Let's move on

[Viperdoc[_5_]]

Anthony will never admit he's wrong, even though he's asked some of the most
naive and ignorant questions, ones that truly demonstrate his lack of
knowledge and experience.

For the real pilots and students, I suggest joining Pilots of America, a
moderated group. It is what this NG used to be, before it was ruined by
Anthony and his likes.

The discussions are related to and about flying, with reasonable discourse
and even disagreement. At least it appears that the posters respect each
other for the fact that they actually fly and have experienced the real
thing.

During my brief participation, I have never seen it descend into the usual
trolling that Anthony thrives on.

So, give it a try at Pilots of America and let Anthony argue with himself
and the other wannabes.

[Tim[_1_]]

"Viperdoc" > wrote
>
> For the real pilots and students, I suggest joining Pilots of America, a
> moderated group. It is what this NG used to be, before it was ruined by
> Anthony and his likes.
>

It wasn't so much ruined by Mx as much as those who cannot take a pass on
endlessly arguing with him over some ridiculous detail, or have made it
their mission to expose him as a non-pilot, all with the seemingly honorable
goal of protecting the helpless student who might read something here and
then die as a result.

What a crock. Anyone with half a brain knows how to treat information
posted on a newsgroup, or anywhere else online for that matter. They don't
need help from a few crusaders.

[Thomas Borchert]

Viperdoc,

> I suggest joining Pilots of America
>

Well, from where I sit, the title is somewhat exclusive...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[terry]

On Aug 14, 7:59*pm, "Tim" > wrote:
> "Viperdoc" > wrote
>
>
>
> > For the real pilots and students, I suggest joining Pilots of America, a
> > moderated group. It is what this NG used to be, before it was ruined by
> > Anthony and his likes.
>
> It wasn't so much ruined by Mx as much as those who cannot take a pass on
> endlessly arguing with him over some ridiculous detail, or have made it
> their mission to expose him as a non-pilot, all with the seemingly honorable
> goal of protecting the helpless student who might read something here and
> then die as a result.
>
> What a crock. *Anyone with half a brain knows how to treat information
> posted on a newsgroup, or anywhere else online for that matter. *They don't
> need help from a few crusaders.


I tend to agree. But I refuse to respond to him , not because he is
not a pilot or because he poses a risk to students or that he wants to
engage in endless argument, there are others that do that also. I
dont mind a robust debate myself ,its all part of the learning
process. No I just refuse to debate with him simply because of his
intellectually dishonesty ( some would say disability). If I have a
debate I expect the outcome to be one of 3 possibilities.

1. I have been proved wrong and I acknowledge that and appreciate the
fact that
I have learned something
2. I have proved the other person wrong, and they acknowledge that
and I gain
some personal satisfaction that I have helped someone, and that
perhaps
in 200 or so hours of piloting an aeroplane I might have actually
learned a thing
or two. .
3. The debate is about something that there is no right or wrong
answer and both
parties agree to disagree.

The outcome of a debate with Mxs is rarely any of the above the 3.
He has a total inability to admit he is wrong. He will either deny it
or try to deceitfully change the topic of what was disagreed with.
He is just a total waste of oxygen. Its a free choice of course but I
highly reccommend the ignore approach.
Terry
PPL Downunder

[Viperdoc[_5_]]

The ignore approach has been advocated, but there will always be someone who
takes the bait, and this starts the endless cycle again.

Hey, I could care less whether anyone chooses to lurk here and watch the
repetitive and useless interaction with someone who has no experience and
nothing to offer. I simply offered the alternative, which is Pilots of
America, and other boards, that are actually focused on aviation related
topics, and not Anthony.

[Tim[_1_]]

"terry" > wrote

The outcome of a debate with Mxs is rarely any of the above the 3.
He has a total inability to admit he is wrong. He will either deny it
or try to deceitfully change the topic of what was disagreed with.

Terry
PPL Downunder


Right, and everyone here knows it. The mystery is why anyone would attempt
to prove a point one way or another with him when they know this going in,
and yet the same people do it over and over and over again.

[[email protected]]

On Aug 14, 8:14*am, "Tim" > wrote:
> "terry" > wrote
>
> The outcome of a debate with Mxs is rarely any of the above the 3.
> He has a total inability to admit he is wrong. *He will either deny it
> or try to deceitfully change the topic of what was disagreed with.
>
> Terry
> PPL Downunder
>
> Right, and everyone here knows it. *The mystery is why anyone would attempt
> to prove a point one way or another with him when they know this going in,
> and yet the same people do it over and over and over again.

I've played with the troll, but it's stopped being fun. He and the
threads have gotten boring.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Thomas Borchert wrote:
> Viperdoc,
>
>> I suggest joining Pilots of America
>>
>
> Well, from where I sit, the title is somewhat exclusive...
>

The title simply states the host of the group. ALL pilots are welcome
there. Pilots post there from all over the world.
Give it a try. It's on topic and avoids the usual Usenet issues.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Stealth Pilot[_2_]]

On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 12:57:57 +0200, Thomas Borchert
> wrote:

>Viperdoc,
>
>> I suggest joining Pilots of America
>>
>
>Well, from where I sit, the title is somewhat exclusive...

ditto

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Stealth Pilot > wrote:

> >> I suggest joining Pilots of America
> >
> >Well, from where I sit, the title is somewhat exclusive...
>
> ditto

Which is more important, the title of the web-based forum
or lack of usenet sewerage?

(of course, I would prefer to have the usenet participants
behave themselves, but I'm not holding my breath...)

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

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Bob Noel wrote:
> In article >,
> Stealth Pilot > wrote:
>
>>>> I suggest joining Pilots of America
>>> Well, from where I sit, the title is somewhat exclusive...
>> ditto
>
> Which is more important, the title of the web-based forum
> or lack of usenet sewerage?
>
> (of course, I would prefer to have the usenet participants
> behave themselves, but I'm not holding my breath...)
>

Can't speak for others, but my experience on that group is that it is
NOT exclusive in any way at all. In fact, my impression is that they go
way out of their way to make ALL pilots feel welcome there.
Of course there will always be those from Usenet who believe that simply
because the hosts of this forum are from the U.S. that this means it's
an "exclusive" group :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

[F. Baum]

On Aug 14, 5:57*am, "Viperdoc" > The ignore approach has been
advocated, but there will always be someone who
> takes the bait, and this starts the endless cycle again.

Sad isnt it ? Agree 101 % that the attention starved doofus would just
go away if no one responded.

> I simply offered the alternative, which is Pilots of
> America, and other boards, that are actually focused on aviation related
> topics, and not Anthony.

Im gonna respectfully disagree on the POA argument. I have made a few
passes through that board (And others) and here is what I have
noticed. First, this seems to be a close knit group of mostly East
Coast pilots who all get together on occasion . While this is good for
them, for the rest of us it amounts to a large quantity of non
aviation related "Small talk" amongst aquantances that wouldnt hold
anyone elses intrest. Second, the level of expertertise and experience
over there seems to be quite a bit lower than over here. Once again,
this is good for small talk but if you want meaningfull aviation
discussion you might keep looking. You can post just about any
response you want on POA no mater how inaccurate as long as you dont
flame or use expletitives . In fact, they have their own versions of
MX over there. They are the ones who know anything about everything
and a couple of them sugest or imply much more experience in much
bigger airplanes than what they actually have, just like our well
known troll. Take a look at the post counters and you can see members
with thousands of posts and many of the high post count members also
have the least meaningful (Aviation wise) content.
I am begining to think that it is just the nature of these groups.
FB

[Thomas Borchert]

Dudley,

> Give it a try.
>

I might. Thanks for the explanation.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Thomas Borchert > wrote:

> > Give it a try.
>
> I might. Thanks for the explanation.

Note that you might want to avoid the "spin zone"... I think the
default is now for new folks not to be subscribed to it.

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

[Dallas]

On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 21:52:34 -0500, Viperdoc wrote:

> For the real pilots and students, I suggest joining Pilots of America, a
> moderated group. It is what this NG used to be, before it was ruined by
> Anthony and his likes.

I donno... web based forums suffer from being slow and cumbersome to use.
Besides, the couple of times I've been there, I didn't see any familiar
names and just never got excited about what was there.



--
Dallas

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
Dallas > wrote:

> On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 21:52:34 -0500, Viperdoc wrote:
>
> > For the real pilots and students, I suggest joining Pilots of America, a
> > moderated group. It is what this NG used to be, before it was ruined by
> > Anthony and his likes.
>
> I donno... web based forums suffer from being slow and cumbersome to use.
> Besides, the couple of times I've been there, I didn't see any familiar
> names and just never got excited about what was there.

well, there are currently more on-topic threads than in the rec.aviation.* groups

(ps - I much prefer the usenet gui - the web-based stuff is worse than
cumbersome).

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

[Ross]

Dallas wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 21:52:34 -0500, Viperdoc wrote:
>
>> For the real pilots and students, I suggest joining Pilots of America, a
>> moderated group. It is what this NG used to be, before it was ruined by
>> Anthony and his likes.
>
> I donno... web based forums suffer from being slow and cumbersome to use.
> Besides, the couple of times I've been there, I didn't see any familiar
> names and just never got excited about what was there.
>
>
>

I now have filters that excludes the known troll traffic. (and Bertie
has shown he can defeat it). I do like this forum for its ease of use. I
like the suggestion to just ignore and do not respond - never, ever. If
it is a safety issue then start a new thread and discuss the topic.
Hopefully, the old regulars will check and migrate back. I would like to
see more discussion on R.A.O.

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

[Marco Leon[_5_]]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
...
> Can't speak for others, but my experience on that group is that it is NOT
> exclusive in any way at all. In fact, my impression is that they go way
> out of their way to make ALL pilots feel welcome there.
> Of course there will always be those from Usenet who believe that simply
> because the hosts of this forum are from the U.S. that this means it's an
> "exclusive" group :-))

I've been to POA a few times but what I personally dislike is the setup of
the forums. With over ten different "rooms" that overlap in subject matter
it's hard to get a good picture of what's going on without going into each
one. When I do reply and/or post, I forget which room I did it in. Granted,
I can find threads through searches but it gets real old real quick.

I still find myself going to rec.aviation first. Then again, I've got Mx and
others on my ignore list so I never see their threads and most related
content.

Marco

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Marco Leon wrote:
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Can't speak for others, but my experience on that group is that it is NOT
>> exclusive in any way at all. In fact, my impression is that they go way
>> out of their way to make ALL pilots feel welcome there.
>> Of course there will always be those from Usenet who believe that simply
>> because the hosts of this forum are from the U.S. that this means it's an
>> "exclusive" group :-))
>
> I've been to POA a few times but what I personally dislike is the setup of
> the forums. With over ten different "rooms" that overlap in subject matter
> it's hard to get a good picture of what's going on without going into each
> one. When I do reply and/or post, I forget which room I did it in. Granted,
> I can find threads through searches but it gets real old real quick.
>
> I still find myself going to rec.aviation first. Then again, I've got Mx and
> others on my ignore list so I never see their threads and most related
> content.
>
> Marco
>
>
The venue is different, that's for sure. Some who are used to Usenet
will never like a web forum. I have trouble myself sometimes figuring
out who is answering whom :-))
The bottom line for me is that ALL forms of public aviation posting have
lost their lustre for me, and I don't post anywhere near as often as I
used to.
To be quite frank, I'm just tired of dealing with it. I still drop a few
lines here and there but I've given up long ago caring who agrees or
disagrees with me on anything.
They say this comes to all who stay on forums for any length of time.
There's some truth to it for sure :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

[terry]

On Aug 15, 12:31*am, Stealth Pilot >
wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 12:57:57 +0200, Thomas Borchert
>
> > wrote:
> >Viperdoc,
>
> >> I suggest joining Pilots of America
>
> >Well, from where I sit, the title is somewhat exclusive...
>
I joined POA ( I am an Aussie also for those that dont know), and
while there is certainly no discrimination against non americans, I
find that interesting aviation discussions are few and far between
amongst the general chit chat. Its more like a social chat board than
a genuine aviation discussion group. I guess thats what you might
expect to happen when you have strict rules about how people have to
interact with each other, the friendly types stay around and become
good friends, nothing wrong with that of course but I already have
enough friends ( 3 counting my wife) and I just want somewhere to go
and talk technical stuff about flying.
Terry
PPL Downunder.

[Rocky Stevens]

As I've mentioned on other threads, I REALLY like the AOPA board (I
have not tried out POA or the purple board). I agree that the
interface is not nearly as good as some Usenet clients out there
(though I just use Google Groups due to Time Warner dropping Usenet,
and their interface ain't all that great either).

