I can never fly again.

jesse said:
What is wrong with a class B airport? Some are very GA friendly -- like Kansas City Intl.
Click to expand...

That's because MCI has about as much traffic as a lot of class C airports, but really with a few exceptions just about all the class B's aren't all that bad towards GA. Some just charge exhorborant landing and ramp fees to discourage most GA. I landed at IAH which is about 3 times busier than MCI and they treated me quite nicely. They just asked me to keep my speed up so I gave them 125kts until I turned a short base and I was off at the first taxiway. Flying in VFR they were able to sequence me in quite nicely and nobody was delayed any more than they would have been with a fast jet (actually probably a lot less). The FBO didn't charge me any fees since I bought gas there even though I stayed for 4 days. I've had class nothing airports treat me a lot worse.
 
Cleveland is also a piece of cake.

Class B isn't scary. It's like Class C only better ATC services - if you can get them to say hello back to you.
 
As a rule, I talk to ATC on virtually every flight of at least 50 miles. There have been a few exceptions in the past few months:

1) I have a passenger who I want to have a conversation with, and don't want interruptions.

2) I don't feel like talking to anybody, period, and it's a clear VFR day/night.

Otherwise, I generally pick up at least flight following. I only file IFR when it makes sense to. Sometimes it does, sometimes it's a necessity, sometimes it doesn't. I've flown over water without flight following/IFR at night (in the Aztec with a small load). To me, that was an acceptable risk. Also flown over mountains at night without flight following/IFR (also in the Aztec, solo). I've done plenty of flying over water in singles, though, even in winter.
 
Depends on the class B. Flying into LGA, JFK, or EWR in GA isn't much fun (so I hear). Flying into PHL in GA is actually a lot of fun, I've done it 3 times in the past two months. I wouldn't want to do it in something slower than a Mooney, though (and even the Mooney I used to fly is a bit on the slow side) just out of courtesy for the traffic they're trying to push in and out. I've even flown into PHL on a Friday afternoon, landing at 5:30.
 
Lots of folks may have one or two restrictions on that list, I doubt many have more than that.

Part of the problem with the aviation culture that has gotten many pilots killed is the macho attitude in the original post. "Only a wimp would have that restriction" or "real men fly IMC at night in freezing rain," is the kind of BS that gets people killed.

When other pilots choose to launch has no effect whatsoever on your flying, other than to apparently irritate you because they are not as studly as you are. Whatever, are you nine years old?

How about we stop getting pilots killed by pushing them to do things they are not comfortable with? A large proportion of accidents start with a pilot making a decision to take off when they are not fully comfortable with the conditions. Personally I'd rather see those pilots stay on the ground and go home to their families than to end up as smoking holes in the earth because their ego couldn't stand their friends saying what ******* they are.
 
AuntPeggy said:
...the wind is more than gale force (in any direction!).
Click to expand...

Helicopter landings are fun. Touch down on the numbers, stop before getting off the numbers, lift off before the first stripe. Taxxing is a PITA though.


bullwinkle said:
Part of the problem with the aviation culture that has gotten many pilots killed is the macho attitude in the original post..
Click to expand...

Another part of the problem with the aviation culture is the overfocus on excess safety. Sometimes being too safe is more dangerous.

Take one of my last rental checkouts for instance: On downwind the CFI called for a short field landing over an obstacle in a 180HP Horton STOL CE172 that we had just got through proving would reliably stay flying well after the ASI started bouncing off the 0kt stop pin in the instrument. He pooped his pants when I turned final at 55kts, dumped to full flaps and started slowing down even while verbalizing precisely what I was doing. Apparently DA at a 6200MSL airport requires approach speeds around 70kts over the fence in that plane. After all faster has a higher buffer on stall speed thus it is safer right? Too much confusion too close to the ground so I went around and did it his way. We floated about half a mile down the runway before it would land without forcing it onto the ground. Afterward I was thinking how much trouble a new student would be in if setting up for a real off airport landing after being taught to land fast like that because a small farmers field with obstacles at both ends will get you killed if you try that.

Total fanatical safety isn't the solution. Totally macho he man piloting isn't the solution either. There is a balance that blatantly violates the protocol at both extreme ends of the spectrum.
 
