Peter Stickney wrote:

I don't get into Boasting Games, sport. If I were you, my posts would
be full of being conceived in a J-3 Cub, Soloing at 14, learning
mountain flying in some of the most unpredictable weather in the world
- you Floridians have absolutely no idea - looking at the Earth's
curvature from 50,000', or watching the jump-up on the Airspeed/Mach
Indicator as the shockwave formed. Or spending 4 hours above 35,000',
watching a strong Aurora Borealis play along the entire Northern
Horizon. Or the incredible greenness of North America after a year in
the Stinking Desert. Of feeling the heavy feel, but crisp reponse of the
De Havilland Vampire, or the instant response of the SGS 1-26, the
concnetration and precision needed to get the best out of an Mu-2.
Yeah, I don't fly much any more - UV at high altitude roasts your
eyes, and for some of us with the right genes, you've got screwed up
eyes for the rest of your life. I've managed to have some great
experiences, though. I've had the pleaser of being shot at and
shooting back, of flying an airplane faster than sound, of going to
exotic places to do dangerous things, and, best of all, holding my
newborn daughter in my arms.

But, you see, I'm not anything special, in that regard. nor have I
really done any great things. But I know folks who have, and I'm glad
to sit and listen to them any time.

Great post which promptss me to raise a point I have been thinking about
for some little time. Among RAM regulars there is obviously a wealth of
valuable aviation knowledge, but it seems to be overshadowed by
bickering.

I'd like to suggest that RAM regulars donate some of their knowledge to
wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia which expands rapidly every day.
Some of you may already, but I'd guess most don't.

Wikipedia is being compiled by thousands of people worldwide in several
languages, and anyone can post information or edit existing information.
However, wikipedia is about facts, and bias/points of
view/flames/vandalism etc are taboo and quickly edited out by sysops.
Deliberate vandals are soon blocked from contributing (I don't know
how).

I'm positive that contributions by RAM regulars would make wikipedia a
much richer reference tool. It's at http://en.wikipedia.org/ or if you'd
like to go direct to the mil aviation section that's at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Aviation. You will see pages that
contain very little, or glaring ommissions. That's because wikipedia
compilation is ongoing and some categories await the submission of
factual information from people like RAM regulars.

I'd strongly suggest that anyone thinking of contributing/editing should
first read style etc guidelines and experiment on the site. I think RAM
would be a very good place for wikipedia military contributors/editors
to discuss controversial info before agreeing what is factual and could
be posted to wikipedia. And if some of the hostility here could be
replaced by thoughtful discussion to determine those facts, it would be
a more valuable use of time. I asked a question here a few days ago, and
based on a response from Bill Silvey (and others), was able to amend
wikipedia with factual information which removed an inference of
uniqueness attributed to the B_2.

Cheers

ronh