Private pilot license

[[email protected]]

I'm considering going in for a private pilot license. Just wanted
general feedback from anyone who has one or is considering opting for
one.

Cheers

[G Farris]

In article . com>,
says...
>
>
>I'm considering going in for a private pilot license. Just wanted
>general feedback from anyone who has one or is considering opting for
>one.
>

Sorry - no one here has one of these!


Couldn't resist the joke - sorry.
Just about the only ones here who don't have one are (like Rachel)
because they have a commercial or ATP!

So you're going to have to be more specific about what you want to know.
How much does it cost? To get, or to keep? Is it safe? Is it fun? Is it
practical? How do you get acces to planes? Rent? Buy? How much for all
that? I think "general feedback" is a bit too general for this group.

G Faris

[G Farris]

In article >, says...

>Just about the only ones here who don't have one are (like Rachel)
>because they have a commercial or ATP!
>


Oops, I forgot - There's Skylune who doesn't have one, but admits he's
considering getting one! He'll also be happy to give you "general feedback"
:-)

Don' be put off by my jokes.
Any aviation enthusiast is welcome here, and people will gladly answer your
questions.

G Faris

[Jim Macklin]

It is very much a worthwhile endeavor and a great
experience. The time required is often somewhat longer than
the minimum times listed in the regulations, often taking
50-100% longer and costing more money. There are many
things to learn and skills to develop and each student is
different.
Getting books and videos and studying before you begin the
flight portion will save money and time once you begin to
fly. Try to have the money available so you can fly at
least every other day [3-4 times per week]. Try to devote
this as a full-time schedule, don't mix up your time with a
family vacation, or start any new businesses, in other
words, focus on the flying.

There many obstacles, mostly time and money and more things
to learn every day that passes, as new regulations are
added, new navigation technologies develop. The weather is
always a factor in flying and that includes pilot training,
schedules are often hard to meet. It is possible to get a
private pilot certificate in as little as a month or so ,
but many people take a year or more because of time and
money issues. If you get the test passed in one season, you
won't have learned about the other three seasons yet. If
you learn to fly in Florida, you won't know about Kansas
winds or Colorado mountains.

If you want motivation to begin, get started. Get the
catalogs from Sporty's and Aircraft Spruce, join the AOPA
and the EAA. Go to Oshkosh for the national flying of the
EAA [July 24-30 this year]. Checkout the FAA website
http://www.faa.gov/ where you can download all the current
regulations and many text books at no cost. You can get a
PDA or laptop computer and save the cost of printing these
documents which are mostly PDF files.

Buy some commercial text books and get two copies of some of
them, keep one at home and carry one with you to work and
read it instead of the newspaper.

You will need a medical exam before you can solo, unless you
want to learn to fly gliders or get the new Sport Pilot
certificate as a stepping stone or even final goal. You can
find which doctors in your area are FAA DME [designated
medical examiners] by calling the nearest flight school or
looking on the Internet at the medical link on the FAA site,
or the AOPA.

www.aopa.org www.eaa.org www.aircraftspruce.com
www.sportys.com

Don't be concerned about whether the airplane is high wing
or low wing design, don't forget to have fun.


> wrote in message
oups.com...
| I'm considering going in for a private pilot license. Just
wanted
| general feedback from anyone who has one or is considering
opting for
| one.
|
| Cheers
|

[Rachel]

wrote:
> I'm considering going in for a private pilot license. Just wanted
> general feedback from anyone who has one or is considering opting for
> one.
>
> Cheers
>

First thing I tell everyone - it's addicting!

[G Farris]

In article >,
says...
>
>
wrote:
>> I'm considering going in for a private pilot license. Just wanted
>> general feedback from anyone who has one or is considering opting for
>> one.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>
>First thing I tell everyone - it's addicting!

That's true!
First question - are you married?
How do you like the prospect of no longer being? :-)

GF

[Stubby]

wrote:
> I'm considering going in for a private pilot license. Just wanted
> general feedback from anyone who has one or is considering opting for
> one.

You need to tell us what your expectations are. You said "private"
pilot. A PPL can't do much other than fly around with passengers and
without an instructor. For instance it doesn't qualify you to fly an
airliner or even to charge a few bucks for hauling cargo.

OTOH, you are able to have fun. Flying is just pure fun. But, you had
better have plenty of insurance even though you are renting airplanes.

And note that achieving the great goal of getting a PPL does not make
flying suddenly free. You maybe allowed to operate an airplane, but you
still have to pay for it and pay for fuel, etc.

[Skylune]

>>G raris:

Oops, I forgot - There's Skylune who doesn't have one, but admits he's
considering getting one! He'll also be happy to give you "general
feedback"
:-)"

I might yet do it, as I sold the boat, and will have some free time. If
I
can't find the time to fly at least once per week, I won't bother.

I tried that once, and realized I could develop just enough skills to be
dangerous, but still legal. That, plus the totally unprofessional CFI at
FRG (I can't mention the companies or individuals name: that could start
a libel suit) caused me to pull the plug after 15 hours...

[BDS]

"Skylune" > wrote

> I might yet do it, as I sold the boat, and will have some free time. If
> I
> can't find the time to fly at least once per week, I won't bother.
>
> I tried that once, and realized I could develop just enough skills to be
> dangerous, but still legal. That, plus the totally unprofessional CFI at
> FRG (I can't mention the companies or individuals name: that could start
> a libel suit) caused me to pull the plug after 15 hours...

Everything you write seems to contain at least one slam against the AOPA,
FAA, NTSB, or flying in general - you just can't seem to help yourself, can
you?

If you feel that your skills have deteriorated to the point that you are
dangerous, does it really make any difference whether you are "legal" or
not? The amount of flying it takes to stay "current" varies from individual
to individual, and is also somewhat related to experience level. That being
the case, how do you regulate the amount of flying it takes for everyone to
be "safe"?

It would be nice if we could start to give people at least some credit for
having a minimum amount of common sense. Some things in life were not meant
for everyone - flying is one of them, especially if you expect to be able to
abdicate your responsibility for keeping yourself safe to the FAA.

BDS

[Skylune]

>>BDS: It would be nice if we could start to give people at least some
credit for
having a minimum amount of common sense. Some things in life were not
meant
for everyone - flying is one of them, especially if you expect to be able
to
abdicate your responsibility for keeping yourself safe to the FAA.<<

The REASON I decided to stop is that I do take responsibility for my own
actions, and realized I could get the PPL but only be a marginally
competent pilot. Maybe
some people can maintain proficiency by flying 1-2x per month. I didn't
think I could, and would not subject any passengers to unnecessary risk.
I still think it was the right thing to do.

