Airparks; Living On The Beaten Path?

On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 07:19:33 -0700 (PDT), BobR wrote:


lol Starting with the Subject *Airparks; Living On The Beaten Path? (note
was and is a question), ending with raping freedom-mongers - in three
sentences - I would say you took liberties with the term "gross
extrapolation".


First, I wasn't replying or talking with you but discussing the basic
problem which you clearly display, a total lack of any understanding
of aviation and the risk factors involved. You initial post
demonstrated that ignorance and you continuation has only reinforced
that perception.

I wasn't replying directly to you either, Mr. Sensitive. The only ignorance
going on in this thread is the constant state of denial that accidents GASP
do happen with airplanes and GASP can happen on airstrips next to houses.

Back to the Subject and the discussion, since no one has yet to answer. Has
anyone a place I can go that would specifically have data on these types
(Upper Captiva) of airstrips and the incidence of off runway incidents (w/
houses, people, etc).


Don't expect us to do your dirty work for you.

Dirty work? Something your hiding, Robert?

Then, of course, we have this issue.

FAR 91.119, which states something like "Except for purposes of take off
and landing, no aircraft shall be operated closer than 500 feet to persons,
vehicles, or structures."
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!
I hesitate to add to this discussion because I'm not an instructor,
just a rather slow student who's not qualified to give advice that
might kill someone.

On Mar 14, 1:45*pm, WJRFlyBoy wrote:
On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 07:19:33 -0700 (PDT), BobR wrote:

lol Starting with the Subject *Airparks; Living On The Beaten Path? (note
was and is a question), ending with raping freedom-mongers - in three
sentences - I would say you took liberties with the term "gross
extrapolation".

First, I wasn't replying or talking with you but discussing the basic
problem which you clearly display, a total lack of any understanding
of aviation and the risk factors involved. *You initial post
demonstrated that ignorance and you continuation has only reinforced
that perception.

I wasn't replying directly to you either, Mr. Sensitive. The only ignorance
going on in this thread is the constant state of denial that accidents GASP
do happen with airplanes and GASP can happen on airstrips next to houses.


Apparently, you can't even keep up with who you are replying to.
Nobody is denying that accidents happen. We just put them into
perspective and if we decide to live on an airport, consider those
risks as part of that decision. Too hard for you to understand or
what?


Back to the Subject and the discussion, since no one has yet to answer. Has
anyone a place I can go that would specifically have data on these types
(Upper Captiva) of airstrips and the incidence of off runway incidents (w/
houses, people, etc).

Don't expect us to do your dirty work for you.

Dirty work? Something your hiding, Robert?


Not hiding anything but I might ask the same of you, just what is your
problem?

Then, of course, we have this issue.

FAR 91.119, which states something like "Except for purposes of take off
and landing, no aircraft shall be operated closer than 500 feet to persons,
vehicles, or structures."

DUH! Guess what, "Except for purposes of take off and landing" which
is the expressed purpose of a landing strip, just what are you fishing
for?

On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:52:17 -0700 (PDT), BobR wrote:

Nobody is denying that accidents happen. We just put them into
perspective and if we decide to live on an airport, consider those
risks as part of that decision. Too hard for you to understand or
what?

Excellent counterpoint, you really hit all the high spots.
Is this sort of dialogue considered incisive debate in your circles or
merely witty banter?

Is the Subject Of This Thread too hard for you?

Airparks; Living On The Beaten Path?

You attack like a rabid Muppet on crack. It's clear as a
bright summer day why you get the treatment you get almost every time
you post. You foist the most ludicrous, self contradictory arguments
I've ever seen anyone even attempt in my entire life, then try and
defend them. You're absolutely insane. Obsessed.

Feel free to stay in character and scream about what a "troll" I am
some more for pointing out your glaringly obvious dishonesty.

Feel free to have the last word on me and expect no more gifts, I'm not
****ing Santa Claus.

--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!
I hesitate to add to this discussion because I'm not an instructor,
just a rather slow student who's not qualified to give advice that
might kill someone.

WJRFlyBoy wrote in
:

On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:52:17 -0700 (PDT), BobR wrote:

Nobody is denying that accidents happen. We just put them into
perspective and if we decide to live on an airport, consider those
risks as part of that decision. Too hard for you to understand or
what?

Excellent counterpoint, you really hit all the high spots.
Is this sort of dialogue considered incisive debate in your circles or
merely witty banter?

Is the Subject Of This Thread too hard for you?

Airparks; Living On The Beaten Path?

You attack like a rabid Muppet on crack. It's clear as a
bright summer day why you get the treatment you get almost every time
you post. You foist the most ludicrous, self contradictory arguments
I've ever seen anyone even attempt in my entire life, then try and
defend them. You're absolutely insane. Obsessed.

Feel free to stay in character and scream about what a "troll" I am
some more for pointing out your glaringly obvious dishonesty.

