GoBills808 Posted January 29, 2020 Posted January 29, 2020 Milan v Torino Coppa Italia black armbands
Alphadawg7 Posted January 29, 2020 Posted January 29, 2020 Wow some interesting Jerry West info: 1 - He gets no royalties from the NBA for being the "logo" as the NBA refuses to admit its him. F-ed up man. 2 - He just told a story about how Kobe called him to tell him he was going to sign with the Clippers and committed to them. Jerry told him no way you can go play for that owner (which was Sterling still) and talked him out of it despite Kobe already verbally committing to the Clippers. Amazing 1
Gugny Posted January 29, 2020 Posted January 29, 2020 1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said: Yeah that was hard man watching him talk and go through his emotions and other losses. CP3 IG message was hard to read too. I heard some of the Shaq audio on the way home tonight. Choked me up. I try not to hold grudges and this is exactly why. Four years, they went without talking. And now they'll never have the chance to talk again. Very sad. 2 1
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 29, 2020 Posted January 29, 2020 2 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said: Yeah, thats a fair point too. A friend of mind brought the notion of what if something happened to the pilot, like a stroke or heart attack and it just all happened so fast? What if he lost consciousness almost immediately? A close friend almost died a couple years ago when he was driving and had sudden cardiac arrest causing him to immediately lose consciousness and his car go off the road and hit a sign. He got lucky there was an off duty officer who witnessed it and got to him immediately and resuscitated him. He ended up having a 2nd bout of full cardiac arrest as he was being loaded into the ambulance and took a couple days before he woke. Looked bleak until then as they had no idea yet if he suffered brain damage or the extent of the damage if so. Turns out, the off duty officer being there ended up being the difference between life and death. So yeah, thats a good point you make, but the descent also still seems awfully like the helicopter was out of control and falling from the sky. They also seemed to hit a relatively flat part of ground at the elevation they were at as opposed to flying into an edge of a mountain. Feels like either his instruments failed him, some kind of equipment failure, or maybe something just suddenly happened to the pilot based on how the reports I heard the copter was descending. Again, I am definitely no aviation expert...just at first look it just seems like the descent indicated something more than a pilot error to me. Hi, bear in mind that this isn't official ATC tape that's out there to date....it's like a scanner capture of that frequency. The controller was evidently hearing some responses that aren't captured in the recordings that are to date available, such as the pilot's transmission that he was 'climbing above a cloud layer' Safe flight in instrument meterological conditions depends upon careful adherence to a system of procedures and instructions, either published or from ATC- the "Instrument Flight Rules". There are minimal safe altitudes defined for each charted area, specific routes at specific charted altitudes between specified navigation points, specific procedures with specified starting points, directions, and descent profiles for approaching and landing at airports. When a pilot is flying under visual flight rules, it's "Indian Country" - you're on your own to "see and avoid" what can kill you. You can navigate visually along a route like a road or a railroad....but if conditions suddenly deteriorate to where you can't do that, you better damned well have a good "Plan B" that will get you out of trouble and let you either transition into the instrument procedure system or turn tail and return to safe visual flight conditions. And it better be specific at each point along your route. Anyway, all sorts of stuff is possible, but they're kind of like hearing hoofbeats and thinking of Zebras. Bessie the Horse clopping along that's been found to blame in thousands of accidents in similar weather conditions is the pilot 1) lost positional awareness and flew into something hard (controlled flight into terrain) 2) lost control of the craft while trying to climb rapidly and avoid terrain - aerodynamic stall, whatever the chopper equivalent is of stall/spin 3) was unable to control the craft by reference to instruments when he lost visual contact with the ground. From information I've seen/heard to date, 2) seems most likely to me The valid point has been well made that some of what's out there may not be correct at this point, and relevant additional information may well change the picture. 3