(Where was the slam against AOPA, FAA, NTSB in that post? The CFI was a
jerk. So what? I'm not intimating that all CFIs are jerks, or that all
flight schools are bad.)

[BDS]

"Skylune" > wrote

> (Where was the slam against AOPA, FAA, NTSB in that post?

You wrote:

> I tried that once, and realized I could develop just enough skills to be
> dangerous, but still legal.

BDS

[Skylune]

>>by "BDS" > Feb 9, 2006 at 03:45 PM


"Skylune" > wrote

> (Where was the slam against AOPA, FAA, NTSB in that post?

You wrote:

> I tried that once, and realized I could develop just enough skills to
be
> dangerous, but still legal.

BDS<<

Well, ok, i guess that can be considered a "slam." I think that many
people up there with valid PPLs are just not that skilled, and standards
should be tougher. Goto AOPA message boards, "Never Again," and you will
see a whole big collection of pilots who agree.

[Gene Seibel]

Have had one for 29 years. Need to fly some more before deciding
whether it's a good thing.... ;)
--
Gene Seibel
Tales of Flight - http://pad39a.com/gene/tales.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

[Marco Leon]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
>
> The REASON I decided to stop is that I do take responsibility for my own
> actions, and realized I could get the PPL but only be a marginally
> competent pilot. Maybe
> some people can maintain proficiency by flying 1-2x per month. I didn't
> think I could, and would not subject any passengers to unnecessary risk.
> I still think it was the right thing to do.

If you take responsibility for your own actions, then why don't you take
responsibility for your training as well? If you didn't like the
instructor(s) you found at FRG, then look for another one. If you think
you'll be only "marginally" competent, then take more training. Placing the
"blame" on the handful of instructors you encountered is not indicative a
person who takes charge. Maybe you're not PIC material and I applaud your
realization and decision to stay on the ground. Hopefully one day you are
able to grasp the fact that as a pilot, you are as safe as you want to be
and go for your PPL--and I'm not saying that facetiously.

It's obvious that you are not a total idiot but you put quite a bit of time
and energy into all these negative posts. The effect on this "community" is
similar. It's an unfortunate way to spend your day but of course you're in
command of your own time are free to do so.

Marco



Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

[Skywise]

G Farris > wrote in :

> In article . com>,
> says...
>>
>>
>>I'm considering going in for a private pilot license. Just wanted
>>general feedback from anyone who has one or is considering opting for
>>one.
>>
>
> Sorry - no one here has one of these!
>
>
> Couldn't resist the joke - sorry.
> Just about the only ones here who don't have one are (like Rachel)
> because they have a commercial or ATP!

I don't have one....but read here because I'd like to get one
someday. I'm hoping all the experiences shared here by pilots
will make my eventual experience of getting in the air and
staying there much more enjoyable.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

[Morgans]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote

> You will need a medical exam before you can solo, unless you
> want to learn to fly gliders or get the new Sport Pilot
> certificate as a stepping stone or even final goal. You can
> find which doctors in your area are FAA DME [designated
> medical examiners] by calling the nearest flight school or
> looking on the Internet at the medical link on the FAA site,
> or the AOPA.
>
Be careful with this bit of advise.

Be aware that you will need a medical, but also be SURE you can PASS the
medical, before you go to take it.

If you fail, you will not have the option of going with a sport pilot
ticket, without spending lots of money, to try and pass the medical at least
one time. After that, you can use your driver's license as your medical to
fly on the sport pilot plan.

The rule reads that once failing a 3rd class (or any class) medical, you
may not use a driver's license to fly SP. You have to get the medical
passed, then let it lapse and fly with sport pilot rules.

Google sport pilot, or light sport pilot, and you will have some reading for
the next little while! <g>
--
Jim in NC

[Jim Macklin]

Thank you for clarifying and extending my comment. You can
check the requirements for a medical on the AOPA web site
and if you see a problem discuss it with the AOPA [member
only benefit] or a local doctor, not an FAA DME. The common
reasons for a problem are generally diseases of old age or a
history of drug/alcohol use. You do not have to be a
perfect specimen, you can even get a medical with one eye,
and no legs. Some things are more difficult and take time
and money.


"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
|
| > You will need a medical exam before you can solo, unless
you
| > want to learn to fly gliders or get the new Sport Pilot
| > certificate as a stepping stone or even final goal. You
can
| > find which doctors in your area are FAA DME [designated
| > medical examiners] by calling the nearest flight school
or
| > looking on the Internet at the medical link on the FAA
site,
| > or the AOPA.
| >
| Be careful with this bit of advise.
|
| Be aware that you will need a medical, but also be SURE
you can PASS the
| medical, before you go to take it.
|
| If you fail, you will not have the option of going with a
sport pilot
| ticket, without spending lots of money, to try and pass
the medical at least
| one time. After that, you can use your driver's license
as your medical to
| fly on the sport pilot plan.
|
| The rule reads that once failing a 3rd class (or any
class) medical, you
| may not use a driver's license to fly SP. You have to get
the medical
| passed, then let it lapse and fly with sport pilot rules.
|
| Google sport pilot, or light sport pilot, and you will
have some reading for
| the next little while! <g>
| --
| Jim in NC
|

[Rachel]

G Farris wrote:
> In article >,
> says...
>
>>
wrote:
>>
>>>I'm considering going in for a private pilot license. Just wanted
>>>general feedback from anyone who has one or is considering opting for
>>>one.
>>>
>>>Cheers
>>>
>>
>>First thing I tell everyone - it's addicting!
>
>
> That's true!
> First question - are you married?
> How do you like the prospect of no longer being? :-)
>
> GF
>
LOL! I stopped dating years ago...well, at least when I finished college.

[Rachel]

Morgans wrote:
> "Jim Macklin" > wrote
>
>
>>You will need a medical exam before you can solo, unless you
>>want to learn to fly gliders or get the new Sport Pilot
>>certificate as a stepping stone or even final goal. You can
>>find which doctors in your area are FAA DME [designated
>>medical examiners] by calling the nearest flight school or
>>looking on the Internet at the medical link on the FAA site,
>>or the AOPA.
>>
>
> Be careful with this bit of advise.
>
> Be aware that you will need a medical, but also be SURE you can PASS the
> medical, before you go to take it.

That advice isn't any different than advice a few years ago.
Personally, I would not have been happy with the restrictions on the
sport pilot certificate. I would rather have failed the medical
initially and not flown at all.

