Re: Aviation Conspiracy: Concorde Finally Goes Bust!!!

[Larry Fransson]

On 2003-10-26 08:17:20 -0800, (null) said:

> The graphic (website) version of this newsletter can be accessed at:
>
> http://pages.prodigy.net/rockaway/newsletter243.htm

There's something a little curious about this. The banner on your "newsletter" has a message that says, "say no to monopolies - Boycott Micro$oft". But on the other hand, you used Microsoft FrontPage to build the HTML version of the newsletter, and it certainly gives the appearance of being hosted on a Microsoft server.

So what's it gonna be? Microsoft, or no Microsoft?

[ShawnD2112]

You know, Bill. I've got to admit you're nothing if not good entertainment!

Shawn

"Bill Mulcahy" > wrote in message
...
> The graphic (website) version of this newsletter can be accessed at:
>
> http://pages.prodigy.net/rockaway/newsletter243.htm
>
> Quote of the Week: "I certainly don't think anybody wants practical
> decisions concerning the safety of the flying public in the hands of
> ideologues in the White House" Senator Lautenburg commenting on how the
GOP
> is backing down on air traffic control privatization issue in the FAA
> Reauthorization Bill
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Aviation Conspiracy Newsletter
> #243.........................................Octob er 26 , 2003 Past
> newsletters can be accessed at:
> http://pages.prodigy.net/rockaway/ACNewsmenu.htm Bill Mulcahy
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Concorde Finally Goes Bust!!!
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> As Bill Sees It: (Editorial): Media Creeps Lament The Concorde's End: I'm
so
> happy their gone. This is a victory that some people have been waiting
> thirty years for. However, watching the news coverage of it, you would
think
> they were shutting down aviation entirely (what a wonderful thought!)!!!
It
> really was nauseating to listen to commentator after commentator wail
about
> how the Concorde's demise was "an end of era." This was the way the story
> was "spinned," instead of telling the truth that the public was finally
> getting rid of a dangerous, highly noise and air-polluting,
thirty-year-old,
> environmental atrocity that lost money every year of its operation and was
> used only by the the filthy rich!!! No doubt the media lackeys desperately
> want to be perceived as pro-aviation by their aviation industry
advertisers.
> While some networks did mention the massive community anti- noise protests
> as the reason why no more than a handful of these monsters were built, I
did
> not hear or see one story about Concorde polluting the upper atmosphere,
> which was another reason for its limited production. It was interesting to
> hear the news reporters, who were on the last flight, practically yelling
to
> be heard over the loud engine noise inside the Concorde cabin. Apparently
> while flying, Concorde passengers got some of the noise pollution they
help
> inflict on their fellow humans! There was no coverage of the celebrations
of
> the end of the Concorde in some of the communities under the Concorde
flight
> path, like Rockaway, Hamilton Beach and Howard Beach in New York City. The
> coverage of the last flight had a view (a first...see above) of the
Concorde
> flying over the apartments and homes of the people it assaulted daily.
This
> kind of picture, like aerial pictures of airports together with their
nearby
> communities, are never shown by the aviation/media cabal and very hard to
> find.
>
> Concordes To Be Cut Up And Sold In Pieces!!! I think I would like a piece
of
> the stupid nosecone. Maybe I could make a lamp out of it.
>
> RepubliSCUMS Back Away From Air Traffic Control (ATC) Privatization: Maybe
> the stench of House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman
> Rep. Mica's (pictured at right) saying that he would make deals with
> individual Republicans to have their airports taken off the privatization
> list got to be too much even even for the republiscums. Mica had said he
> would do this in order to get the FAA Reauthorization Bill passed with the
> ATC privatization included. The DemocRATS, who apparently won on this
issue,
> are holding out for a restoration of the original language in the bill
which
> banned ATC privatization. The whole problem started when this item was
> secretly taken out (by request of President Moron himself!) of the bill by
> the "conference committee" which was supposed to "iron out" differences
> between the House and Senate versions of the bill. This whole episode has
to
> be a new low level of political duplicity even for the
congresscriminals!!!
>
> FAA's Bizzaro Blakey Says Flying Planes Closer Together Improves
"Safety!!!"
> Safety is the reason that the FAA uses to get away with their most heinous
> crimes and, believe it or not, they are using it as a reason to cut the
> separation, between planes in the air, by HALF!!! Most people would say
that
> the further you keep planes from each other the safer it is. However, the
> FAA boss, Marion Blakey, says flying planes closer together is "safer."
She
> wants the distance between aircraft to be cut in half, from 2,000 to 1,000
> feet, by 2005!!! You can be sure in the bizarro world of the FAA and the
> Aviation Cabal, they have manufactured all the reports to prove how this
> will be safer. Although this only supposed to take place at "high
> altitudes," I believe the real purpose of all this is to increase the
number
> of planes landing and taking off at airports. Has an Environmental Impact
> Study (EIS) been done on this, as required by law? What about the air
> turbulence issue? I guess they feel that the public has forgotten how
> Flt.587's tail was ripped off due to turbulence from another airplane
being
> too close. I guess it will take a mid-air collision or another turbulence
> crash before this FAA plan is stopped.
>
> GOP Backing Down On Airport Privatization Effort In FAA Reauthorization
> Bill!!! Senate Commerce Aviation Subcommittee Chairman Trent Lott,
R-Miss.,
> said Tuesday he will remove any reference to privatization from the
> conference draft, and that the contentious provision is not worth
> jeopardizing the entire bill. "Taking down the whole bill is a huge
> mistake," said Lott, adding he remains confident the agency will be
> reauthorized before the Oct. 31 deadline. Lott refused to say whether the
> privatization language would simply be stricken from the bill or if the
new
> conference report would include the prohibition passed by the House and
> Senate. Editor's Note: President Moronic-Polluter promised to veto the
bill
> if the airport privatization wasn't in it. Lets hope he keeps his word. I
