Home Slamming Down Under; Drone Slamming in AZ

[Skylune[_1_]]

First article covers small plane that SLAMMED into a house in Austriala.
Second covers drone that SLAMMED into a hillside near some homes. Seems
that slamming is spreading to other countries and newer forms of aviation.
Should be really interesting when the VLJs get in on the action!

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/all-survive-plane-crash-into-home/2006/08/08/1154802862084.html

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0807Drones-Side-ON.html

[Kingfish]

Skylune wrote:
> First article covers small plane that SLAMMED into a house in Austriala.
> Second covers drone that SLAMMED into a hillside near some homes. Seems
> that slamming is spreading to other countries and newer forms of aviation.
> Should be really interesting when the VLJs get in on the action!

Ugh. With that last comment you have once again shown your complete
ignorance of aviation. You need to better educate yourself before
posting such stupidity. Are we wrong to expect more from you than just
ill-informed drivel?

BTW, where exactly is "Austriala"?

[Skylune[_1_]]

Ah, jump on a typo... ok.

VLJs: FAA plan is to put thousands of these into the air, and mix them in
with the old GA fleet. Then, sprinkle in a bunch of basically untrained
LSA pilots. (Read an article in GA news that a company is offering a
program to get an LSA license in a week. Damn: that's less time than it
takes to learn to drive a car!!!)

I'm wondering, since some pilots are so concerned about mid-airs, whether
home slammings occur with greater frequency.

[Skylune[_1_]]

But, given your criticisms, I contacted an expert: Bill Mulcahy.

He agrees with me: slammings will become more frequent as more planes
flown by GA pilots are pushed into the air by the FAA.

[Steve Foley[_1_]]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
> Damn: that's less time than it takes to learn to drive a car!!!)

Nope. I've seen people get a license the day after getting a learner's
permit.

[Newps]

Skylune wrote:
> Ah, jump on a typo... ok.
>
> VLJs: FAA plan is to put thousands of these into the air,

Not the FAA plan. Never was the FAA plan.

[Skylune[_1_]]

I'll bet they are highly skilled drivers, then.

As you know, Steve, Massachusetts, one of the many nanny states, is
debating RESTRICTING licenses to young, inexperienced drivers. FAA/AOPA
cabal on the other hand wants EVERYONE INTO THE AIR!!

Step right up, and get your LSA license!

[Skylune[_1_]]

I'll take your word for it. But notice I said "learn to drive.," not "get
a driver's license."

What you are saying is that it is legal to get a driver's license without
having learned to drive. Just like the FAA: get a PPL and fly 2x per
year. All perfectly legal!! Cool.

(A friend is flying his Cessna from ISP this weekend. I asked him to let
me know when he will be near my house, so that I can be sure I am in the
basement with fire extinguisher and first aid supplies at the ready!)

[Jose[_1_]]

> VLJs: FAA plan is to put thousands of these into the air, and mix them in
> with the old GA fleet. Then, sprinkle in a bunch of basically untrained
> LSA pilots.

Actually, LSA pilots can fly twin jets. Look up "Cri cri".

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Steve Foley[_1_]]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> But, given your criticisms, I contacted an expert: Bill Mulcahy.
>
> He agrees with me: slammings will become more frequent as more planes
> flown by GA pilots are pushed into the air by the FAA.
>

Planes aren't pushed into the air by the FAA. They're pushed into the air by
money.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> First article covers small plane that SLAMMED into a house in Austriala.
> Second covers drone that SLAMMED into a hillside near some homes. Seems
> that slamming is spreading to other countries and newer forms of aviation.
> Should be really interesting when the VLJs get in on the action!
>


Yes the news media is all about their buzz words. I once had a News Director
tell the staff that if they used the phrase "looks like a war zone" there
had better be video of bullet holes.