Alphadawg7 Posted January 29, 2020 Posted January 29, 2020 1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Hi, bear in mind that this isn't official ATC tape that's out there to date....it's like a scanner capture of that frequency. The controller was evidently hearing some responses that aren't captured in the recordings that are to date available, such as the pilot's transmission that he was 'climbing above a cloud layer' Safe flight in instrument meterological conditions depends upon careful adherence to a system of procedures and instructions, either published or from ATC- the "Instrument Flight Rules". There are minimal safe altitudes defined for each charted area, specific routes at specific charted altitudes between specified navigation points, specific procedures with specified starting points, directions, and descent profiles for approaching and landing at airports. When a pilot is flying under visual flight rules, it's "Indian Country" - you're on your own to "see and avoid" what can kill you. You can navigate visually along a route like a road or a railroad....but if conditions suddenly deteriorate to where you can't do that, you better damned well have a good "Plan B" that will get you out of trouble and let you either transition into the instrument procedure system or turn tail and return to safe visual flight conditions. And it better be specific at each point along your route. Anyway, all sorts of stuff is possible, but they're kind of like hearing hoofbeats and thinking of zebras. Bessie the Horse clopping along that's been found to blame in thousands of accidents in similar weather conditions is the pilot 1) lost positional awareness and flew into something hard (controlled flight into terrain) 2) lost control of the craft while trying to climb rapidly and avoid terrain - aerodynamic stall, whatever the chopper equivalent is of stall/spin 3) was unable to control the craft by reference to instruments when he lost visual contact with the ground. From information I've seen/heard to date, 2) seems most likely to me The valid point has been well made that some of what's out there may not be correct at this point, and relevant additional information may well change the picture. Thanks for the detailed info, appreciate it. Yeah, in your scenarios and the way you describe it, I would agree with you that #2 does sound like a more likely scenario than the other 2. I do still wonder if something happened to the pilot though as well still given the point the other poster mentioned of not having any evidence of distress communicated over the radio if he had say lost control. Obviously, could have all happened so fast that he just didn’t radio for help either while he was frantically say trying to regain control. Question: In a case like this, let say number 2 did happen...or maybe something like cardiac arrest did happen. Would be there be anyway they could discover that was the case in an investigation and reach a conclusive decision on the cause of the accident?
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 29, 2020 Posted January 29, 2020 36 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: Thanks for the detailed info, appreciate it. Yeah, in your scenarios and the way you describe it, I would agree with you that #2 does sound like a more likely scenario than the other 2. I do still wonder if something happened to the pilot though as well still given the point the other poster mentioned of not having any evidence of distress communicated over the radio if he had say lost control. Obviously, could have all happened so fast that he just didn’t radio for help either while he was frantically say trying to regain control. Question: In a case like this, let say number 2 did happen...or maybe something like cardiac arrest did happen. Would be there be anyway they could discover that was the case in an investigation and reach a conclusive decision on the cause of the accident? Well, from hints he's dropped @sherpa may be your guy here, if we're speaking abstractly hypothetically and in general terms. I give it a solid "It Depends" - on too many factors we have no way of knowing at this point. For example, there was a post-crash fire in that location, the helicopter was pretty much smashed to hell .... this gets gruesome, but do they have enough body to post-mortem? Do they have enough critical pieces intact to examine for mechanical or instrument failures? Once all the details of the aircraft's actual flight path are put together from ADS-B and radar and any GPS tracking that may have been on board, given the precise location and elevation of the crash and surrounding terrain and the known performance envelope of the Sikorsky, they'll be able to reach a much more educated conclusion about the immediate cause of the crash. The pilot's recent training and flight logs will give more clues. A lot of times, though, the report gets written as "The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be the pilot's decision to continue VFR flight into instrument meteorological conditions. Contributing to the accident were (some point the NTSB wants to make about training or equipment that may or may not have helped)". That probably sounds ***** cynical on my part, so maybe I should explain that at this point in my life, I need both hands and some toes to count up the friends, un-friends, flight instructors, and just folks I know who have died over the years in small aircraft accidents, sometimes in situations that seemed wildly out of character with the person I thought I knew - and the final NTSB report didn't provide much insight at all. Because of the high-profile of the passengers, this one will get a much deeper look than some, but in the end, if there isn't enough data, there isn't enough. And sometimes it comes down to saying, really, a damned fine pilot made a series of what look like really bad choices, and we'll never know why.