> thought that Trent (Klansman) Lott had been removed from power because of
> his alleged sympathy for the KKK.
> http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1003/102003cd2.htm
>
> FAA To Allow Planes To Fly Closer Together In The U.S.!!! In January, 2005
> the government will allow planes to fly closer together at "higher
> altitudes" over the U.S. The government says it will improve airline
safety
> and efficiency by allowing airliners to fly closer together at high
> altitudes. That may sound counter-intuitive, but the FAA says narrower
> separations will provide more options to reroute flights around bad
weather.
> The increased flexibility is also expected to save fuel. Currently, planes
> flying between 29-thousand and 41-thousand feet must be separated from
other
> planes by two-thousand feet. Beginning in January 2005, the new minimum
will
> be one-thousand feet. http://www.wqad.com/Global/story.asp?S=1493157
>
> Boeing's Tanker Lease Deal STILL In Trouble In Congress: Bad blood between
> the U.S. Congress and the Pentagon has taken a toll on Boeing Co.'s (nyse:
> BA - news - people) multibillion-dollar drive to lease jetliners to the
Air
> Force as refueling planes, congressional officials and private analysts
said
> on Friday. Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, for instance,
spurned
> on Wednesday a McCain request for Boeing lease-related records of Air
Force
> Secretary James Roche and Michael Wynne, the Pentagon's acting top weapons
> buyer. http://www.forbes.com/markets/newswire/2003/10/24/rtr1122671.html
>
>
>
>
>
> Purdue Universary Doing A National Noise Study? The FAA is calling on the
> country's best and brightest to cut noise and pollution around airports.
> Administrator Marion Blakey announced that seven U.S. universities will
> conduct research into all aspects of the broad-ranging topics with the
goal
> of a cleaner and quieter environment at airports. The Purdue team will try
> to figure out how people react to aircraft noise and to understand why, if
> airports are such noisy, filthy places, do we insist on building our homes
> and businesses so near them. Editor's Note: We can expect the usual FAA
> corruption, lies and pro-aviation distortions using the cover of academia.
> Why isn't the EPA funding this study instead of the FAA?
> http://www.avweb.com/newswire/9_43b/briefs/185917-1.html
> http://pages.prodigy.net/rockaway/newsletter242.htm
>
> Congressmen Shill For Boeing With India? Forty-five US Congressmen have
> urged Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee to authorise purchase of Boeing
> Aircraft by Air India. "It will serve as a great demonstration of
> strengthened Indo-US commercial ties," said co-chair of India Caucus
Joseph
> Crowley. Noting that India is currently looking to expand its fleet of
> commercial aircraft, Crowley said, "I am concerned that there has been no
> movement by the Government of India or the Air India Board to authorise
the
> Boeing sale."
>
http://www.ndtv.com/business/showbusinessstory.asp?slug=US+urges+for+Boeing+
sale+to+AI&id=15697
> Boeing Opens Up Technology Office...In India!!! Boeing International
> Corporation is setting up a wholly owned information technology subsidiary
> company in India. The company will also provide marketing, sales and
support
> services to the Chicago-based aerospace major.
>
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/xml/uncomp/articleshow?msid=2516
11
> Editor's Note: Maybe they could get Iraqis to buy some if we could open
> their airports without worrying about planes being hit with a should-fired
> missiles.
>
> @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
>
> Important Aviation News Stories This Week
>
> October 22, 2003 http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1003/102203cd2.htm
>
> FAA Reauthorization Bill: GOP backs off FAA privatization, but Dems seek
> more
>
> Republicans may be ready to strip air traffic control privatization
language
> from the Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization bill, but
Democrats
> still maintain that the original anti-privatization provision passed by
the
> House and Senate must be reinserted for the bill to pass.
>
> Senate Commerce Aviation Subcommittee Chairman Trent Lott, R-Miss., said
> Tuesday he will remove any reference to privatization from the conference
> draft, and that the contentious provision is not worth jeopardizing the
> entire bill.
>
> "Taking down the whole bill is a huge mistake," said Lott, adding he
remains
> confident the agency will be reauthorized before the Oct. 31 deadline.
>
> Lott refused to say whether the privatization language would simply be
> stricken from the bill or if the new conference report would include the
> prohibition passed by the House and Senate.
>
> "We've got to keep all these options open until we get ready to go to
> conference," he said, indicating a second round of conference talks could
> occur next week.
>
> Democratic sources and union officials said that if Lott plans only to
strip
> the provision without reinserting the original language, the bill would
not
> prevent future privatization.
>
> National Air Traffic Controllers Association President John Carr said
simply
> removing the provision "still leaves the system vulnerable to
privatization.
> This may seem like an easy fix ... but to think this returns us to the
> status quo is overly simplistic."
>
> A Democratic source close to the conference said a plan only to strike the
> language would be "ridiculous" and "a step in the wrong direction." He
added
> that Congress will have to pass another temporary extension of federal
> aviation programs before Oct. 31 unless Democrats are included in the
> conference process.
>
> "Nothing's going to happen until they come to us, rather than just putting
> all these proposals out there to see if they can get the votes," he said.
>
> Meanwhile, House Transportation and Infrastructure Aviation Subcommittee
> Chairman John Mica, R-Fla., is floating a proposal that would shift
command
> of the air traffic control workforce to the military. Such a move would
then
> prevent air traffic controllers from joining a union. Mica plans to hold a
> hearing Nov. 6 to discuss the possibility.
>
> Carr said Mica's idea "recognizes the inherently governmental function of
> air traffic control, although we believe the military's priority should be
> military air traffic control, not civilian." He also expressed concern
that
> a military currently fighting the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan
may
> already be spread too thin to take on the responsibility of the domestic
air
> traffic control syst
>
>

