It’s actually a thing, guys. F#@k Cancer is a movement/organization/Canadian charity that gets a lot of social media play to inform about early detection of cancers. Maybe he was playing off that group, I don’t know.
I suppose it was more gratifying for him than sewing masks or some other boring thing in reaction to the crisis.
Let’s see. By your account then every airmen (including women) will have free license to curse during tower and atc radio conversations. Think about what you presume is ok by your loose definitions of using the ‘F’ or "S’words via radio comms, advertising, planned flight recorded on Flightaware. There’s civility in conversations when flying using radio comms and then personal discussions anywhere that isn’t recorded. Your opinions may be uncensored but according to you uncensored radio comms is in the future. Hopefully you’re mistaken as I and I suspect many others in the flying community will not accept profanity during radio communications. Perhaps I’m wrong…
Try using profanity during radio comms to tower and ATC. Please get back to us…
There’s no doubt in my mind that this young man has exceptional flying skills to draw his thoughts in the sky knowing full well Flightaware recorded it. Perhaps he doesn’t know everything by displaying his articulation in skywriting without leaving smoke trails but definitely in recorded radar tracking. Does he have the discipline to refrain from using profanity in the future?
Thinking about it some more, he shoulda written, “F China!”
Just in the last two days, I’ve had major medical impact because of the virus so … that’d be MY Flight Aware bread crumb trail.
I see what you did there…”An Army without leaders is like a foot without a big toe”…you sir, are our new big toe. Now all you need to do lead a bunch of reactionaries who seem to want to liken this event to broadcasting on the public airwaves. Good Luck, you’ll need it?
I’ll bet that I can do an age demographics by reading the comments. For many older individuals, that is a very strong, profane word. However, in today’s society, it is practically commonplace, and used by both sexes (often more by the “fairer” sex!) in everyday speech. I worked in the construction industry for years, and if all words that were used were to be catalogued, this one would be in the top three!
As some have mentioned, he appears to be a pretty clean-cut kid, possesses a reasonable level of both flight and data skills, and isn’t on the front page for drugs, gang crime, etc, so I agree with many - lighten up! And I’m going out a short distance on a limb by saying he is well intelligent enough to know to NOT use it in formal conversation (read:ATC)! Besides, I’m jealous…
Why am I not surprised?
I wouldn’t expect him to know specifics of how to fly a Max, but he should have been asked what he thinks about the legitimacy of the push for a 100LL replacement, and if the hype about the dangers of LL is backed up by credible authority. That, he should know.
In my line of reasoning, lack of knowledge in the field of aviation would make a candidate a GREATER risk to be swayed by some of the many interest groups the FAA rules cover.
I said it before, and I’ll say it again: Paul Bertorelli for Administrator.
I support the motion, good idea. Paul Bertorelli for Administrator.
I second the motion
Paul would be excellent but would never pass the criteria for appointment. His fatal flaws are that he uses hard data and facts, he full of common sense that isn’t very common in DC, and he’s a great communicator in plain language.
Never happen, that would be far to sensible. Besides, I think Paul would be way too smart to let himself get sucked into that vortex.
Moved and seconded. All in favor?
So a non-pilot asks a non-pilot a pilot question and deems him unfit for the job when he can’t answer? I’m not going to say being a pilot can’t be helpful, but shouldn’t there be at least someone who IS a pilot asking him questions during the confirmation hearings? Same thing for education, energy, transportation, etc; there should always be at least one person who has direct knowledge of the subject involved in all confirmation hearings.
Ever since Langhorne Bond, I have always felt that the FAA director should have relevant expertise in the aviation field.Unfortunately so many political appointments are based on cronyism and not qualifications. Good to hear the potential appointee’s feet are being held to the fire. Another case in point, the Transportation Secretary.
Why is there no “quiz” for the highest office in the land, or event the second? Shouldn’t that be the biggest quiz of all? All other top jobs require a certification, license or something!
We need to stand up and oppose this. WE DO NOT HIRE THE UNQUALIFIED.