cmurf

20 years ago I was in Japan with a prepurchased tourist train pass. It worked on all non-local trains, including regional and Shinkansen, and all the JR local trains in Tokyo.

Compared to what I'm reading in the link and in this thread, it was ridiculously easy, except perhaps the initial awareness of its availability, buying it, and getting it stamped by customs to prove I was in fact a tourist.

All I did every time I wanted to travel was go to a train station ticket counter with an English speaking agent, show the pass, tell them where I want to go, and they'd print physical tickets. In effect this bypassed all the friction discussed here.

I have no idea what this pass was called or if there's still an equivalent today. My recollection was it was time limited. It had an activation date on arrival and was good for a set number of days decided on in advance, which formed the basis of the cost. I remember thinking it was ridiculously cheap. I might have paid $300 for a 21-day pass?

They need historians and political scientists, and maybe some politicians, to constantly remind them not to allow perfection to be the enemy of good.

It is not always obvious how to lay ground work over a decade ... or four of them.

It isn't even mostly about fixing problems. But how to make government act as an expedient rather than as an impediment.

Impeachment requires a simple majority in the House.

Conviction requires 2/3rd of those present in the Senate.

There's no veto possible.The power is exclusive to the legislative branch, the other two branches have no say at all.

Viktor Orbán, 2026 Slovakia, 2018 Mozambique, 2004

There's more...

There are two best glide airspeeds for this scenario: lowest descent rate (typically not published) and greatest range. Simplistically, the published airspeed number will get you pretty close to the best lift/drag ratio for make/model. This should be a memory number.

As for the landing, perhaps the best advise I read was from Bob Hoover (aerobatics in a twin Aero Commander): If you’re faced with a forced landing, fly the thing as far into the crash as possible.

The key word: fly. You are not flying if you are stalling. And you only have positive control if you're flying. Or also: don't stop too abruptly.

It wouldn’t just monetize the national debt. By inflating away his own debts he might actually become a billionaire.

Conviction. Removal from office.

Third time’s the charm?

By all means let Senators defend and protect him. Maybe they don't care about their historical reputation

Outlaw rewards credit cards? Or make it compulsory that the true cost of a specific credit card is revealed to the merchant who has the right to absorb or pass on, in a line item, that cost to that specific consumer?

If I know I'm paying for my own rewards, I'd choose a card that keeps more money in my pocket. I'd go as low as the PITA factor of cash.

It's not clear to me what the net benefit is of a credit card over a debit card.

But for sure the confusion ensuing from allowing debit cards to be charged as credit cards should be illegal. The merchant account providers are probably the ones reaping the free money on the racket.

Credit is the POS default, for whatever reason. Not all POS are the same. e.g. US Post Office consistently knows if I am using a debit card, and it prompts for a PIN when I do. Every restaurant, bar, service does not ask for PIN, and the handful of merchants I've inquired with say their debit card fees changed by the merchant account providers are the same as credit. Scammy.

At least in Colorado it's legal for businesses regardless of the TOS contract with a merchant account supplier to pass on the transaction and processing fees of credit cards. It's not legal to pass on cost/fees for debit cards, ACH, or cash.

Ok after rereading the preliminary report, ATC gave them a vector north and clearance to a named fix. They were not off course. While on a vector clearance, terrain and obstacle clearance is ATC's responsibility.

Once the accident flight requested and received a visual approach clearance ~30 miles out, terrain and obstacle avoidance becomes pilot responsibility. It seems likely to me that whether GPS was working or not, whether RNAV 24 or ILS 24, they'd have requested a visual approach. And the pilots did not adequately account for the terrain between the flight and the airport when they initiated the descent, and descended below minimum safe IFR altitude.

Further due to this flight operating under 14 CFR 135, there's a regulatory bridge to bind the flight to the (Part 135) Certificate Holder's operation specifications (OpSpecs). Pilots cannot operate outside of OpSpecs.

It's possible the medivac company's OpSpecs require mandatory direct visual contact with terrain and obstacles - something that could not be achieved with 0% illumination due to no moon. Some OpSpecs will prohibit visual approaches at night to non-towered airports. SRR airport has no tower. I'm not familiar with this operator's OpSpecs.

The accident flight descended into hostile terrain at night and had a CFIT.

That has less to do with GPS jamming than it does accepting a visual approach from 14 miles out with an enormous mountain they couldn't see between them and the airport.

The error as I see it is abandoning the safeguards of flying a standard instrument approach procure. RNAV or ILS, the terrain clearance is backed into the procedure. They descended below minimum safe altitude.

Yes, but…

They are enhancing the navaids that remain. Greater range, and a documented network of airports serviced by ground based instrument approach procedures.

The shrinkage of total number of navaids concerns me from a rural support perspective but less so as a pilot. What does concern me as a pilot is even the MON navaids are having maintenance issues resulting in outages.