A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

B-52 Re-engining?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #92  
Old September 29th 03, 04:15 AM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Gene Storey" wrote in message
...
"Tarver Engineering" wrote
If you feel that you are somehow a peer in this discussion, then I am

afraid
you have joined those on the usenet that have taken leave of their

senses.

You are a pretender.


Not me.


  #93  
Old September 29th 03, 04:16 AM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"B2431" wrote in message
...


As an example think of his invented term "pitot port." it took a couple of
years for him to admit he thought a pitot tube without integral static

ports is
a "pitot port."


I never admitted anything. The fact that Dan is a little turd running an
archive troll is not my issue.


  #95  
Old September 29th 03, 05:19 AM
David Lesher
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"John R Weiss" writes:


Yet another total BS Tarverism for the archives...


You expected otherwise??

The other difference between Tarbrain's posts and the dozens of swen
virus mails I am getting is, they make more sense.

--
A host is a host from coast to
& no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
  #97  
Old September 29th 03, 05:28 AM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"David Lesher" wrote in message
...
"John R Weiss" writes:


Yet another total BS Tarverism for the archives...


You expected otherwise??

The other difference between Tarbrain's posts and the dozens of swen
virus mails I am getting is, they make more sense.


You know, it is almost too funny to have Lesher, aka Mr. Sam, the all time
usenet KoTM come by to insult me.

At least Weiss is among peers.


  #98  
Old September 29th 03, 06:30 AM
John R Weiss
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Tarver Engineering" wrote...

The pilot flying keeps his feet on the rudder
pedals when hand-flying the aircraft.

An unsafe practice, for modern airliners.


Why does Boeing and the FAA advocate such an "unsafe practice," then?


You need to know how to fly the airplane when it is broke. I think
simulator time would be a much better place to play "hand fly the airplane"
than during revenue.


Well, as usual, your thinking is misguided, at best. Hand flying an airplane is
a skill that cannot be learned and kept current via a simulator session every 6
or 12 months.


No, use of the rudder is explicity unsafe.


It's Ex-Lax time! You're so full of crap, it's taken over your brain! Use

of rudder is absolutely required for crosswind takeoffs and landings, else the
airplane will run off the side of the runway. Seldom will an airplane track
absolutely straight down the centerline even with no wind or a direct
headwind -- on crowned runways especially!

Sure, but then you need to leave the rudder alone. There are exceptions to
using the rudder, but in the general case, a modern airliner breaks when the
operator panics while using the rudder. (ie A-300 USAir 427)


In the general case, the operator does not panic while using the rudder. Your
citation is an exception to the general case even if your assessment of panic
were accurate in the situation.


BTW, I have checked the 747-400 FHB, and turn coordination is indeed a function
of the yaw damper. I had overlooked that detail, since the spoilers tend to
assist in that same function.

OTOH, the rest of your generalizations regarding [non]use of the rudders are
still BS.

  #99  
Old September 29th 03, 01:30 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Tarver Engineering" wrote:


"David Lesher" wrote in message
...
"John R Weiss" writes:


Yet another total BS Tarverism for the archives...


You expected otherwise??

The other difference between Tarbrain's posts and the dozens of swen
virus mails I am getting is, they make more sense.


You know, it is almost too funny to have Lesher, aka Mr. Sam, the all time
usenet KoTM come by to insult me.

At least Weiss is among peers.

John's just having his fun with you guys you know...an aside
here, WRT John W's post. He's just risen 'another' notch in my
view when he corrected himself wrt the yaw damper providing
assistance in turns. One can't help but admire the integrity it
requires to admit even that slight error when arguing with JT.
--

-Gord.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.