Some caveats for people new to aviation and to this group

Jay Beckman wrote:

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
e.com...
Every now and then we get a contentious, obnoxious know-it-all who in fact
has only rudimentary knowledge of aviation.

Snip Cold Hard Truth

Very well said CJ...very well said.

An recent example is one poster (in another group) who claimed to be a
'naval aviator' in Vietnam and later flew privately.
His knowledge of aerodynamics was such that he 'knew' heavy aircraft
couldn't fly at low altitudes because the low pressure area under the
wing would suck the aircraft straight into the ground..
So there you go ground effect is an invention of those lift fairies :-)

Message exerpts to keep you smiling

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
Al... has no one informed you that you can't fly a jumbo jet at max
speed
anywhere near the ground? There's a rather large lift vacuum
underneath
that would pull it immediately into the ground.

Claim 1
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
It's not difficult at all to understand... but having been a Marine
Aviator
during Viet Nam and a pilot in more recent times, I have somehwat of
a grip on the way an aircraft functions and a definite knowledge of the
numbers and types of parts that sinplt do NOT disintegrate.

Claim2
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
One didn't have to be a military 'pilot' to fly the back seat of an
OV-10a Bronco
on flare missions to be considered an 'aviator'. Never jump to
conclusions...
but since you looked, maybe you could also look up ownership of N-5848A

and it's pilot's logs.

Note: we did and he isn't the registered owner. No big shock there
but do d search and read up on the piloting skills of the 'pilot'

Claim3
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
the mere act of takeoff and achieving cruise altitude requires roughly
20%
of whatever fuel load was placed on the aircraft,

Probably half the people posting on Usenet are not who they say they are or
haven't done the things they say they have done. Even if you ARE who you say
you are on Usenet, it's STILL incumbent on those reading what is written to
do their own research to separate fact from fiction.
Only a total fool takes Usenet at face value. Everything posted on Usenet is
questionable.
When you come to Usenet, you are well advised not to take it seriously. Your
concern for example about this poster being an imposter is simply Usenet 101
for the average reader out here and certainly not worth all the trouble you
are going to in "exposing" this person.
Learn to take Usenet for what it is and it will save you a lot of trouble.
On Usenet, nobody cares for these long drawn out "investigations" started by
some individual to "expose" somebody they are mad at, don't believe, or
dislike for some reason. It just takes up our bandwidth and is a total waste
of time .
If this guy is a phony, his posted information will disclose it soon enough
for those who know, and for the rest it doesn't matter anyway.
Hell, I've been posting on Usenet for years under my own name. There are
people out here who know me personally. Even with that, there is still no
absolute proof that what you are reading right now has been posted by me and
not someone else. Trust me on this one; it doesn't matter.
Typical Usenet example as follows;
I was underposted by an individual who wanted to tell the entire world that
I wasn't Dudley Henriques. He said he could prove that because he knew
Dudley Henriques personally and knew where he was.
My wife immediately sent him an email asking him to PLEASE go immediately
and ask the real Dudley Henriques if he liked to do yard work and if so,
would he consider coming home right away, since the imposter she had been
living with for 40 years absolutely hated to do yardwork!!.
That's Usenet my friend! Just take it as it is and enjoy it for WHAT it is.
Trying to change it is a lesson in futility
:-)))
Dudley Henriques (But is it
REALLY???????????????????????????????????????????? ?? :-)



"george" wrote in message
ups.com...
Jay Beckman wrote:

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
e.com...
Every now and then we get a contentious, obnoxious know-it-all who in
fact
has only rudimentary knowledge of aviation.

Snip Cold Hard Truth

Very well said CJ...very well said.

An recent example is one poster (in another group) who claimed to be a
'naval aviator' in Vietnam and later flew privately.
His knowledge of aerodynamics was such that he 'knew' heavy aircraft
couldn't fly at low altitudes because the low pressure area under the
wing would suck the aircraft straight into the ground..
So there you go ground effect is an invention of those lift fairies :-)

Message exerpts to keep you smiling

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
Al... has no one informed you that you can't fly a jumbo jet at max
speed
anywhere near the ground? There's a rather large lift vacuum
underneath
that would pull it immediately into the ground.

Claim 1
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
It's not difficult at all to understand... but having been a Marine
Aviator
during Viet Nam and a pilot in more recent times, I have somehwat of
a grip on the way an aircraft functions and a definite knowledge of the
numbers and types of parts that sinplt do NOT disintegrate.

Claim2
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
One didn't have to be a military 'pilot' to fly the back seat of an
OV-10a Bronco
on flare missions to be considered an 'aviator'. Never jump to
conclusions...
but since you looked, maybe you could also look up ownership of N-5848A

and it's pilot's logs.

