How do weather services get sky conditions above the surface?

[Mxsmanic]

It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the surface to measure
wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what is the normal way for
meteorologists to measure these things aloft? Do they depend on PIREPs, or
expendable/recoverable probes and balloons, or satellites, or what?

[[email protected]]

On Jul 23, 9:37*am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the surface to measure
> wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what is the normal way for
> meteorologists to measure these things aloft? *Do they depend on PIREPs, or
> expendable/recoverable probes and balloons, or satellites, or what?

This is one of your poorest troll attempts, Anthony, you are a
disappointment. Please try to do better.

[Steven P. McNicoll[_2_]]

wrote:
> On Jul 23, 9:37 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>> It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the surface to
>> measure wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what is the normal
>> way for meteorologists to measure these things aloft? Do they depend
>> on PIREPs, or expendable/recoverable probes and balloons, or
>> satellites, or what?
>
> This is one of your poorest troll attempts, Anthony, you are a
> disappointment. Please try to do better.
>

Do you folks that continue to respond to Mxsmanic, Bertie, Maxwell, and the
other trolls realize that if you had simply ignored them this would still be
a useful forum?

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the surface to
> measure wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what is the normal
> way for meteorologists to measure these things aloft? Do they depend
> on PIREPs, or expendable/recoverable probes and balloons, or
> satellites, or what?

They lok out the window fjukktard.
Try it.

Bertie

[Darkwing]

"Mxsmanic" > wrote in message
...
> It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the surface to
> measure
> wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what is the normal way for
> meteorologists to measure these things aloft? Do they depend on PIREPs,
> or
> expendable/recoverable probes and balloons, or satellites, or what?

Try Google, Simboi.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in
m:

> wrote:
>> On Jul 23, 9:37 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>>> It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the surface to
>>> measure wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what is the normal
>>> way for meteorologists to measure these things aloft? Do they depend
>>> on PIREPs, or expendable/recoverable probes and balloons, or
>>> satellites, or what?
>>
>> This is one of your poorest troll attempts, Anthony, you are a
>> disappointment. Please try to do better.
>>
>
> Do you folks that continue to respond to Mxsmanic, Bertie, Maxwell,
> and the other trolls realize that if you had simply ignored them this
> would still be a useful forum?
>
>
>

Actually, I likve for poasts just like this one....


Bertie

[buttman]

On Jul 23, 7:37*am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the surface to measure
> wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what is the normal way for
> meteorologists to measure these things aloft? *Do they depend on PIREPs, or
> expendable/recoverable probes and balloons, or satellites, or what?

Theres a little "eye" that looks up at the sky at various points. It
detects if there is cloud, or sky. The sensor is prone to errors,
though. Sometimes if it's broken, it'll say its overcast because some
of the sensors are pointing diagonally and are sensing the side of the
cloud. I had an ATC college-style text book that had a very
informative diagram of how they worked, but that book is long gone.

http://www.cyanogen.com/products/cloud_main.htm

here is an example of one.

[Frank Olson]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the surface to measure
> wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what is the normal way for
> meteorologists to measure these things aloft? Do they depend on PIREPs, or
> expendable/recoverable probes and balloons, or satellites, or what?


<Tongue firmly in cheek> They charter a Bell 47 helicopter and take it
up in increments of 1000 feet where they hover for a few seconds. They
roll down the window and use the "finger method" to determine wind speed
and direction. At altitudes above 30,000 feet they use the frozen toe
method to determine winds aloft and temperatures.

[Rocky Stevens]

On Jul 23, 10:05*am, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
wrote:
> wrote:
> > On Jul 23, 9:37 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> >> It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the surface to
> >> measure wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what is the normal
> >> way for meteorologists to measure these things aloft? Do they depend
> >> on PIREPs, or expendable/recoverable probes and balloons, or
> >> satellites, or what?
>
> > This is one of your poorest troll attempts, Anthony, you are a
> > disappointment. Please try to do better.
>
> Do you folks that continue to respond to Mxsmanic, Bertie, Maxwell, and the
> other trolls realize that if you had simply ignored them this would still be
> a useful forum?

It would also be a useful forum if people actually answered the
questions posed, regardless of *who* is asking it. The OP's question
is perefectly valid, and x number of years from now when somebody
Google's for the answer and gets this thread, all they will see for an
answer are insults. There is nothing more frustrating than
Googling for an anwer to something only to find the response was "why
don't you Google for it". If you have the time to post such a
response, you have the time to answer the question.

[Steven P. McNicoll[_2_]]

Rocky Stevens wrote:
>
> It would also be a useful forum if people actually answered the
> questions posed, regardless of *who* is asking it. The OP's question
> is perefectly valid, and x number of years from now when somebody
> Google's for the answer and gets this thread, all they will see for an
> answer are insults. There is nothing more frustrating than
> Googling for an anwer to something only to find the response was "why
> don't you Google for it". If you have the time to post such a
> response, you have the time to answer the question.
>

True, but the folks that post such a response probably don't know the
answer.

[Gig 601Xl Builder]

Rocky Stevens wrote:
> On Jul 23, 10:05 am, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
> wrote:
>> wrote:
>>> On Jul 23, 9:37 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>>>> It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the surface to
>>>> measure wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what is the normal
>>>> way for meteorologists to measure these things aloft? Do they depend
>>>> on PIREPs, or expendable/recoverable probes and balloons, or
>>>> satellites, or what?
>>> This is one of your poorest troll attempts, Anthony, you are a
>>> disappointment. Please try to do better.
>> Do you folks that continue to respond to Mxsmanic, Bertie, Maxwell, and the
>> other trolls realize that if you had simply ignored them this would still be
>> a useful forum?
>
> It would also be a useful forum if people actually answered the
> questions posed, regardless of *who* is asking it. The OP's question
> is perefectly valid, and x number of years from now when somebody
> Google's for the answer and gets this thread, all they will see for an
> answer are insults. There is nothing more frustrating than
> Googling for an anwer to something only to find the response was "why
> don't you Google for it". If you have the time to post such a
> response, you have the time to answer the question.
>

You must be new here. Somebody will answer Anthony's question and then
he will tell them they are wrong and say he has studied the issue in
depth and that just because the person that answered the question is a
pilot does not mean that they know anything about weather or how the
information is collected.

And to top it all off the fact that I have posted the above in no way
lowers the chances of Anthony doing exactly what I've said he would do.

[buttman]

On Jul 23, 9:20*am, Gig 601Xl Builder >
wrote:
> Rocky Stevens wrote:
> > On Jul 23, 10:05 am, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
> > wrote:
> >> wrote:
> >>> On Jul 23, 9:37 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> >>>> It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the surface to
> >>>> measure wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what is the normal
> >>>> way for meteorologists to measure these things aloft? Do they depend
> >>>> on PIREPs, or expendable/recoverable probes and balloons, or
> >>>> satellites, or what?
> >>> This is one of your poorest troll attempts, Anthony, you are a
> >>> disappointment. Please try to do better.
> >> Do you folks that continue to respond to Mxsmanic, Bertie, Maxwell, and the
> >> other trolls realize that if you had simply ignored them this would still be
> >> a useful forum?
>
> > It would also be a useful forum if people actually answered the
> > questions posed, regardless of *who* is asking it. The OP's question
> > is perefectly valid, and x number of years from now when somebody
> > Google's for the answer and gets this thread, all they will see for an
> > answer are insults. There is nothing more frustrating than
> > Googling for an anwer to something only to find the response was "why
> > don't you Google for it". If you have the time to post such a
> > response, you have the time to answer the question.
>
> You must be new here. Somebody will answer Anthony's question and then
> he will tell them they are wrong and say he has studied the issue in
> depth and that just because the person that answered the question is a
> pilot does not mean that they know anything about weather or how the
> information is collected.
>
> And to top it all off the fact that I have posted the above in no way
> lowers the chances of Anthony doing exactly what I've said he would do.

oh god shut up. I've been frankly answering his questions for a while
now and I've yet to see him respond to me in that manner, or to other
people in that manner either. If it bothers you so much why don't you
just not read this place anymore? There are tons of people that post
here that I don't like. I cope with it by *gasp* ignoring them. Its
not as hard as it sounds.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

buttman > wrote in
:

> On Jul 23, 9:20*am, Gig 601Xl Builder >
> wrote:
>> Rocky Stevens wrote:
>> > On Jul 23, 10:05 am, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
>> > wrote:
>> >> wrote:
>> >>> On Jul 23, 9:37 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>> >>>> It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the
>> >>>> surface to measure wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what
>> >>>> is the normal way for meteorologists to measure these things
>> >>>> aloft? Do they depend on PIREPs, or expendable/recoverable
>> >>>> probes and balloons, or satellites, or what?
>> >>> This is one of your poorest troll attempts, Anthony, you are a
>> >>> disappointment. Please try to do better.
>> >> Do you folks that continue to respond to Mxsmanic, Bertie,
>> >> Maxwell, an
> d the
>> >> other trolls realize that if you had simply ignored them this
>> >> would st
> ill be
>> >> a useful forum?
>>
>> > It would also be a useful forum if people actually answered the
>> > questions posed, regardless of *who* is asking it. The OP's
>> > question is perefectly valid, and x number of years from now when
>> > somebody Google's for the answer and gets this thread, all they
>> > will see for an answer are insults. There is nothing more
>> > frustrating than Googling for an anwer to something only to find
>> > the response was "why don't you Google for it". If you have the
>> > time to post such a response, you have the time to answer the
>> > question.
>>
>> You must be new here. Somebody will answer Anthony's question and
>> then he will tell them they are wrong and say he has studied the
>> issue in depth and that just because the person that answered the
>> question is a pilot does not mean that they know anything about
>> weather or how the information is collected.
>>
>> And to top it all off the fact that I have posted the above in no way
>> lowers the chances of Anthony doing exactly what I've said he would
>> do.
>
> oh god shut up. I've been frankly answering his questions for a while
> now and I've yet to see him respond to me in that manner, or to other
> people in that manner either. If it bothers you so much why don't you
> just not read this place anymore? There are tons of people that post
> here that I don't like. I cope with it by *gasp* ignoring them. Its
> not as hard as it sounds.
>

Yeah, right. I believe you. Millions wouldn't but I do.

Bertie

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Rocky Stevens" > wrote

It would also be a useful forum if people actually answered the
questions posed, regardless of *who* is asking it. The OP's question
is perefectly valid, and x number of years from now when somebody
Google's for the answer and gets this thread, all they will see for an
answer are insults. There is nothing more frustrating than
Googling for an anwer to something only to find the response was "why
don't you Google for it". If you have the time to post such a
response, you have the time to answer the question.

You must not have kids, or if you do, they are brats.

All kids occasionally need to be ignored when they exibit undesirable
behavior, and rewarded for correct behavior. That is MX. He never exibits
desireable behavior, when the big picture has been taken into account. What
he has done is drive off posters by the droves.

I still do not understand how anyone with a brain can think that his
presence here is desireable, or why they would answer any post of his for
any reason.
--
Jim in NC

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Morgans" > wrote in
:

>
> "Rocky Stevens" > wrote
>
> It would also be a useful forum if people actually answered the
> questions posed, regardless of *who* is asking it. The OP's question
> is perefectly valid, and x number of years from now when somebody
> Google's for the answer and gets this thread, all they will see for an
> answer are insults. There is nothing more frustrating than
> Googling for an anwer to something only to find the response was "why
> don't you Google for it". If you have the time to post such a
> response, you have the time to answer the question.
>
> You must not have kids, or if you do, they are brats.
>
> All kids occasionally need to be ignored when they exibit undesirable
> behavior, and rewarded for correct behavior. That is MX. He never
> exibits desireable behavior, when the big picture has been taken into
> account. What he has done is drive off posters by the droves.
>
> I still do not understand how anyone with a brain can think that his
> presence here is desireable, or why they would answer any post of his
> for any reason.