[Viperdoc[_5_]]

The GUI of POA is cumbersome and hard to follow. It's main advantage (and
it's a big one) is that Anthony is not there!

[Mxsmanic]

Dudley Henriques writes:

> They say this comes to all who stay on forums for any length of time.

It's possible to accept and adapt to it. The key is to concentrate on what
interests you and ignore the rest. The level of noise in most public forums
is very high and if you cannot or don't wish to separate noise from signal, it
can be very exhausting.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
>> They say this comes to all who stay on forums for any length of time.
>
> It's possible to accept and adapt to it. The key is to concentrate on what
> interests you and ignore the rest. The level of noise in most public forums
> is very high and if you cannot or don't wish to separate noise from signal, it
> can be very exhausting.


True enough.


--
Dudley Henriques

[Mxsmanic]

terry writes:

> I joined POA ( I am an Aussie also for those that dont know), and
> while there is certainly no discrimination against non americans, I
> find that interesting aviation discussions are few and far between
> amongst the general chit chat. Its more like a social chat board than
> a genuine aviation discussion group. I guess thats what you might
> expect to happen when you have strict rules about how people have to
> interact with each other, the friendly types stay around and become
> good friends, nothing wrong with that of course but I already have
> enough friends ( 3 counting my wife) and I just want somewhere to go
> and talk technical stuff about flying.

Talking about serious issues on which people have strong opinions tends to
lead to arguments, and many poorly moderated forums get around this by
simplying outlawing any serious discussion. They don't do this in so many
words, but the character of the moderation is such that nothing but friendly
small talk survives.

The fact is, when people discuss conflicting and strong opinions, most rapidly
resort to personal attacks, degrading the quality of discussion. Few people
can remain objective when defending their own opinions or when addressing
other opinions with which they disagree. Social chit-chat avoids this,
although it's not very interesting. People who have opinions that they've
adopted wholesale from others (that is, opinions that they have not arrived at
through personal reflection, which makes the opinions impossible to defend)
are particularly prone to fall prey to emotion in very short order.

This is why moderated forums are relatively free of stressful flame wars, but
are also generally very boring and uninformative. Conversely, this is why
unmoderated forums can cover fairly weighty subjects, but at the price of very
high noise levels and extremely acerbic personal flame wars.

[Mxsmanic]

terry writes:

> If I have a debate I expect the outcome to be one of 3 possibilities.
>
> 1. I have been proved wrong and I acknowledge that and appreciate the
> fact that I have learned something
> 2. I have proved the other person wrong, and they acknowledge that
> and I gain some personal satisfaction that I have helped someone, and that
> perhaps in 200 or so hours of piloting an aeroplane I might have actually
> learned a thing or two.
> 3. The debate is about something that there is no right or wrong
> answer and both parties agree to disagree.

Your error is in (2), because you not only want to prove someone wrong, but
you want your ego to be stroked with an unwarranted recognition of the
questionable value of your hours of experience. Without the ego boost, you
aren't satisfied.

I occasionally show that someone is wrong about something, but anything beyond
an acknowledgement of that is superfluous to me, and even the acknowledgement
is only useful for closure and not absolutely essential.

[Mxsmanic]

Tim writes:

> Right, and everyone here knows it. The mystery is why anyone would attempt
> to prove a point one way or another with him when they know this going in,
> and yet the same people do it over and over and over again.

They want to "win," not realizing that it's not a contest. Since it is not a
contest, they cannot win or lose, and so they end up frustrated.

[Mxsmanic]

F. Baum writes:

> I am begining to think that it is just the nature of these groups.

It is human nature.

[Viperdoc[_5_]]

The value of POA is that Anthony isn't there and wouldn't be tolerated. He
single handedly is primarily responsible for the demise of this group.

[Viperdoc[_5_]]

Anthony can not ever admit that he's wrong, even when it is blatantly
obvious to those of us who actually fly.

[Viperdoc[_5_]]

Anthony does not realize when he is wrong, and incapable of acknowledging
his own obvious shortcomings.

[Viperdoc[_5_]]

Anthony has a penchant for stating the obvious, but never acknowledging his
own errors. He never substantiates his outlandish claims with actual
citations. His own warped sense of reality is simply based upon playing a
computer game.

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> The value of POA is that Anthony isn't there and wouldn't be tolerated.
> He single handedly is primarily responsible for the demise of this group.

Sorry, Doc -- gotta disagree there. This group could've easily withstood a
hundred years of MX-types -- but it only took a few months for the more
vitriolic trolls (Bertie and Maxwell) to completely destroy it.

Whatever you blame its demise on, you're right on regarding Pilots of
America. It's like a breath of fresh air over there, full of helpful,
knowledgeable, friendly and respectful pilots and learned conversation about
piloting. In fact, it smells just like this newsgroup used to smell, before
the trolls decided to wallow here.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> Note that you might want to avoid the "spin zone"... I think the
> default is now for new folks not to be subscribed to it.

When I signed up with PofA some months ago, membership defaulted to
automatically allowing access to the "Spin Zone" -- an area of the site
which is pretty much a more polite equivalent of what this group has become.

It didn't take me long to realize that opting out of that area was a good
move -- but I'm glad it's there, since it provides an outlet for all the
off-topic posters, and keeps the rest of the site pretty much purely about
aviation.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> I've been to POA a few times but what I personally dislike is the setup of
> the forums. With over ten different "rooms" that overlap in subject matter
> it's hard to get a good picture of what's going on without going into each

The key to making the PofA interface work is to use the "New Posts" button
exclusively. By pushing this button you only see posts that have been made
since the last time you visited the site, which efficiently and quickly cuts
through the too-complex interface.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Ricky]

On Aug 14, 8:28*pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:

> I occasionally show that someone is wrong about something,

Anthony, serious question.
Why do you not ever admit you are wrong when you are wrong so many
times?

Ricky

[Thomas Borchert]

Marco,

> so I never see their threads and most related
> content.
>

Yes, but the problem is that there's not much left after that.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Steve Foley]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:b_6pk.298525$yE1.138575@attbi_s21...
> > Viperdoc wrote:
> > The value of POA is that Anthony isn't there and wouldn't be tolerated.
> > He single handedly is primarily responsible for the demise of this
group.
>
> Sorry, Doc -- gotta disagree there. This group could've easily withstood
a
> hundred years of MX-types -- but it only took a few months for the more
> vitriolic trolls (Bertie and Maxwell) to completely destroy it.

I agree with Viperdoc that MX is responsible for the demise of this group.

Atkielski is a cancer. He admits he's been trolling for decades, and he is
very good at it. He chooses his words very carefully, with the sole purpose
to irritate.

He's a selfish little prick with no absolutely no redeeming value.

Bertie and Maxwell are simply secondary infections. When someone dies from
cancer, a secondary infection (or heart failure, or whatever) is what kills
them. Without Atkielski poisoning these groups, Bertie and Maxwell would
have never thrived.

[[email protected]]

On Aug 15, 8:05 am, "Steve Foley" > wrote:
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
>
> news:b_6pk.298525$yE1.138575@attbi_s21...
>
> > > Viperdoc wrote:
> > > The value of POA is that Anthony isn't there and wouldn't be tolerated.
> > > He single handedly is primarily responsible for the demise of this
> group.
>
> > Sorry, Doc -- gotta disagree there. This group could've easily withstood
> a
> > hundred years of MX-types -- but it only took a few months for the more
> > vitriolic trolls (Bertie and Maxwell) to completely destroy it.
>
> I agree with Viperdoc that MX is responsible for the demise of this group.
>
> Atkielski is a cancer. He admits he's been trolling for decades, and he is
> very good at it. He chooses his words very carefully, with the sole purpose
> to irritate.
>
> He's a selfish little prick with no absolutely no redeeming value.
>
> Bertie and Maxwell are simply secondary infections. When someone dies from
> cancer, a secondary infection (or heart failure, or whatever) is what kills
> them. Without Atkielski poisoning these groups, Bertie and Maxwell would
> have never thrived.

Anthony has become boring, engagements with him are without
resolution, so I will let him hang in peace, or pieces.

[Tim[_1_]]

"Steve Foley" > wrote
>
> I agree with Viperdoc that MX is responsible for the demise of this group.
>

That's not really true now, is it. He is a participant and an instigator,
but without others cooperating the endless arguing over meaningless detail
would not ensue.

> Atkielski is a cancer. He admits he's been trolling for decades, and he is
> very good at it. He chooses his words very carefully, with the sole
purpose
> to irritate.

Probably true. So, knowing that, when one feels that they are getting
nowhere with him it can be your choice to take the high road and quit
communicating rather than resort to the tedious back and forth that almost
always takes place instead. It's the classic example of wrestling with a
pig - those who participate always come out looking worse than the
instigator.

I gotta tell ya, as a fellow pilot I am sometimes embarrased by what is said
on this NG by other pilots while they try to get Mx to admit he is wrong or
somehow made a mistake.

[Steve Foley]

> wrote in message
...


> Anthony has become boring, engagements with him are without
> resolution, so I will let him hang in peace, or pieces.

I've taken to replying to him via email (as was the original intent if
usenet) . He has yet to respond, so I always get the last word.

It's a refreshing change.

[Steve Foley]

"Tim" > wrote in message
...
> "Steve Foley" > wrote
> >
> > I agree with Viperdoc that MX is responsible for the demise of this
group.
> >
>
> That's not really true now, is it. He is a participant and an instigator,
> but without others cooperating the endless arguing over meaningless detail
> would not ensue.

Yes, it is true. He is the root cause of the demise. I agree it takes the
participation of others, but if he never came along, I honestly believe this
group would not have dried up and blown away.

[Ross]

Viperdoc wrote:
> Anthony has a penchant for stating the obvious, but never acknowledging his
> own errors. He never substantiates his outlandish claims with actual
> citations. His own warped sense of reality is simply based upon playing a
> computer game.
>
>

Total ignoring, discussing, or mentioning of Anthony will stop this. He
does not exist. Do not respond, recognize, or comment back to him or
about him in this newsgroup. He will go away. Oops, I did, didn't I?
--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

[Jon]

On Aug 15, 9:20*am, "Steve Foley" > wrote:
> "Tim" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > "Steve Foley" > wrote
>
> > > I agree with Viperdoc that MX is responsible for the demise of this
> group.
>
> > That's not really true now, is it. *He is a participant and an instigator,
> > but without others cooperating the endless arguing over meaningless detail
> > would not ensue.
>
> Yes, it is true. He is the root cause of the demise. I agree it takes the
> participation of others, but if he never came along, I honestly believe this
> group would not have dried up and blown away.

So the question is: Who will change? I think it's clear we know who
won't.

[Marco Leon[_5_]]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
...
> The venue is different, that's for sure. Some who are used to Usenet will
> never like a web forum. I have trouble myself sometimes figuring out who
> is answering whom :-))
> The bottom line for me is that ALL forms of public aviation posting have
> lost their lustre for me, and I don't post anywhere near as often as I
> used to.
> To be quite frank, I'm just tired of dealing with it. I still drop a few
> lines here and there but I've given up long ago caring who agrees or
> disagrees with me on anything.
> They say this comes to all who stay on forums for any length of time.
> There's some truth to it for sure :-))

The sad thing from my perspective is that I've learned a whole heck of a lot
from these groups. I feel as though I got at least a few years of "free
experience" by learning from others in the group. I like the setup of
piloting/owning/ifr where piloting acts as the general forum. I'd love to
see a similar more disciplined setup somewhere.

Marco

[Marco Leon[_5_]]

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> Marco,
>> so I never see their threads and most related
>> content.
>
> Yes, but the problem is that there's not much left after that.

Absolutely true. Maybe the group needs a "vacation" where the trolls get
bored and move on to other groups for their trolling pleasure. Then the
value-add folks might slowly come back and the group might experience a
rebirth of activity. There must be some eco-system principles at work here.

Marco

[Marco Leon[_5_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:w77pk.243710$TT4.67463@attbi_s22...
> The key to making the PofA interface work is to use the "New Posts" button
> exclusively. By pushing this button you only see posts that have been
> made since the last time you visited the site, which efficiently and
> quickly cuts through the too-complex interface.