Sure enough I got to cover a shooting in the local 'hood a day or two after
and even though the war zone comment wasn't really accurate I just couldn't
resist.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> Ah, jump on a typo... ok.
>
> VLJs: FAA plan is to put thousands of these into the air, and mix them in
> with the old GA fleet. Then, sprinkle in a bunch of basically untrained
> LSA pilots. (Read an article in GA news that a company is offering a
> program to get an LSA license in a week. Damn: that's less time than it
> takes to learn to drive a car!!!)
>
> I'm wondering, since some pilots are so concerned about mid-airs, whether
> home slammings occur with greater frequency.


Not to worry. I think the hype surrounding how many VLJs are going to be put
in the air is hopeful at best.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Jose" > wrote in message
m...
>> VLJs: FAA plan is to put thousands of these into the air, and mix them
>> in
>> with the old GA fleet. Then, sprinkle in a bunch of basically untrained
>> LSA pilots.
>
> Actually, LSA pilots can fly twin jets. Look up "Cri cri".
>
> Jose


Not as an LSA they can't.

Single, reciprocating engine (if powered), including rotary or diesel
engines

[Morgans[_3_]]

"Jose" > wrote in message
m...
> > VLJs: FAA plan is to put thousands of these into the air, and mix them
in
> > with the old GA fleet. Then, sprinkle in a bunch of basically untrained
> > LSA pilots.
>
> Actually, LSA pilots can fly twin jets. Look up "Cri cri".

Nope. LSA are internal combustion only, single engine only. Look that up!
<g>
--
Jim in NC

[Skylune[_1_]]

Yes it is. FAA's conflicting, dueling missions are to promote aviation
(VLJs do just that, and airport grants to extend runways to accomodate the
VLJs are evidience) and enhance safety.

[Skylune[_1_]]

Oh man, Jose, if Mulcahy gets ahold of that info there is no telling what
he will write in his weekly newsletter!

I won't tell him. Let him find out for himself!

[Steve Foley[_1_]]

But VLJs don't need extended runways.

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> Yes it is. FAA's conflicting, dueling missions are to promote aviation
> (VLJs do just that, and airport grants to extend runways to accomodate the
> VLJs are evidience) and enhance safety.
>

[Larry Dighera]

Our fear of UAVs may be well founded:



On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 08:53:32 -0400, "Skylune"
> wrote in
utaviation.com>:

>
>http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0807Drones-Side-ON.html

Crash stirs debate on drone safety

Alan Levin
USA Today
Aug. 7, 2006 08:30 AM


The explosion nearly jolted Barbara Trent out of bed. At first she
thought someone had bombed the high-desert scrubland where she lives
in southern Arizona.

When daylight arrived a few hours later April 25, Trent and her
neighbors realized that what they heard wasn't a bomb at all. Instead,
an unmanned drone the government uses to monitor the nearby Mexican
border had slammed into a hillside near several homes.

The Predator B, which weighs as much as 10,500 pounds and has a
wingspan of 66 feet, had been crippled when its operator accidentally
switched off its engine. It glided as close as 100 feet above two
homes before striking the ground, says Tom Duggin, the owner of one of
the houses. advertisement

"I was very, very concerned," says Trent, whose house is about 1,000
feet from the crash site. "If it had hit my house, I'd be dead."

Flight issues

The crash of the Customs and Border Protection plane has been a
catalyst heating up the debate over whether it is safe to operate
unmanned aircraft in the nation's airways.

Thousands of unmanned aerial vehicles regularly ply the skies above
the war zones in Iraq and Afghanistan. As pressure grows to put the
UAVs to use in the United States, federal officials and aviation
industry representatives are conducting highly technical discussions
on how unmanned aircraft should be regulated.

The debate also addresses the philosophy of what it means to fly. In a
sense, UAVs are the first example of robot-like devices being allowed
to roam the earth, says Massachusetts Institute of Technology aviation
professor John Hansman.

The questions they raise are profound. Can a machine replace the
skills of a veteran pilot? If there are no people aboard, should the
safety standards developed over the past 100 years for aircraft be
eased? Should a human controlling a drone from a desktop computer be
subject to the same standards as a traditional pilot?

"The increased use of unmanned aircraft by (the military) is certainly
challenging some of the long-held beliefs of organizations that have
worked aviation safety for a long time," says Dyke Weatherington, who
oversees UAV procurement at the Pentagon.

