My Modest Proposal to End Global Warming, Revitalize General Aviation, and End Our Dependence on Foreign Oil

[C J Campbell[_1_]]

Vast numbers of automobiles with 2 or 3 or more cars per household;
long commutes of single drivers; horrible freeway congestion; urban
sprawl; loss of farmland and wilderness resources; the decay of cities
and the takeover of large areas of our cities by lawless gangs; obesity
caused by everyone eating at fast food joints; dependence on foreign
oil; global warming; pollution; filth, crud, corruption; hundreds of
thousands dead in traffic accidents; the closure of local airports
because of expanding city growth:

All of these problems can be traced to the rise of the superhighway. We
built it, and everybody moved out of town in an ever-increasing spiral
of flight to a chimera of utopian suburbia. The only people left in the
cities were a few of the very rich who understood city life and a lot
of the extremely poor and desperate. People forgot their responsibility
to their fellow man because their fellow man who needed help now lived
in that awful place fifty miles away. City parks were taken over by
drug users and prostitutes because they were the only ones left.
Schools, well, schools were simply abandoned to their fate.

The only reason people really live so far from where the work is
because of the freeway. They thought they would be happy out there, but
demonstrably they are not. So they keep moving further away, never
finding happiness, dragging the culture and amenities of the city
behind them. They wanted to live in quiet farmland, but they wanted
shopping like they had in the city, so they built huge shopping malls
and then complained that it was too much like the city and moved even
further away. They didn't like nosy people telling them how to live in
the city, so they moved to neighborhoods with restrictive covenants and
complained. It is madness.

Much of the only land available was near small town airports, so they
demanded that the airports be closed and developed into more suburbs or
golf courses. The trains were shut down as freight was transferred to
the new railroad of the freeways as trucks pulled entire chains of
trailers behind them across country.

It is time to reverse this trend! Vote no on new freeways! Vote no even
for maintenance! Elect people who will dynamite the freeways! Elect
incompetents who will allow the freeways to die of well-deserved
neglect! Here in Washington State we have been doing that for decades,
but only half-heartedly. Now is the time to finish the job!

When people realize that suburbia is not the answer, they will move
back to the cities where they will be happier and those who have to
live and work in the hinterland and remain behind will be happier.
Automobile usage will be cut by more than half, along with its
attendant use of petroleum.

Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some other
way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the old
days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will spring up
like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The little
planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will realize they
are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the incentive
to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

[Gene Seibel]

On Oct 13, 3:33 pm, C J Campbell >
wrote:
>
> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some other
> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the old
> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will spring up
> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The little
> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will realize they
> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the incentive
> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>

Sounds good to me.
--
Gene Seibel
Hangar 131 - http://pad39a.com/gene/plane.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

[Jay Honeck]

> Sounds good to me.

Me, too.

I could live quite happily without freeways. In fact, given my 6 mile
(round trip) commute each day, I'm considering an all-electric car as
my next vehicle.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[[email protected]]

In rec.aviation.owning Jay Honeck > wrote:
> > Sounds good to me.

> Me, too.

> I could live quite happily without freeways. In fact, given my 6 mile
> (round trip) commute each day, I'm considering an all-electric car as
> my next vehicle.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

A trip to a client site is typically 50 miles one way for me.

Thankfully I can do a lot of things remotely.

The last time I was able to walk to work was in the Army.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[[email protected]]

> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some other
> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the old
> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will spring up
> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The little
> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will realize they
> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the incentive
> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>

If by little planes you mean 4 seaters and such, then I doubt that
they will ever become reliable means of private transport like the
car. Even with an instrument rating it would require a high level of
skill, confidence and time commitment on part of the pilot to use a
little airplane regularly for commuting. Besides, no matter how many
airports spring up, there still remains the problem of getting from
the airport to the work place and back.
If more and more employers and employees work together to find ways to
work remotely from home, it would reduce automobile usage to an
extent.

[Bob Noel]

In article om>,
Jay Honeck > wrote:

> > Sounds good to me.
>
> Me, too.
>
> I could live quite happily without freeways. In fact, given my 6 mile
> (round trip) commute each day, I'm considering an all-electric car as
> my next vehicle.

Just a note if you ever consider a gas/electric hybrid, with such a short
commute you probably won't see the book gas mileage because the
engine needs to warm up before it will shutoff while driving.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 06:39:27 -0000, wrote:

>
>> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some other
>> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the old
>> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will spring up
>> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The little
>> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will realize they
>> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the incentive
>> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>>
>
>If by little planes you mean 4 seaters and such, then I doubt that
>they will ever become reliable means of private transport like the
>car. Even with an instrument rating it would require a high level of
>skill, confidence and time commitment on part of the pilot to use a
>little airplane regularly for commuting. Besides, no matter how many
>airports spring up, there still remains the problem of getting from
>the airport to the work place and back.
>If more and more employers and employees work together to find ways to
>work remotely from home, it would reduce automobile usage to an
>extent.

what a lonely life that is.
working from home. horrors, perish the thought.
no cultural stimulation.
bugger all new technology.
everything you work with you have to pay for by yourself.

stupid idea.
long live the modern office.

Stealth Pilot

[Jay Honeck]

> Just a note if you ever consider a gas/electric hybrid, with such a short
> commute you probably won't see the book gas mileage because the
> engine needs to warm up before it will shutoff while driving.

Nah, I want a pure electric vehicle. Plug & play.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Scott[_1_]]

How about that flying car thing? Was it something like Moller? ;)



Scott
http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/
Gotta Fly or Gonna Die
Building RV-4 (Super Slow Build Version

wrote:
Besides, no matter how many
> airports spring up, there still remains the problem of getting from
> the airport to the work place and back.

[Matt Whiting]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>> Just a note if you ever consider a gas/electric hybrid, with such a short
>> commute you probably won't see the book gas mileage because the
>> engine needs to warm up before it will shutoff while driving.
>
> Nah, I want a pure electric vehicle. Plug & play.

That is plug and PAY, Jay, plug and PAY.

And given our impending shortage of electrical generation capacity,
people who move this direction are going to pay dearly in 10-15 years
.... unless they can ramp up the nuclear power plants a lot faster than I
think they can.

Matt

[Jay Honeck]

> what a lonely life that is.
> working from home. horrors, perish the thought.
> no cultural stimulation.
> bugger all new technology.
> everything you work with you have to pay for by yourself.
>
> stupid idea.
> long live the modern office.

My wife telecommutes to a job in Wisconsin. She now does it from the
hotel, but for years she did it from home.

With little kids, it was great. Like being a stay-at-home mom, with
income. Going to work meant putting slippers on, and sitting down at
the PC.

Later, when the kids were in school, you're right -- she was socially
isolated, and lonely. She is now much happier telecommuting from the
hotel, where there is obviously ample opportunity for social
interaction.

Telecommuting is great in many ways, but awful in others.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Michael Ash]

In rec.aviation.student Matt Whiting > wrote:
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>>> Just a note if you ever consider a gas/electric hybrid, with such a short
>>> commute you probably won't see the book gas mileage because the
>>> engine needs to warm up before it will shutoff while driving.
>>
>> Nah, I want a pure electric vehicle. Plug & play.
>
> That is plug and PAY, Jay, plug and PAY.
>
> And given our impending shortage of electrical generation capacity,
> people who move this direction are going to pay dearly in 10-15 years
> ... unless they can ramp up the nuclear power plants a lot faster than I
> think they can.

In 10-15 years it's probably time to replace that car anyway.

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

[Michael Ash]

In rec.aviation.student Stealth Pilot > wrote:
> what a lonely life that is.
> working from home. horrors, perish the thought.
> no cultural stimulation.

I work from home and go hang out with the glider club on the weekends,
does great for the cultural stimulation business.

> bugger all new technology.
> everything you work with you have to pay for by yourself.

Funny, my employers still buy most of my equipment even though they never
see me, or it.

--
Michael Ash
Rogue Amoeba Software

[Dallas]

On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 06:06:21 -0700, Jay Honeck wrote:

> Nah, I want a pure electric vehicle. Plug & play.

Just buy a golf cart...

--
Dallas

[Matt Barrow[_4_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ps.com...
>> Just a note if you ever consider a gas/electric hybrid, with such a short
>> commute you probably won't see the book gas mileage because the
>> engine needs to warm up before it will shutoff while driving.
>
> Nah, I want a pure electric vehicle. Plug & play.

How is the electricity generated?

[Anthony W]

I've yet to see any proof that global warming is man made. I've seen
some evidence that it's more of a solar phenomena.

As for ending the dependence on imported oil, so far hydrogen powered
internal combustion engines look promising but will have the same issues
and propane fueled engines. For now it's petrochemical fuel and there's
more in the USA than the feds will let the oil companies drill for.

Tony

[Matt Barrow[_4_]]

"Anthony W" > wrote in message
news:6ruQi.3487$hI1.1829@trndny06...
> I've yet to see any proof that global warming is man made. I've seen some
> evidence that it's more of a solar phenomena.
>

Not to mention the vastly overstated forcing of CO2.

[Jay Honeck]

> Just buy a golf cart...

Those are a bit cold in winter around here...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Rich S.[_1_]]

"Anthony W" > wrote in message
news:6ruQi.3487$hI1.1829@trndny06...
> For now it's petrochemical fuel and there's more in the USA than the feds
> will let the oil companies drill for.

Not to mention gummint restrictions on building the &*^%&^ refineries !!!!

Rich S.

[Margy Natalie]

wrote:
>>Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some other
>>way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the old
>>days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will spring up
>>like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The little
>>planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will realize they
>>are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the incentive
>>to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>>
>
>
> If by little planes you mean 4 seaters and such, then I doubt that
> they will ever become reliable means of private transport like the
> car. Even with an instrument rating it would require a high level of
> skill, confidence and time commitment on part of the pilot to use a
> little airplane regularly for commuting. Besides, no matter how many
> airports spring up, there still remains the problem of getting from
> the airport to the work place and back.
> If more and more employers and employees work together to find ways to
> work remotely from home, it would reduce automobile usage to an
> extent.
>
This is a good reason for flex schedules I work a 9/5/4/ (9 hours, 5
days one week, 4 the next). If everyone did that it would reduce travel
10%. Some folks work 10/4/4 which is a really long day, but if you
commute 4 hours a day (not unrealistic in this area) you save a lot of
real time and traffic is reduced 20%.

Margy

[[email protected]]

>
> stupid idea.
> long live the modern office.

It depends. It would be a stupid idea if it leads to lesser
productivity but lesser productivity rarely goes unnoticed. If your
job is such that you can work from home without sacrificing on
productivity, then getting caught in rush hour traffic while
unnecessarily commuting to work would be a stupid idea instead. There
would be plenty of cases where a worker would be more productive while
working from home.

[Anthony W]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>> Just buy a golf cart...
>
> Those are a bit cold in winter around here...
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA

And damp around here in NW Oregon.

