Talk:Able Crewmen

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 Oxford^{Talk 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---Benzyne^{Talk 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)

Oh, okay. Just Piloting then? ---Q-Cumber 16:37, 11 March 2010 (EST)