Hmmm. Gotta try that Jay. Thanks

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Marco Leon wrote:
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote in message
> ...
>> The venue is different, that's for sure. Some who are used to Usenet will
>> never like a web forum. I have trouble myself sometimes figuring out who
>> is answering whom :-))
>> The bottom line for me is that ALL forms of public aviation posting have
>> lost their lustre for me, and I don't post anywhere near as often as I
>> used to.
>> To be quite frank, I'm just tired of dealing with it. I still drop a few
>> lines here and there but I've given up long ago caring who agrees or
>> disagrees with me on anything.
>> They say this comes to all who stay on forums for any length of time.
>> There's some truth to it for sure :-))
>
> The sad thing from my perspective is that I've learned a whole heck of a lot
> from these groups. I feel as though I got at least a few years of "free
> experience" by learning from others in the group. I like the setup of
> piloting/owning/ifr where piloting acts as the general forum. I'd love to
> see a similar more disciplined setup somewhere.
>
> Marco
>
>

There is much of value that passes on both types of forums. It all boils
down to whether or not you are willing to put up with the crap you will
find on Usenet. Personally, I've reached the point where for me, the
crap on Usenet simply isn't worth my time. I come and go with little
expectation of a positive result. If I happen to get a positive result,
I simply consider that a good day and I'll converse with respectful
Usenet posters. If I don't find that, I'll tell people to go ****
themselves in a heartbeat!
On the moderated forums, I know going in that I'll never have to resort
to telling anyone to go **** themselves, and for me, that's important.
You see, I don't particularly like telling people to go **** themselves.


--
Dudley Henriques

[f-newguy]

"Steve Foley" > wrote in message
news:Rhepk.782$EL2.244@trnddc01...
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:b_6pk.298525$yE1.138575@attbi_s21...
>> > Viperdoc wrote:
>> > The value of POA is that Anthony isn't there and wouldn't be
>> > tolerated.
>> > He single handedly is primarily responsible for the demise of this
> group.
>>
>> Sorry, Doc -- gotta disagree there. This group could've easily withstood
> a
>> hundred years of MX-types -- but it only took a few months for the more
>> vitriolic trolls (Bertie and Maxwell) to completely destroy it.
>
> I agree with Viperdoc that MX is responsible for the demise of this group.
>

This group is a long way from dead, except perhaps as a vanity site for a
certain braggart and his sycophants.

[Steven Barnes]

I just got back from teaching short & soft field takeoff & landings.

Just thought I'd throw some aviation content in....



"Tim" > wrote in message
...
> "Viperdoc" > wrote
> >
> > For the real pilots and students, I suggest joining Pilots of America, a
> > moderated group. It is what this NG used to be, before it was ruined by
> > Anthony and his likes.
> >
>
> It wasn't so much ruined by Mx as much as those who cannot take a pass on
> endlessly arguing with him over some ridiculous detail, or have made it
> their mission to expose him as a non-pilot, all with the seemingly
honorable
> goal of protecting the helpless student who might read something here and
> then die as a result.
>
> What a crock. Anyone with half a brain knows how to treat information
> posted on a newsgroup, or anywhere else online for that matter. They
don't
> need help from a few crusaders.
>
>
>
>
>

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Dudley Henriques" > wrote

> Personally, I've reached the point where for me, the crap on Usenet simply
> isn't worth my time. I come and go with little expectation of a positive
> result. If I happen to get a positive result, I simply consider that a
> good day and I'll converse with respectful Usenet posters. If I don't find
> that, I'll tell people to go **** themselves in a heartbeat!
> On the moderated forums, I know going in that I'll never have to resort to
> telling anyone to go **** themselves, and for me, that's important. You
> see, I don't particularly like telling people to go **** themselves.

Agreed

What we really need is a small group of reasonable people to act as
moderators, here, on usenet. All we need to do is keep out the riff-raff,
and the worst of the disrespect.

It is all about respect, and that is a sign of the times.

As I contemplate going back to having students at school next week, I have
come to dread it, and there too, it is all about respect, and the lack of
it.

Lack of respect for others, their property, and even for themselves.

If I was allowed he whack their little backsides when they needed it, 90% of
the problem would disappear.

It's a pity that we can't pound a little respect into this generation when
they need it. But no, that isn't civilized, or some such crap.

Anyway, I've wandered.

Anyone want to be a moderator?
--
Jim in NC

[Mxsmanic]

Dudley Henriques writes:

> On the moderated forums, I know going in that I'll never have to resort
> to telling anyone to go **** themselves, and for me, that's important.
> You see, I don't particularly like telling people to go **** themselves.

And yet you do it. Given that it has no real effect on anything, why do it if
you don't like to?

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
>> On the moderated forums, I know going in that I'll never have to resort
>> to telling anyone to go **** themselves, and for me, that's important.
>> You see, I don't particularly like telling people to go **** themselves.
>
> And yet you do it. Given that it has no real effect on anything, why do it if
> you don't like to?

I do lots of things I don't like doing Anthony. I just try keeping these
things to a minimum if they're uncomfortable to me.

Example; I'm showing 67,800 posts to Usenet on Google as of today. I've
found it necessary to tell very few of the people I deal with on these
forums to go **** themselves. It seems you just bring out the very best
in people :-))

--
Dudley Henriques

[F. Baum]

On Aug 14, 9:46*pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
> Whatever you blame its demise on, you're right on regarding Pilots of
> America. *It's like a breath of fresh air over there, full of helpful,
> knowledgeable, friendly and respectful pilots and learned conversation about
> piloting. *

Jay, be careful with the "knowlegible, helpful" stuff. I would say
that from a pure aviation knowlege standpoint that list is no better
and certainly worse in many ways than what you get over here. I am not
to good at pinning down human nature but as I see it, many pilots come
to these groups to discuss thier hobby of flying. Unfortunatly for
some, these forums sorta become the hobby. POA , seems to be full of
these types. Look at the guys with thousands of posts and you will see
what I mean. There is some good aviation content over there to be
sure, but I dont see the signal to noise ratio any better than this
place and (If you exclude all the MX stuff) probably much worse.
There is alot of good people here, and a few attention starved "flying
squirells"(My own term). The big difference on POA is that no one
Is gonna tell the squirells to **** off ,as Dudley would say. Both
good and bad I guess ;))))))

[Mxsmanic]

Dudley Henriques writes:

> I do lots of things I don't like doing Anthony. I just try keeping these
> things to a minimum if they're uncomfortable to me.

Why do you do them?

> Example; I'm showing 67,800 posts to Usenet on Google as of today. I've
> found it necessary to tell very few of the people I deal with on these
> forums to go **** themselves.

What made it "necessary" to tell them this?

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> Absolutely true. Maybe the group needs a "vacation" where the trolls get
> bored and move on to other groups for their trolling pleasure. Then the
> value-add folks might slowly come back and the group might experience a
> rebirth of activity. There must be some eco-system principles at work
> here.

Sadly, I've seen precisely this happen with Bertie here recently. When it's
apparent that he's completely killed the group, he goes into hibernation, or
(more diabolically) enters one of his more constructive phases where he
actually discusses aviation.

Right now he's noticeably absent, in case you haven't noticed. Either that
or NO ONE is responding to him, which seems unlikely.

His absence slowly lures people back into the newsgroup fold. Once some
number of users (known only to Bertie) have jumped back in the group, he
then resumes his inane 3-word personal attacks. His evil twin, Maxwell,
follows suit shortly thereafter.

It's disgustingly predictable, and kill files only cure half the problem.
(The other half being all the people who respond to their inane, 3-word
personal attack posts...)

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: This group would still be
thriving with TEN "MX-style" posters actively participating. But all it
took was two "Bertie-style" trolls to swiftly and efficiently kill it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[george]

On Aug 16, 3:46 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> I've said it before, and I'll say it again: This group would still be
> thriving with TEN "MX-style" posters actively participating. But all it
> took was two "Bertie-style" trolls to swiftly and efficiently kill it.

The group hasn't been killed.
Some posters do not suffer fools gladly and are only to happy to
demonstrate the fact.

[[email protected]]

Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
>> I do lots of things I don't like doing Anthony. I just try keeping these
>> things to a minimum if they're uncomfortable to me.
>
> Why do you do them?

Adults do lots of things they don't like to do because that is part of
being an adult.

But what would you know about adult behavior?

Do you pay your taxes though you don't want to?

Have you ever cared for and financially supported someone just because
it was the right thing to do?

Have you ever stayed at a job you didn't like because people depended
upon you for support?

Have you ever gone to war, scared ****less, because it was the right
thing to do?

I could go on, but I doubt your world view extends beyond your hovel
and simulated life.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Mxsmanic]

writes:

> Adults do lots of things they don't like to do because that is part of
> being an adult.

People of all ages never do anything unless there is something in it for them.

> I could go on, but I doubt your world view extends beyond your hovel
> and simulated life.

You could go on, but it would be much better to return to a discussion of
aviation, don't you think?

You must like me a lot more than you like flying, because you're much more
prone to discuss me than you are to discuss aviation.

[Ricky]

On Aug 15, 11:40*pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:

blah, blah, blah....

Hey Anthony, how about those references, hmmmm???

You are a liar if you can't simply provide them.

Ricky

[Steve Foley]

"f-newguy" > wrote in message
...

>
> This group is a long way from dead, except perhaps as a vanity site for a
> certain braggart and his sycophants.

Compared to the traffic in this group before atkielski showed up, this group
is dead and buried.

[Martin Hotze[_2_]]

Jay Honeck schrieb:
> It's disgustingly predictable, and kill files only cure half the problem.
> (The other half being all the people who respond to their inane, 3-word
> personal attack posts...)

then killfile them, too.
here about 50% or more of all postings are wiped out by the killfile.

#m

[Martin Hotze[_2_]]

Marco Leon schrieb:
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:w77pk.243710$TT4.67463@attbi_s22...
>> The key to making the PofA interface work is to use the "New Posts" button
>> exclusively. By pushing this button you only see posts that have been
>> made since the last time you visited the site, which efficiently and
>> quickly cuts through the too-complex interface.
>
> Hmmm. Gotta try that Jay. Thanks

problem: you have (for example) 100 new posts, you read through 40 of
them as time allows. You sign off and want to read on later. Now the
remaining 60 posts are not shown to you as new posts ...

#m

[Viperdoc[_5_]]

Again, anyone for Pilots of America?

..

[f-newguy]

"Viperdoc" > wrote in message
...
> Again, anyone for Pilots of America?
>

Nope.

[Jay Maynard]

On 2008-08-16, Viperdoc > wrote:
> Again, anyone for Pilots of America?

I'm there already.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> then killfile them, too.
> here about 50% or more of all postings are wiped out by the killfile.

I was here for ten years without needing a killfile. Now, the solution is
to killfile dozens of posters?

That illustrates just how far this group has fallen, Martin. How sad. IMHO
it's better to learn an awkward interface than to put up with this.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Bob Noel]

In article <FqApk.245644$TT4.98287@attbi_s22>,
"Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> it's better to learn an awkward interface than to put up with this.

It would be even better to improve the lousy interface (but I'm not
holding my breath)

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

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:FqApk.245644$TT4.98287@attbi_s22:

>> then killfile them, too.
>> here about 50% or more of all postings are wiped out by the killfile.
>
> I was here for ten years without needing a killfile. Now, the
> solution is to killfile dozens of posters?
>
> That illustrates just how far this group has fallen, Martin. How sad.
> IMHO it's better to learn an awkward interface than to put up with
> this.

Run awya! run away!


Bertie

[Rocky Stevens]

On Aug 16, 8:38 am, "f-newguy" > wrote:
> "Viperdoc" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > Again, anyone for Pilots of America?
>
> Nope.

After reading f-newguy's other posts, I'm not sure POA could have
gotten a better endorsement :)

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Morgans" > wrote in
:

>
> "Dudley Henriques" > wrote
>
>> Personally, I've reached the point where for me, the crap on Usenet
>> simply isn't worth my time. I come and go with little expectation of
>> a positive result. If I happen to get a positive result, I simply
>> consider that a good day and I'll converse with respectful Usenet
>> posters. If I don't find that, I'll tell people to go **** themselves
>> in a heartbeat! On the moderated forums, I know going in that I'll
>> never have to resort to telling anyone to go **** themselves, and for
>> me, that's important. You see, I don't particularly like telling
>> people to go **** themselves.
>
> Agreed
>
> What we really need is a small group of reasonable people to act as
> moderators, here, on usenet. All we need to do is keep out the
> riff-raff, and the worst of the disrespect.
>
> It is all about respect, and that is a sign of the times.
>
> As I contemplate going back to having students at school next week, I
> have come to dread it, and there too, it is all about respect, and the
> lack of it.
>
> Lack of respect for others, their property, and even for themselves.
>
> If I was allowed he whack their little backsides when they needed it,
> 90% of the problem would disappear.
>
> It's a pity that we can't pound a little respect into this generation
> when they need it. But no, that isn't civilized, or some such crap.
>
> Anyway, I've wandered.
>
> Anyone want to be a moderator?


I will!

You're out, for one.