Tony

[Scott[_1_]]

Do you get the mandatory overtime pay (5 hours) for the first week where
you work 45 hours in that work week or are you on salary? My boss would
never let us (non-exempt) folks work that schedule...wish we had a 2-20
schedule (2 days a week, 20 hours each...work 20 straight, 8 off and
then another straight 20)...would be great to have 5 day weekends :)

Scott


Margy Natalie wrote:
> wrote:
>
>>> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some other
>>> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the old
>>> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will spring up
>>> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The little
>>> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will realize they
>>> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the incentive
>>> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>>>
>>
>>
>> If by little planes you mean 4 seaters and such, then I doubt that
>> they will ever become reliable means of private transport like the
>> car. Even with an instrument rating it would require a high level of
>> skill, confidence and time commitment on part of the pilot to use a
>> little airplane regularly for commuting. Besides, no matter how many
>> airports spring up, there still remains the problem of getting from
>> the airport to the work place and back.
>> If more and more employers and employees work together to find ways to
>> work remotely from home, it would reduce automobile usage to an
>> extent.
>>
> This is a good reason for flex schedules I work a 9/5/4/ (9 hours, 5
> days one week, 4 the next). If everyone did that it would reduce travel
> 10%. Some folks work 10/4/4 which is a really long day, but if you
> commute 4 hours a day (not unrealistic in this area) you save a lot of
> real time and traffic is reduced 20%.
>
> Margy

--
Scott
http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/
Gotta Fly or Gonna Die
Building RV-4 (Super Slow Build Version)

[JohnO]

On Oct 14, 9:33 am, C J Campbell >
wrote:
> Vast numbers of automobiles with 2 or 3 or more cars per household;
> long commutes of single drivers; horrible freeway congestion; urban
> sprawl; loss of farmland and wilderness resources; the decay of cities
> and the takeover of large areas of our cities by lawless gangs; obesity
> caused by everyone eating at fast food joints; dependence on foreign
> oil; global warming; pollution; filth, crud, corruption; hundreds of
> thousands dead in traffic accidents; the closure of local airports
> because of expanding city growth:
>
> All of these problems can be traced to the rise of the superhighway. We
> built it, and everybody moved out of town in an ever-increasing spiral
> of flight to a chimera of utopian suburbia. The only people left in the
> cities were a few of the very rich who understood city life and a lot
> of the extremely poor and desperate. People forgot their responsibility
> to their fellow man because their fellow man who needed help now lived
> in that awful place fifty miles away. City parks were taken over by
> drug users and prostitutes because they were the only ones left.
> Schools, well, schools were simply abandoned to their fate.
>
> The only reason people really live so far from where the work is
> because of the freeway. They thought they would be happy out there, but
> demonstrably they are not. So they keep moving further away, never
> finding happiness, dragging the culture and amenities of the city
> behind them. They wanted to live in quiet farmland, but they wanted
> shopping like they had in the city, so they built huge shopping malls
> and then complained that it was too much like the city and moved even
> further away. They didn't like nosy people telling them how to live in
> the city, so they moved to neighborhoods with restrictive covenants and
> complained. It is madness.
>
> Much of the only land available was near small town airports, so they
> demanded that the airports be closed and developed into more suburbs or
> golf courses. The trains were shut down as freight was transferred to
> the new railroad of the freeways as trucks pulled entire chains of
> trailers behind them across country.
>
> It is time to reverse this trend! Vote no on new freeways! Vote no even
> for maintenance! Elect people who will dynamite the freeways! Elect
> incompetents who will allow the freeways to die of well-deserved
> neglect! Here in Washington State we have been doing that for decades,
> but only half-heartedly. Now is the time to finish the job!
>
> When people realize that suburbia is not the answer, they will move
> back to the cities where they will be happier and those who have to
> live and work in the hinterland and remain behind will be happier.
> Automobile usage will be cut by more than half, along with its
> attendant use of petroleum.
>
> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some other
> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the old
> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will spring up
> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The little
> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will realize they
> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the incentive
> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>
> --
> Waddling Eagle
> World Famous Flight Instructor

Sounds wonderful, but if a whole lot of folks start flying the GA
traffic congestion will be a lot worse than what the roads and
freeways are now. Compare minimum separation for cars vs planes!

[Margy Natalie]

Overtime? What a bizarre concept :-0, No we don't get overtime for
anything. If we work extra hours we can get comp time, if we get it
approved first. We can't work more than 10 per day (no 20/2), but the
9/5/4 works out ok, until you end up just going in for 2 or 3 hours on
Sunday and spending 6 (lawn is not mowed, leaves are not up, laundry is
not done, oh well, another weekend shot to hell, but I did get a few
minutes stick time in an L-39 JET this weekend!!!)

Margy

Scott wrote:
> Do you get the mandatory overtime pay (5 hours) for the first week where
> you work 45 hours in that work week or are you on salary? My boss would
> never let us (non-exempt) folks work that schedule...wish we had a 2-20
> schedule (2 days a week, 20 hours each...work 20 straight, 8 off and
> then another straight 20)...would be great to have 5 day weekends :)
>
> Scott
>
>
> Margy Natalie wrote:
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some other
>>>> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the old
>>>> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will spring up
>>>> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The little
>>>> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will realize they
>>>> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the incentive
>>>> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If by little planes you mean 4 seaters and such, then I doubt that
>>> they will ever become reliable means of private transport like the
>>> car. Even with an instrument rating it would require a high level of
>>> skill, confidence and time commitment on part of the pilot to use a
>>> little airplane regularly for commuting. Besides, no matter how many
>>> airports spring up, there still remains the problem of getting from
>>> the airport to the work place and back.
>>> If more and more employers and employees work together to find ways to
>>> work remotely from home, it would reduce automobile usage to an
>>> extent.
>>>
>> This is a good reason for flex schedules I work a 9/5/4/ (9 hours, 5
>> days one week, 4 the next). If everyone did that it would reduce
>> travel 10%. Some folks work 10/4/4 which is a really long day, but if
>> you commute 4 hours a day (not unrealistic in this area) you save a
>> lot of real time and traffic is reduced 20%.
>>
>> Margy
>
>

[Edward Kiernan]

Anthony W wrote:
> I've yet to see any proof that global warming is man made. I've seen
> some evidence that it's more of a solar phenomena.
>
> As for ending the dependence on imported oil, so far hydrogen powered
> internal combustion engines look promising but will have the same issues
> and propane fueled engines. For now it's petrochemical fuel and there's
> more in the USA than the feds will let the oil companies drill for.
>
> Tony
Here's a recent scientific report on the effects of solar phenomena on
the climate.
http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/proceedings_a/rspa20071880.pdf

[Alex G.[_2_]]

> On Oct 14, 9:33 am, C J Campbell >
> wrote:

>>
>> All of these problems can be traced to the rise of the superhighway. We
>> built it, and everybody moved out of town in an ever-increasing spiral
>> of flight to a chimera of utopian suburbia. The only people left in the
>> cities were a few of the very rich who understood city life and a lot
>> of the extremely poor and desperate. People forgot their responsibility
>> to their fellow man because their fellow man who needed help now lived
>> in that awful place fifty miles away. City parks were taken over by
>> drug users and prostitutes because they were the only ones left.
>> Schools, well, schools were simply abandoned to their fate.
>>

Wow, all of the rpoblems of modern life blamed solely on the freeway!! A
single cause responsible for every evil known to man! And only you figured
it all out! You know, I'll bet the problems are a little more complex than
that.

[Scott[_1_]]

Oh...I forgot to ask if you were self employed. That would explain no
overtime pay since it is only required for employment covered in the
fair labor standards act...
http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/whdfs23.htm

Scott


Margy Natalie wrote:
>
> Overtime? What a bizarre concept :-0, No we don't get overtime for
> anything. If we work extra hours we can get comp time, if we get it
> approved first. We can't work more than 10 per day (no 20/2), but the
> 9/5/4 works out ok, until you end up just going in for 2 or 3 hours on
> Sunday and spending 6 (lawn is not mowed, leaves are not up, laundry is
> not done, oh well, another weekend shot to hell, but I did get a few
> minutes stick time in an L-39 JET this weekend!!!)
>
> Margy
>
> Scott wrote:
>
>> Do you get the mandatory overtime pay (5 hours) for the first week
>> where you work 45 hours in that work week or are you on salary? My
>> boss would never let us (non-exempt) folks work that schedule...wish
>> we had a 2-20 schedule (2 days a week, 20 hours each...work 20
>> straight, 8 off and then another straight 20)...would be great to have
>> 5 day weekends :)
>>
>> Scott
>>
>>
>> Margy Natalie wrote:
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some other
>>>>> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the old
>>>>> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will spring up
>>>>> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The little
>>>>> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will realize
>>>>> they
>>>>> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the incentive
>>>>> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If by little planes you mean 4 seaters and such, then I doubt that
>>>> they will ever become reliable means of private transport like the
>>>> car. Even with an instrument rating it would require a high level of
>>>> skill, confidence and time commitment on part of the pilot to use a
>>>> little airplane regularly for commuting. Besides, no matter how many
>>>> airports spring up, there still remains the problem of getting from
>>>> the airport to the work place and back.
>>>> If more and more employers and employees work together to find ways to
>>>> work remotely from home, it would reduce automobile usage to an
>>>> extent.
>>>>
>>> This is a good reason for flex schedules I work a 9/5/4/ (9 hours, 5
>>> days one week, 4 the next). If everyone did that it would reduce
>>> travel 10%. Some folks work 10/4/4 which is a really long day, but
>>> if you commute 4 hours a day (not unrealistic in this area) you save
>>> a lot of real time and traffic is reduced 20%.
>>>
>>> Margy
>>
>>
>>

--
Scott
http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/
Gotta Fly or Gonna Die
Building RV-4 (Super Slow Build Version)

[Mark Hickey]

Scott > wrote:

>Oh...I forgot to ask if you were self employed. That would explain no
>overtime pay since it is only required for employment covered in the
>fair labor standards act...
>http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/whdfs23.htm

Doesn't apply to the huge number of salaried employees. Either that,
or my ex-employee owes me a few million dollars.

Mark "don't I wish..." Hickey

>Scott
>
>
>Margy Natalie wrote:
>>
>> Overtime? What a bizarre concept :-0, No we don't get overtime for
>> anything. If we work extra hours we can get comp time, if we get it
>> approved first. We can't work more than 10 per day (no 20/2), but the
>> 9/5/4 works out ok, until you end up just going in for 2 or 3 hours on
>> Sunday and spending 6 (lawn is not mowed, leaves are not up, laundry is
>> not done, oh well, another weekend shot to hell, but I did get a few
>> minutes stick time in an L-39 JET this weekend!!!)
>>
>> Margy
>>
>> Scott wrote:
>>
>>> Do you get the mandatory overtime pay (5 hours) for the first week
>>> where you work 45 hours in that work week or are you on salary? My
>>> boss would never let us (non-exempt) folks work that schedule...wish
>>> we had a 2-20 schedule (2 days a week, 20 hours each...work 20
>>> straight, 8 off and then another straight 20)...would be great to have
>>> 5 day weekends :)
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
>>>
>>> Margy Natalie wrote:
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some other
>>>>>> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the old
>>>>>> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will spring up
>>>>>> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The little
>>>>>> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will realize
>>>>>> they
>>>>>> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the incentive
>>>>>> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If by little planes you mean 4 seaters and such, then I doubt that
>>>>> they will ever become reliable means of private transport like the
>>>>> car. Even with an instrument rating it would require a high level of
>>>>> skill, confidence and time commitment on part of the pilot to use a
>>>>> little airplane regularly for commuting. Besides, no matter how many
>>>>> airports spring up, there still remains the problem of getting from
>>>>> the airport to the work place and back.
>>>>> If more and more employers and employees work together to find ways to
>>>>> work remotely from home, it would reduce automobile usage to an
>>>>> extent.
>>>>>
>>>> This is a good reason for flex schedules I work a 9/5/4/ (9 hours, 5
>>>> days one week, 4 the next). If everyone did that it would reduce
>>>> travel 10%. Some folks work 10/4/4 which is a really long day, but
>>>> if you commute 4 hours a day (not unrealistic in this area) you save
>>>> a lot of real time and traffic is reduced 20%.
>>>>
>>>> Margy
>>>
>>>
>>>

[C J Campbell[_1_]]

On 2007-10-15 03:20:47 -0700, "Alex G." > said:

>
>
>> On Oct 14, 9:33 am, C J Campbell >
>> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> All of these problems can be traced to the rise of the superhighway. We
>>> built it, and everybody moved out of town in an ever-increasing spiral
>>> of flight to a chimera of utopian suburbia. The only people left in the
>>> cities were a few of the very rich who understood city life and a lot
>>> of the extremely poor and desperate. People forgot their responsibility
>>> to their fellow man because their fellow man who needed help now lived
>>> in that awful place fifty miles away. City parks were taken over by
>>> drug users and prostitutes because they were the only ones left.
>>> Schools, well, schools were simply abandoned to their fate.
>>>
>
> Wow, all of the rpoblems of modern life blamed solely on the freeway!! A
> single cause responsible for every evil known to man! And only you figured
> it all out! You know, I'll bet the problems are a little more complex than
> that.