Lots of things you can't understand, apparently


Bertie

[buttman]

On Jul 23, 10:12*am, "Morgans" > wrote:

> All kids occasionally need to be ignored when they exibit undesirable
> behavior, and rewarded for correct behavior. *That is MX. *He never exibits
> desireable behavior, when the big picture has been taken into account. *What
> he has done is drive off posters by the droves.
>
> I still do not understand how anyone with a brain can think that his
> presence here is desireable, or why they would answer any post of his for
> any reason.
> --
> Jim in NC

What, praytell, exactly do you find "undesirable" about posting an on-
topic question to a newsgroup?

The only thing "undesirable" about mxsmanic's postings are the idiots
like you who come out of the woodwork to help **** up this place more
than it already is.

[buttman]

On Jul 23, 10:20*am, Nomen Nescio > wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>
> From: buttman >
>
> >oh god shut up. I've been frankly answering his questions for a while
> >now and I've yet to see him respond to me in that manner, or to other
> >people in that manner either.
>
> Not particularly observant. Are you?
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: N/A
>
> iQCVAwUBSIeCGJMoscYxZNI5AQGb9QP9E9iMM5eK6hfFKnwOol RJgM8QmVtYj4sk
> eCfhVJ1ojbiKlDpM13k37Mm3aj1VH3TvAnGsA/GCv6jakJ74EIygbg+z13wFW+KN
> rYTqLkQKA+Me6veyBQmY53Ns92gvujMKpJSS7ld3U3EklE9sl0 HOH/ncoA9r+dp9
> 5kYVq3Qou0c=
> =aBkX
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Or maybe I'm just not emotionally fragile enough to cry over the
internet about it.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

buttman > wrote in news:48262bdd-32f9-482b-9d4a-
:

> On Jul 23, 10:20*am, Nomen Nescio > wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>
>> From: buttman >
>>
>> >oh god shut up. I've been frankly answering his questions for a while
>> >now and I've yet to see him respond to me in that manner, or to other
>> >people in that manner either.
>>
>> Not particularly observant. Are you?
>>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: N/A
>>
>> iQCVAwUBSIeCGJMoscYxZNI5AQGb9QP9E9iMM5eK6hfFKnwOol RJgM8QmVtYj4sk
>> eCfhVJ1ojbiKlDpM13k37Mm3aj1VH3TvAnGsA/GCv6jakJ74EIygbg+z13wFW+KN
>> rYTqLkQKA+Me6veyBQmY53Ns92gvujMKpJSS7ld3U3EklE9sl0 HOH/ncoA9r+dp9
>> 5kYVq3Qou0c
>> =aBkX
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> Or maybe I'm just not emotionally fragile enough to cry over the
> internet about it.
>

Or maybe you're just stupid.

I know where I'd put my money.

Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

buttman > wrote in
:

> On Jul 23, 10:12*am, "Morgans" > wrote:
>
>> All kids occasionally need to be ignored when they exibit undesirable
>> behavior, and rewarded for correct behavior. *That is MX. *He never e
> xibits
>> desireable behavior, when the big picture has been taken into
>> account.
> *What
>> he has done is drive off posters by the droves.
>>
>> I still do not understand how anyone with a brain can think that his
>> presence here is desireable, or why they would answer any post of his
>> for any reason.
>> --
>> Jim in NC
>
> What, praytell, exactly do you find "undesirable" about posting an on-
> topic question to a newsgroup?
>
> The only thing "undesirable" about mxsmanic's postings are the idiots
> like you who come out of the woodwork to help **** up this place more
> than it already is.
>

Great PKB poast there fjukktard

Bertie

[Gig 601Xl Builder]

buttman wrote:

>
> oh god shut up. I've been frankly answering his questions for a while
> now and I've yet to see him respond to me in that manner, or to other
> people in that manner either.

If this is an example of your skills when it observational skills then I
really am concerned about your ability to act as a CFI.

>If it bothers you so much why don't you
> just not read this place anymore? There are tons of people that post
> here that I don't like. I cope with it by *gasp* ignoring them. Its
> not as hard as it sounds.

So feel free to add me to your ignore list.

[buttman]

On Jul 23, 10:53*am, Gig 601Xl Builder >
wrote:
> buttman wrote:
>
> > oh god shut up. I've been frankly answering his questions for a while
> > now and I've yet to see him respond to me in that manner, or to other
> > people in that manner either.
>
> If this is an example of your skills when it observational skills then I
> really am concerned about your ability to act as a CFI.

Uh huh. How about providing me with one of these seemingly ubiquitous
examples of him
telling me, or anyone else that they are "wrong" and that he has
"studied the issue in
depth"? The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. I just
went through the last 5 or so post I've made to his threads and I
haven't noticed any rudeness.

[[email protected]]

Mxsmanic > wrote:
> It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the surface to measure
> wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what is the normal way for
> meteorologists to measure these things aloft? Do they depend on PIREPs, or
> expendable/recoverable probes and balloons, or satellites, or what?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteorology

http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu/(Gh)/guides/mtr/fcst/home.rxml

http://www.physics.uwo.ca/~whocking/p103/instrum.html


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

buttman > wrote in news:0b760b6d-456d-43dc-85c8-
:

> On Jul 23, 10:53*am, Gig 601Xl Builder >
> wrote:
>> buttman wrote:
>>
>> > oh god shut up. I've been frankly answering his questions for a while
>> > now and I've yet to see him respond to me in that manner, or to other
>> > people in that manner either.
>>
>> If this is an example of your skills when it observational skills then I
>> really am concerned about your ability to act as a CFI.
>
> Uh huh. How about providing me with one of these seemingly ubiquitous
> examples of him
> telling me, or anyone else that they are "wrong" and that he has
> "studied the issue in
> depth"? The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. I just
> went through the last 5 or so post I've made to his threads and I
> haven't noticed any rudeness.
>

It's because you're stupid.


This is someting it would behoove you to accept sooner rather than later.
It would keep you from having any sort of expectations about your life.


Bertie

[[email protected]]

On Jul 23, 12:12 pm, "Morgans" > wrote:
> "Rocky Stevens" > wrote
>
> It would also be a useful forum if people actually answered the
> questions posed, regardless of *who* is asking it. The OP's question
> is perefectly valid, and x number of years from now when somebody
> Google's for the answer and gets this thread, all they will see for an
> answer are insults. There is nothing more frustrating than
> Googling for an anwer to something only to find the response was "why
> don't you Google for it". If you have the time to post such a
> response, you have the time to answer the question.
>
> You must not have kids, or if you do, they are brats.
>
> All kids occasionally need to be ignored when they exibit undesirable
> behavior, and rewarded for correct behavior. That is MX. He never exibits
> desireable behavior, when the big picture has been taken into account. What
> he has done is drive off posters by the droves.
>
> I still do not understand how anyone with a brain can think that his
> presence here is desireable, or why they would answer any post of his for
> any reason.
> --
> Jim in NC

Jim, he amuses us. It's understandable if he does not amuse you, but
if that's the case, simply don't read threads he originates. This
topic is an especially bad troll attempt for someone whose world view
is via google.

[Gig 601Xl Builder]

buttman wrote:
> On Jul 23, 10:53 am, Gig 601Xl Builder >
> wrote:
>> buttman wrote:
>>
>>> oh god shut up. I've been frankly answering his questions for a while
>>> now and I've yet to see him respond to me in that manner, or to other
>>> people in that manner either.
>> If this is an example of your skills when it observational skills then I
>> really am concerned about your ability to act as a CFI.
>
> Uh huh. How about providing me with one of these seemingly ubiquitous
> examples of him
> telling me, or anyone else that they are "wrong" and that he has
> "studied the issue in
> depth"? The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. I just
> went through the last 5 or so post I've made to his threads and I
> haven't noticed any rudeness.


Well seeing has Anthony has posted to R.A.P. over 7000 times since
August of 2006 as I wouldn't say that the last 5 or
so posts are a legitimate sample size. Just wait, I'll point it out to
you next time it happens.

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Gig 601Xl Builder > wrote:

> buttman wrote:
> > On Jul 23, 10:53 am, Gig 601Xl Builder >
> > wrote:
> >> buttman wrote:
> >>
> >>> oh god shut up. I've been frankly answering his questions for a while
> >>> now and I've yet to see him respond to me in that manner, or to other
> >>> people in that manner either.
> >> If this is an example of your skills when it observational skills then I
> >> really am concerned about your ability to act as a CFI.
> >
> > Uh huh. How about providing me with one of these seemingly ubiquitous
> > examples of him
> > telling me, or anyone else that they are "wrong" and that he has
> > "studied the issue in
> > depth"? The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. I just
> > went through the last 5 or so post I've made to his threads and I
> > haven't noticed any rudeness.
>
>
> Well seeing has Anthony has posted to R.A.P. over 7000 times since
> August of 2006 as I wouldn't say that the last 5 or
> so posts are a legitimate sample size. Just wait, I'll point it out to
> you next time it happens.




try in the Take off and landing advice thread begun Jun 2002

>> You haven't been here long enough. Many times Mx or Le Chaud
>> Lapin will ask a question, get the right answer in a polite manner,
>> and then argue endlessly against that answer, belittling the teacher.
>
> That's not true, at least in my case (I haven't audited all the threads in
> which Le Chaud Lapin participates).
>
> Many times, I get an answer that the poster believes to be correct, but it
> conflicts with other sources I've consulted, so naturally I question it. Or I
> get an answer that sounds intriguing, but when I ask for an explanation, the
> person who gave me the answer has none--he learned it from someone and simply
> accepted it, without caring about or looking up the supporting theory (if
> any). Or I get multiple conflicting answers from several people, who then
> start arguing with each other and trading insults--they cannot all be
> simultaneously right.
>
> I don't belittle anyone, but some people here are so incredibly insecure that
> anything other than total, unconditional acceptance of anything they say is an
> intolerable blow to their fragile egos, and they become defensive, resorting
> to personal attacks, when confronted with anything less than total acceptance.
> They are so sensitive, in fact, that they interpret every request for
> clarification as a personal affront. People like this are hard to deal with
> because they are so hypersensitive and emotional; however, they often don't
> know much about anything, so dealing with them isn't always necessary.
> Unfortunately, they are often among the first to respond. Once they learn
> that their responses may not be instantly and totally accepted, their
> subsequent responses consist of nothing more than personal attacks.
>
>> Many of the physics and other things in aviation are not
>> intuitive; that is, they don't make sense to the uninitiated, and
>> without well-rounded groundschooling and flight instruction they never
>> will make sense.
>
> It's worse than that. I've discovered that many pilots just don't understand
> those concepts, and asking about them only irritates them as they realize how
> little they understand. The reality is that many of these concepts don't have
> to be understood just to fly an airplane, and of those that might be useful to
> understand, few are mandatory for safe flight.
>
> Pilots are instructed by rote, just as most people are instructed by rote in
> most things. The threshold of aptitude required to absorbe rote learning is
> much lower than that required to understand theory, which is why it is usually
> used. And rote learning accomplishes the purpose, as long as experience is
> limited to situations covered by that learning. It only fails in situations
> where inferences must be made for unforeseen situations based on theory, and
> these are thankfully rare.
>
>> Flight simulators don't teach these things.
>
> Nobody teaches them, apparently, or at least nobody in flight instruction.
>
> At one time I believed that flight instruction was far more comprehensive. I
> now know, from what I see here and from my own investigations of the training
> materials, that it is much simpler than I believed it to be. This shouldn't
> surprise me (because almost all training is like this), but it does.
>
> No amount of insult, personal attacks, or trolling intimidates me, so I don't
> know why people bother. It actually seems to bother them far more than it
> does me, when they discover that I don't care.
>
> I'd be content to discuss aviation, but some people turn every discussion into
> a discussion of personalities instead.

