This is probably a strange one
02-03-2019, 07:54 PM
#22
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,017
Originally Posted by Moe96
Funny how even with transparency you still get imbeciles such as yourself who respond. Good job contributing to the topic at hand here imebcile.
Originally Posted by Moe96
This makes sense, you definitely don’t have a 737 or 747 type.
Your'e an idiot.
02-03-2019, 07:57 PM
#23
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,499
Originally Posted by emiratesatpgod
I wouldn’t expect a freshly minted commercial pilot to be familiar with a 121 reg.
Originally Posted by emiratesatpgod
Last thing, I take it you don't read much? He clearly disclosed that he was not yet a commercial pilot.
And seriously, a brand new fake APC persona in an attempt to make a phony ‘authority’ to back up the ignorance you’ve already posted? Even after your original one was banned for being:
A. Wrong
and
B. Abusive?
Do you have any idea how many people will read these postings and LAUGH at you? Particularly since you were foolish enough to post your location and email address in your previous postings?
Last edited by Excargodog; 02-03-2019 at 08:18 PM.
02-03-2019, 08:14 PM
#24
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: B757
Posts: 84
Originally Posted by emiratesatpgod
Regarding the rest of the people in this thread, I wouldn't be surprised if they were kiddie simulator pilots on VATSIM that all of sudden think they are qualified pilots after spending $35 on a joystick after that Christmas sale at Walmart. Stay in your lane kiddos, get back to getting denied from your online fantasy airlines.
Fly safe,
B757
02-03-2019, 08:47 PM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: 767A (Ret)
Posts: 6,248
Originally Posted by emiratesatpgod
Also, Vtaildude and Moe96, please PM me.
Edit: Just saw that Moe96 was banned while I was writing my post apparently. Pretty pathetic that a contributing user was banned unlike these other posters.
Edit: Just saw that Moe96 was banned while I was writing my post apparently. Pretty pathetic that a contributing user was banned unlike these other posters.
02-03-2019, 09:37 PM
#26
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,017
Originally Posted by Moe96
Though the way you logged your time is not optimal, I personally don’t think anyone cares as long as you can explain the route you flew during the month and the hours you logged for condition of flight are accurate (i.e. night, actual instrument, simulated instrument, etc.). This is especially the case if you had no flights between your commutes in other aircraft.
Here’s why: “Legal Interpretation to E. Thomas Sisk (Mar. 18,2008); see a/so Legal Interpretation to Alfred Tenuta, Jr. (Apr. 17,1998). These interpretations allow a pilot to string together multiple legs to log a single cross-country flight. However, there is nothing in § 61. 1(b)(3)(ii) or previous FAA interpretations dictating how separate flights must be logged. Accordingly, the pilot may choose what is considered a flight and what is merely a segment of a flight, and then log that flight time appropriately when the flight is conducted.”
That is straight from the FAA chief counsel’s office here is a link to that legal interpretation from the FAA website: https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...rpretation.pdf
Feel free to read it for full context. Hope I’ve been able to help. Good luck on your written, and perhaps someone else with more experience could also weigh in.
It's clear that the banned poster doesn't understand the import of the legal counsel letter of interpretation which he referenced. That partial quote, out of context and inappropriate here, regards the logging of cross country time on consecutive legs which individually may not meet cross country requirements.
The legal interpretation cited is wholly inappropriate and irrelevant here, as the banned poster was responding to the OP, who logged time by the month. Two entirely different subjects, and the use of the above legal interpretation, improperly applied and clearly not understood by the user, speaks to ignorance of both the subject of the thread, and the legal application.
The original poster didin't cite his cross country time or how it's logged.
On a separate note, if one is retired at age 35 and bored, one is probably doing fairly well in life.
02-04-2019, 07:59 AM
#28
Perennial Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,499
Originally Posted by Vtaildude
Ok. I’m just going to go to another forum so the fighting will stop.
Most of us have been around long enough that we can handle puerile insults, but erroneous info that is relied upon by people just starting out who may not know better is something most of us wish to discourage. The career path can be frustrating enough for a newbie even without them being encouraged to take wrong turns.
Fly safe.
02-04-2019, 08:36 AM
#29
All is fine at .79
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Position: Paahlot
Posts: 4,082
Originally Posted by Vtaildude
Ok. I’m just going to go to another forum so the fighting will stop. For those of you that contributed. Thank you.
You can literally have flight simmers handing out career advice.
They’re usually called out fairly quickly but some that play the game a little better then others and know which fights to pick can linger for years on a forum.
Any forum. Guns, cars, airplanes whatever.
You can easily look up somebody’s posting history, threads they started and so on.
Whatshisnameagain got his panties twisted and picked the wrong fight and now he’ll join another forum and do it again.
You had a legitimate question.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