Apparently the nature of satire is lost on you.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

[Robert M. Gary]

On Oct 13, 1:33 pm, C J Campbell >
wrote:
> Vast numbers of automobiles with 2 or 3 or more cars per household;
> long commutes of single drivers; horrible freeway congestion; urban
> sprawl; loss of farmland and wilderness resources; the decay of cities
> and the takeover of large areas of our cities by lawless gangs; obesity
> caused by everyone eating at fast food joints; dependence on foreign
> oil; global warming; pollution; filth, crud, corruption; hundreds of
> thousands dead in traffic accidents; the closure of local airports
> because of expanding city growth:

If you are really worried about Global Warming you can buy carbon
offset credits from me. Please send cash.

-robert

[Ray Andraka]

Jay Honeck wrote:

> I could live quite happily without freeways. In fact, given my 6 mile
> (round trip) commute each day, I'm considering an all-electric car as
> my next vehicle.

Ditto. Although I need one with about a 50 mile range. Virtually all
of our driving is around town, with the farthest points being the
airport and kid's high school which are 14 and 17 miles away
respectively. I've looked at a couple of the conversion kits for VW's
and Hondas, but so far it looks like the range is typically 40-50 miles.

[Ray Andraka]

Bob Noel wrote:

> Just a note if you ever consider a gas/electric hybrid, with such a
short
> commute you probably won't see the book gas mileage because the
> engine needs to warm up before it will shutoff while driving.
>

Precisely why I am interested in an all-electric, not a hybrid. I work
from my home most of the time, so the commute isn't the issue. The
issue is the requisite running around that needs to be done to support
six kids and all their activities.

[Ray Andraka]

Matt Barrow wrote:


>
> How is the electricity generated?
>
>

by the grid or by a windmill at home. The energy is stored in
batteries, and in some cases batteries combined with super capacitors

[Ray Andraka]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>>Just buy a golf cart...
>
>
> Those are a bit cold in winter around here...


And not street legal around here.

[Matt Barrow[_4_]]

"Ray Andraka" > wrote in message
...
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>
>
>>
>> How is the electricity generated?
>
> by the grid or by a windmill at home.

A windmill at home is not likely to have the output to power an all-electric
car for more than a few yards.

If it's a power grid powered by coal, you're likely causing more pollution
than a car that's nicely tuned.

> The energy is stored in batteries, and in some cases batteries combined
> with super capacitors

Capt. Obvious strikes again "~)

When someone can explain why temps went DOWN while CO2 emissions went UP, or
why temps were much lower during epochs when CO2 was several times higher
than today, I'll buy into the ACC arguments.

Until then, my Toyota 4-Runner suits me just fine :~o

[Margy Natalie]

Scott wrote:
> Oh...I forgot to ask if you were self employed. That would explain no
> overtime pay since it is only required for employment covered in the
> fair labor standards act...
> http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/whdfs23.htm
>
> Scott
Not sefl-employed, I'm a federal employee.

Margy


>
>
> Margy Natalie wrote:
>
>>
>> Overtime? What a bizarre concept :-0, No we don't get overtime for
>> anything. If we work extra hours we can get comp time, if we get it
>> approved first. We can't work more than 10 per day (no 20/2), but the
>> 9/5/4 works out ok, until you end up just going in for 2 or 3 hours on
>> Sunday and spending 6 (lawn is not mowed, leaves are not up, laundry
>> is not done, oh well, another weekend shot to hell, but I did get a
>> few minutes stick time in an L-39 JET this weekend!!!)
>>
>> Margy
>>
>> Scott wrote:
>>
>>> Do you get the mandatory overtime pay (5 hours) for the first week
>>> where you work 45 hours in that work week or are you on salary? My
>>> boss would never let us (non-exempt) folks work that schedule...wish
>>> we had a 2-20 schedule (2 days a week, 20 hours each...work 20
>>> straight, 8 off and then another straight 20)...would be great to
>>> have 5 day weekends :)
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
>>>
>>> Margy Natalie wrote:
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some
>>>>>> other
>>>>>> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the old
>>>>>> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will spring up
>>>>>> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The
>>>>>> little
>>>>>> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will realize
>>>>>> they
>>>>>> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the incentive
>>>>>> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If by little planes you mean 4 seaters and such, then I doubt that
>>>>> they will ever become reliable means of private transport like the
>>>>> car. Even with an instrument rating it would require a high level of
>>>>> skill, confidence and time commitment on part of the pilot to use a
>>>>> little airplane regularly for commuting. Besides, no matter how many
>>>>> airports spring up, there still remains the problem of getting from
>>>>> the airport to the work place and back.
>>>>> If more and more employers and employees work together to find ways to
>>>>> work remotely from home, it would reduce automobile usage to an
>>>>> extent.
>>>>>
>>>> This is a good reason for flex schedules I work a 9/5/4/ (9 hours, 5
>>>> days one week, 4 the next). If everyone did that it would reduce
>>>> travel 10%. Some folks work 10/4/4 which is a really long day, but
>>>> if you commute 4 hours a day (not unrealistic in this area) you save
>>>> a lot of real time and traffic is reduced 20%.
>>>>
>>>> Margy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>

[Scott[_1_]]

Yup...understand. In my earlier reply to this message topic (down
below), I did note that exempt (salaried) employees are not required to
get overtime pay...

Scott

Mark Hickey wrote:

>
>
> Doesn't apply to the huge number of salaried employees. Either that,
> or my ex-employee owes me a few million dollars.
>
> Mark "don't I wish..." Hickey
>
>


>>>
>>>Scott wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Do you get the mandatory overtime pay (5 hours) for the first week
>>>>where you work 45 hours in that work week or are you on salary? My
>>>>boss would never let us (non-exempt) folks work that schedule...wish
>>>>we had a 2-20 schedule (2 days a week, 20 hours each...work 20
>>>>straight, 8 off and then another straight 20)...would be great to have
>>>>5 day weekends :)
>>>>
>>>>Scott
>>>>
>>>>

[Scott[_1_]]

Oh...THAT's killer! You work for the same government that mandated O.T.
pay. Sometimes I just love the way our government works..."It's OK for
us to make rules to protect our citizens from getting screwed, but we're
going to screw our own employees." That figures! ;) Thanks for
hanging in there and clarifying :)

Margy Natalie wrote:

> Scott wrote:
>
>> Oh...I forgot to ask if you were self employed. That would explain no
>> overtime pay since it is only required for employment covered in the
>> fair labor standards act...
>> http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/whdfs23.htm
>>
>> Scott
>
> Not sefl-employed, I'm a federal employee.
>
> Margy
>
>
>>
>>
>> Margy Natalie wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Overtime? What a bizarre concept :-0, No we don't get overtime for
>>> anything. If we work extra hours we can get comp time, if we get it
>>> approved first. We can't work more than 10 per day (no 20/2), but
>>> the 9/5/4 works out ok, until you end up just going in for 2 or 3
>>> hours on Sunday and spending 6 (lawn is not mowed, leaves are not up,
>>> laundry is not done, oh well, another weekend shot to hell, but I did
>>> get a few minutes stick time in an L-39 JET this weekend!!!)
>>>
>>> Margy
>>>
>>> Scott wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do you get the mandatory overtime pay (5 hours) for the first week
>>>> where you work 45 hours in that work week or are you on salary? My
>>>> boss would never let us (non-exempt) folks work that schedule...wish
>>>> we had a 2-20 schedule (2 days a week, 20 hours each...work 20
>>>> straight, 8 off and then another straight 20)...would be great to
>>>> have 5 day weekends :)
>>>>
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Margy Natalie wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some
>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the old
>>>>>>> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will spring up
>>>>>>> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The
>>>>>>> little
>>>>>>> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will
>>>>>>> realize they
>>>>>>> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the
>>>>>>> incentive
>>>>>>> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If by little planes you mean 4 seaters and such, then I doubt that
>>>>>> they will ever become reliable means of private transport like the
>>>>>> car. Even with an instrument rating it would require a high level of
>>>>>> skill, confidence and time commitment on part of the pilot to use a
>>>>>> little airplane regularly for commuting. Besides, no matter how many
>>>>>> airports spring up, there still remains the problem of getting from
>>>>>> the airport to the work place and back.
>>>>>> If more and more employers and employees work together to find
>>>>>> ways to
>>>>>> work remotely from home, it would reduce automobile usage to an
>>>>>> extent.
>>>>>>
>>>>> This is a good reason for flex schedules I work a 9/5/4/ (9 hours,
>>>>> 5 days one week, 4 the next). If everyone did that it would reduce
>>>>> travel 10%. Some folks work 10/4/4 which is a really long day, but
>>>>> if you commute 4 hours a day (not unrealistic in this area) you
>>>>> save a lot of real time and traffic is reduced 20%.
>>>>>
>>>>> Margy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>

--
Scott
http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/
Gotta Fly or Gonna Die
Building RV-4 (Super Slow Build Version)

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Margy Natalie" <> wrote

> but I did get a few minutes stick time in an L-39 JET this weekend!!!)

Cool beans!

Shoot, I'd settle for a ride in an L-39, let alone some stick time!

Go on; you told us a little, now spill it! Tell us all about it, so we can
live vicariously! <g>
--
Jim in NC

[Margy Natalie]

Scott wrote:
> Oh...THAT's killer! You work for the same government that mandated O.T.
> pay. Sometimes I just love the way our government works..."It's OK for
> us to make rules to protect our citizens from getting screwed, but we're
> going to screw our own employees." That figures! ;) Thanks for
> hanging in there and clarifying :)

I'm on a salary, I just work and work (no matter what Jay says about
Federal workers). I do get comp time, but somehow getting a Thurday off
doesn't really make up for working a Saturday night, if you know what I
mean. I do get to do some really cool stuff, meet really great people,
and I have an SR-71 outside of my office, so that's a plus!

