sherpa

Two losers.

I was completely amazed at how horrible Alex Smith was. Not seeing open guys, and there were plenty. Missing open guys. Checking down way too early. Reacting to minor pressure far too early. Horrible decisions on who to throw to. I thought the guy was atrocious.

I liquid brined for a couple years, but it's too much work and takes up too much space. For the last few, including this year, I've dry brined. Takes more time, but much easier, and great results.

Pretty hot. I've done them at 325 and 350 in my Primo. I cook to temp as well, but just wondering what the planned time was. Now that I know the temp, I can pretty much guess.

Which kamado, and what temp and planning time are you going to use?

No, you didn't call them figureheads. Someone else did, and I wanted to respond to it because it isn't true.

You live in your fantasy world. No problem here. Those relieved would be screaming like pigs if there was something afoot, and they weren't "taken offline." Further, CO's and XO's, on Navy combatants are far, far more than "figureheads."

I do. Given the fact that the commanding officers and others have been relieved, I think the facts are in.

Ya they do, but the normal process to remove wings is to convene a Field Naval Aviation Evaluation Board, made up of Naval Aviators, and that hasn't been done yet. Awfully silly to throw away over a million dollars + in training, (close to 1.5m if the other individual was an NFO), over something as silly as this. But....There's a wildcard. The entire Pacific fleet has been under scrutiny since the occurrence of these idiotic ship to ship collisions. Scott Swift, who is now commander of the Pacific Fleet, and was the the odds on favorite to be named PACOM, the head of the entire, (multi-service), military in the Pacific, just announced his retirement as he was told he would not get the PACOM position. In all probability, because of these collisions. These high visibility, stupid, though meaningless, mistakes have a way of causing over reactions. So....Who knows?

A senior chief is not going to have any say in that decision. They aren't players in such things. A bullet to the head, career wise, for sure, but not worthy of wing pulling. It was an electronic warfare squadron airplane. They are always a bit odd. Really odd.

I'm not saying that it was designed to only be a freighter. It was developed with a thought that it would have to have cargo only capability, if supersonic travel eliminated subsonic, long range airliners. thus the hinge-able nose. At the time, side loading double deck airplanes was not possible, so the the hinged nose would allow front loading. All that has changed, and now side loading is possible. Still, the design acknowledges that issue, as there was no other reason to put the flight deck on a different level.

I'm guessing that was because you were price sensitive and based on your circuitous route, purchased a Southwest ticket. There are far easier ways.

They are all still charters.

I meant from passenger service. Four engines is considerably more expensive to operate. Can't give away an Airbus 380 these days. 747 was originally designed as cargo anyway, thus the flight deck on the upper level.

For shorter legs, usually a 757. Longer legs, a 767. The London games use Virgin Atlantic. It's part of the contract agreement. Buffalo''s long runway is 8800' long. That's long enough for a 747-400 on a domestic trip with required fuel and cargo loads. Regarding the age of the airplane, the 747 series are all being retired because they are too expensive to operate, not because of airworthiness issues.

Anybody recognize this guy?

The deer where I live in VA are only grass fed. The venison is excellent. It used to be the favored meet of European royalty. We don't "hunt," we merely choose to grab one of the many deer that roam our property, and there are plenty. We don't eat bucks, only does, and head shots to keep the meat from getting blood on it. Just one or two a year, but the backstrap is excellent.

I've got one of those. A 64

Not competitive. Rock bottom.

I haven't been paying attention. What got my attention was showing a subsurface launched missile, which is not germane to the claim at all, and my disdain for using cui bono arguments as stand alone evidence of some conspiracy. So much of that is used in the 9-11 crap, and it's never proved to be of any value or legitimacy.

You have "operators on the ground?"

You're a confusing one. They didn't "upgrade" the terror threat vis a vis drones, they updated it mentioning that platform as a potential threat. Should have been done months ago. And regarding your "ballistic missile" impossibility claim, I'm confused why you keep posting pictures of a subsurface launched missile, when that isn't the claim. The claim is that it was a Burkan 2H, which is a pretty stupid scud type missile with a good bit of range. Certainly nothing sub surface launched.

Point?

All ACC, and specifically..... U.......V........A..... Go Hoos!