Re: Ping Nesbitt

[Bertie the Bunyip]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
>> news:0JydnYJ4TPELaJPdRVn- :
>>
>> > Whom does Knoyle sell his "negative knowledge" services to?
>> >
>>
>> you, apparently.
>
> Knoyle's employment is a "safety of flight" issue, bunyip.

And your alleged employment is a danger in flight issue.

****.

Bertie

[Tarver Engineering]

"Jim Knoyle" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> > ws.com...
> > > "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
> > > :
> > >
> > > >
> > > > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > > >> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
> > > >> news:0JydnYJ4TPELaJPdRVn- :
> > > >>
> > > >> > Whom does Knoyle sell his "negative knowledge" services to?
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >> you, apparently.
> > > >
> > > > Knoyle's employment is a "safety of flight" issue, bunyip.
> > >
> > > And your alleged employment is a danger in flight issue.
> >
> > I am self employed and doing very well.
> >
> > Knoyle is due to be run out of the industry.

> That'll be the day...

Post up your employer, Knoyle.

I'm sure they want to enjoy the light of your incompetence. Especially now
that it is revealed for the whole world to see. There are plenty here with
a concern for safety that you are a threat to, Jimmy.

[running with scissors]

Bertie the Bunyip > wrote in message m>...
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
> :
>
> >
> > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
> >> news:0JydnYJ4TPELaJPdRVn- :
> >>
> >> > Whom does Knoyle sell his "negative knowledge" services to?
> >> >
> >>
> >> you, apparently.
> >
> > Knoyle's employment is a "safety of flight" issue, bunyip.
>
> And your alleged employment is a danger in flight issue.
>
> ****.
>
> Bertie


and on the ground also.

[Jim Knoyle]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jim Knoyle" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> > > ws.com...
> > > > "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
> > > > :
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> > > > > ...
> > > > >> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
> > > > >> news:0JydnYJ4TPELaJPdRVn- :
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > Whom does Knoyle sell his "negative knowledge" services to?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >> you, apparently.
> > > > >
> > > > > Knoyle's employment is a "safety of flight" issue, bunyip.
> > > >
> > > > And your alleged employment is a danger in flight issue.
> > >
> > > I am self employed and doing very well.
> > >
> > > Knoyle is due to be run out of the industry.
>
> > That'll be the day...
>
> Post up your employer, Knoyle.
>
> I'm sure they want to enjoy the light of your incompetence. Especially
now
> that it is revealed for the whole world to see. There are plenty here
with
> a concern for safety that you are a threat to, Jimmy.
>
>
Anybody is invited to read anything I have posted (unedited by you)
and compare it to the drivel that you have posted. That's the whole point!
I recommend Google.

Be my guest.

A good start:
http://home.att.net/~j.knoyle/the_tarver_chronicles.html

JK

[Tarver Engineering]

"Jim Knoyle" > wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote:

>
>"Gord Beaman" > wrote in message
...
>> "Jim Knoyle" > wrote:
>
>> Hang on here a second now Jim, you still need two samples. As Dan
>> says you need 'static pressure' to read the altitude from and you
>> need 'pitot pressure' (ram air pressure) as well as the static
>> pressure to derive the airspeed reading from. Sounds like you're
>> saying that you can read 'both' from just the 'ram air pressure'
>> alone. Or did I misunderstand you?
>
>Jim has finally figued out what a pitot tube is, but somehow he still wants
>to be correct in his archive troll. It is a great paradox.
>

I know...ain't life a bitch John :) :)

--

-Gord.

[Bertie the Bunyip]

(running with scissors) wrote
in om:

> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote in message
> m>...
>> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
>> :
>>
>> >
>> > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> >> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
>> >> news:0JydnYJ4TPELaJPdRVn- :
>> >>
>> >> > Whom does Knoyle sell his "negative knowledge" services to?
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> you, apparently.
>> >
>> > Knoyle's employment is a "safety of flight" issue, bunyip.
>>
>> And your alleged employment is a danger in flight issue.
>>
>> ****.
>>
>> Bertie
>
>
> and on the ground also.

Not to mention zoologically.

Bertie
>

[Jim Knoyle]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jim Knoyle" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Gord Beaman" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> "Jim Knoyle" > wrote:
> >
> >> Hang on here a second now Jim, you still need two samples. As Dan
> >> says you need 'static pressure' to read the altitude from and you
> >> need 'pitot pressure' (ram air pressure) as well as the static
> >> pressure to derive the airspeed reading from. Sounds like you're
> >> saying that you can read 'both' from just the 'ram air pressure'
> >> alone. Or did I misunderstand you?
> >
> >Jim has finally figued out what a pitot tube is, but somehow he still
wants
> >to be correct in his archive troll. It is a great paradox.
> >
>
> I know...ain't life a bitch John :) :)
>
> --
>
> -Gord.
>
>
Splaps, you can go on quoting Gord's comment
'till the cows come home but your ommision of
my response to Gord is just more evidence of
your dishonesty.
The ongoing evidence of your dishonesty is much
appreciated. Keep on keeping on! :-)

JK

[Tarver Engineering]

"Jim Knoyle" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Jim Knoyle" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > "Tarver Engineering" > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >"Gord Beaman" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >> "Jim Knoyle" > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hang on here a second now Jim, you still need two samples. As Dan
> > >> says you need 'static pressure' to read the altitude from and you
> > >> need 'pitot pressure' (ram air pressure) as well as the static
> > >> pressure to derive the airspeed reading from. Sounds like you're
> > >> saying that you can read 'both' from just the 'ram air pressure'
> > >> alone. Or did I misunderstand you?
> > >
> > >Jim has finally figued out what a pitot tube is, but somehow he still
> wants
> > >to be correct in his archive troll. It is a great paradox.
> > >
> >
> > I know...ain't life a bitch John :) :)
> >
> > --
> >
> > -Gord.
> >
> >
> Splaps, you can go on quoting Gord's comment
> 'till the cows come home but your ommision of
> my response to Gord is just more evidence of
> your dishonesty.

There is no response possible, Knoyle.

You are revealed as an incompetent, for all to see.

[Tom Mosher]

Bertie the Bunyip > wrote in message m>...
> (running with scissors) wrote
> in om:
>
> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote in message
> > m>...
> >> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
> >> :
> >>
> >> >
> >> > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> >> > ...
> >> >> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
> >> >> news:0JydnYJ4TPELaJPdRVn- :
> >> >>
> >> >> > Whom does Knoyle sell his "negative knowledge" services to?
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> you, apparently.
> >> >
> >> > Knoyle's employment is a "safety of flight" issue, bunyip.
> >>
> >> And your alleged employment is a danger in flight issue.
> >>
> >> ****.
> >>
> >> Bertie
> >
> >
> > and on the ground also.
>
> Not to mention zoologically.
>
> Bertie
> >

What's with Tarver? He's constantly saying that someone should be run
out of the industry or that he'll use his connections to get someone
fired or in trouble with the law.