Safety precautions

In hearings before the House Aviation Subcommittee in March, Michael
Kostelnik, a retired general who heads Customs and Border Protection's
Air and Marine office, assured lawmakers that the agency's Predator
had robust backup systems to ensure safety.

"This redundant system works on all levels, from sensors to the flight
computer, and provides a triple-check system to protect the vehicle
and others in the airspace," said Kostelnik's written testimony.
....

[Skylune[_1_]]

How long do they need? I think 2500-3000 feet would not be enough to land
in marginal weather conditions.

I will have to contact the foremost expert on all facets of aviation, the
one and only Bill Mulcahy, again.

He reports objectively, just like Fox News. Here is a sample: "Plane
Death Dive Rattles Home."

http://pages.prodigy.net/rockaway/newsletter376.htm

[Jose[_1_]]

> Not as an LSA they can't [fly the Cri cri].
>
> Single, reciprocating engine (if powered), including rotary or diesel
> engines

Ok, I didn't know it was limited that way. But I think you can fly the
cri-cri without a license, or with just whatever they do nowadays for
ultralights.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Steve Foley[_1_]]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> How long do they need? I think 2500-3000 feet would not be enough to land
> in marginal weather conditions.
>
> I will have to contact the foremost expert on all facets of aviation, the
> one and only Bill Mulcahy, again.
>
> He reports objectively, just like Fox News. Here is a sample: "Plane
> Death Dive Rattles Home."
>
> http://pages.prodigy.net/rockaway/newsletter376.htm
>

Your favorite runway extension project is already over 5000'.

[Kingfish]

Skylune wrote:
>> VLJs: FAA plan is to put thousands of these into the air, and mix them in
>> with the old GA fleet.<<

The FAA is not responsible for putting *any* aircraft in the air. They
just adjudicate over the ones that are. The "thousands of jets" stuff
is just hype. And yes, any VLJs that do fly will be sharing airspace
with the existing GA fleet.

>>Then, sprinkle in a bunch of basically untrained LSA pilots. (Read an article in GA news that a company is offering a program to get an LSA license in a week. Damn: that's less time than it takes to learn to drive a car!!!)<<

If you really think jets, which by definition fly high and fast, will
be mixing it up with LSA (which fly low and slow) you need to do some
more reading on the subject. The only interface would be in the traffic
pattern at (mostly) towered airports IMO.

>> I'm wondering, since some pilots are so concerned about mid-airs, whether home slammings occur with greater frequency.<<

I think *most* pilots are concerned about midairs. Ya know Lune,
instead of continually posting more of your unfounded nonsense here,
why don't you propose a "home slamming" to your
wife/girlfriend/significant other. She'd like that - and it would keep
your mind off of all those dangerous little planes waiting to crash
into your house.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article
utaviation.com>,
"Skylune" > howled at the moon:

> I'll bet they are highly skilled drivers, then.
>
> As you know, Steve, Massachusetts, one of the many nanny states, is
> debating RESTRICTING licenses to young, inexperienced drivers. FAA/AOPA
> cabal on the other hand wants EVERYONE INTO THE AIR!!
>
> Step right up, and get your LSA license!


Is "Skylune" another alias for "Birdstrike Bill" MulCahy?

[Skylune[_1_]]

Your "fears" had nothing to do with house slamming.

Rather, they had to do with compatibility with GA.

[Skylune[_1_]]

"Ya know Lune,
instead of continually posting more of your unfounded nonsense here,
why don't you propose a "home slamming" to your
wife/girlfriend/significant other. She'd like that - and it would keep
your mind off of all those dangerous little planes waiting to crash
into your house."

It would be wife... LOL. That was funny!

[Skylune[_1_]]

LOL Orval. No, Bill Mulcahy has gone insane, perhaps due to all the
airplane noise. I am not there. Yet!

Bill Mulcahy is just as crazy as Bill Boyer, who lived for years in the
fantasy land world of network television. Now he writes docudramas for
AOPA.

At least Mulcahy is fairly harmless: Its funny that he wants politicians
to support his cause, and then writes in his newletters that a "benefit"
of GA crashes is that it "eliminates" politicians.

