<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Around the Pattern</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.aroundthepattern.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.aroundthepattern.com</link>
	<description>Ramblings about flying for fun and profit.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 15:39:33 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Aviation Articles for February 3, 2012 by Tracy</title>
		<link>http://www.aroundthepattern.com/aviation-news/aviation-articles-for-february-3-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-391</link>
		<dc:creator>Tracy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 15:39:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aroundthepattern.com/?p=3234#comment-391</guid>
		<description>You&#039;re right again....  airplanes and people age much faster when they just sit around sitting around rather than staying active.  :-)

tr</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re right again&#8230;.  airplanes and people age much faster when they just sit around sitting around rather than staying active.  <img src='http://www.aroundthepattern.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>tr</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Aviation Articles for February 3, 2012 by Cedarglen</title>
		<link>http://www.aroundthepattern.com/aviation-news/aviation-articles-for-february-3-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-390</link>
		<dc:creator>Cedarglen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Feb 2012 09:03:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aroundthepattern.com/?p=3234#comment-390</guid>
		<description>Thanks, Tracy.  A &#039;lite&#039; list of good material is always better than a long list of junk.  This reader appreciates the difference.  I&#039;m happy to hear that yo got a little Swift time during the weather window.  I suspect that the machine benefits at least as much as you do.  Best Regards, -Craig</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, Tracy.  A &#8216;lite&#8217; list of good material is always better than a long list of junk.  This reader appreciates the difference.  I&#8217;m happy to hear that yo got a little Swift time during the weather window.  I suspect that the machine benefits at least as much as you do.  Best Regards, -Craig</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Aviation Articles for January 27, 2012 by Tracy</title>
		<link>http://www.aroundthepattern.com/aviation-news/aviation-articles-for-january-27-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-388</link>
		<dc:creator>Tracy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 02:08:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aroundthepattern.com/?p=3225#comment-388</guid>
		<description>Craig,

I agree. It seems that the military is, more and more, relying on the Reserves to accomplish their missions. I believe all the C-5s are flown by the reserves and I wouldn&#039;t be surprised if the C-17s start being transferred (if they haven&#039;t already). It sounds like the current administration expects future wars to be fought with RC models (yeah, I know they&#039;re much more than that) by pseudo-pilots sitting in a room someplace. 

A professional pilot shortage is approaching rapidly - both for the military and the airlines. It will be interesting to sit on the sidelines, watch it happen and see how the &#039;experts&#039; come up with a solution.
And if you think today&#039;s environment discourages people from entering professional aviation, wait and see what happens if aviation user fees are put in place. 

Tracy</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Craig,</p>
<p>I agree. It seems that the military is, more and more, relying on the Reserves to accomplish their missions. I believe all the C-5s are flown by the reserves and I wouldn&#8217;t be surprised if the C-17s start being transferred (if they haven&#8217;t already). It sounds like the current administration expects future wars to be fought with RC models (yeah, I know they&#8217;re much more than that) by pseudo-pilots sitting in a room someplace. </p>
<p>A professional pilot shortage is approaching rapidly &#8211; both for the military and the airlines. It will be interesting to sit on the sidelines, watch it happen and see how the &#8216;experts&#8217; come up with a solution.<br />
And if you think today&#8217;s environment discourages people from entering professional aviation, wait and see what happens if aviation user fees are put in place. </p>
<p>Tracy</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Aviation Articles for January 27, 2012 by Cedarglen</title>
		<link>http://www.aroundthepattern.com/aviation-news/aviation-articles-for-january-27-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-387</link>
		<dc:creator>Cedarglen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jan 2012 23:07:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aroundthepattern.com/?p=3225#comment-387</guid>
		<description>Thank you, again for a great post of items that I would have missed.  You&#039;r&#039;e right!  I&#039;never have found the first post from GeekWire, about Zach in REdmond, ,WA.  Already a (sport) pilot at 17 and with what looks like a secure command of RC operations, including photography, this young fellow has a a future waiting for him.  Before we know it, he will vanish into the ether of non-disclosure and probably contribute some new ideas.  A great post, Tracy.