Once, I believe, he threatened my employment by saying that he'd rat
me out to Pratt & Whitney who he thought at the time was my employer.

My last two employers had zero problems with my work and in fact I
have no problems finding a job when I decide it's time to find
something more interesting to do.

Tom Mosher
(not at PWC)

[Tarver Engineering]

"Tom Mosher" > wrote in message
m...

> What's with Tarver? He's constantly saying that someone should be run
> out of the industry or that he'll use his connections to get someone
> fired or in trouble with the law.

Been there done that.

That is how the aviation industry works here on Earth, Tommy.

Knoye is incompetent and his employeer deserves to share detrimental
consequences of Knoyle's archive troll.

It was all funny when sub-idiot Henriques was trying to damage my busineess
and SC Shafer didn't even want to be saved.

[B2431]

>From: (Tom Mosher)


>
>What's with Tarver? He's constantly saying that someone should be run
>out of the industry or that he'll use his connections to get someone
>fired or in trouble with the law.
>
>Once, I believe, he threatened my employment by saying that he'd rat
>me out to Pratt & Whitney who he thought at the time was my employer.
>
>My last two employers had zero problems with my work and in fact I
>have no problems finding a job when I decide it's time to find
>something more interesting to do.
>
>Tom Mosher
>(not at PWC)
>

My theory is he's just insecure. If he sent my employer anything I have said in
this or other newsgroup they would laugh since I know my stuff. Then again
tarver wouldn't get anywhere with me using that tactic since I am on disability
(100% VA). If you do a google search on tarver in RAM, rec.aviation.homebuilt,
some automotive etc newsgroups you will see he plays the same childish games
there.

My personal opinion is the man is a fraud. This is based on his almost complete
lack of knowledge about sytems I am very familiar with.

If he really were the expert he claims to be he would not have to resort to
threats, personal attacks and vulgarity when asked for verifiable citations for
anything he has ever claimed.

I don't ask you to accept my opinion, but a Google search on his name is quite
enlightening.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Tarver Engineering]

"B2431" > wrote in message
...

>
> My theory is he's just insecure. If he sent my employer anything I have
said in
> this or other newsgroup they would laugh since I know my stuff.

Dan, you just finnished demopnstrating you are incompetent in the
thermocouple thread. You also bought into the Knoyle archive troll, which
indicates you are incompetent over a wide area of aircraft and aircraft
related systems.

At no time would I want you anywhere near any airplane carrying any
passenger.

[Tom Mosher]

Tarver Engineering wrote:

> "Tom Mosher" > wrote in message
> m...
>
>
>>What's with Tarver? He's constantly saying that someone should be run
>>out of the industry or that he'll use his connections to get someone
>>fired or in trouble with the law.
>
>
> Been there done that.
>
> That is how the aviation industry works here on Earth, Tommy.
>
> Knoye is incompetent and his employeer deserves to share detrimental
> consequences of Knoyle's archive troll.
>
> It was all funny when sub-idiot Henriques was trying to damage my busineess
> and SC Shafer didn't even want to be saved.
>
>
I know how the aviation industry works considering the fact that I've
worked or done work for Braniff, Flying Tigers, SouthWest, SimuFlite,
Nordam, Aeromet, Guiness Peat, GE Capital, Dassault and many others.

Tom Mosher
Senior Logistics Analyst

[Bertie the Bunyip]

(Tom Mosher) wrote in
m:

> Bertie the Bunyip > wrote in message
> m>...
>> (running with scissors)
>> wrote in om:
>>
>> > Bertie the Bunyip > wrote in message
>> > m>...
>> >> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
>> >> :
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>> >> > ...
>> >> >> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
>> >> >> news:0JydnYJ4TPELaJPdRVn- :
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Whom does Knoyle sell his "negative knowledge" services to?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> you, apparently.
>> >> >
>> >> > Knoyle's employment is a "safety of flight" issue, bunyip.
>> >>
>> >> And your alleged employment is a danger in flight issue.
>> >>
>> >> ****.
>> >>
>> >> Bertie
>> >
>> >
>> > and on the ground also.
>>
>> Not to mention zoologically.
>>
>> Bertie
>> >
>
> What's with Tarver? He's constantly saying that someone should be run
> out of the industry or that he'll use his connections to get someone
> fired or in trouble with the law.

Simply put, he's an idiot.

>
> Once, I believe, he threatened my employment by saying that he'd rat
> me out to Pratt & Whitney who he thought at the time was my employer.

snort! Imagine how that phone call would go..


"Good morning, Pratt and Whitney, how may I help you?"
"Uh, I wanna rat out a bad engineer. A real bad engineer."
"I see I'll connect you to our rat department"
"Oh, is this an 900 number? "
"Excuse me sir?"
(sounds of heavy breathing)
"Uh I want to talk to the guy in charge unless he's a butt licking
Klinonista"
"Yes sir, I'll connect you to our butt licking section"
(more heavy breathing)
"Hello, this is standards, may I help you?"
"Uh, yeah, I want to snithc on one of your people.He pretends to be an
engineer but has no idea what a temerature totalizer is."
"a temerature totalizer? Can you explain sir? I don't know what that is
either."
You know it totals up the temperatures in the cans"
"In the cans? Like beer cans?"
"Yes, beer.Malt liquor, Tarver tea, yellow gold.
wait! no, i mean it totals up the temperature in the engine"
"Really? That sounds like it might be useful if we ever get to the point
where we just have a big red light saying "temperature" on the dashboard."
"You do have one of those, it's in the EPHIS display, moron!
"Excuse me Mr Tarver, but I'm not going to stand here and be called a moron
by someone I don't even know!"
"Then you're a negaive genius, moron!


and so on..