Bertie

[Martin Hotze[_2_]]

Jay Honeck schrieb:
>> then killfile them, too.
>> here about 50% or more of all postings are wiped out by the killfile.
>
> I was here for ten years without needing a killfile. Now, the solution is
> to killfile dozens of posters?

now, that's life IMHO. 20 years ago you might also have not locked your
front door, nowadays you'll probably lock up.

> That illustrates just how far this group has fallen, Martin. How sad. IMHO
> it's better to learn an awkward interface than to put up with this.

First it is good to use a newsserver that filters out the obvious crap
(EMP - excessive multiposts, HTML, binaries, ...), then you finetune to
what you seem appropriate using your killfile. Most likely you get rid
of 20% or more of the crap filtering out those postings coming in via
googlegroups, then it *might* also be a good idea filtering those using
a gmail-account.

#m

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Martin Hotze wrote:
> Jay Honeck schrieb:
>>> then killfile them, too.
>>> here about 50% or more of all postings are wiped out by the killfile.
>>
>> I was here for ten years without needing a killfile. Now, the
>> solution is to killfile dozens of posters?
>
> now, that's life IMHO. 20 years ago you might also have not locked your
> front door, nowadays you'll probably lock up.
>
>> That illustrates just how far this group has fallen, Martin. How
>> sad. IMHO it's better to learn an awkward interface than to put up
>> with this.
>
> First it is good to use a newsserver that filters out the obvious crap
> (EMP - excessive multiposts, HTML, binaries, ...), then you finetune to
> what you seem appropriate using your killfile. Most likely you get rid
> of 20% or more of the crap filtering out those postings coming in via
> googlegroups, then it *might* also be a good idea filtering those using
> a gmail-account.
>
> #m
The trouble with you is that you like lecturing people so much on these
forums you don't follow your own advice. For example, you have never
once since I've been on this forum, posted an aviation related post to
me, but you are a constant source of lecturing on how dis-satisfied you
are with my performance on the forum.
I would think that you, in your "infinite wisdom", would have kill filed
me a long time ago, but you haven't have you?
You sir, are simply one more part of the Usenet problem, not a solution :-)

--
Dudley Henriques

[Mxsmanic]

Nomen Nescio writes:

> If you believe that, then explain what's in it for us to answer questions
> for an idiot like you.

That is for you to determine, not me.

> Only if you're gone.

If you can or will discuss aviation only if I'm gone, it implies that I'm more
interesting than aviation. I suppose I should feel flattered.

[[email protected]]

Mxsmanic > wrote:
> writes:
>
>> Adults do lots of things they don't like to do because that is part of
>> being an adult.
>
> People of all ages never do anything unless there is something in it for them.

I would imagine terms like "charity" and "selfless act" have no meaning
to you.

What was "in it" for Michael A. Monsoor when he threw himself on a grenade
to save his comrades?


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

wrote:
> Mxsmanic > wrote:

>> People of all ages never do anything unless there is something in it for them.


>
> I would imagine terms like "charity" and "selfless act" have no meaning
> to you.
>
> What was "in it" for Michael A. Monsoor when he threw himself on a grenade
> to save his comrades?
>
>

People who believe the sentiment expressed by the poster you have
answered have no feeling whatsoever for the acts of people like Monsoor.
To them, all that exists is the search for an ulterior motive which they
either assume or create.


--
Dudley Henriques

[Buster Hymen]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Nomen Nescio writes:
>
>> If you believe that, then explain what's in it for us to answer
>> questions for an idiot like you.
>
> That is for you to determine, not me.
>
>> Only if you're gone.
>
> If you can or will discuss aviation only if I'm gone, it implies that
> I'm more interesting than aviation. I suppose I should feel
> flattered.

Anthony, you're problem is that you are too ****ing stupid to understand
that everyone has been calling you ****ing stupid.

[Mxsmanic]

writes:

> I would imagine terms like "charity" and "selfless act" have no meaning
> to you.

They have meaning to me. I even see what's in it for the giver.

> What was "in it" for Michael A. Monsoor when he threw himself on a grenade
> to save his comrades?

He ensured the safety of his friends.

[Rocky Stevens]

On Aug 16, 1:01 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
> wrote:
> > Mxsmanic > wrote:
> >> People of all ages never do anything unless there is something in it for them.
>
> > I would imagine terms like "charity" and "selfless act" have no meaning
> > to you.
>
> > What was "in it" for Michael A. Monsoor when he threw himself on a grenade
> > to save his comrades?
>
> People who believe the sentiment expressed by the poster you have
> answered have no feeling whatsoever for the acts of people like Monsoor.
> To them, all that exists is the search for an ulterior motive which they
> either assume or create.
>
> --
> Dudley Henriques

IIRC, the original act that MX questioned was somebody saying, "go
**** yourself". Not exactly on par with somebody throwing themselves
on a grenade.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Rocky Stevens wrote:
> On Aug 16, 1:01 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>> wrote:
>>> Mxsmanic > wrote:
>>>> People of all ages never do anything unless there is something in it for them.
>>> I would imagine terms like "charity" and "selfless act" have no meaning
>>> to you.
>>> What was "in it" for Michael A. Monsoor when he threw himself on a grenade
>>> to save his comrades?
>> People who believe the sentiment expressed by the poster you have
>> answered have no feeling whatsoever for the acts of people like Monsoor.
>> To them, all that exists is the search for an ulterior motive which they
>> either assume or create.
>>
>> --
>> Dudley Henriques
>
> IIRC, the original act that MX questioned was somebody saying, "go
> **** yourself". Not exactly on par with somebody throwing themselves
> on a grenade.

Tell me moron, is there ANYONE on this forum left with a brain?
You have mixed me up with another poster. Somebody called
) whatever or whoever the **** that is!
I wasn't even remotely involved in the discussion as you have indicated.
In other words, it WASN'T me he was referencing you ****ing moron!
Get a ****ing life will you please!

--
Dudley Henriques

[Rocky Stevens]

On Aug 16, 9:12 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:

> Tell me moron, is there ANYONE on this forum left with a brain?
> You have mixed me up with another poster. Somebody called
> ) whatever or whoever the **** that is!
> I wasn't even remotely involved in the discussion as you have indicated.
> In other words, it WASN'T me he was referencing you ****ing moron!
> Get a ****ing life will you please!
>
> --
> Dudley Henriques

You are not the one that said the following?
"People who believe the sentiment expressed by the poster you have
answered have no feeling whatsoever for the acts of people like
Monsoor.
To them, all that exists is the search for an ulterior motive which
they
either assume or create. "

In any event, thanks for the kind words.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Rocky Stevens wrote:
> On Aug 16, 9:12 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>
>> Tell me moron, is there ANYONE on this forum left with a brain?
>> You have mixed me up with another poster. Somebody called
>> ) whatever or whoever the **** that is!
>> I wasn't even remotely involved in the discussion as you have indicated.
>> In other words, it WASN'T me he was referencing you ****ing moron!
>> Get a ****ing life will you please!
>>
>> --
>> Dudley Henriques
>
> You are not the one that said the following?
> "People who believe the sentiment expressed by the poster you have
> answered have no feeling whatsoever for the acts of people like
> Monsoor.
> To them, all that exists is the search for an ulterior motive which
> they
> either assume or create. "
>
> In any event, thanks for the kind words.

What I said was NOT what you were referencing in your post. Show me
where the phrase "Go **** yourself" appears in the quote above made by
me. It doesn't!

You used me where I wasn't involved. But don't sweat that. It happens
quite a lot on this idiotic forum.



--
Dudley Henriques

[Mxsmanic]

Dudley Henriques writes:

> Tell me moron, is there ANYONE on this forum left with a brain?
> You have mixed me up with another poster. Somebody called
> ) whatever or whoever the **** that is!
> I wasn't even remotely involved in the discussion as you have indicated.
> In other words, it WASN'T me he was referencing you ****ing moron!
> Get a ****ing life will you please!

I feel like I'm reading one of Martin Scorsese's scripts.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Dudley Henriques writes:
>
>> Tell me moron, is there ANYONE on this forum left with a brain?
>> You have mixed me up with another poster. Somebody called
>> ) whatever or whoever the **** that is!
>> I wasn't even remotely involved in the discussion as you have indicated.
>> In other words, it WASN'T me he was referencing you ****ing moron!
>> Get a ****ing life will you please!
>
> I feel like I'm reading one of Martin Scorsese's scripts.

As mad as I've been lately, it's getting to be more like Sam Peckenpaugh
:-))

--
Dudley Henriques

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

>> #m
> The trouble with you is that you like lecturing people so much on these
> forums you don't follow your own advice. For example, you have never once
> since I've been on this forum, posted an aviation related post <snip>

Martin is an interesting newsgroup character. He never, EVER posts about
aviation, yet he's always here, on a piloting forum. It's kinda weird,
actually, although he can be a decent guy. Just don't bring up the U.S.,
and everything is fine.

And now, for some NAC: BTW, Dudley -- Mary and I flew the 'Coupe to nearby
Muscatine this evening, as a flight of two with friends. It was a gorgeous
summer's eve, flying (with the top down, natch) low and slow over the most
stunning emerald-green landscape you can imagine. After a great dinner we
landed back in Iowa City a few minutes past sunset, with the biggest moon
rising you can imagine.

Total cost: 3.9 gallons of unleaded mogas. Gotta love it!

I tell ya, we've never had so much fun as we've had with this little
Ercoupe...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Viperdoc[_5_]]

Volk Field, an Air Force base in central Wisconsin, had an open house today,
and offered not only a static display, but also the F-16 demo team as well
as an IFR and VFR seminar by the FAA. It was a beautiful high pressure day,
and there were at least 30 planes on the ramp. We had a Chinook, Blackhawk,
three f-16's, as well as a KC-135 and other stuff, in addition to the Wings
seminar and great weather.

It was a great flying day, and fun for all.

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>> #m
>> The trouble with you is that you like lecturing people so much on
>> these forums you don't follow your own advice. For example, you have
>> never once since I've been on this forum, posted an aviation related
>> post <snip>
>
> Martin is an interesting newsgroup character. He never, EVER posts
> about aviation, yet he's always here, on a piloting forum. It's kinda
> weird, actually, although he can be a decent guy. Just don't bring up
> the U.S., and everything is fine.

It is strange. He's injected himself in on me before; always with some
"advice" he thinks I need. He might well even be right but I don't play
well with people who do this kind of thing, but no big deal. :-)

>
> And now, for some NAC: BTW, Dudley -- Mary and I flew the 'Coupe to
> nearby Muscatine this evening, as a flight of two with friends. It was
> a gorgeous summer's eve, flying (with the top down, natch) low and slow
> over the most stunning emerald-green landscape you can imagine. After a
> great dinner we landed back in Iowa City a few minutes past sunset, with
> the biggest moon rising you can imagine.
>
> Total cost: 3.9 gallons of unleaded mogas. Gotta love it!
>
> I tell ya, we've never had so much fun as we've had with this little
> Ercoupe...

The old Coupe is a wonderful airplane as I'm sure you have already
learned. It chugs along quite cheerfully on a dime. I have a few hours
in one that we had on the field. It was a lot of fun, sort of like a
car. I'd roll down the side window and just feel the breezes. We flew it
off a hard surface but it behaved a bit better on the grass.
The one thing I recall more than anything else was how low the nose was
when we had to prop it once in a while.

Looks like your son has taken to the bird with no trouble at all. Glad
you guys are getting some relief from the gas prices :-))



--
Dudley

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> The old Coupe is a wonderful airplane as I'm sure you have already
> learned. It chugs along quite cheerfully on a dime. I have a few hours in
> one that we had on the field. It was a lot of fun, sort of like a car. I'd
> roll down the side window and just feel the breezes. We flew it off a hard
> surface but it behaved a bit better on the grass.

I haven't taken it on grass yet, but it lands so easily I expect it'll be
very nice. (Our local grass strip -- one of our favorite places to fly --
is still closed since the flooding in June. Six feet of water killed the
grass, and they're keeping it closed until the turf comes back strong enough
to take the abuse of landings.)

> The one thing I recall more than anything else was how low the nose was
> when we had to prop it once in a while.

You may be describing a typical problem with 'Coupes. The landing gear
geometry is important, and with age gets "off" as the landing gear donuts
age and sag. This also adversely impacts take-off performance, as it
changes the angle of attack. Our landing gear is brand new, and sits fairly
tall, especially compared to the old, clapped out Ercoupe I flew in back in
Wisconsin.

Of course, it's a tiny airplane, so even "sitting tall" it's pretty low to
the ground. Everything about it is...cute.

