Aurora 4x
VB6 Aurora => Aurora Chat => Topic started by: waresky on July 11, 2017, 09:26:43 AM
-
https://www.facebook.com/FUNKER530/photos/a.236681436383500.73525.195258057192505/1546593702058927/?type=3 (https://www.facebook.com/FUNKER530/photos/a.236681436383500.73525.195258057192505/1546593702058927/?type=3)
See link..:D
-
Rather for Aurora Chat (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?board=54.0) than C# Aurora forum.
-
Yes and no. Rank example for Steve. :P
-
Yes and no.
no.
-
Lucky isnt a pool question. Steve check every idea,then decide autonomous. My 2 cent
-
Wow those ranks are rubbish. . . Starship/Starbase master sergant? What if he is working in ground control or moonbase or something?
-
Hi Waresky. Nice to see you after all this time! I'm afraid this post really is off topic for the C# forum and does belong in chat. I'm going to go ahead and move it. Don't be concerned though - Steve reads chat too IIRC!
Best,
John
-
These ranks are lame. "Astronaut"? Really? That's the best they could come up with?
Honestly they should just stick with Naval ranks. Ensigns and petty officers and such.
-
Theres no way those ranks are genuine, are they?
-
Supposdely yes
-
Supposdely yes
It's a great idea really, I'm sure the rest of the military likes the idea...
This proposal is opposed by the U.S. Air Force, Air Force Space Command, and other military leaders, including Secretary of Defense James Mattis, Secretary of the Air Force Heather Wilson, Chief of Staff of the Air Force General David L. Goldfein, and the current commander of Air Force Space Command General John W. Raymond.[5][6][7][8] Other former military and space leaders in opposition to this effort include Secretary Sean O'Keefe, former Secretary of the Navy and NASA administrator; Lisa Disbrow, former Under Secretary of the Air Force; General Victor E. Renuart Jr., former commander of U.S. Northern Command and NORAD; and Lieutenant General Edward G. Anderson III, former deputy commander of U.S. Northern Command and NORAD
...Uh, well ok, but what do they know.
-
Honestly they should just stick with Naval ranks. Ensigns and petty officers and such.
Um, why would they use naval ranks? Space forces would fall under the umbrella of the Air Force, not the Navy.
Wow those ranks are rubbish. . . Starship/Starbase master sergant? What if he is working in ground control or moonbase or something?
Some of them are a little silly, but that's kind of a groundless criticism. Rank titles are not meant to be a comprehensive job description.
Besides, they're still better than some of the fictional ranks I see in space-navy sci-fi books. I'd rather call a junior rating 'Astronaut' than, say, 'Spaceman'. Now *that* would be rubbish.
-
It's a great idea really, I'm sure the rest of the military likes the idea......Uh, well ok, but what do they know.
The other branches will either hate it because its chairforce or love the opportunity. Most will fall into the former category.
-
Sorry But that is something that is Non Military cam up with. As for the Army I dough it. As it uses either Air force or Navy ranks
-
Some of them are a little silly, but that's kind of a groundless criticism. Rank titles are not meant to be a comprehensive job description.
Besides, they're still better than some of the fictional ranks I see in space-navy sci-fi books. I'd rather call a junior rating 'Astronaut' than, say, 'Spaceman'. Now *that* would be rubbish.
They are indeed not a job description, but they should not imply a different job IMO. I mean, it is silly if they are contradictory to what the person is doing. And they may not be the worst imaginable but my point is, they are not better than the existing NAVY/Air-Force ranks. So if they can't come up with something better, they should use those.