[G Farris]

In article >,
says...

>>
>LOL! I stopped dating years ago...well, at least when I finished college.

You're the exception though!
I don't think a woman pilot has to worry so much about her boyfriend or
husband complaining that flying is too dangerous, or that the money could be
better spent on curtains and lawn furniture!

Greg

[G Farris]

In article . com>,
says...
>
>
>Have had one for 29 years. Need to fly some more before deciding
>whether it's a good thing.... ;)
>--

Funny that we're all giving advice, debating each others' advice and
fine-tuning our comments, yet the original poster hasn't come back even
once to clarify his request, ask for further information or otherwise
contribute. Do I sense a lack of committment?

Greg

[Rachel]

G Farris wrote:
> In article >,
> says...
>
>
>>LOL! I stopped dating years ago...well, at least when I finished college.
>
>
> You're the exception though!
> I don't think a woman pilot has to worry so much about her boyfriend or
> husband complaining that flying is too dangerous, or that the money could be
> better spent on curtains and lawn furniture!
>
> Greg
>

You'd be surprised at how many guys are instantly turned off when I tell
them I'm a pilot. They assume I'm gay or that I'm going to cheat on
them with the other guys I fly with. Works both ways, I guess. Maybe I
should have waited until after I was married? Of course, then I would
get comments like, "Now why would you want to do something like that?
Flying's not easy, you know."

[Bob Noel]

In article >, Rachel >
wrote:

> You'd be surprised at how many guys are instantly turned off when I tell
> them I'm a pilot.

How many pilots are turned off when you tell them you are a pilot?

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[G Farris]

In article >,
says...

>
>How many pilots are turned off when you tell them you are a pilot?
>

Maybe she's turned off by pilots! :-)

I envy couples who share flying - either because they're both pilots, or
because one of them is and they enjoy flying together. seems to be more the
exception than the rule though.

I have one friend who's a 737 F.O. and her husband is not a pilot. She has it
set up though so she's home almost every night, and they have a normal family
life. If one or the other is going to be away twelve to fifteen nights a
month, that's hard to manage.

Flying for pleasure or in the pursuit of business is another matter, as one
often feels the other is taking on too much risk and unnecessary expense just
for the pleasure of flying.

Greg

[Jay Honeck]

> I don't have one....but read here because I'd like to get one
> someday. I'm hoping all the experiences shared here by pilots
> will make my eventual experience of getting in the air and
> staying there much more enjoyable.

That's a good approach. I wish I had known about these groups, back when I
was training -- they're a great resource, and I've learned more here than in
all the years of hanging around airports.

Um, hmmm. Just dawned on me that perhaps they didn't exist? Hey, folks,
was Usenet here (as we know it now) in '94? I jumped in around '98-ish.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> You'd be surprised at how many guys are instantly turned off when I tell
> them I'm a pilot. They assume I'm gay or that I'm going to cheat on them
> with the other guys I fly with. Works both ways, I guess. Maybe I should
> have waited until after I was married? Of course, then I would get
> comments like, "Now why would you want to do something like that? Flying's
> not easy, you know."

It's not always that way.

Mary (my wife) didn't learn to fly until '99, after we'd been married 14
years. (And we dated for NINE before that...) I didn't push her (well,
much!), but was thrilled when she went through the training and got her
ticket. And I really love always having a second pilot on board -- it makes
everything easier, less stressful, and safer.

BTW: Personally, I find female pilots irresistibly sexy!

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Doug]

You are at a party, how con you tell who is a pilot?

[Bob Noel]

In article <MD1Hf.547923$084.126821@attbi_s22>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> Um, hmmm. Just dawned on me that perhaps they didn't exist? Hey, folks,
> was Usenet here (as we know it now) in '94? I jumped in around '98-ish.

yep. rec.aviation existed and was split into the current groups prior to 1994.
I don't remember the exact year.

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Michelle]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>I don't have one....but read here because I'd like to get one
>>someday. I'm hoping all the experiences shared here by pilots
>>will make my eventual experience of getting in the air and
>>staying there much more enjoyable.
>
>
> That's a good approach. I wish I had known about these groups, back when I
> was training -- they're a great resource, and I've learned more here than in
> all the years of hanging around airports.
>
> Um, hmmm. Just dawned on me that perhaps they didn't exist? Hey, folks,
> was Usenet here (as we know it now) in '94? I jumped in around '98-ish.
Been here since late 80's.
Michelle

[[email protected]]

>>>Hey, folks, was Usenet here (as we know it now) in '94?<<<

I remember posting to deja.com before Google took over the newsgroups.
I think that happened around '98 or '99.

[Skylune]

by "Jay Honeck" <jjhoneck@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Feb 10, 2006 at 02:47 PM


BTW: Personally, I find female pilots irresistibly sexy!

:-)<<


Based on the ones I've seen, I'd have to agree. I once flew from the old
Stapleton to Durango, Co on a Beechcraft Puddle-jumper (Sky West, or as
the locals used to call it, Scared Worst) piloted by a woman with a German
accent. One of the bumpiest flights I have ever been on, esp when flying
over Pikes Peak. She handled that plane like a fine sports car, doing the
takeoff roll from a running start on the taxiway. When she got near Pikes,
she pulled the curtain and announced that it usually gets bumpy here --
very straight and matter of fact -- then smiled and closed the curtain.
She wasn't kidding. She landed the plane in a pretty good crosswind,
parked the plane, and pulled the curtain back and with a bemused smile
asked if everyone enjoyed the flight. I think she enjoyed watching the
reactions of all the guys in the suits. She was awesome!

There are some guys who like self assured, confident and highly
professional women. I certainly do. She was absolutely smoking cool.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>>>>Hey, folks, was Usenet here (as we know it now) in '94?<<<
>
> I remember posting to deja.com before Google took over the newsgroups.
> I think that happened around '98 or '99.
>

The oldest USENET messages that I've been able to find date back to 1981. I
know the REC.AVIATION.* groups were alive and quite active in '95.

[Jim Logajan]

Bob Noel > wrote:
> In article <MD1Hf.547923$084.126821@attbi_s22>,
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
>> Um, hmmm. Just dawned on me that perhaps they didn't exist? Hey,
>> folks, was Usenet here (as we know it now) in '94? I jumped in
>> around '98-ish.
>
> yep. rec.aviation existed and was split into the current groups prior
> to 1994. I don't remember the exact year.