Bertie

[Tom Mosher]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> (Tom Mosher) wrote in
> m:
>
>
>>Bertie the Bunyip > wrote in message
m>...
>>
(running with scissors)
>>>wrote in om:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Bertie the Bunyip > wrote in message
m>...
>>>>
>>>>>"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
>>>>>>>news:0JydnYJ4TPELaJPdRVn- :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Whom does Knoyle sell his "negative knowledge" services to?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>you, apparently.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Knoyle's employment is a "safety of flight" issue, bunyip.
>>>>>
>>>>>And your alleged employment is a danger in flight issue.
>>>>>
>>>>>****.
>>>>>
>>>>>Bertie
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>and on the ground also.
>>>
>>>Not to mention zoologically.
>>>
>>>Bertie
>>>
>>What's with Tarver? He's constantly saying that someone should be run
>>out of the industry or that he'll use his connections to get someone
>>fired or in trouble with the law.
>
>
> Simply put, he's an idiot.
>
>
>>Once, I believe, he threatened my employment by saying that he'd rat
>>me out to Pratt & Whitney who he thought at the time was my employer.
>
>
> snort! Imagine how that phone call would go..
>
>
> "Good morning, Pratt and Whitney, how may I help you?"
> "Uh, I wanna rat out a bad engineer. A real bad engineer."
> "I see I'll connect you to our rat department"
> "Oh, is this an 900 number? "
> "Excuse me sir?"
> (sounds of heavy breathing)
> "Uh I want to talk to the guy in charge unless he's a butt licking
> Klinonista"
> "Yes sir, I'll connect you to our butt licking section"
> (more heavy breathing)
> "Hello, this is standards, may I help you?"
> "Uh, yeah, I want to snithc on one of your people.He pretends to be an
> engineer but has no idea what a temerature totalizer is."
> "a temerature totalizer? Can you explain sir? I don't know what that is
> either."
> You know it totals up the temperatures in the cans"
> "In the cans? Like beer cans?"
> "Yes, beer.Malt liquor, Tarver tea, yellow gold.
> wait! no, i mean it totals up the temperature in the engine"
> "Really? That sounds like it might be useful if we ever get to the point
> where we just have a big red light saying "temperature" on the dashboard."
> "You do have one of those, it's in the EPHIS display, moron!
> "Excuse me Mr Tarver, but I'm not going to stand here and be called a moron
> by someone I don't even know!"
> "Then you're a negaive genius, moron!
>
>
> and so on..
>
> Bertie
Temperature totalizer? Did he actually use that phrase?

I've been working in one state and living in another so I don't get to
peruse the newsgroups very often these days.

Tom Mosher

[Tarver Engineering]

"Tom Mosher" > wrote in message
igy.com...

> I know how the aviation industry works considering the fact that I've
> worked or done work for Braniff, Flying Tigers, SouthWest, SimuFlite,
> Nordam, Aeromet, Guiness Peat, GE Capital, Dassault and many others.

Then you should get it just fine.

And you also know that standing up for incompetence will get this mess on
you.

[Tom Mosher]

Tarver Engineering wrote:

> "Tom Mosher" > wrote in message
> igy.com...
>
>
>>I know how the aviation industry works considering the fact that I've
>>worked or done work for Braniff, Flying Tigers, SouthWest, SimuFlite,
>>Nordam, Aeromet, Guiness Peat, GE Capital, Dassault and many others.
>
>
> Then you should get it just fine.
>
> And you also know that standing up for incompetence will get this mess on
> you.
>
>
....and what mess whould that be?

Trying to get someone fired over some bull**** posted on the newsgroups
is pretty juvenile of you.

Tom Mosher

[Bertie the Bunyip]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
:

>
> "Tom Mosher" > wrote in message
> m...

>> fired or in trouble with the law.
>
> Been there done that.

Yep, pretty sure you have.


Bertie

[B2431]

>Subject: Re: Ping Nesbitt
>From: Tom Mosher

>> Bertie
>Temperature totalizer? Did he actually use that phrase?
>
>I've been working in one state and living in another so I don't get to
>peruse the newsgroups very often these days.

Yes he did and once again he is right and every single person who disagrees
with him is a moron despite the fact no one on Earth agrees with him and he
refuses to provide a citation that does. Let's face it, the poor boy is legend
in his own mind.

The question I have has he ever really been correct about anything aviation?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[John R Weiss]

"B2431" > wrote...
>
> The question I have has he ever really been correct about anything aviation?

Well...

The other day he said something about CAS being "Computed Airspeed", while most
of us who fly think of CAS as "Calibrated Airspeed"... Even though it is a
lesser-used acronym, mainly limited to the Digital Air Data Computer crowd,
"Computed Airspeed" IS a valid description of the acronym/abbreviation...

Correct? Yes. Useful? Who knows...

[Tarver Engineering]

"B2431" > wrote in message
...
> >Subject: Re: Ping Nesbitt
> >From: Tom Mosher
>
> >> Bertie
> >Temperature totalizer? Did he actually use that phrase?
> >
> >I've been working in one state and living in another so I don't get to
> >peruse the newsgroups very often these days.
>
> Yes he did

No I didn't.

The only peson insisting that a thermocouple totalizer adds temperate was
Rick.

Besides that, Dan, your bong hit posts about averaging thermocouples had to
be you lying. Noone could be that clueless and be allowed anywhere near
instrumentation.

[Ralph Nesbitt]

"Tom Mosher" > wrote in message
om...
> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> > (Tom Mosher) wrote in
> > m:
> >
> >
> >>Bertie the Bunyip > wrote in message
> m>...
> >>
> (running with scissors)
> >>>wrote in om:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Bertie the Bunyip > wrote in message
> m>...
> >>>>
> >>>>>"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
> :
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
> >>>>>>>news:0JydnYJ4TPELaJPdRVn- :
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>Whom does Knoyle sell his "negative knowledge" services to?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>you, apparently.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Knoyle's employment is a "safety of flight" issue, bunyip.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>And your alleged employment is a danger in flight issue.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>****.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Bertie
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>and on the ground also.
> >>>
> >>>Not to mention zoologically.
> >>>
> >>>Bertie
> >>>
> >>What's with Tarver? He's constantly saying that someone should be run
> >>out of the industry or that he'll use his connections to get someone
> >>fired or in trouble with the law.
> >
> >
> > Simply put, he's an idiot.
> >
> >
> >>Once, I believe, he threatened my employment by saying that he'd rat
> >>me out to Pratt & Whitney who he thought at the time was my employer.
> >
> >
> > snort! Imagine how that phone call would go..
> >
> >
> > "Good morning, Pratt and Whitney, how may I help you?"
> > "Uh, I wanna rat out a bad engineer. A real bad engineer."
> > "I see I'll connect you to our rat department"
> > "Oh, is this an 900 number? "
> > "Excuse me sir?"
> > (sounds of heavy breathing)
> > "Uh I want to talk to the guy in charge unless he's a butt licking
> > Klinonista"
> > "Yes sir, I'll connect you to our butt licking section"
> > (more heavy breathing)
> > "Hello, this is standards, may I help you?"
> > "Uh, yeah, I want to snithc on one of your people.He pretends to be an
> > engineer but has no idea what a temerature totalizer is."
> > "a temerature totalizer? Can you explain sir? I don't know what that is
> > either."
> > You know it totals up the temperatures in the cans"
> > "In the cans? Like beer cans?"
> > "Yes, beer.Malt liquor, Tarver tea, yellow gold.
> > wait! no, i mean it totals up the temperature in the engine"
> > "Really? That sounds like it might be useful if we ever get to the point
> > where we just have a big red light saying "temperature" on the
dashboard."
> > "You do have one of those, it's in the EPHIS display, moron!
> > "Excuse me Mr Tarver, but I'm not going to stand here and be called a
moron
> > by someone I don't even know!"
> > "Then you're a negaive genius, moron!
> >
> >
> > and so on..
> >
> > Bertie
> Temperature totalizer? Did he actually use that phrase?
>
> I've been working in one state and living in another so I don't get to
> peruse the newsgroups very often these days.
>
> Tom Mosher
>
Phil Miller started a "Thread" on the system that measures Intake Air Temp
on T-56 engines used on Hercules A/C based on the manual. Tarver argued the
manual was wrong & the system worked in a different way. Jim Knowle joined
the discussion. Several have posted Tarver was an "Idiot" or similar
inference re his posts in the thread.