Feel free to have the last word on me and expect no more gifts, I'm not
****ing Santa Claus.


That's right, your not Santa Claus, you're a ****ing asshole!

On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 21:51:39 GMT, Benjamin Dover wrote:

That's right, your not Santa Claus, you're a ****ing asshole!

D00d, go see Bob for some Stress Debriefing. Develop a partnership with
Bob before an incident occurs. Prevention and planning are key
components for a sanity resumption plan. lol
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!
I hesitate to add to this discussion because I'm not an instructor,
just a rather slow student who's not qualified to give advice that
might kill someone.

In article , 726 wrote:
On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:52:17 -0700 (PDT), BobR wrote:

Nobody is denying that accidents happen. We just put them into
perspective and if we decide to live on an airport, consider those
risks as part of that decision. Too hard for you to understand or
what?

Excellent counterpoint, you really hit all the high spots.
Is this sort of dialogue considered incisive debate in your circles or
merely witty banter?

Is the Subject Of This Thread too hard for you?

Airparks; Living On The Beaten Path?

You attack like a rabid Muppet on crack. It's clear as a
bright summer day why you get the treatment you get almost every time
you post. You foist the most ludicrous, self contradictory arguments
I've ever seen anyone even attempt in my entire life, then try and
defend them. You're absolutely insane. Obsessed.

Feel free to stay in character and scream about what a "troll" I am
some more for pointing out your glaringly obvious dishonesty.

Feel free to have the last word on me and expect no more gifts, I'm not
****ing Santa Claus.


I have been reading this group for ten years.

I am always pleased to see another post by BobR.
I consider his comments to be intelligent and well written.

In your case: ** plonk **

On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 23:52:42 GMT, who cares? wrote:

In article , 726 wrote:
On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:52:17 -0700 (PDT), BobR wrote:

Nobody is denying that accidents happen. We just put them into
perspective and if we decide to live on an airport, consider those
risks as part of that decision. Too hard for you to understand or
what?

Excellent counterpoint, you really hit all the high spots.
Is this sort of dialogue considered incisive debate in your circles or
merely witty banter?

Is the Subject Of This Thread too hard for you?

Airparks; Living On The Beaten Path?

You attack like a rabid Muppet on crack. It's clear as a
bright summer day why you get the treatment you get almost every time
you post. You foist the most ludicrous, self contradictory arguments
I've ever seen anyone even attempt in my entire life, then try and
defend them. You're absolutely insane. Obsessed.

Feel free to stay in character and scream about what a "troll" I am
some more for pointing out your glaringly obvious dishonesty.

Feel free to have the last word on me and expect no more gifts, I'm not
****ing Santa Claus.


I have been reading this group for ten years.

This guarantees that you are fourteen.

I am always pleased to see another post by BobR.
I consider his comments to be intelligent and well written.

So do I, add belligerent and mono-focused and we are right on

In your case: ** plonk **

Did you fall into a lake?
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!
I hesitate to add to this discussion because I'm not an instructor,
just a rather slow student who's not qualified to give advice that
might kill someone.

WJRFlyBoy wrote:


In your case: ** plonk **


Did you fall into a lake?



Ah, not, that was you...

His way of saying not to waste his time.

On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 17:24:07 -0600, cavelamb himself wrote:

WJRFlyBoy wrote:

In your case: ** plonk **

Did you fall into a lake?

Ah, not, that was you...

His way of saying not to waste his time.

lol Been on Usenet for over a decade.
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!
I hesitate to add to this discussion because I'm not an instructor,
just a rather slow student who's not qualified to give advice that
might kill someone.

On Mar 14, 4:36*pm, WJRFlyBoy wrote:
On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:52:17 -0700 (PDT), BobR wrote:
Nobody is denying that accidents happen. *We just put them into
perspective and if we decide to live on an airport, consider those
risks as part of that decision. *Too hard for you to understand or
what?

Excellent counterpoint, *you really hit all the high spots.
Is this sort of dialogue considered incisive debate in your circles or
merely witty banter?

Is the Subject Of This Thread too hard for you?

Airparks; Living On The Beaten Path?

You attack like a rabid Muppet on crack. It's clear as a
bright summer day why you get the treatment you get almost every time
you post. You foist the most ludicrous, self contradictory arguments
I've ever seen anyone even attempt in my entire life, then try and
defend them. You're absolutely insane. Obsessed.

Feel free to stay in character and scream about what a "troll" I am
some more for pointing out your glaringly obvious dishonesty.

Feel free to have the last word on me and expect no more gifts, I'm not
****ing Santa Claus.

--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!
I hesitate to add to this discussion because I'm not an instructor,
just a rather slow student who's not qualified to give advice that
might kill someone.

You have attacked the Caveman and now BobR? These two have been good
contributors to these RA groups for years ever since I was just a
lurker. You on the other hand having contributed much. Writers and
readers here can tell who's who.

Wil