The reorg happened in 1992. Just FYI, the archive of all postings to
news.announce.newgroups that pertain to that reorg are archived at isc.org
here:

ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/usenet/news.announce.newgroups/rec/rec.aviation-reorg

[dimsch]

Jay Honeck schrieb:


> Um, hmmm. Just dawned on me that perhaps they didn't exist? Hey, folks, was Usenet here (as we know it now) in '94? I jumped in around '98-ish.

It was there and alive long before that.
And it did have a very, very lively pilot group.

It may be of interest to you that on Compuserve (something like AOL way
back in the 80ies and 90ies; was bought by AOL) the very very first
chatroom was one installed by pilots for pilots.... but that was a
while ago...

[Rachel]

Bob Noel wrote:
> In article >, Rachel >
> wrote:
>
>
>>You'd be surprised at how many guys are instantly turned off when I tell
>>them I'm a pilot.
>
>
> How many pilots are turned off when you tell them you are a pilot?

You'd be surprised. Low time pilots are intrigued...anyone with a
commercial or above is kind of turned off.

[Morgans]

"dimsch" > wrote

> It was there and alive long before that.
> And it did have a very, very lively pilot group.

How does one go about researching their own posting records? I really don't
remember when I started, and would like to find out.
--
Jim in NC

[Jay Honeck]

> yep. rec.aviation existed and was split into the current groups prior to
> 1994.
> I don't remember the exact year.

Hey -- welcome back, Bob!

How're you feeling? (And the check arrived -- made out to MARY!?? -- quite
promptly, thanks... :-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> It may be of interest to you that on Compuserve (something like AOL way
> back in the 80ies and 90ies; was bought by AOL) the very very first
> chatroom was one installed by pilots for pilots.... but that was a
> while ago...

Compuserve! Now *there* is a blast from the past.

Remember "Prodigy"? Owned by Sears, Roebuck, of all people! That was my
first venture into the on-line world...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck]

> Funny that we're all giving advice, debating each others' advice and
> fine-tuning our comments, yet the original poster hasn't come back even
> once to clarify his request, ask for further information or otherwise
> contribute. Do I sense a lack of committment?

That's the trouble with the internet. It's so huge that it's easy to find
someplace cool (like this!), and then forget where (or when) you saw it.

I've posted questions on other, non-aviation newsgroups and then completely
forgotten about them until days or weeks later. Luckily, that's the nice
part about Usenet -- the answers will still be there, waiting, when you get
your head out of your butt and remember the conversation...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Montblack]

("Morgans" wrote)
> How does one go about researching their own posting records? I really
> don't remember when I started, and would like to find out.


One option:

<http://groups.google.com/group/rec.aviation.piloting/about?hl=en>
Google/Groups/Rec/Aviation/Piloting/About group/Pick a year


Montblack

[Bob Noel]

In article <xqbHf.767941$_o.211301@attbi_s71>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> > yep. rec.aviation existed and was split into the current groups prior to
> > 1994.
> > I don't remember the exact year.
>
> Hey -- welcome back, Bob!
>
> How're you feeling?

slowly recovering. Nice to be home, but the folks at St Luke's
were really wonderful.


> (And the check arrived -- made out to MARY!?? -- quite
> promptly, thanks... :-)

Well, I was talking to Mary about it. Was it supposed to be
made out to someone else?

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[Jay Honeck]

> Well, I was talking to Mary about it. Was it supposed to be
> made out to someone else?

Why, me, of course...

;-)

Ah, well, if she spends it, it's less I have to fork out later -- so it's
all good...!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Martin Hotze]

On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 14:47:32 GMT, Jay Honeck wrote:

>BTW: Personally, I find female pilots irresistibly sexy!

shouldn't this be: "personally, I find _ONE_ special female pilot
irresistibly sexy!"

#m
--
We reject Gilmore’s right to travel argument because the Constitution does
not guarantee the right to travel by any particular form of transportation.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?P27712B8C

[Martin Hotze]

On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 15:46:46 GMT, Michelle wrote:

>> Um, hmmm. Just dawned on me that perhaps they didn't exist? Hey, folks,
>> was Usenet here (as we know it now) in '94? I jumped in around '98-ish.
>Been here since late 80's.

Mom? Is this you? haven't I told you one-zero thousand times to stay off
the net?

>Michelle

scnr,

#m
--
We reject Gilmore’s right to travel argument because the Constitution does
not guarantee the right to travel by any particular form of transportation.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?P27712B8C

[Greg B]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:wsbHf.759917$x96.396114@attbi_s72...
> Compuserve! Now *there* is a blast from the past.
>
> Remember "Prodigy"? Owned by Sears, Roebuck, of all people! That was my
> first venture into the on-line world...

IIRC, there was another competitor of Prodigy and CompuServe around then but
can't think of its name. It used Gopher searches. Also, BBS's were big back
then and some of them would sync their messages together nightly using Fido
net. Most would run on 1,200 bps, some were only 300 but the 'good' ones
supported 2,400. Most could only have one person dial in at a time.

- I miss my 300bps dial-up modem. (yeah, right...)

[Montblack]

("Greg B" wrote)
> IIRC, there was another competitor of Prodigy and CompuServe around then
> but can't think of its name. It used Gopher searches. Also, BBS's were big
> back then and some of them would sync their messages together nightly
> using Fido net. Most would run on 1,200 bps, some were only 300 but the
> 'good' ones supported 2,400. Most could only have one person dial in at a
> time.


Delphi?

http://www.walthowe.com/navnet/history.html
Any help?


Montblack

[Greg B]

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> Delphi?
>
> http://www.walthowe.com/navnet/history.html
> Any help?

It must have been CompuServe that I had access to way back then. I wonder if
my account there still works. ;-)

What was this post originally about??? Oh yeah, someone asking something
about a PPL. If you have the desire, money and time then go for it.

[Jim Macklin]

My first computer and modem cost me about $1,800. It had no
hard drive, a 720 KB floppy and 1.2 MB of RAM and a 4.7 MHz
16 bit processor. The modem was a WorldPort external on the
serial port at 2400 bps but it did have compression and
could get 4800 bits. It was DOS only but WORKS 2.0 ran on
it.