The Discussion over Intake Air Temp Systems, combined with Pitot Tubes is
what has got "Tarver/Splaps Boy/Splappy" on the "War Path" after Jim Knowle.

Perhaps Phil can/will give you the exact "Thread Listing". It is good a
enough laugh to make it worth a trip to "Goggle".
Ralph Nesbitt
Professional FD/CFR/ARFF Type

[Tarver Engineering]

"John R Weiss" > wrote in message
news:HdIQb.117057$nt4.481633@attbi_s51...
> "B2431" > wrote...
> >
> > The question I have has he ever really been correct about anything
aviation?

Dan, do you remember when you were lying about averaging thermocouples by
shorting them together? You would do well to stick to humor.

> Well...
>
> The other day he said something about CAS being "Computed Airspeed", while
most
> of us who fly think of CAS as "Calibrated Airspeed"... Even though it is
a
> lesser-used acronym, mainly limited to the Digital Air Data Computer
crowd,
> "Computed Airspeed" IS a valid description of the acronym/abbreviation...

> Correct? Yes. Useful? Who knows...

ARINC likes Computed Airspeed and I generally go along with them. That way
I end up with certification paperwork the ACO understands.

Not to say that if some military procurement required me to say, "calibrated
airspeed" that I wouldn't.

[Yeff]

On 25 Jan 2004 04:58:49 GMT, B2431 wrote:

> The question I have has he ever really been correct about anything aviation?

The question I have is why anybody continues to engage the idiot?

-Jeff B.
yeff at erols dot com

[Tarver Engineering]

"Yeff" > wrote in message
...
> On 25 Jan 2004 04:58:49 GMT, B2431 wrote:
>
> > The question I have has he ever really been correct about anything
aviation?
>
> The question I have is why anybody continues to engage the idiot?

That is because it is not me that is the idiot.

The irony is rich.

[Jim Knoyle]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
...
>
> "B2431" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> >
> > My theory is he's just insecure. If he sent my employer anything I have
> said in
> > this or other newsgroup they would laugh since I know my stuff.
>
> Dan, you just finnished demopnstrating you are incompetent in the
> thermocouple thread. You also bought into the Knoyle archive troll, which
> indicates you are incompetent over a wide area of aircraft and aircraft
> related systems.
>
> At no time would I want you anywhere near any airplane carrying any
> passenger.
>
>
I appreciate your mentioning my name once in a while but
you keep forgetting to mention the url.
http://home.att.net/~j.knoyle/the_tarver_chronicles.html

Jimmy

[Tarver Engineering]

"Jim Knoyle" > wrote in message
...

That is because being afiliated with your archive troll is a demonstration
of incompetence.

Here are refutations of the first two sections of the Knoyle "be an idiot
too" archive troll.

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote:
>
>"Gord Beaman" > wrote in message
...
>> "Jim Knoyle" > wrote:
>
>> Hang on here a second now Jim, you still need two samples. As Dan
>> says you need 'static pressure' to read the altitude from and you
>> need 'pitot pressure' (ram air pressure) as well as the static
>> pressure to derive the airspeed reading from. Sounds like you're
>> saying that you can read 'both' from just the 'ram air pressure'
>> alone. Or did I misunderstand you?
>
>Jim has finally figued out what a pitot tube is, but somehow he still wants
>to be correct in his archive troll. It is a great paradox.
>

I know...ain't life a bitch John :) :)

--

-Gord.

Ralph Nesbitt wrote:

> Ok educate me. As previously stated my experience with "Pitot Tubes &
> Associated Systems" is due fires on Pitot Covers & associated Red "Remove
> Before Flight" streamers, plus IFE's due system problems associated with
> Pitot Tubes.

We put those covers on pitot tubes to keep the mud bees out, dippy.

[Jim Knoyle]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jim Knoyle" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> That is because being afiliated with your archive troll is a demonstration
> of incompetence.
>
> Here are refutations of the first two sections of the Knoyle "be an idiot
> too" archive troll.
>
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote:
> >
> >"Gord Beaman" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> "Jim Knoyle" > wrote:
> >
> >> Hang on here a second now Jim, you still need two samples. As Dan
> >> says you need 'static pressure' to read the altitude from and you
> >> need 'pitot pressure' (ram air pressure) as well as the static
> >> pressure to derive the airspeed reading from. Sounds like you're
> >> saying that you can read 'both' from just the 'ram air pressure'
> >> alone. Or did I misunderstand you?
> >
> >Jim has finally figued out what a pitot tube is, but somehow he still
wants
> >to be correct in his archive troll. It is a great paradox.
> >
>
> I know...ain't life a bitch John :) :)
>
> --
>
> -Gord.
>
> Ralph Nesbitt wrote:
>
> > Ok educate me. As previously stated my experience with "Pitot Tubes &
> > Associated Systems" is due fires on Pitot Covers & associated Red
"Remove
> > Before Flight" streamers, plus IFE's due system problems associated with
> > Pitot Tubes.
>
> We put those covers on pitot tubes to keep the mud bees out, dippy.
>
>
So did I once during a labor dispute.
Square that with your statement: ( direct quote )
"No pitot tube silly bunny.
It would be profoundly stupid to put a home for mud wasps on an airplane
flying as much as a 727."

There you go again, bad-mouthing the Boeing engineers. :)

[B2431]

>From: "Tarver Engineering"
>
>"John R Weiss" > wrote in message
>news:HdIQb.117057$nt4.481633@attbi_s51...
>> "B2431" > wrote...
>> >
>> > The question I have has he ever really been correct about anything
>aviation?
>
>Dan, do you remember when you were lying about averaging thermocouples by
>shorting them together? You would do well to stick to humor.
>

Tarver, I never said that. Making things up is not a good way to make yourself
look good.

