in search of J.C. Kamienski

"Snowbird" wrote in message
om...
[...] Any idea why it contains 3 Lynne Millers -- a student pilot,
a mechanic, and someone with "no certificates" ??

Maybe her legal name is something else. Maybe her first name is really
"Amberlynne" or "Lynnette" or something along those lines. Maybe she's
posting using her married name but the FAA knows her by her maiden name (or
vice a versa). Maybe she (or even he) is using someone else's newsgroup
account to read the newsgroups.

Not that your past posting history makes one dubious of the
Gulfstream or anything like that.

Frankly, I'm suspicious of anyone on Usenet newsgroups. It's why I think
threads like "how many hours did you fly?" and "how many hours to you have"
are silly and meaningless, and why I get bored by people who seem to be
mainly using Usenet to relive their "glory days", assuming they really even
had "glory days".

If there's factual content, I am usually capable of learning for myself
whether the facts are correct or not -- I certainly don't trust anything on
Usenet as the gospel truth -- and if it's not pertinent factual content
(i.e. some person claim to status, glory, or whatever) I don't really even
care whether it's true, since I'm not paying attention to stuff like that
anyway.

Pete

(Jill Kamienski) wrote in message . com...

I graduated from the initial ATC training last December.

Congratulations Jill!

I hope they get you in to on-the-job training soon.

Best of luck to you, and hope you get back in the air soon!
Sydney

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message ...
"Snowbird" wrote in message
om...
[...] Any idea why it contains 3 Lynne Millers -- a student pilot,
a mechanic, and someone with "no certificates" ??

Maybe her legal name is something else.

Sure, anything is possible.

Look, Peter, you can judge for yourself. No one is taking that
right away from you. Go For It. Hit http://www.groups.google.com
and look up Lynne Miller's posting history on these groups. There's
not that much, read it all.

But those who don't have the time or inclination but who contribute
a great deal to these groups deserve, IMO, not to have their time
wasted by someone who has a 2 1/2 yr posting history which sure
makes her appear to be a Troll.

She first posted on 5/29/01, about getting her PPL and getting a
tattoo on her ankle to celebrate. Two months later she's advising
someone how to fly into an obstructed airport: "get some balls and
be an aviator." Three months later, in August 01, she's calling Mike
Rappoport an "MU-2 moron" and posting about "her" CE-500 type rating
and "her" $4.6 million dollar "Citation Bravo" N550B.

When someone points out that N550B is a A35 Bonanza, she claims
she bought it from the owner so she could use the tail number.
Two years later, N550B is still a Bonanza and Lynne Miller is still
at it.

Is it possible to go from a PPL to a Citation type rating in 3
months? Sure, it's possible. Likely, given the content and
context she posted? Well, you want to judge for yourself....

Now Lynne Miller is posting about a Gulfstream and a set of King
DVDs (retail $179) she'll sell for $499. Someone points out the
outrageous markup:
"I'll include an autographed picture and a personal note"

See a pattern here? Except that she seems to have gotten more
subtle and figured out that she can't just waltz in and start out
by calling respected posters "stupid" "morons" "idiotic" and
"knucklehead". She needs to build some credibility first by
making some plausible, inoffensive posts.

OK, Peter, now you judge for yourself. I admire you for it.
Kudos. Very admirable. Take everything posted here with a
grain of salt. Good for you.

But people like Richard Kaplan (whom she scammed by pretending
an interest in C210 training and wasting time on his schedule)
http://tinyurl.com/x76u or for tinyurl haters
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Ly...aNews &rnum=1
deserve not to have their time wasted or to be abused IMO.

And others who may be more credulous deserve IMO not to be
misled by posts about "throw out that checklist" and "there
are no challenging instrument approaches" yadda yadda by someone
who purports to be an aviator of experience flying jets all over
the world -- but who started making that claim 3 months after
posting about her PPL checkride.

Your milage may vary. You may disapprove of me and these posts
instead. I have no problem with that.

Cheers,
Sydney

Chip,
First it was just waiting on other trainees, but now we're putting
URET in, so they say they don't have the staffing and equipment to
continue D-side training while doing URET training.

My area has 8 sectors, but two sets are usually combined together
except during "ski country" when things get crazy-busy.
I work in the area that handles the mountain airports, like Aspen,
Eagle, Telluride, Montrose, Grand Junction, Steamboat Springs, etc.

I'm not sure on the number of controllers, but I know we're considered
short staffed (any surprise there?). We just had to transfer in two
controllers from other areas to try to even things out. Initially
they were going to force two people who had previously been in our
area to come back, but they finally decided to take volunteers instead
(to everyone's relief).