"Greg B" > wrote in message
...
| "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
| news:wsbHf.759917$x96.396114@attbi_s72...
| > Compuserve! Now *there* is a blast from the past.
| >
| > Remember "Prodigy"? Owned by Sears, Roebuck, of all
people! That was my
| > first venture into the on-line world...
|
| IIRC, there was another competitor of Prodigy and
CompuServe around then but
| can't think of its name. It used Gopher searches. Also,
BBS's were big back
| then and some of them would sync their messages together
nightly using Fido
| net. Most would run on 1,200 bps, some were only 300 but
the 'good' ones
| supported 2,400. Most could only have one person dial in
at a time.
|
| - I miss my 300bps dial-up modem. (yeah, right...)
|
|

[Dave Stadt]

That was a big time PC, first here was a TI-99 which I still have. Not even
a floppy but a cassette tape.

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:thjHf.79692$QW2.38366@dukeread08...
> My first computer and modem cost me about $1,800. It had no
> hard drive, a 720 KB floppy and 1.2 MB of RAM and a 4.7 MHz
> 16 bit processor. The modem was a WorldPort external on the
> serial port at 2400 bps but it did have compression and
> could get 4800 bits. It was DOS only but WORKS 2.0 ran on
> it.
>
>
> "Greg B" > wrote in message
> ...
> | "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> | news:wsbHf.759917$x96.396114@attbi_s72...
> | > Compuserve! Now *there* is a blast from the past.
> | >
> | > Remember "Prodigy"? Owned by Sears, Roebuck, of all
> people! That was my
> | > first venture into the on-line world...
> |
> | IIRC, there was another competitor of Prodigy and
> CompuServe around then but
> | can't think of its name. It used Gopher searches. Also,
> BBS's were big back
> | then and some of them would sync their messages together
> nightly using Fido
> | net. Most would run on 1,200 bps, some were only 300 but
> the 'good' ones
> | supported 2,400. Most could only have one person dial in
> at a time.
> |
> | - I miss my 300bps dial-up modem. (yeah, right...)
> |
> |
>
>

[Jay Honeck]

>>BTW: Personally, I find female pilots irresistibly sexy!
>
> shouldn't this be: "personally, I find _ONE_ special female pilot
> irresistibly sexy!"

Nope.

But I *do* find one sexier than the others...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[John T]

oh yeah...compuserve! I think they were my first online foray, back in
about 1984? 300 baud modem in my atari 400, long distance phone
charges....I still remember playing LOTS of megawars! hehehe
I had several different accounts with them over the years, even found
the local number :)

I was also pretty active on GEnie. In fact, shortly before my 10th
anniversary with them, they got bought by another company who made an
abrupt and arbitary (sp?) change to an internet provider. dropped them
just a few days before my 10th.

After that, I was dragged kicking and screaming into the internet age...

John

[Jim Macklin]

I've got one of those too, with the speech synthesizer, I
should have said "my first PC was" [Toshiba T1000 laptop].
Remember the days when you'd got into Sears or K-Mart or
some mall and they'd have a TI99 or a Commodore on the
counter with people playing games? I would get to the
machine and enter a program that would ask for a null string
input, change the screen color for a running program and
start to count to 1,000, then print this on the screen,
"Sorry, I can't Do That" Then it would loop back and wait
for any other null input. Pressing any key started the loop
again. The only escape was to turn it off. Later I put
several steps in that would get more adamant that I Can't do
that. It was fun to stand a few feet away and watch the
people get angry with the machine. Then they'd call the
clerk and they knew nothing and it would take them several
escalating people before somebody would turn it off.

I haven't don't that in about 35-40 years, I guess it
wouldn't be as much fun today. I just get phone calls from
friends asking what some message on their computer means
when they can't tell me the exact wording. Then they tell
me they have been uninstalling programs, etc.


"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
. com...
|
| That was a big time PC, first here was a TI-99 which I
still have. Not even
| a floppy but a cassette tape.
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:thjHf.79692$QW2.38366@dukeread08...
| > My first computer and modem cost me about $1,800. It
had no
| > hard drive, a 720 KB floppy and 1.2 MB of RAM and a 4.7
MHz
| > 16 bit processor. The modem was a WorldPort external on
the
| > serial port at 2400 bps but it did have compression and
| > could get 4800 bits. It was DOS only but WORKS 2.0 ran
on
| > it.
| >
| >
| > "Greg B" > wrote in message
| > ...
| > | "Jay Honeck" > wrote in
message
| > | news:wsbHf.759917$x96.396114@attbi_s72...
| > | > Compuserve! Now *there* is a blast from the past.
| > | >
| > | > Remember "Prodigy"? Owned by Sears, Roebuck, of all
| > people! That was my
| > | > first venture into the on-line world...
| > |
| > | IIRC, there was another competitor of Prodigy and
| > CompuServe around then but
| > | can't think of its name. It used Gopher searches.
Also,
| > BBS's were big back
| > | then and some of them would sync their messages
together
| > nightly using Fido
| > | net. Most would run on 1,200 bps, some were only 300
but
| > the 'good' ones
| > | supported 2,400. Most could only have one person dial
in
| > at a time.
| > |
| > | - I miss my 300bps dial-up modem. (yeah, right...)
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

[Jose]

BDS quotes Skylune thus...
>> I tried that once, and realized I could develop just enough skills to be
>> dangerous, but still legal.

implying it's a slam (presumably on the FAA)

I don't consider this a bad thing. It is the nature of freedom. It
ipmlies judgement on the part of the pilot (or anyone else governed)
that the rules permit unsafe actions on occasion, leaving it to the
governed to excercise judgement. I much prefer it this way to the
alternative of having perfectly safe operations proscribed because
somebody couldn't handle it.

CAUTION: SILICA GEL... DO NOT EAT!!
(yep, just what I expected with my digital camera - a snack!)

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jose]

> IIRC, there was another competitor of Prodigy and CompuServe around then

GEnie.

Its downfall was aladdin, a program you could use for unatttended
downloads of message boards and such. The name was cute, but the
program got long in the tooth and there would be no competitors as GEnie
was enamored of the name.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[BDS]

"Jose" > wrote
> BDS quotes Skylune thus...
> >> I tried that once, and realized I could develop just enough skills to
be
> >> dangerous, but still legal.
>
> implying it's a slam (presumably on the FAA)

Well, since the guy who wrote it eventually admitted it was, I guess I was
right on, eh? Seems obvious if you follow what preceded that sentence -
what would be the point of that "but still legal" ending otherwise?

> I don't consider this a bad thing. It is the nature of freedom.

I don't think you will find a pilot who thinks otherwise, but nobody was
talking about whether it was good or bad, only about whether someone was
taking yet another opportunity to make a negative comment about something
relating to GA in order to further a personal agenda.

BDS

[G Farris]

In article >, says...
>

>
>You'd be surprised. Low time pilots are intrigued...anyone with a
>commercial or above is kind of turned off.

