I’ve always wondered about one thing regarding the side-sticks:

What if you are a left handed co-pilot or a right handed pilot? Would that make it more of a hassle to use the side stick? Also, when you promote from co-pilot to pilot, how hard is it t get used to the stick being on the “wrong” side?

Never use the digital zoom. With the digital zoom the camera just enlarges the picture. It’s like when you use the computer to cut a small bit from your photo and size it up.

The disadvantages are well known by anyone who has ever enlarged a picture with the computer. You loose sharpness. I never use the digital zoom (even though my camera can) because the computer can do the same A LOT better.

Optical zoom is the normal zoom. The same kind of zoom you will find on compact camera’s and SLR’s.

For determining the kind of camera there are a few mayor questions to be asked:

1. What price are you willing to spend;
2. What do you want to make photos off. Just saying planes will not cut it. Do you want to make ramp shots (small zoom) or shots of planes that are in final approach (longer zoom, faster shooting);
3. What do you want to do with the photo’s. If you just shoot them dfor yourself 3 megapixel should be sufficient (never go for less though!). If you want to publish them on a.net 5 mp will be a nice starting point.
4. Do you also want to use it indoors (family shots, museums)? In that case a flash would be nice.
5. How many photo’s will you shoot per day. This is important because of the memory available. For some bnrands the memory sticks are rather expensive for others they are cheaper. Also mind the battery live. Batteries can be quite expensive as well.

Nice pic,

I can tell it is not a 777, its tail ends with a “screw driver”, and this one ends in a cone. This would make it either a 757 or a 767. My guess would be a 757.

Hi Arthur,

I know the Geneva Convention does apply, problem is that Rumsfeld and chaps do not know, or at least pretend not to know. I just twisted Rumsfelds explanation in the same way that Rumsfeld twists rules. I must say I find it amusing that by a bit of twisting I can make Castro the supreme judge. 😀

Leuk om te horen dat je eens in dit rotgat geweest bent. Hoe beviel de vakantie in de achterlijke hoek?

This is a good one, a few months ago Rumsfeld explained why they did not get an normal American trial. The reasons were:

They were unlawfull combatants, thus the geneva convention did not apply.
They were not Americans, nor where they in the US, thus the US law did not apply.

So let’s consider just what that means… Let’s assume they are indeed unlawful combatants, in that case they are imprisoned by the US. This means a US court should handle it by their laws.

The US is saying this is not the case because the people are not held in the us. Its true that the prisoners arenot theld in the US. They are held in Cuba. Now lets assume for a second that this indeed means that US law does not apply. (even though US law should still be uphold since they are US prisoners).

The interesting question becomes, whose law DOES apply. They are imprisoned in CUBA and by the logic of the US the Cuban law should therefore be applied! Since Cuban law is more or less similar to Castro’s demand, the ball now lies firmly in Castro’s field. In other words, if Castro were to say that the prisoners have to be released the US will have a problem.

The US either has to release the prisoners (which it won’t), or will have to say they are US prisoners thus taking responsibility. They will then to be trialled by a US court upholding US laws!

Either way, Castro could stir some ****! 😀 😮