Note: we did and he isn't the registered owner. No big shock there
but do d search and read up on the piloting skills of the 'pilot'

Claim3
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
the mere act of takeoff and achieving cruise altitude requires roughly
20%
of whatever fuel load was placed on the aircraft,

On Sat, 6 Jan 2007 15:10:07 -0500, "Dudley Henriques"
wrote:

.. . .
Typical Usenet example as follows;
I was underposted by an individual who wanted to tell the entire world that
I wasn't Dudley Henriques. He said he could prove that because he knew
Dudley Henriques personally and knew where he was.
My wife immediately sent him an email asking him to PLEASE go immediately
and ask the real Dudley Henriques if he liked to do yard work and if so,
would he consider coming home right away, since the imposter she had been
living with for 40 years absolutely hated to do yardwork!!.

Y'know, that's what's good about Usenet. It offers win-win situations
for everybody.

Don

"Don Tuite" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 6 Jan 2007 15:10:07 -0500, "Dudley Henriques"
wrote:

. . .
Typical Usenet example as follows;
I was underposted by an individual who wanted to tell the entire world
that
I wasn't Dudley Henriques. He said he could prove that because he knew
Dudley Henriques personally and knew where he was.
My wife immediately sent him an email asking him to PLEASE go immediately
and ask the real Dudley Henriques if he liked to do yard work and if so,
would he consider coming home right away, since the imposter she had been
living with for 40 years absolutely hated to do yardwork!!.

Y'know, that's what's good about Usenet. It offers win-win situations
for everybody.

Don

"ain't it the truth" :-)

DH

Education, grandmother, ova and a fair amount of suction.
For some reason aviation is a subject that kooks,wannabes and Walter
Mittys latch onto..
Why?
I have no idea. perhaps with all the accumulated wisdom you have you
might like to pass on the reasons ?
If you want to fly or learn to fly there are hundreds (even thousands)
of instructors waiting out there for you to walk through the doors.
Why just pass over a posters claims when you know that they are
seriously in error ?

The most useless things in aviation are;
fuel in the bowser
runway behind you
and altitude above you

"george" wrote in message
ups.com...



Education, grandmother, ova and a fair amount of suction.

Sounds profound, but I have no idea why :-)


For some reason aviation is a subject that kooks,wannabes and Walter
Mittys latch onto..
Why?

It's the nature of man that he's excited by adventure. It's also the nature
of man that not all men are adventurers.


I have no idea. perhaps with all the accumulated wisdom you have you
might like to pass on the reasons ?

I don't play well with veiled sarcasam, and I've already stated a cornacopia
of "reasons" :-)


If you want to fly or learn to fly there are hundreds (even thousands)
of instructors waiting out there for you to walk through the doors.

Yes I know. I'm one of them :-)


Why just pass over a posters claims when you know that they are
seriously in error ?

As a flight instructor, I will naturally "correct" any "error" in a post
that I determine might be harmful to someone. This however applies to flight
safety. I should also add that even my "correction" should be considered and
researched to competent authority for verification by all who read it on
Usenet.
You on the other hand, are attempting to deal with a person's authenticity
on Usenet, which is a total waste of time and NOT related in any way to
flight safety. You are of course free to do this, as I am free to tell you
it's a waste of time. See.....that's Usenet! Nobody wins. :-))

Dudley Henriques

Probably half the people posting on Usenet are not who they say they are
or
haven't done the things they say they have done. Even if you ARE who you
say
you are on Usenet, it's STILL incumbent on those reading what is written
to
do their own research to separate fact from fiction.
Only a total fool takes Usenet at face value. Everything posted on Usenet
is
questionable.

Very true. At worst; it's entertainment, with no waiting for your favorite
program. At best, it contains information with a bibliography--or at least
a couple of new search arguments to further your search.

Peter

"Peter Dohm" wrote in message
news:jMTnh.20095$_X.12406@bigfe9...
Probably half the people posting on Usenet are not who they say they are
or
haven't done the things they say they have done. Even if you ARE who you
say
you are on Usenet, it's STILL incumbent on those reading what is written
to
do their own research to separate fact from fiction.
Only a total fool takes Usenet at face value. Everything posted on Usenet
is
questionable.

Very true. At worst; it's entertainment, with no waiting for your
favorite
program. At best, it contains information with a bibliography--or at
least
a couple of new search arguments to further your search.

Peter

I always tell people when I post something I feel is of importance
concerning flight safety on Usenet;
"Please feel free to take this post to competent authority for verification
".
Then, after years of posting comment and information, if that information is
factual and accurate, the number of people who actually take your posts to
check them out might diminish a bit :-)
Dudley Henriques

"DH" == Dudley Henriques writes:

DH Probably half the people posting on Usenet are not who they
DH say they are or haven't done the things they say they have
DH done.

All of the people you meet in your life carry a facade they present to
the world, including the guy or gal in the mirror. Surely part of
growing up is learning that, and then learning your response to it.

--
A child af five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child
of five.
Groucho Marx

George,

a rather large lift vacuum
underneath


Really good!

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)