"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Jim Knoyle" wrote in message
...

That is because being afiliated with your archive troll is a demonstration
of incompetence.

Here are refutations of the first two sections of the Knoyle "be an idiot
too" archive troll.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote:

"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
.. .
"Jim Knoyle" wrote:

Hang on here a second now Jim, you still need two samples. As Dan
says you need 'static pressure' to read the altitude from and you
need 'pitot pressure' (ram air pressure) as well as the static
pressure to derive the airspeed reading from. Sounds like you're
saying that you can read 'both' from just the 'ram air pressure'
alone. Or did I misunderstand you?

Jim has finally figued out what a pitot tube is, but somehow he still
wants
to be correct in his archive troll. It is a great paradox.


I know...ain't life a bitch John

--

-Gord.

Ralph Nesbitt wrote:

Ok educate me. As previously stated my experience with "Pitot Tubes &
Associated Systems" is due fires on Pitot Covers & associated Red
"Remove
Before Flight" streamers, plus IFE's due system problems associated with
Pitot Tubes.

We put those covers on pitot tubes to keep the mud bees out, dippy.


So did I once during a labor dispute.
Square that with your statement: ( direct quote )
"No pitot tube silly bunny.
It would be profoundly stupid to put a home for mud wasps on an airplane
flying as much as a 727."

There you go again, bad-mouthing the Boeing engineers.