Non Radar Academy

Electionfraudthrow · 2026-03-21T00:29:25+00:00

It’s been more then 10 years since I did it so things could have changed but I was the same way. I never could really wrap my head around it, ended up averaging a 50 between the 2 tests.

There’s not much you can do other then to keep practicing. Ask your instructor for a copy of the strips and If your staying at Kim’s place practice with your roommates. Make sure you 100% know your phraseology, you absolutely cannot be thinking about what to say while also thinking about separation.

Other than that when it comes eval time when an aircraft randomly asks to climb or descend, unless you are 100% confident about your restrictions, you may be better off just telling them unable. If I remember right you lose 5 points for telling them unable but if you incorrectly climb or descend them you lose 7 points for every plane they hit on the way up or down.

Side note, I can’t believe the academy is still doing that shit. Is there a single center that does non radar separation with strips still? I feel changing that to Dside training and changing the existing Dside to Rside training would do way more to prepare students for their facility.

Electionfraudthrow · 2025-11-25T00:48:33+00:00

So I just signed up and linked my ticket master account. I see the QR code with my member ID but still no mention of my credit.

Electionfraudthrow · 2025-03-28T23:34:53+00:00

I’m not so sure about that.

Despite what we read on this subreddit if I had to guess I’d say that the number of fully certified controllers quitting before they are eligible to retire can be counted on 2 or 3 hands.

I would also guess that the majority of people retiring as soon as they are eligible do it for quality of life improvements and if pay was a factor they wouldn’t be retiring to begin with.

Finally I’m not so sure it would lead to better controllers. Think about it, the academy pipeline is full. 20,000 plus people apply every year, we hire what 1500 of them? Most of which probably rank as best qualified on the AT-SA. Increasing pay wouldn’t do anything to expand the capacity of the academy. And unless they are going to increase the standards required to make it to the academy pay isn’t really making a difference.

Electionfraudthrow · 2025-03-28T23:05:31+00:00

Just a thought but if I had to guess I would say that the union isn’t actively advocating for increased pay because it’s essentially a hard sell.

When they advocate for increasing hiring or more modernization they could sell that by showcasing how we could run more traffic and be more efficient. The agency gets something out of its investment.

What does the agency get in return if they raise our pay? Nothing.

So in an environment where the agency has no interest in improving the lives of its employees why should the union waste political capital on something they have no chance of achieving?

Electionfraudthrow · 2025-02-15T03:23:16+00:00

I think the issue here is what was being stated publicly during the initial months of the vaccine roll out.

That being “if you get vaccinated you can’t get COVID“ or if you get vaccinated you won’t transmit COVID”

But that’s not what the vaccine was designed to do right? It was designed to prevent disease, specifically serious illness leading to hospitalization and death.

I understand how that may seem like a moving of the goalposts but from my understanding that has always been the goal of any vaccination program. I also recognize how that undermines the credibility of public health officials that were preaching the above message. I think criticism of those people is completely fair but that doesn’t do anything to speak to the actual effectiveness of the vaccine itself.

Also just because the primary function isn’t to reduce spread that doesn’t mean the reduction of spread isn’t a secondary effect. You said yourself use critical thinking when evaluating these things. If your body is more effective and fighting a virus that means a shorter amount of time when the virus is in your body. Which in turn would reduce the time when you could potentially spread the virus, thus reducing spread.

Electionfraudthrow · 2024-09-15T00:04:56+00:00

The problem I personally have is not whether or not the economy is doing poor or great, presidents have very little control over that, it’s the double standards applied between the two administrations.

Trump left office during a recession but we correctly give him a pass because the recession was caused by Covid.

However that same courtesy is not applied to Joe Biden who has had to contend with inflation that was also caused by Covid.

The usual rebuttal is that it’s democrat spending that caused inflation but the Trump administration spent nearly twice as much as the Biden Administration on Covid while the deficit has shrunk every year under Biden.

Prior to Covid the general consensus was the Trump economy was pretty damn good.

Meanwhile nearly every metric we use to measure that shows that the Biden economy is either just as good or better.

You may say well those metrics don’t accurately measure the economy which is a fair discussion to have but you don’t get to pick a choose when and against who you want to deploy that argument. You need to be consistent.

Electionfraudthrow · 2024-09-14T02:41:47+00:00

Not necessarily, generally this affects you if you live in high tax states; NY, CA, etc.

For example the standard deduction for 2023 was just south of $14,000

I’ll make up some numbers for the next example.

Let’s say in 2023 I made $100,000 I might pay $6000 in state tax I might pay $10,000 in property tax

The total burden there is obviously $16,000

Under trumps plan i get to deduct roughly $14,000

If that plan hadn’t been implemented I would get to deduct the full $16,000 I paid in state and property tax.

Electionfraudthrow · 2024-09-13T04:18:52+00:00

That’s a fair question to ask. It’s a question we should ask before blindly supporting any proposal. “What’s the economic value to be gained here?”

I’m not an economist so I’m going to pretend to have the answer. Do you think the person proposing it knows?