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

[Ricky]

On Jul 23, 8:37*am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the surface to measure
> wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what is the normal way for
> meteorologists to measure these things aloft? *Do they depend on PIREPs, or
> expendable/recoverable probes and balloons, or satellites, or what?

Anthony, this may have already been suggested to you in the past.
Why don't you start taking flying lessons?
You will enjoy the real thing so much more than your simulator and you
will learn the answer to all these questions quickly.
The best & most economical way to learn is to enroll in a part 141
college with aviation or go the LSA or recreational pilot route.
That's how I did it when I was in my late 20s (college), and I got my
commercial/Instrument in 2 semesters. All I did was fly, I didn't take
any college academics.
We used a simulator extensively for instrument instruction, which I
found to be more challenging than the real airplane.
All kinds of financing is available, from federal grants & loans to
thousands of other financing options.
There really is little reason why one who wants to fly cannot learn.
You can do it...

Ricky

[Mxsmanic]

buttman writes:

> Theres a little "eye" that looks up at the sky at various points. It
> detects if there is cloud, or sky. The sensor is prone to errors,
> though. Sometimes if it's broken, it'll say its overcast because some
> of the sensors are pointing diagonally and are sensing the side of the
> cloud. I had an ATC college-style text book that had a very
> informative diagram of how they worked, but that book is long gone.
>
> http://www.cyanogen.com/products/cloud_main.htm
>
> here is an example of one.

Cool--I wouldn't mind having one (useful for photography as well as astronomy
and aviation). However, it's still a ground-based sensor, so it would only
see the first level of clouds. Conversely, a satellite would only see the top
layer of clouds. If there are three or four layers of clouds, how do weather
services discover them?

The same is true for temperature, humidity, and pressure. Pressure you can
probably infer from surface pressure, and temperature you can guess at in a
similar way. Humidity is more vague. I'm curious as to how all of these get
measured aloft.

And what about winds? Weather services seem to have awareness of winds aloft,
but where are they getting the measurements? Winds aloft may have no
correlation with surface winds and can change a lot over short distances. You
could set up probes, but that's a lot of probes to launch and recover even to
cover small areas. You could rely on PIREPs, but that seems kind of hit and
miss. So how is it really done?

How are the paths and speeds of jet streams determined?

[Steve Foley]

"Bob Noel" > wrote in message
...

His Wikipedia 'bio' is even more telling:

I like to engage people in discussions when I detect that they cling to
opinions that they are unable to defend (opinions based on emotion, opinions
adopted wholesale from others, etc.), in order to try to compel them to
think for themselves. I have been involved in online debates along these
lines for several decades, usually under various pseudonyms (mainly to guard
against spam). I'm an extremely strong supporter of freedom of speech in all
public venues, as well as civil liberties in general.

[edit] Contacts

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> buttman writes:
>
>> Theres a little "eye" that looks up at the sky at various points. It
>> detects if there is cloud, or sky. The sensor is prone to errors,
>> though. Sometimes if it's broken, it'll say its overcast because some
>> of the sensors are pointing diagonally and are sensing the side of
>> the cloud. I had an ATC college-style text book that had a very
>> informative diagram of how they worked, but that book is long gone.
>>
>> http://www.cyanogen.com/products/cloud_main.htm
>>
>> here is an example of one.
>
> Cool--I wouldn't mind having one (useful for photography as well as
> astronomy and aviation). However, it's still a ground-based sensor,
> so it would only see the first level of clouds. Conversely, a
> satellite would only see the top layer of clouds. If there are three
> or four layers of clouds, how do weather services discover them?
>
> The same is true for temperature, humidity, and pressure. Pressure
> you can probably infer from surface pressure, and temperature you can
> guess at in a similar way. Humidity is more vague. I'm curious as to
> how all of these get measured aloft.
>
> And what about winds? Weather services seem to have awareness of
> winds aloft, but where are they getting the measurements? Winds aloft
> may have no correlation with surface winds and can change a lot over
> short distances. You could set up probes, but that's a lot of probes
> to launch and recover even to cover small areas. You could rely on
> PIREPs, but that seems kind of hit and miss. So how is it really
> done?

Send me $300 and I'll tell you.


Bertie

[Mxsmanic]

Ricky writes:

> Anthony, this may have already been suggested to you in the past.
> Why don't you start taking flying lessons?

No money, no time. I doubt that I could pass any of the exams as well.

> You will enjoy the real thing so much more than your simulator and you
> will learn the answer to all these questions quickly.

I doubt that this particular question would be answered in a piloting
curriculum.

I might enjoy it more; I might not. There are some distinct advantages to
simulation, such as the fact that I don't actually have to go anywhere just to
fly, and when I'm finished flying in a sim, I'm still right at home.

> The best & most economical way to learn is to enroll in a part 141
> college with aviation or go the LSA or recreational pilot route.

I can't afford any type of flying instruction, nor do I have enough free time
to dedicate to it. Simulation is orders of magnitude cheaper (making it
affordable for me), and requires only the time spent flying or (voluntarily)
studying.

> We used a simulator extensively for instrument instruction, which I
> found to be more challenging than the real airplane.

I've heard varying stories on which is more difficult, sim or real life.

> All kinds of financing is available, from federal grants & loans to
> thousands of other financing options.

I don't have any money to pay anything back.

> There really is little reason why one who wants to fly cannot learn.
> You can do it...

Not at this time. Perhaps at certain points in the past. Today I just don't
have the resources. But simulation isn't as bad as many people seem to think.

[Jim Logajan]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote:
> Rocky Stevens wrote:
>>
>> It would also be a useful forum if people actually answered the
>> questions posed, regardless of *who* is asking it. The OP's question
>> is perefectly valid, and x number of years from now when somebody
>> Google's for the answer and gets this thread, all they will see for
>> an answer are insults. There is nothing more frustrating than
>> Googling for an anwer to something only to find the response was "why
>> don't you Google for it". If you have the time to post such a
>> response, you have the time to answer the question.
>>
>
> True, but the folks that post such a response probably don't know the
> answer.

Over on rec.aviation.student Mxsmanic recently asked a question about
Cessna rudder input on MS Flight sim versus the real thing that Dudley
Henriques, among others, responded to - some good, some not. There was a
civil dialog between Dudley and Mxsmanic - Mxsmanic appears to have
followed Dudley's advice, looked up the references that Dudley provided,
and he thanked Dudley for his help a couple times. I considered the
thread distinctive because of the unfortunate Pavlovian responses a
number of people have conditioned themselves into that added noise
to what would have been an otherwise short and simple thread:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.aviation.student/browse_thread/thread/3170bdb4e3b0eae0?hl=en#

[[email protected]]

Ricky > wrote:
> On Jul 23, 8:37?am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> > It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the surface to measure
> > wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what is the normal way for
> > meteorologists to measure these things aloft? ?Do they depend on PIREPs, or
> > expendable/recoverable probes and balloons, or satellites, or what?

> Anthony, this may have already been suggested to you in the past.
> Why don't you start taking flying lessons?
> You will enjoy the real thing so much more than your simulator and you
> will learn the answer to all these questions quickly.
> The best & most economical way to learn is to enroll in a part 141
> college with aviation or go the LSA or recreational pilot route.
> That's how I did it when I was in my late 20s (college), and I got my
> commercial/Instrument in 2 semesters. All I did was fly, I didn't take
> any college academics.
> We used a simulator extensively for instrument instruction, which I
> found to be more challenging than the real airplane.
> All kinds of financing is available, from federal grants & loans to
> thousands of other financing options.
> There really is little reason why one who wants to fly cannot learn.
> You can do it...

No, he can't.

You haven't been paying attention.

He is afraid of real airplanes, real flying and real people.

He lives in France.

He has no job and no money.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Gig 601Xl Builder" > wrote
>
> If this is an example of your skills when it observational skills then I
> really am concerned about your ability to act as a CFI.

Just that is not has made some people wonder if he is a CFI, or a dangerous
one, if he is.

Things like cutting the engine just after rotation on a student. Other
examples abound.

He is definitely brain dead, if he thinks answering MF is a "good thing" to
do.

Another nail in a nearly filled coffin.
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans[_2_]]

> wrote

> Jim, he amuses us.

I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement is worth the
dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums on aviation, by
aviators?

If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a value placed
on your own entertainment.

> simply don't read threads he originates.

I can do that, but it is not possible to read the good threads that are no
longer here, because the people that would have been participating are gone,
_because_ of people that continue to respond "for their own amusement."

Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only thing that is
sufficient.
--
Jim in NC

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Morgans" > wrote in
:

>
> > wrote
>
>> Jim, he amuses us.
>
> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement is worth
> the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums on
> aviation, by aviators?
>
> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a value
> placed on your own entertainment.
>
>> simply don't read threads he originates.
>
> I can do that, but it is not possible to read the good threads that
> are no longer here, because the people that would have been
> participating are gone, _because_ of people that continue to respond
> "for their own amusement."
>
> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only thing that
> is sufficient.

Yeah, best of luck with that, net nazi.

The only thing that will save any newsgroup is that the posters not run
around like little girls whining about what someone else posts and
coming up wiht endless lame solutions.

Period.

End of story.

Get over it or **** off.




Bertie

[buttman]

On Jul 23, 12:47*pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> buttman writes:
> > Theres a little "eye" that looks up at the sky at various points. It
> > detects if there is cloud, or sky. The sensor is prone to errors,
> > though. Sometimes if it's broken, it'll say its overcast because some
> > of the sensors are pointing diagonally and are sensing the side of the
> > cloud. I had an ATC college-style text book that had a very
> > informative diagram of how they worked, but that book is long gone.
>
> >http://www.cyanogen.com/products/cloud_main.htm
>
> > here is an example of one.
>
> Cool--I wouldn't mind having one (useful for photography as well as astronomy
> and aviation). *However, it's still a ground-based sensor, so it would only
> see the first level of clouds. *Conversely, a satellite would only see the top
> layer of clouds. *If there are three or four layers of clouds, how do weather
> services discover them?
>
> The same is true for temperature, humidity, and pressure. *Pressure you can
> probably infer from surface pressure, and temperature you can guess at in a
> similar way. *Humidity is more vague. *I'm curious as to how all of these get
> measured aloft.
>
> And what about winds? *Weather services seem to have awareness of winds aloft,
> but where are they getting the measurements? *Winds aloft may have no
> correlation with surface winds and can change a lot over short distances. *You
> could set up probes, but that's a lot of probes to launch and recover even to
> cover small areas. *You could rely on PIREPs, but that seems kind of hit and
> miss. *So how is it really done?
>
> How are the paths and speeds of jet streams determined?

When I was in college I took a meteorology class which was taught by a
grad student who spent the last summer doing an internship at a
weather station. She worked with the people who did the Upper Air
Charts. She said they release balloons at least every day, which is
how they get their measurements. From there they use the data to make
forecasts.