Let's see if you can find where I said anything even remotely like that. Quote
it for us in its entirety, not with the usual tarver editing.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[B2431]

>From: Yeff

>
>On 25 Jan 2004 04:58:49 GMT, B2431 wrote:
>
>> The question I have has he ever really been correct about anything
>aviation?
>
>The question I have is why anybody continues to engage the idiot?
>
>-Jeff B.
>yeff at erols dot com
>

Well I am housebound most of the time and they don't allow real fights on
Springer anymore so I have to substitute. <g>

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Bertie the Bunyip]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in news:AeOdnWo-5YmRxozdRVn-
:

>
> "Jim Knoyle" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > "Jim Knoyle" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> >
>> > "Tarver Engineering" > wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > >"Gord Beaman" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> > >> "Jim Knoyle" > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Hang on here a second now Jim, you still need two samples. As Dan
>> > >> says you need 'static pressure' to read the altitude from and you
>> > >> need 'pitot pressure' (ram air pressure) as well as the static
>> > >> pressure to derive the airspeed reading from. Sounds like you're
>> > >> saying that you can read 'both' from just the 'ram air pressure'
>> > >> alone. Or did I misunderstand you?
>> > >
>> > >Jim has finally figued out what a pitot tube is, but somehow he still
>> wants
>> > >to be correct in his archive troll. It is a great paradox.
>> > >
>> >
>> > I know...ain't life a bitch John :) :)
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>> > -Gord.
>> >
>> >
>> Splaps, you can go on quoting Gord's comment
>> 'till the cows come home but your ommision of
>> my response to Gord is just more evidence of
>> your dishonesty.
>
> There is no response possible, Knoyle.
>

Well, duh.

bertie

[Tarver Engineering]

"B2431" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Tarver Engineering"
> >
> >"John R Weiss" > wrote in message
> >news:HdIQb.117057$nt4.481633@attbi_s51...
> >> "B2431" > wrote...
> >> >
> >> > The question I have has he ever really been correct about anything
> >aviation?
> >
> >Dan, do you remember when you were lying about averaging thermocouples by
> >shorting them together? You would do well to stick to humor.
> >
>
> Tarver, I never said that. Making things up is not a good way to make
yourself
> look good.

It made you look foolish, Dan and then Gord made himself look foolish trying
to help you.

[Tarver Engineering]

"B2431" > wrote in message
...
> >From: Yeff
>
> >
> >On 25 Jan 2004 04:58:49 GMT, B2431 wrote:
> >
> >> The question I have has he ever really been correct about anything
> >aviation?
> >
> >The question I have is why anybody continues to engage the idiot?

> Well I am housebound most of the time and they don't allow real fights on
> Springer anymore so I have to substitute. <g>

Yeff can't even offer your level of incompenance to the group, so I wonder
why he is even posting.

[Tarver Engineering]

"Jim Knoyle" > wrote in message

> Square that with your statement: ( direct quote )
> "No pitot tube silly bunny.
> It would be profoundly stupid to put a home for mud wasps on an airplane
> flying as much as a 727."

The 727 has a pitot port and a static port, idiot Knoyle. You might want to
note that your ignorance of trying to add pitot and static pressures from a
pitot tube demonstrates that you are also incompetent WRT pitot static
systems in general.

You remember, a pitot port is that thing you were mis-describing when Gord
wrote this:

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote:

>
>"Gord Beaman" > wrote in message
...
>> "Jim Knoyle" > wrote:
>
>> Hang on here a second now Jim, you still need two samples. As Dan
>> says you need 'static pressure' to read the altitude from and you
>> need 'pitot pressure' (ram air pressure) as well as the static
>> pressure to derive the airspeed reading from. Sounds like you're
>> saying that you can read 'both' from just the 'ram air pressure'
>> alone. Or did I misunderstand you?
>
>Jim has finally figued out what a pitot tube is, but somehow he still wants
>to be correct in his archive troll. It is a great paradox.
>

I know...ain't life a bitch John :) :)

--

-Gord.

[Tom Mosher]

Ralph Nesbitt wrote:
> "Tom Mosher" > wrote in message
> om...
>
>>Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>
(Tom Mosher) wrote in
m:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Bertie the Bunyip > wrote in message
m>...
>>>>
>>>>
(running with scissors)
>>>>>wrote in om:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Bertie the Bunyip > wrote in message
m>...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
>>>>>>>>>news:0JydnYJ4TPELaJPdRVn- :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Whom does Knoyle sell his "negative knowledge" services to?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>you, apparently.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Knoyle's employment is a "safety of flight" issue, bunyip.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>And your alleged employment is a danger in flight issue.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>****.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Bertie
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>and on the ground also.
>>>>>
>>>>>Not to mention zoologically.
>>>>>
>>>>>Bertie
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>What's with Tarver? He's constantly saying that someone should be run
>>>>out of the industry or that he'll use his connections to get someone
>>>>fired or in trouble with the law.
>>>
>>>
>>>Simply put, he's an idiot.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Once, I believe, he threatened my employment by saying that he'd rat
>>>>me out to Pratt & Whitney who he thought at the time was my employer.
>>>
>>>
>>>snort! Imagine how that phone call would go..
>>>
>>>
>>>"Good morning, Pratt and Whitney, how may I help you?"
>>>"Uh, I wanna rat out a bad engineer. A real bad engineer."
>>>"I see I'll connect you to our rat department"
>>>"Oh, is this an 900 number? "
>>>"Excuse me sir?"
>>>(sounds of heavy breathing)
>>>"Uh I want to talk to the guy in charge unless he's a butt licking
>>>Klinonista"
>>>"Yes sir, I'll connect you to our butt licking section"
>>>(more heavy breathing)
>>>"Hello, this is standards, may I help you?"
>>>"Uh, yeah, I want to snithc on one of your people.He pretends to be an
>>>engineer but has no idea what a temerature totalizer is."
>>>"a temerature totalizer? Can you explain sir? I don't know what that is
>>>either."
>>>You know it totals up the temperatures in the cans"
>>>"In the cans? Like beer cans?"
>>>"Yes, beer.Malt liquor, Tarver tea, yellow gold.
>>> wait! no, i mean it totals up the temperature in the engine"
>>>"Really? That sounds like it might be useful if we ever get to the point
>>>where we just have a big red light saying "temperature" on the
>
> dashboard."
>
>>>"You do have one of those, it's in the EPHIS display, moron!
>>>"Excuse me Mr Tarver, but I'm not going to stand here and be called a
>
> moron
>
>>>by someone I don't even know!"
>>>"Then you're a negaive genius, moron!
>>>
>>>
>>>and so on..
>>>
>>>Bertie
>>
>>Temperature totalizer? Did he actually use that phrase?
>>
>>I've been working in one state and living in another so I don't get to
>>peruse the newsgroups very often these days.
>>
>>Tom Mosher
>>
>
> Phil Miller started a "Thread" on the system that measures Intake Air Temp
> on T-56 engines used on Hercules A/C based on the manual. Tarver argued the
> manual was wrong & the system worked in a different way. Jim Knowle joined
> the discussion. Several have posted Tarver was an "Idiot" or similar
> inference re his posts in the thread.
>
> The Discussion over Intake Air Temp Systems, combined with Pitot Tubes is
> what has got "Tarver/Splaps Boy/Splappy" on the "War Path" after Jim Knowle.
>
> Perhaps Phil can/will give you the exact "Thread Listing". It is good a
> enough laugh to make it worth a trip to "Goggle".
> Ralph Nesbitt
> Professional FD/CFR/ARFF Type
>
>
I tried at one time to follow the thread but gave up in frustration as
it twisted and turned.