sherpa Posted January 29, 2020 Posted January 29, 2020 1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said: I do still wonder if something happened to the pilot though as well still given the point the other poster mentioned of not having any evidence of distress communicated over the radio if he had say lost control. Obviously, could have all happened so fast that he just didn’t radio for help either while he was frantically say trying to regain control. This is one of the misconceptions that comes up all the time in media reports and other discussions of this type. There is nothing that "radioing for help" is going to do, anymore than getting into a control situation in a vehicle and thinking it would be a good idea to get on you cell phone and tell people about it. The old axiom is "aviate, navigate, communicate. What the media always calls "issuing a mayday," is actually declaring an emergency, which is a legal declaration, not an indication of distress, which the media often suggests. Declaring an emergency opens up the entire tool box of options, and allows the individual in command to do whatever is necessary to lead to a successful conclusion regardless of of ATC issues. You will be held responsible for the actions, but you do what you need to do and handle that issue later. From a pilot's perspective, folks are hesitant to do it for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that you are probably very busy and ATC is going to start asking a lot of questions that you really don't have time to answer, and are not related to the issue, so you do so when you need to use your emergency authority. In any event, if there is a mechanical or a control problem, you solve the problem first. The last thing done is tell ATC about with some thought that they are going to provide a solution. If the "problem" results in being degraded to the point where you need to inform them so they may consider it in their traffic picture, you tell them, but in the case of a control issue, you do what you do to regain control before anything else. They are capable of helping out a little guy who is lost, gets into a little weather without weather radar, or a host of other things, but with most problems, they have no more knowledge than anyone else. 1
Chandler#81 Posted January 29, 2020 Posted January 29, 2020 On 1/27/2020 at 8:05 PM, Hapless Bills Fan said: Hi, OK a bit more. Flying under "special VFR" is not necessarily a big deal for a Heli pilot. It has to do with federal regulations about visibility and distance from clouds in different classes of controlled airspace - more visibility and cloud clearance are required in airports with a control tower, basically. Outside the controlled airspace around airports, Helis are allowed to operate in 1/2 mile visibility and "clear of clouds", in recognition of the fact that they can slow down and hover and maneuver easily. So you ask for an "sVFR clearance" so the controllers can keep an eye on you and keep the planes operating under instrument flight rules and you from swapping paint, and off you go. The FAA even established special VFR routes through the edges of controlled airspace to allow the helicopters defined routes to get out to less-controlled "Indian Country" airspace and do their thing. Again, pretty routine thing. That's what the pilot is asking for when he talks to the Burbank controller - I'm unfamiliar, but there must be a charted VFR flyway along a couple of highways where the helicopters normally come and go. The weather at the two airport control towers the pilot was talking to was not reported as all that bad. The pilot could have been operating at 600 ft above the ground, which is well clear of light towers and buildings short of skyscrapers, and with 2 1/2 mile visibility. That's safe weather for a helicopter. But he still needed a special VFR clearance because the minimum in that type of controlled airspace is 3 miles. Here's the flag - the controller is talking about a flight that is "going around". What that means under instrument flight rules, is that the pilot got to the designated position and altitude where he has to make a decision "am I able to land at this airport, or do I gotta bail?" and said "Nope! Bail!". It's called a "missed approach". Now there are various reasons for this - could be a pilot doing approach training. Could be a pilot who flew a sloppy approach and got off course. Or, could be a sign that the weather is variable and the pilot of that aircraft encountered visibility or cloud conditions way lower than what's being reported. I'd be on the horn asking for a pilot report, me. As someone else commented, when the weather conditions are right, fog can form almost instantaneously. There can be no fog, then move into a microclime around a river or between sets of hills and Whoooooo! instant white, and as that person pointed out, trying to get below a layer of clouds that goes to the ground is a losing proposition. But assuming Kobe's helicopter is instrument-equipped, it's also not a big