Recent comments in /f/IAmA

LizRD15 OP t1_j66dmhh wrote

I appreciate this question, TurboTBag. It would be more about my mindset than a specific career. I felt I had to have it all together and all figured out in my 20s. I felt like I was behind and that everyone was thriving while I was confused and trying to figure out my strengths and passions in the workforce. If I could travel back in time I'd tell myself that I do not have to have it all figured out, especially in my 20s, and that nobody else does either. I would also tell myself to be proud of the jobs I had because they were not any less meaningful or "impressive" than anybody else's jobs.

8

LizRD15 OP t1_j66d16k wrote

Hi BaconTacoLove! I drink black iced coffee with a few drops of organic liquid stevia. I avoid the creamers and sweeteners that add up to a lot of calories and spike your blood sugar. I enjoy iced vs. hot simply out of personal preference. I enjoy Stevia as it is an all-natural, non-caloric sweetener that studies have shown to be safe for consumption with no side effects (unlike artificial sweeteners that cause gas and bloating, and have been shown to be carcinogens).

5

davesellsnseattle OP t1_j65s9i0 wrote

SR71 decommission in the 1990s.

I've controlled about everything. Mostly military, including:

Uh-1

AH-1

H-60

H-46

H-53se & d

H-47

A-10s

F-18s

F-14 or two

C-130

lots of C-planes

Air Show planes

Foreign Military planes

Wierdest was probably the Russian IL-76s that brought supplies into Iraq when I was there. Those MFers sometimes didn't listen to instructions. I did pull one IL-76 pilot out of his plane and offer to pistol-whip his dumbass after he tried to land on about 20 Marines and Sailors on a closed Runway. They were know to drink while flying.

1

humanefly t1_j65s71r wrote

It's Wing In Ground; I think it's because ground effect does happen when a regular plane flies close to a surface, but this craft is designed so that it's optimized specifically to keep the wing in the ground effect, or at least that's how I think of it.

International Maritime Organization

https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/Pages/WIG.aspx#:~:text=WIG%20craft%20is%20a%20multimodal,which%20are%20intended%20to%20utilize

Wiki

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-effect_vehicle

I'm in Ontario, Canada. We have a lock system with a lot of shipping from the Atlantic, and the Great Lakes. My thought is that it might be possible to use WIG in specific narrowly defined use cases: a large cargo WIG drone could in theory move goods faster and more efficiently than cargo ships; it would be slower than a regular plane but again, much more efficient because the engine doesn't need to provide any lift.

I live fairly near to an airport on the lake, and I have some bushland up North fairly near to another airport on a lake. I was wondering if I were to build a drone or a ship, and I kept it under 400 ft at all times and 95% of the time within say a wingspan or two of the surface of the water, if I'd piss off the air traffic controllers. I wouldn't fly anywhere near the airport from my perspective. I think you answered my question!

I do think if I built it, it would need a maritime transponder of some kind but I have to look into that; in either case, both airports would be accustomed to regular maritime traffic, I expect this would be no different from their perspective, but I was a little bit concerned about the potential of upsetting the military.

Thanks

1

davesellsnseattle OP t1_j65qx48 wrote

Not just no, but hell to the no nono.

Military pilots that I know are the absolute best and batshit craziest at flying in "uncontrolled" airspace or out in the woods. The problem Military pilots worry about in alot of US uncontrolled airspace is other VFR civil pilots and the traffic hazard that they can be when in close proximity and low altitude.

1

Psycho_Kronos t1_j65qvsx wrote

What type of aircraft did you supervise during your career? You've mentioned an OH-58 Helicopter. The SR-71 is absurd because it's a ridiculously rare and expensive aircraft for recon and high altitude flight made in the 1970's.

See any fighter jets, gunships? Anything on Unmanned Aerial Vehicles or Drones?

1

uburoy t1_j65q0u6 wrote

One day the weather went bad and I was the lone student pilot in a room full of twin turbine military pilots. We talked about the differences in our worlds and it seemed to come down to airspace and controllers.

