As a private pilot that had been away from flying for nearly as long I can say you may be surprised at how little time it would take to get current. It took me about 6 hours of flight time to be comfortable again at the controls and complete a flight review. Seems the landing finesse took the longest for me to get back. That's just the actual flying part though. I spent a LOT of time going through a new FAR/AIM and studying the newer airspace regulations. All in all it didn't take nearly as long as I thought it would. As for the expense, I am going to forego exercising private pilot privleges and fly under sport pilot rules instead (basically, day VFR, and in planes that qualify as light-sport). That, combined with going with amature/experimental or LSA instead of certificated aircraft, could bring the price down to about the same per hour that it costs to drive my pickup truck! If you really want to fly check out what's available on barnstormers.com in the light-sport section (planes such as Challenger, Titan Tornado, Kitfox, Kolb, etc). You may be surprised that many cost no more than a small boat or motorcycle.
Assuming you still want to fly, and fly equipment that most of us can't afford, why not be a corporate pilot? You may not get rich at it but the pay is pretty good, and in addition someone else is paying for your flying fix too! Of course you could go into engineering instead and buy your own plane, but as you probably already know on most of us IT guys' pay you won't be affording a jet-a blowtorch.
I'm a DCS system admin at an oil refinery. We keep the DCS and business lans totally separated, and that directive is driven from the top down. If anyone asks for remote access we just let them know that's NOT going to happen - end of story! It can be a pain getting files from one network to the other (patches, etc.) but certainly worth the effort.
With a higher energy density, and if the size and weight are low, it could help make electric motors a viable option for light general aviation aircraft. I'd love to see this work out.
I do understand that. My previous comment was not meant in a negative way towards the many fine folks working at the USPS (I sure wouldn't want any of their jobs!) but more in pointing out that maybe someone needs to rethink just how it's run. Maybe it should be run more like a business, even if they just end up breaking even.
Good grief! And how exactly is it that the post office is due ANY funds from an email someone sends??? If they want more funds they should EARN it like the rest of us have to, not steal it from someone else that has earned it. If they're not making enough to keep things going then they should do like any other business and manage their costs and set prices appropriately.
When a doc's clerical error or comment could potentially affect a patient's future care or even their livelyhood (such as if a pilot's medical is denied or revoked based on info in their medical records) then the patient absolutely should have the full access to all of their records no matter how crappy it makes the doc's job! Put another way, the crapiness level of a docs job should not be sufficient justification for denying someone access to information that could have life altering consequences - particularly when the patient is the one footing the tab for it.
To say the patient shouldn't have access to their medical records would be like saying a person shouldn't have access to their credit report. It's a given that incorrect, incomplete, or misleading information will be found from time to time. That bad info could affect future care, or possibly even other things in the future. Who knows who besides the patient may end up being able to view this information that the patient would have no way of viewing or correcting. For instance, could insurance companies be allowed to view it before deternining if they should write a policy for an individual? Another example would be if the DOT or FAA could view it and decide not to issue a medical certificate based on what they see. Someone could loose their livelyhood without being able to even see the evidence used against them.
I'm also a pilot. Yes, sport and rec pilots may not have a lot of time (at least not those with new certificates) but they do have "skin" in it, unlike the drone pilots. A drone pilot probably isnt faced with injury or death if he crashes.
I think some of the arrogance has to do with being skilled in your field, but not recognizing that others who are not so skilled in your field are have skills you may not have. It's the "big fish in a small pond" syndrome.
Yes, it's definitely possible. Most of the job postings I've seen that specify a degree requirement also say something like "or equivalent experience". Yes, there are a few companies that absolutely require a degree, but most do not. So, you will usually need either a degree or experience to even get the interview.
The fact that a person doesn't have a degree doesn't automatically mean their education is lacking. Not everyone requires the structured environment of a classroom to learn. Many people are driven to learn on their own. It's that drive to learn that's important. I'd take that person over an unmotivated college grad any day as an employee.
Slashdot Mirror
If you like your GOTO you can KEEP your GOTO
And from Close Encounters we know an ARP 2500 modular analog synthesizer will work too.
