I just dont understand what you get out of constantly acting like an employee of PMDG who is hired to point out the signature policy every time?

 

It's one fewer time that I, or any other mod, has to say it. I don't mind it. Nobody else should either.

 

Sure, there are ways of using it as one of many arguments in a vaguely ad hominem attack, but apart from that, I really don't see the issue so many people have with it. Further dragging it out by arguing about it, derailing the thread in the process, helps no one.

It's one fewer time that I, or any other mod, has to say it. I don't mind it. Nobody else should either.

Well ok....yes I guess I see how it makes your life easier.....but then again does it really?

 

If it was you or another mod I would accept whatever rules you point out to me.

(I did not know you were a mod by the way...I knew you tested for and help PMDG where you can but I did not know you were a mod).

But when a random guy starts with that then the chance of a why/and who are you/I dont care kinda discussion starting is high(er).

 

often the guy pointing out the signature missing ads something like "your post might be deleted" bla bla.....and I just dont buy that at all.

Sure, there are ways of using it as one of many arguments in a vaguely ad hominem attack,

exactly.....that is what it all feels like to me.

 

Some people just seem to feel better when they can tell others what they are doing wrong.

Something I will never understand.

 

If it was just about helping someone, totally without self interest, then the "police guy" could just PM the person without signature and point out that his great post might get deleted if he does not sign.

 

And in the thread the "police guy" could refrain to simply assisting the guy with his problem.

 

Looks way more friendly if you ask me.

Further dragging it out by arguing about it, derailing the thread in the process, helps no one.

Yes you are right.

Lets hope it does not derail.

 

I did not want to post my objections to the unofficial signature police....honestly!

Because I know it helps nothing.

And I know not everyone shares my opinion.

But I have been seeing people acting as "signature police" for months now (I guess all motivated by that top post in the forums here)....I swear, for months.....and every single time I think......man what is your problem?.......I finally just had to say something.

 

So although it is not my place to say anything about anybody at all I appriciate you staying polite about it Kyle.

So although it is not my place to say anything about anybody at all I appriciate you staying polite about it Kyle.

(Quoted the one line to avoid quoting the whole thing.)

 

I understand how you feel. Honestly, I'd personally ask that the signature pointers just get assumed as doing someone a favor unless it's clearly part of an ad hominem attack.

 

 

The rest spoken generically (to anyone):

 

To me, I think the issue has evolved over time and people have forgotten that there's a difference between simply stating a rule, and stating a rule to make someone appear less credible/stupid/etc.

 

Heck, I certainly wouldn't call anyone a "wannabe anything" if they noticed me tossing a pack of gum in my flight bag on my way to Singapore, noting that gum is illegal there. Sure, you're not going to caned on the forum, but it's the same concept: someone saw that someone was at risk and alerted them to it. I'd argue that people only get upset about it here because we've cultivated that perception.

 

Think about it:

Imagine the chewing gum example. You probably thought "yeah, I'd appreciate that too!"

Now think of the signature example. It probably got you a little annoyed.

 

Why though? Both cases, someone notices someone else is at risk of busting a rule and lets them know. If someone detects that it's intentionally and obviously unkind, there's a report button so that the thread doesn't need to get derailed.

 

That in mind...back to our feature documentary: "End of the Road for the 777: An in-depth look at the aviation market, and potential risks to a staple of the modern Boeing product line."

Well, in spite of the ruckus, this post is intended to see if what I just changed works.  I appreciate ALL your help.  Police or not.  Seems to me the only way to learn is to ask questions and LISTEN.  I'm listening.

 

Seems as if I deleted the banner somehow.  more work.

SWA doesn't have any 500's.  They never have.

 

Donald Baker

They have a few. And it seems most of them zip in and out of HOU on any given day.

17 SWA flights out of KHOU tomorrow will be 500's. Used to fly a sim version quite a bit in a past

FS life.  They still have a good number of 300's too, but the older ones are slowly being replaced

with 700's as the new ones filter in.

Don't know how much longer the 500's will be around, but I don't think they are in a huge rush

to ditch them. I think they find them kind of handy for the short non full flights, so they can save the larger planes for the wider loads that tend to fill up.

One fixing to land on KHOU 12R right here..  B)

 

 

Kyle,  I thot I knew it all 'til I started editing my signature.  The banner doesn't seem to be working for me.  I wonder if you think a bigger hammer will help?

Kyle, I thot I knew it all 'til I started editing my signature. The banner doesn't seem to be working for me. I wonder if you think a bigger hammer will help?

Instead of using IMG tags, copy the link portion only and then click on the picture icon just above the text box you'd be typing in. A small window should pop up for you to paste the link into. That should do it.

 

That, or check to make sure the light switch icon at the top left of the text box is turned on (that enables/disables the BBcode needed to use the IMG and other BBcode tags).

 

If all else fails, try a (figurative) sledgehammer.

ref the SW-300s haven't they converted them to all glass cockpits and applied winglets pretty much converting them to NGS?

ref the SW-300s haven't they converted them to all glass cockpits and applied winglets pretty much converting them to NGS?

All of SW's 300's still have the steam guages in them. Installing winglets on a 300 does not turn it into an NG. It's really a very different aircraft in many respects from a systems standpoint. Kindest regards.

The history of commercial aviation and specifically aircraft development is a fascinating read. Up until the advent of the high bypass turbofans such as the PW JT9, engine manufacturers were always trying to keep pace with airframe designer aspirations. The JT9 was indeed pushing the limits of the day as Boeing was continuously revising its thrust rating requirements upward due to the 747's ballooning weight. It's hard to imagine in this day in age of 100,000 lb thrust engines like the GE90 and the RR Trent, but back in the late 60's 50,000 lbs of thrust was almost in science fiction territory. Boeing is by no means alone in betting everything on a new design. The development of the  RB211 almost bankrupted Rolls Royce. That engine was developed specifically for the L1011, which wound up driving Lockheed out of the commercial aircraft business even though it is regarded by many to be technically superior to the DC-10 in many respects. The RB211 series, however, has gone on to become one of the most popular engines in history. Regards

I am a Boeing man.  Look at what Airbus did for their sales by installing newer engines on their A320 and A330 planes.  Boeing is definitely not asleep at the wheel, hence the 777X.  Airbus A350 was a response to the Dreamliner.

 

Gnacino

I am a Boeing man.  Look at what Airbus did for their sales by installing newer engines on their A320 and A330 planes.  Boeing is definitely not asleep at the wheel, hence the 777X.  Airbus A350 was a response to the Dreamliner.

 

Gnacino

I agree.  Airbus was looking at bigger airframes, ie the 380.  Only when the market started to demand "smaller" aircraft that could fly long range and frequent flights like the 787, did they look into the 350.  In the end I believe that the 777x will be a success.  The airlines will not have to retrain their flight crews and maintanence, if they all ready have the 777 in their fleets.  They will gain more fuel efficient aircraft and hopefully new technology added to the airframe.

Competition is good for the marketplace.  I look forward to see what is developed in the next few decades from Airbus and Boeing.  Break out the popcorn.

 

Jared Shipley

Thanx Kyle: I wasn't in the bbcode mode. I appreciate your help

Thanx Kyle: I wasn't in the bbcode mode. I appreciate your help

 

Welcome - guess how I learned about that switch? 

 

Glad to help.

I believe that's called wisdom: Been there, done that. Lol.