deal. The pilot realizes he just flew into the soup, he hovers and starts climbing, and he says something like "Center, Helicopter 72Echo Xray lost visual with the ground near terrain at (position), I'm climbing". All that movie stuff about Mayday Mayday Emergency Souls on Board is for a situation which will take a while to sort itself out, not for when you're sucking the seat cushion up your butt 'cuz the windscreen just went white and you know there's a hill nearby. Start climbing and the controllers will treat him as an emergency, move any other aircraft out of his way, provide whatever assistance he needs to be safe, and sort out what happened later. Air traffic controllers hate to read about aircraft they've handled being turned into wreckage and they have wide latitude - they can treat you as an emergency without declaring an emergency, they can declare an emergency for you. The controllers almost certainly know that's Kobe Bryant's helicopter, they are being SUPER polite and helpful in that radio clip. Stephen Colbert opens up about his heartbreak and a call for cockpit recordings in helicopters. 1
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 29, 2020 Posted January 29, 2020 7 hours ago, sherpa said: This is one of the misconceptions that comes up all the time in media reports and other discussions of this type. There is nothing that "radioing for help" is going to do, anymore than getting into a control situation in a vehicle and thinking it would be a good idea to get on you cell phone and tell people about it. The old axiom is "aviate, navigate, communicate. What the media always calls "issuing a mayday," is actually declaring an emergency, which is a legal declaration, not an indication of distress, which the media often suggests. Declaring an emergency opens up the entire tool box of options, and allows the individual in command to do whatever is necessary to lead to a successful conclusion regardless of of ATC issues. You will be held responsible for the actions, but you do what you need to do and handle that issue later. From a pilot's perspective, folks are hesitant to do it for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that you are probably very busy and ATC is going to start asking a lot of questions that you really don't have time to answer, and are not related to the issue, so you do so when you need to use your emergency authority. In any event, if there is a mechanical or a control problem, you solve the problem first. The last thing done is tell ATC about with some thought that they are going to provide a solution. If the "problem" results in being degraded to the point where you need to inform them so they may consider it in their traffic picture, you tell them, but in the case of a control issue, you do what you do to regain control before anything else. They are capable of helping out a little guy who is lost, gets into a little weather without weather radar, or a host of other things, but with most problems, they have no more knowledge than anyone else. "Never drop plane to fly microphone" "Bernoulli not Marconi makes the plane fly" What Sherpa said with two important additions: 1) A controller can declare an emergency on the pilot's behalf. The benefits to the controller are his other responsibilities/airspace can get re-assigned so he has free brain cells for the aircraft in distress and can coordinate other ATC or ground emergency services. It also justifies giving the aircraft in distress priority. 2) A controller can and will start treating an airplane as an emergency without declaring an emergency. For example, if the controller thought he knew which aircraft was 72EX (he might, the Van Nuys controller attempted a handoff to him), the moment the pilot said something unusual like "climb to get above cloud layer" ATC would look at whether he had traffic in the area he needed to divert. No pilot is going to ask questions if a controller tells them to turn 10 degrees for traffic or hold briefly, and it's much better to keep aircraft from swapping paint now and work out legalities later. The reason to switch between 2) and 1) (from the ATC side of the mic) would be the point at which the controller needs some of his workload lightened so he has a few extra brain cycles free, or the point where he needs to start giving that aircraft priority that might raise eyebrows except in an emergency. Caveat I am not and have never been an air traffic controller but have had good friends who are.
row_33 Posted January 29, 2020 Posted January 29, 2020 On 1/27/2020 at 7:13 PM, OZBILLS said: Wait until the family was told by police? Might be the only one ESPN mocked Kobe 100% his last seasons, splicing together constant hi-lite reels of his horrible shots, with background effects attacking him, withering commentary about what a selfish stat-padding chucker he had turned into. Face it, ESPN totally biffed on the biggest sports story since (perhaps) Magic's HIV announcement and retirement. And it's why they are cratering to the Stone Age every week.
