"Tarver Engineering" wrote in :


"Jim Knoyle" wrote in message
...

Msnip
Darn, Splaps, I can clearly recall lugging a data base loader
out to all of our 767s and 757s to update the FMC database.

In what way do you believe the "data base" would alter the flight plan,
village idiot Knoyle?


Oh jesus christ, he just never gives up, does he?

IF a waypoint, heading, airway, local magentic variation, runway heading,
sid, star, platform altitude, runway elevation, frequency, mora or a
thousand other fjucking things change.

any one of these will alter the plane, fjuckwit.




Bertie

"Rule" wrote in
newsvQab.527307$uu5.88351@sccrnsc04:



And by the way; one of the things I asked for was "something to help
convince me you know what you're talking about."



You came to usenet asking that? Jim knows what he's talking about.


Bertie

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in
:


"Rule" wrote in message
news:0Rlbb.536303$Ho3.92018@sccrnsc03...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Rule" wrote in message
newsU9bb.536233$uu5.89498@sccrnsc04...

I want the information so I can be a better informed citizen. As
for
"using
it", why assume I have any plan at all for using it ?

Here is the way I look at it rule:

The NTSB, ALPA and TWA spent a lot of money and time promoting a
lie
about
TWA 800 and so now we have a conspiracy theory that is not going to
go
away.
It doesn't take much knowledge to know that didn't happen.

"The NRSB, ALPA and TWA spent a lot of time and money promoting a
lie"????

Please! Tell me more!

Well sure, there is nothing wrong with the design of the 747, any more
than there was a problem with rudder PCUs on 737s. The 747 was a bad
retrofit, just like SR111, with the same Ostendorf as DER.

Bad retrofit?

Bwawhahwhhahwhahwhhahwhahwhhahwhahwh!

Bertie

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
"Tarver Engineering" wrote in
:


"Rule" wrote in message
news:0Rlbb.536303$Ho3.92018@sccrnsc03...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Rule" wrote in message
newsU9bb.536233$uu5.89498@sccrnsc04...

I want the information so I can be a better informed citizen. As
for
"using
it", why assume I have any plan at all for using it ?

Here is the way I look at it rule:

The NTSB, ALPA and TWA spent a lot of money and time promoting a
lie
about
TWA 800 and so now we have a conspiracy theory that is not going to
go
away.
It doesn't take much knowledge to know that didn't happen.

"The NRSB, ALPA and TWA spent a lot of time and money promoting a
lie"????

Please! Tell me more!

Well sure, there is nothing wrong with the design of the 747, any more
than there was a problem with rudder PCUs on 737s. The 747 was a bad
retrofit, just like SR111, with the same Ostendorf as DER.

Bad retrofit?

Yep, upper deck galley add.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in :


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...
"Tarver Engineering" wrote in
:


"Rule" wrote in message
news:0Rlbb.536303$Ho3.92018@sccrnsc03...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Rule" wrote in message
newsU9bb.536233$uu5.89498@sccrnsc04...

I want the information so I can be a better informed citizen. As
for
"using
it", why assume I have any plan at all for using it ?

Here is the way I look at it rule:

The NTSB, ALPA and TWA spent a lot of money and time promoting a
lie
about
TWA 800 and so now we have a conspiracy theory that is not going to
go
away.
It doesn't take much knowledge to know that didn't happen.

"The NRSB, ALPA and TWA spent a lot of time and money promoting a
lie"????

Please! Tell me more!

Well sure, there is nothing wrong with the design of the 747, any more
than there was a problem with rudder PCUs on 737s. The 747 was a bad
retrofit, just like SR111, with the same Ostendorf as DER.

Bad retrofit?

Yep, upper deck galley add.

Bwawhaw

Toaster short out on you splaps boy?

Bertei

"Tarver Engineering" wrote:
"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote:

Bad retrofit?

Yep, upper deck galley add.

This is in response to a response to a troll with the
handle Bertie. In many cases he has chosen several
newsgroups to crosspost this thread to.

Please don't feed the trolls. It only feeds their
sick little egos and pollutes the newsgroups further.