Last edited:
gismo said:
I can't agree with you Ed, to me it's perfectly acceptable for a pilot to limit themselves to their "comfort zone" if that's what floats their boat.
Click to expand...
+1. I'm guessing that 90% of the people on this board fly for fun so if they want to limit themselves I don't see why they should care what other people have to say about it. Remember that most of the population probably wouldn't trust themselves at the controls of an airplane, period.
 
EdFred said:
Over the past 4-5 years if I were to combine all the limitations of people (I am not counting student pilot limits, students get a pass) on this board and the red board I would never fly....ever!

I won't fly if...

...the wind is more than 10 knots (in any direction!).(Did that while still a student)
...the ceilings are below 4,000'.(Did that while still a student)
...the runway isn't at least 5,000' long. (Home field is 2975X40, nuff sed)
...the runway isn't at least 75' wide. (see above)
...over water. (KBOW-KMTH)
...over mountains.(Flying through Banning Pass was a hoot!)
...at night.(They're missing the most beautiful flying there is)
...in a single.(There is something else?)
...to a grass field.(Gaston's is really nice.)
...to a class D airport.(Most of my 170 airports)
...to a class C airport.(Some of my 170 airports)
...to a class B airport.(A few of my 170 airports)
...to an uncontrolled field(Most of my 170 airports)
...in IMC (even when IR rated!)(Inadvertently, but I am still alive)
...under VFR (Nearly always)
...if I can't stay in radar contact.(Unless I want to)
...more than 50 miles from home.(Duh!)
...in the winter.(Duh!)
...outside gliding distance of an airport.(Duh!)

When did this country become a bunch of namby-pamby momma's boys (and girls)?
Click to expand...

Most of the above "minimums" were violated long before I had 300 hours.
Didn't have a GPS until last fall.
2 of the 4 stops on my solo XCs were airports my instructor had never been to, none of them were to fields I had been to before.
 
jesse said:
What is wrong with a class B airport? Some are very GA friendly -- like Kansas City Intl.
Click to expand...
KC is pretty far away. The local Class Bs are JFK, LGA, BOS, etc. Hubby landed at LAS once and we sat in the July sun for nearly an hour waiting at the hold-short line for takeoff. My understanding is that you can expect a $2.00 premium at least on every gallon of gas at Bs. Should I mention TSA?
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Depends on the class B. Flying into LGA, JFK, or EWR in GA isn't much fun (so I hear). Flying into PHL in GA is actually a lot of fun, I've done it 3 times in the past two months. I wouldn't want to do it in something slower than a Mooney, though (and even the Mooney I used to fly is a bit on the slow side) just out of courtesy for the traffic they're trying to push in and out. I've even flown into PHL on a Friday afternoon, landing at 5:30.
Click to expand...

I think it just depends on if you're IFR or VFR. If you're IFR, then they have to sequence you outside the FAF, so you're probably going to slow a lot of faster planes down quite a bit. If you're VFR, they can give you a 360 on a base leg if they have to and sequence you on a mile or less final, so it just gives ATC more options. At IAH they just put me on a runway they were using primarily for departures, so they only had to hold the next guy in line for an extra minute or two that it took me to land and get off the runway. It was pretty painless for everyone involved.
 
AuntPeggy said:
KC is pretty far away. The local Class Bs are JFK, LGA, BOS, etc. Hubby landed at LAS once and we sat in the July sun for nearly an hour waiting at the hold-short line for takeoff. My understanding is that you can expect a $2.00 premium at least on every gallon of gas at Bs. Should I mention TSA?
Click to expand...

I didn't deal with the TSA or spend any $$ on fuel at Cleveland. No ramp/landing fee either. Just gotta know how to talk to the counter lady. :)
 
Ted DuPuis said:
As a rule, I talk to ATC on virtually every flight of at least 50 miles. There have been a few exceptions in the past few months:

1) I have a passenger who I want to have a conversation with, and don't want interruptions.

2) I don't feel like talking to anybody, period, and it's a clear VFR day/night.

Otherwise, I generally pick up at least flight following. I only file IFR when it makes sense to. Sometimes it does, sometimes it's a necessity, sometimes it doesn't. I've flown over water without flight following/IFR at night (in the Aztec with a small load). To me, that was an acceptable risk. Also flown over mountains at night without flight following/IFR (also in the Aztec, solo). I've done plenty of flying over water in singles, though, even in winter.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...

