"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Jim Knoyle" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Ralph Nesbitt" wrote in message
y.com...

Splappy you are beginning to get so far out in the "Briar Patch"
beyond
the
"Facility's Left Field Fence" you can barely be "Heard".

I am completely mainstream. It is your insistance on lying about the
reliability of the 747 that is out in the ozone, Ralph. There is
nothing
wrong with the airplane, as it comes from the factory.

Your "burning electricity caused section 40 to fall off" theory
sure finds fault with the electrical fault isolation design and
you accuse Boeing of installing an undocumented section
to boot! Suggest you brush up on chapters 6 and 24.

Undocumented in what way, Jimmy loon?

Undocumented as in nonexistant.

If you mean the unaproved data you mechanics are fed, yes, what you are
told
about the equipment you work on is often wrong; that is the nature of
every
MM ever produced.

There you go again, bad-mouthing Boeing.

If you mean to say that my posts about the section 41/42 join failing,
your
monkey ignorance about inches still has people lauging.


The only time I've come close to mentioning inches is when I
mentioned station 520. Where is station 520 on a 747, Splaps?
Looks like the laugh is on you again!
Remember why I mentioned sta. 520, Splaps?

JK
http://home.att.net/~j.knoyle/section.html