Time to go back to Texas. It ought to be interesting to see how this
thread morphs during the week when I have no access to the newsgroups.

Tom Mosher
SLA

[Alan Minyard]

On 25 Jan 2004 04:58:49 GMT, (B2431) wrote:

>>Subject: Re: Ping Nesbitt
>>From: Tom Mosher
>
>>> Bertie
>>Temperature totalizer? Did he actually use that phrase?
>>
>>I've been working in one state and living in another so I don't get to
>>peruse the newsgroups very often these days.
>
>Yes he did and once again he is right and every single person who disagrees
>with him is a moron despite the fact no one on Earth agrees with him and he
>refuses to provide a citation that does. Let's face it, the poor boy is legend
>in his own mind.
>
>The question I have has he ever really been correct about anything aviation?
>
>Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

ISTR a post of his about 2-3 years ago in which all of the words were spelled
correctly. Of course, that was an anomaly. :-)

Al Minyard

[Blippie]

RN wrote:
>Tarver argued the manual was wrong [...]


With that attitude, I hope he never tries to put up any furniture from Ikea

Cheers

Blippie
--
Visit the alt.aviation.safety FAQ online at www.blippie.org.uk

[Tarver Engineering]

"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
...

> ISTR a post of his about 2-3 years ago in which all of the words were
spelled
> correctly. Of course, that was an anomaly. :-)

Beyond spelling, ram is pretty much all beyond Minyard's understanding.

I like my okie phonics, it is a maximum lazy way to write.

[Tarver Engineering]

"Blippie" > wrote in message
...
> RN wrote:
> >Tarver argued the manual was wrong [...]
>
>
> With that attitude, I hope he never tries to put up any furniture from
Ikea

MMs are usually wrong, but it doesn't generally make any difference. It
doesn't really hurt anything for the MM to call a "total" an "average".
Except perhaps the tiny mind of Miller and those adhearing to his sub-idiot
detection system.

I remember last Summer when we were building out the ADCU-500 for Boeing's
747 ammended type certificate and BCAG Long Beach told us that one of the
signals from the King ADC ran backwards from the way we had implemented it,
but by the end of the same day Everett had verified that the MM Long Beach
was reading was incorrect.

[B2431]

>From: "Tarver Engineering"

>
>"B2431" > wrote in message
...
>> >From: "Tarver Engineering"
>> >
>> >"John R Weiss" > wrote in message
>> >news:HdIQb.117057$nt4.481633@attbi_s51...
>> >> "B2431" > wrote...
>> >> >
>> >> > The question I have has he ever really been correct about anything
>> >aviation?
>> >
>> >Dan, do you remember when you were lying about averaging thermocouples by
>> >shorting them together? You would do well to stick to humor.
>> >
>>
>> Tarver, I never said that. Making things up is not a good way to make
>yourself
>> look good.
>
>It made you look foolish, Dan and then Gord made himself look foolish trying
>to help you.

Well, seeing as you refuse to say where I said anything about shorted
thermocouples I have to remind you that YOU were the only one who mentioned
shorted thermocouples when you said that is the way they usually fail.

You failed to quote the part where I asked you for proof I ever said anything
about shorted thermocouples.

Selected omissions and outright lies are so typical of you. This is the reason
everyone in this newsgroup considers you a fraud. It makes me wonder why I
bother treating you with respect.

Dan, U.S.Air Force, retired

[Tarver Engineering]

"B2431" > wrote in message
...
<snip>
> >It made you look foolish, Dan and then Gord made himself look foolish
trying
> >to help you.
>
> Well, seeing as you refuse to say where I said anything about shorted
> thermocouples I have to remind you that YOU were the only one who
mentioned
> shorted thermocouples when you said that is the way they usually fail.

I mentioned a dead short as the "major failure mode" of thermocouples to
demonstate the paradox of your lies, Dan.

I will give you this, unlike the village idiot Knoyle, you at least know
that you need both pitot and static pressure to make air data from a pitot
static system, Dan.

But you really ought to stop lying about your "memories". :)

[John R Weiss]

"Yeff" > wrote...
>
> The question I have is why anybody continues to engage the idiot?

Some of us are masochists.

Somebody has to make sure his spew isn't mistaken for truth by the
uninitiated...

[Tarver Engineering]

"John R Weiss" > wrote in message
news:_MXQb.20192$U%5.158339@attbi_s03...
> "Yeff" > wrote...
> >
> > The question I have is why anybody continues to engage the idiot?
>
> Some of us are masochists.
>
> Somebody has to make sure his spew isn't mistaken for truth by the
> uninitiated...

My spew is only taken for truth by the competent.

I remember a couple of years ago when I was having a discussion with
TomKraft and we were laughing at you comical idiots.

[B2431]

>From: "Tarver Engineering"
>Date: 1/25/2004 12:56 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>
>"B2431" > wrote in message
...
><snip>
>> >It made you look foolish, Dan and then Gord made himself look foolish
>trying
>> >to help you.
>>
>> Well, seeing as you refuse to say where I said anything about shorted
>> thermocouples I have to remind you that YOU were the only one who
>mentioned
>> shorted thermocouples when you said that is the way they usually fail.
>
>I mentioned a dead short as the "major failure mode" of thermocouples to
>demonstate the paradox of your lies, Dan.
>
>I will give you this, unlike the village idiot Knoyle, you at least know
>that you need both pitot and static pressure to make air data from a pitot
>static system, Dan.
>
>But you really ought to stop lying about your "memories". :)
>
OK, now all you have to do is prove me wrong. I would ask you to retract that
accusation as a gentleman would. However, I have seen nothing in you to
indicate you are or ever were a gentleman.

Does it really make you feel better to hurl insults? Are you really that
insecure?

Wait, don't answer, I don't care.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Tarver Engineering]

"B2431" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Tarver Engineering"
> >Date: 1/25/2004 12:56 PM Central Standard Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> >
> >"B2431" > wrote in message
> ...
> ><snip>
> >> >It made you look foolish, Dan and then Gord made himself look foolish
> >trying
> >> >to help you.
> >>
> >> Well, seeing as you refuse to say where I said anything about shorted
> >> thermocouples I have to remind you that YOU were the only one who
> >mentioned
> >> shorted thermocouples when you said that is the way they usually fail.
> >
> >I mentioned a dead short as the "major failure mode" of thermocouples to
> >demonstate the paradox of your lies, Dan.
> >
> >I will give you this, unlike the village idiot Knoyle, you at least know
> >that you need both pitot and static pressure to make air data from a
pitot
> >static system, Dan.
> >
> >But you really ought to stop lying about your "memories". :)
> >
> OK, now all you have to do is prove me wrong.