As far as in-between could layers, its only reported by pireps. Its
very common to ask ATC what the cloud tops are and get a response "I
don't know, no one has given any pireps yet" No one hardly ever flies
VFR between cloud layers, because its too easy to get stuck, therefore
no one bothers making a chart for multiple cloud layers.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

buttman > wrote in
:

> On Jul 23, 12:47*pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>> buttman writes:
>> > Theres a little "eye" that looks up at the sky at various points.
>> > It detects if there is cloud, or sky. The sensor is prone to
>> > errors, though. Sometimes if it's broken, it'll say its overcast
>> > because some of the sensors are pointing diagonally and are sensing
>> > the side of the cloud. I had an ATC college-style text book that
>> > had a very informative diagram of how they worked, but that book is
>> > long gone.
>>
>> >http://www.cyanogen.com/products/cloud_main.htm
>>
>> > here is an example of one.
>>
>> Cool--I wouldn't mind having one (useful for photography as well as
>> astro
> nomy
>> and aviation). *However, it's still a ground-based sensor, so it
>> would
> only
>> see the first level of clouds. *Conversely, a satellite would only
>> see
> the top
>> layer of clouds. *If there are three or four layers of clouds, how do
>> w
> eather
>> services discover them?
>>
>> The same is true for temperature, humidity, and pressure. *Pressure
>> you
> can
>> probably infer from surface pressure, and temperature you can guess
>> at in
> a
>> similar way. *Humidity is more vague. *I'm curious as to how all of t
> hese get
>> measured aloft.
>>
>> And what about winds? *Weather services seem to have awareness of
>> winds
> aloft,
>> but where are they getting the measurements? *Winds aloft may have no
>> correlation with surface winds and can change a lot over short
>> distances.
> *You
>> could set up probes, but that's a lot of probes to launch and recover
>> eve
> n to
>> cover small areas. *You could rely on PIREPs, but that seems kind of
>> hi
> t and
>> miss. *So how is it really done?
>>
>> How are the paths and speeds of jet streams determined?
>
> When I was in college I took a meteorology class which was taught by a
> grad student who spent the last summer doing an internship at a
> weather station. She worked with the people who did the Upper Air
> Charts. She said they release balloons at least every day, which is
> how they get their measurements. From there they use the data to make
> forecasts.
>
> As far as in-between could layers, its only reported by pireps.

Nope, wrong again, fjukktard.

Not that it matters, since your "student" will never ever fly.


Bertie

[Rocky Stevens]

On Jul 23, 7:42 pm, "Morgans" > wrote:
> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement is worth the
> dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums on aviation, by
> aviators?

The thing is, the "dismantling" is done by the people that with
respond to him with such classy comments as "you are poor, and have no
life," not by Msmanix himself. I have been lurking for quite a while
now, and rarely do I see his posts warrant the responses he gets.

[Rocky Stevens]

On Jul 23, 2:58 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Ricky writes:
> > Anthony, this may have already been suggested to you in the past.
> > Why don't you start taking flying lessons?
>
> No money, no time. I doubt that I could pass any of the exams as well.
>

Not that it really matters, but I am sure you could pass the FAA
written; it is a very easy, multiple choice test. I think the study
guides may even have the actual questions that will be asked in them.
But you are right about the cost; it is pretty damned expensive.
FWIW, I think you would really dislike lessons anyway, as your
intellectual curiosity would not be satisfied, and very well may
irritate the hell out of your instructor (you can see the responses
you get here).

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Rocky Stevens > wrote in news:ca3c482c-f55a-40e9-
:

> On Jul 23, 2:58 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>> Ricky writes:
>> > Anthony, this may have already been suggested to you in the past.
>> > Why don't you start taking flying lessons?
>>
>> No money, no time. I doubt that I could pass any of the exams as well.
>>
>
> Not that it really matters, but I am sure you could pass the FAA
> written; it is a very easy, multiple choice test.


Except that he would create an extra column and tell the adjudicator that
all of the possible answers are incorrect, because he read different on
Google.


Bertie

[Rocky Stevens]

BTW, if anyone else would like to weigh in with a serious answer, I
would appreciate it. I can sort of see how they could use radar to
determine clound coverage, but the winds aloft thing is really
puzzling me. Take a look at http://www.navmonster.com/wx/KCDW-25; just
one Pirep (which does not even include winds aloft) but they have
winds aloft for various altitudes.

[§ñühwØ£f]

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 15:57:53 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th' terraists
with the following claims :

> buttman > wrote in
> :
>
>> On Jul 23, 9:20Â*am, Gig 601Xl Builder >
>> wrote:
>>> Rocky Stevens wrote:
>>> > On Jul 23, 10:05 am, "Steven P. McNicoll" >
>>> > wrote:
>>> >> wrote:
>>> >>> On Jul 23, 9:37 am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>>> >>>> It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the
>>> >>>> surface to measure wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what
>>> >>>> is the normal way for meteorologists to measure these things
>>> >>>> aloft? Do they depend on PIREPs, or expendable/recoverable
>>> >>>> probes and balloons, or satellites, or what?

I would a55ume that they have planes in the air at some point and the
aircraft report the ceiling height of teh clouds and then they estimate
windspeed from observaton stations on the ground.
I'm just guessing. I knew a weather observer once.


--
"Those who can make you believe absurdities,
can make you commit atrocities" - Voltaire

[[email protected]]

Rocky Stevens > wrote:
> BTW, if anyone else would like to weigh in with a serious answer, I
> would appreciate it. I can sort of see how they could use radar to
> determine clound coverage, but the winds aloft thing is really
> puzzling me. Take a look at http://www.navmonster.com/wx/KCDW-25; just
> one Pirep (which does not even include winds aloft) but they have
> winds aloft for various altitudes.

RADAR, LIDAR, balloons, airplanes, among other things.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Steve Foley]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...

> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement is worth the
> dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums on aviation, by
> aviators?
>
> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a value placed
> on your own entertainment.
>
> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only thing that is
> sufficient.
> --
> Jim in NC

I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave. When I came back
most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by bertie, followed by Max,
followed by bertie - max - bertie - max - - - - -

I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server, with my own
rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll publish the
address.

Here's a preview:

You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you ever see a
response to them.
You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known poster decides to
spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.

[gatt[_5_]]

Steve Foley wrote:

>
> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server, with my own
> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll publish the
> address.

Just start a moderated forum. It's a lot of work, but, less work than
managing an nntp server.

Most people don't like moderated forums but, believe me, at this point
there are plenty of people here who would give it a try. The PHP-based
forums that Dudley et al moved to are immensely useful as well,but
they're a little more time-consuming to read everything.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Rocky Stevens > wrote in news:df844305-ac37-4d08-
:

> BTW, if anyone else would like to weigh in with a serious answer, I
> would appreciate it. I can sort of see how they could use radar to
> determine clound coverage, but the winds aloft thing is really
> puzzling me. Take a look at http://www.navmonster.com/wx/KCDW-25; just
> one Pirep (which does not even include winds aloft) but they have
> winds aloft for various altitudes.


They do it primarily from the pressure gradient. The steeper the gradient
the stronger the wind.

Actually, measuring between the isobars along your route regardless of the
angle they may form in relation to it, only counting the frequency, will
give you a very good idea of your head or tail and crosswind.

There's a scale on some types of detailed surface charts that directly give
the geostrophic wind speed based solely on isobar seperation.

Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Steve Foley" > wrote in
news:Kw2ik.499$_l.72@trnddc04:

> "Morgans" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement is worth
>> the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums on
>> aviation, by aviators?
>>
>> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a value
>> placed on your own entertainment.
>>
>> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only thing that
>> is sufficient.
>> --
>> Jim in NC
>
> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave. When I
> came back most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by bertie,
> followed by Max, followed by bertie - max - bertie - max - - - - -
>
> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server, with my own
> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll publish
> the address.
>
> Here's a preview:
>
> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you ever see a
> response to them.
> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known poster
> decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>

Snort.

Like that'd stop me.



Bertie

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Rocky Stevens > wrote:

> On Jul 23, 7:42 pm, "Morgans" > wrote:
> > I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement is worth the
> > dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums on aviation, by
> > aviators?
>
> The thing is, the "dismantling" is done by the people that with
> respond to him with such classy comments as "you are poor, and have no
> life," not by Msmanix himself. I have been lurking for quite a while
> now, and rarely do I see his posts warrant the responses he gets.

Which is a goal of trolls.

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

[Steve Foley]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...

>
> Snort.
>
> Like that'd stop me.
>

You'll just be another tree falling in the woods.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Steve Foley" > wrote in news:1R8ik.261825
:

> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>
>> Snort.
>>
>> Like that'd stop me.
>>
>
> You'll just be another tree falling in the woods.
>
>
>
>

Wanna bet?


Bertie

[Steve Foley]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...


>
> Wanna bet?
>
>
> Bertie

How much?

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Steve Foley" > wrote in news:ZI9ik.261937
:

> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
>>
>> Wanna bet?
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> How much?
>

Your diginity, of course.




Bertie

[Steve Foley]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...

>>> Wanna bet?

>> How much?

> Your diginity, of course.

> Bertie

Against what?

[Mxsmanic]

§ñühwØ£f writes:

> I would a55ume that they have planes in the air at some point and the
> aircraft report the ceiling height of teh clouds and then they estimate
> windspeed from observaton stations on the ground.
> I'm just guessing. I knew a weather observer once.

That makes sense. I wonder how they estimate things like heights and
distances, though. I suppose experience would help to come up with educated
guesses for these, but one might still be way off. Certainly experience would
be useful in recognizing specific cloud types and patterns.

One article I read (I think it was Wikipedia) mentioned just ten radiosondes
for the entire Caribbean, that's hardly what I'd call high-resolution
measurement. You could almost fit a hurricane between radiosondes.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Steve Foley" > wrote in news:eX9ik.133616
:

> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>>> Wanna bet?
>
>>> How much?
>
>> Your diginity, of course.
>
>> Bertie
>
> Against what?
>
>
>

Your dignity, of course.



Bertie

[Mxsmanic]

buttman writes:

> As far as in-between could layers, its only reported by pireps. Its
> very common to ask ATC what the cloud tops are and get a response "I
> don't know, no one has given any pireps yet" No one hardly ever flies
> VFR between cloud layers, because its too easy to get stuck, therefore
> no one bothers making a chart for multiple cloud layers.

That hadn't occurred to me. If you're VFR you definitely wouldn't want to be
stuck between clouds, so the in-between layers aren't important. And if
you're IFR it doesn't matter ... unless the clouds are associated with icing
or severe turbulence.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> §ñühwØ£f writes:
>
>> I would a55ume that they have planes in the air at some point and the
>> aircraft report the ceiling height of teh clouds and then they
>> estimate windspeed from observaton stations on the ground.
>> I'm just guessing. I knew a weather observer once.
>
> That makes sense. I wonder how they estimate things like heights and
> distances, though. I suppose experience would help to come up with
> educated guesses for these, but one might still be way off. Certainly
> experience would be useful in recognizing specific cloud types and
> patterns.
>
> One article I read (I think it was Wikipedia) mentioned just ten
> radiosondes for the entire Caribbean, that's hardly what I'd call
> high-resolution measurement. You could almost fit a hurricane between
> radiosondes.
>

You are an idiot.


Bertie

[Mxsmanic]

Rocky Stevens writes:

> Not that it really matters, but I am sure you could pass the FAA
> written; it is a very easy, multiple choice test.

Maybe, but tests tend to stress me a lot and I don't do well on them. I hate
competition.

> I think the study guides may even have the actual questions that
> will be asked in them.

I have a little blue one that is pretty good that I've read through on many
occasions.

> But you are right about the cost; it is pretty damned expensive.

Even more so in Europe. Here I've been told that the private pilot license
could cost up to $30,000, and an IFR rating would double that.

> FWIW, I think you would really dislike lessons anyway, as your
> intellectual curiosity would not be satisfied, and very well may
> irritate the hell out of your instructor (you can see the responses
> you get here).

That has always been a problem for me in such environments, although it
depends on the structure and the instructor. Instructors who are insecure or
incompetent enough to dislike questioning come to hate me very quickly. Those
who enjoy elaborating on all sorts of details find me a refreshing change from
many students (who often are only interesting in learning enough to pass an
exam).

[[email protected]]

Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Rocky Stevens writes:

> > Not that it really matters, but I am sure you could pass the FAA
> > written; it is a very easy, multiple choice test.

> Maybe, but tests tend to stress me a lot and I don't do well on them. I hate
> competition.

