F/A-22 flyover during Rose Bowl

"Gord Beaman" wrote in message
...
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:


"fudog50" wrote in message
.. .
What in the heck does an F-104 and HiMAT have to do with the Rose Bowl
and the flyover?? for cryin out loud, you need to change your name to

I like Mary and she can change the subjet to anyting she wants to,
anytime
she wants to. A net contributer to the newsgroup.

Possibly true...unless you want to discuss 'Pilot Error' (she
thinks that there's no such thing)

I do not claim that Mary is accurate, or even honest, just interesting.

(B2431) wrote in message ...
From: Scott Ferrin
Date: 1/3/2004 5:13 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Explain to us how two aircraft making 26 flights equals a 100% crash
rate.

According to NASA the only 2 HiMATs made are on display in the Smithsonian.

According to tarver's 100% crash theory the 2 HiMATs would have averaged 13
"crashes" each.

Well, HiMAT did land on skids, and maybe Tarver's definition of
"landing" only involves tires. It was a wicked-looking little thing,
though.

"Jeb Hoge" wrote in message
om...
(B2431) wrote in message
...
From: Scott Ferrin
Date: 1/3/2004 5:13 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Explain to us how two aircraft making 26 flights equals a 100% crash
rate.

According to NASA the only 2 HiMATs made are on display in the
Smithsonian.

According to tarver's 100% crash theory the 2 HiMATs would have averaged
13
"crashes" each.

Well, HiMAT did land on skids, and maybe Tarver's definition of
"landing" only involves tires. It was a wicked-looking little thing,
though.

HiMAT also flew on the West Side of the SJV, so the San Gabrials were not at
risk. HiMAT is a nice little to, aerodynamically, but electrically, it was
a dud. What the shuttle crash investigation boads says is true, as many of
NASA's problems are directly tracable to the "inability to attract and
retain EEs".