Based in the SFRA and under the Class B shelf, I end up filing IFR most of the time. Helps a bit with the amount of traffic in/out of HEF, helps stay clear of the numerous R areas, and sometimes allows more favorable routing to the NE (where possible, I'll get routed up the east side of Dulles under IFR but not so VFR). With the SFRA, you're talking to them anyway, might as well file.
 
MikePapa said:
I think it just depends on if you're IFR or VFR. If you're IFR, then they have to sequence you outside the FAF, so you're probably going to slow a lot of faster planes down quite a bit. If you're VFR, they can give you a 360 on a base leg if they have to and sequence you on a mile or less final, so it just gives ATC more options. At IAH they just put me on a runway they were using primarily for departures, so they only had to hold the next guy in line for an extra minute or two that it took me to land and get off the runway. It was pretty painless for everyone involved.
Click to expand...
O'Hare wouldn't even let us in VFR. They said we had to be on an IFR flight plan. And the number of people on the board here who have flown into ORD could probably be counted on two hands. I can only name three myself, and I don't know if one of them has ever done it GA.
 
ive had no problems in Kansas City (in a Lance) and St. Louis (in a 421). $ignature at St. Louis did hit me with something like 160 bucks "handling" fee. at first I thought i was getting charged for someone elses fuel. I was in, booted out the passenger, paid, and was heading out, in about 10 or 15 minutes.
 
wsuffa said:
Hmmm...

Based in the SFRA and under the Class B shelf, I end up filing IFR most of the time. Helps a bit with the amount of traffic in/out of HEF, helps stay clear of the numerous R areas, and sometimes allows more favorable routing to the NE (where possible, I'll get routed up the east side of Dulles under IFR but not so VFR). With the SFRA, you're talking to them anyway, might as well file.
Click to expand...

That's why I put in the "sometimes it makes sense" comment. :)

In the areas that I tend to fly, there is less restricted airspace, I know where it is, and I don't often find myself in situations where I have to talk to someone unless I want to. Most of the time I do, sometimes I don't. If I lived in the SFRA, obviously that would be a different story.
 
EdFred said:
I didn't deal with the TSA or spend any $$ on fuel at Cleveland. No ramp/landing fee either. Just gotta know how to talk to the counter lady. :)
Click to expand...

Talking to the people at the counter nicely has gotten me out of paying most (but not all) fees. I once paid $5 as the landing fee at Trenton for a Navajo.
 
AuntPeggy said:
KC is pretty far away. The local Class Bs are JFK, LGA, BOS, etc. Hubby landed at LAS once and we sat in the July sun for nearly an hour waiting at the hold-short line for takeoff. My understanding is that you can expect a $2.00 premium at least on every gallon of gas at Bs. Should I mention TSA?
Click to expand...

Many of the big city FBOs just charge out the yang for gas so I don't think this is really exclusive to the class B's, and sometimes the class B's are actually cheaper on fuel that some of the surrounding airports. AIRNAV lists a price of $4.15 for 100LL at DFW (3rd busiest airport in the world), yet 11 miles away at ADS which is exclusively GA, you'll pay as much as $6.87.

For an IFR departure, you're just going to have to get in line with everyone else, and sometimes even VFR departures are going to take a while, but this is also the case for many exclusively GA airports.

Most (if not all) class B airports have a GA ramp, and as long as you don't hop out of your plane at a place that you're not supposed to, there's really no hassle at all with TSA. The only inconvienience I've had at all was that I couldn't drive my rental car out to my plane, but the FBO offered to either pull my plane right up to the terminal or take my stuff out in a golf cart.
 
bullwinkle said:
Lots of folks may have one or two restrictions on that list, I doubt many have more than that.

Part of the problem with the aviation culture that has gotten many pilots killed is the macho attitude in the original post. "Only a wimp would have that restriction" or "real men fly IMC at night in freezing rain," is the kind of BS that gets people killed.

When other pilots choose to launch has no effect whatsoever on your flying, other than to apparently irritate you because they are not as studly as you are. Whatever, are you nine years old?

How about we stop getting pilots killed by pushing them to do things they are not comfortable with? A large proportion of accidents start with a pilot making a decision to take off when they are not fully comfortable with the conditions. Personally I'd rather see those pilots stay on the ground and go home to their families than to end up as smoking holes in the earth because their ego couldn't stand their friends saying what ******* they are.
Click to expand...