Did and done, what you were writing is stupid.

[B2431]

>From: "Tarver Engineering"
>Date: 1/25/2004 6:07 PM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>
>"B2431" > wrote in message
...
>> >From: "Tarver Engineering"
>> >Date: 1/25/2004 12:56 PM Central Standard Time
>> >Message-id: >
>> >
>> >
>> >"B2431" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> ><snip>
>> >> >It made you look foolish, Dan and then Gord made himself look foolish
>> >trying
>> >> >to help you.
>> >>
>> >> Well, seeing as you refuse to say where I said anything about shorted
>> >> thermocouples I have to remind you that YOU were the only one who
>> >mentioned
>> >> shorted thermocouples when you said that is the way they usually fail.
>> >
>> >I mentioned a dead short as the "major failure mode" of thermocouples to
>> >demonstate the paradox of your lies, Dan.
>> >
>> >I will give you this, unlike the village idiot Knoyle, you at least know
>> >that you need both pitot and static pressure to make air data from a
>pitot
>> >static system, Dan.
>> >
>> >But you really ought to stop lying about your "memories". :)
>> >
>> OK, now all you have to do is prove me wrong.
>
>Did and done, what you were writing is stupid.
>
I didn't think you were man enough to apologize and unfortunately I have been
proved right once again.

Grow up, little boy.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[Tarver Engineering]

"B2431" > wrote in message
...
> >From: "Tarver Engineering"
> >Date: 1/25/2004 6:07 PM Central Standard Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> >
> >"B2431" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> >From: "Tarver Engineering"
> >> >Date: 1/25/2004 12:56 PM Central Standard Time
> >> >Message-id: >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >"B2431" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> ><snip>
> >> >> >It made you look foolish, Dan and then Gord made himself look
foolish
> >> >trying
> >> >> >to help you.
> >> >>
> >> >> Well, seeing as you refuse to say where I said anything about
shorted
> >> >> thermocouples I have to remind you that YOU were the only one who
> >> >mentioned
> >> >> shorted thermocouples when you said that is the way they usually
fail.
> >> >
> >> >I mentioned a dead short as the "major failure mode" of thermocouples
to
> >> >demonstate the paradox of your lies, Dan.
> >> >
> >> >I will give you this, unlike the village idiot Knoyle, you at least
know
> >> >that you need both pitot and static pressure to make air data from a
> >pitot
> >> >static system, Dan.
> >> >
> >> >But you really ought to stop lying about your "memories". :)
> >> >
> >> OK, now all you have to do is prove me wrong.
> >
> >Did and done, what you were writing is stupid.
> >
> I didn't think you were man enough to apologize and unfortunately I have
been
> proved right once again.

Perhaps Gord has the patience to explain how aircraft are designed to be
fault tollerent to you.

[running with scissors]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message >...
> "Blippie" > wrote in message
> ...
> > RN wrote:
> > >Tarver argued the manual was wrong [...]
> >
> >
> > With that attitude, I hope he never tries to put up any furniture from
> Ikea
>
> MMs are usually wrong,


oh why dont you shut up you ****ing idiot.

look you moron, no one buys your utter crap. you play this consistant
image that the whole aviation world couldnt exist with you.

you have stated in the past the honeywell, boeing etc etc, depend on
your expertise for survival, yet you cannot tell the difference
between a spoiler and flap. you have some bizarre perception of pitot
tubes.

you are a drunk, a liar and full of fcuking ****. NOW SHUT UP.

idiot


> but it doesn't generally make any difference. It
> doesn't really hurt anything for the MM to call a "total" an "average".

a total is not, nothing like, nor anywhere near an average. its about
the same as calling a spolier a flap.

****ing idiot.

[Tarver Engineering]

"running with scissors" > wrote in
message om...
> "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
>...
> > "Blippie" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > RN wrote:
> > > >Tarver argued the manual was wrong [...]
> > >
> > >
> > > With that attitude, I hope he never tries to put up any furniture from
> > Ikea
> >
> > MMs are usually wrong,
>
>
> oh why dont you shut up you ****ing idiot.
>
> look you moron, no one buys your utter crap. you play this consistant
> image that the whole aviation world couldnt exist with you.

I am sorry that you are nothing and feel sad that I am one of the top
engineers in the aviation industry.

Paul Nixon tried to warn you years ago.

Know that the entire industry laughs at you regularly.

[running with scissors]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message >...
> "Blippie" > wrote in message
> ...
> > RN wrote:
> > >Tarver argued the manual was wrong [...]
> >
> >
> > With that attitude, I hope he never tries to put up any furniture from
> Ikea
>
> MMs are usually wrong,

bwahahhahahahhahahhahahhahahhahhahahhahahhaha

> but it doesn't generally make any difference.

bwahahahhahhahhahhahhahhahhahhahahhahhahahhahahaha hhahah

It
> doesn't really hurt anything for the MM to call a "total" an "average".

bwahahhahahhahahhahahhahahahhahahhahahhahahahhahah hahahahhahahahhahahahhahahah
hahhahahhahahahhahahhahahahhahahahahhahahhahahahah hahahhahahahhahahahahhahahah

yes tarver of course, "total" and "average" dont matter at all. like
"average fuel burn" and "total fuel burn" really dont matter, they can
be interchanged with impunity in a manual and it really doesnt matter.

bwahhahahahhahahhahahhahahahhahahhahahhahahahhahah ahahhahahahhahahaha

****! and you claim to have some degree of knowledge.

"total" and "average" are completely different and in no way
interchangeable and if you make a claim like that and claim to be
around aircraft then you are by and large a ****ing idiot.


for example, John Tarver is a total idiot. His fantastical claims
assure that he is not your average idiot.