[Kingfish]

Skylune wrote:
> How long do they need? I think 2500-3000 feet would not be enough to land
> in marginal weather conditions.

Eclipse site says takeoff distance (over 50ft obstacle) is 2300ft at SL
airports, 3500ft at a 5,000 MSL airport. Landing distance at SL is
2200ft. That capability opens up a whole lotta airports that can safely
accomodate the jet. Additionally, the Eclipse is the quietest jet
flying with takeoff noise levels significantly lower than the current
Stage 4 requirement. Combined with its climb profile on departure the
noise footprint should be quite small.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Skylune wrote:
>> First article covers small plane that SLAMMED into a house in Austriala.
>> Second covers drone that SLAMMED into a hillside near some homes. Seems
>> that slamming is spreading to other countries and newer forms of
>> aviation.
>> Should be really interesting when the VLJs get in on the action!
>>
>> http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/all-survive-plane-crash-into-home/2006/08/08/1154802862084.html
>>
>> http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0807Drones-Side-ON.html
>
>
>
> im still new here but i think ur comment didnt quite make sense
>
> could u comment back and tell me what u meant?
>
> thanx
>
>
> nitram
>

Since your new here please understand that Skylune will never post a comment
that you or anyone else can understand.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

> wrote in message
ups.com...



> thanx for making that clear for me!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> is this more a serious group or is it also directed at humor?
>
> sry for makin that sound so weird




Oh we have plenty of humor but we are laughing at Skylune not with him. You
see he once tried to learn to fly and decided he was not capable of doing
so. Now, since he isn't capable he doesn't think anyone else is either.

I also think he has some sort of unrequited crush on the head of the AOPA.

[Bob Noel]

In article om>,
" > wrote:

> thanx for making that clear for me!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> is this more a serious group or is it also directed at humor?
>
> sry for makin that sound so weird
>
> nitram

Anyone have a caps key and some vowels for nitramwin?

--
Bob Noel
Looking for a sig the
lawyers will hate

[BTIZ]

> VLJs: FAA plan is to put thousands of these into the air, and mix them in
> with the old GA fleet. Then, sprinkle in a bunch of basically untrained
> LSA pilots. (Read an article in GA news that a company is offering a
> program to get an LSA license in a week. Damn: that's less time than it
> takes to learn to drive a car!!!)

This is not the FAA PLAN... this is the aviation industry's plan

BT

[Larry Dighera]

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 17:50:40 -0400, Bob Noel
> wrote in
>:

>> is this more a serious group or is it also directed at humor?
>>
>> sry for makin that sound so weird
>>
>> nitram
>
>Anyone have a caps key and some vowels for nitramwin?

I pointed her to the Netiquette web site. Perhaps she'll get a clue.
This is not one of GoogleGroup's in-house discussion groups; it's
Usenet.

I wonder if she's interested in becoming a pilot?

[Bob Fry]

>>>>> "nitramwin" == nitramwin > writes:

nitramwin> im still new here but i think ur comment didnt quite
nitramwin> make sense

nitramwin> could u comment back and tell me what u meant?

nitramwin> thanx

Lesson #1. Usenet is not IM. There is no need to use odd word
abbreviations that teeny-boppers like. Please spell out your words in
full. Bonus points for using a spell-checker before posting.

[Larry Dighera]

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 18:21:52 -0700, Bob Fry >
wrote in >:

>Bonus points for using a spell-checker before posting.

Not to mention using your real name.

[Grumman-581[_1_]]

On 8 Aug 2006 13:19:28 -0700, "
> wrote:
> im still new here but i think ur comment didnt quite make sense
>
> could u comment back and tell me what u meant?
>
> thanx

Awh, gee, another of the idiot kids from the text messaging generation
who are too ****in' lazy (or stupid) to be able to spell words
correctly...

Probably just a kid playing on his momma's computer anyway... Thinks
he's a big **** actiing as a troll on newsgroups... Pathetic **** is
more like it...

<bitch-slap>

<plonk>

--
"Welcome to USENET. Has anyone told you to **** off yet?"

