"Allen Epps" wrote in message
et...
In article , Tarver Engineering
wrote:

"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" wrote in message
...
On 4/5/04 12:19 PM, in article , "Tarver
Engineering" wrote:


"Doug "Woody" and Erin Beal" wrote in
message
SNIP
Yes. Truly. It's in the NATOPS and everything. My confusion with
your
statements is this occasional mention of a "break out" or "break
out
force." There is nothing like that.

I know that information from having desiged the first accuratee
F/A-18
simulator at Dryden. The reason for bringing up the break out force
in
the
first place was to demonstrate how much force a Flanker applying an
additional 33# of force directly into his crotch to do a cobra would
be
risking. It is a completely different thread, but monkey wanted to
branch
off into a demonstration is his huge penis and then immediately
stepped
on
same.


Flanker, whatever... It's not a Hornet, which was where I came into
this
discussion. Okay? As long as you're agreeing that there's no break
out
force in the Hornet, we're square.

Let us agree that I know where the F/A-18 stick breaks out at (20#) and
that
you and monkey are clueless. That is so much easier than stroking your
fragile ego, Woody. It is a safety of flight issue and I am not going
to
budge on the fact. If Canada chooses to use less safe operators for
their
F-18s then that is their business.

Woody, just unload and extend on this moron. I thought I'd give him a
chance at sanity but back in the plonk files he goes.

I don't understand why the Canadians not knowing that the stick force
transducers on the F/A-18 break out at 20#s is a reason why I can't know it.
I am the sane one and cognitive dissonance from those avoiding learning
something new that is only adding noise to these threads.