Since it is an impartial evaluation of your knowledge, I can see why
that might stress you.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Rocky Stevens writes:
>
>> Not that it really matters, but I am sure you could pass the FAA
>> written; it is a very easy, multiple choice test.
>
> Maybe, but tests tend to stress me a lot and I don't do well on them.
> I hate competition.

Competition?

You truly are a moron.

Buttman is the perfect instructor for you.


Bertie

[buttman]

Nomen Nescio wrote:

> I'm far from an expert on this, but I'd put my bet on ALL the MX supporters
> being MX himself.
> After all, could there really be anyone, other than MX, who doesn't think MX is
> an idiot, an asshole, and a chronic failure?
>

That tinfoil hat you're wearing seems to be frying your brain.

[More_Flaps]

On Jul 24, 2:24*am, buttman > wrote:
> On Jul 23, 7:37*am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
>
> > It's easy enough to establish measurement stations on the surface to measure
> > wind, temperature, visibility, etc., but what is the normal way for
> > meteorologists to measure these things aloft? *Do they depend on PIREPs, or
> > expendable/recoverable probes and balloons, or satellites, or what?
>
> Theres a little "eye" that looks up at the sky at various points. It
> detects if there is cloud, or sky. The sensor is prone to errors,
> though. Sometimes if it's broken, it'll say its overcast because some
> of the sensors are pointing diagonally and are sensing the side of the
> cloud. I had an ATC college-style text book that had a very
> informative diagram of how they worked, but that book is long gone.
>
>
> here is an example of one.

No imaging device there, just a couple of bolimeters.


Cheers

[Rocky Stevens]

On Jul 24, 12:58 pm, "Steve Foley" > wrote:
> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement is worth the
> > dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums on aviation, by
> > aviators?
>
> > If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a value placed
> > on your own entertainment.
>
> > Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only thing that is
> > sufficient.
> > --
> > Jim in NC
>
> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave. When I came back
> most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by bertie, followed by Max,
> followed by bertie - max - bertie - max - - - - -
>
> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server, with my own
> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll publish the
> address.
>
> Here's a preview:
>
> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you ever see a
> response to them.
> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known poster decides to
> spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.

You should really check out the AOPA forums; they are excellent. You
have to be a member to use them, but it is only 40 bucks a year and
WELL worth it.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

buttman > wrote in
:

>
>
> Nomen Nescio wrote:
>
>> I'm far from an expert on this, but I'd put my bet on ALL the MX
>> supporters being MX himself.
>> After all, could there really be anyone, other than MX, who doesn't
>> think MX is an idiot, an asshole, and a chronic failure?
>>
>
> That tinfoil hat you're wearing seems to be frying your brain.
>


the voice of experience speaks.

Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

§ñühwØ£f > wrote in
:

> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:27:31 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
terraists
> with the following claims :
>
>> Mxsmanic > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> §ñühwØ£f writes:
>>>
>>>> I would a55ume that they have planes in the air at some point and
the
>>>> aircraft report the ceiling height of teh clouds and then they
>>>> estimate windspeed from observaton stations on the ground.
>>>> I'm just guessing. I knew a weather observer once.
>>>
>>> That makes sense. I wonder how they estimate things like heights
and
>>> distances, though. I suppose experience would help to come up with
>>> educated guesses for these, but one might still be way off.
Certainly
>>> experience would be useful in recognizing specific cloud types and
>>> patterns.
>>>
>>> One article I read (I think it was Wikipedia) mentioned just ten
>>> radiosondes for the entire Caribbean, that's hardly what I'd call
>>> high-resolution measurement. You could almost fit a hurricane
between
>>> radiosondes.
>>>
>>
>> You are an idiot.
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Maybe they use dopplar radar to tell the height of the clouds, eh?
> Otherwise I assume some sort of math involving triangulation and other
> difficult things.
>:)
>

Nah, it's easy. They compare the temperature to the dewpoint add in th
edry adiabatic lapse rate and voila, you get the cloudbase. Observation
is used for terminal areas, otherwise, though, it's still done the old
fashioned way for the most part. These days, al info is mixed together,
whihc gives a much better actual and forecasting capability.

bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

§ñühwØ£f > wrote in
:

> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:09:39 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
terraists
> with the following claims :
>
>> "Steve Foley" > wrote in
>> news:Kw2ik.499$_l.72@trnddc04:
>>
>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement is
worth
>>>> the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums on
>>>> aviation, by aviators?
>>>>
>>>> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a value
>>>> placed on your own entertainment.
>>>>
>>>> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only thing
that
>>>> is sufficient.
>>>> --
>>>> Jim in NC
>>>
>>> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave. When I
>>> came back most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by bertie,
>>> followed by Max, followed by bertie - max - bertie - max - - - - -
>>>
>>> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server, with my
own
>>> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll publish
>>> the address.
>>>
>>> Here's a preview:
>>>
>>> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you ever see
a
>>> response to them.
>>> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known poster
>>> decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>>>
>>
>> Snort.
>>
>> Like that'd stop me.
>>
>> Bertie
>
> This is interesting. Is the OP in question saying that they have the
> skills to fly a plane but *lack* the skills to configure a kilfile?
> If so, this is indeed troubling news and would provide a clue as to
*why*
> our skys are so unsafe today.


You're joking, of course, but in fact, you've hit the nail right on the
head.
Don't know about the OP, but a startling number of pilots today are
spoon fed idiots who need a Nintendo DS in front of them to do the
simplest flights...


Bertie

[§ñühwØ£f]

On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:09:39 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th' terraists
with the following claims :

> "Steve Foley" > wrote in
> news:Kw2ik.499$_l.72@trnddc04:
>
>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement is worth
>>> the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums on
>>> aviation, by aviators?
>>>
>>> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a value
>>> placed on your own entertainment.
>>>
>>> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only thing that
>>> is sufficient.
>>> --
>>> Jim in NC
>>
>> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave. When I
>> came back most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by bertie,
>> followed by Max, followed by bertie - max - bertie - max - - - - -
>>
>> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server, with my own
>> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll publish
>> the address.
>>
>> Here's a preview:
>>
>> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you ever see a
>> response to them.
>> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known poster
>> decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>>
>
> Snort.
>
> Like that'd stop me.
>
> Bertie

This is interesting. Is the OP in question saying that they have the
skills to fly a plane but *lack* the skills to configure a kilfile?
If so, this is indeed troubling news and would provide a clue as to *why*
our skys are so unsafe today.
Discuss.

--
"Those who can make you believe absurdities,
can make you commit atrocities" - Voltaire
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/16052

[§ñühwØ£f]

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:27:31 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th' terraists
with the following claims :

> Mxsmanic > wrote in
> :
>
>> §ñühwØ£f writes:
>>
>>> I would a55ume that they have planes in the air at some point and the
>>> aircraft report the ceiling height of teh clouds and then they
>>> estimate windspeed from observaton stations on the ground.
>>> I'm just guessing. I knew a weather observer once.
>>
>> That makes sense. I wonder how they estimate things like heights and
>> distances, though. I suppose experience would help to come up with
>> educated guesses for these, but one might still be way off. Certainly
>> experience would be useful in recognizing specific cloud types and
>> patterns.
>>
>> One article I read (I think it was Wikipedia) mentioned just ten
>> radiosondes for the entire Caribbean, that's hardly what I'd call
>> high-resolution measurement. You could almost fit a hurricane between
>> radiosondes.
>>
>
> You are an idiot.
>
> Bertie

Maybe they use dopplar radar to tell the height of the clouds, eh?
Otherwise I assume some sort of math involving triangulation and other
difficult things.
:)

--
"Those who can make you believe absurdities,
can make you commit atrocities" - Voltaire
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/16052

[Benjamin Dover]

Rocky Stevens > wrote in
:

> On Jul 24, 12:58 pm, "Steve Foley" > wrote:
>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>
>> ...
>>
>> > I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement is
>> > worth the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums
>> > on aviation, by aviators?
>>
>> > If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a value
>> > placed on your own entertainment.
>>
>> > Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only thing
>> > that is sufficient.
>> > --
>> > Jim in NC
>>
>> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave. When I
>> came back most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by bertie,
>> followed by Max, followed by bertie - max - bertie - max - - - - -
>>
>> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server, with my
>> own rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll
>> publish the address.
>>
>> Here's a preview:
>>
>> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you ever see
>> a response to them.
>> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known poster
>> decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>
> You should really check out the AOPA forums; they are excellent. You
> have to be a member to use them, but it is only 40 bucks a year and
> WELL worth it.
>

The $40 per year keeeps Anthony out.

[gatt[_5_]]

Joeseph P. Blow wrote:

>>You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you ever see a
>>response to them.
>
>
> Wow, neat! You'll be a ****ing censor!

You would be free to choose not to participate to his terms of use.

Other people would participate. I'm positive you've heard of moderated
forums.

>>You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known poster decides to
>>spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>
> Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Or maybe you haven't.

-c

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

gatt > wrote in
:

> Joeseph P. Blow wrote:
>
>>>You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you ever see
>>>a response to them.
>>
>>
>> Wow, neat! You'll be a ****ing censor!
>
> You would be free to choose not to participate to his terms of use.
>
> Other people would participate. I'm positive you've heard of
> moderated forums.
>
>>>You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known poster
>>>decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>>
>> Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
>
> Or maybe you haven't.
>

Believe me, it'd never work. no chance.


Bertie

[george]

On Jul 26, 5:28 am, Benjamin Dover > wrote:

> The $40 per year keeeps Anthony out.

I've got Greasemonkey for free and it keeps the Anthony burble in here
down to them as laugh at him ...

[§ñühw¤£f[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
> :
>
>> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:27:31 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
> terraists
>> with the following claims :
>>
>>> Mxsmanic > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> §ñühwØ£f writes:
>>>>
>>>>> I would a55ume that they have planes in the air at some point and
> the
>>>>> aircraft report the ceiling height of teh clouds and then they
>>>>> estimate windspeed from observaton stations on the ground.
>>>>> I'm just guessing. I knew a weather observer once.
>>>>
>>>> That makes sense. I wonder how they estimate things like heights
> and
>>>> distances, though. I suppose experience would help to come up
> with
>>>> educated guesses for these, but one might still be way off.
> Certainly
>>>> experience would be useful in recognizing specific cloud types and
>>>> patterns.
>>>>
>>>> One article I read (I think it was Wikipedia) mentioned just ten
>>>> radiosondes for the entire Caribbean, that's hardly what I'd call
>>>> high-resolution measurement. You could almost fit a hurricane
> between
>>>> radiosondes.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You are an idiot.
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>
>> Maybe they use dopplar radar to tell the height of the clouds, eh?
>> Otherwise I assume some sort of math involving triangulation and
> other
>> difficult things.
>>:)
>>
>
> Nah, it's easy. They compare the temperature to the dewpoint add in th
> edry adiabatic lapse rate and voila, you get the cloudbase.
> Observation
> is used for terminal areas, otherwise, though, it's still done the old
> fashioned way for the most part. These days, al info is mixed
> together,
> whihc gives a much better actual and forecasting capability.
>
> bertie

Are you an ex weather observer or summat? I had a friend who was ex USAF
weather observer then he got a job in elko doing weather observation &
moved :(
He was always talking about clouds & stuff trying to explain what was
happening up there...