> Looks like your son has taken to the bird with no trouble at all. Glad you
> guys are getting some relief from the gas prices :-))

Yeah, we can pretty much fly the 'Coupe four times a week (or more) for what
it costs to fly Atlas once. Once the weather gets cold, and we're not able
to fly with the top down, I expect we'll not be flying "Sweetie" quite so
much -- but ya gotta make hay while the sun's shining!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Jay Honeck wrote:

> Yeah, we can pretty much fly the 'Coupe four times a week (or more) for
> what it costs to fly Atlas once. Once the weather gets cold, and we're
> not able to fly with the top down, I expect we'll not be flying
> "Sweetie" quite so much -- but ya gotta make hay while the sun's shining!

Sounds like you might have found the "new" family airplane once you STC
that back seat you've been wishing you had back there :-))))
--
Dudley Henriques

[Rocky Stevens]

On Aug 17, 9:11 am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> > The old Coupe is a wonderful airplane as I'm sure you have already
> > learned. It chugs along quite cheerfully on a dime. I have a few hours in
> > one that we had on the field. It was a lot of fun, sort of like a car. I'd
> > roll down the side window and just feel the breezes. We flew it off a hard
> > surface but it behaved a bit better on the grass.
>
> I haven't taken it on grass yet, but it lands so easily I expect it'll be
> very nice. (Our local grass strip -- one of our favorite places to fly --
> is still closed since the flooding in June. Six feet of water killed the
> grass, and they're keeping it closed until the turf comes back strong enough
> to take the abuse of landings.)
>
> > The one thing I recall more than anything else was how low the nose was
> > when we had to prop it once in a while.
>
> You may be describing a typical problem with 'Coupes. The landing gear
> geometry is important, and with age gets "off" as the landing gear donuts
> age and sag. This also adversely impacts take-off performance, as it
> changes the angle of attack. Our landing gear is brand new, and sits fairly
> tall, especially compared to the old, clapped out Ercoupe I flew in back in
> Wisconsin.
>
> Of course, it's a tiny airplane, so even "sitting tall" it's pretty low to
> the ground. Everything about it is...cute.
>
> > Looks like your son has taken to the bird with no trouble at all. Glad you
> > guys are getting some relief from the gas prices :-))
>
> Yeah, we can pretty much fly the 'Coupe four times a week (or more) for what
> it costs to fly Atlas once. Once the weather gets cold, and we're not able
> to fly with the top down, I expect we'll not be flying "Sweetie" quite so
> much -- but ya gotta make hay while the sun's shining!
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> Ercoupe N94856www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

How expensive is it to maintain a coupe, relative to other aircraft?
There are a few models that are LSA eligible, and I have been tossing
the idea of buying one to train in.

[Mortimer Schnerd, RN[_2_]]

Martin Hotze wrote:
> Jay Honeck schrieb:
>> It's disgustingly predictable, and kill files only cure half the problem.
>> (The other half being all the people who respond to their inane, 3-word
>> personal attack posts...)
>
> then killfile them, too.
> here about 50% or more of all postings are wiped out by the killfile.



Or even more. I believe I was one of the earliest to point out that our problem
poster was just a troll. I caught a fair amount of flak for it but I ended up
killfiling him. Then I started sending emails to those who insisted on getting
hooked on his line. I caught more flak. How dare I threaten them? Well, they
weren't threats. They were nothing more than an advisory message saying that I
was going to killfile those who answered him and recommend that others do the
same.

The people who were offended no longer exist in my Usenet universe. Traffic
dropped considerably but so what? Most of that traffic had to do with being
trolled.

My killfile has plenty of folks in it and room for plenty more. It amazes me
that the NG is still dealing with this petty annoyance.

Have I earned a spot in other's killfiles? Who cares? Life will go on.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Rocky Stevens wrote:
> On Aug 17, 9:11 am, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>>> The old Coupe is a wonderful airplane as I'm sure you have already
>>> learned. It chugs along quite cheerfully on a dime. I have a few hours in
>>> one that we had on the field. It was a lot of fun, sort of like a car. I'd
>>> roll down the side window and just feel the breezes. We flew it off a hard
>>> surface but it behaved a bit better on the grass.
>> I haven't taken it on grass yet, but it lands so easily I expect it'll be
>> very nice. (Our local grass strip -- one of our favorite places to fly --
>> is still closed since the flooding in June. Six feet of water killed the
>> grass, and they're keeping it closed until the turf comes back strong enough
>> to take the abuse of landings.)
>>
>>> The one thing I recall more than anything else was how low the nose was
>>> when we had to prop it once in a while.
>> You may be describing a typical problem with 'Coupes. The landing gear
>> geometry is important, and with age gets "off" as the landing gear donuts
>> age and sag. This also adversely impacts take-off performance, as it
>> changes the angle of attack. Our landing gear is brand new, and sits fairly
>> tall, especially compared to the old, clapped out Ercoupe I flew in back in
>> Wisconsin.
>>
>> Of course, it's a tiny airplane, so even "sitting tall" it's pretty low to
>> the ground. Everything about it is...cute.
>>
>>> Looks like your son has taken to the bird with no trouble at all. Glad you
>>> guys are getting some relief from the gas prices :-))
>> Yeah, we can pretty much fly the 'Coupe four times a week (or more) for what
>> it costs to fly Atlas once. Once the weather gets cold, and we're not able
>> to fly with the top down, I expect we'll not be flying "Sweetie" quite so
>> much -- but ya gotta make hay while the sun's shining!
>> --
>> Jay Honeck
>> Iowa City, IA
>> Pathfinder N56993
>> Ercoupe N94856www.AlexisParkInn.com
>> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
> How expensive is it to maintain a coupe, relative to other aircraft?
> There are a few models that are LSA eligible, and I have been tossing
> the idea of buying one to train in.

Can't speak to the current prices, but for sheer fun on a budget, the
Coupe is a great little airplane. I wouldn't recommend buying one for
initial flight training however. Your initial learning curve requires
acclimation to controls and control response that are much better
learned in a straight conventional setup. Even an Ercoupe with a rudder
conversion would not be as suitable for initial training as say a 150
Cessna. Once you have coordination down pat, the switch to a Coupe is a
fun thing.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

>> How expensive is it to maintain a coupe, relative to other aircraft?
>> There are a few models that are LSA eligible, and I have been tossing
>> the idea of buying one to train in.
>
> Can't speak to the current prices, but for sheer fun on a budget, the
> Coupe is a great little airplane. I wouldn't recommend buying one for
> initial flight training however.

Agree 100% with Dudley -- this bird is not a primary trainer.

The Ercoupe is incredibly easy to fly -- it was designed by Fred Weick (the
guy who later designed the Cherokee) to be "Everyman's Plane", the plane
that anyone can fly with minimal training after they come back from WWII.

To achieve this he made it as automotive as possible, with the yoke working
as a steering wheel on the ground, and the rudder pedals eliminated
completely. (The rudders are interconnected with the ailerons, and work
remarkably well at keeping the ball centered.)

Much of his design innovations have become standard in all planes (an
electric starter, all-metal construction, etc.) and were quite modern for
the time -- but much of them did NOT become standard, meaning that learning
to fly in an Ercoupe is pretty much a developmental dead-end. You'll never
know how to fly a plane with rudder pedals if you train in one that only has
a brake pedal on the floor!

Thus, when my daughter starts training next year, she'll be learning in the
FBO's old 150s. I recommend the same for you -- and THEN buy yourself a
little deuce 'coupe...

:-)

(We flew Sweetie to an "ice cream social" fly-in at Capitol Airport in
Milwaukee, WI today. It took 2.1 hours to get there, 2.4 back -- she's not
speed demon -- but only took a grand total of 18 gallons of unleaded car gas
to do it! And, of course, everyone on the ramp wanted to know what it was,
which is kinda fun...)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> My killfile has plenty of folks in it and room for plenty more. It amazes
> me that the NG is still dealing with this petty annoyance.
>
> Have I earned a spot in other's killfiles? Who cares? Life will go on.

While I agree with you, I'm still deeply saddened by the turn of events.
There was a time here when we were all friends -- and I mean *all* friends.
The list of names of great posters who have moved on to other forums thanks
to the trolls is way too long.

But, everything in life is cyclical, and I expect this is just an especially
deep downturn. Everyone and every thing changes, and (sooner or later)
Bertie, Maxwell, and (to a lesser extent) MX will move on and leave the
group in peace. Or, perhaps the migration to web-based forums will be
complete, and this group will simply dissolve.

Heck, even when this group was (IMHO) great, there were posters here
lamenting the "day AOL opened up the newsgroups" as if that was the utter
ruin of this group. It's ironic how insignificant that event turned out to
be, in the long run.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dakota]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> I will!
>
> You're out, for one.
>
>
> Bertie

You already are kook. What do you want now, an official title?

[Dakota]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:xr4qk.247791$TT4.121438@attbi_s22...
>> My killfile has plenty of folks in it and room for plenty more. It
>> amazes me that the NG is still dealing with this petty annoyance.
>>
>> Have I earned a spot in other's killfiles? Who cares? Life will go on.
>
> While I agree with you, I'm still deeply saddened by the turn of events.
> There was a time here when we were all friends -- and I mean *all*
> friends. The list of names of great posters who have moved on to other
> forums thanks to the trolls is way too long.
>
> But, everything in life is cyclical, and I expect this is just an
> especially deep downturn. Everyone and every thing changes, and (sooner
> or later) Bertie, Maxwell, and (to a lesser extent) MX will move on and
> leave the group in peace. Or, perhaps the migration to web-based forums
> will be complete, and this group will simply dissolve.
>
> Heck, even when this group was (IMHO) great, there were posters here
> lamenting the "day AOL opened up the newsgroups" as if that was the utter
> ruin of this group. It's ironic how insignificant that event turned out
> to be, in the long run.
> --

Nonsense. You and your ilk used to control this group, just like Bertie and
his ilk controls it today. It's always been a struggle of controlling
personalities. Until EVERYONE can learn to make room for EVERYONE ELSE'S
opinion, the forum will suffer.

Too many chiefs and not enough indians, too many teachers and not enough
students.

As long as everyone as a group embraces people that don't treat others with
respect, the entire group will suffer.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Dakota" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
:

>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:xr4qk.247791$TT4.121438@attbi_s22...
>>> My killfile has plenty of folks in it and room for plenty more. It
>>> amazes me that the NG is still dealing with this petty annoyance.
>>>
>>> Have I earned a spot in other's killfiles? Who cares? Life will go
>>> on.
>>
>> While I agree with you, I'm still deeply saddened by the turn of
>> events. There was a time here when we were all friends -- and I mean
>> *all* friends. The list of names of great posters who have moved on
>> to other forums thanks to the trolls is way too long.
>>
>> But, everything in life is cyclical, and I expect this is just an
>> especially deep downturn. Everyone and every thing changes, and
>> (sooner or later) Bertie, Maxwell, and (to a lesser extent) MX will
>> move on and leave the group in peace. Or, perhaps the migration to
>> web-based forums will be complete, and this group will simply
>> dissolve.
>>
>> Heck, even when this group was (IMHO) great, there were posters here
>> lamenting the "day AOL opened up the newsgroups" as if that was the
>> utter ruin of this group. It's ironic how insignificant that event
>> turned out to be, in the long run.
>> --
>
> Nonsense. You and your ilk used to control this group, just like
> Bertie and his ilk controls it today. It's always been a struggle of
> controlling personalities. Until EVERYONE can learn to make room for
> EVERYONE ELSE'S opinion, the forum will suffer.
>
> Too many chiefs and not enough indians, too many teachers and not
> enough students.
>
> As long as everyone as a group embraces people that don't treat others
> with respect, the entire group will suffer.

Yeeh, right buttboi.


Bertie
>

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Dakota" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:JA4qk.21391$LF2.13744
@newsfe09.iad:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>>
>> I will!
>>
>> You're out, for one.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> You already are kook. What do you want now, an official title?


You could always nominate me in AUK.


since you actually do have an official title your nomination should carry
great weight.





Bertie

[Mxsmanic]

Jay Honeck writes:

> The Ercoupe is incredibly easy to fly -- it was designed by Fred Weick (the
> guy who later designed the Cherokee) to be "Everyman's Plane", the plane
> that anyone can fly with minimal training after they come back from WWII.
>
> To achieve this he made it as automotive as possible, with the yoke working
> as a steering wheel on the ground, and the rudder pedals eliminated
> completely. (The rudders are interconnected with the ailerons, and work
> remarkably well at keeping the ball centered.)

So why didn't it catch on? In _Stick and Rudder_ Wolfgang regularly sings its
praises, without actually naming it.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Jay Honeck writes:
>
>> The Ercoupe is incredibly easy to fly -- it was designed by Fred
>> Weick (the guy who later designed the Cherokee) to be "Everyman's
>> Plane", the plane that anyone can fly with minimal training after
>> they come back from WWII.
>>
>> To achieve this he made it as automotive as possible, with the yoke
>> working as a steering wheel on the ground, and the rudder pedals
>> eliminated completely. (The rudders are interconnected with the
>> ailerons, and work remarkably well at keeping the ball centered.)
>
> So why didn't it catch on? In _Stick and Rudder_ Wolfgang regularly
> sings its praises, without actually naming it.
>

They realised it might actaully entice idiots like you to fly.