Maybe, but you are not Delta Airlines.
You do not need to require an ATP and 1000h of Turbinr Time for candidates to
be considered!

GF

[Jose]

> Well, since the guy who wrote it eventually admitted it was, I guess I was
> right on, eh?

Well, sorta. He didn't "admit it was" (or was intended to), he admitted
it could be taken thus. A little different. It casts shade on the
-other- statements he makes (which are slams) but I would not consider
it a slam in itself. In fact, as I point out, I consider it a positive
comment on the FAA.

> nobody was
> talking about whether it was good or bad, only about whether someone was
> taking yet another opportunity to make a negative comment

Uh... "negative comment" implies a judgement about good or bad.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[BDS]

"Jose" > wrote

> Well, sorta. He didn't "admit it was" (or was intended to), he admitted
> it could be taken thus. A little different. It casts shade on the
> -other- statements he makes (which are slams) but I would not consider
> it a slam in itself. In fact, as I point out, I consider it a positive
> comment on the FAA.

Someone says something is dangerous, but legal, and you take that as a
positive comment - er, OK then. My guess is that you would be alone in that
interpretation.

BDS

[Jose]

> Someone says something is dangerous, but legal, and you take that as a
> positive comment - er, OK then. My guess is that you would be alone in that
> interpretation.

I don't think I'm alone. You want the government to come up with a list
of all the dangerous things they think people can do and make them
illegal? That's not the kind of world I want to live in.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[BDS]

"Jose" > wrote

> > Someone says something is dangerous, but legal, and you take that as a
> > positive comment - er, OK then. My guess is that you would be alone in
that
> > interpretation.
>
> I don't think I'm alone. You want the government to come up with a list
> of all the dangerous things they think people can do and make them
> illegal? That's not the kind of world I want to live in.

Good grief - you win, I give up.

BDS

[Rachel]

G Farris wrote:
> In article >, says...
>
>
>>You'd be surprised. Low time pilots are intrigued...anyone with a
>>commercial or above is kind of turned off.
>
>
> Maybe, but you are not Delta Airlines.
> You do not need to require an ATP and 1000h of Turbinr Time for candidates to
> be considered!
>
> GF
>
LOL!

Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places.

[G Farris]

In article >,
says...
>
>
>G Farris wrote:

>LOL!
>
>Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places.


Maybe you're looking too hard. . .
It's when you're not looking you get found!

GF

[Rachel]

G Farris wrote:
> In article >,
> says...
>
>>
>>G Farris wrote:
>
>
>>LOL!
>>
>>Maybe I'm looking in the wrong places.
>
>
>
> Maybe you're looking too hard. . .
> It's when you're not looking you get found!
>
> GF
>
Like I said, I stopped looking. I have a rule about not dating pilots,
anyway.

[G Farris]

In article >,
says...

>>
>Like I said, I stopped looking. I have a rule about not dating pilots,
>anyway.

It's wouldn't the first time you've broken a rule, would it?

[Skylune]

>>by "BDS" <doesitreallymatter@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Feb 12, 2006 at 01:49
PM


"Jose" <teacherjh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote

> Well, sorta. He didn't "admit it was" (or was intended to), he
admitted
> it could be taken thus. A little different. It casts shade on the
> -other- statements he makes (which are slams) but I would not consider
> it a slam in itself. In fact, as I point out, I consider it a positive
> comment on the FAA.

Someone says something is dangerous, but legal, and you take that as a
positive comment - er, OK then. My guess is that you would be alone in
that
interpretation.

BDS<<

Hunting is dangerous, but legal. Ask Dick Cheney.

[Grumman-581]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> Hunting is dangerous, but legal. Ask Dick Cheney.

Big ****in' Deal... He shot a *lawyer*... They're considered a pest and as
such, there's no explicit season for 'em, you can shoot 'em year-round...

[Skylune]

>>by "Grumman-581" > Feb 13, 2006 at
08:11 PM


"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> Hunting is dangerous, but legal. Ask Dick Cheney.

Big ****in' Deal... He shot a *lawyer*... They're considered a pest and
as
such, there's no explicit season for 'em, you can shoot 'em
year-round...<<

Uh, ok... does that include the AOPA legal staff?

BTW, do you have any of those cool "Anytime Baby" stickers that Grumman
used to make? The ones with the grinning tomcat? I used to have some
(grew up with many Grumman employees that worked in Bethpage and
Calverton), but I can't find where i left 'em.

[Grumman-581]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> Uh, ok... does that include the AOPA legal staff?

If we get rid of *all* the lawyers, we wouldn't need the AOPA ones either...

http://www.geocities.com/grumman581/lawyer-problem-solution.htm

[Skylune]

by "Grumman-581" <grumman581@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Feb 13, 2006 at 09:25 PM


If we get rid of *all* the lawyers, we wouldn't need the AOPA ones
either...<<

Fine, but what about the damned stickers?

[Grumman-581]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> Fine, but what about the damned stickers?

Don't have any, but feel free to have some made from this photo:

http://www.geocities.com/grumman581/liberals-the-other-white-meat.htm

[Jerry]

Certificate not license.

Jerry in NC

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> I'm considering going in for a private pilot license. Just wanted
> general feedback from anyone who has one or is considering opting for
> one.
>
> Cheers
>

[Matt Whiting]

Jerry wrote:

> Certificate not license.

And the difference is?


Matt

[Jerry]

Certificate is a document certifying that one has fulfilled the requirements
of and may practice in a field while a license is a permission granted by
competent authority to engage in a business or occupation or in an activity
otherwise unlawful per Webster. Summary, certificate is earned while
license is granted. FAA uses the term certificate.

Jerry in NC

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Jerry wrote:
>
>> Certificate not license.
>
> And the difference is?
>
>
> Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Jerry wrote:
> Certificate is a document certifying that one has fulfilled the requirements
> of and may practice in a field while a license is a permission granted by
> competent authority to engage in a business or occupation or in an activity
> otherwise unlawful per Webster. Summary, certificate is earned while
> license is granted. FAA uses the term certificate.

I'm certificated as a pilot, but I'm licensed as a professional
engineer. The PE license wasn't just "granted", I can assure of you
that. I had to meet rigorous education and experience requirements (a
total of 12 years worth - but you get 8 years credit for your
unergraduate engineering degree as long as your school is ABET
accredited). I also had to pass two exams that ran 8 hours each. Much
more rigorous than any FAA exam I've taken and I've taken the private,
instrument and commercial. Haven't got to the ATP yet so maybe that is
different, but I doubt it runs for 16 hours total.

