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 » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

ATC Altimeter Settings



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 9th 05, 12:09 AM
Jose
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Nearby" means it's located a short distance away.

.... and what is "short"? A distance which is nearby?

What you intended it to mean is irrelevant.


Unless one wants to communicate.

Minimum IFR altitudes apply to IFR operations without regard to IMC or VMC.


I believe I said that, or something consistant with that.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
  #2  
Old April 9th 05, 01:41 AM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Jose" wrote in message
. com...

... and what is "short"? A distance which is nearby?


Short is having little length; not long.



Unless one wants to communicate.


Wanting to communicate is one thing, having the ability to do so is another.



I believe I said that, or something consistant with that.


You're mistaken.


  #3  
Old April 9th 05, 04:31 PM
Jose
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Short is having little length; not long.

....and what is long? "Not short"?

Wanting to communicate is one thing, having the ability to do so is another.


One of us lacks that ability. I won't speculate on which one that is.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
  #4  
Old April 9th 05, 04:44 PM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Jose" wrote in message
m...

...and what is long? "Not short"?


Long is having the greater length of two or the greatest length of several.



One of us lacks that ability.


Correct.



I won't speculate on which one that is.


It is you.


  #5  
Old April 10th 05, 08:42 AM
Chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Jose" wrote in message
m...

...and what is long? "Not short"?


Long is having the greater length of two or the greatest length of
several.


Incorrect, that's longer, i.e. there are two long runways but one is
longer than the other, or two short runways with one longer.

Having the greater length of several is "longest".

long longer longest


  #6  
Old April 10th 05, 02:04 PM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Chris" wrote in message
...

Incorrect, that's longer, i.e. there are two long runways but one is
longer than the other, or two short runways with one longer.


Wouldn't the longer of the two be the long one?



Having the greater length of several is "longest".

long longer longest


They're not my definitions, your argument is with a dictionary.



  #7  
Old April 10th 05, 04:28 PM
Chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Chris" wrote in message
...

Incorrect, that's longer, i.e. there are two long runways but one is
longer than the other, or two short runways with one longer.


Wouldn't the longer of the two be the long one?


Nope the longer of the two would be the longer one. They could both be long
ones, but only one can be longer.


  #8  
Old April 10th 05, 03:54 PM
Jose
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Long is having the greater length of two or the greatest length of several.

No, it isn't.

It is you.


Apparantly not.

Followups to alt.definitions and rec.english and misc.oumunications

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
  #9  
Old April 10th 05, 04:09 PM
Steven P. McNicoll
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Jose" wrote in message
...

No, it isn't.


According to dictionaries it is. Why don't you tell the dictionary
producers they're wrong?



Apparantly not.


It clearly is.


 




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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pressure Altitude and Terminology Icebound Piloting 0 November 27th 04 10:14 PM
Local altimeter at BFM Dan Luke Instrument Flight Rules 3 June 15th 04 03:01 PM
Why not use the F-22 to replace the F/A-18 and F-14? Tony Naval Aviation 290 March 7th 04 08:58 PM
Why not use the F-22 to replace the F/A-18 and F-14? Guy Alcala Military Aviation 265 March 7th 04 10:28 AM
Altimeter experience HankC Piloting 2 July 25th 03 10:43 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:58 AM.


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