[Dave]

"ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
...
> You know, Bill. I've got to admit you're nothing if not good
entertainment!
>

I for one am sad to see the end of Concorde. For one minute each day there
was the noise, but what a site.

Whilst Concorde may be gone, its legacy will continue. Concorde was an Anglo
French collaboration, which eventually paved the way for Airbus which now
ships more aircraft than Boeing and will continue to out perform Boeing.

Before someone says that Airbus is subsidized by its sponsoring governments
and therefore poses unfair competition to Boeing just remember how many tax
dollars Boeing gets for overpriced aircraft, inflated price research and
state governments falling over themselves to offer advantageous terms for
building new assembly plants.

So every you see an Airbus, remember that Concorde was the founder member of
the Airbus family.

Dave

[Tarver Engineering]

"Dave" > wrote in message
...
>
> "ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
> ...
> > You know, Bill. I've got to admit you're nothing if not good
> entertainment!
> >
>
> I for one am sad to see the end of Concorde. For one minute each day there
> was the noise, but what a site.
>
> Whilst Concorde may be gone, its legacy will continue. Concorde was an
Anglo
> French collaboration, which eventually paved the way for Airbus which now
> ships more aircraft than Boeing and will continue to out perform Boeing.

No, AI has never shipped more aircraft than Boeing.

> Before someone says that Airbus is subsidized by its sponsoring
governments
> and therefore poses unfair competition to Boeing just remember how many
tax
> dollars Boeing gets for overpriced aircraft, inflated price research and
> state governments falling over themselves to offer advantageous terms for
> building new assembly plants.

Bull****.

> So every you see an Airbus, remember that Concorde was the founder member
of
> the Airbus family.

Concorde was a $1.5 billion subsidy, equivalent to $14 billion today.

[Dave]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dave" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > You know, Bill. I've got to admit you're nothing if not good
> > entertainment!
> > >
> >
> > I for one am sad to see the end of Concorde. For one minute each day
there
> > was the noise, but what a site.
> >
> > Whilst Concorde may be gone, its legacy will continue. Concorde was an
> Anglo
> > French collaboration, which eventually paved the way for Airbus which
now
> > ships more aircraft than Boeing and will continue to out perform Boeing.
>
> No, AI has never shipped more aircraft than Boeing.
>

AI will ship more civil aircraft this year than the ****heads at Boeing

[Tarver Engineering]

"Dave" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Dave" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > "ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > You know, Bill. I've got to admit you're nothing if not good
entertainment!
> > > >
> > >
> > > I for one am sad to see the end of Concorde. For one minute each day
there
> > > was the noise, but what a site.
> > >
> > > Whilst Concorde may be gone, its legacy will continue. Concorde was an
Anglo
> > > French collaboration, which eventually paved the way for Airbus which
now
> > > ships more aircraft than Boeing and will continue to out perform
Boeing.
> >
> > No, AI has never shipped more aircraft than Boeing.
> >
>
> AI will ship more civil aircraft this year than the ****heads at Boeing

Perhaps, but this year is not past.

