sherpa

Flying isn't "very risky" when done by people who know what they're doing. I'm not sure what you mean when you claim that if "you make enough $$$$ they let you be a pilot." You are tested and granted the certificate after a thorough practical exam and display of requisite skills. Your net worth has zero to do with it. This guy was flying a very low performance airplane. He had emailed his father that it was "like flying a fighter." That is a grossly uninformed viewpoint which I hope had noting to do with his accident, but I'm suspicious it did.

I understand your point, but you are missing a major distinction. That isn't your fault because the media failed to report it in many of their reports of this. The "missed" difference is that this would be voluntary, whereas a draft isn't. "Officials stress that returning to active duty is strictly voluntary, and the service does not intend to implement a stop-loss measure." http://taskandpurpose.com/air-force-can-recall-1000-retired-pilots-new-executive-order/ All pilot positions in the military are voluntary. All they did was change the number.

No "emotion" whatsoever. Pat Walsh is no more "ensnared" is this than you are. Pat was a four star who was Commander in Chief, Pacific Fleet. The guy in question was a rich contractor who had provided services to the US Navy. In your link, Walsh states that he didn't know who invited the guy to his change of command, but said that the guy had a knack for showing up at a lot of different events. As background for you, when extremely high ranking changes of command occur, a protocol office handles a lot of the invites. He also states that the guy invited him to dinner when he was commander of the USS Stennis carrier strike group, but he didn't attend. What your link does is show pro forma receiving line pictures and claim these folks are "ensnared." It is this type of ridiculous false linkage that underpins a lot of these idiotic broad brush conspiracy suggestions. Pat Walsh is successfully retired and not at all concerned.

What I understand, or at least surmise, is that you are way off on this, and wasting your time. I know Pat Walsh pretty well. He is referenced a few times in your link; quoted and pictured often. This is absolute nonsense, but it is your time.

Actually, it makes me wonder what your agenda is. The story is the broad brush smear of all time.

What a useless link. Pictures from receiving lines at changes of command. No linkage to this individual whatsoever. Just pure smear. One of them was a friend of mine, and laughable that he would be included in this nonsense. The only thing more stupid are the comments below the link, especially the one about Tailhook, which is grossly ignorant and ridiculous.

This is a complicated issue that has absolutely nothing to do with a "draft." Military pilots are not "drafted."

Brown's fan said tonight" " Alexa.....Disembowel me,"

Its an easy three hour thing, and they're probably more focused than if it was a home game. The travel is simple. Not much more than a commute. The issue is coaching and the pre-travel prep for something they should have seen months ago. I'm sure they did.

I don't play message board games. If there's something somebody has to add to what I have posted, have at it. Not understanding carrier transitioning fleet geographic boundaries is not an argument.

Do you have something to add to this? Are you at all familiar with how this, (US Navy ship transits), usually works?

Ya. Roosevelt just in-chopped to 7th fleet on its way to the Western Pacific for a long scheduled deployment. Nimitz just in-chopped on its way home. Nothing magic about this.

It happens, and sometimes it's just schedule coincidence. To answer your question directly, in 2007 three carrier battle groups were in the Pacific and didn't get "used." The explanation is quite simple. Carrier schedules are planned well in advance, more than a year, Occasionally, one will be on the way home and one on the way out. That is exactly what is happening now, but the media prefers the suggestion that it is something other than that. 1. Reagan is in Busan, South Korea on a port call. It is based in Japan and almost always part of the 7th fleet, the fleet responsible for that area. Named fleets are responsible for specific geographic areas. 2. Roosevelt just left the US on a scheduled deployment. Ships "in-chop" to the 7th fleet shortly after leaving Hawaii. 3, Nimitz is on it's way home from the Persian Gulf, and left the 5th fleet, entering the 7th fleet area on the 23rd. Simply transiting on its way home. So, you have three carriers in the 7th fleet because one is permanently based there, one is transiting on its deployment, and one is transiting home. Another case of the media overlooking the obvious for a suggestive headline, and people always bite.