Margy
>
> Margy Natalie wrote:
>
>> Scott wrote:
>>
>>> Oh...I forgot to ask if you were self employed. That would explain
>>> no overtime pay since it is only required for employment covered in
>>> the fair labor standards act...
>>> http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/whdfs23.htm
>>>
>>> Scott
>>
>>
>> Not sefl-employed, I'm a federal employee.
>>
>> Margy
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Margy Natalie wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Overtime? What a bizarre concept :-0, No we don't get overtime for
>>>> anything. If we work extra hours we can get comp time, if we get it
>>>> approved first. We can't work more than 10 per day (no 20/2), but
>>>> the 9/5/4 works out ok, until you end up just going in for 2 or 3
>>>> hours on Sunday and spending 6 (lawn is not mowed, leaves are not
>>>> up, laundry is not done, oh well, another weekend shot to hell, but
>>>> I did get a few minutes stick time in an L-39 JET this weekend!!!)
>>>>
>>>> Margy
>>>>
>>>> Scott wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Do you get the mandatory overtime pay (5 hours) for the first week
>>>>> where you work 45 hours in that work week or are you on salary? My
>>>>> boss would never let us (non-exempt) folks work that
>>>>> schedule...wish we had a 2-20 schedule (2 days a week, 20 hours
>>>>> each...work 20 straight, 8 off and then another straight
>>>>> 20)...would be great to have 5 day weekends :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Scott
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Margy Natalie wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some
>>>>>>>> other
>>>>>>>> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the
>>>>>>>> old
>>>>>>>> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will
>>>>>>>> spring up
>>>>>>>> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The
>>>>>>>> little
>>>>>>>> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will
>>>>>>>> realize they
>>>>>>>> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the
>>>>>>>> incentive
>>>>>>>> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If by little planes you mean 4 seaters and such, then I doubt that
>>>>>>> they will ever become reliable means of private transport like the
>>>>>>> car. Even with an instrument rating it would require a high level of
>>>>>>> skill, confidence and time commitment on part of the pilot to use a
>>>>>>> little airplane regularly for commuting. Besides, no matter how many
>>>>>>> airports spring up, there still remains the problem of getting from
>>>>>>> the airport to the work place and back.
>>>>>>> If more and more employers and employees work together to find
>>>>>>> ways to
>>>>>>> work remotely from home, it would reduce automobile usage to an
>>>>>>> extent.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a good reason for flex schedules I work a 9/5/4/ (9 hours,
>>>>>> 5 days one week, 4 the next). If everyone did that it would reduce
>>>>>> travel 10%. Some folks work 10/4/4 which is a really long day,
>>>>>> but if you commute 4 hours a day (not unrealistic in this area)
>>>>>> you save a lot of real time and traffic is reduced 20%.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Margy
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>

[Scott[_1_]]

I think I'd rather have my office IN an SR-71 :)

I was never a big fan of comp time...especially when the boss was the
one who decided which day he would give you as comp time :(

Scott


Margy Natalie wrote:
> Scott wrote:
>
>> Oh...THAT's killer! You work for the same government that mandated
>> O.T. pay. Sometimes I just love the way our government works..."It's
>> OK for us to make rules to protect our citizens from getting screwed,
>> but we're going to screw our own employees." That figures! ;)
>> Thanks for hanging in there and clarifying :)
>
>
> I'm on a salary, I just work and work (no matter what Jay says about
> Federal workers). I do get comp time, but somehow getting a Thurday off
> doesn't really make up for working a Saturday night, if you know what I
> mean. I do get to do some really cool stuff, meet really great people,
> and I have an SR-71 outside of my office, so that's a plus!
>
> Margy
>
>>
>> Margy Natalie wrote:
>>
>>> Scott wrote:
>>>
>>>> Oh...I forgot to ask if you were self employed. That would explain
>>>> no overtime pay since it is only required for employment covered in
>>>> the fair labor standards act...
>>>> http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/whdfs23.htm
>>>>
>>>> Scott
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Not sefl-employed, I'm a federal employee.
>>>
>>> Margy
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Margy Natalie wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Overtime? What a bizarre concept :-0, No we don't get overtime
>>>>> for anything. If we work extra hours we can get comp time, if we
>>>>> get it approved first. We can't work more than 10 per day (no
>>>>> 20/2), but the 9/5/4 works out ok, until you end up just going in
>>>>> for 2 or 3 hours on Sunday and spending 6 (lawn is not mowed,
>>>>> leaves are not up, laundry is not done, oh well, another weekend
>>>>> shot to hell, but I did get a few minutes stick time in an L-39 JET
>>>>> this weekend!!!)
>>>>>
>>>>> Margy
>>>>>
>>>>> Scott wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you get the mandatory overtime pay (5 hours) for the first week
>>>>>> where you work 45 hours in that work week or are you on salary?
>>>>>> My boss would never let us (non-exempt) folks work that
>>>>>> schedule...wish we had a 2-20 schedule (2 days a week, 20 hours
>>>>>> each...work 20 straight, 8 off and then another straight
>>>>>> 20)...would be great to have 5 day weekends :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Margy Natalie wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need
>>>>>>>>> some other
>>>>>>>>> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in
>>>>>>>>> the old
>>>>>>>>> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will
>>>>>>>>> spring up
>>>>>>>>> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The
>>>>>>>>> little
>>>>>>>>> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will
>>>>>>>>> realize they
>>>>>>>>> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the
>>>>>>>>> incentive
>>>>>>>>> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If by little planes you mean 4 seaters and such, then I doubt that
>>>>>>>> they will ever become reliable means of private transport like the
>>>>>>>> car. Even with an instrument rating it would require a high
>>>>>>>> level of
>>>>>>>> skill, confidence and time commitment on part of the pilot to use a
>>>>>>>> little airplane regularly for commuting. Besides, no matter how
>>>>>>>> many
>>>>>>>> airports spring up, there still remains the problem of getting from
>>>>>>>> the airport to the work place and back.
>>>>>>>> If more and more employers and employees work together to find
>>>>>>>> ways to
>>>>>>>> work remotely from home, it would reduce automobile usage to an
>>>>>>>> extent.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is a good reason for flex schedules I work a 9/5/4/ (9
>>>>>>> hours, 5 days one week, 4 the next). If everyone did that it
>>>>>>> would reduce travel 10%. Some folks work 10/4/4 which is a
>>>>>>> really long day, but if you commute 4 hours a day (not
>>>>>>> unrealistic in this area) you save a lot of real time and traffic
>>>>>>> is reduced 20%.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Margy
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>

--
Scott
http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/
Gotta Fly or Gonna Die
Building RV-4 (Super Slow Build Version)

[Margy Natalie]

Morgans wrote:
> "Margy Natalie" <> wrote
>
>
>>but I did get a few minutes stick time in an L-39 JET this weekend!!!)
>
>
> Cool beans!
>
> Shoot, I'd settle for a ride in an L-39, let alone some stick time!
>
> Go on; you told us a little, now spill it! Tell us all about it, so we can
> live vicariously! <g>
It was GREAT!!! The wonderful man who owns the L-39 and has flown to my
fly-in every year. He's mentioned he "owes" me a ride for a bit and we
hooked up at a local fly-in this weekend (thanks to my boss's boss who
is also checked out in L-39's).

Well, the ride was going to be around 2:30 (after they opened the
airspace from the show) so I figured I'd better eat about 1 (not too
empty, not too full) so at 12:45 I got in line. I didn't get my food
until 2:15 so I wolfed down BBQ and fries (not wise) and got out to the
airplane. Joe (boss's boss) straped me in, which I think he felt a bit
odd doing. We'd briefed earlier so he showed me what to pull "just in
case" etc. I was strapped to the parachute and it was attached to the
plane. "if something really bad happens pull that, Art will turn upside
down and you will fall out". Sounded good to me! In and locked in Art
fired up the best looking L-39 in the world (too me at least, as I was
INSIDE). All the instruments and warning lights are in Russian :-). It
was a bit odd to have my ears popping right there on the ground as he
pressurized.

He took off, over the runway we had already exceeded the Navion's red
line speed and I was way behind. We got up to about 3,500' and Art said
"you've got the airplane" and shook the stick. I said "you're
kidding" He said "No, your airplane" I shook the stick and held on
flying perfectly straight and level with a grin ear to ear. I was
flying a JET!!!! He said "you can turn if you want". Ok, I made really
gentle turns and my face hurt from smiling so wide. He said, "let me
show you a turn" and wow we turned! I flew a bit and he said "How about
an aileron roll" so I said sure (mind you I get sick on
Merry-go-rounds). So we did the roll which was really gentle until the
pull out and the BBQ started to rise, but not too far, whew. So I flew
for a bit and then it was time to go back. He thought I might know
where I was (as the ride was from my home field, but I was way not
knowing anything). A second later I spotted the "golf balls" (radomes)
and pointed them out and explained they were 45 for downwind.

He asked if I wanted him to do a break for landing or a regular pattern.
Well the stomach was back and I figured after the break we'd be on the
gound in a few seconds so I said "we can do the break", he replied "Are
you sure" I said "yeah, we can do the break" then I asked "How violent
is the break?" he replied "2 Gs" I said "OK" figuring we'd be on the
ground and out of the plane. Piece of cake.

So we zoom in faster than I normally do anything, whipped around in the
break (damned BBQ) and are coming around on final. This is WAY COOL.
Stomach is well, ok, but we will be on the ground in a few seconds, when
I hear "Culpeper traffic, Cessna xxxx departing runway 22, Culpeper". I
look down and someone is getting ready to get on the runway right in
front of us. Art calls, "Culpeper traffic can you delay your departure
for the JET on final", "Culpeper traffic, Cessna departing 22 ... "
damned she was talking, but not listening so around we go (with someone
else on the radio asking for a tail number). The go around was
uneventful and we came in for a smooth landing.

This was a GREAT moment for me. I did aerobatics (well, aerobatic
singular) and didn't throw up! I flew really fast and it was really
cool and wow it was GREAT! I would recommend it to anyone.

I'm still a bit dizzy from the thrill and people are tired of me
spontaniously shouting "I flew a JET!" periodically :-). This in one of
the great perks of my job. I get to meet really cool people. Art is
one of the best I've ever met, he has a really cool plane and as soon as
I got out he had kids in the airplane (not flying) for the rest of the
day. At my fly-in he spends the entire day putting kids in and out of
the plane. It is great. I found out this weekend he's also the only
one to ever dead-stick a Harrier in (Richmond, VA) he got a medal for
that. He recently aquired a Harrier and hopefully will have it on the
airshow circut soon. He's a really nice guy with really cool planes.

Hee hee hee I flew a JET!

Margy

[Margy Natalie]

Scott wrote:
> I think I'd rather have my office IN an SR-71 :)
>
> I was never a big fan of comp time...especially when the boss was the
> one who decided which day he would give you as comp time :(
>
> Scott

We luck out there. The boss doesn't decide the comp time although he
has to approve it. I try to stack it up for a long weekend. He doesn't
really like it (says I'll burn out with some of the weeks I work), but
he approves it. Of course if I don't use it by the end of the calendar
year it turns to dust, and the office needs to be covered Xmas week, and
we all earn a bunch before and during major events in the fall ...

Margy
>
>
> Margy Natalie wrote:
>
>> Scott wrote:
>>
>>> Oh...THAT's killer! You work for the same government that mandated
>>> O.T. pay. Sometimes I just love the way our government works..."It's
>>> OK for us to make rules to protect our citizens from getting screwed,
>>> but we're going to screw our own employees." That figures! ;)
>>> Thanks for hanging in there and clarifying :)
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm on a salary, I just work and work (no matter what Jay says about
>> Federal workers). I do get comp time, but somehow getting a Thurday
>> off doesn't really make up for working a Saturday night, if you know
>> what I mean. I do get to do some really cool stuff, meet really great
>> people, and I have an SR-71 outside of my office, so that's a plus!
>>
>> Margy
>>
>>>
>>> Margy Natalie wrote:
>>>
>>>> Scott wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Oh...I forgot to ask if you were self employed. That would explain
>>>>> no overtime pay since it is only required for employment covered in
>>>>> the fair labor standards act...
>>>>> http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/whdfs23.htm
>>>>>
>>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not sefl-employed, I'm a federal employee.
>>>>
>>>> Margy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Margy Natalie wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Overtime? What a bizarre concept :-0, No we don't get overtime
>>>>>> for anything. If we work extra hours we can get comp time, if we
>>>>>> get it approved first. We can't work more than 10 per day (no
>>>>>> 20/2), but the 9/5/4 works out ok, until you end up just going in
>>>>>> for 2 or 3 hours on Sunday and spending 6 (lawn is not mowed,
>>>>>> leaves are not up, laundry is not done, oh well, another weekend
>>>>>> shot to hell, but I did get a few minutes stick time in an L-39
>>>>>> JET this weekend!!!)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Margy
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Scott wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Do you get the mandatory overtime pay (5 hours) for the first
>>>>>>> week where you work 45 hours in that work week or are you on
>>>>>>> salary? My boss would never let us (non-exempt) folks work that
>>>>>>> schedule...wish we had a 2-20 schedule (2 days a week, 20 hours
>>>>>>> each...work 20 straight, 8 off and then another straight
>>>>>>> 20)...would be great to have 5 day weekends :)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Scott
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Margy Natalie wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need
>>>>>>>>>> some other
>>>>>>>>>> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in
>>>>>>>>>> the old
>>>>>>>>>> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will
>>>>>>>>>> spring up
>>>>>>>>>> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy.
>>>>>>>>>> The little
>>>>>>>>>> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will
>>>>>>>>>> realize they
>>>>>>>>>> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the
>>>>>>>>>> incentive
>>>>>>>>>> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If by little planes you mean 4 seaters and such, then I doubt that
>>>>>>>>> they will ever become reliable means of private transport like the
>>>>>>>>> car. Even with an instrument rating it would require a high
>>>>>>>>> level of
>>>>>>>>> skill, confidence and time commitment on part of the pilot to
>>>>>>>>> use a
>>>>>>>>> little airplane regularly for commuting. Besides, no matter how
>>>>>>>>> many
>>>>>>>>> airports spring up, there still remains the problem of getting
>>>>>>>>> from
>>>>>>>>> the airport to the work place and back.
>>>>>>>>> If more and more employers and employees work together to find
>>>>>>>>> ways to
>>>>>>>>> work remotely from home, it would reduce automobile usage to an
>>>>>>>>> extent.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is a good reason for flex schedules I work a 9/5/4/ (9
>>>>>>>> hours, 5 days one week, 4 the next). If everyone did that it
>>>>>>>> would reduce travel 10%. Some folks work 10/4/4 which is a
>>>>>>>> really long day, but if you commute 4 hours a day (not
>>>>>>>> unrealistic in this area) you save a lot of real time and
>>>>>>>> traffic is reduced 20%.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Margy
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>