Personally, I still don't see the difference between license and
certificate. And flying without a certificate is illegal, so it isn't
just a legality difference as suggested above.


Matt

[Jose]

> Certificate is a document certifying that one has fulfilled the requirements
> of and may practice in a field while a license is a permission granted by
> competent authority to engage in a business or occupation or in an activity
> otherwise unlawful per Webster. Summary, certificate is earned while
> license is granted. FAA uses the term certificate.

1: FAA also uses the term "license".

2: Permission is required in order to pilot an airplane. The
certificate ebmodies that permission. Therefore a pilot certificate is
a license.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Bob Moore]

Jose > wrote

> 1: FAA also uses the term "license".

Only in error...see below

> 2: Permission is required in order to pilot an airplane. The
> certificate ebmodies that permission. Therefore a pilot certificate
> is a license.

No it is not....see below

The following e-mail exchange took place recently between myself
and Russ Niles, one of the daily editors at AVWEB. Russ had used
the phrase "pilot license" in one of his daily articles.

---------------------------------------------------------
I can understand the idiots at the local TV station constantly
referring to "pilot's licenses", but how did supposedly "aviation
savvy" writers for AVWEB mistake a certificate for a license in
the lead article pertaining to medical certificate fraud?
----------------------------------------------------------------
A little journalistic license, Bob, as approved by the FAA.
Check it out under the Airman Registry subhed in the link provided
below.
It now appears that license is the preferred term and (certificate)
is bracketed :ie less used... http://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A quick call to the FAA confirms that there has been no change and that,
just like the newscasters, the webmaster has inserted his own slant on
the subject.
Since the page seems to be intended for the general public, the
webmaster probably felt that they would understand license better than
certificate.

However............from Wikipedia

A license (American English) or licence (Commonwealth English) is a
document or agreement giving permission to do something.

A certificate is an official document affirming some fact.
A certificate may also certify that a person has received specific
education or has passed a test.
------------------------------------------------------------------
It is this little bit of freedom granted to citizens of the United
States of America that makes the difference between license and
certificate.

"United State Code TITLE 49 - TRANSPORTATION
Sec. 40103. Sovereignty and use of airspace
(2) A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit
through the navigable airspace."

No further granting of permission (license) is required, however, a
demonstration of training or ability (certification) may be
required. Note the ultralight Part 103 exception to the certificate
requirement.

There is no such federal code granting a citizen the right to operate
a vehicle on public roads, or to practice medicine, therefore allowing
the government to require a license.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
My response from the FAA webmaster

Subject
Has the FAA really switched "pilot certificate" to "pilot license" as is
indi...

Discussion Thread
Response (FAA Expert) 07/22/2005 03:51 PM
It's a web error. Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We are
in the process of restructuring our entire web site. I have initiated
action to correct this page to reflect "pilot certificate" and "mechanic
certificates."
--------------------------------------------------------------------
>Would you mind if I wrote about this for Monday, Bob?

Write away Russ....just bear in mind that I'll be checking each and
every word. :-) :-)

What started out as just a gentle chide to the AVWEB editor turned out
to taking-on the FAA, something that I've done many times in the past.
I've been in this flying business for 47 years and have learned that the
FAA probably makes more mistakes than I do. Getting them to admit it as
easily as happened Friday came as quite a shock to me. My first call
was to the local (Tampa) FSDO and what a waste that was.
A simple yes or no question and after a five minute dissertation, I
still did not have a firm answer.

My name since leaving Naval Aviation and joining PanAm in 1967 has been
"Bob (It's a certificate not a license) Moore". The basic indoctrination
course at PanAm taught us a lot about aviation law and history. At 70
years of age, I am still an active Flight Instructor. I instructed for
three years in the Navy, probably ten years in the airline industry and
six years in the GA business and one thing that I learned early-on from
my students was to very carefully weigh each and every word that I
uttered for accuracy. This is much more important for those who would
commit words to paper, or nowadays,to the internet. :-)

BTW, that little bit of Federal Code had its origins in the Air Commerce
Act of 1926. Just try discussing that with your friendly local FDSO
inspector! :-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Lakeview Bill]

You are issued a "certificate" demonstrating that the FAA has granted you a
"license"...




"Bob Moore" > wrote in message
. 122...
> Jose > wrote
>
> > 1: FAA also uses the term "license".
>
> Only in error...see below
>
> > 2: Permission is required in order to pilot an airplane. The
> > certificate ebmodies that permission. Therefore a pilot certificate
> > is a license.
>
> No it is not....see below
>
> The following e-mail exchange took place recently between myself
> and Russ Niles, one of the daily editors at AVWEB. Russ had used
> the phrase "pilot license" in one of his daily articles.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> I can understand the idiots at the local TV station constantly
> referring to "pilot's licenses", but how did supposedly "aviation
> savvy" writers for AVWEB mistake a certificate for a license in
> the lead article pertaining to medical certificate fraud?
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> A little journalistic license, Bob, as approved by the FAA.
> Check it out under the Airman Registry subhed in the link provided
> below.
> It now appears that license is the preferred term and (certificate)
> is bracketed :ie less used... http://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> A quick call to the FAA confirms that there has been no change and that,
> just like the newscasters, the webmaster has inserted his own slant on
> the subject.
> Since the page seems to be intended for the general public, the
> webmaster probably felt that they would understand license better than
> certificate.
>
> However............from Wikipedia
>
> A license (American English) or licence (Commonwealth English) is a
> document or agreement giving permission to do something.
>
> A certificate is an official document affirming some fact.
> A certificate may also certify that a person has received specific
> education or has passed a test.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> It is this little bit of freedom granted to citizens of the United
> States of America that makes the difference between license and
> certificate.
>
> "United State Code TITLE 49 - TRANSPORTATION
> Sec. 40103. Sovereignty and use of airspace
> (2) A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit
> through the navigable airspace."
>
> No further granting of permission (license) is required, however, a
> demonstration of training or ability (certification) may be
> required. Note the ultralight Part 103 exception to the certificate
> requirement.
>
> There is no such federal code granting a citizen the right to operate
> a vehicle on public roads, or to practice medicine, therefore allowing
> the government to require a license.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> My response from the FAA webmaster
>
> Subject
> Has the FAA really switched "pilot certificate" to "pilot license" as is
> indi...
>
> Discussion Thread
> Response (FAA Expert) 07/22/2005 03:51 PM
> It's a web error. Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We are
> in the process of restructuring our entire web site. I have initiated
> action to correct this page to reflect "pilot certificate" and "mechanic
> certificates."
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >Would you mind if I wrote about this for Monday, Bob?
>
> Write away Russ....just bear in mind that I'll be checking each and
> every word. :-) :-)
>
> What started out as just a gentle chide to the AVWEB editor turned out
> to taking-on the FAA, something that I've done many times in the past.
> I've been in this flying business for 47 years and have learned that the
> FAA probably makes more mistakes than I do. Getting them to admit it as
> easily as happened Friday came as quite a shock to me. My first call
> was to the local (Tampa) FSDO and what a waste that was.
> A simple yes or no question and after a five minute dissertation, I
> still did not have a firm answer.
>
> My name since leaving Naval Aviation and joining PanAm in 1967 has been
> "Bob (It's a certificate not a license) Moore". The basic indoctrination
> course at PanAm taught us a lot about aviation law and history. At 70
> years of age, I am still an active Flight Instructor. I instructed for
> three years in the Navy, probably ten years in the airline industry and
> six years in the GA business and one thing that I learned early-on from
> my students was to very carefully weigh each and every word that I
> uttered for accuracy. This is much more important for those who would
> commit words to paper, or nowadays,to the internet. :-)
>
> BTW, that little bit of Federal Code had its origins in the Air Commerce
> Act of 1926. Just try discussing that with your friendly local FDSO
> inspector! :-)
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Montblack]

