So, the Plus One Flyers club I belong to is adding a gorgeous Cessna 180 to the line, at my home field where I keep the Yak.

$175/hr, 160 mph cruise, 950 useful.....

I am REALLY looking forward to this.

'Gimp

Tucker Carlson has been on fire recently, he said with her stunt yesterday that Fauxcohantas has effectively crowned herself the leader of the #MeSioux movement.

'Gimp

The Dem's have just totally lost the Meme Wars - FB is just filled with great Warren memes, and it isn't even 12 hours later yet.

This was an incredibly stoopid move on her part - I am more Native American than she is and my family on my Dad's side has only been here for 150 years.

'Gimp

Damn, that statement from the Cherokee Nation is gonna leave a mark.

And, everyone on this board is probably more Native American than 1/1024 Fauxcohantas.

'Gimp

The pro’s – the flight and space sequences were very well done, good attention to detail and period correct as best as I could tell. Sound design was very good for these sequences as well. They were good but, IMO, no better than Apollo 13 or The Right Stuff.

The con’s – Ryan Gosling’s portrayal did not, for me, create a relatable or sympathetic character, to the contrary I thought it paints Neil Armstrong as nearly inhuman which is not what I think the intention was. Claire Foy, the actress who portrayed Jan Armstrong (I am not familiar with her) was also not someone I could connect to emotionally, I actually found her portrayal off-putting, especially the fem-splaining she did at times.

The supporting cast however was excellent, especially Jason Clarke as Ed White who was lost in the Apollo 1 fire (an event I thought the film handled superbly).

There is a sequence which made zero sense in the context of the film where we find a hippy encampment and a hipster black man both protesting the investment into NASA and the Vietnam War – of course I understand this was historically accurate, however literally every other minute of film time is either focused on Armstrong, his family, or the other Astronauts – in the context of the film this seemed unnecessary and forced.

I had heard of course about the deliberate omission of the planting of the American Flag preferring to focus instead on the ‘human triumph’ and I was admittedly rather upset/put off by that since there are two kinds of countries of Earth, those that have NOT put men on the Moon, and the United States – but in actuality this was the least of the weaknesses in the film and would not have added much to story, especially within the messaging of the film as edited.

Overall, I felt that this movie provides some great period-correct eye candy for space program fans like myself, but the peek into the lives behind the legends, as told in the film, was a downer as executed. I also felt that the film was particularly negative towards Buzz Aldrin, unnecessarily so.

I hoped that First Man would be an uplifting and inspirational movie, as I found The Right Stuff and Apollo 13 to have been – but that was a bridge too far for this film.

I do think that if you are going to see it, it should be experienced in a theater for the scale and the audio power in order to truly enjoy the flight and space sequences.

'Gimp

I don't have time right now to expound on this Jim but you are actually proving My point not yours with the elements you are quoting and this is where my background in Aviation Safety matters.

There are easily definable reasons why the accident rates are what they are and it can be legitimately argued that the causality is not wing loading (design) but inadequate training and the diminished piloting ability of guys stepping 'down' to LSA's after flying heavier planes presumably due to actual or impending loss of their medical (human factors) - similarly it could be argued that the fact many LSA's stem from previously experimental designs which simply don't fly/behave the same as their heavier certified brethren - they are more maneuverable/sportier, but that again can be shown to ultimately circle back to training and pilotage (human factors) vs design.

I'll try to get back to this later but understand that the human being is ALWAYS the least reliable element in any system, making that less stringent logically CANNOT result in better performance/more safety.

'Gimp

EAA is pushing it, and AOPA is taking credit for it.

The Sport Pilot concept was to give medically questionable pilots an ability to fly simple, light, day VFR sportplanes with 2 seats - it was also intended to overcome the issue with fat ultralights which were at best marginally safe.

Now they want to let them fly much heavier planes with potentially more seats, etc., I just think it's a bad idea.  Not that there is a substantial difference anymore on the medical front specifically with new Class III, but there are also some training and operational limitation differences between Sport Pilot and PPL and on.

I might just be the aviation equivalent of Clint Eastwood telling the kids to get off my lawn but I do feel pretty strongly this may be a mistake.

'Gimp

It's a bad idea.

Opens up Sport Pilots to fly much heavier planes, with more seats and more speed - which is counter to the whole concept.

'Gimp