[Dan[_2_]]

Anthony W wrote:
> Jay Honeck wrote:
>>> Just buy a golf cart...
>>
>> Those are a bit cold in winter around here...
>> --
>> Jay Honeck
>> Iowa City, IA
>
> And damp around here in NW Oregon.
>
> Tony

OK, you bunch of whiners, when I was a child I had to walk 15 miles
to school in my bare feet in the sleet and snow, up hill.....both ways.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Margy Natalie" > wrote in message

>
> Hee hee hee I flew a JET!

Congrats! Way cool!

> He recently aquired a Harrier and hopefully will have it on the airshow
> circut soon. He's a really nice guy with really cool planes.

A really nice guy with deep pockets, I would guess. You would have to have
a "few" surplus bucks around, JUST to pay the fuel bill for either of those
planes! :-)
--
Jim in NC

[Scott[_1_]]

See! If you'd have had a freeway, you could've taken a school bus to
school...

Scott


Dan wrote:
> Anthony W wrote:
>
>> Jay Honeck wrote:
>>
>>>> Just buy a golf cart...
>>>
>>>
>>> Those are a bit cold in winter around here...
>>> --
>>> Jay Honeck
>>> Iowa City, IA
>>
>>
>> And damp around here in NW Oregon.
>>
>> Tony
>
>
> OK, you bunch of whiners, when I was a child I had to walk 15 miles to
> school in my bare feet in the sleet and snow, up hill.....both ways.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

--
Scott
http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/
Gotta Fly or Gonna Die
Building RV-4 (Super Slow Build Version)

[Ray Andraka]

Margy,

That is way way way cool. I'm green (and not from flying upside-down)!
See, there are perks to working where you do.


Margy Natalie wrote:


> Hee hee hee I flew a JET!
>
> Margy

[Jay Honeck]

> I'm on a salary, I just work and work (no matter what Jay says about
> Federal workers).

When you're doing what you want to do, and you love doing it, it's not
really "work".

>I do get comp time, but somehow getting a Thurday off
> doesn't really make up for working a Saturday night, if you know what I
> mean.

Hey, Thursday (when I actually get it off) is my "Sunday". I *love*
having non-weekend days off -- no crowds anywhere.

And I work *every* Saturday, so suck it up!

:-)

> I do get to do some really cool stuff, meet really great people,
> and I have an SR-71 outside of my office, so that's a plus!

There you have it. We do what we do for the perks, not the pay...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Margy Natalie]

Morgans wrote:
> "Margy Natalie" > wrote in message
>
>
>>Hee hee hee I flew a JET!
>
>
> Congrats! Way cool!
>
>
>> He recently aquired a Harrier and hopefully will have it on the airshow
>>circut soon. He's a really nice guy with really cool planes.
>
>
> A really nice guy with deep pockets, I would guess. You would have to have
> a "few" surplus bucks around, JUST to pay the fuel bill for either of those
> planes! :-)
Former Marine turned DC developer I believe. Nice guy!

[Margy Natalie]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>
>>I do get comp time, but somehow getting a Thurday off
>>doesn't really make up for working a Saturday night, if you know what I
>>mean.
>
>
> Hey, Thursday (when I actually get it off) is my "Sunday". I *love*
> having non-weekend days off -- no crowds anywhere.
>
> And I work *every* Saturday, so suck it up!
>
> :-)
>
But all the fly-ins are on Saturdays ...

[Scott[_1_]]

And, I'll bet you don't get to make many fly ins since most are geared
to folks that have Sat/Sun off work...that would be the BIG downside for
me!!

Scott


Jay Honeck wrote:


>
>
> Hey, Thursday (when I actually get it off) is my "Sunday". I *love*
> having non-weekend days off -- no crowds anywhere.
>
> And I work *every* Saturday, so suck it up!
>
> :-)
>
>
>
> There you have it.

> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

--
Scott
http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/
Gotta Fly or Gonna Die
Building RV-4 (Super Slow Build Version)

[Dan Luke[_2_]]

"Dan" wrote:

> OK, you bunch of whiners, when I was a child I had to walk 15 miles to
> school in my bare feet in the sleet and snow, up hill.....both ways.
>


Luxury!

At least you had feet. Our mom used ours to make soup. We had to walk to
school on the stumps!

--
Dan

"Don't make me nervous when I'm carryin' a baseball bat."
- Big Joe Turner

[Eduardo K.]

In article om>,
Jay Honeck > wrote:
>> Sounds good to me.
>
>Me, too.
>
>I could live quite happily without freeways. In fact, given my 6 mile
>(round trip) commute each day, I'm considering an all-electric car as
>my next vehicle.

convert one. I am converting a 1978 Citroen and will have a 10 mile range at 35mph (what
I need for my commute) for aroung US$1500 invested.

there is a very good list I can point you to if you are interested.

You being in the US makes its much easier than it has been for me :)


--
Eduardo K. |
http://www.carfun.cl | I'm white and nerdy
http://ev.nn.cl | Weird Al
|

[Eduardo K.]

In article >,
Matt Barrow > wrote:
>>
>> by the grid or by a windmill at home.
>
>A windmill at home is not likely to have the output to power an all-electric
>car for more than a few yards.

you are very misinformed. a BEV needs around 300wh to go a mile, that means a windwill
that makes 1kw per hour only needs a couple of hours to make enough for a local
commute. In my case its 5miles to my job, or 1.5kwh.

>If it's a power grid powered by coal, you're likely causing more pollution
>than a car that's nicely tuned.

also missinformed. coal (or diesel) to electricity is over 90% efficient, versus
the 30% or so of efficiency of an internal combustion engine. more efficient is
almost always less polluting.



--
Eduardo K. |
http://www.carfun.cl | I'm white and nerdy
http://ev.nn.cl | Weird Al
|

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Margy Natalie" <> wrote

> Former Marine turned DC developer I believe. Nice guy!

Well, it's good to hear that nice guys don't always finish last!
--
Jim in NC

[Montblack]

("Dan Luke" wrote)
> At least you had feet. Our mom used ours to make soup. We had to walk to
> school on the stumps!


That's it, cut him off! <g>


Montblack

[Dan[_2_]]

Montblack wrote:
> ("Dan Luke" wrote)
>> At least you had feet. Our mom used ours to make soup. We had to walk to
>> school on the stumps!
>
>
> That's it, cut him off! <g>
>
>
> Montblack
>
>
At least you had soup, we had to graze on the lint on the floor.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Matt Barrow[_4_]]

"Dan" > wrote in message
...
> Montblack wrote:
>> ("Dan Luke" wrote)
>>> At least you had feet. Our mom used ours to make soup. We had to walk
>>> to school on the stumps!
>>
>>
>> That's it, cut him off! <g>
>>
>>
>> Montblack
> At least you had soup, we had to graze on the lint on the floor.

You had a floor? A real, honest-to-god floor? You pansy!! :~0

[Dan[_2_]]

Matt Barrow wrote:
> "Dan" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Montblack wrote:
>>> ("Dan Luke" wrote)
>>>> At least you had feet. Our mom used ours to make soup. We had to walk
>>>> to school on the stumps!
>>>
>>> That's it, cut him off! <g>
>>>
>>>
>>> Montblack
>> At least you had soup, we had to graze on the lint on the floor.
>
> You had a floor? A real, honest-to-god floor? You pansy!! :~0
>
>
In winter the mud froze and we had a solid floor.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Sat, 13 Oct 2007 20:31:37 -0700, Jay Honeck >
wrote:

>> Sounds good to me.
>
>Me, too.
>
>I could live quite happily without freeways. In fact, given my 6 mile

Rarely do I need one and even then I could leave a bit earlier. OTOH
what happens to all the cars?

>(round trip) commute each day, I'm considering an all-electric car as
>my next vehicle.

About that time most of your neighbors will do the same, there will be
no off peak times any more due to every one getting their batteries
charged at night, and we'll discover we don't have either the
electrical generating capacity from those smoky, coal burning plants,
nor the electrical grid capacity to deliver it.

Roger (K8RI)

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 22:16:34 +0000, Scott >
wrote:

>Oh...THAT's killer! You work for the same government that mandated O.T.
>pay. Sometimes I just love the way our government works..."It's OK for


Only for the hourly folk. Us professionals are paid so much a month,
once a month. <:-))

Roger (K8RI)

>us to make rules to protect our citizens from getting screwed, but we're
>going to screw our own employees." That figures! ;) Thanks for
>hanging in there and clarifying :)
>
>Margy Natalie wrote:
>
>> Scott wrote:
>>
>>> Oh...I forgot to ask if you were self employed. That would explain no
>>> overtime pay since it is only required for employment covered in the
>>> fair labor standards act...
>>> http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/whdfs23.htm
>>>

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 21:39:16 -0400, Margy Natalie >
wrote:

>Scott wrote:
>> I think I'd rather have my office IN an SR-71 :)
>>
>> I was never a big fan of comp time...especially when the boss was the
>> one who decided which day he would give you as comp time :(
>>
>> Scott
>
>We luck out there. The boss doesn't decide the comp time although he

Officially we didn't have comp time and vacation was use it or lose
it, BUT they quietly made an exception for us computer folk. Most of
us would come wandering in around 10:00 AM and go home around 4:00 to
make up for it. If we worked Saturday and Sunday the odds were pretty
good we'd miss a couple of days within the next couple of weeks. The
plant manager's secretary sent me a nasty note explaining what
flexible hours were and I needed to change my ways. I gave the letter
to my boss and volunteered to work 8:00 to 4:30, but I might be hard
to find after hours. He told me to keep doing as I was and he'd
explain how many hours I really worked each week. Just make sure I was
there for any scheduled meetings. It didn't hurt that I was up the
food chain a ways, worked for corporate, and had offices at two
different plants. After 7 years I retired with them owing me for over
90 some days of vacation, and I had taken the last full week off to
spend at Oshkosh. That 90 plus days made a real nice retirement check.
I retired out on the flight line. <:-))

>has to approve it. I try to stack it up for a long weekend. He doesn't

We just worked as needed with no approval required .

