It may not be entertaining, I don't know. Entertainment means different things to different people. Citizen Kane certainly doesn't 'throw a meaning to you at the end' though. I don't think it's even supposed to be a 'clever' ending, you don't learn anything new from it; the ending is just sort of a denouement.
Besides, as a student of film, you should value it for it's impact on culture. There are references and allusions to it everywhere, to the point where I bet a lot of people that haven't seen the movie would know large parts of it. Everything from the Simpsons to the White Stripes to some of my kid's movies I've just seen recently have references to it.
Citizen Kane has no point and goes nowhere? I can understand if you don't like the film (it's awfully slow by today's standards), but it's ALL point, and it's ALL going somewhere, to get to that point.
I don't know how cool it is. I think Mel's realized he's out of ideas. First he does the stage version of 'The Producers'. I can see that, but hardly original. Then re-doing the movie. Why? The original was perfect. Now this?
Then again, at least it's not 'Dracula: Dead and Loving it.'
You still need to have common purpose. Now, you could argue that going to the same place to do two different kinds of business IS common purpose. One of the yardsticks the NTSB uses is 'would the pilot have made the trip anyway if the passenger had decided not to go' and you may be able to prove that under your first scenario. I wouldn't risk my certificate on it, but there's a good chance you'd get away with it. The FAA is usually pretty reasonable, but the NTSB seems to throw decisions around based upon their mood at the time.
The important thing, though, is that the original poster's scenario was the last one you mentioned, which is clearly not legal, both for private and commercial pilots operating under pt. 91.
This stuff is very dangerous, and people get busted ALL of the time because they don't have a good understanding of commercial operations and flying for hire, and what 'holding out' is. To share expenses on a flight, the passengers and the pilots have to have a common purpose, and that purpose can't be 'I want to go to such-and-such a place, can you take me? We'll split the cost of the flight.' The pilot's selling a ticket in this case (at a discounted price.)
Another problem people run into is not realizing that commercial flying is commercial flying, whether or not the pilot is being paid. This can go beyond FAA, the NTSB can throw people in jail for this. Be careful!
The format of this page makes my soul hurt, but it is good information, and Phillip Kolczynski is a well-respected aviation lawyer. Pay particular attention to 'the fifth trap' he mentions.
I just want to point out that you can NOT (legally) just go to an FBO and pay some young pilot to fly you somewhere, whether or not they are a commercial pilot. Whether he/she wants the hours is irrelevant. You also seem to be saying that you could split the cost of the trip with a private pilot, which is not the case.
Just wondering, do you need reading glasses or is your near vision still good? That's the only thing that keeps me from doing it; I know that when I get to be your age I would HATE having to carry reading glasses with me everywhere.
Thanks.
Don't YOU be a tool. the **AA's method's aren't any more sophisticated than using Google and starting at the top and working down. The more people throw names around, the more danger they're in.
Slashdot Mirror
Sort of true. The transponder is in the aircraft, but it is interrogated and responds to secondary radar, read more here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_radar
Also, the VFR squawk is 1200, not 2700 (at least not in the U.S.), and is definitely used for commercial aviation as well as general.
I'm sorry Douglas. I waited too long.
It may not be entertaining, I don't know. Entertainment means different things to different people. Citizen Kane certainly doesn't 'throw a meaning to you at the end' though. I don't think it's even supposed to be a 'clever' ending, you don't learn anything new from it; the ending is just sort of a denouement. Besides, as a student of film, you should value it for it's impact on culture. There are references and allusions to it everywhere, to the point where I bet a lot of people that haven't seen the movie would know large parts of it. Everything from the Simpsons to the White Stripes to some of my kid's movies I've just seen recently have references to it.
Citizen Kane has no point and goes nowhere? I can understand if you don't like the film (it's awfully slow by today's standards), but it's ALL point, and it's ALL going somewhere, to get to that point.
Jet-A does not contain lead. Certain specialty fuels used for supersonic flight have a very small amount of lead added, but Jet-A does not.
That 747 burns Jet-A, which is basically kerosene. It is not leaded.
Ummm, you know that Winston Groom did write a sequel to Forrest Gump, right? Gump and Co.
I don't know how cool it is. I think Mel's realized he's out of ideas. First he does the stage version of 'The Producers'. I can see that, but hardly original. Then re-doing the movie. Why? The original was perfect. Now this? Then again, at least it's not 'Dracula: Dead and Loving it.'
When I was in school, we had a device upon which we would type papers.
You still need to have common purpose. Now, you could argue that going to the same place to do two different kinds of business IS common purpose. One of the yardsticks the NTSB uses is 'would the pilot have made the trip anyway if the passenger had decided not to go' and you may be able to prove that under your first scenario. I wouldn't risk my certificate on it, but there's a good chance you'd get away with it. The FAA is usually pretty reasonable, but the NTSB seems to throw decisions around based upon their mood at the time.
The important thing, though, is that the original poster's scenario was the last one you mentioned, which is clearly not legal, both for private and commercial pilots operating under pt. 91.
This is not correct. See explanation further down the thread.
This stuff is very dangerous, and people get busted ALL of the time because they don't have a good understanding of commercial operations and flying for hire, and what 'holding out' is. To share expenses on a flight, the passengers and the pilots have to have a common purpose, and that purpose can't be 'I want to go to such-and-such a place, can you take me? We'll split the cost of the flight.' The pilot's selling a ticket in this case (at a discounted price.)
# comporhire
Another problem people run into is not realizing that commercial flying is commercial flying, whether or not the pilot is being paid. This can go beyond FAA, the NTSB can throw people in jail for this. Be careful!
The format of this page makes my soul hurt, but it is good information, and Phillip Kolczynski is a well-respected aviation lawyer. Pay particular attention to 'the fifth trap' he mentions.
http://www.aviationlawcorp.com/content/traps.html
Hope this helps.
I just want to point out that you can NOT (legally) just go to an FBO and pay some young pilot to fly you somewhere, whether or not they are a commercial pilot. Whether he/she wants the hours is irrelevant. You also seem to be saying that you could split the cost of the trip with a private pilot, which is not the case.
Just wondering, do you need reading glasses or is your near vision still good? That's the only thing that keeps me from doing it; I know that when I get to be your age I would HATE having to carry reading glasses with me everywhere. Thanks.
I'm not in until Nintendo re-releases ROB! Listen up, nintendo, I want my robotic operating buddy!
Oh god, now someone's going to drag out the 'Actually, Betamax died because the porn industry didn't support it' thing.
Well, why don't you give us heads up next time this sort of thing is gonna happen?
Um, I just did.
You've gotta be the stupidest damn person I've ever come across here, and that's saying a lot.
Don't YOU be a tool. the **AA's method's aren't any more sophisticated than using Google and starting at the top and working down. The more people throw names around, the more danger they're in.
Listing torrent sites in an open forum like this brings them one step closer to being shut down.
I'm never swimming again now that I know there are mummy dolphins.
Be careful...Mame-ing an old cabinet gets lots of people very angry.
If you have a project page, I'd love to see it. I've been considering doing the same with a vectrex for awhile.
Do you have a cabinet with an actual vector monitor? If so, I'm VERY jealous.
So you run the red lights when you ride a bicycle? I don't understand.