"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 16:31:22 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 3 Jan 2004 09:57:26 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote:


"Mary Shafer" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 16:27:31 -0800, Hobo
wrote:

In article ,
Mary Shafer wrote:

I know that we always worried about the HiMAT (Highly
Maneuverable
Aircraft Technology, a subscale research vehicle capable of 0.9
Mach)
escaping from remote-piloting control and zipping over the San
Gabriels to Pasadena because it's so close. So much so, in
fact,
that
we put a backup control into the back seat of an F-104 that we
chased
it with.

Was the F-104 equipped to shoot down the HIMAT, if necessary?

No. It was prepared to control it well enough to get it back close
enough for the regular system to take over.

Bull****, the HiMAT lawn darted on every flight.


http://www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/HiMAT/index.html


Two aircraft made 26 flights. Last time I checked 2 does not equal
26.

The last time you checked the F-22 was doing fine, Ferrin.

The last itme I checked the F-22 still doesn't have strakes. You
going to put up or shut your pie hole?

Asking a proven and repetitive liar to prove his lie is not likely to get
you anywhere fast, Scott. We all know if the Tarvernaut's claim was correct
he should be able to post a link to a photo of one of these mythical
beasties--but he won't, because he can't. He'll just run his mouth, generate
a few more lies, then astonishingly claim victory with his trademark and
juvenile, "Thanks for playing", and be off to his next set of lies. The
F-22-with-strakes will join the rest of the Tarvernaut's growing pile of
noxious and odious past Tarverisms, such as his
recoilless-howitzer-on-the-AC-130, his "optical nuke", his F-106's carrying
AIM-7's and AIM-9's, his pitot tube nonsense, his unique analysis of Civil
War naval history that "proves" the Confederate Navy was blockading the
Union, etc., etc., ad nauseum. Of course, then again he might just get
really nasty and threaten to sick his personal US-Senator-cum-attack-dawg on
you, or even allude to personal threats...but in the end he is just a sad
little cretin craving attention in any form he can get it, not unlike the
child who throws a tantrum just to get noticed. Just killfile the pitiful
creature--as another poster mentioned to me, that single act can bring you
significant peace of mind...and the fact that you are at the same time
denying him what he really wants (an audience) is just icing on the cake.

Brooks