...but fortunately, all aircrew reported rescued safely.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080107/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/navy_crash
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080107/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/navy_crash
...but fortunately, all aircrew reported rescued safely.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080107/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/navy_crash
The smartass remark and lighthearted nature of my comment is not out of line. All of the aircrew were safely recovered and had they not, I certainly would not have made a smartass remark. I have lost 26 people 22 of which were in aircraft in the past 7.5 years I have been in the Navy. I am hardly a smartass remarker unless the time is right and appropriate.FLYTPAY said:Sorry wannabe's......2 less jets for slots.....that will skew the % that get jets I'm sure![]()
Sorry wannabe's......2 less jets for slots.....that will skew the % that get jets I'm sure![]()
Sorry wannabe's......2 less jets for slots.....that will skew the % that get jets I'm sure![]()
As if 42% wasn't hard enough!
Maybe we should sticky thatIt's now 41.8%.
Reminds me of the movie "Charlie Wilson's War" where the Mujahadeen shoot down first a Prowler/Intruder looking plane, then a Huey, and then an F-16... Funny as hell...