I get that, but you mentioned you had purchased the wine after a barrel tasting. From reading your posts, I think you are a bright guy with discriminating tastes. As a producer, I know that wine goes in the barrel after a minimum of about six weeks of fermentation and clarifying. I have four week old petit verdot sitting right behind me in secondary, anaerobic fermentation. The same stuff we sold that will end up at over $25-$30 per bottle in a couple years. Initially, the tannins and other proteins are so overwhelming that there is now way for a consumer to judge the final product at that point. So...If I was going to make a purchase decision on fresh wine just put in oak, I would ask what the chemistry was at harvest. Without going into specifics, they would have the three or four data points involved, and knowing the appellation and the specific wineries history, I could make a decision.

To be clear, I never said it was "always a bad fire season." I said they always claimed it was going to be a bad fire season. If it was a dry year it would be bad because of an elongated season. If it was wet, too much fuel. Regarding your other post about buying wine that is recently harvested, did they give you the "chemistry" on it? We sell about 3000 pounds a year to a winery, but keep about 10 gallons for our own production. I have found, over the years, that the chemistry at harvest has been a far more accurate indicator of eventual flavor than when it's new in the barrel. I often taste our wine that the winery is producing, and don't get a feel for the final product until its been in oak at least a year.

I seriously doubt it will have any impact on retail wine prices. There is so much on the market. Expect a lot more truck traffic between the San Joaquin Valley and Napa-Napa's little secret. On the California weather thing, re fires, they're never happy. If it's a wet winter there's more fuel for the fire season. If it's a dry winter the fire season is extended. It was non stop annual complaints, no matter what. Twelve years there, six near Napa, and no matter what weather they had, it was going to be a bad fire season.

The vast majority were harvested weeks ago. They had an issue this year with early raisoning, because of excessive heat, so they harvested early. Still cost them 10% or better of their crop, but not too serious. Only issue with harvested grapes in fermentation is smoke damage, and that can be prevented.

It certainly seems that the receiving end of the supply chain is lacking. Same as happened after the Haiti earthquake.

I doubt is was airplane related. Animals don't like stress. The cargo compartment is about 60-65 degrees, and comfortably pressurized, but it's stressful for them.

Animals in the cargo compartment has more to do with the airplane than the company. Some airplanes have fairly good environmental controls and monitoring of cargo. Some do not. If I knew there was an animal there, I would always make it a point to check on them on the ramp, prior to them going into the compartment. Never saw one on a flight over six hours, and not a good idea, as the drugs wear off. After a career of this, I would never put a pet of mine in there. Dark, noisy and probably really scary. Most airlines do not permit carriage in the summer. The ramps are too hot.

Regarding your comment on getting the airplane in the air and "rolling the dice," that doesn't happen. There's an old axiom in aviation: "Better to be on the ground wishing you were in the air than being in the air wishing you were on the ground." You simply don't take problems airborne. On the "service" dog issue, it's complete nonsense and one of the problems that we will see more of in the future. You need an MD "prescription" to justify it, and they are not hard to get, because the MD really doesn't care. There was an MD in the Dominican Republic who used to charge for them. Made quite a bit of money doing it, I'm told, so every time you'd leave Santo Domingo, there'd be about ten of them, which is not possible to handle. Big thing in LA as well. Have a great day.

Isn't going to happen, at least the payout. People do all kinds of funny things on airplanes, and make all kinds of bizarre demands. I once had the wife of a hall of fame QB refuse to sit for takeoff, (and said she wouldn't for landing either), becasue she had cosmetic butt surgery the day before. She said she would stand in the galley. Fortunately, her "demand" was made known at the gate, so it was resolved there.

There are lots of reasons to deny boarding or have someone removed. Airline crews do not administer injections. They do have a few things on board, but if necessary, they find a physician or licensed medical individual to do it, and there is almost always one on board. Wouldn't be done at the gate though. You'd have the passenger removed and handled by airport medical folks, who are available. Passengers do not have the right to limit other passenger's options, but if they state they have a condition at the time of the reservation, if possible, they will be accommodated. This happens more frequently with people who have peanut allergies. This professor now has to face five separate charges. Pretty dumb move.

There weren't any additional airplanes built for Vietnam.