[§ñühw¤£f[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
> :
>
>> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:09:39 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
> terraists
>> with the following claims :
>>
>>> "Steve Foley" > wrote in
>>> news:Kw2ik.499$_l.72@trnddc04:
>>>
>>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement is
> worth
>>>>> the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums on
>>>>> aviation, by aviators?
>>>>>
>>>>> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a
> value
>>>>> placed on your own entertainment.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only thing
> that
>>>>> is sufficient.
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jim in NC
>>>>
>>>> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave. When I
>>>> came back most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by bertie,
>>>> followed by Max, followed by bertie - max - bertie - max - - - - -
>>>>
>>>> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server, with my
> own
>>>> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll
> publish
>>>> the address.
>>>>
>>>> Here's a preview:
>>>>
>>>> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you ever
> see
> a
>>>> response to them.
>>>> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known poster
>>>> decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Snort.
>>>
>>> Like that'd stop me.
>>>
>>> Bertie
>>
>> This is interesting. Is the OP in question saying that they have the
>> skills to fly a plane but *lack* the skills to configure a kilfile?
>> If so, this is indeed troubling news and would provide a clue as to
> *why*
>> our skys are so unsafe today.
>
>
> You're joking, of course, but in fact, you've hit the nail right on
> the
> head.
> Don't know about the OP, but a startling number of pilots today are
> spoon fed idiots who need a Nintendo DS in front of them to do the
> simplest flights...
>
>
They fly with the computer and not so much with the stick eh?
THey should watch 'Space Cowboys' some time. Tommy Lee Jones does a nice
job of landing the "flying brick" with a stick and no computer.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

§ñühw¤£f > wrote in
:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:27:31 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>> terraists
>>> with the following claims :
>>>
>>>> Mxsmanic > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> §ñühwØ£f writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I would a55ume that they have planes in the air at some point and
>> the
>>>>>> aircraft report the ceiling height of teh clouds and then they
>>>>>> estimate windspeed from observaton stations on the ground.
>>>>>> I'm just guessing. I knew a weather observer once.
>>>>>
>>>>> That makes sense. I wonder how they estimate things like heights
>> and
>>>>> distances, though. I suppose experience would help to come up
>> with
>>>>> educated guesses for these, but one might still be way off.
>> Certainly
>>>>> experience would be useful in recognizing specific cloud types and
>>>>> patterns.
>>>>>
>>>>> One article I read (I think it was Wikipedia) mentioned just ten
>>>>> radiosondes for the entire Caribbean, that's hardly what I'd call
>>>>> high-resolution measurement. You could almost fit a hurricane
>> between
>>>>> radiosondes.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You are an idiot.
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>
>>> Maybe they use dopplar radar to tell the height of the clouds, eh?
>>> Otherwise I assume some sort of math involving triangulation and
>> other
>>> difficult things.
>>>:)
>>>
>>
>> Nah, it's easy. They compare the temperature to the dewpoint add in
th
>> edry adiabatic lapse rate and voila, you get the cloudbase.
>> Observation
>> is used for terminal areas, otherwise, though, it's still done the
old
>> fashioned way for the most part. These days, al info is mixed
>> together,
>> whihc gives a much better actual and forecasting capability.
>>
>> bertie
>
> Are you an ex weather observer or summat? I had a friend who was ex
USAF
> weather observer then he got a job in elko doing weather observation &
> moved :(
> He was always talking about clouds & stuff trying to explain what was
> happening up there...
>

Nah,, I'm a pilot. We have to learn the basics of how it's done. It's
interesting, but not riveting for me, anyhow. Handy to know a bit abou
tit in my line of work, though.

Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

§ñühw¤£f > wrote in news:PM000452E0695605C7
@unknown.unknown.dom:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:09:39 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>> terraists
>>> with the following claims :
>>>
>>>> "Steve Foley" > wrote in
>>>> news:Kw2ik.499$_l.72@trnddc04:
>>>>
>>>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement is
>> worth
>>>>>> the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums on
>>>>>> aviation, by aviators?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a
>> value
>>>>>> placed on your own entertainment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only thing
>> that
>>>>>> is sufficient.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Jim in NC
>>>>>
>>>>> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave. When I
>>>>> came back most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by bertie,
>>>>> followed by Max, followed by bertie - max - bertie - max - - - - -
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server, with my
>> own
>>>>> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll
>> publish
>>>>> the address.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's a preview:
>>>>>
>>>>> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you ever
>> see
>> a
>>>>> response to them.
>>>>> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known poster
>>>>> decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Snort.
>>>>
>>>> Like that'd stop me.
>>>>
>>>> Bertie
>>>
>>> This is interesting. Is the OP in question saying that they have the
>>> skills to fly a plane but *lack* the skills to configure a kilfile?
>>> If so, this is indeed troubling news and would provide a clue as to
>> *why*
>>> our skys are so unsafe today.
>>
>>
>> You're joking, of course, but in fact, you've hit the nail right on
>> the
>> head.
>> Don't know about the OP, but a startling number of pilots today are
>> spoon fed idiots who need a Nintendo DS in front of them to do the
>> simplest flights...
>>
>>
> They fly with the computer and not so much with the stick eh?
> THey should watch 'Space Cowboys' some time. Tommy Lee Jones does a
nice
> job of landing the "flying brick" with a stick and no computer.
>

Mm, not so much that as flying with the compute and not their heads!


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

§ñühwØ£f > wrote in
:

> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:18:29 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
terraists
> with the following claims :
>
>> §ñühw¤£f > wrote in
news:PM000452E0695605C7
>> @unknown.unknown.dom:
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:09:39 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>>>> terraists
>>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Steve Foley" > wrote in
>>>>>> news:Kw2ik.499$_l.72@trnddc04:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement is
>>>> worth
>>>>>>>> the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums
on
>>>>>>>> aviation, by aviators?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a
>>>> value
>>>>>>>> placed on your own entertainment.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only
thing
>>>> that
>>>>>>>> is sufficient.
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Jim in NC
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave. When
I
>>>>>>> came back most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by bertie,
>>>>>>> followed by Max, followed by bertie - max - bertie - max - - - -
-
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server, with
my
>>>> own
>>>>>>> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll
>>>> publish
>>>>>>> the address.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here's a preview:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you ever
>>>> see
>>>> a
>>>>>>> response to them.
>>>>>>> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known poster
>>>>>>> decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Snort.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Like that'd stop me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>
>>>>> This is interesting. Is the OP in question saying that they have
the
>>>>> skills to fly a plane but *lack* the skills to configure a
kilfile?
>>>>> If so, this is indeed troubling news and would provide a clue as
to
>>>> *why*
>>>>> our skys are so unsafe today.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You're joking, of course, but in fact, you've hit the nail right on
>>>> the
>>>> head.
>>>> Don't know about the OP, but a startling number of pilots today are
>>>> spoon fed idiots who need a Nintendo DS in front of them to do the
>>>> simplest flights...
>>>>
>>>>
>>> They fly with the computer and not so much with the stick eh?
>>> THey should watch 'Space Cowboys' some time. Tommy Lee Jones does a
>> nice
>>> job of landing the "flying brick" with a stick and no computer.
>>>
>>
>> Mm, not so much that as flying with the compute and not their heads!
>>
>>
> I always thot you had to fly by "the seat of your pants".
> What if your pants dont fit?

Hmm, a safety issue that possibly need sto be addrsssed.

Bertie

[§ñühwØ£f]

On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:18:29 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th' terraists
with the following claims :

> §ñühw¤£f > wrote in news:PM000452E0695605C7
> @unknown.unknown.dom:
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:09:39 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>>> terraists
>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>
>>>>> "Steve Foley" > wrote in
>>>>> news:Kw2ik.499$_l.72@trnddc04:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement is
>>> worth
>>>>>>> the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums on
>>>>>>> aviation, by aviators?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a
>>> value
>>>>>>> placed on your own entertainment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only thing
>>> that
>>>>>>> is sufficient.
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Jim in NC
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave. When I
>>>>>> came back most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by bertie,
>>>>>> followed by Max, followed by bertie - max - bertie - max - - - - -
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server, with my
>>> own
>>>>>> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll
>>> publish
>>>>>> the address.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's a preview:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you ever
>>> see
>>> a
>>>>>> response to them.
>>>>>> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known poster
>>>>>> decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Snort.
>>>>>
>>>>> Like that'd stop me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>>
>>>> This is interesting. Is the OP in question saying that they have the
>>>> skills to fly a plane but *lack* the skills to configure a kilfile?
>>>> If so, this is indeed troubling news and would provide a clue as to
>>> *why*
>>>> our skys are so unsafe today.
>>>
>>>
>>> You're joking, of course, but in fact, you've hit the nail right on
>>> the
>>> head.
>>> Don't know about the OP, but a startling number of pilots today are
>>> spoon fed idiots who need a Nintendo DS in front of them to do the
>>> simplest flights...
>>>
>>>
>> They fly with the computer and not so much with the stick eh?
>> THey should watch 'Space Cowboys' some time. Tommy Lee Jones does a
> nice
>> job of landing the "flying brick" with a stick and no computer.
>>
>
> Mm, not so much that as flying with the compute and not their heads!
>
>
I always thot you had to fly by "the seat of your pants".
What if your pants dont fit?
:(

--
"Those who can make you believe absurdities,
can make you commit atrocities" - Voltaire
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/16072

[§ñühwØ£f]

On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:17:32 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th' terraists
with the following claims :

> §ñühw¤£f > wrote in
> :
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:27:31 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>>> terraists
>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>
>>>>> Mxsmanic > wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>> §ñühwØ£f writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would a55ume that they have planes in the air at some point and
>>> the
>>>>>>> aircraft report the ceiling height of teh clouds and then they
>>>>>>> estimate windspeed from observaton stations on the ground.
>>>>>>> I'm just guessing. I knew a weather observer once.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That makes sense. I wonder how they estimate things like heights
>>> and
>>>>>> distances, though. I suppose experience would help to come up
>>> with
>>>>>> educated guesses for these, but one might still be way off.
>>> Certainly
>>>>>> experience would be useful in recognizing specific cloud types and
>>>>>> patterns.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One article I read (I think it was Wikipedia) mentioned just ten
>>>>>> radiosondes for the entire Caribbean, that's hardly what I'd call
>>>>>> high-resolution measurement. You could almost fit a hurricane
>>> between
>>>>>> radiosondes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You are an idiot.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bertie
>>>>
>>>> Maybe they use dopplar radar to tell the height of the clouds, eh?
>>>> Otherwise I assume some sort of math involving triangulation and
>>> other
>>>> difficult things.
>>>>:)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Nah, it's easy. They compare the temperature to the dewpoint add in
> th
>>> edry adiabatic lapse rate and voila, you get the cloudbase.
>>> Observation
>>> is used for terminal areas, otherwise, though, it's still done the
> old
>>> fashioned way for the most part. These days, al info is mixed
>>> together,
>>> whihc gives a much better actual and forecasting capability.
>>>
>>> bertie
>>
>> Are you an ex weather observer or summat? I had a friend who was ex
> USAF
>> weather observer then he got a job in elko doing weather observation &
>> moved :(
>> He was always talking about clouds & stuff trying to explain what was
>> happening up there...
>>
>
> Nah,, I'm a pilot. We have to learn the basics of how it's done. It's
> interesting, but not riveting for me, anyhow. Handy to know a bit abou
> tit in my line of work, though.
>
Sure, the basics; thats a funnel cloud, thats a hurricane, sheep arn't
supposed to fly...