Bertie

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

>> To achieve this he made it as automotive as possible, with the yoke
>> working
>> as a steering wheel on the ground, and the rudder pedals eliminated
>> completely. (The rudders are interconnected with the ailerons, and work
>> remarkably well at keeping the ball centered.)
>
> So why didn't it catch on? In _Stick and Rudder_ Wolfgang regularly sings
> its
> praises, without actually naming it.

I think it's a bit too weird for most pilots to land in a crab. In a
cross-wind, without rudders you can't kick it straight, so you touch down in
a crab, which feels VERY strange the first few times you do it.

There's also the problem of not being able to cross-control/slip without
rudder pedals. If (for example) you're high on final approach in the
Ercoupe there's nothing you can do to correct it but retard the throttle.
If that's not enough to get your glide slope nailed, your only option is to
go around.

And, finally, it's sort of like asking why there are still manual
transmission cars on the road, when the automatic transmission has proven
itself to be superior in nearly all regards. Some people (myself included)
*like* to have full control of their vehicles, and that's what the rudder
pedals allow.

The nose-wheel/yoke connection sure makes a lot of sense though, doesn't it?
Ground steering with your feet never made/makes much sense to me.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:OWdqk.303325$yE1.116320@attbi_s21:

>>> To achieve this he made it as automotive as possible, with the yoke
>>> working
>>> as a steering wheel on the ground, and the rudder pedals eliminated
>>> completely. (The rudders are interconnected with the ailerons, and
>>> work remarkably well at keeping the ball centered.)
>>
>> So why didn't it catch on? In _Stick and Rudder_ Wolfgang regularly
>> sings its
>> praises, without actually naming it.
>
> I think it's a bit too weird for most pilots to land in a crab. In a
> cross-wind, without rudders you can't kick it straight, so you touch
> down in a crab, which feels VERY strange the first few times you do
> it.
>
> There's also the problem of not being able to cross-control/slip
> without rudder pedals. If (for example) you're high on final
> approach in the Ercoupe there's nothing you can do to correct it but
> retard the throttle. If that's not enough to get your glide slope
> nailed, your only option is to go around.
>
> And, finally, it's sort of like asking why there are still manual
> transmission cars on the road, when the automatic transmission has
> proven itself to be superior in nearly all regards. Some people
> (myself included) *like* to have full control of their vehicles, and
> that's what the rudder pedals allow.


You having full control of an airplane? You just admitted you kcik it
straight" in a crosswind.....


Don't make me laugh.

Oh wait,

Do.





Bertie

[Blanche]

Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>Rocky Stevens wrote:
>> On Aug 16, 1:01 pm, Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>>> wrote:
>>>> Mxsmanic > wrote:
>>>>> People of all ages never do anything unless there is something in
>it for them.
>>>> I would imagine terms like "charity" and "selfless act" have no meaning
>>>> to you.
>>>> What was "in it" for Michael A. Monsoor when he threw himself on a grenade
>>>> to save his comrades?
>>> People who believe the sentiment expressed by the poster you have
>>> answered have no feeling whatsoever for the acts of people like Monsoor.
>>> To them, all that exists is the search for an ulterior motive which they
>>> either assume or create.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dudley Henriques
>>
>> IIRC, the original act that MX questioned was somebody saying, "go
>> **** yourself". Not exactly on par with somebody throwing themselves
>> on a grenade.
>
>Tell me moron, is there ANYONE on this forum left with a brain?
>You have mixed me up with another poster. Somebody called
) whatever or whoever the **** that is!
>I wasn't even remotely involved in the discussion as you have indicated.
>In other words, it WASN'T me he was referencing you ****ing moron!
>Get a ****ing life will you please!

Oh, there are still many people on this forum with brains. We've just
decided not to contribute to the idiocy of MX. I still read the
threads (for a bit) because once in a while, I need to be reminded that
there really is something less interesting than cleaning the bathroom.

[Blanche]

Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>Mxsmanic wrote:
>> Dudley Henriques writes:
>>
>>> Tell me moron, is there ANYONE on this forum left with a brain?
>>> You have mixed me up with another poster. Somebody called
>>> ) whatever or whoever the **** that is!
>>> I wasn't even remotely involved in the discussion as you have indicated.
>>> In other words, it WASN'T me he was referencing you ****ing moron!
>>> Get a ****ing life will you please!
>>
>> I feel like I'm reading one of Martin Scorsese's scripts.
>
>As mad as I've been lately, it's getting to be more like Sam Peckenpaugh
>:-))

More like a combination of Quentin Tarantino and Theodor Geisel

[Jon]

On Aug 18, 12:59*pm, Blanche > wrote:
>[...]
> Oh, there are still many people on this forum with brains. We've just
> decided not to contribute to the idiocy of MX. I still read the
> threads (for a bit) because once in a while, I need to be reminded that
> *there really is something less interesting than cleaning the bathroom.

Nice ;)


The following may help those that need to stop:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lI2RupGZ_D4&feature=related>

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Blanche wrote:
> Dudley Henriques > wrote:
>> Mxsmanic wrote:
>>> Dudley Henriques writes:
>>>
>>>> Tell me moron, is there ANYONE on this forum left with a brain?
>>>> You have mixed me up with another poster. Somebody called
>>>> ) whatever or whoever the **** that is!
>>>> I wasn't even remotely involved in the discussion as you have indicated.
>>>> In other words, it WASN'T me he was referencing you ****ing moron!
>>>> Get a ****ing life will you please!
>>> I feel like I'm reading one of Martin Scorsese's scripts.
>> As mad as I've been lately, it's getting to be more like Sam Peckenpaugh
>> :-))
>
> More like a combination of Quentin Tarantino and Theodor Geisel
>

I think you might have a point there Blanche, and please forgive the
harsh language in some other posts.

--
Dudley Henriques

[Mxsmanic]

Jay Honeck writes:

> The nose-wheel/yoke connection sure makes a lot of sense though, doesn't it?
> Ground steering with your feet never made/makes much sense to me.

Agreed. Are there any other aircraft that you can steer on the ground with
the yoke?

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> Jay Honeck writes:
>
>> The nose-wheel/yoke connection sure makes a lot of sense though, doesn't it?
>> Ground steering with your feet never made/makes much sense to me.
>
> Agreed. Are there any other aircraft that you can steer on the ground with
> the yoke?

Just about every airplane use for primary instruction when taxied for
the first time by a new student (until the instructor shows them how to
use their feet :-))))

--
Dudley Henriques

[Rocky Stevens]

On Aug 17, 11:10 pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Jay Honeck writes:
> > The Ercoupe is incredibly easy to fly -- it was designed by Fred Weick (the
> > guy who later designed the Cherokee) to be "Everyman's Plane", the plane
> > that anyone can fly with minimal training after they come back from WWII.
>
> > To achieve this he made it as automotive as possible, with the yoke working
> > as a steering wheel on the ground, and the rudder pedals eliminated
> > completely. (The rudders are interconnected with the ailerons, and work
> > remarkably well at keeping the ball centered.)
>
> So why didn't it catch on? In _Stick and Rudder_ Wolfgang regularly sings its
> praises, without actually naming it.

He actually does mention it a couple of times; it is what first gave
me the thought of getting one. I hate steering with my feet!

[Rocky Stevens]

On Aug 17, 9:33 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> Much of his design innovations have become standard in all planes (an
> electric starter, all-metal construction, etc.) and were quite modern for
> the time -- but much of them did NOT become standard, meaning that learning
> to fly in an Ercoupe is pretty much a developmental dead-end. You'll never
> know how to fly a plane with rudder pedals if you train in one that only has
> a brake pedal on the floor!
>

That is what I thought at first as well, but then I got to thinking: I
learned to drive in an automatic, and later learned to drive a stick.
Also, many people learn to fly with fixed gear, and then later go on
to retractable (though as far as I know there is not that much
difference there besides remembering to lower the gear).

In any event, I do not have the guts to buy a plane right now; I am
notoriously cheap (which makes me a REAL genius for taking up flying).

[f-newguy]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:xr4qk.247791$TT4.121438@attbi_s22...
>> My killfile has plenty of folks in it and room for plenty more. It
>> amazes me that the NG is still dealing with this petty annoyance.
>>
>> Have I earned a spot in other's killfiles? Who cares? Life will go on.
>
> While I agree with you, I'm still deeply saddened by the turn of events.

I bet you are, braggart.

It's not your personal spam paradise anymore, is it?

And most of your suck buddies have disappeared, haven't they?

Sad for you, good for the group.

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

>> Agreed. Are there any other aircraft that you can steer on the ground
>> with
>> the yoke?
>
> Just about every airplane use for primary instruction when taxied for the
> first time by a new student (until the instructor shows them how to use
> their feet :-))))

ROTFL! For sure...

But I honestly can't think of any other plane that have
yoke-ground-steering, can you, Dudley?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

>> Much of his design innovations have become standard in all planes (an
>> electric starter, all-metal construction, etc.) and were quite modern for
>> the time -- but much of them did NOT become standard, meaning that
>> learning
>> to fly in an Ercoupe is pretty much a developmental dead-end. You'll
>> never
>> know how to fly a plane with rudder pedals if you train in one that only
>> has
>> a brake pedal on the floor!
>>
>
> That is what I thought at first as well, but then I got to thinking: I
> learned to drive in an automatic, and later learned to drive a stick.

True, but IMHO the choice of rudder pedals (versus none) are a bit more
important to an airplane than the choice of stick shift (versus none) is to
a car. Learning to use a primary flight control properly could one day be
the difference between life and death, whereas manual shifting versus an
automatic transmission is more of a personal performance choice.

On the other hand, if all you want to do is fly, and you have no intention
of buying up the performance ladder, who really cares if you know how to fly
anything beyond an Ercoupe? It's all about your personal choice, and if I
were at a different point in my life right now, I might be very happy to
only fly the Ercoupe.

> In any event, I do not have the guts to buy a plane right now; I am
> notoriously cheap (which makes me a REAL genius for taking up flying).

Well, "cheap" and "flying" don't usually go together -- but the Ercoupe is
about as economical as it gets. I figure I can fly the 'Coupe about four
hours for about the same cost as flying my Pathfinder (with its 6-cylinder
0-540) for one hour. That's a HUGE difference, and is why I've been flying
the 'Coupe almost every day after work.

Well, that, and it's just so damned fun to fly! There's nothing like
"driving around the sky" with your arm on the window-sill, like an old '48
Buick...

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jim Logajan]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>>> Agreed. Are there any other aircraft that you can steer on the
>>> ground with
>>> the yoke?
>>
>> Just about every airplane use for primary instruction when taxied for
>> the first time by a new student (until the instructor shows them how
>> to use their feet :-))))
>
> ROTFL! For sure...
>
> But I honestly can't think of any other plane that have
> yoke-ground-steering, can you, Dudley?

Google the "General Skyfarer". Or check this link out:

http://books.google.com/books?id=FE5rzrj32dwC&pg=PA150&lpg=PA150&dq=%22general+skyfarer%22&source=web&ots=-BkjwiENgo&sig=ngJkoMQ4ZYjuSTnS0tHwA6_J0Zw&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result#PPA151,M1

[Dudley Henriques[_2_]]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>> Agreed. Are there any other aircraft that you can steer on the
>>> ground with
>>> the yoke?
>>
>> Just about every airplane use for primary instruction when taxied for
>> the first time by a new student (until the instructor shows them how
>> to use their feet :-))))
>
> ROTFL! For sure...
>
> But I honestly can't think of any other plane that have
> yoke-ground-steering, can you, Dudley?
I'll tell you the truth. I think the final count for me for types flown
was around 50. I have never flown anything, even experimental and
prototype single engine that steered on the ground with a yoke except
the Coupe.
Some of the big jets use a small "tiller wheel" within specific
parameters for taxiing but aside from one flight I made in a DC8 as a
guest of the airline's chief pilot (actually managed the approach and
landing at Fairbanks without bending it :-) the Ercoupe was the only one.

--
Dudley Henriques

[MaxweII]

How interesting that two of our most outspoken quitters for POA, are now
back with us but feeding a well known troll.

Geez, I wonder why????

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> Google the "General Skyfarer". Or check this link out:

Cool! Basically a high-wing Ercoupe. It was even developed at the same
time (circa 1941)...and ended up being owned by a company in Lemars, Iowa,
of all places.