Stagnation leads to complacency. Complacency leads to accidents. Experience prevents this. You cant get experience with anything if you only fly pattern work on a perfectly calm day.

Scenario: You fly out of your 13,000 x 300 former AFB and only go up with 1.5 hours of fuel, because you are only going to stay within the area. While you are in the air one of the few airliners that come in has an accident and closes the single runway. Your options are a 2200' grass strip over nothing but trees between you and there. You also have a 2600' grass strip with nothing but swamp between you and there. The ceilings are fine going to either of these places. Your other option is a 4000' grass strip but clouds off the lake have the ceilings down to 1500' along the route.

Now, who's more likely to become a smoking hole? The flying wuss who won't go anywhere without his bike helmet and tether, or someone who will at least ventured outside the nest?
 
gprellwitz said:
O'Hare wouldn't even let us in VFR. They said we had to be on an IFR flight plan. And the number of people on the board here who have flown into ORD could probably be counted on two hands. I can only name three myself, and I don't know if one of them has ever done it GA.
Click to expand...

ORD is one of the exceptions, but you have to remember that ORD trades off with ATL as the busiest airport in the world. They also can't simultaneously use as many runways as ATL which means their max capacity is lower. Flights are frequently delayed there simply because they run out of capacity.
 
MikePapa said:
ORD is one of the exceptions, but you have to remember that ORD trades off with ATL and OSH as the busiest airport in the world. They also can't simultaneously use as many runways as ATL which means their max capacity is lower. Flights are frequently delayed there simply because they run out of capacity.
Click to expand...
Fixed that for ya.
 
gprellwitz said:
O'Hare wouldn't even let us in VFR. They said we had to be on an IFR flight plan. And the number of people on the board here who have flown into ORD could probably be counted on two hands. I can only name three myself, and I don't know if one of them has ever done it GA.
Click to expand...

Who was it who had an Angel Flight and was coming into ORD VFR, and found out they had no idea whatsoever how handle a VFR: "Contact approach" "Contact tower" "We can only take handoffs from approach"
 
EdFred said:
Over the past 4-5 years if I were to combine all the limitations of people (I am not counting student pilot limits, students get a pass) on this board and the red board I would never fly....ever!

I won't fly if...

...the wind is more than 10 knots (in any direction!).
...the ceilings are below 4,000'.
...the runway isn't at least 5,000' long.
...the runway isn't at least 75' wide.
...over water.
...over mountains.
...at night.
...in a single.
...to a grass field.
...to a class D airport.
...to a class C airport.
...to a class B airport.
...to an uncontrolled field
...in IMC (even when IR rated!)
...under VFR
...panyhose in a bunch
...if I can't stay in radar contact.
...more than 50 miles from home.
...in the winter.
...outside gliding distance of an airport.

When did this country become a bunch of namby-pamby momma's boys (and girls)?
Click to expand...
At least one of those is a person min of Mr. 24! ;)
 
fgcason said:
Another part of the problem with the aviation culture is the overfocus on excess safety. Sometimes being too safe is more dangerous.



Total fanatical safety isn't the solution. Totally macho he man piloting isn't the solution either. There is a balance that blatantly violates the protocol at both extreme ends of the spectrum.
Click to expand...

BRAVO sir!
 
fgcason said:
Total fanatical safety isn't the solution. Totally macho he man piloting isn't the solution either. There is a balance that blatantly violates the protocol at both extreme ends of the spectrum.
Click to expand...

OMG how eloquent. Thanks Frank. :cheerswine:
 
I've had more problems getting out of PNE IFR than PHL. PNE has lots of traffic from PHL to deal with. From PHL, you're just part of that traffic.
 
mikea said:
Who was it who had an Angel Flight and was coming into ORD VFR, and found out they had no idea whatsoever how handle a VFR: "Contact approach" "Contact tower" "We can only take handoffs from approach"
Click to expand...
Kent has described a similar situation, but I don't think he was on an Angel Flight.
 
bullwinkle said:
Lots of folks may have one or two restrictions on that list, I doubt many have more than that.

Part of the problem with the aviation culture that has gotten many pilots killed is the macho attitude in the original post. "Only a wimp would have that restriction" or "real men fly IMC at night in freezing rain," is the kind of BS that gets people killed.