("Bob Moore" wrote)
[snip]
> My name since leaving Naval Aviation and joining PanAm in 1967 has been
> "Bob (It's a certificate not a license) Moore". The basic indoctrination
> course at PanAm taught us a lot about aviation law and history. At 70
> years of age, I am still an active Flight Instructor. I instructed for
> three years in the Navy, probably ten years in the airline industry and
> six years in the GA business and one thing that I learned early-on from my
> students was to very carefully weigh each and every word that I uttered
> for accuracy. This is much more important for those who would commit words
> to paper, or nowadays,to the internet. :-)


Sometimes modern general usage trumps older distinctions. Who and whom comes
to mind - unfortunately.

Another example:
You're hearing "fewer" less and less often these days. (This one bugs me)

I'm ok with "license" for general usage in GA. Call it my personal minimum -
others have higher personal minimums WRT those two terms. Apparently
"others" also includes the FAA. :-)


Montblack

[Bob Moore]

"Montblack" wrote

> Sometimes modern general usage trumps older distinctions. Who and whom
> comes to mind - unfortunately.

And....distinguishes the educated from the ignorant.
The dumbing down of America (USA) marches on. :-)

Bob Moore

[Jose]

> It is this little bit of freedom granted to citizens of the United
> States of America that makes the difference between license and
> certificate.
>
> "United State Code TITLE 49 - TRANSPORTATION
> Sec. 40103. Sovereignty and use of airspace
> (2) A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit
> through the navigable airspace."

That the citizen has the right to be carried as a passenger aboard an
aircraft flying through the navigable airspace does not give him the
right to pilot an aircraft through such airspace.

> BTW, that little bit of Federal Code had its origins in the Air Commerce
> Act of 1926.

.... and may have been superseded by subsequent legislations,
specifically the one requiring certificates in the first place.

> ...and have learned that the
> FAA probably makes more mistakes than I do. Getting them to admit it...

The FAA does not make errors. They define what they do as correct.

> Response (FAA Expert) 07/22/2005 03:51 PM
> It's a web error.

The webmaster's fault, not the fault of the FAA. But I've also seen it
in printed documents.

The certificate confers permission to =pilot= a craft, which is more
than the "right of transit" granted above. Therefore it is a license.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jose]

> Jose, tell us from where does your vast knowledge of the US aviation
> regulatory system come.

It comes from almost fifty years of studying and using the English
language (and I will refrain from commenting on the structure of the
above quoted sentence). It comes from Usenet posts (that is, I am not
offering my independent knowledge, but rather, my interpretation of the
knowledge that is offered as support for the position with which I disagree)

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Matt Whiting]

Bob Moore wrote:

> It is this little bit of freedom granted to citizens of the United
> States of America that makes the difference between license and
> certificate.
>
> "United State Code TITLE 49 - TRANSPORTATION
> Sec. 40103. Sovereignty and use of airspace
> (2) A citizen of the United States has a public right of transit
> through the navigable airspace."
>
> No further granting of permission (license) is required, however, a
> demonstration of training or ability (certification) may be
> required. Note the ultralight Part 103 exception to the certificate
> requirement.

This appears to me to be the classic case of a distinction without a
difference. If a demonstration of training or ability is required in
order to exercise a right, then it is hardly a right at all.

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Morgans wrote:

> "Jose" > wrote
>
>
>>The certificate confers permission to =pilot= a craft, which is more
>>than the "right of transit" granted above. Therefore it is a license.
>
>
> My take on the whole thing is that the FAA give a certificate that says you
> have passed the requirements to pilot a plane, *if* you meet many other
> requirements, such as a current medical, current BFR, currency, as in recent
> piloting to meet standards for carrying passengers, or conditions. (night,
> or IFR as examples)
>
> A driver's license gives you unconditional permission to drive a car, as
> long as you are not impaired.
>
> A certificate gives you permission to fly a plane, only if you meet all of
> the other requirements. If it were a license, you would be good to fly,
> without other strings attached.
>
> Am I close? <g>

Nope, not even. My PA driver's license requires several things of me:

1. I must wear corrective lenses.
2. I can drive only the class of vehicles listed on my license.
3. I must renew the license every year by getting my picture taken any
paying $36 or so to the state

I'd hardly say that this is unconditional or without strings attached. :-)


Matt

[Morgans]

"Jose" > wrote

> The certificate confers permission to =pilot= a craft, which is more
> than the "right of transit" granted above. Therefore it is a license.

My take on the whole thing is that the FAA give a certificate that says you
have passed the requirements to pilot a plane, *if* you meet many other
requirements, such as a current medical, current BFR, currency, as in recent
piloting to meet standards for carrying passengers, or conditions. (night,
or IFR as examples)

A driver's license gives you unconditional permission to drive a car, as
long as you are not impaired.

A certificate gives you permission to fly a plane, only if you meet all of
the other requirements. If it were a license, you would be good to fly,
without other strings attached.

Am I close? <g>
--
Jim in NC

[hamburg113]

If you want to get more materials that related to this topic, you can visit: http://privatepilotlicense.info/

Best regards.