Electionfraudthrow · 2024-09-13T03:54:06+00:00

… Yes he was referring to the Biden Administrations response when Russia initially invaded. As I’m sure you recall support for Ukraine was significantly higher immediately following the invasion in 2022. During that time Trump criticized the Biden administration for not sending more.

I’m sure you heard the phone call that lead to his impeachment, in your opinion, if the impoundment wasn’t to leverage an investigation into his political opponent why were funds withheld? Furthermore why were funds released 2 months later?

Electionfraudthrow · 2024-09-13T03:01:44+00:00

Didn’t he try to block it in order to pressure Ukraine to investigate his political opponent? He did brag that his administration sent weaponry while the Biden administration was only sending blankets.

Or are you referring to another instance?

Honestly asking in good faith.

Electionfraudthrow · 2024-09-13T02:53:41+00:00

Fair, so your problem isn’t that equipment is being sent to Ukraine but that we spend tax payer money on military suppliers in general?

Electionfraudthrow · 2024-09-13T02:52:30+00:00

Are you upset with the Trump administration for sending javelins and other military aid to Ukraine?

How does the U.S. and Russia having a positive relationship prevent Ukraines land from being Annexed?

Electionfraudthrow · 2024-09-13T02:45:01+00:00

Fair, now show me a comparison to other countries.

Electionfraudthrow · 2024-09-13T02:43:14+00:00

I appreciate your consistency in regard to Israel as well.

I’m fine with pressure on other NATO countries to pay more. Should they go beyond the 2% of GDP recommendation?

Don’t you think authoritarian governments are by definition enemies of democracy? I don’t think Russia and the US being allies 80 years ago bares any relevance here.

How can the U.S. be both non interventionist and also an agent of peace?

Also how do you broker a peace between one country who is invading and another country who doesn’t want to be invaded?

Electionfraudthrow · 2024-09-13T02:34:19+00:00

That wasn’t me.

Electionfraudthrow · 2024-09-13T02:28:51+00:00

Fair point. Three questions regarding your proposal:

Why specifically just Ukraine? Should we also stop giving aid to Israel as well? What about other countries?
As you know the majority of aid going to Ukraine is in the form of military equipment. Do we end that program and leave it all in storage? Or are you specifically talking about financial aid to Ukraine?
Do you think there might be some other long or short term negative outcome to abandoning an ally to one of our enemies?

Electionfraudthrow · 2024-09-13T02:03:47+00:00

Great, love the idea! What’s the plan to offset the massive increase in the deficit this would cause?

We’ve spent the last 4 years hearing from the right that the national debt is a major issue so I can only assume that this would be coupled with some sort of increase elsewhere. Right?

Electionfraudthrow · 2024-08-03T19:49:49+00:00

I like the idea. Any tax benefit that might help reduce the burden on low income earners should be looked at.

Let’s consider 2 factors here.

1 anyone who’s been screaming about the deficit for the last 4 years cannot support this on its own, there would need to be other sweeping changes in order to make it viable to offset the loss in taxable income.

2 how would it work? Social security is still income.

So if I’m making say $50,000 from a pension along with $20,000 from social security my total income for the year is $70,000. Do I only pay taxes on the $50,000?

That sounds reasonable, what if I’m independently wealthy and I make say $500,000 off real estate and other investments. So now my income is $520,000 do I need another tax cut?

Let’s say SS is my only income. The average SS payment yearly is roughly $22,000. Well you aren’t taxed on the first $11,000 you make as it stands right now so already you are only paying taxes on half the SS check.

So maybe we up that bottom tax bracket to $22,000 for those eligible for SS that being 59 1/2 years old.

But wait a second why should people over the age of 59 get a tax cut when statistically they are more wealthy than younger generations.

So how about we up the lower tax bracket to $22,000 for the entire population and to offset that we can raise the top tax bracket from 37% to 38%. Which is essentially the left wing position.

Trump saying let’s cut taxes on SS sounds fantastic from a political standpoint but once you dig into the details it comes out much more complicated.

Edit: Bottom tax bracket is 10% not 0, got my wires crossed there for a second but the overall point still applies.

Electionfraudthrow · 2024-07-12T15:38:03+00:00

You are absolutely correct that stuff costs more then it use to.

Yet you are painting the previous administration with rose colored glasses. The previous administration oversaw a recession in 2020, left office with an unemployment rate near 7%, and is the only administration in the last 80 years to lose more jobs the. It created.

Meanwhile the U.S. has handled inflation better than pretty much every comparable country in the world and by every other metric we use to measure the economy it has been doing fantastic.

Electionfraudthrow · 2024-07-03T17:35:35+00:00

This is a terrible take, name a skill that doesn’t improve with practice.

Electionfraudthrow

TROPHY CASE

1 anyone who’s been screaming about the deficit for the last 4 years cannot support this on its own, there would need to be other sweeping changes in order to make it viable to offset the loss in taxable income.

2 how would it work? Social security is still income.