When other pilots choose to launch has no effect whatsoever on your flying, other than to apparently irritate you because they are not as studly as you are. Whatever, are you nine years old?

How about we stop getting pilots killed by pushing them to do things they are not comfortable with? A large proportion of accidents start with a pilot making a decision to take off when they are not fully comfortable with the conditions. Personally I'd rather see those pilots stay on the ground and go home to their families than to end up as smoking holes in the earth because their ego couldn't stand their friends saying what ******* they are.
Click to expand...


+1! My dad has been a pilot since the early 70's and I've flown with him since I was five. He earned his instrument rating, but just was never comfortable flying in those conditions... He just wanted to have the knowledge just in case he was ever inadvertantly put into something like that. He's definitedly not complacent.

Me, I'm a private and very, very careful. I make sure that every flight is very well planned and that I'm gonna know what I have to do.

I don't like to hear this, either. Maybe your limitations are completely different from someone else's. (Personally, I wouldn't fly into Gaston's at night with no lights... but, that's just me.)
 
Jack Spectre said:
I've had my PP-ASEL for 6 months now. I'll asterisk the ones I won't do:
Click to expand...

I won't fly if...

...the wind is more than 10 knots (in any direction!).
...the ceilings are below 4,000'.
...the runway isn't at least 5,000' long.
...the runway isn't at least 75' wide.
...over water.
...over mountains.
...at night.
...in a single.
**...to a grass field.
...to a class D airport.
...to a class C airport.
...to a class B airport.
...to an uncontrolled field
...in IMC (even when IR rated!)
...under VFR
...if I can't stay in radar contact.
...more than 50 miles from home.
...in the winter.
...outside gliding distance of an airport.

That's my only real "restriction" and it has less to do with a "won't land at a grass strip ever" (I realize the chances of a grass strip being in bad enough condition to cause a serious problem are minimal at worst) with "can't see a good reason to do it". I just don't see the allure a lot of people do in landing on a rough strip of grass. Quite a few of you all look at it as something nearly akin to a religious experience, but that's the beauty of freedom: you're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine.

Several of the others (IMC, mountain flying, etc) are obviously not options since I'm not in possession of my instrument rating, etc. Beyond that, I evaluate everything on a case-by-case basis. As for runway width and length, it's just a matter of personal preference to stick with the larger runways, but if I have no other choice or the rewards of landing at a small field are sufficient, I'd do it so long as I have a reasonable chance of being able to perform it safely.

You can do fun and interesting stuff in the meantime or sit on the couch with bubble wrap taped around you.
Click to expand...

I always remind people that not getting off the couch or even out of bed carries with it a separate set of risks (blood clots, coronary events, bed sores, intractable boredom, etc).
 
Looking at it from a different perspective though, I think a lot of folks don't realize how much utility/opportunity they are losing by waiting for those ideal days that may come along only now and again. Find another pilot to sit right seat and go do some things that you haven't done in a while (IMC flight, flight through Bravo / Delta airspaces, night flights for dinner). When's the last time you practiced power on departure stalls for example? You can do it! You just may not realize it anymore.
 
Stagnation leads to complacency. Complacency leads to accidents. Experience prevents this. You cant get experience with anything if you only fly pattern work on a perfectly calm day.
Click to expand...

....and thinking "Hey, I want to push my limits just to see if I can" also gets people killed. No offense, but you're seemingly at that opposite end of the spectrum from the sniveling wusses you seem to malign so much and as someone else pointed out, that is just as dangerous if not more so than someone who simply enjoys pattern work and doesn't feel the need to be Scott Crossfield. Even those of us who tend to stick to longer fields practice for short field operations but do so with the realization that should be screw up during our learning curve, we have another 2,000 ft of runway ahead of us instead of a treeline, a fence or a precipice. Not exactly real world training but then again if you fly a rental aircraft, you can't exactly do grass field practice so you have to stick to the next best thing.