Roger (K8RI)

>really like it (says I'll burn out with some of the weeks I work), but
>he approves it. Of course if I don't use it by the end of the calendar
>year it turns to dust, and the office needs to be covered Xmas week, and
>we all earn a bunch before and during major events in the fall ...
>
>Margy
>>

[Matt Barrow[_4_]]

"Dan" > wrote in message
...
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>> "Dan" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Montblack wrote:
>>>> ("Dan Luke" wrote)
>>>>> At least you had feet. Our mom used ours to make soup. We had to
>>>>> walk to school on the stumps!
>>>>
>>>> That's it, cut him off! <g>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Montblack
>>> At least you had soup, we had to graze on the lint on the floor.
>>
>> You had a floor? A real, honest-to-god floor? You pansy!! :~0
> In winter the mud froze and we had a solid floor.
>
We had a black hole that we had to jump over. We were unable to train the
dog to make the jump, and she's now in another dimension.

[C J Campbell[_1_]]

On 2007-10-15 10:01:25 -0700, "Robert M. Gary" > said:

> On Oct 13, 1:33 pm, C J Campbell >
> wrote:
>> Vast numbers of automobiles with 2 or 3 or more cars per household;
>> long commutes of single drivers; horrible freeway congestion; urban
>> sprawl; loss of farmland and wilderness resources; the decay of cities
>> and the takeover of large areas of our cities by lawless gangs; obesity
>> caused by everyone eating at fast food joints; dependence on foreign
>> oil; global warming; pollution; filth, crud, corruption; hundreds of
>> thousands dead in traffic accidents; the closure of local airports
>> because of expanding city growth:
>
> If you are really worried about Global Warming you can buy carbon
> offset credits from me. Please send cash.
>
> -robert

Actually, I was going to buy a G-II, but I changed my mind. How many
carbon credits is that worth?

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

[C J Campbell[_1_]]

On 2007-10-15 19:20:09 -0700, Dan > said:

> Anthony W wrote:
>> Jay Honeck wrote:
>>>> Just buy a golf cart...
>>>
>>> Those are a bit cold in winter around here...
>>> --
>>> Jay Honeck
>>> Iowa City, IA
>>
>> And damp around here in NW Oregon.
>>
>> Tony
>
> OK, you bunch of whiners, when I was a child I had to walk 15 miles
> to school in my bare feet in the sleet and snow, up hill.....both ways.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

True legend:

Sometime in the 14th century the Campbells were returning from a cattle
raid that had not gone very well, so they were making a rapid tactical
retreat across the snow. Finally, exhausted, they wrapped themselves in
their kilts and threw themselves down into the snow to take a needed
rest. The clan chief's son, however, rolled up a large snowball and put
it under his head. The chief came over and kicked the snowball away,
saying, "And are ye become so effeminate, lad, that ye need a pillow?"

That story has been handed down among Campbells for centuries, but
there is no way to verify it. Still, it seems plausible. Consider the
experience of a more recent ancestor:

My grandmother's grandmother, Sarah Urrinda Rawson, at the age of six
made the trek across the plains to Utah, walking the entire distance.
She wrote that she and her little brother were in charge of the cattle,
which frightened her sometimes when the cattle stampeded or when
Indians attacked trying to steal cattle. The children had no shoes, so
she got great cracks in her feet which she would sew up with her sewing
kit when they stopped for the night.

This was not the first time the children had had to migrate to a new
home without shoes. After their home was burned by mobs the first time
in Missouri, they had to flee in the dead of winter across the Missouri
River, taking shelter on a sand bar. There her mother, Elizabeth, and
Sarah Urrinda's baby brother, had to stay with nothing more to protect
them than a sheet hung between willows. The children's feet were
severely frostbitten.

Sarrah Urrinda's older brother, Daniel was probably still a little sore
from the ball he took in his knee at the battle of Clear Creek. He was
16 at the time. Later, when he was 19, he confronted an armed mob alone
and demanded that they at least partially pay for the house in Illinois
they had burned, the flocks and pigs they had stolen, and for the fence
they destroyed. They finally caved and gave him a side of bacon, a
cheese, and some eggs. Then they shot at him as he left for home.

Later, Daniel was making shakes for a barn and he and the others
decided to sleep at another barn that night. A mob set fire to the barn
and started shooting everybody that came out. Daniel's best friend was
shot to death as he stood next to him.

They stopped in Iowa to regroup and the Army came asking for volunteers
for a battalion of men to march against Mexico. Daniel swore that he
would never serve the American government, which had done nothing to
prevent these attacks by mobs or restore order. But he volunteered
anyway when Brigham Young asked him to. So they marched to Missouri for
supplies, but the supply depot was manned by the same people who had
chased them out of Missouri. The commander of the battalion finally
gave the Missourians an ultimatum that either they would deliver the
supplies within the day or he would open fire with his cannon. They
delivered.

They marched across to San Diego, building a road all the way from
Independence. Mustered out, they went to Yerba Buena (now San
Francisco), and on to Sacramento looking for work so they could earn
money to get back to Utah. They found it at Sutter's mill. Although
they discovered gold there, Daniel was asked to take the horses back to
Salt Lake City in the spring, which he did in a running battle with
Indians the whole way. He sometimes had to swim across icy rivers
towing a raft carrying the horses.

So, when I hear people mocking the "15 miles each way in our bare feet"
I think of those guys. They really lived like that.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

[James Sleeman]

On Oct 15, 12:34 am, Stealth Pilot >
wrote:

> working from home. horrors, perish the thought.

The best thing about working from home, is you are at home when you
are at work.

The worst thing about working form home, is you are at work when you
are at home.

> no cultural stimulation.

Only if you so desire.

> bugger all new technology.

Only if you are a cheap bugger.

> everything you work with you have to pay for by yourself.

All the profits (and savings) you make, you get to keep for yourself.

[Skylune]

On Oct 13, 4:33 pm, C J Campbell >
wrote:
> Vast numbers of automobiles with 2 or 3 or more cars per household;
> long commutes of single drivers; horrible freeway congestion; urban
> sprawl; loss of farmland and wilderness resources; the decay of cities
> and the takeover of large areas of our cities by lawless gangs; obesity
> caused by everyone eating at fast food joints; dependence on foreign
> oil; global warming; pollution; filth, crud, corruption; hundreds of
> thousands dead in traffic accidents; the closure of local airports
> because of expanding city growth:
>
> All of these problems can be traced to the rise of the superhighway. We
> built it, and everybody moved out of town in an ever-increasing spiral
> of flight to a chimera of utopian suburbia. The only people left in the
> cities were a few of the very rich who understood city life and a lot
> of the extremely poor and desperate. People forgot their responsibility
> to their fellow man because their fellow man who needed help now lived
> in that awful place fifty miles away. City parks were taken over by
> drug users and prostitutes because they were the only ones left.
> Schools, well, schools were simply abandoned to their fate.
>
> The only reason people really live so far from where the work is
> because of the freeway. They thought they would be happy out there, but
> demonstrably they are not. So they keep moving further away, never
> finding happiness, dragging the culture and amenities of the city
> behind them. They wanted to live in quiet farmland, but they wanted
> shopping like they had in the city, so they built huge shopping malls
> and then complained that it was too much like the city and moved even
> further away. They didn't like nosy people telling them how to live in
> the city, so they moved to neighborhoods with restrictive covenants and
> complained. It is madness.
>
> Much of the only land available was near small town airports, so they
> demanded that the airports be closed and developed into more suburbs or
> golf courses. The trains were shut down as freight was transferred to
> the new railroad of the freeways as trucks pulled entire chains of
> trailers behind them across country.
>
> It is time to reverse this trend! Vote no on new freeways! Vote no even
> for maintenance! Elect people who will dynamite the freeways! Elect
> incompetents who will allow the freeways to die of well-deserved
> neglect! Here in Washington State we have been doing that for decades,
> but only half-heartedly. Now is the time to finish the job!
>
> When people realize that suburbia is not the answer, they will move
> back to the cities where they will be happier and those who have to
> live and work in the hinterland and remain behind will be happier.
> Automobile usage will be cut by more than half, along with its
> attendant use of petroleum.
>
> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some other
> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the old
> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will spring up
> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The little
> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will realize they
> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the incentive
> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>
> --
> Waddling Eagle
> World Famous Flight Instructor

Right on! And, also oppose subsidies paid to GA airports by
commercial passengers and general taxpayers. Stop the subsidies!

[Skylune]

On Oct 13, 4:33 pm, C J Campbell >
wrote:
> Vast numbers of automobiles with 2 or 3 or more cars per household;
> long commutes of single drivers; horrible freeway congestion; urban
> sprawl; loss of farmland and wilderness resources; the decay of cities
> and the takeover of large areas of our cities by lawless gangs; obesity
> caused by everyone eating at fast food joints; dependence on foreign
> oil; global warming; pollution; filth, crud, corruption; hundreds of
> thousands dead in traffic accidents; the closure of local airports
> because of expanding city growth:
>
> All of these problems can be traced to the rise of the superhighway. We
> built it, and everybody moved out of town in an ever-increasing spiral
> of flight to a chimera of utopian suburbia. The only people left in the
> cities were a few of the very rich who understood city life and a lot
> of the extremely poor and desperate. People forgot their responsibility
> to their fellow man because their fellow man who needed help now lived
> in that awful place fifty miles away. City parks were taken over by
> drug users and prostitutes because they were the only ones left.
> Schools, well, schools were simply abandoned to their fate.
>
> The only reason people really live so far from where the work is
> because of the freeway. They thought they would be happy out there, but
> demonstrably they are not. So they keep moving further away, never
> finding happiness, dragging the culture and amenities of the city
> behind them. They wanted to live in quiet farmland, but they wanted
> shopping like they had in the city, so they built huge shopping malls
> and then complained that it was too much like the city and moved even
> further away. They didn't like nosy people telling them how to live in
> the city, so they moved to neighborhoods with restrictive covenants and
> complained. It is madness.
>
> Much of the only land available was near small town airports, so they
> demanded that the airports be closed and developed into more suburbs or
> golf courses. The trains were shut down as freight was transferred to
> the new railroad of the freeways as trucks pulled entire chains of
> trailers behind them across country.
>
> It is time to reverse this trend! Vote no on new freeways! Vote no even
> for maintenance! Elect people who will dynamite the freeways! Elect
> incompetents who will allow the freeways to die of well-deserved
> neglect! Here in Washington State we have been doing that for decades,
> but only half-heartedly. Now is the time to finish the job!
>
> When people realize that suburbia is not the answer, they will move
> back to the cities where they will be happier and those who have to
> live and work in the hinterland and remain behind will be happier.
> Automobile usage will be cut by more than half, along with its
> attendant use of petroleum.
>
> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some other
> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the old
> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will spring up
> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The little
> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will realize they
> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the incentive
> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>
> --
> Waddling Eagle
> World Famous Flight Instructor

Right on! And, vote NO to the outrageous subsidization of General
Aviation airports by commercial passengers and general taxpayers.
Enough of the encroachment of GA airports into residential
neighborhoods, which were there well before any airport.

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 12:17:48 -0700, C J Campbell
> wrote:

>On 2007-10-15 10:01:25 -0700, "Robert M. Gary" > said:
>
>> On Oct 13, 1:33 pm, C J Campbell >
>> wrote:
>>> Vast numbers of automobiles with 2 or 3 or more cars per household;
>>> long commutes of single drivers; horrible freeway congestion; urban
>>> sprawl; loss of farmland and wilderness resources; the decay of cities
>>> and the takeover of large areas of our cities by lawless gangs; obesity
>>> caused by everyone eating at fast food joints; dependence on foreign
>>> oil; global warming; pollution; filth, crud, corruption; hundreds of
>>> thousands dead in traffic accidents; the closure of local airports
>>> because of expanding city growth:
>>
>> If you are really worried about Global Warming you can buy carbon
>> offset credits from me. Please send cash.
>>
>> -robert
>
>Actually, I was going to buy a G-II, but I changed my mind. How many
>carbon credits is that worth?