We're also overloaded with trainees in the area. Right now we have 7
people that will be bidding R-side trainee lines (either radar
developmentals now, or people nearly done with their D-sides) and 4
that will be bidding D-side trainee lines.
I'm the only one left in the area that's A-side only, so I should be
next to train, whenever "next" comes up.
My side of the week is pretty good about getting training done, but
the other side keeps the devs on the positions they're already checked
out on and does very little training.

Hopefully the rumors will end up true and I'll get some training early
next year, rather than waiting until next fall when URET is complete.

Later,
Jill


"Chip Jones" wrote:
Hey Jill. Yeek! Been there at ZDV since April and not into D-school yet?
What's up out there? Too many developmentals?

Just curious, how many sectors in your Area of Specialization, and how many
controllers assigned to the Area?

Regards,

Chip, ZTL

"Snowbird" wrote in message
m...
Your milage may vary. You may disapprove of me and these posts
instead. I have no problem with that.

I'm not sure I understand your vehemence. My point was simply that you have
no way of knowing who the person is or is not, and that's true for every
single person that posts here. Even if you had found the person's name in
the FAA database and they appeared to hold the appropriate ratings, that
would mean nothing. The person posting could have simply borrowed someone
else's identity.

For example, how do you know for sure that my real name is "Peter Duniho"?
And even if it's not, why would you care? The answer to both questions is
"you don't".

If anything, Richard Kaplan's experience (whatever it was) is a cautionary
tale. A person should not take statements from anonymous people at face
value, especially on Usenet where it is *known* to be a sizable group of
people who do nothing but try to gum up the works with a variety of tactics,
including fraud.

As far as the posts made under the name of "Lynne Miller" go, I've never
paid much attention to them. They've been inconsistent and uninformative,
and that alone is reason enough to ignore her. I'm not defending her, I'm
just pointing out that a) your research has proved nothing regarding her
actual identify, positive or negative and b) it doesn't really matter who
she is, since the "proof is in the pudding", so to speak. Her posts provide
sufficient reason to blow her off...we don't need an FAA database to do
that.

I guess if there's a point at all to what I'm saying here is that if one is
going to participate in the Usenet environment, one needs to bring a healthy
sense of skepticism. I don't see why you're singling out Lynne Miller's
posts; there's been any number of other posts here that are similarly
content-free. What got stuck in your craw this time?

Pete

"Peter Duniho" wrote in message ...
"Snowbird" wrote in message
m...
Your milage may vary. You may disapprove of me and these posts
instead. I have no problem with that.

I'm not sure I understand your vehemence.

I'm not sure you understand at all, but in fact I don't see
any particular vehemence of mine.

I simply stated facts available to anyone who cares to search
a publically accessible database and publically accessible news
archives, along with a brief explanation of my personal reasons
for so doing (that I don't feel recent arrivals and long-term
contributors who lack time for such research should be imposed
on).

My point was simply that you have
no way of knowing who the person is or is not

I disagree. We have no way of knowing for sure who a person is.

But at times, we can know with reasonable certainty who (or what)
a person is not.

It appears to me to be a rather important distinction.

You, on the other hand, appeared to have a rather vehement
additional point. You appeared to object rather strongly
to my post. If that's not the case, it puzzles me to know
why you responded at all, much less at such length.

For example, how do you know for sure that my real name is "Peter Duniho"?
And even if it's not, why would you care? The answer to both questions is
"you don't".

That depends, actually, on what you're doing on the group. If
you were making requests of people which cross over into their
lives or work (say, asking Jay to reserve 3 suites for you for
a week, you'd be paying cash. or asking Chip to clear your
Citation Bravo direct), and I had reason to believe you weren't
as you presented yourself, I would undoubtedly state my reasons
for so believing. You, of course, could refute them if you
chose.

If you're simply posting factual responses or personal experiences,
you're right, I don't care who you are, only whether your responses
are indeed factual.

If anything, Richard Kaplan's experience (whatever it was) is a cautionary
tale. A person should not take statements from anonymous people at face
value, especially on Usenet where it is *known* to be a sizable group of
people who do nothing but try to gum up the works with a variety of tactics,
including fraud.

Well, perhaps it's idealistic, but IMO there is a certain sense
of community here in the piloting newsgroups. I gather you don't
feel it, but I think others do. I've certainly benefitted tangibly
from that sense of community. But with community comes responsibility
(in my idealistic mind at least).

As far as the posts made under the name of "Lynne Miller" go, I've never
paid much attention to them.

Peter, I mean no offense here, but I'm really not concerned
with your personal reactions. As far as I'm concerned, you're
welcome to react as you choose and believe as you choose.

I don't see why you're singling out Lynne Miller's
posts; there's been any number of other posts here that are similarly
content-free.

Yes, I gather that you don't see.

I lack faith in my ability to explain any better. I thought it
was already quite clear that the issue isn't content or the lack
thereof.