[John Galban]

Newps wrote:
>
> Not the FAA plan. Never was the FAA plan.

Hey Newps,

If you happen to see this, could you drop me an email at:
jgalban(at)cox.net ? Got a question for you.

Thanks

John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Larry Dighera]

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 11:45:46 -0400, "Skylune"
> wrote in
utaviation.com>:

>Your "fears" had nothing to do with house slamming.

Very good. Why you should bring up that fact, given the change in
message subject, is puzzling however.

>Rather, they had to do with compatibility with GA.

Well done. You're catching on.


What I want to know, is if the "pilot" of the UAV that violated its
ATC clearance will face FAA administrative action? If not, why not?

Will General Atomics have its ability to launch its UAVs in the NAS
revoked until it can assure that its products will not endanger
citizens?

What will it take to get the attention of retired General Kostelnik,
now a bureaucrat, focused on air safety instead of his relationship
with General Atomics? Termination?


Safety precautions

In hearings before the House Aviation Subcommittee in March,
Michael Kostelnik, a retired general who heads Customs and Border
Protection's Air and Marine office, assured lawmakers that the
agency's Predator had robust backup systems to ensure safety.

"This redundant system works on all levels, from sensors to the
flight computer, and provides a triple-check system to protect the
vehicle and others in the airspace," said Kostelnik's written
testimony.

In an interview last week, Kostelnik said the crash about 30 miles
from Nogales had not changed his mind. He and the manufacturer of
the Predator, General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, blame the
pilot of the drone for the accident. He worked for General
Atomics, which flew the Predator under contract with the
government.

The pilot told investigators from the National Transportation
Safety Board (NTSB) that his control panel froze up. When he
switched to a second control station, he didn't notice that it was
set to shut off the plane's fuel. The switch cut off the
Predator's engine.

The drone had been given permission to fly at 14,000 to 16,000
feet, an area that was closed to other planes. After the engine
quit, it drifted until it struck the ground.

John Porter, manager of business development at General Atomics,
defended the control station's design and said the accident did
not reveal any safety issues with the plane. Kostelnik said he
hopes to have a replacement Predator flying soon and the agency
wants to buy additional Predators.

[Margy Natalie]

Bob Noel wrote:
> In article om>,
> " > wrote:
>
>
>>thanx for making that clear for me!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>is this more a serious group or is it also directed at humor?
>>
>>sry for makin that sound so weird
>>
>>nitram
>
>
> Anyone have a caps key and some vowels for nitramwin?
>
Just what I was thinking!

[john smith]

The real test for UAV's will be the first lawsuit against the
manufacturer and the operator when one kills someone.

[Newps]

Skylune wrote:

> Your "fears" had nothing to do with house slamming.
>
> Rather, they had to do with compatibility with GA.
>

Does anybody have any idea to whom or what he is responding to?

[Larry Dighera]

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 12:51:23 -0600, Newps > wrote
in >:

>
>
>Skylune wrote:
>
>> Your "fears" had nothing to do with house slamming.
>>
>> Rather, they had to do with compatibility with GA.
>>
>
>Does anybody have any idea to whom or what he is responding to?
>

If you'll look at the 'References:' header contained in his article,
you'll find Loony was following up to:
Message-ID: >

[Montblack[_1_]]

("Newps" wrote)
> Does anybody have any idea to whom or what he is responding to?


With DeLoon DeLoon it's either this, or ...the other way.

Of the two, this is better.


Montblack

[Jim Carter[_1_]]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Skylune ]
> Posted At: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 8:53 AM
> Posted To: rec.aviation.piloting
> Conversation: Home Slamming Down Under; Drone Slamming in AZ
> Subject: Re: Home Slamming Down Under; Drone Slamming in AZ
>
> I'll bet they are highly skilled drivers, then.
>
> As you know, Steve, Massachusetts, one of the many nanny states, is
> debating RESTRICTING licenses to young, inexperienced drivers.
FAA/AOPA
> cabal on the other hand wants EVERYONE INTO THE AIR!!
>
> Step right up, and get your LSA license!
>
>
I'll be first in line if I can find a pressurized LSA that will operate
at VLJ altitudes where I can take advantage of the winds...