[Dave]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dave" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > "Dave" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > >
> > > > "ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > > > > You know, Bill. I've got to admit you're nothing if not good
> entertainment!
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I for one am sad to see the end of Concorde. For one minute each day
> there
> > > > was the noise, but what a site.
> > > >
> > > > Whilst Concorde may be gone, its legacy will continue. Concorde was
an
> Anglo
> > > > French collaboration, which eventually paved the way for Airbus
which
> now
> > > > ships more aircraft than Boeing and will continue to out perform
> Boeing.
> > >
> > > No, AI has never shipped more aircraft than Boeing.
> > >
> >
> > AI will ship more civil aircraft this year than the ****heads at Boeing
>
> Perhaps, but this year is not past.

Ironic that one of the Concordes is going to Boeing in Seattle. No doubt the
Boeing engineers will enjoy having a look at her.

I also imagine that they will take better care of her that the clowns at the
Intrepid in New York.

Mind you I still don't understand why BA and AirFrance have let the aircraft
go to the US since it was the US that did its best to prevent Concorde being
a commercial success.

But then Concorde was not built in the USA.

[Tarver Engineering]

"Dave" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Dave" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > >
> > > > "Dave" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > > > >
> > > > > "ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
> > > > > ...
> > > > > > You know, Bill. I've got to admit you're nothing if not good
entertainment!
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I for one am sad to see the end of Concorde. For one minute each
day there
> > > > > was the noise, but what a site.
> > > > >
> > > > > Whilst Concorde may be gone, its legacy will continue. Concorde
was an Anglo
> > > > > French collaboration, which eventually paved the way for Airbus
which now
> > > > > ships more aircraft than Boeing and will continue to out perform
Boeing.
> > > >
> > > > No, AI has never shipped more aircraft than Boeing.

> > > AI will ship more civil aircraft this year than the ****heads at
Boeing
> >
> > Perhaps, but this year is not past.
>
> Ironic that one of the Concordes is going to Boeing in Seattle. No doubt
the
> Boeing engineers will enjoy having a look at her.

I doubt Boeing's engineers could give a flying **** about the Concorde, but
plenty of tourists will enjoy the static display and say "glory days".

> I also imagine that they will take better care of her that the clowns at
the
> Intrepid in New York.
>
> Mind you I still don't understand why BA and AirFrance have let the
aircraft
> go to the US since it was the US that did its best to prevent Concorde
being
> a commercial success.

Concorde was never a comercial success, but it was a gigantic subsidy to
European aerospace.

[Micbloo]

>There was no coverage of the celebrations of
>the end of the Concorde in some of the communities under the Concorde flight
>path, like Rockaway, Hamilton Beach and Howard Beach in New York City

Yes there was. But you being holed up in Orange County, NY with your little
black & white TV it would be difficult to see the coverage.
Maybe now you'll come out of the woods and return to the Rockaways.
Nah, stay up where you are.

[Micbloo]

> In conclusion, it seems that your bandstanding on about being
>anti-aviation, though perfectly within your rights as a free American,
>is completely devoid of any credible fact or knowlege to back up your
>arguments.

That's Bills BIG problem. He has no clue what he is complaining about. You
would think after all these years he would have a little knowledge about the
aviation industry but he doesnt. He throws out wild, inaccurate statements
then gets hammered by those with real knowledge. And he wonders why he gets
nothing accomplished and everyone treats him like a buffoon. If you're going
to be an activist against something at least KNOW WHAT THE "F" YOU ARE TALKING
ABOUT.

[Steve McCroskey]

And Bombardier will ship more then the two of them combined.. What's the point?

"Dave" > wrote in message >...
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Dave" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > "ShawnD2112" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > You know, Bill. I've got to admit you're nothing if not good
> entertainment!
> > > >
> > >
> > > I for one am sad to see the end of Concorde. For one minute each day
> there
> > > was the noise, but what a site.
> > >
> > > Whilst Concorde may be gone, its legacy will continue. Concorde was an
> Anglo
> > > French collaboration, which eventually paved the way for Airbus which
> now
> > > ships more aircraft than Boeing and will continue to out perform Boeing.
> >
> > No, AI has never shipped more aircraft than Boeing.
> >
>
> AI will ship more civil aircraft this year than the ****heads at Boeing