Thanks for that, Jim. Amazing what you can find on the internet.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

>> While I agree with you, I'm still deeply saddened by the turn of events.
>
> I bet you are, braggart.

"Braggart"? This is a piloting group, my friend. We talk about airplanes
here, owning and flying them. If you think that's "bragging", may I suggest
you visit some other newsgroups that are, perhaps, more sensitive to your
emotional needs?

> It's not your personal spam paradise anymore, is it?

I don't do spam. Never have, never will. In fact, I would support the
death penalty for spammers.

Members of this group (in its heyday) were directly responsible for the
direction we took (in 2002) of buying an old hotel and converting it into a
pilots' lodging paradise. At virtually every step, I relied on advice from
this group WRT appointments, services offered, fees -- you name it, this
group was instrumental in the development of the Alexis Park Inn & Suites.

Yet another indication of how far this group has fallen. Imagine, once upon
a time, this group actually helped to *create* something cool...

> And most of your suck buddies have disappeared, haven't they?

Didn't ever notice anyone like that here -- but almost everyone else has
sure gone away, thanks to a handful of bitter, surly folks like you. It's a
shame.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Mxsmanic]

Jay Honeck writes:

> On the other hand, if all you want to do is fly, and you have no intention
> of buying up the performance ladder, who really cares if you know how to fly
> anything beyond an Ercoupe? It's all about your personal choice, and if I
> were at a different point in my life right now, I might be very happy to
> only fly the Ercoupe.

Can you obtain a PPL without knowing how to use rudder pedals?

[More_Flaps]

On Aug 19, 4:09*pm, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> Jay Honeck writes:
> > On the other hand, if all you want to do is fly, and you have no intention
> > of buying up the performance ladder, who really cares if you know how to fly
> > anything beyond an Ercoupe? *It's all about your personal choice, and if I
> > were at a different point in my life right now, I might be very happy to
> > only fly the Ercoupe.
>
> Can you obtain a PPL without knowing how to use rudder pedals?

I'd say yes but it's really bad idea for getting additional type
ratings efficiently. Can you imagine trying to land a tail dragger
without any experience of using a rudder? Lord knows I'm finding it
difficult enough and I have some part of my brain trained to use the
rudder already...

Cheers

[john smith]

> > Can you obtain a PPL without knowing how to use rudder pedals?

Certainly!

Pilots who learn in tricycle landing gear airplanes will occassional
push one pedal or the other, but they rarely learn to use them properly.

Pilots who learn to fly taildraggers, on the other hand, learn to
properly use the rudder pedals or suffer serious financial and bodily
consequences.

:-))

[a[_3_]]

On Aug 19, 8:44 am, John Smith > wrote:
> > > Can you obtain a PPL without knowing how to use rudder pedals?
>
> Certainly!
>
> Pilots who learn in tricycle landing gear airplanes will occassional
> push one pedal or the other, but they rarely learn to use them properly.
>
> Pilots who learn to fly taildraggers, on the other hand, learn to
> properly use the rudder pedals or suffer serious financial and bodily
> consequences.
You're a little full of yourself, aren't you? With a little beta on
the prop I can parallel park my trike.

Your turn.

[Mxsmanic]

More_Flaps writes:

> I'd say yes but it's really bad idea for getting additional type
> ratings efficiently. Can you imagine trying to land a tail dragger
> without any experience of using a rudder?

But taildraggers need a lot of specific training already, don't they?

[Orval Fairbairn[_2_]]

In article >,
Mxsmanic > wrote:

> Jay Honeck writes:
>
> > On the other hand, if all you want to do is fly, and you have no intention
> > of buying up the performance ladder, who really cares if you know how to
> > fly
> > anything beyond an Ercoupe? It's all about your personal choice, and if I
> > were at a different point in my life right now, I might be very happy to
> > only fly the Ercoupe.
>
> Can you obtain a PPL without knowing how to use rudder pedals?

Yes, but you are limited to single-control airplanes. You have to take
an additional flight test in an airplane with rudder controls in order
to lift the restriction.

--
Remove _'s from email address to talk to me.

[john smith]

In article
>,
a > wrote:

> On Aug 19, 8:44 am, John Smith > wrote:
> > > > Can you obtain a PPL without knowing how to use rudder pedals?
> >
> > Certainly!
> >
> > Pilots who learn in tricycle landing gear airplanes will occassional
> > push one pedal or the other, but they rarely learn to use them properly.
> >
> > Pilots who learn to fly taildraggers, on the other hand, learn to
> > properly use the rudder pedals or suffer serious financial and bodily
> > consequences.

> You're a little full of yourself, aren't you? With a little beta on
> the prop I can parallel park my trike.
> Your turn.

I'll bet you could do it quicker and in less space if you had beta on a
taildragger!

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Rocky Stevens > wrote in
:

> On Aug 17, 9:33 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>
>> Much of his design innovations have become standard in all planes (an
>> electric starter, all-metal construction, etc.) and were quite modern
>> for the time -- but much of them did NOT become standard, meaning
>> that learning to fly in an Ercoupe is pretty much a developmental
>> dead-end. You'll never know how to fly a plane with rudder pedals if
>> you train in one that only has a brake pedal on the floor!
>>
>
> That is what I thought at first as well, but then I got to thinking: I
> learned to drive in an automatic, and later learned to drive a stick.
> Also, many people learn to fly with fixed gear, and then later go on
> to retractable (though as far as I know there is not that much
> difference there besides remembering to lower the gear).
>
> In any event, I do not have the guts to buy a plane right now; I am
> notoriously cheap (which makes me a REAL genius for taking up flying).
>


They're crap for training, and so are Cherokees, which handle in a very
similar fashion.
The reason is that the habits formed in the first few hours are those that
remain with the pilot for life. It's difficult to undo those habits once
formed.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:Deqqk.249170$TT4.12809@attbi_s22:

>>> Much of his design innovations have become standard in all planes
>>> (an electric starter, all-metal construction, etc.) and were quite
>>> modern for the time -- but much of them did NOT become standard,
>>> meaning that learning
>>> to fly in an Ercoupe is pretty much a developmental dead-end.
>>> You'll never
>>> know how to fly a plane with rudder pedals if you train in one that
>>> only has
>>> a brake pedal on the floor!
>>>
>>
>> That is what I thought at first as well, but then I got to thinking:
>> I learned to drive in an automatic, and later learned to drive a
>> stick.
>
> True, but IMHO the choice of rudder pedals (versus none) are a bit
> more important to an airplane than the choice of stick shift (versus
> none) is to a car. Learning to use a primary flight control properly
> could one day be the difference between life and death, whereas manual
> shifting versus an automatic transmission is more of a personal
> performance choice.

This from a cherokee pilot who doesn't know what his feet are for anyway.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> More_Flaps writes:
>
>> I'd say yes but it's really bad idea for getting additional type
>> ratings efficiently. Can you imagine trying to land a tail dragger
>> without any experience of using a rudder?
>
> But taildraggers need a lot of specific training already, don't they?
>

You are an idiot.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:Ksrqk.304251$yE1.68005@attbi_s21:

>>> While I agree with you, I'm still deeply saddened by the turn of
>>> events.
>>
>> I bet you are, braggart.
>
> "Braggart"? This is a piloting group, my friend. We talk about
> airplanes here, owning and flying them. If you think that's
> "bragging", may I suggest you visit some other newsgroups that are,
> perhaps, more sensitive to your emotional needs?
>
>> It's not your personal spam paradise anymore, is it?
>
> I don't do spam. Never have, never will. In fact, I would support
> the death penalty for spammers.
>
> Members of this group (in its heyday) were directly responsible for
> the direction we took (in 2002) of buying an old hotel and converting
> it into a pilots' lodging paradise. At virtually every step, I relied
> on advice from this group WRT appointments, services offered, fees --
> you name it, this group was instrumental in the development of the
> Alexis Park Inn & Suites.


Bwawhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhahwhhahwhahwhahwhahwh ahwhha!


Good god.



OH, BTW, shameless spamming noted.



Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"MaxweII" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:%4rqk.23147$LF2.6685
@newsfe09.iad:

>
> How interesting that two of our most outspoken quitters for POA, are now
> back with us but feeding a well known troll.
>
> Geez, I wonder why????
>
>
>

You wonder why things hit the floor when they fall out of your hand..



Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:D5qqk.304155$yE1.90928@attbi_s21:

>>> Agreed. Are there any other aircraft that you can steer on the
>>> ground with
>>> the yoke?
>>
>> Just about every airplane use for primary instruction when taxied for
>> the first time by a new student (until the instructor shows them how
>> to use their feet :-))))
>
> ROTFL! For sure...
>
> But I honestly can't think of any other plane that have
> yoke-ground-steering, can you, Dudley?

There were loads of them, all designed for fjukkwits.

Like you.






Bertie

[5 by 5]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
.. .
>
> There were loads of them, all designed for fjukkwits.
>
> Bertie

Oh, so you do fly one.

[5 by 5]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> Rocky Stevens > wrote in
> :
>
>> On Aug 17, 9:33 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>>
>
> They're crap for training, and so are Cherokees, which handle in a very
> similar fashion.
> The reason is that the habits formed in the first few hours are those that
> remain with the pilot for life. It's difficult to undo those habits once
> formed.
>
>
> Bertie
>

AAAwwwww, Bertie and Mx's sock in a stroking session. I'm sure like your
brother Dudley, Mx will soon follow.

[5 by 5]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
.. .
> Mxsmanic > wrote in
> :
>
>> More_Flaps writes:
>>
>>> I'd say yes but it's really bad idea for getting additional type
>>> ratings efficiently. Can you imagine trying to land a tail dragger
>>> without any experience of using a rudder?
>>
>> But taildraggers need a lot of specific training already, don't they?
>>
>
> You are an idiot.
>
>
> Bertie

And now that you're lagging around with his head sockpuppet, the makes you
his big brother-once-removed.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"5 by 5" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:gNFqk.33781$KZ.30100
@newsfe03.iad:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> .. .
>>
>> There were loads of them, all designed for fjukkwits.
>>
>> Bertie
>
> Oh, so you do fly one.
>
>

Nope, I fly a 757, amnongst other things.


You?


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"5 by 5" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Rocky Stevens > wrote in
>>
>> :
>>
>>> On Aug 17, 9:33 pm, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>>>
>>
>> They're crap for training, and so are Cherokees, which handle in a
>> very similar fashion.
>> The reason is that the habits formed in the first few hours are those
>> that remain with the pilot for life. It's difficult to undo those
>> habits once formed.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>
> AAAwwwww, Bertie and Mx's sock in a stroking session. I'm sure like
> your brother Dudley, Mx will soon follow.
>


Yeh, sure wannabe boi.



Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"5 by 5" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> Mxsmanic > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> More_Flaps writes:
>>>
>>>> I'd say yes but it's really bad idea for getting additional type
>>>> ratings efficiently. Can you imagine trying to land a tail dragger
>>>> without any experience of using a rudder?
>>>
>>> But taildraggers need a lot of specific training already, don't
>>> they?
>>>
>>
>> You are an idiot.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
> And now that you're lagging around with his head sockpuppet, the makes
> you his big brother-once-removed.
>

Oh ouch.



Come on Butboi, you can do better! You're an AUK award winning k00k!



Bertie

[Ricky]

On Aug 14, 4:59*am, "Tim" > wrote:
> "Viperdoc" > wrote
>
>
>
> > For the real pilots and students, I suggest joining Pilots of America, a
> > moderated group. It is what this NG used to be, before it was ruined by
> > Anthony and his likes.
>
> It wasn't so much ruined by Mx as much as those who cannot take a pass on
> endlessly arguing with him over some ridiculous detail, or have made it
> their mission to expose him as a non-pilot, all with the seemingly honorable
> goal of protecting the helpless student who might read something here and
> then die as a result.
>
> What a crock. *Anyone with half a brain knows how to treat information
> posted on a newsgroup, or anywhere else online for that matter. *They don't
> need help from a few crusaders.

After reading this, I totally agree, and I have been one of the worst
at engaging Anthony lately. What a waste of time I have participated
in!
I will not engage Anthony or Maxwell any longer. I do feel badly for
them, though, as they demonstrate very deeply troubled & disturbed
lives. I really do enjoy the aviation here and that's why I lurk, post
& respond, or at least it should be.

Anyone who leaves rec.aviation.piloting because of a few idiots is
participating in the crock you mentioned above. The idiots here will
not have that kind of power over me, and shouldn't over anyone else.
Yes, It's a shame that we have to wade through the mire of MX, Maxwell
& others, but that's what focus, willpower, and your killfile are for.