As a private pilot that had been away from flying for nearly as long I can say you may be surprised at how little time it would take to get current. It took me about 6 hours of flight time to be comfortable again at the controls and complete a flight review. Seems the landing finesse took the longest for me to get back. That's just the actual flying part though. I spent a LOT of time going through a new FAR/AIM and studying the newer airspace regulations. All in all it didn't take nearly as long as I thought it would.
As for the expense, I am going to forego exercising private pilot privleges and fly under sport pilot rules instead (basically, day VFR, and in planes that qualify as light-sport). That, combined with going with amature/experimental or LSA instead of certificated aircraft, could bring the price down to about the same per hour that it costs to drive my pickup truck! If you really want to fly check out what's available on barnstormers.com in the light-sport section (planes such as Challenger, Titan Tornado, Kitfox, Kolb, etc). You may be surprised that many cost no more than a small boat or motorcycle.
Maybe they could offer an optional Traffic Light Camera stamp so those could be taken out as well :-)
Assuming you still want to fly, and fly equipment that most of us can't afford, why not be a corporate pilot? You may not get rich at it but the pay is pretty good, and in addition someone else is paying for your flying fix too! Of course you could go into engineering instead and buy your own plane, but as you probably already know on most of us IT guys' pay you won't be affording a jet-a blowtorch.
I'm a DCS system admin at an oil refinery. We keep the DCS and business lans totally separated, and that directive is driven from the top down. If anyone asks for remote access we just let them know that's NOT going to happen - end of story! It can be a pain getting files from one network to the other (patches, etc.) but certainly worth the effort.
With a higher energy density, and if the size and weight are low, it could help make electric motors a viable option for light general aviation aircraft. I'd love to see this work out.
I do understand that. My previous comment was not meant in a negative way towards the many fine folks working at the USPS (I sure wouldn't want any of their jobs!) but more in pointing out that maybe someone needs to rethink just how it's run. Maybe it should be run more like a business, even if they just end up breaking even.
Good grief! And how exactly is it that the post office is due ANY funds from an email someone sends??? If they want more funds they should EARN it like the rest of us have to, not steal it from someone else that has earned it. If they're not making enough to keep things going then they should do like any other business and manage their costs and set prices appropriately.
When a doc's clerical error or comment could potentially affect a patient's future care or even their livelyhood (such as if a pilot's medical is denied or revoked based on info in their medical records) then the patient absolutely should have the full access to all of their records no matter how crappy it makes the doc's job! Put another way, the crapiness level of a docs job should not be sufficient justification for denying someone access to information that could have life altering consequences - particularly when the patient is the one footing the tab for it.
To say the patient shouldn't have access to their medical records would be like saying a person shouldn't have access to their credit report. It's a given that incorrect, incomplete, or misleading information will be found from time to time. That bad info could affect future care, or possibly even other things in the future. Who knows who besides the patient may end up being able to view this information that the patient would have no way of viewing or correcting. For instance, could insurance companies be allowed to view it before deternining if they should write a policy for an individual? Another example would be if the DOT or FAA could view it and decide not to issue a medical certificate based on what they see. Someone could loose their livelyhood without being able to even see the evidence used against them.
I'm also a pilot. Yes, sport and rec pilots may not have a lot of time (at least not those with new certificates) but they do have "skin" in it, unlike the drone pilots. A drone pilot probably isnt faced with injury or death if he crashes.
^^^ This ^^^
I think some of the arrogance has to do with being skilled in your field, but not recognizing that others who are not so skilled in your field are have skills you may not have. It's the "big fish in a small pond" syndrome.
Kit plane in a book! The instruction manual doubles as the airframe construction material!
Yes, it's definitely possible. Most of the job postings I've seen that specify a degree requirement also say something like "or equivalent experience". Yes, there are a few companies that absolutely require a degree, but most do not. So, you will usually need either a degree or experience to even get the interview.
The fact that a person doesn't have a degree doesn't automatically mean their education is lacking. Not everyone requires the structured environment of a classroom to learn. Many people are driven to learn on their own. It's that drive to learn that's important. I'd take that person over an unmotivated college grad any day as an employee.