****ing moron.

[Ralph Nesbitt]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
...
>
> "running with scissors" > wrote
in
> message om...
> > "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
> >...
> > > "Blippie" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > RN wrote:
> > > > >Tarver argued the manual was wrong [...]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > With that attitude, I hope he never tries to put up any furniture
from
> > > Ikea
> > >
> > > MMs are usually wrong,
> >
> >
> > oh why dont you shut up you ****ing idiot.
> >
> > look you moron, no one buys your utter crap. you play this consistant
> > image that the whole aviation world couldnt exist with you.
>
> I am sorry that you are nothing and feel sad that I am one of the top
> engineers in the aviation industry.
>
> Paul Nixon tried to warn you years ago.
>
> Know that the entire industry laughs at you regularly.
>
Splapy; You keep stating "Paul Nixon tried to warn you years ago" in
response to various posts. Why do you consider "Paul Nixon" so qualified to
warn anyone about anything re your posts?
Ralph Nesbitt
Professional FD/CFR/ARFF Type

[running with scissors]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message >...
> "running with scissors" > wrote in
> message om...
> > "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
> >...
> > > "Blippie" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > RN wrote:
> > > > >Tarver argued the manual was wrong [...]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > With that attitude, I hope he never tries to put up any furniture from
> > > Ikea
> > >
> > > MMs are usually wrong,
> >
> >
> > oh why dont you shut up you ****ing idiot.
> >
> > look you moron, no one buys your utter crap. you play this consistant
> > image that the whole aviation world couldnt exist with you.
>
> I am sorry that you are nothing and feel sad that I am one of the top
> engineers in the aviation industry.
>
> Paul Nixon tried to warn you years ago.
>
> Know that the entire industry laughs at you regularly.


words you should be reciting into the mirror little man.

[running with scissors]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message >...
> "running with scissors" > wrote in
> message om...
> > "Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message
> >...
> > > "Blippie" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > RN wrote:
> > > > >Tarver argued the manual was wrong [...]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > With that attitude, I hope he never tries to put up any furniture from
> > > Ikea
> > >
> > > MMs are usually wrong,
> >
> >
> > oh why dont you shut up you ****ing idiot.
> >
> > look you moron, no one buys your utter crap. you play this consistant
> > image that the whole aviation world couldnt exist with you.
>
> I am sorry that you are nothing and feel sad that I am one of the top
> engineers in the aviation industry.

is that why you cant tell the difference between "average" and "total"
little man

>
> Paul Nixon tried to warn you years ago.
>

nixon has never tried to warn me of anything you liar.

> Know that the entire industry laughs at you regularly.


mm yes, whereas the entire industry does laugh at an "engineer" who
doent know the difference between "total" and "average", thinks a
spolier is a flap and who states that the P1T0t , not pitot, was
introduced to jet aircraft to prevent them stalling in fog.

again a poor attempt at a diversion from own ignorance nad stupidity.
ireally dont need to attempt a childish schlong waving competetion
here, you *ARE* an industry joke tarver. your quotations are posted
on notice boards of maintenance and engineering facilities across the
world, your hysterically inaccurate and frankly bizzare quotations
have been used and recognised in lectures worldwide.

tarver, the industry is laughing at you not with you.

dont even try an attempt on my credibility, as anyone with a brain
cell can see your drivel for what it is.

drunk.

[Bertie the Bunyip]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in
:

>
> "Blippie" > wrote in message
> ...
>> RN wrote:
>> >Tarver argued the manual was wrong [...]
>>
>>
>> With that attitude, I hope he never tries to put up any furniture
>> from
> Ikea
>
> MMs are usually wrong, but it doesn't generally make any difference.
> It doesn't really hurt anything for the MM to call a "total" an
> "average". Except perhaps the tiny mind of Miller and those adhearing
> to his sub-idiot detection system.
>
> I remember last Summer when we were building out the ADCU-500 for
> Boeing's 747 ammended type certificate and BCAG Long Beach told us
> that one of the signals from the King ADC ran backwards from the way
> we had implemented it,

Now there's a surprise

bertie

[Kurt Lochner]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>
>Tartar Engine-earring" > whined about:
> >
> > "Blippie" wrote:
> >
> >> RN wrote:
> >> >Tarver argued the manual was wrong [...]
> >>
> >> With that attitude, I hope he never tries to put up any furniture
> >> from Ikea
> >
> >MMs are usually wrong, but it doesn't generally make any difference.
> >It doesn't really hurt anything for the MM to call a "total" an
> >"average". Except perhaps the tiny mind of Miller and those adhearing
> >to his sub-idiot detection system.
> >
> >I remember last Summer when we were building out the ADCU-500 for
> >Boeing's 747 ammended type certificate and BCAG Long Beach told us
> >that one of the signals from the King ADC ran backwards from the way
> >we had implemented it,
>
> Now there's a surprise

*>snickering<* Yeah, that from "one of the top engineers in the aviation industry."

--Go figure..

[Ralph Nesbitt]

"Kurt Lochner" > wrote in message
...
> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> >
> >Tartar Engine-earring" > whined about:
> > >
> > > "Blippie" wrote:
> > >
> > >> RN wrote:
> > >> >Tarver argued the manual was wrong [...]
> > >>
> > >> With that attitude, I hope he never tries to put up any furniture
> > >> from Ikea
> > >
> > >MMs are usually wrong, but it doesn't generally make any difference.
> > >It doesn't really hurt anything for the MM to call a "total" an
> > >"average". Except perhaps the tiny mind of Miller and those adhearing
> > >to his sub-idiot detection system.
> > >
> > >I remember last Summer when we were building out the ADCU-500 for
> > >Boeing's 747 ammended type certificate and BCAG Long Beach told us
> > >that one of the signals from the King ADC ran backwards from the way
> > >we had implemented it,
> >
> > Now there's a surprise
>
> *>snickering<* Yeah, that from "one of the top engineers in the aviation
industry."
>
> --Go figure..
>
Consider if the attitude/comments in this thread is from "one of the top
engineers in the aviation industry", The attitudes/comments of "lower class
engineers in/from the aviation industry" should/would really be a "Hoot"
IMHO.
Ralph Nesbitt
Professional FD/CFR/ARFF Type

[running with scissors]

"Tarver Engineering" > wrote in message >...
> "Kurt Lochner" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> > >
> > >Tartar Engine-earring" > whined about:
> > > >
> > > > "Blippie" wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> RN wrote:
> > > >> >Tarver argued the manual was wrong [...]
> > > >>
> > > >> With that attitude, I hope he never tries to put up any furniture
> > > >> from Ikea
> > > >
> > > >MMs are usually wrong, but it doesn't generally make any difference.
> > > >It doesn't really hurt anything for the MM to call a "total" an
> > > >"average". Except perhaps the tiny mind of Miller and those adhearing
> > > >to his sub-idiot detection system.
> > > >
> > > >I remember last Summer when we were building out the ADCU-500 for
> > > >Boeing's 747 ammended type certificate and BCAG Long Beach told us
> > > >that one of the signals from the King ADC ran backwards from the way
> > > >we had implemented it,
> > >
> > > Now there's a surprise
> >
> > *>snickering<* Yeah, that from "one of the top engineers in the aviation
> industry."
>
> That is what I am.
>
> Skylight was correct and Long Beach was wrong. It was a rather rediculess
> mistake for Long Beach to make, considering that MMs are specifically called
> out by the ACO as "not a basis for certification". Connector issues later
> took out a long time Douglas DER, but that is another story. It was kind of
> fun to see BCAG bend their knee to Knutson.


mmmm yes of course, little man.