-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Breitling custom watches
- Thread starter Intruder Driver
- Start date
Credit card roulette, and it is relatively common. I lost in Guam.....at the Outback.....out of 15 O's.....the damage was about $450 dollars(I just glanced, I was afraid to look)......at least I got to drink for free the rest of the night.........
You could opt out and a few guys did but most were good sports, it was all in good fun.....and I could afford it. While I felt a little down about seeing that much money just vanish, a trip to the Viking quickly cured me of my sorrow.........
Credit Card Roulette is ONLY worth the risk if you will be drinking in the near future. If there is no promise of alcohol, it's not worth it, because when you lose, you are just stuck with a huge bill and nothing to show for it.
Det Rules is fun though, and I'm with Mefesto, when it comes to Det Rules, order what you want. If you order cheap, you deserve to be fvcked
Det Rules is fun though, and I'm with Mefesto, when it comes to Det Rules, order what you want. If you order cheap, you deserve to be fvcked
Agreed - it's the "dollar-cost averaging" of the dining world. Besides, it's not as if it's an everyday at home type of thing. If you're on det, you might as well enjoy it.
I have mixed feelings about Det Rules eating. We did it the whole time in Asia and I saw the good and bad of it. Personally, I don't eat a lot at each meal, just more through the day, so breakfast and lunch were usually not that big for me. Granted, come dinner time I'd get a nice steak, etc, so I guess it'd balance out in the long run.
It does suck for some people who just didn't eat alot (i.e. females and some of the guys). They were getting fvcked at every meal.
It does suck for some people who just didn't eat alot (i.e. females and some of the guys). They were getting fvcked at every meal.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
That is their problem for being females and metrosexuals.
Ha, so so true
Maybe they should stop being homos
What I hate is when you go on det to a great location, and that ONE guy that is CHEAP only wants to eat at Taco Bell or something. I hate them.
Maybe they should stop being homos
What I hate is when you go on det to a great location, and that ONE guy that is CHEAP only wants to eat at Taco Bell or something. I hate them.
Man no kidding. Or when you go somewhere new and exciting and all they want to eat is american fast food! Why not try some of the local fare? If you come home with per diem, that's great, but don't eat top raman the whole time just to assure that you do. Live it up, you may never return to whatever sh!thole you're in, so enjoy it while you're there.
Bird_Dog322
Registered User
Fat girls don't deserve sex, because they bring nothing to the table.
Eddie beat me to it with the reply. Fatties may not always bring much to the table, but rest assured they'll most likely demolish what's there (i.e. food or personal standards or pride, temporarily for some)
Maybe they should stop being homos
What I hate is when you go on det to a great location, and that ONE guy that is CHEAP only wants to eat at Taco Bell or something. I hate them.
I have known a few that don't even want to splurge for that expense. There was a legendary story of a pilot in my first squadron who walked a 1/2 mile in the snow in Misawa because he wanted a refund from the Commissary for the chapstick that he paid 4 cents more there than at the Class Six down the road. Ironically, the guy was a millionaire because he had invested in hometown Seattle stocks in the early '90's, like Starbucks, Boeing and Microsoft.
He was also one of the pilots who would pull back the power on the way home to get that extra .2 in his logbook. He was such an moron personality-wise though he never got hired by the airlines.....
The mere mention of his name to my current boss, a fromer DH, is enough to get him cursing his name in vain.You mean not everyone does that?
Just kidding. This does bring up a question I had though. Do you guys try to conserve fuel when you fly? Say you are only trying to get from point A to point B and you have plenty of fuel and time is no factor; do you go best power or best economy?
I understand trying to conserve fuel so you can actually make it back and other circumstances, but given the example above, what do you do?
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
In my case, about .24 on a good day at 400'.
You mean not everyone does that?
Just kidding. This does bring up a question I had though. Do you guys try to conserve fuel when you fly? Say you are only trying to get from point A to point B and you have plenty of fuel and time is no factor; do you go best power or best economy?
I understand trying to conserve fuel so you can actually make it back and other circumstances, but given the example above, what do you do?
P-3's operated under restrictions for power to preserve the engines (do they still?) . EP-3's were not under those restrictions due to the extra weight of the aircraft. The pilots would set a regular speed to go to and from the operating areas that was pretty reasonable for gas and speed, a balance of the two. Some pilots would deliberately pull back on the pawer to lengthen the time to get back to homebase, and it was not to lessen fuel consumption. Only a few pilots did this, and it was usually in PACOM due to the distances involved, but it was a real bone of contention with the guys who did it. Only the pilots benifited from getting back 15 minutes later from a 10 hour flight and the other 21 guys on board were ready to land and get the day done with.
The pilots who did this were well known and only did it if they were the MC's as well as the AC's or the NFO MC went along with it, sometimes because of peer pressure from the pilots. Fortunately I never had to put up with it but it did happen with regularity with other crews. One of the pilots who hated the other ones who did this went on a rant were he figured that the guys who did this were at most getting 20-40 extra hours during a 3 year tour, and that was only if they did it on each operational flight they did in that 3 years which was highly unlikely. His point was what the heck did 30 extra hours do for a guy when he had 2000-3000 hours? A good point that I always fall back on when this comes up.
The few actual arguments that came up were usually between a pilot who really abused it and a NFO MC, and that was rare. It usually took the guise of some friendly ribbing but the pilots would usually push the power up if they were bugged enough. For some crews it was a game to see if the Nav and the MC would notice if the pilots pulled the power back, and it was usually a mix of good humor and pilots actually wanting more flight time. The rest of the crew kept quiet except the 'special' officer in the back who would always whine anyways. The unfortunate thing about that was he would go through his CoC and it would end up with his O-6 calling the Skipper and the squadron CO would tell the AC and MC to push the power up to keep the peace. That was always an interesting dynamic, and a CRM problem. I ought to write an Approach article one day.
As you can see, it was a bit of a issue in my EP-3 squadron. There was one guy who tried to do that in my Prowler squadron and he was promptly told by the XO, a pilot, not to do it again (Brett, it was Bucket
). Don't be that guy.......
I never worried about gas, only about hours, usually from a maintenance perspective. It always seemed to be the Ops guy that would overlog and then complain at the end of two weeks that the birds were in phase/specials sooner than he had planned.