"I'll spend as much of YOUR money as I want!" - Bu$h's Sunday Presidential Address

No Dan, Knoyle is an insulting ass and you are quoting his archive troll.

Nope, I quoted a google search. It wasn't a personal attck, just a statement of
facts.

Bye now.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

"B2431" wrote in message
...
No Dan, Knoyle is an insulting ass and you are quoting his archive troll.

Nope, I quoted a google search. It wasn't a personal attck, just a
statement of
facts.

Nope, Dan quoted an archive troll, which is intended as a personal attack.

Don't be an asshole and expect professional treatment, Dan.

I suppose I should.

It amazes me an adult in his 50s can't admit he's wrong and switches sides and
says he was correct all along despite the evidence.

Actually, he's not amusing anymore. I didn't killfile him before because it
amazed me what he would come up with in this and other NGs.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

"B2431" wrote in message
...
I suppose I should.

Why not, Dan, you have already exposed yourself as an idiot.

It amazes me an adult in his 50s can't admit he's wrong and switches sides
and
says he was correct all along despite the evidence.

I never changed my claim of what a pitot tube is, Dan. there have been
times that I used terms that you don't understand, but to do otherwise would
be difficult.

Actually, he's not amusing anymore. I didn't killfile him before because
it
amazed me what he would come up with in this and other NGs.

I think most of our posters can look up Henri Pitot's invention and know you
have stepped on your dick, Dan. It is not my habbit to respond to archive
trolls, but
I made an exception for you. The fact that you bought into Knoyle's archive
troll is your fault, not mine.

B2431 wrote:
I suppose I should.

It amazes me an adult in his 50s can't admit he's wrong and switches sides and
says he was correct all along despite the evidence.

Actually, he's not amusing anymore. I didn't killfile him before because it
amazed me what he would come up with in this and other NGs.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Sometimes amusing, mostly annoying is my personal opinion of the fellow
in question. My killfile list for the military newsgroups I read is
getting longer and longer as I get older and older. VBG

George

"George Shirley" wrote in message
...
B2431 wrote:
I suppose I should.

It amazes me an adult in his 50s can't admit he's wrong and switches
sides and
says he was correct all along despite the evidence.

Actually, he's not amusing anymore. I didn't killfile him before because
it
amazed me what he would come up with in this and other NGs.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Sometimes amusing, mostly annoying is my personal opinion of the fellow
in question. My killfile list for the military newsgroups I read is
getting longer and longer as I get older and older.

Do you ever contribute anything to ram, George? I don't remember you ever
posting anything of value and your tabbing onto Dan being stupid does not
bode well for you.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Jim Knoyle" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"B2431" wrote in message
...

From: "Tarver Engineering"

snip

Dan, on the other hand, is a asshole running an archive troll on me
and
wanting me to be nice to him. (ie stupid)

Once again you resort to vulgar and personal attacks rather than
answer
a
simple question.

No Dan, Knoyle is an insulting ass and you are quoting his archive
troll.
There is noting professional, or friendly, about what you are doing.
You
deserve to be flamed off the board, but I have been very patient with
you.
If you feel that you are not stupid, then why do you continue to act
in
a
stupid manner? I can not see how you can expect me to treat you with
any
respect at all.

You still haven't given us an example of a tome when I attacked you
personally
or otherwise. I really don't think you will ever respond civilly. Oh
well.

The archive troll is a personal attack and has been an economic attack
on
my
business for some years. If I thought Knoyle had a pot to **** in I
would
take it away, but he has the protection of nothin to lose. Unlike our
ex-NASA participants, who paid dearly for Dudley's ignorance.



Somewhere I read:
"To argue against an easily verifiable fact for a few months is stupid.
To argue against an easily verifiable fact for three years is insanity."

Knoyle, I already know you are a mental case.

All anyone has to do is compare Henri Pitot's invention to our discussion,
to know you are an idiot, jimmy. The archive troll raises you to village
idiot, but I suppose it does keep you from eating the piece.


We'll need a bit of translation for this bit of gibberish.

As usual, you've snipped the text that you can't handle.
What's so difficult about admitting what the five pointy things
on a Boeing 727 are called?

You *still* haven't shown us even ONE actual application of
P1T0.

You haven't refuted it, so I guess you accept the fact that the
fitting labeled PITOT on the 747 Mach Airspeed Switch is
connected to the lower right pointy thing on the nose. Did you
ever figure out what the fitting labeled STATIC is connected to?

No, Mr Tarver, Dan is correct. You posted that an entire squadron on
jets were lost when they encountered fog and were not equipped with
p1t0 tubes. You stated that p1t0 tubes were introduced only after jets
became the norm.

Right, there is no t0 in a pitot tube for gasoline airplanes.

It is good to see Minyard make a fool of himself too.


Tarver, I have worked on recips as well as jets. I have replaced pito and
pitot-tatic on both types. The only electrical connectors on either type of
tube I have ever seen is for pitot heat. Pitot tubes used for pitot static
systems never has a "T0" on any aircraft.

I have worked several different temperature indication systems from carburetor
intakes on T-29s to EGT on F-4Es to FAT on C-130s. I know what I am talking
about. Do a google search on this newsgroup and you will see that I do.

I assume you are aware of avgas being the common term for the fuel used in
recips.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

From: "Tarver Engineering"

snip

Don't be an asshole and expect professional treatment, Dan.


Take your own advice.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

"B2431" wrote in message
...
No, Mr Tarver, Dan is correct. You posted that an entire squadron on
jets were lost when they encountered fog and were not equipped with
p1t0 tubes. You stated that p1t0 tubes were introduced only after jets
became the norm.

Right, there is no t0 in a pitot tube for gasoline airplanes.

It is good to see Minyard make a fool of himself too.


Tarver, I have worked on recips as well as jets. I have replaced pito and
pitot-tatic on both types. The only electrical connectors on either type
of
tube I have ever seen is for pitot heat. Pitot tubes used for pitot static
systems never has a "T0" on any aircraft.

You are an wrong again, Dan and we can only assume you are either lying, or
senile.

For cold weather:

low t0, more fuel == higher mass flow rate - more thrust

for water injection:

low TIT, more fuel ==higher mass flow rate-more thrust

I tend to believe you are either a fraud, or a troll, at this point, Dan.
Are you a sock, Dan, operated by our village idiot, Knoyle? I mean, this as
a serious question, because at this point, there is no possibility you ever
worked a pitot tube on a jet.