Chris Newport wrote:

And count 5 blades before hitting the mags.....

The blades passed way too quickly to count and there were closer to 500
blades before the engine lit off. It would give you a stiff neck looking
back at them and there were other much more important things to watch
during start.

Rick

On Thursday 24 June 2004 10:40 pm in rec.boats.cruising Rick wrote:

Chris Newport wrote:

And count 5 blades before hitting the mags.....

The blades passed way too quickly to count and there were closer to 500
blades before the engine lit off. It would give you a stiff neck looking
back at them and there were other much more important things to watch
during start.

The goony cranked real slow - if you hit the mags before 5 blades
you stood a chance of severe damage due to hydraulic lock.
The head of the bottom cylinder could get blown off or the crank bent.

But Jax wants oil in there...........

My real address is crn (at) netunix (dot) com
WARNING all messages containing attachments or html will be silently
deleted. Send only plain text.

gene, if all that is true why are you bragging about some license a savy 18
year old kid could get?

Most people aren't capable of working in .001 and .0001 and find the
pressure of doing it right the first time or suffering the penalty of
causing loss of property or life too much...

really? you find working at that level to be genuine strain? No wonder you
never became a carpenter. You would have cut all your fingers off the first
season.

ROFLMAO..... Jax, you truly are clueless. After working in machine
shops for 35+ years and running my own for over 20 years.... close
tolerances are not a problem. As an Authorized Inspector, signing off
completed aircraft major alterations and major repairs isn't a
problem, either....

Oh, and beginning when I was just a kid, I've operated nearly every
woodworking and metalworking machine known to man... and I still have
all of my fingers and toes.....

Keep trying...... maybe if you keep flailing about, through mere
chance, you'll finally find something that is true or accurate.....

Not bragging Jax.

yeah you are, and about a license a savy 18 year old kid could get.

which I suppose you still believe can be pre-oiled by spinning the
prop by hand....

ah, gene? when you were spending all those years getting that license you brag
about did you perhaps learn what an oil pump is? How about how an oil pump
works? If yes on both counts, how about what an oil pump is connected to?
Howabout what a prop is connected to? How about what happens when an oil pump
turns?

it seems you missed learning much in quite a number of those years you spent
getting that license you brag about.

chris, you numb knuts. the discussion was about aircraft engines built in the
last sixty years.

geesh, dud. wake up.

Chris Newport wrote:

And count 5 blades before hitting the mags.....

The blades passed way too quickly to count and there were closer to 500
blades before the engine lit off. It would give you a stiff neck looking
back at them and there were other much more important things to watch
during start.

The goony cranked real slow - if you hit the mags before 5 blades
you stood a chance of severe damage due to hydraulic lock.
The head of the bottom cylinder could get blown off or the crank bent.

But Jax wants oil in there...........

My real address is crn (at) netunix (dot) com
WARNING all messages containing attachments or html will be silently
deleted. Send only plain text.

JAXAshby wrote:
chris, you numb knuts. the discussion was about aircraft engines built in the
last sixty years.

Those engines were built within the last 60 years, moron. Besides that
little demonstration of your continuing ignorance of aircraft engines, I
don't see where you were discussing aircraft engines. Your only
contribution is a few one line insults of the same very low quality as
all of your posts tend to be.

You don't know enough about aircraft engines, or any engine, to discuss
them here. Your attempts to do so just provide more evidence of your
bizarre pathology. They are in the same class as your speedo pictures,
humiliating at best.

Give it up, Jax, you don't have a clue about anything you claim
expertise. Your own bizarre statements prove you have zero experience of
engines at all much less aircraft engines.

It appears that you really do fit the descriptions of the loser who will
accept any attention for any reason rather than continue in your empty
world alone. Yeah, you are famous alright ... now take your pills and
read some more Walter Mitty stories.

Rick

rick, you live in a universe of your own making. it is a common problem to
those way behind the power curve IQ-wise.

chris, you numb knuts. the discussion was about aircraft engines built in
the
last sixty years.

Those engines were built within the last 60 years, moron. Besides that
little demonstration of your continuing ignorance of aircraft engines, I
don't see where you were discussing aircraft engines. Your only
contribution is a few one line insults of the same very low quality as
all of your posts tend to be.

You don't know enough about aircraft engines, or any engine, to discuss
them here. Your attempts to do so just provide more evidence of your
bizarre pathology. They are in the same class as your speedo pictures,
humiliating at best.

Give it up, Jax, you don't have a clue about anything you claim
expertise. Your own bizarre statements prove you have zero experience of
engines at all much less aircraft engines.

It appears that you really do fit the descriptions of the loser who will
accept any attention for any reason rather than continue in your empty
world alone. Yeah, you are famous alright ... now take your pills and
read some more Walter Mitty stories.

Rick

JAXAshby wrote:
Only one more of his one line retorts rather than address the issues ...

Jax, you are running true to form. You have nothing on which to base
your arguments, you have been trashed again by those of us who know and
do what you can only dream about, and now all you can do is paste lame
insults.

You are a loser Jax. A Walter Mitty wannabe loser who has nothing but a
computer to fill out an empty existence.

What's the matter loser, afraid to talk about engines? You should be you
don't know squat about them and it shows.

Tell us again how pulling the prop over "prelubes" the engine ... Don't
you want to talk about the engines that actually prevent oil from
entering the oil pump during a start? Way over your head but that
doesn't take too much as we all can see.

Bwahahahahahahahahahah What a freakin' moron.

Rick

rick, it is not possible to have a rational discussion with you. Try as I have
in the past, you ALWAYS fail to keep up and then you spout superstition and
voodoo science as the fact of the realm. In fact, if you were to read your
post below you STILL have no idea how the prop is used to prelube an engine.
You just aren't capable of understanding.

From: Rick
Date: 6/25/2004 11:04 AM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id: t

JAXAshby wrote:
Only one more of his one line retorts rather than address the issues ...

Jax, you are running true to form. You have nothing on which to base
your arguments, you have been trashed again by those of us who know and
do what you can only dream about, and now all you can do is paste lame
insults.

You are a loser Jax. A Walter Mitty wannabe loser who has nothing but a
computer to fill out an empty existence.

What's the matter loser, afraid to talk about engines? You should be you
don't know squat about them and it shows.

Tell us again how pulling the prop over "prelubes" the engine ... Don't
you want to talk about the engines that actually prevent oil from
entering the oil pump during a start? Way over your head but that
doesn't take too much as we all can see.

Bwahahahahahahahahahah What a freakin' moron.

Rick