety and that of other user of our airspace.