Dante Posted January 29, 2020 Posted January 29, 2020 (edited) 13 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said: Yeah, thats a fair point too. A friend of mind brought the notion of what if something happened to the pilot, like a stroke or heart attack and it just all happened so fast? What if he lost consciousness almost immediately? A close friend almost died a couple years ago when he was driving and had sudden cardiac arrest causing him to immediately lose consciousness and his car go off the road and hit a sign. He got lucky there was an off duty officer who witnessed it and got to him immediately and resuscitated him. He ended up having a 2nd bout of full cardiac arrest as he was being loaded into the ambulance and took a couple days before he woke. Looked bleak until then as they had no idea yet if he suffered brain damage or the extent of the damage if so. Turns out, the off duty officer being there ended up being the difference between life and death. So yeah, thats a good point you make, but the descent also still seems awfully like the helicopter was out of control and falling from the sky. They also seemed to hit a relatively flat part of ground at the elevation they were at as opposed to flying into an edge of a mountain. Feels like either his instruments failed him, some kind of equipment failure, or maybe something just suddenly happened to the pilot based on how the reports I heard the copter was descending. Again, I am definitely no aviation expert...just at first look it just seems like the descent indicated something more than a pilot error to me. On another forum, I was reading some pilots going back and forth. Like you I am no aviation expert. What stuck out to me while listening to ATC instructing the pilot was for him to follow highways to navigate. #5 and #118 for example. One of the pilots who I believe knows what he is talking about thought that if the conditions are that bad where you are relying on highways as navigation, then you should land immediately and call a limo. Edited January 29, 2020 by Dante
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 29, 2020 Posted January 29, 2020 1 hour ago, Dante said: On another forum, I was reading some pilots going back and forth. Like you I am no aviation expert. What stuck out to me while listening to ATC instructing the pilot was for him to follow highways to navigate. #5 and #118 for example. One of the pilots who I believe knows what he is talking about thought that if the conditions are that bad where you are relying on highways as navigation, then you should land immediately and call a limo. I think that pilot is kind of blowing smoke out his arse a bit, which, to be honest, a lot of us pilots like to do in these situation. It's the "footsteps on our graves" phenomenon. At this point, the most straightforward cause that fits the facts publically known involves craptastic pilot decision making AND he took 8 people with him including 3 kids. We'd all like to believe we're 100% better than that and would nevereverever do something that dumb. The Bell by damn Won't Toll for Us! We're smarter than that! We have better judgement! That leads to pontificating of which there's a lot at present- me too. But it's not that simple. For a helicopter pilot - the roads represent defined "transitions" through controlled airspace under VFR, which is what all that talk with the controllers is about. He would be given the same instructions on a clear sunny day. Navigating by highways is pretty routine for a chopper and even for small aircraft making a VFR transition of controlled airspace. The reported vis and cloud cover at the airports he transitioned wasn't THAT low, and the pilot's report of his altitude and flight conditions are not that worrisome. He and the controller are just agreeing what his VFR route will be so he won't infringe on their other operations. That the pilot pushed the weather too far is almost certainly part of the accident chain, but it's a matter of situational awareness, and decision making, not a matter of some absolute directive like "land and call a limo if you're navigating by highways". The highway navigation isn't a red flag per se, it's SOP for VFR transition of controlled airspace. The problem is what happens if conditions suddenly get so bad that you stop being able to see the highways. What's your plan then? If you lose sight of the highway, what's your immediate safe "won't hit something" heading? What's your backup plan? Are you equipped and proficient to enter the IFR system? If so, do you have an IFR route already programmed into your avionics or are you going to be suddenly trying to program it in, while simultaneously controlling the aircraft, pointing it in a safe direction and getting it to a safe altitude? If you do have it pre-programmed, what's the transition like between that route and your current location? What minimum safe altitude do you need to make that transition? If you can't enter the IFR system, well....what do you know about the nearest good weather and how to safely retreat to it....or the closest good parking lots? ? Things happen fast and the situation is extremely unforgiving of error. And it can go from "Not that bad, I can manage this" to "OhCrap" in a fingersnap. And sometimes even good experienced pilots don't recognize that they're in one of those fingersnap-change situations, until it taps on their shoulder. Or sometimes they do, and they made a dumb choice or practiced de Nile. ?♂️