[Jim Carter[_1_]]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Skylune ]
> Posted At: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 9:48 AM
> Posted To: rec.aviation.piloting
> Conversation: Home Slamming Down Under; Drone Slamming in AZ
> Subject: Re: Home Slamming Down Under; Drone Slamming in AZ
>
> Yes it is. FAA's conflicting, dueling missions are to promote
aviation
> (VLJs do just that, and airport grants to extend runways to accomodate
the
> VLJs are evidience) and enhance safety.

Your premise is invalid. Promoting aviation and enhancing safety are not
conflicting missions.

[Jim Carter[_1_]]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Skylune ]
> Posted At: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 8:35 AM
> Posted To: rec.aviation.piloting
> Conversation: Home Slamming Down Under; Drone Slamming in AZ
> Subject: Re: Home Slamming Down Under; Drone Slamming in AZ
>
> But, given your criticisms, I contacted an expert: Bill Mulcahy.
>
> He agrees with me: slammings will become more frequent as more planes
> flown by GA pilots are pushed into the air by the FAA.

I'm glad someone's gonna push...this damn avgas is getting way too
expensive.

[Jim Carter[_1_]]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: john smith ]
> Posted At: Thursday, August 10, 2006 9:20 AM
> Posted To: rec.aviation.piloting
> Conversation: Home Slamming Down Under; Drone Slamming in AZ
> Subject: Re: UAVs A Threat to Public Safety? (Was: Re: Home Slamming
Down
> Un
>
> The real test for UAV's will be the first lawsuit against the
> manufacturer and the operator when one kills someone.

Haven't we already done that with one (or more) in Iraq?

Gotta love technology...

[Jim Carter[_1_]]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Fry ]
> Posted At: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 8:22 PM
> Posted To: rec.aviation.piloting
> Conversation: Home Slamming Down Under; Drone Slamming in AZ
> Subject: Re: Home Slamming Down Under; Drone Slamming in AZ
>
> >>>>> "nitramwin" == nitramwin > writes:
>
> nitramwin> im still new here but i think ur comment didnt quite
> nitramwin> make sense
>
> nitramwin> could u comment back and tell me what u meant?
>
> nitramwin> thanx
>
> Lesson #1. Usenet is not IM. There is no need to use odd word
> abbreviations that teeny-boppers like. Please spell out your words in
> full. Bonus points for using a spell-checker before posting.

Extra bonus points if someone can find me a meaning checker...

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 12:51:23 -0600, Newps > wrote
> in >:
>
>>
>>
>>Skylune wrote:
>>
>>> Your "fears" had nothing to do with house slamming.
>>>
>>> Rather, they had to do with compatibility with GA.
>>>
>>
>>Does anybody have any idea to whom or what he is responding to?
>>
>
> If you'll look at the 'References:' header contained in his article,
> you'll find Loony was following up to:
> Message-ID: >

So because the Lune can't properly reply to a message we should have to go
back and check headers? Jeez

[Larry Dighera]

On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 08:21:48 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder"
<wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in >:

>
>So because the Lune can't properly reply to a message we should have to go
>back and check headers? Jeez

If you use a threaded news reader, it should be obvious from the
juxtaposition of the articles which are in response to which. I've
never used Microsoft Outlook Express, but I would expect it to be
capable of displaying article relationships.

To answer your question, I don't think Loony has anything to say worth
the effort to decipher his non-standard postings.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 08:21:48 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder"
> <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in >:
>
>>
>>So because the Lune can't properly reply to a message we should have to go
>>back and check headers? Jeez
>
> If you use a threaded news reader, it should be obvious from the
> juxtaposition of the articles which are in response to which. I've
> never used Microsoft Outlook Express, but I would expect it to be
> capable of displaying article relationships.
>
> To answer your question, I don't think Loony has anything to say worth
> the effort to decipher his non-standard postings.
>

OE Express threads ok buy I hide messages that I have read and the threading
does seem to get messed up regularly anyway.