Cheers,
Sydney

"Jill Kamienski" wrote in message
om...
Chip,
First it was just waiting on other trainees, but now we're putting
URET in, so they say they don't have the staffing and equipment to
continue D-side training while doing URET training.

LOL, URET eh? Wow! We were supposed to put URET in a couple of years ago
here at ZTL. We didn't have enough controllers to both train on URET and
also run the day to day operation so we had to take a pass. It looks like
we may end up being the last ARTCC in the NAS to get URET, but they're gonna
have to send us some staffing or we'll *never* get it up and running.


My area has 8 sectors, but two sets are usually combined together
except during "ski country" when things get crazy-busy.
I work in the area that handles the mountain airports, like Aspen,
Eagle, Telluride, Montrose, Grand Junction, Steamboat Springs, etc.

8 sectors, cool. I can't wait to hear your opinion about URET and non-radar
operations. Love your strips, they are your friends. URET is merely
another scam in a parade of FAA contractor scams, IMO. "Conflict Probe!"
Just what the chic enroute controller needs (NOT!!!). Pass the pork,
please.


I'm not sure on the number of controllers, but I know we're considered
short staffed (any surprise there?). We just had to transfer in two
controllers from other areas to try to even things out. Initially
they were going to force two people who had previously been in our
area to come back, but they finally decided to take volunteers instead
(to everyone's relief).

We're also overloaded with trainees in the area. Right now we have 7
people that will be bidding R-side trainee lines (either radar
developmentals now, or people nearly done with their D-sides) and 4
that will be bidding D-side trainee lines.
I'm the only one left in the area that's A-side only, so I should be
next to train, whenever "next" comes up.
My side of the week is pretty good about getting training done, but
the other side keeps the devs on the positions they're already checked
out on and does very little training.


Well, you went to the right facility and Region. In my area we have a grand
total of 1
R-side developmental and five D-side developmentals, one of whom is a PATCO
re-hire who is not likely to ever get certified. He's 65 or so. Another is
an ex-USAF retired E-8 controller on the Phoenix-20 program who was probably
great at terminal op's and on the battlefield but thus far is over his head
here in Atlanta-land. However, I guess four out of six hopefuls is better
than nothing.

At least out there at ZDV you will probably get checked out in normal time
once you get started. Here, no matter what side of the week you train on,
dev's are constantly getting pulled out of training to provide watch
coverage. I've got D-side guys who have been at it for over a year and
still have half the sectors left to conquer. It's a real catch 22. We
don't have enough staffing to consistently train people, and we don't have
enough staffing because we can't get people trained. Sin loi!

Good luck out there!

Chip, ZTL

Uh....some translations for us infidels, please? URET? D-side?

Aspen, Eagle, etc I understand (I live here) but the rest?

Help!

Blanche wrote in message ...
Uh....some translations for us infidels, please? URET? D-side?

Aspen, Eagle, etc I understand (I live here) but the rest?

Help!


Blanche,
URET=User Request Evaluation Tool.
Basically it's a conflict resolution type tool that's being added to
the sectors to try to warn controllers of problems way ahead of time.
It also eliminates the flight progress strips, as all the information
will be contained on the computer.
There are many varying opinions about its usefulness. I don't know
enough myself (hey, I'm only a developmental who hasn't even started
training) to form an opinion yet.


D-side=the controller at a sector who coordinates with the controllers
of surrounding sectors, marks flight progress strips, makes a lot of
the computer entries, issues clearances through flight service, and so
forth, but will never talk to airplanes. Sometimes the radar
controller (R-side) will handle everything themself, but when things
are busier a D-side is put on the sector to help with those tasks.


Jill
JK @ ZDV

I can't wait to hear your opinion about URET and non-radar operations.

It sounds like at least initially we're going to keep strips in the
non-radar sectors. I guess eventually they'll go URET, but it will
take longer to implement.


The other fun thing about URET coming here is that they're saying
because the training department is "ahead of schedule", then my
training is not being delayed, therefore no back-pay. Whatever.


At least out there at ZDV you will probably get checked out in normal time
once you get started.

We'll see. It depends how much time they spend training. Training
pretty much stops during our "ski country" which is basically
December-March. It doesn't sound as bad as ZTL, but my area tends to
be slower to check people out than even all the other areas at ZDV,
and it's not due to devs using more hours, they still use the same,
but it's due to taking longer to get those hours (at least that's what
I've been told, including a threat to take me out of my area, which I
hope is a dead issue because I love my area).


We
don't have enough staffing to consistently train people, and we don't have
enough staffing because we can't get people trained.

Yep, sounds like here.
Fortunately we have one sup that is really into training, and whenever
he has the desk he finds a way to get training done, no matter what
manipulating he has to do. He can't do much else but he can get
training accomplished. That's why his side of the week does better
than the other.


Later,
Jill