sherpa Posted January 29, 2020 Posted January 29, 2020 2 hours ago, Dante said: On another forum, I was reading some pilots going back and forth. Like you I am no aviation expert. What stuck out to me while listening to ATC instructing the pilot was for him to follow highways to navigate. #5 and #118 for example. One of the pilots who I believe knows what he is talking about thought that if the conditions are that bad where you are relying on highways as navigation, then you should land immediately and call a limo. This is what happens when people not familiar with the way these things work start judging them. Not you, but whoever posted what you referred to. Helicopters are a special sub set of aviation, and they frequently use ground reference for navigation. Special VFR is an alternative for them that allows them to fly as long as they stay clear of clouds and have a very low visibility requirement. They are so low that they rarely get into the regular system. I fact they rarely fly using IFR rules and clearances. Some never do for their entire helo career. Areas that have a high degree of helo traffic, for whatever reason, come up with their own procedures and agreements for these types of things, and helo corridors are built to facilitate it. New York and LA are two of the most obvious. These types of things involve police, sight-seeing, personal transport, power line inspection and a host of other things. Having this guy, who is under special VFR, and that never changes, navigate by using highways or other ground based points is not unusual for this area. What he should have done is land at Van Nuys and let them Uber it to the practice site. 1
sherpa Posted January 29, 2020 Posted January 29, 2020 (edited) 6 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: I think that pilot is kind of blowing smoke out his arse a bit, which, to be honest, a lot of us pilots like to do in these situation. It's the "footsteps on our graves" phenomenon. At this point, the most straightforward cause that fits the facts publically known involves craptastic pilot decision making AND he took 8 people with him including 3 kids. We'd all like to believe we're 100% better than that and would nevereverever do something that dumb. The Bell by damn Won't Toll for Us! We're smarter than that! We have better judgement! That leads to pontificating of which there's a lot at present- me too. But it's not that simple. ?♂️ I have read your posts with curiosity. There is no "we." here. There is no "us pilots," to use your term. Frankly, and I'll get killed for this, your posts read like a small airplane pilot or new instructor who has never done this for a living, and is enamored of that, and I don't understand why this thing is pinned. Edited January 29, 2020 by sherpa
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 29, 2020 Posted January 29, 2020 30 minutes ago, sherpa said: I have read your posts with curiosity. There is no "we." here. There is no "us pilots," to use your term. Frankly, and I'll get killed for this, your posts read like a small airplane pilot or new instructor who has never done this for a living, and is enamored of that, and I don't understand why this thing is pinned. You won't get killed (by the way, perhaps poor choice of wording?) by me for an astute perception and correct call - I am a small airplane pilot and have never flown for a living. No where stated or implied to the contrary. So that's exactly how my posts should read. But that does not mean there is no "us pilots" - that part is, pardon my saying, out of line on your part. Commercial pilots who fly for a living are the minority of certificated pilots. Do I need to print up a t-shirt "PP-ASEL are pilots too"? There are vibrant and enthusiastic communities of general aviation pilots all across the country that I've had the honor to know. Some of them are also commercial pilots who have more experience than you do (I feel very safe saying that) and some have much less and frankly, not one of them has ever before tried to tell me I'm not a pilot. To your lack of understanding on the pin: Threads about significant news or events get pinned for a while to keep them elevated so multiple threads don't propegate on the same topic. It will get unpinned when interest is seen to have died down. Hope this helps.
sherpa Posted January 29, 2020 Posted January 29, 2020 24 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: You won't get killed by me for an astute perception and correct call - I am a small airplane pilot and have never flown for a living. No where stated or implied to the contrary. So that's exactly how my posts should read. But that does not mean there is no "us pilots" - that part is, pardon my saying, out of line on your part. Commercial pilots who fly for a living are the minority of certificated pilots. Look it up. There are vibrant and enthusiastic communities of general aviation pilots all across the country. Some of them have more experience than you do (I feel very safe saying that) and some have much less, and we all get opinions and reactions too. To your lack of understanding on the pin: Threads about significant news or events get pinned for a while to keep them elevated so multiple threads don't propegate on the same topic. It will get unpinned when interest is seen to have died down. Hope this helps. I appreciate your comments, and mean no disdain. It is just very obvious that in reading your posts, you don't, or didn't, do this for a living. Your posts contain a lot of conjecture, if not guesses. Most are reasonable, but some are not. Regarding experience, which you bought up, I will not argue. I have flown small singles, have a double II, flown fighters from an aircraft carrier, a tour as a TopGun adversary, and airliners for over three decades. I don't want any more experience.
ExiledInIllinois Posted January 30, 2020 Posted January 30, 2020 36 minutes ago, sherpa said: I appreciate your comments, and mean no disdain. It is just very obvious that in reading your posts, you don't, or didn't, do this for a living. Your posts contain a lot of conjecture, if not guesses. Most are reasonable, but some are not. Regarding experience, which you bought up, I will not argue. I have flown small singles, have a double II, flown fighters from an aircraft carrier, a tour as a TopGun adversary, and airliners for over three decades. I don't want any more experience. LoL... Appreciate the humor Sherpa... 2
Recommended Posts