--
"Those who can make you believe absurdities,
can make you commit atrocities" - Voltaire
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/16072

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

§ñühwØ£f > wrote in
:

> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:17:32 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th' terraists
> with the following claims :
>
>> §ñühw¤£f > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:27:31 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>>>> terraists
>>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Mxsmanic > wrote in
>>>>>> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> §ñühwØ£f writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would a55ume that they have planes in the air at some point and
>>>> the
>>>>>>>> aircraft report the ceiling height of teh clouds and then they
>>>>>>>> estimate windspeed from observaton stations on the ground.
>>>>>>>> I'm just guessing. I knew a weather observer once.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That makes sense. I wonder how they estimate things like heights
>>>> and
>>>>>>> distances, though. I suppose experience would help to come up
>>>> with
>>>>>>> educated guesses for these, but one might still be way off.
>>>> Certainly
>>>>>>> experience would be useful in recognizing specific cloud types and
>>>>>>> patterns.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One article I read (I think it was Wikipedia) mentioned just ten
>>>>>>> radiosondes for the entire Caribbean, that's hardly what I'd call
>>>>>>> high-resolution measurement. You could almost fit a hurricane
>>>> between
>>>>>>> radiosondes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You are an idiot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe they use dopplar radar to tell the height of the clouds, eh?
>>>>> Otherwise I assume some sort of math involving triangulation and
>>>> other
>>>>> difficult things.
>>>>>:)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nah, it's easy. They compare the temperature to the dewpoint add in
>> th
>>>> edry adiabatic lapse rate and voila, you get the cloudbase.
>>>> Observation
>>>> is used for terminal areas, otherwise, though, it's still done the
>> old
>>>> fashioned way for the most part. These days, al info is mixed
>>>> together,
>>>> whihc gives a much better actual and forecasting capability.
>>>>
>>>> bertie
>>>
>>> Are you an ex weather observer or summat? I had a friend who was ex
>> USAF
>>> weather observer then he got a job in elko doing weather observation &
>>> moved :(
>>> He was always talking about clouds & stuff trying to explain what was
>>> happening up there...
>>>
>>
>> Nah,, I'm a pilot. We have to learn the basics of how it's done. It's
>> interesting, but not riveting for me, anyhow. Handy to know a bit abou
>> tit in my line of work, though.
>>
> Sure, the basics; thats a funnel cloud, thats a hurricane, sheep arn't
> supposed to fly...
>
>

Yeah, that sort of stuff

[§ñühw¤£f[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
> :
>
>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:18:29 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
> terraists
>> with the following claims :
>>
>>> §ñühw¤£f > wrote in
> news:PM000452E0695605C7
>>> @unknown.unknown.dom:
>>>
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:09:39 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>>>>> terraists
>>>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Steve Foley" > wrote in
>>>>>>> news:Kw2ik.499$_l.72@trnddc04:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement
> is
>>>>> worth
>>>>>>>>> the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums
> on
>>>>>>>>> aviation, by aviators?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a
>>>>> value
>>>>>>>>> placed on your own entertainment.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only
> thing
>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>> is sufficient.
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Jim in NC
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave.
> When
> I
>>>>>>>> came back most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by bertie,
>>>>>>>> followed by Max, followed by bertie - max - bertie - max - - -
> -
> -
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server,
> with
> my
>>>>> own
>>>>>>>> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll
>>>>> publish
>>>>>>>> the address.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here's a preview:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you
> ever
>>>>> see
>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> response to them.
>>>>>>>> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known
> poster
>>>>>>>> decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Snort.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Like that'd stop me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is interesting. Is the OP in question saying that they have
> the
>>>>>> skills to fly a plane but *lack* the skills to configure a
> kilfile?
>>>>>> If so, this is indeed troubling news and would provide a clue as
> to
>>>>> *why*
>>>>>> our skys are so unsafe today.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You're joking, of course, but in fact, you've hit the nail right
> on
>>>>> the
>>>>> head.
>>>>> Don't know about the OP, but a startling number of pilots today
> are
>>>>> spoon fed idiots who need a Nintendo DS in front of them to do
> the
>>>>> simplest flights...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> They fly with the computer and not so much with the stick eh?
>>>> THey should watch 'Space Cowboys' some time. Tommy Lee Jones does
> a
>>> nice
>>>> job of landing the "flying brick" with a stick and no computer.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Mm, not so much that as flying with the compute and not their
> heads!
>>>
>>>
>> I always thot you had to fly by "the seat of your pants".
>> What if your pants dont fit?
>
> Hmm, a safety issue that possibly need sto be addrsssed.
>
>
Needless to say...scotsmen would be at a distinct disadvantage...

--
www.votenader.org

[Rich Ahrens[_2_]]

on 7/26/2008 4:41 PM §ñühw¤£f said the following:
> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:18:29 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>> terraists
>>> with the following claims :
>>>
>>>> §ñühw¤£f > wrote in
>> news:PM000452E0695605C7
>>>> @unknown.unknown.dom:
>>>>
>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>>>>> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:09:39 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>>>>>> terraists
>>>>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Steve Foley" > wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:Kw2ik.499$_l.72@trnddc04:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement
>> is
>>>>>> worth
>>>>>>>>>> the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums
>> on
>>>>>>>>>> aviation, by aviators?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a
>>>>>> value
>>>>>>>>>> placed on your own entertainment.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only
>> thing
>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> is sufficient.
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Jim in NC
>>>>>>>>> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave.
>> When
>> I
>>>>>>>>> came back most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by bertie,
>>>>>>>>> followed by Max, followed by bertie - max - bertie - max - - -
>> -
>> -
>>>>>>>>> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server,
>> with
>> my
>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>>> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll
>>>>>> publish
>>>>>>>>> the address.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Here's a preview:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you
>> ever
>>>>>> see
>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> response to them.
>>>>>>>>> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known
>> poster
>>>>>>>>> decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Snort.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Like that'd stop me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>> This is interesting. Is the OP in question saying that they have
>> the
>>>>>>> skills to fly a plane but *lack* the skills to configure a
>> kilfile?
>>>>>>> If so, this is indeed troubling news and would provide a clue as
>> to
>>>>>> *why*
>>>>>>> our skys are so unsafe today.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You're joking, of course, but in fact, you've hit the nail right
>> on
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> head.
>>>>>> Don't know about the OP, but a startling number of pilots today
>> are
>>>>>> spoon fed idiots who need a Nintendo DS in front of them to do
>> the
>>>>>> simplest flights...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> They fly with the computer and not so much with the stick eh?
>>>>> THey should watch 'Space Cowboys' some time. Tommy Lee Jones does
>> a
>>>> nice
>>>>> job of landing the "flying brick" with a stick and no computer.
>>>>>
>>>> Mm, not so much that as flying with the compute and not their
>> heads!
>>>>
>>> I always thot you had to fly by "the seat of your pants".
>>> What if your pants dont fit?
>> Hmm, a safety issue that possibly need sto be addrsssed.
>>
>>
> Needless to say...scotsmen would be at a distinct disadvantage...

Aren't they always?

[§ñühwØ£f]

On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 18:35:52 -0500, Rich Ahrens aided th' terraists with
the following claims :

> on 7/26/2008 4:41 PM §ñühw¤£f said the following:
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:18:29 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>>> terraists
>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>
>>>>> §ñühw¤£f > wrote in
>>> news:PM000452E0695605C7
>>>>> @unknown.unknown.dom:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:09:39 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>>>>>>> terraists
>>>>>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Steve Foley" > wrote in
>>>>>>>>> news:Kw2ik.499$_l.72@trnddc04:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement
>>> is
>>>>>>> worth
>>>>>>>>>>> the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums
>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>> aviation, by aviators?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a
>>>>>>> value
>>>>>>>>>>> placed on your own entertainment.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only
>>> thing
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> is sufficient.
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Jim in NC
>>>>>>>>>> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave.
>>> When
>>> I
>>>>>>>>>> came back most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by bertie,
>>>>>>>>>> followed by Max, followed by bertie - max - bertie - max - - -
>>> -
>>> -
>>>>>>>>>> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server,
>>> with
>>> my
>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>>>> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll
>>>>>>> publish
>>>>>>>>>> the address.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Here's a preview:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you
>>> ever
>>>>>>> see
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> response to them.
>>>>>>>>>> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known
>>> poster
>>>>>>>>>> decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Snort.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Like that'd stop me.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>> This is interesting. Is the OP in question saying that they have
>>> the
>>>>>>>> skills to fly a plane but *lack* the skills to configure a
>>> kilfile?
>>>>>>>> If so, this is indeed troubling news and would provide a clue as
>>> to
>>>>>>> *why*
>>>>>>>> our skys are so unsafe today.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You're joking, of course, but in fact, you've hit the nail right
>>> on
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> head.
>>>>>>> Don't know about the OP, but a startling number of pilots today
>>> are
>>>>>>> spoon fed idiots who need a Nintendo DS in front of them to do
>>> the
>>>>>>> simplest flights...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> They fly with the computer and not so much with the stick eh?
>>>>>> THey should watch 'Space Cowboys' some time. Tommy Lee Jones does
>>> a
>>>>> nice
>>>>>> job of landing the "flying brick" with a stick and no computer.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Mm, not so much that as flying with the compute and not their
>>> heads!
>>>>>
>>>> I always thot you had to fly by "the seat of your pants".
>>>> What if your pants dont fit?
>>> Hmm, a safety issue that possibly need sto be addrsssed.
>>>
>>>
>> Needless to say...scotsmen would be at a distinct disadvantage...
>
> Aren't they always?

I too, hate the scottish. A vile lot if ever there was one.

--
"Those who can make you believe absurdities,
can make you commit atrocities" - Voltaire

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

§ñühw¤£f > wrote in news:PM000452F425FF59A8
@unknown.unknown.dom:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:18:29 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>> terraists
>>> with the following claims :
>>>
>>>> §ñühw¤£f > wrote in
>> news:PM000452E0695605C7
>>>> @unknown.unknown.dom:
>>>>
>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>>>>> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:09:39 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>>>>>> terraists
>>>>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Steve Foley" > wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:Kw2ik.499$_l.72@trnddc04:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement
>> is
>>>>>> worth
>>>>>>>>>> the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums
>> on
>>>>>>>>>> aviation, by aviators?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a
>>>>>> value
>>>>>>>>>> placed on your own entertainment.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only
>> thing
>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> is sufficient.
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Jim in NC
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave.
>> When
>> I
>>>>>>>>> came back most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by bertie,
>>>>>>>>> followed by Max, followed by bertie - max - bertie - max - - -
>> -
>> -
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server,
>> with
>> my
>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>>> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll
>>>>>> publish
>>>>>>>>> the address.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Here's a preview:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you
>> ever
>>>>>> see
>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> response to them.
>>>>>>>>> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known
>> poster
>>>>>>>>> decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Snort.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Like that'd stop me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is interesting. Is the OP in question saying that they have
>> the
>>>>>>> skills to fly a plane but *lack* the skills to configure a
>> kilfile?
>>>>>>> If so, this is indeed troubling news and would provide a clue as
>> to
>>>>>> *why*
>>>>>>> our skys are so unsafe today.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You're joking, of course, but in fact, you've hit the nail right
>> on
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> head.
>>>>>> Don't know about the OP, but a startling number of pilots today
>> are
>>>>>> spoon fed idiots who need a Nintendo DS in front of them to do
>> the
>>>>>> simplest flights...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> They fly with the computer and not so much with the stick eh?
>>>>> THey should watch 'Space Cowboys' some time. Tommy Lee Jones does
>> a
>>>> nice
>>>>> job of landing the "flying brick" with a stick and no computer.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Mm, not so much that as flying with the compute and not their
>> heads!
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I always thot you had to fly by "the seat of your pants".
>>> What if your pants dont fit?
>>
>> Hmm, a safety issue that possibly need sto be addrsssed.
>>
>>
> Needless to say...scotsmen would be at a distinct disadvantage...
>

Well, as compensation, they would be able to utilise th ependulum effect
in it's place.
Bertie

[§ñühwØ£f]

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 16:41:04 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th' terraists
with the following claims :

