Hmmm a BD5J with zero hours FS

So, you did a job you considered simple under pressure. Doesn't appear to
be a career-defining moment, to me.



" Within weeks I got my best eval ever and had my txfr request out of NC
approved, to California. The rest is history, and records from that day
will verify everything happened exactly as I state here.

"Juan Jimenez" wrote in message
.. .

"Dan" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Juan Jimenez wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
Juan Jimenez wrote:
...
Sorry, ChuckSteak, but it has to carry a human being. You don't rate
the
privilege.

But it doesn't have to ever leave the ground while carrying a
human being right?
Ask Marco. He'll set you straight.


How about if instead of asking Marco myself, I trust you and accept
what you wrote he

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...d2bfabf?hl=en&
"Marco knows it had not flown when the record application was
submitted "?

Now, keeping in mind that opinion is like flatulence,
in that everyone has it and everyone thinks everyone
else's stinks worse than their own, IMHO, it takes more
than a bit of chutzpah to submit a claim for the world's
smallest/lightest/shortest/whatever human piloted
jet aircraft, when the aircraft in question has never flown.

But to accept, such a claim, as Guiness has, is just plain
stupid. And that is their problem, not yours.

The way I look at it, if the plane doesn't have to fly to hold the
record that guy with the jet-powered Cri-Cri could just lop
off a little from each (or only one!) wing and the nose and
take the record away from your BD5. Then you could do
the same and take it back. The two of you could keep that
up until all that is left of each of your planes is a seat
duct taped onto an engine. At that point I think the
Cri-Cri would win, having the smaller engine.

During that process, it would never be clear exactly
when either plane ceased to qualify as a human-piloted
jet aircraft, so I would think that it would only be reasonable
to include, as a condition for the record, a stipulation that
the plane leave the ground under it's own power, while
carrying a human pilot.

Then we could argue over whether or not it left ground effect.

Gee, now yawn will have to put you in your place with a childish
remark. Brace yourself.

Geez, got me a volunteer secretary now. And a free one, too. Thanks for
taking care of that for me.

What repartee scooter, You come up with this stuff all by yourself?

Al G

If I have to explain to you that military aviation is by definition a risky
business, I doubt you would understand it. The point is not the risk, the
point is lives were saved. But you already knew that, didn't you.

"anon" wrote in message
m...
So, in an assignment in which you were tasked to help people, you helped
people? To what extent did you place yourself at risk in this mission?

Tell you what, if you ever grow balls large enough, go check the records
of SOES, circa 1979 through 1981, at MCAS Cherry Point. In fact, check
out the records of a medevac mission in 1981 involving a mom who had just
given birth and was hemorraging, and the preemie to which she had just
given birth. Then check out the comments of the (at the time,
double-digit midget) Vietnam-vet crew chief on the aircraft that took
them from Cherry Point to the main hospital at Lejeune.





--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Yes, it would seem so to someone who doesn't value the lives of a mother and
a newborn, wouldn't it.

Putz.

"anon" wrote in message
m...
So, you did a job you considered simple under pressure. Doesn't appear to
be a career-defining moment, to me.

" Within weeks I got my best eval ever and had my txfr request out of NC
approved, to California. The rest is history, and records from that day
will verify everything happened exactly as I state here.





--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Al G" wrote in message
...

"Juan Jimenez" wrote in message
.. .

"Dan" wrote in message
...
wrote:
Juan Jimenez wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
Juan Jimenez wrote:
...
Sorry, ChuckSteak, but it has to carry a human being. You don't rate
the
privilege.

But it doesn't have to ever leave the ground while carrying a
human being right?
Ask Marco. He'll set you straight.


How about if instead of asking Marco myself, I trust you and accept
what you wrote he

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.a...d2bfabf?hl=en&
"Marco knows it had not flown when the record application was
submitted "?

Now, keeping in mind that opinion is like flatulence,
in that everyone has it and everyone thinks everyone
else's stinks worse than their own, IMHO, it takes more
than a bit of chutzpah to submit a claim for the world's
smallest/lightest/shortest/whatever human piloted
jet aircraft, when the aircraft in question has never flown.

But to accept, such a claim, as Guiness has, is just plain
stupid. And that is their problem, not yours.

The way I look at it, if the plane doesn't have to fly to hold the
record that guy with the jet-powered Cri-Cri could just lop
off a little from each (or only one!) wing and the nose and
take the record away from your BD5. Then you could do
the same and take it back. The two of you could keep that
up until all that is left of each of your planes is a seat
duct taped onto an engine. At that point I think the
Cri-Cri would win, having the smaller engine.

During that process, it would never be clear exactly
when either plane ceased to qualify as a human-piloted
jet aircraft, so I would think that it would only be reasonable
to include, as a condition for the record, a stipulation that
the plane leave the ground under it's own power, while
carrying a human pilot.

