That's perhaps the single most arrogant, asinine statement I've read on this board for a great while, maybe even to date. Stay below the rest of us, huh? Several of the ag pilots on this thread, and on this board, are the rest of "us." We are you, think about that.
As a matter of fact, the best instrument student I ever had to date was an ag pilot...20 years of hard core VFR and he took to flying instruments like a duck to water. Royal pain? It was a pleasure.
Perhaps if you really believe we should stay below "us," then those us's to whom you refer should stay clear and out of the way of ag operators, too.
All the little lemmings have gathered to play lynchmen once again, bleeting and baahing about that which they know not...so typical, so common. Here I'm accused of advocating not using a radio...I made no such advocacy, suggested no such thing. But oh, how you rail, how you bleet and caw and howl, putting words into my mouth I never spoke, attributing to me your own ideas. So typical, so common.
Never did I suggest one should not use a radio..but I did revile agains those who would accusing such an one without the facts. My comments are true and correct and without grounds for contestation.
I'm accused of suggesting that an ag aviator is not without fault...never have I suggested any such thing in any way, shape or form. I did suggest that those without the experience to say, should perhaps keep their tongue, as they should. One poster, claiming numerous accolades as a master of law, director of safety, and grand high poohbah to the accidnet investigators of the world, stated that I was wrong, and stated that the subject of this thread had acted illegally. I challenged him to cite the law of which his expertise shouts...yet he could only respond by tooting his own horn and further listing his infinite qualifications.
I'm accused of advocating unsafe practices, when I did no such thing. I did correctly state the regulation, and further cited common practice in the industry which is done safely every day. Never, not once did I advocate cutting off another pilot or creating a hazard, though certainly more than a few mindless lemmings have pounded home just such an attack. I did suggest, rightly, that one may land ahead of other traffic when their circituous path has exceeded that of the SR-71 on a warm day...gaurantee that I'm not going to climb to 1,000' and drag myself in a long tour following all the kiddies on training day when there's work to be done and it can be done safely.
Kids, you only look stupid reviling me for that which I never said...can you not read? If you can read, can you not comprehend? If ou comprehend and still press on, are you really that stupid? And yet, you call my comments condescending. Interesting. Foolish, but interesting none the less. For the armchair experts who have experience operating under Part 137 and the application of the regulation thereof, thanks for your skewed misunderstood direction. It's been fun.
I'm done with this thread.