Also, be kind to the mentally ill. Don't get into
battles with them. Bertie isn't just a regular troll,
he's spent years attacking alt.religion.asatru
hurling personal insults and false accusations. He
has done so using several accounts, too. Here's one.
A glance at the number of postings shows that he is
obsessive and paraniod:

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...:A%40a.aaaaaa+

Note that he crossposts to get as many people
involved as possible, another indication of mental
illness. To show his level of obssession, glance at
the sheer number of troll postings he has done on
news:alt.religion.asatru (ARA):

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...eligion.asatru

That search will take you back as far as 2001, and it
will show many accounts he posts from, accounts that
he uses to have conversations with himself, and so on.
He has been trolling ARA since 1999. The man needs pity
and medical help.

One of his maccabre twists is that he accuses folks on
ARA of being Nazis. There was a heathen revival in
Germany and Austria in the 1920s and 10930s. Those
people were among the first targets the real Nazis sent
to their deaths in the concentration camps. The Jews
were targetted when Germany and Austria ran out of
heathens. Asatru and Nazism are polar opposites much
like Judaism and Nazism because of this. Most of the
documentation I've read about the pre-WWII Asatru
revival has been in print, so I welcome web references
the the writings of those who were killed in the camps.
The Asatru Alliance's quarterly Vor Tru ran a series on
them for several years.

What is Asatru really about, then? I follow the old
gods and goddesses known in northern Europe in the times
before Christianity came through. Thor and Sif, Odin
and Frigga, Ull and Skadhi and so on. Their adventures
are recorded in the myths of the Norse, Saxons, Goths
and so on across the sprectrum of Germanic peoples.

Like any religion, Asatru teaches a moral code. It has
lessons that lead a person to be a better person. It
has Lore that was passed down from generation to
generation until it contains lessons of everyday life.

Dirk Buerre posts a large list of links to various
Asatru resources. To give a quick idea of what Asatru
is and who Asatruar, I offer a few of the ones I
recommend to newcomers. I'm in the US so I'm most
interested in US resources, especially ones that span
borders:

http://www.thetroth.org/ *The Troth
http://www.friggasweb.org *Frigga's web
http://www.irminsul.org/ *Irminsul Aettir
http://alliance.eagleut.com/ *Asatru Alliance

The starting point for read are the Poetic Edda and
the Prose Edda which are the best preserved Norse
myths, and Saxo Grammaticus which contains mainland
European versions of the old tales:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...049972-9079868
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...049972-9079868
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...049972-9079868
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/AS...049972-9079868
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...glance&s=books

Hail Asgard!
Doug Freyburger

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in
:


"Alfred Gantz" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 18:12:14 -0700, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Laurence Doering" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 05:26:15 GMT, Rule
wrote:

"Rule" wrote in message
news:qUzab.516307$YN5.343320@sccrnsc01...

"Laurence Doering" wrote in message

Would a nerve agent really be the best choice? What are the
chances that somebody in the cockpit would go into
convulsions and bump the aircraft's control yoke,
disconnecting the autopilot?

Does simply bumping the yoke automatically disconnect the
autopilot? I was under the impression there was a little
toggle-switch on the yoke involved here. Am I wrong?

No, there normally is an autopilot disengage switch on the control
yoke. That's used to turn off the autopilot when everything is
normal.

One potential problem with an automatic pilot is a "runaway",
where the autopilot malfunctions and applies control inputs the
pilot doesn't want. Autopilots are typically designed so that a
certain amount of force on the control yoke will cause the
autopilot to disengage, so that in the event of a runaway the
pilot can simply grab the yoke and move it in the appropriate
direction to regain control without having to fight the autopilot
while reaching for the disconnect button.

What lawerence writes of here is a small GA thing and is not used in
Airliners, where the operator wishes to remain employed.

Any modern autopilot which wishes to be certified by the FAA behaves
more-or-less precisely as he describes. I would add that the
autopilot generally senses control forces via the amount of
electrical current required by the individual servos.

Bull****, no airline pilot would have job after using the yoke to
disengage the autopilot. although it is possible to disengage in the
manner described, that method is one for spam cans.


Bwawhahwhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahw!

You really have no idea at all, Splaps boy, do you?


I would like to hear your description of how you believe one to
operate, however.

Back off Alfred, we don't need additional small GA kook trolls lying
to the conspiricists.

IOW Tarver doesn't know.

Bertie

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in :


"Laurence Doering" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 05:26:15 GMT, Rule wrote:

"Rule" wrote in message
news:qUzab.516307$YN5.343320@sccrnsc01...

"Laurence Doering" wrote in message

Would a nerve agent really be the best choice? What are the
chances that somebody in the cockpit would go into convulsions
and bump the aircraft's control yoke, disconnecting the autopilot?

Does simply bumping the yoke automatically disconnect the autopilot?
I was under the impression there was a little toggle-switch on the
yoke involved here. Am I wrong?

No, there normally is an autopilot disengage switch on the control
yoke. That's used to turn off the autopilot when everything is
normal.

One potential problem with an automatic pilot is a "runaway", where
the autopilot malfunctions and applies control inputs the pilot
doesn't want. Autopilots are typically designed so that a certain
amount of force on the control yoke will cause the autopilot to
disengage, so that in the event of a runaway the pilot can simply
grab the yoke and move it in the appropriate direction to regain
control without having to fight the autopilot while reaching for
the disconnect button.

What lawerence writes of here is a small GA thing and is not used in
Airliners, where the operator wishes to remain employed.




Bwawhahwhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahhwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahh w!

Want to see the checklist for a runaway trim on just about anyhting flying
fjuckwit?


they all start with "grab the goddamn stick and push/pull as appropriate,
whether to operate the stab brake, do a supervisory over ride, disengage
the autopilot or give th eoperator time to flip the cutout switches.

Clueless ****.





Bertie

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in
:


"Alfred Gantz" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 19:21:16 -0700, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Alfred Gantz" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 18:12:14 -0700, "Tarver Engineering"

wrote:


"Laurence Doering" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 05:26:15 GMT, Rule

wrote:

"Rule" wrote in message
news:qUzab.516307$YN5.343320@sccrnsc01...

"Laurence Doering" wrote in message

Would a nerve agent really be the best choice? What are
the chances that somebody in the cockpit would go into
convulsions and bump the aircraft's control yoke,
disconnecting the
autopilot?

Does simply bumping the yoke automatically disconnect the
autopilot?
I was under the impression there was a little toggle-switch
on
the
yoke involved here. Am I wrong?

No, there normally is an autopilot disengage switch on the
control yoke. That's used to turn off the autopilot when
everything is normal.

One potential problem with an automatic pilot is a "runaway",
where the autopilot malfunctions and applies control inputs the
pilot doesn't want. Autopilots are typically designed so that
a certain amount of force on the control yoke will cause the
autopilot to disengage, so that in the event of a runaway the
pilot can simply grab the yoke and move it in the appropriate
direction to regain control without having to fight the
autopilot while reaching for the disconnect button.

What lawerence writes of here is a small GA thing and is not used
in Airliners, where the operator wishes to remain employed.

Any modern autopilot which wishes to be certified by the FAA
behaves more-or-less precisely as he describes. I would add that
the autopilot generally senses control forces via the amount of
electrical current required by the individual servos.

Bull****, no airline pilot would have job after using the yoke to
disengage
the autopilot. although it is possible to disengage in the manner
described, that method is one for spam cans.

The scenario he was using was one of a "runaway"

Runaways autopilots are also a small GA phenonema; please do not post
lies about transports. It is counter productive to terrify passengers
with your lying and ignorance. We do not need kook spam can operators
making up lies and posting them.


Good grief Splaps boy, Is there any little detail of how an airplane works
that you can't get wrong?


Bertie

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in
:


"Alfred Gantz" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 06:43:08 -0700, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:

"Alfred Gantz" wrote in message
. ..

snip
Care to further denigrate yourself, Mr. Tarver?

No, we are way past done, dip****.

HAND, moron.

Don't confuse your spam can with a flying robot, Gantz.


Please, what did I tell yo about advertising yur sex life, splaps boy?

Bertie