Only about a quarter or what it would have been had you not purchased
a G-III with the much larger engine.

I was going to purchase two new SUVs, a Hummer, and one of those big
Chrysler pickups with the V-10...but I didn't. That should be enough
credits you can go out and buy two new airplanes. it also saved me a
lot of money I didn't have which should make my wife happy.


Roger (K8RI)

[Edward A. Falk]

In article om>,
Jay Honeck > wrote:
>> Sounds good to me.
>
>Me, too.
>
>I could live quite happily without freeways. In fact, given my 6 mile
>(round trip) commute each day, I'm considering an all-electric car as
>my next vehicle.

All-electric cars have the problem of limited range. I'm thinking of
a plug-in Prius for my next car. It's an electric car for short trips,
and a hybrid for long ones. With solar panels on the roof to charge it,
it becomes pretty green.

--
-Ed Falk,
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/

[Jim Macklin]

Billions of Li-ion AA batteries in cars will be a
recycling/disposal nightmare.

We need nuclear powered cars and trucks.

Global warming is only the tip of the iceberg, the whole
solar system is getting hotter. Jupiter has a new Red Spot,
Mars ice caps are receding and the Rovers are getting
considerably more power than was predicted. Even Pluto is
getting hot, up to several degree above absolute zero now.


Maybe we now know why the ancient Egyptians worshiped the
Sun.


"Edward A. Falk" > wrote in message
...
| In article
om>,
| Jay Honeck > wrote:
| >> Sounds good to me.
| >
| >Me, too.
| >
| >I could live quite happily without freeways. In fact,
given my 6 mile
| >(round trip) commute each day, I'm considering an
all-electric car as
| >my next vehicle.
|
| All-electric cars have the problem of limited range. I'm
thinking of
| a plug-in Prius for my next car. It's an electric car for
short trips,
| and a hybrid for long ones. With solar panels on the roof
to charge it,
| it becomes pretty green.
|
| --
| -Ed Falk,
| http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Edward A. Falk" <> wrote

> All-electric cars have the problem of limited range. I'm thinking of
> a plug-in Prius for my next car. It's an electric car for short trips,
> and a hybrid for long ones. With solar panels on the roof to charge it,
> it becomes pretty green.

Unless you park it for a few weeks between uses, solar cells don't come
close to providing enough power to make it a viable charging option.
--
Jim in NC

[[email protected]]

In rec.aviation.owning Morgans > wrote:

> "Edward A. Falk" <> wrote

> > All-electric cars have the problem of limited range. I'm thinking of
> > a plug-in Prius for my next car. It's an electric car for short trips,
> > and a hybrid for long ones. With solar panels on the roof to charge it,
> > it becomes pretty green.

> Unless you park it for a few weeks between uses, solar cells don't come
> close to providing enough power to make it a viable charging option.
> --
> Jim in NC

Actually, if you covered the entire area of a Prius with the best
solar cells you can buy and parked it for 8 hours in Tucson in the
middle of summer, you could go a few feet.

1 hp = 746 Watts

Get the available sunlight energy from:
http://rredc.nrel.gov/solar/old_data/nsrdb/redbook/atlas/serve.cgi

Really good solar cells are about 20% efficient.

You do the math.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Matt Whiting]

Edward A. Falk wrote:
> In article om>,
> Jay Honeck > wrote:
>>> Sounds good to me.
>> Me, too.
>>
>> I could live quite happily without freeways. In fact, given my 6 mile
>> (round trip) commute each day, I'm considering an all-electric car as
>> my next vehicle.
>
> All-electric cars have the problem of limited range. I'm thinking of
> a plug-in Prius for my next car. It's an electric car for short trips,
> and a hybrid for long ones. With solar panels on the roof to charge it,
> it becomes pretty green.
>

Have you researched the process of making solar panels? Things aren't
as "green" as they seem...

Matt

[Scott[_1_]]

What voltage do those cars use? I assume it's more than 12V. If so,
you'll have to series connect several solar panels to match what you
need. And then, if it's an oddball voltage, you'll have to build your
own charge controller to keep from overcharging. And then, does the
battery type used require a constant voltage or constant current to
charge them. If constant current, you will have to build your own
current source. None of this is un-doable, just some dinking around.
If the voltage required is quite high, you will have a fair investment
in solar panels...

Edward A. Falk wrote:

> In article om>,
> Jay Honeck > wrote:
>
>>>Sounds good to me.
>>
>>Me, too.
>>
>>I could live quite happily without freeways. In fact, given my 6 mile
>>(round trip) commute each day, I'm considering an all-electric car as
>>my next vehicle.
>
>
> All-electric cars have the problem of limited range. I'm thinking of
> a plug-in Prius for my next car. It's an electric car for short trips,
> and a hybrid for long ones. With solar panels on the roof to charge it,
> it becomes pretty green.
>

--
Scott
http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/
Gotta Fly or Gonna Die
Building RV-4 (Super Slow Build Version)

[Jim Macklin]

The current crop of electric hybrids use about 4,000 AA
Li-ion batteries in series-parallel to get 800-1000 VDC for
the motors.



"Scott" > wrote in message
.. .
| What voltage do those cars use? I assume it's more than
12V. If so,
| you'll have to series connect several solar panels to
match what you
| need. And then, if it's an oddball voltage, you'll have
to build your
| own charge controller to keep from overcharging. And
then, does the
| battery type used require a constant voltage or constant
current to
| charge them. If constant current, you will have to build
your own
| current source. None of this is un-doable, just some
dinking around.
| If the voltage required is quite high, you will have a
fair investment
| in solar panels...
|
| Edward A. Falk wrote:
|
| > In article
om>,
| > Jay Honeck > wrote:
| >
| >>>Sounds good to me.
| >>
| >>Me, too.
| >>
| >>I could live quite happily without freeways. In fact,
given my 6 mile
| >>(round trip) commute each day, I'm considering an
all-electric car as
| >>my next vehicle.
| >
| >
| > All-electric cars have the problem of limited range.
I'm thinking of
| > a plug-in Prius for my next car. It's an electric car
for short trips,
| > and a hybrid for long ones. With solar panels on the
roof to charge it,
| > it becomes pretty green.
| >
|
| --
| Scott
| http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/
| Gotta Fly or Gonna Die
| Building RV-4 (Super Slow Build Version)

[Jim Stewart]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> The current crop of electric hybrids use about 4,000 AA
> Li-ion batteries in series-parallel to get 800-1000 VDC for
> the motors.

The specs I've seen on the Honda Accord hybrid
show 120 NiMH cells giving 144 volts at 6.0 Ah

The Prius also uses NiMH cells, a total of 168
and a peak voltage of 201 volts and 6.5 Ah.

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 20:41:30 -0500, "Jim Macklin"
> wrote:

>Billions of Li-ion AA batteries in cars will be a
>recycling/disposal nightmare.
>
Most of the market is still using the older NiMH batteris with far
less capacity than the LI-Ion. But they are on the way.

Roger (K8RI)

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Sat, 20 Oct 2007 01:28:19 +0000 (UTC), (Edward
A. Falk) wrote:

>In article om>,
>Jay Honeck > wrote:
>>> Sounds good to me.
>>
>>Me, too.
>>
>>I could live quite happily without freeways. In fact, given my 6 mile
>>(round trip) commute each day, I'm considering an all-electric car as
>>my next vehicle.
>
>All-electric cars have the problem of limited range. I'm thinking of
>a plug-in Prius for my next car. It's an electric car for short trips,

Of course in the US that voids your warranty. In Europe they have a
button on the dash to use it as an all electric when around town and
then go to hybrid for longer trips. Instead of just shy of 50 MPG
they are running in the neighborhood of 100 MPG.

The reason for not having the button in the US is the battery
warranty.

Roger (K8RI)
>and a hybrid for long ones. With solar panels on the roof to charge it,
>it becomes pretty green.

[Peter Dohm]

"Jim Stewart" > wrote in message
.. .
> Jim Macklin wrote:
>> The current crop of electric hybrids use about 4,000 AA Li-ion batteries
>> in series-parallel to get 800-1000 VDC for the motors.
>
> The specs I've seen on the Honda Accord hybrid
> show 120 NiMH cells giving 144 volts at 6.0 Ah
>
> The Prius also uses NiMH cells, a total of 168
> and a peak voltage of 201 volts and 6.5 Ah.

That makes more sense; although I admit that the much higher voltage, with
solid state controls, could be fun to watch--from a safe distance.

[Peter Dohm]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Edward A. Falk wrote:
>> In article om>,
>> Jay Honeck > wrote:
>>>> Sounds good to me.
>>> Me, too.
>>>
>>> I could live quite happily without freeways. In fact, given my 6 mile
>>> (round trip) commute each day, I'm considering an all-electric car as
>>> my next vehicle.
>>
>> All-electric cars have the problem of limited range. I'm thinking of
>> a plug-in Prius for my next car. It's an electric car for short trips,
>> and a hybrid for long ones. With solar panels on the roof to charge it,
>> it becomes pretty green.
>>
>
> Have you researched the process of making solar panels? Things aren't as
> "green" as they seem...
>
> Matt

"Green" is a religion, in which party-hack politicians are the gods.

Personally, I prefer a religion in which the only God is more perfect than
any human could even be or even imagine.

[David G. Nagel]

Ray Andraka wrote:
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>
>
>>
>> How is the electricity generated?
>>
>
> by the grid or by a windmill at home. The energy is stored in
> batteries, and in some cases batteries combined with super capacitors

Let's see:

Battery: Lead Acid--Lead/Sulphuric Acid
NICD--Nickle/Cadmimum
NIMH--Nickle/Metal Paste
LiON--Lithium

Capacitors: Various metals--Most poisonous

Windmill: Iron, Copper, Aluminum, misc other materials--Manufacturing of
which can be hazardous. Blades can interfer with bird flight.

Remote power generation: Coal and it's problems. Gas and it's problems.
Nuclear and IT'S problems. Hydro and it's problems.

Nothing is simple, clean and save.

Check the price of your corn flakes next time you fuel up with E85.


Dave N

[Morgans[_2_]]

"David G. Nagel" <> wrote

> Hydro and it's problems.

Problems? What problems? Last I checked, hydro was clean, non polluting,
and has the advantage of helping to control floods.
--
Jim in NC

[C J Campbell[_1_]]

On 2007-10-14 00:39:27 -0600, said:

>
>> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some other
>> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the old
>> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will spring up
>> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The little
>> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will realize they
>> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the incentive
>> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>>
>
> If by little planes you mean 4 seaters and such, then I doubt that
> they will ever become reliable means of private transport like the
> car. Even with an instrument rating it would require a high level of
> skill, confidence and time commitment on part of the pilot to use a
> little airplane regularly for commuting. Besides, no matter how many
> airports spring up, there still remains the problem of getting from
> the airport to the work place and back.
> If more and more employers and employees work together to find ways to
> work remotely from home, it would reduce automobile usage to an
> extent.

Nevertheless, NASA is committed to developing the advanced technology
to make flying an airplane as easy and safe as driving a car, if not
more so. Modern glass panel avionics are one part of that. The Adam is
based on the ideas developed in this program.

It is going to happen -- if GA manages to survive until then.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

[Al G[_1_]]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "David G. Nagel" <> wrote
>
>> Hydro and it's problems.
>
> Problems? What problems? Last I checked, hydro was clean, non polluting,
> and has the advantage of helping to control floods.
> --
> Jim in NC
>
The baby fish of course!

Al G

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 17:58:02 -0400, "Morgans"
> wrote:

>
>"David G. Nagel" <> wrote
>
>> Hydro and it's problems.
>
>Problems? What problems? Last I checked, hydro was clean, non polluting,
>and has the advantage of helping to control floods.