To my surprise, they found flying into uncontrolled airports quite uncomfortable. In their own words, it seemed like they were much more directed, than self-directed.

Does it seem like that from the Controller's point of view?

1

IAmAModBot t1_j65ptm6 wrote

Hello /u/davesellsnseattle,

There is not enough proof included in the post that connects your identity to the IAmA.

Unfortunately, the links or photos you've posted could have been posted by anyone, and they don't prove that you are the person doing the AMA. Your proof needs to be something that connects the fact that you're doing an AMA with your identity. This could be something like a photo of you in a work uniform or at a relevant location with a sign that has your username and the date. It could also be documents (partially redacted if desired) with a note that has your username and the date. We're happy for you to get creative with your proof as long as it makes it clear to a reasonable person that the person doing the AMA does meet the criteria laid out in the topic of the AMA.

If you can't think of a way to prove your claims publicly, you can also submit confidential proof to the moderators at this link, though bear in mind it may take some time to review.

Here's a link to the section of our wiki that discusses proof.

Please edit your post and add new proof, and reply here to let us know. If your post is more than a couple of hours old, it may be more effective to create a new post and include the proof from the start. Thanks!


If you'd like to appeal, please click here to send a message to the moderator team.

^(This comment was made by a bot, but a real live human reviewed the post and made the decision.)

1

davesellsnseattle OP t1_j65nc1c wrote

Well, I do go to work in exchange for a pay check, just like you do.

A note about the 6% tho: half of that is designated for the buyers broker, the other half for the sellers broker (generally), That means, if I represent the seller, my company gets 3% of the sale price when we are closed.

My cut of that is 64% of that 3%, before I pay taxes OR expenses (like paying for photoshoots, videos, floorplans, virtual tours, flyers, signs marketing specific to the property, and employees.

So, on a $400k sale, my Company makes $12k. Of that I get $7680. Then I pay taxes (35%) leaving $5376 to pay expenses, employees, then finally, myself.

Average Realtor sells about 8 a year. If I'm average in this business, I'm poor.

1

humanefly t1_j65mgq3 wrote

I'm interested in a vehicle technology called WIG(Wing in Ground) or GEV(Ground Effect Vehicle).

These craft come in different form factors. I really like the look of the reverse delta. It looks a lot like a seaplane, but the wings are shaped a little bit differently. Instead of being shaped to provide lift like a regular plane, they are shaped to force the air underneath the craft, when the craft is over a flat surface this creates a bubble of air underneath it. It "floats" on this bubble of air like an air hockey puck. It's similar to a hover craft, except a hover craft is designed so that the engine itself forces the air under the hover craft. With a WIG, usually the engine placement means that the majority of the time the engine is providing thrust to move the craft forward, not create lift. The actual shape of the craft forces the air underneath; this is not flying according to the technical or legal definition of flight. As such, a pilots license is not technically or legally required in most jurisdictions; it's licensed as a power boat.

So I guess the question is: would regular air traffic control detect a craft like a WIG travelling just above the surface of the water?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-sWokqiVHw

1

davesellsnseattle OP t1_j65lsr5 wrote

Ok. Army OH-58, landed on my Runway, I turn him off on a Taxyway to the airfield Ops pad and hand him off to Ground Control. 15 seconds later I look back to see knucklenuts OH-58 pilot has taken a 2nd right turn onto the perimeter road and is taxiing before a ford F150.

I've seen some Army pilots do some really dumb things. Then, in a combat zone, I saw them do some fucking awesome things.

2

davesellsnseattle OP t1_j65lay3 wrote

I've never thought of them as stupid. They are essentially "Names" for airports and Runways. The runway numbers are particularly useful, because they are derived by the magnetic heading of that Runway, so the name of it alone provides pilots with usable information in the moment.

Example: VFR Pilot calls 5 miles inbound to the airport with no information. I greet him say, "(Callsign) AskMeAnything Tower, wind 270 at 10, make a right base for runway 25."

Pilot knows immediately I am setting him up with the duty runway and a good wind touchdown.

1