Difference between revisions of "Talk:Able Crewmen"
From OCE Space Simulation
| (8 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I don't think that "Able Seaman" should be an actual position, as we should not be planning on having astronauts with no specific purpose. [[User:Stefanido|Stefanido]] 19:18, 1 April 2006 (EST) | I don't think that "Able Seaman" should be an actual position, as we should not be planning on having astronauts with no specific purpose. [[User:Stefanido|Stefanido]] 19:18, 1 April 2006 (EST) | ||
| − | Well, Bfoo liked to call Nevin "able seamen" so I sorta took it from there. | + | :Well, Bfoo liked to call Nevin "able seamen" so I sorta took it from there ----Alex Foo |
| + | |||
| + | ::First off, Alex, INDENT YOUR POSTS so that we can actually read the posts in chronological order without getting screwed up (use a colon). Secondly, add your signature at the end of your post by putting four tildes in succesion. Thirdly, I don't agree that having a specific astro function be "does not appear to have a function" is a good idea, and I am sure that the current leadership as well as the past leadership will back me on this. [[User:Stefanido|Stefanido]] 23:22, 6 April 2006 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | :May I ask why you're inventing terms? Are you trying to complicate things for new members? [[User:Avacar|Avacar]] 11:49, 7 April 2006 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Noting Able Crewmen== | ||
| + | |||
| + | I don't think past able crewman should be included, because if they were, it was noted on the mission page. Also, think of all the past missions with no data. ---[[user:rubberchickenben|<font color="green">Herr Doktor Tolkien von Oxford]][[User_talk:Rubberchickenben|<sup>Talk Page</sup></font>]] 19:04, 24 November 2009 (EST) | ||
| + | ==[[2009-10]] Crewmen== | ||
| + | The fact that they have ranks SHOULD NOT BE NOTED IN AN ARTICLE ABOUT NOT HAVING RANKS---[[user:rubberchickenben|<font color="green">Benzyne]][[User_talk:Rubberchickenben|<sup>Talk Page</sup></font>]] 15:54, 4 February 2010 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==FLIGHT== | ||
| + | Are we calling the piloting position on Hab FLIGHT? I'd prefer to reserve FLIGHT for the Flight Director in Mission Control. [[User:Stefanido|Stefanido]] 16:34, 11 March 2010 (EST) | ||
| + | :Oh, okay. Just [[Pilot]]ing then? ---[[user:Q-Cumber|<font color="green">Q-Cumber</font>]] 16:37, 11 March 2010 (EST) | ||
Latest revision as of 16:37, 11 March 2010
I don't think that "Able Seaman" should be an actual position, as we should not be planning on having astronauts with no specific purpose. Stefanido 19:18, 1 April 2006 (EST)
- Well, Bfoo liked to call Nevin "able seamen" so I sorta took it from there ----Alex Foo
- First off, Alex, INDENT YOUR POSTS so that we can actually read the posts in chronological order without getting screwed up (use a colon). Secondly, add your signature at the end of your post by putting four tildes in succesion. Thirdly, I don't agree that having a specific astro function be "does not appear to have a function" is a good idea, and I am sure that the current leadership as well as the past leadership will back me on this. Stefanido 23:22, 6 April 2006 (EDT)
- May I ask why you're inventing terms? Are you trying to complicate things for new members? Avacar 11:49, 7 April 2006 (EDT)
Noting Able Crewmen
I don't think past able crewman should be included, because if they were, it was noted on the mission page. Also, think of all the past missions with no data. ---Herr Doktor Tolkien von OxfordTalk Page 19:04, 24 November 2009 (EST)
2009-10 Crewmen
The fact that they have ranks SHOULD NOT BE NOTED IN AN ARTICLE ABOUT NOT HAVING RANKS---BenzyneTalk Page 15:54, 4 February 2010 (EST)
FLIGHT
Are we calling the piloting position on Hab FLIGHT? I'd prefer to reserve FLIGHT for the Flight Director in Mission Control. Stefanido 16:34, 11 March 2010 (EST)