Most of us- myself included- fly primarily in our own area and have a lot more options than your nifty little scenario presents. Even if you take me down to 30-45 minutes of fuel (and why the hell would anyone- especially someone who is trying to avoid risk- be down to that point without being on the ground already?), that puts two dozen or so airports at my disposal not to mention more corn and soybean fields than I can shake a stick at, many with open stretches longer than the paved runways I operate off of. To make my point a little strong, I should point out this area is not exactly packed with airports like some places. If you're going to be operating in an environment with few options, then that sort of setting tends to self-select against pilots who are truly and completely afraid of risk so your "only port in the storm only works for those with 'The Right Stuff'" argument tends to fall apart based simply on that fact. I'm not an advocate of trying to do stupid **** just to prove that one can, but at the same time I do see your point that complacency does get people killed but it usually does it in the opposite way you're suggesting. By that I mean people gradually become used to the risk and slowly push their luck until they get hurt, killed or find themselves on the ground thanking God that they weren't hurt or killed because of flying with outstanding maintenance issues, VFR into IMC, operating aircraft out of their league, etc. This risk prone complacency kills more annually than the few pilots out there who stick to what they know even if you think they are cowards and fools for doing so.

Even I, a risk averse aviator who tries to minimize his chances of a crash (despite liking to engage in other high risk activities such as skydiving and firefighting), tend to look at those who are at each end of the spectrum and shake my head. The only way I have respect for either of them is if they choose to not belittle those who hold beliefs counter to their own simply because they believe they are infallible and their way is the only "good" way to do things. BTW, the reason for being risk-averse when it comes to flying is not so much my safety, but the safety of my passengers (my wife and eventually my kids) when they are with me and what would happen to my wife and kids should I get killed.
 
I believe the spirit of the initial statement was for those that are qualified (for that type of flight) and have grown uncomfortable doing so because they haven't done it in so long.
 
I flew outside of every one of those "limitations" as a student pilot.
Click to expand...

I've done all of them except mountains (no mountains in this part of the world) and grass strips (been a right front seat passenger on a couple of flights into them, but never been at the controls). Actually I really like flying at night and over water. To me I would much rather be over water when the engine quits than over a cornfield or forest but that's just the product of having been through dunker training and your mileage may vary.
 
steingar said:
Bit geographically challenged. Head East a little ways and you'll find mountains aplenty.
Click to expand...

Sure will, but the OP makes it clear that those of us who live and fly over significant Eastern Mountains are "wusses" because we may pause before launching over them SEL at night in IMC.

I 've done it, but the pucker factor was high. I was solo. I won't subject passengers to a level of risk they cannot knowledgeably assess and assent to.
 
Engine doesn't know where it's at.
 
SteveinMichigan said:
That's my only real "restriction" and it has less to do with a "won't land at a grass strip ever" (I realize the chances of a grass strip being in bad enough condition to cause a serious problem are minimal at worst) with "can't see a good reason to do it". I just don't see the allure a lot of people do in landing on a rough strip of grass. Quite a few of you all look at it as something nearly akin to a religious experience, but that's the beauty of freedom: you're entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to mine.
Click to expand...

What cow pastures are you flying into? Grass strips =! rough.
 
Not pushing you're limits (within reason) and stretching you're known abilities could kill your family someday.
I'm sure that the begining post was not to advise everyone to be Scott Crossfield,instead to not be complacent with their current level abilities and strive to keep "learning"
If we all are good enough pilot's already, why do we have BFR's ,and the wing's program,etc., why do pattern work for that matter, it's because you want to be the best you can be,alway's improving or to at least maintain the level you once were.( you're losing brain cell's everyday)
To me it's still amazing that with as little as one 40 hr. work week ,8hrs. for a whopping 5 day's you can become a pilot.:loco:20 hrs. for a sport pilot.
For everything worthwhile in this world, someone pushed their limit's ,attempted new unknown feat's, for the benefit of those who follow. Most pilot's to me seem to be leaders not followers.:thumbsup:
 
AuntPeggy said:
if
...the wind is more than gale force (in any direction!).
...the ceilings are below 1,000'.
...the runway isn't at least 1,000' long.
...the runway isn't at least 25' wide.
...over 4 hour leg.
...over the Alps.
...over an overcast.
...in a multi.
...to a grass field.
...to an ice field.
...to a class B airport.
...in IMC
...near lightning
...if I can't stay in radio contact.
...more than 5000 miles from home (unless you invite me to go with you).
...when I'm sick.
...when I'm really angry.
...more than 9 hours in a day.
Click to expand...
Ok. Hubby reminded me that I have flown into PHL and it was so dramatic that ...

... I have forgotten about it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top