> §ñühw¤£f > wrote in news:PM000452F425FF59A8
> @unknown.unknown.dom:
>
>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>> :
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:18:29 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>>> terraists
>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>
>>>>> §ñühw¤£f > wrote in
>>> news:PM000452E0695605C7
>>>>> @unknown.unknown.dom:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:09:39 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>>>>>>> terraists
>>>>>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Steve Foley" > wrote in
>>>>>>>>> news:Kw2ik.499$_l.72@trnddc04:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your amusement
>>> is
>>>>>>> worth
>>>>>>>>>>> the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful forums
>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>> aviation, by aviators?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of a
>>>>>>> value
>>>>>>>>>>> placed on your own entertainment.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only
>>> thing
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> is sufficient.
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Jim in NC
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave.
>>> When
>>> I
>>>>>>>>>> came back most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by bertie,
>>>>>>>>>> followed by Max, followed by bertie - max - bertie - max - - -
>>> -
>>> -
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server,
>>> with
>>> my
>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>>>> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll
>>>>>>> publish
>>>>>>>>>> the address.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Here's a preview:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you
>>> ever
>>>>>>> see
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> response to them.
>>>>>>>>>> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known
>>> poster
>>>>>>>>>> decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Snort.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Like that'd stop me.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is interesting. Is the OP in question saying that they have
>>> the
>>>>>>>> skills to fly a plane but *lack* the skills to configure a
>>> kilfile?
>>>>>>>> If so, this is indeed troubling news and would provide a clue as
>>> to
>>>>>>> *why*
>>>>>>>> our skys are so unsafe today.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You're joking, of course, but in fact, you've hit the nail right
>>> on
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> head.
>>>>>>> Don't know about the OP, but a startling number of pilots today
>>> are
>>>>>>> spoon fed idiots who need a Nintendo DS in front of them to do
>>> the
>>>>>>> simplest flights...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> They fly with the computer and not so much with the stick eh?
>>>>>> THey should watch 'Space Cowboys' some time. Tommy Lee Jones does
>>> a
>>>>> nice
>>>>>> job of landing the "flying brick" with a stick and no computer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Mm, not so much that as flying with the compute and not their
>>> heads!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I always thot you had to fly by "the seat of your pants".
>>>> What if your pants dont fit?
>>>
>>> Hmm, a safety issue that possibly need sto be addrsssed.
>>>
>>>
>> Needless to say...scotsmen would be at a distinct disadvantage...
>>
>
> Well, as compensation, they would be able to utilise th ependulum effect
> in it's place.
> Bertie

The scots? HA! They're hung like mice...

--
"Those who can make you believe absurdities,
can make you commit atrocities" - Voltaire
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/16118

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

§ñühwØ£f > wrote in
:

> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 16:41:04 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
> terraists with the following claims :
>
>> §ñühw¤£f > wrote in
>> news:PM000452F425FF59A8 @unknown.unknown.dom:
>>
>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:18:29 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>>>> terraists
>>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>>
>>>>>> §ñühw¤£f > wrote in
>>>> news:PM000452E0695605C7
>>>>>> @unknown.unknown.dom:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:09:39 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided
>>>>>>>>> th'
>>>>>>>> terraists
>>>>>>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Steve Foley" > wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> news:Kw2ik.499$_l.72@trnddc04:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your
>>>>>>>>>>>> amusement
>>>> is
>>>>>>>> worth
>>>>>>>>>>>> the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful
>>>>>>>>>>>> forums
>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>> aviation, by aviators?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of
>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> value
>>>>>>>>>>>> placed on your own entertainment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only
>>>> thing
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> is sufficient.
>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim in NC
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave.
>>>> When
>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>> came back most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by
>>>>>>>>>>> bertie, followed by Max, followed by bertie - max - bertie -
>>>>>>>>>>> max - - -
>>>> -
>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server,
>>>> with
>>>> my
>>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>>>>> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll
>>>>>>>> publish
>>>>>>>>>>> the address.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Here's a preview:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you
>>>> ever
>>>>>>>> see
>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>> response to them.
>>>>>>>>>>> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known
>>>> poster
>>>>>>>>>>> decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Snort.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Like that'd stop me.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is interesting. Is the OP in question saying that they
>>>>>>>>> have
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> skills to fly a plane but *lack* the skills to configure a
>>>> kilfile?
>>>>>>>>> If so, this is indeed troubling news and would provide a clue
>>>>>>>>> as
>>>> to
>>>>>>>> *why*
>>>>>>>>> our skys are so unsafe today.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You're joking, of course, but in fact, you've hit the nail
>>>>>>>> right
>>>> on
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> head.
>>>>>>>> Don't know about the OP, but a startling number of pilots today
>>>> are
>>>>>>>> spoon fed idiots who need a Nintendo DS in front of them to do
>>>> the
>>>>>>>> simplest flights...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They fly with the computer and not so much with the stick eh?
>>>>>>> THey should watch 'Space Cowboys' some time. Tommy Lee Jones
>>>>>>> does
>>>> a
>>>>>> nice
>>>>>>> job of landing the "flying brick" with a stick and no computer.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mm, not so much that as flying with the compute and not their
>>>> heads!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I always thot you had to fly by "the seat of your pants".
>>>>> What if your pants dont fit?
>>>>
>>>> Hmm, a safety issue that possibly need sto be addrsssed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Needless to say...scotsmen would be at a distinct disadvantage...
>>>
>>
>> Well, as compensation, they would be able to utilise th ependulum
>> effect in it's place.
>> Bertie
>
> The scots? HA! They're hung like mice...
>

Mmm, you make a good point. Perhaps with a ring laser gyro attached..


Bertie

[§ñühwØ£f]

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 15:09:58 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th' terraists
with the following claims :

> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
> :
>
>> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 16:41:04 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>> terraists with the following claims :
>>
>>> §ñühw¤£f > wrote in
>>> news:PM000452F425FF59A8 @unknown.unknown.dom:
>>>
>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:18:29 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>>>>> terraists
>>>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> §ñühw¤£f > wrote in
>>>>> news:PM000452E0695605C7
>>>>>>> @unknown.unknown.dom:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:09:39 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided
>>>>>>>>>> th'
>>>>>>>>> terraists
>>>>>>>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> "Steve Foley" > wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>> news:Kw2ik.499$_l.72@trnddc04:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your
>>>>>>>>>>>>> amusement
>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>> worth
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful
>>>>>>>>>>>>> forums
>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> aviation, by aviators?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>> value
>>>>>>>>>>>>> placed on your own entertainment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only
>>>>> thing
>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> is sufficient.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim in NC
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave.
>>>>> When
>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>> came back most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by
>>>>>>>>>>>> bertie, followed by Max, followed by bertie - max - bertie -
>>>>>>>>>>>> max - - -
>>>>> -
>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server,
>>>>> with
>>>>> my
>>>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>>>>>> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll
>>>>>>>>> publish
>>>>>>>>>>>> the address.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Here's a preview:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you
>>>>> ever
>>>>>>>>> see
>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>> response to them.
>>>>>>>>>>>> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known
>>>>> poster
>>>>>>>>>>>> decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Snort.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Like that'd stop me.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This is interesting. Is the OP in question saying that they
>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> skills to fly a plane but *lack* the skills to configure a
>>>>> kilfile?
>>>>>>>>>> If so, this is indeed troubling news and would provide a clue
>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>> *why*
>>>>>>>>>> our skys are so unsafe today.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You're joking, of course, but in fact, you've hit the nail
>>>>>>>>> right
>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> head.
>>>>>>>>> Don't know about the OP, but a startling number of pilots today
>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>> spoon fed idiots who need a Nintendo DS in front of them to do
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> simplest flights...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They fly with the computer and not so much with the stick eh?
>>>>>>>> THey should watch 'Space Cowboys' some time. Tommy Lee Jones
>>>>>>>> does
>>>>> a
>>>>>>> nice
>>>>>>>> job of landing the "flying brick" with a stick and no computer.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mm, not so much that as flying with the compute and not their
>>>>> heads!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I always thot you had to fly by "the seat of your pants".
>>>>>> What if your pants dont fit?
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmm, a safety issue that possibly need sto be addrsssed.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Needless to say...scotsmen would be at a distinct disadvantage...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, as compensation, they would be able to utilise th ependulum
>>> effect in it's place.
>>> Bertie
>>
>> The scots? HA! They're hung like mice...
>>
>
> Mmm, you make a good point. Perhaps with a ring laser gyro attached..
>
>
Is that anything like a laod ballancer?

--
"Those who can make you believe absurdities,
can make you commit atrocities" - Voltaire

[No Name]

"§ñühwØ£f" > wrote in message
.. .
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 15:09:58 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th' terraists
> with the following claims :
>
>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 16:41:04 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>>> terraists with the following claims :
>>>
>>>> §ñühw¤£f > wrote in
>>>> news:PM000452F425FF59A8 @unknown.unknown.dom:
>>>>
>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>>>>> :
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 00:18:29 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided th'
>>>>>> terraists
>>>>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> §ñühw¤£f > wrote in
>>>>>> news:PM000452E0695605C7
>>>>>>>> @unknown.unknown.dom:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> §ñühwØ£f > wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:09:39 +0000, Bertie the Bunyip aided
>>>>>>>>>>> th'
>>>>>>>>>> terraists
>>>>>>>>>>> with the following claims :
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Steve Foley" > wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:Kw2ik.499$_l.72@trnddc04:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Morgans" > wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm glad for your amusement, but do you think your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> amusement
>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>> worth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the dismantling of one of the (previously) most useful
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> forums
>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aviation, by aviators?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you think that it is worth it, then you have too high of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>> value
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> placed on your own entertainment.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ignoring him is not sufficient. His departure is the only
>>>>>> thing
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is sufficient.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jim in NC
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I took a 12 month vacation from RAP. He still didn't leave.
>>>>>> When
>>>>>> I
>>>>>>>>>>>>> came back most of the posts I saw were MX, followed by
>>>>>>>>>>>>> bertie, followed by Max, followed by bertie - max - bertie -
>>>>>>>>>>>>> max - - -
>>>>>> -
>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm trying to figure out how to set up my own nntp server,
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> my
>>>>>>>>>> own
>>>>>>>>>>>>> rules. Once I've got it up and running the way I want, I'll
>>>>>>>>>> publish
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the address.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Here's a preview:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You'll never see a post by MX, Bertie, or Max, nor will you
>>>>>> ever
>>>>>>>>>> see
>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> response to them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You'll also never see a post by a spammer, unless a known
>>>>>> poster
>>>>>>>>>>>>> decides to spam, or if I decide it's not really spam.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Snort.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Like that'd stop me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Bertie
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This is interesting. Is the OP in question saying that they
>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> skills to fly a plane but *lack* the skills to configure a
>>>>>> kilfile?
>>>>>>>>>>> If so, this is indeed troubling news and would provide a clue
>>>>>>>>>>> as
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>> *why*
>>>>>>>>>>> our skys are so unsafe today.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You're joking, of course, but in fact, you've hit the nail
>>>>>>>>>> right
>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> head.
>>>>>>>>>> Don't know about the OP, but a startling number of pilots today
>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>> spoon fed idiots who need a Nintendo DS in front of them to do
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> simplest flights...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They fly with the computer and not so much with the stick eh?
>>>>>>>>> THey should watch 'Space Cowboys' some time. Tommy Lee Jones
>>>>>>>>> does
>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>> nice
>>>>>>>>> job of landing the "flying brick" with a stick and no computer.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Mm, not so much that as flying with the compute and not their
>>>>>> heads!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I always thot you had to fly by "the seat of your pants".
>>>>>>> What if your pants dont fit?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmm, a safety issue that possibly need sto be addrsssed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Needless to say...scotsmen would be at a distinct disadvantage...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, as compensation, they would be able to utilise th ependulum
>>>> effect in it's place.
>>>> Bertie
>>>
>>> The scots? HA! They're hung like mice...
>>>
>>
>> Mmm, you make a good point. Perhaps with a ring laser gyro attached..
>>
>>
> Is that anything like a laod ballancer?
>
ignorant ****.