Horrible Flying weather on the way? Weather.com thinks so yikes

[ZUKO]

Originally Posted by MrLeisure757

It was not me.

Well at least you know another faculty member agrees with you. He said it is because you went back and did a landing with a new plane.

[CAFFEINE]

Originally Posted by ZUKO

Well at least you know another faculty member agrees with you. He said it is because you went back and did a landing with a new plane.

Ok, so what tail number do you log then when you go back and do a landing with a new plane? I don't see how you can log it. Reading the definition of "flight time" in part 1 makes it pretty clear. I would not sign my students log book if he/she tried to log that kind of flight time. Besides, what's .4 in the scheme of things? If you MX'ed the flight, it's not like you paid for it so why are you getting your panties in a bunch?

[ZUKO]

Originally Posted by CAFFEINE

Ok, so what tail number do you log then when you go back and do a landing with a new plane? I don't see how you can log it. Reading the definition of "flight time" in part 1 makes it pretty clear. I would not sign my students log book if he/she tried to log that kind of flight time. Besides, what's .4 in the scheme of things? If you MX'ed the flight, it's not like you paid for it so why are you getting your panties in a bunch?

Yeah I really honestly do not know if it’s luggable. I think it’s a matter of opinion. I am logging that kind of time because too me it’s not worth dealing with the different interpretations. But two ground school teachers have both said it is.

[Doug Taylor]

Originally Posted by ZUKO

He said a youung man came in with a question about logging time. And then talked about the exact same thing in that thread agreeing with you that its loggable. I figure it had to be you. Creepy. I guessed I shouldnt have assumed.

Yeup, let's NOT indict other users based on assumptions.

It doesn't add positively to the environment to what we're trying to uphold here at Jetcareers.com

[ZUKO]

Originally Posted by Doug Taylor

Yeup, let's NOT indict other users based on assumptions.

It doesn't add positively to the environment to what we're trying to uphold here at Jetcareers.com

Yeah I agree. It just made all too much sense at the time. I had a conversation with him about the logging debate. I even mentioned MrLeisures first name with the ground school teacher and he didnt say anything so I assumed it was him. Even if it was him, I was never trying to indict him. He would have done nothing wrong.

I am just going to forget about the whole thing and move on. Someone on here or at UND is trying to teach me a lesson or unintentionally did.

Just an odd day.

[MrLeisure757]

Originally Posted by ZUKO

Yeah I agree. It just made all too much sense at the time. I had a conversation with him about the logging debate. I even mentioned MrLeisures first name with the ground school teacher and he didnt say anything so I assumed it was him. Even if it was him, I was never trying to indict him. He would have done nothing wrong.

I am just going to forget about the whole thing and move on. Someone on here or at UND is trying to teach me a lesson or unintentionally did.

Just an odd day.

Alright. Lets not mention first names nor "JC" names in the future.

[ZUKO]

Originally Posted by MrLeisure757

Alright. Lets not mention first names nor "JC" names in the future.

No problem. You do not have to worry. I just asked him if the name of the person who stopped in was (insert your first name).

It is very similar to you referering me by my first name here and I do not mind it.

[Kristie]

Originally Posted by ZUKO

He said a youung man came in with a question about logging time. And then talked about the exact same thing in that thread agreeing with you that its loggable. I figure it had to be you. Creepy. I guessed I shouldnt have assumed.

never assume..assuming makes an "ass" out of "u" and "me"!!

[TXaviator]

kristie, is that you in your new avatar?

if yes, please sign me up for your next flight.