Lot of ecological side effects. Good for short term flood control, but
may cause problems long term. A lot depends on the area where the dam
is located.

Roger (K8RI)

[Matt Barrow[_4_]]

"Roger (K8RI)" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 17:58:02 -0400, "Morgans"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>"David G. Nagel" <> wrote
>>
>>> Hydro and it's problems.
>>
>>Problems? What problems? Last I checked, hydro was clean, non polluting,
>>and has the advantage of helping to control floods.
>
> Lot of ecological side effects. Good for short term flood control, but
> may cause problems long term. A lot depends on the area where the dam
> is located.
>
What sort of "problems"?

[C J Campbell[_1_]]

On 2007-10-21 14:58:02 -0700, "Morgans" > said:

>
> "David G. Nagel" <> wrote
>
>> Hydro and it's problems.
>
> Problems? What problems? Last I checked, hydro was clean, non polluting,
> and has the advantage of helping to control floods.

Here in the west there is considerable pressure to dismantle the dams
already in place. They are being blamed for weak salmon runs (as if
over-fishing and the recovery in the seal and sea lion population have
had nothing to do with it), concentration of heavy metals near the
dams, flooding of "critical habitat," and just about every other sin
people can think of.

There are environmentalists who believe that the worst possible thing
that could happen to the earth would be for someone to discover a
cheap, non-polluting source of energy.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

[news.verizon.net]

These are the same people who think that we should get rid of all the people
of the world except for a few hundred of their fellow believers.


"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
news:200710240644108930-christophercampbell@hotmailcom...
> On 2007-10-21 14:58:02 -0700, "Morgans" > said:
>
>>
>> "David G. Nagel" <> wrote
>>
>>> Hydro and it's problems.
>>
>> Problems? What problems? Last I checked, hydro was clean, non
>> polluting,
>> and has the advantage of helping to control floods.
>
> Here in the west there is considerable pressure to dismantle the dams
> already in place. They are being blamed for weak salmon runs (as if
> over-fishing and the recovery in the seal and sea lion population have had
> nothing to do with it), concentration of heavy metals near the dams,
> flooding of "critical habitat," and just about every other sin people can
> think of.
>
> There are environmentalists who believe that the worst possible thing that
> could happen to the earth would be for someone to discover a cheap,
> non-polluting source of energy.
> --
> Waddling Eagle
> World Famous Flight Instructor
>

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Sun, 21 Oct 2007 19:22:54 -0600, C J Campbell
> wrote:

>On 2007-10-14 00:39:27 -0600, said:
>
>>
>>> Of course, those who still live out in the sticks will need some other
>>> way to get around. This will be the rail lines, just like in the old
>>> days, or they will fly, as God intended. New airports will spring up
>>> like flowers after a rain. Flight instructors will be busy. The little
>>> planes will no longer bother anybody because everyone will realize they
>>> are necessary. Aircraft manufacturers will finally have the incentive
>>> to innovate and produce airplanes in reasonable numbers.
>>>
>>
>> If by little planes you mean 4 seaters and such, then I doubt that
>> they will ever become reliable means of private transport like the
>> car. Even with an instrument rating it would require a high level of

They could with the work NASA is doing, BUT *affordable* is a horse of
a different color.

>> skill, confidence and time commitment on part of the pilot to use a
>> little airplane regularly for commuting. Besides, no matter how many
>> airports spring up, there still remains the problem of getting from
>> the airport to the work place and back.

It would be possible even with today's technology to build an airplane
that could be programmed, or automated to fly from point A to B and
far easier than with cars. The resulting aircraft would, or could
require far less skill than required of today's pilots.

The most difficult to implement and expensive parts lie at each end
of the trip as well as with traffic control.

OTOH like anything that says "airplane" on it, I don't see it becoming
economical.
>> If more and more employers and employees work together to find ways to
>> work remotely from home, it would reduce automobile usage to an
>> extent.

The question is how many could routinely do this and to what extent
would it reduce automobile usage? When you get right down to it, only
a small percent of the work force can work from home. Even office and
data management work can not all be done from home. Yes, a lot of
communications can take place via the Internet/electronically, but
there still needs to be a face-to-face interaction between workers as
well as workers and management.

I used to do a bit more than half my work from home. (Sys admin,
Developmental Analyst, and finally project manager) HOWEVER that
didn't result in less driving. I spent less time at the plants and
corporate headquarters, but I still had to be there nearly every day.
I had to be there often enough they owed me over 90 days of vacation
when I retired.

>
>Nevertheless, NASA is committed to developing the advanced technology
>to make flying an airplane as easy and safe as driving a car, if not
>more so. Modern glass panel avionics are one part of that. The Adam is
>based on the ideas developed in this program.
>
>It is going to happen -- if GA manages to survive until then.

I have no doubt they can do it. It could be done with today's
technology, but I have my doubts that it can be made practical and
economical.

Roger (K8RI)

[Edward A. Falk]

In article >,
Morgans > wrote:
>
>"Edward A. Falk" <> wrote
>
>> ... With solar panels on the roof to charge it,
>> it becomes pretty green.
>
> Unless you park it for a few weeks between uses, solar cells don't come
>close to providing enough power to make it a viable charging option.

Ooops. My bad. I meant the roof of my house.

--
-Ed Falk,
http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/

[Al G[_1_]]

"Edward A. Falk" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Morgans > wrote:
>>
>>"Edward A. Falk" <> wrote
>>
>>> ... With solar panels on the roof to charge it,
>>> it becomes pretty green.
>>
>> Unless you park it for a few weeks between uses, solar cells don't come
>>close to providing enough power to make it a viable charging option.
>
> Ooops. My bad. I meant the roof of my house.
>
> --
> -Ed Falk,
> http://thespamdiaries.blogspot.com/

So you charge it at night from the solar panels?

Or perhaps you charge batteries in the house on good weather days, and
then transfer to your car at night?

Sunlight
>(with losses)> Solar panel on house
>(with losses)> Battery in house
>(with losses)> Battery in car
>(with losses)> motor.

This is pretty green?

How many good weather days will it take to drive to work once?

Al G

[Terry K]

http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/proceedings_a/rspa20071880.pdf
suggests the sun has no effect on climate.

Or, that we we cannot presently correlate sun and climate. Or there is
some interfering data swamping a comparatively small effect.

If not the sun, how about our dirt? It lives, excretes, and is deep,
to boot. Who understands zero gee fission? we are ice on a fireball.
We are the snowball surrounding hell, walking around on a little
insulating frozen rock floating on a lake of magma.

Cheap renewable power? Geothermal, solar steam, wind, tidal.

Real expense? Transmission, overpopulation?

Private planes to eliminate highway congestion? The highway, be it
asphalt or air, is no more than an extension of the parking lot. Are
we gonna have sky garages 20 floors tall and elevator parking for
excess idle Mohler sky machinery, or are we gonna take air taxis? How
many pedestrians squashed by crashing cabs before we try dirigible
busses, or living with parachutes in our office?

I see city buildings before commuter conveniences. Land is limited. I
see deep wells for Icelandic power, even air conditioning. I see tube
trains surrounding volcanic artifacts linking ring of fire hot spots.
I count the calories produced by cities in their warm spots with their
reflective sky scrapers and steam pipes warmed by moving lightweight
reflectors.

I see wind power to produce compressed air, liquid nitrogen and
ultimately, hydrogen to be burned on site to put power into the grid
when needed.

Can liquid nitrogen be used to operate a Stirling cycle engine or
turbine warmed by ambient air? What is it's energy density next to
gasoline or hydrogen? What about it's seasonal efficiency?

Our oil problems are really political marketing.

Terry K

[Tom S.]

"Terry K" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/proceedings_a/rspa20071880.pdf
> suggests the sun has no effect on climate.

I guess they never heard of "seasons".

This paper refutes the above paper:
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/Critique_Lockwood_Gregory/critique_lockwood.pdf

[Roger (K8RI)]

On 31 Oct 2007 15:16:07 -0700, Terry K > wrote:

>
>http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/proceedings_a/rspa20071880.pdf
>suggests the sun has no effect on climate.
>
>Or, that we we cannot presently correlate sun and climate. Or there is
>some interfering data swamping a comparatively small effect.

The sun's effect is easily measured and has been for decades.
It's done by a method called the "pan evaporation rate". The
inconsistency is the pan evaporation rate has been going down for at
least the last three decades or more. That would indicate the amount
of energy from the sun reaching the earth has been steadily dropping
for over 30 years. A Google search should give the process in detail.

>
>If not the sun, how about our dirt? It lives, excretes, and is deep,
>to boot. Who understands zero gee fission? we are ice on a fireball.
>We are the snowball surrounding hell, walking around on a little
>insulating frozen rock floating on a lake of magma.
>
>Cheap renewable power? Geothermal, solar steam, wind, tidal.
>
>Real expense? Transmission, overpopulation?
>
>Private planes to eliminate highway congestion? The highway, be it
>asphalt or air, is no more than an extension of the parking lot. Are
>we gonna have sky garages 20 floors tall and elevator parking for
>excess idle Mohler sky machinery, or are we gonna take air taxis? How
>many pedestrians squashed by crashing cabs before we try dirigible
>busses, or living with parachutes in our office?

None of the sky routes are economical.
A quick check will show some high rises in NY do have parachutes for
emergencies although I'd not think they'd be practical.

>
>I see city buildings before commuter conveniences. Land is limited. I
>see deep wells for Icelandic power, even air conditioning. I see tube
>trains surrounding volcanic artifacts linking ring of fire hot spots.
>I count the calories produced by cities in their warm spots with their
>reflective sky scrapers and steam pipes warmed by moving lightweight
>reflectors.
>
>I see wind power to produce compressed air, liquid nitrogen and

Liquid nitrogen is very inefficient as it takes a lot of energy to
produce and the only energy you get out is the expansion from
evaporation and expansion.

>ultimately, hydrogen to be burned on site to put power into the grid
>when needed.

Hydrogen too is expensive to produce on a large scale and remain a
viable economic alternative to gas, expensive to store and expensive
to transport although not nearly as dangerous as most think. It also
takes more energy to produce the gas than you can get back out of it.
Liquefying it takes even more. However Hydrogen contains far more
energy than liquid Nitrogen as you can use Hydrogen in combustion and
produce a fair amount of clean energy.

>
>Can liquid nitrogen be used to operate a Stirling cycle engine or
>turbine warmed by ambient air? What is it's energy density next to
>gasoline or hydrogen? What about it's seasonal efficiency?

Compared to combustible fuels it's very poor although I don't have the
numbers right at my fingertips. Gasoline is considerably higher than
Hydrogen due to all the carbon.

>
>Our oil problems are really political marketing.

Only partially. Unstable sources, unfriendly sources, poorly
accessible sources, long and expensive transportation routes, all lead
to price sensitivity. It along with coal is also a big source of
pollution.

Roger (K8RI)
>
>Terry K

[Roger (K8RI)]

On Thu, 1 Nov 2007 12:48:16 -0700, "Tom S." >
wrote:

>
>"Terry K" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>>
>> http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/proceedings_a/rspa20071880.pdf
>> suggests the sun has no effect on climate.
>
>I guess they never heard of "seasons".
>
>This paper refutes the above paper:
>http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/Critique_Lockwood_Gregory/critique_lockwood.pdf
>
And this paper too appears to have some flaws. It ignores the Pan
evaporation rate which has shown the amount of energy from the sun
reaching the earth's surface has been going down for decades.

Also it denies the major effect of CO2 while current scientists have
overwhelmingly accepted CO2 as the prime driver.

Still in the end the ONLY source for earth's energy we see does come
from the sun with the exception of a small amount of leakage from the
earth's core.

Both papers have some serious conflicts with today's accepted
theories.

Roger (K8RI)