Other thoughts:  Today&#039;s military pilots seem to achieve very few active flight hours. Most of the big fleets are seriously old, yet fully functional, but without substantial, experienced crews to fly them.  While we cannot but a new Air Force freighter every five years, we CAN employ and train a sufficient flying staff to fly the ones that we have.  Yes, I&#039;m thinking your old friend, the C5, as well as the C17.  What good are they without a substantial number of &#039;experienced&#039; pilots to fly them?  The Air Force&#039;s ready reserves will help in a crisus, but them what?  One **fully qualified** flight crew member per crew is just not enough.   Far too often, I hear or read about USAF (and Navy and Marine Corps) officers leaving service becasue they do not fly enough hours to remain mission-qualified.  I know, it is all about money and budgets.  We&#039;ve got a fleet of low-time airplanes, generally in top shape, but far too few men and women fully qualified to fly them.  Simulator time helps, but especially for older aircraft like the C-5, it is not enough.  I&#039;ve heard horror stories about junior pilots with 15-20 hours of SIM time flying operational missions, as second pilot and as their first live experience with the aircraft.  I&#039;m not sure that this is the best choice.  Our various forces may have adaquate stocks of aircraft, but without **Qualified** pilots to fly them, what good are they?  On the more agressive side, the USAF and USN pilots who fly attack airplanes, there is no substitute - simply none - for butt-in-seat experience.  If those youngsters don&#039;t fly a lot or hours - and regularly - what good are they?  If we choose to have agressive fighters flying those airplanes, they need to have some serious experience flying with them.  Otherwise, they become casualty losses and one more task for the rescue crews, let alone the loss of a very expensive airplane.  Thanks for listening and [Sermon Mode]=OFF.
I always enjoy your posts.  -Craig</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you, again for a great post of items that I would have missed.  You&#8217;r'e right!  I&#8217;never have found the first post from GeekWire, about Zach in REdmond, ,WA.  Already a (sport) pilot at 17 and with what looks like a secure command of RC operations, including photography, this young fellow has a a future waiting for him.  Before we know it, he will vanish into the ether of non-disclosure and probably contribute some new ideas.  A great post, Tracy.</p>
<p>Other thoughts:  Today&#8217;s military pilots seem to achieve very few active flight hours. Most of the big fleets are seriously old, yet fully functional, but without substantial, experienced crews to fly them.  While we cannot but a new Air Force freighter every five years, we CAN employ and train a sufficient flying staff to fly the ones that we have.  Yes, I&#8217;m thinking your old friend, the C5, as well as the C17.  What good are they without a substantial number of &#8216;experienced&#8217; pilots to fly them?  The Air Force&#8217;s ready reserves will help in a crisus, but them what?  One **fully qualified** flight crew member per crew is just not enough.   Far too often, I hear or read about USAF (and Navy and Marine Corps) officers leaving service becasue they do not fly enough hours to remain mission-qualified.  I know, it is all about money and budgets.  We&#8217;ve got a fleet of low-time airplanes, generally in top shape, but far too few men and women fully qualified to fly them.  Simulator time helps, but especially for older aircraft like the C-5, it is not enough.  I&#8217;ve heard horror stories about junior pilots with 15-20 hours of SIM time flying operational missions, as second pilot and as their first live experience with the aircraft.  I&#8217;m not sure that this is the best choice.  Our various forces may have adaquate stocks of aircraft, but without **Qualified** pilots to fly them, what good are they?  On the more agressive side, the USAF and USN pilots who fly attack airplanes, there is no substitute &#8211; simply none &#8211; for butt-in-seat experience.  If those youngsters don&#8217;t fly a lot or hours &#8211; and regularly &#8211; what good are they?  If we choose to have agressive fighters flying those airplanes, they need to have some serious experience flying with them.  Otherwise, they become casualty losses and one more task for the rescue crews, let alone the loss of a very expensive airplane.  Thanks for listening and [Sermon Mode]=OFF.<br />
I always enjoy your posts.  -Craig</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Aviation Articles for January 20, 2012 by Tracy</title>
		<link>http://www.aroundthepattern.com/aviation-news/aviation-articles-for-january-20-2012/comment-page-1/#comment-385</link>
		<dc:creator>Tracy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 05:07:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aroundthepattern.com/?p=3220#comment-385</guid>
		<description>Craig,

Thanks for the comments. The fire got about 1 1/2 miles away. We weren&#039;t in an evacuation area, put it was close. If it had jumped the highway going up to Incline Village we would have packed up and headed out. I&#039;m not too concerned about the lack of comments. Building a community would be nice, but I haven&#039;t exactly been posting articles that generate comments. Analytics on the site way I&#039;m getting steady traffic, so I&#039;m happy. I didn&#039;t start this site to make money on advertising or affiliate sales - and I&#039;m being successful at that :-).

Take care.

Tracy</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Craig,</p>
<p>Thanks for the comments. The fire got about 1 1/2 miles away. We weren&#8217;t in an evacuation area, put it was close. If it had jumped the highway going up to Incline Village we would have packed up and headed out. I&#8217;m not too concerned about the lack of comments. Building a community would be nice, but I haven&#8217;t exactly been posting articles that generate comments. Analytics on the site way I&#8217;m getting steady traffic, so I&#8217;m happy. I didn&#8217;t start this site to make money on advertising or affiliate sales &#8211; and I&#8217;m being successful at that <img src='http://www.aroundthepattern.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> .</p>
<p>Take care.</p>
<p>Tracy</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