Then we could argue over whether or not it left ground effect.

Gee, now yawn will have to put you in your place with a childish
remark. Brace yourself.

Geez, got me a volunteer secretary now. And a free one, too. Thanks for
taking care of that for me.

What repartee scooter, You come up with this stuff all by yourself?

Nah, for this I use a grade-school comeback generator on the web. You don't
rate the good stuff.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Only a stupid **** like you could make such a statement.

You are the one that characterized your repair as quick and simple. I don't
see how anyone could view this as a career-defining moment. For all we know,
you might have been a terrible Marine.


"Juan Jimenez" wrote in message
.. .
Yes, it would seem so to someone who doesn't value the lives of a mother
and a newborn, wouldn't it.

Putz.

My father is a retired Naval Aviator.

There is no doubt in my mind that I have attended more memorial services
than you. My father has lost dozens of friends. My best friend lost his
father and my high school girlfriend lost her father. I won't go into
specifics, but my father was involved in a crash in 1969 and only an
ejection seat failure kept him from ejecting in 1978.

I am aware of the risks. Anyone who grew up in a Navy town knows the risk.

"Juan Jimenez" wrote in message
.. .
If I have to explain to you that military aviation is by definition a
risky business, I doubt you would understand it. The point is not the
risk, the point is lives were saved. But you already knew that, didn't
you.

"anon" wrote in message
m...
So, in an assignment in which you were tasked to help people, you helped
people? To what extent did you place yourself at risk in this mission?

Tell you what, if you ever grow balls large enough, go check the records
of SOES, circa 1979 through 1981, at MCAS Cherry Point. In fact, check
out the records of a medevac mission in 1981 involving a mom who had
just given birth and was hemorraging, and the preemie to which she had
just given birth. Then check out the comments of the (at the time,
double-digit midget) Vietnam-vet crew chief on the aircraft that took
them from Cherry Point to the main hospital at Lejeune.





--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Come on ANON, the Lone Ranger and his trusty "sidekick" rode to the
rescue and singlehandedly saved a damsel in distress. Give credit
where credit is due. It was an heroic effort that could only have been
done by someone showing courage in the face of extreme danger and
knowing that lives were at stake. I just can't figure out why he
didn't receive the congressional medal of honor for his efforts. Must
have been an oversight on somebody's part. I am surprised that they
would let someone so obviously valuable and knowledgable transfer to
another base after such a heroic feat...again an oversight on
somebody's part.


anon wrote:
Only a stupid **** like you could make such a statement.

You are the one that characterized your repair as quick and simple. I don't
see how anyone could view this as a career-defining moment. For all we know,
you might have been a terrible Marine.


"Juan Jimenez" wrote in message
.. .
Yes, it would seem so to someone who doesn't value the lives of a mother
and a newborn, wouldn't it.

Putz.

BobR wrote:
Come on ANON, the Lone Ranger and his trusty "sidekick" rode to the
rescue and singlehandedly saved a damsel in distress. Give credit
where credit is due. It was an heroic effort that could only have been
done by someone showing courage in the face of extreme danger and
knowing that lives were at stake. I just can't figure out why he
didn't receive the congressional medal of honor for his efforts. Must
have been an oversight on somebody's part. I am surprised that they
would let someone so obviously valuable and knowledgable transfer to
another base after such a heroic feat...again an oversight on
somebody's part.


anon wrote:
Only a stupid **** like you could make such a statement.

You are the one that characterized your repair as quick and simple. I don't
see how anyone could view this as a career-defining moment. For all we know,
you might have been a terrible Marine.


"Juan Jimenez" wrote in message
.. .
Yes, it would seem so to someone who doesn't value the lives of a mother
and a newborn, wouldn't it.

Putz.


BobR, the Medal of Honour is a combat medal. In any event yawn is so
modest he would have declined any medal or acknowledgment of his
actions. The only reason he accepted his Good Conduct Medal is his
commander held him down and pinned it on him.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

You sound like one of my sons, or one of many Vietnam era navy dependants.

What did your father fly? On what ships did he serve? Maybe we know each
other. (email me.)

Wayne
A-3B/A-6A, Constellation, FDR, Ranger, Midway, and Enterprise.
http://www.soaridaho.com


"anon" wrote in message
...
My father is a retired Naval Aviator.

There is no doubt in my mind that I have attended more memorial services
than you. My father has lost dozens of friends. My best friend lost his
father and my high school girlfriend lost her father. I won't go into
specifics, but my father was involved in a crash in 1969 and only an
ejection seat failure kept him from ejecting in 1978.

I am aware of the risks. Anyone who grew up in a Navy town knows the risk.

"Juan Jimenez" wrote in message
.. .
If I have to explain to you that military aviation is by definition a
risky business, I doubt you would understand it. The point is not the
risk, the point is lives were saved. But you already knew that, didn't
you.