I just purchased Agent so as soon as I figure out how to configure
this maddening newsreader I will have a killfile, too, as well as a
real newsreader. I've had Free Agent in the past but alas, It is no
more. Now I can't get AT&T to figure out their newsserver's name and
address & I have tried the ones on AT&T's website to no avail. I keep
getting failure notices from Agent when I try to download Usenet
groups & messages. I'll figure out (again) how to get Agent running
here in the next day or two, might even post a question or two if I
need help. I can't wait to get off of Google for good!

If everyone here would ignore MX, Max. and others they would probably
disappear. I notice that the recent activity of some idiots is being
largely ignored which is great. Keep it up! Here is my pledge to
completely ignore all but constructive, entertaining discussion.

Ricky

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Ricky > wrote in
:

> On Aug 14, 4:59*am, "Tim" > wrote:
>> "Viperdoc" > wrote
>>
>>
>>
>> > For the real pilots and students, I suggest joining Pilots of
>> > America,
> a
>> > moderated group. It is what this NG used to be, before it was
>> > ruined by Anthony and his likes.
>>
>> It wasn't so much ruined by Mx as much as those who cannot take a
>> pass on endlessly arguing with him over some ridiculous detail, or
>> have made it their mission to expose him as a non-pilot, all with the
>> seemingly honora
> ble
>> goal of protecting the helpless student who might read something here
>> and then die as a result.
>>
>> What a crock. *Anyone with half a brain knows how to treat
>> information posted on a newsgroup, or anywhere else online for that
>> matter. *They d
> on't
>> need help from a few crusaders.
>
> After reading this, I totally agree, and I have been one of the worst
> at engaging Anthony lately. What a waste of time I have participated
> in!
> I will not engage Anthony or Maxwell any longer. I do feel badly for
> them, though, as they demonstrate very deeply troubled & disturbed
> lives. I really do enjoy the aviation here and that's why I lurk, post
> & respond, or at least it should be.
>
> Anyone who leaves rec.aviation.piloting because of a few idiots is
> participating in the crock you mentioned above. The idiots here will
> not have that kind of power over me, and shouldn't over anyone else.
> Yes, It's a shame that we have to wade through the mire of MX, Maxwell
> & others, but that's what focus, willpower, and your killfile are for.
>
> I just purchased Agent so as soon as I figure out how to configure
> this maddening newsreader I will have a killfile, too, as well as a
> real newsreader.


You bought agent? It's for free all over the place!
Do yourself a favor and get X-news. It's like agent, but without the
problems.

Bertie

[Ricky]

On Aug 19, 4:38*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> Ricky > wrote :
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 14, 4:59*am, "Tim" > wrote:
> >> "Viperdoc" > wrote
>
> >> > For the real pilots and students, I suggest joining Pilots of
> >> > America,
> > a
> >> > moderated group. It is what this NG used to be, before it was
> >> > ruined by Anthony and his likes.
>
> >> It wasn't so much ruined by Mx as much as those who cannot take a
> >> pass on endlessly arguing with him over some ridiculous detail, or
> >> have made it their mission to expose him as a non-pilot, all with the
> >> seemingly honora
> > ble
> >> goal of protecting the helpless student who might read something here
> >> and then die as a result.
>
> >> What a crock. *Anyone with half a brain knows how to treat
> >> information posted on a newsgroup, or anywhere else online for that
> >> matter. *They d
> > on't
> >> need help from a few crusaders.
>
> > After reading this, I totally agree, and I have been one of the worst
> > at engaging Anthony lately. What a waste of time I have participated
> > in!
> > I will not engage Anthony or Maxwell any longer. I do feel badly for
> > them, though, as they demonstrate very deeply troubled & disturbed
> > lives. I really do enjoy the aviation here and that's why I lurk, post
> > & respond, or at least it should be.
>
> > Anyone who leaves rec.aviation.piloting because of a few idiots is
> > participating in the crock you mentioned above. The idiots here will
> > not have that kind of power over me, and shouldn't over anyone else.
> > Yes, It's a shame that we have to wade through the mire of MX, Maxwell
> > & others, but that's what focus, willpower, and your killfile are for.
>
> > I just purchased Agent so as soon as I figure out how to configure
> > this maddening newsreader I will have a killfile, too, as well as a
> > real newsreader.
>
> You bought agent? It's for free all over the place!
> Do yourself a favor and get X-news. It's like agent, but without the
> problems.
>
> Bertie- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Do you mean that AGENT (specifically) is "free all over the place" or
do you mean free newsreaders?
I did recently look at many free and not-free newsreaders (X-News
among them) and looked at the interfaces (if examples were available),
read a little about them (including mostly user & former user
comments), and decided to go with what I had for many years which was
Free Agent. Well, I have Agent because Free Agent is no more but It's
basically the same interface with more features than Free Agent. I
really liked Agent and am used to it and they seemed to get the most
praise amongst what I read before plopping down my $20-something. X-
News did receive lots of good comments, too.

I'd be interested in what you say are Agent's problems since they give
a 30 day money-back test drive (which I'm on), understanding that I
rarely go far beyond reading, posting and replying to 3 Usenet groups
under 3 I.D.s

Ricky

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Ricky > wrote in
:

> On Aug 19, 4:38*pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> Ricky > wrote
>> innews:34b68327-8bce-40b2-b3ca-85d2
> :
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Aug 14, 4:59*am, "Tim" > wrote:
>> >> "Viperdoc" > wrote
>>
>> >> > For the real pilots and students, I suggest joining Pilots of
>> >> > America,
>> > a
>> >> > moderated group. It is what this NG used to be, before it was
>> >> > ruined by Anthony and his likes.
>>
>> >> It wasn't so much ruined by Mx as much as those who cannot take a
>> >> pass on endlessly arguing with him over some ridiculous detail, or
>> >> have made it their mission to expose him as a non-pilot, all with
>> >> the seemingly honora
>> > ble
>> >> goal of protecting the helpless student who might read something
>> >> here and then die as a result.
>>
>> >> What a crock. *Anyone with half a brain knows how to treat
>> >> information posted on a newsgroup, or anywhere else online for
>> >> that matter. *They d
>> > on't
>> >> need help from a few crusaders.
>>
>> > After reading this, I totally agree, and I have been one of the
>> > worst at engaging Anthony lately. What a waste of time I have
>> > participated in!
>> > I will not engage Anthony or Maxwell any longer. I do feel badly
>> > for them, though, as they demonstrate very deeply troubled &
>> > disturbed lives. I really do enjoy the aviation here and that's why
>> > I lurk, post & respond, or at least it should be.
>>
>> > Anyone who leaves rec.aviation.piloting because of a few idiots is
>> > participating in the crock you mentioned above. The idiots here
>> > will not have that kind of power over me, and shouldn't over anyone
>> > else. Yes, It's a shame that we have to wade through the mire of
>> > MX, Maxwell & others, but that's what focus, willpower, and your
>> > killfile are for.
>>
>> > I just purchased Agent so as soon as I figure out how to configure
>> > this maddening newsreader I will have a killfile, too, as well as a
>> > real newsreader.
>>
>> You bought agent? It's for free all over the place!
>> Do yourself a favor and get X-news. It's like agent, but without the
>> problems.
>>
>> Bertie- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Do you mean that AGENT (specifically) is "free all over the place" or
> do you mean free newsreaders?

I meant Free Agent, actually. Sorry it was just beyond me that someone
would pay for one!


> I did recently look at many free and not-free newsreaders (X-News
> among them) and looked at the interfaces (if examples were available),
> read a little about them (including mostly user & former user
> comments), and decided to go with what I had for many years which was
> Free Agent. Well, I have Agent because Free Agent is no more but It's
> basically the same interface with more features than Free Agent. I
> really liked Agent and am used to it and they seemed to get the most
> praise amongst what I read before plopping down my $20-something. X-
> News did receive lots of good comments, too.
>
> I'd be interested in what you say are Agent's problems since they give
> a 30 day money-back test drive (which I'm on), understanding that I
> rarely go far beyond reading, posting and replying to 3 Usenet groups
> under 3 I.D.s
>

I've only used free agent myself, so when I mentioned problems, and they
were negligable IMO I meant those that fre agent had.
X-news is the best I've used and it was also free... Hard to imagine
something better for me.


Bertie

[The Bunyip Slayer]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
>
> I meant Free Agent, actually. Sorry it was just beyond me that someone
> would pay for one!
>

Well, not everyone is a tight assed beggar like you and Anthony.


>>
>
> I've only used free agent myself, so when I mentioned problems, and they
> were negligable IMO I meant those that fre agent had.
> X-news is the best I've used and it was also free... Hard to imagine
> something better for me.
>
>
> Bertie
>

But you always lie, so how do we know?

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"The Bunyip Slayer" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:taIqk.75$Rs1.29
@newsfe08.iad:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> I meant Free Agent, actually. Sorry it was just beyond me that
someone
>> would pay for one!
>>
>
> Well, not everyone is a tight assed beggar like you and Anthony.


OK, interesting to see where your head is at, I suppose.


>
>
>>>
>>
>> I've only used free agent myself, so when I mentioned problems, and
they
>> were negligable IMO I meant those that fre agent had.
>> X-news is the best I've used and it was also free... Hard to imagine
>> something better for me.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>
> But you always lie, so how do we know?

I am lying.


Now I'm gonna watch your head explode.





Bertie

[More_Flaps]

On Aug 20, 2:15*am, Mxsmanic > wrote:
> More_Flaps writes:
> > I'd say yes but it's really bad idea for getting additional type
> > ratings efficiently. Can you imagine trying to land a tail dragger
> > without any experience of using a rudder?
>
> But taildraggers need a lot of specific training already, don't they?

Why already? Yes they have specific properties that lead to an
endorsment.

Cheers

[Martin Hotze[_2_]]

Ricky schrieb:
> I just purchased Agent so as soon as I figure out how to configure
> this maddening newsreader I will have a killfile, too, as well as a
> real newsreader. I've had Free Agent in the past but alas, It is no
> more. Now I can't get AT&T to figure out their newsserver's name and
> address & I have tried the ones on AT&T's website to no avail. I keep
> getting failure notices from Agent when I try to download Usenet
> groups & messages. I'll figure out (again) how to get Agent running
> here in the next day or two, might even post a question or two if I
> need help. I can't wait to get off of Google for good!

you can also try out Mozilla Thunderbird www.mozilla.com; free, too. But
the filtering is limited to "from" only. Maybe I'll try agent, too.

If you need access to a newsreader and can't come to a solution with
AT&T you may contact me (my firstname @ my lastname dot com) and I'll
give you free access on my newsserver.

> Ricky

#m

[Martin Hotze[_2_]]

Ricky schrieb:
> I'd be interested in what you say are Agent's problems since they give
> a 30 day money-back test drive (which I'm on), understanding that I
> rarely go far beyond reading, posting and replying to 3 Usenet groups
> under 3 I.D.s

what I read here:
http://www.forteinc.com/agent/faq.php#D8212751186A878A852571C800049E02
this gives really good possibilities: if a posting is x-posted to
*.kook* or *.flonk* then killfile the posting. This and a couple more
rules will do the job, IMHO.

#m

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

Martin Hotze > wrote in news:g8hm7u$cge$1
@kirk.hotze.com:

> Ricky schrieb:
>> I'd be interested in what you say are Agent's problems since they give
>> a 30 day money-back test drive (which I'm on), understanding that I
>> rarely go far beyond reading, posting and replying to 3 Usenet groups
>> under 3 I.D.s
>
> what I read here:
> http://www.forteinc.com/agent/faq.php#D8212751186A878A852571C800049E02
> this gives really good possibilities: if a posting is x-posted to
> *.kook* or *.flonk* then killfile the posting. This and a couple more
> rules will do the job, IMHO.



Yeh, good luck with that.


Bertie

[Fillard Millmore]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> Martin Hotze > wrote in news:g8hm7u$cge$1
> @kirk.hotze.com:
>
>> Ricky schrieb:
>>> I'd be interested in what you say are Agent's problems since they give
>>> a 30 day money-back test drive (which I'm on), understanding that I
>>> rarely go far beyond reading, posting and replying to 3 Usenet groups
>>> under 3 I.D.s
>>
>> what I read here:
>> http://www.forteinc.com/agent/faq.php#D8212751186A878A852571C800049E02
>> this gives really good possibilities: if a posting is x-posted to
>> *.kook* or *.flonk* then killfile the posting. This and a couple more
>> rules will do the job, IMHO.
>
>
>
> Yeh, good luck with that.
>
>
> Bertie
>

It just thrills you to mock someone's attempts to avoid your bull****,
doesn't it?

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Fillard Millmore" <luv2^fly99@cox.^net> wrote in news:ighrk.5974
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Martin Hotze > wrote in news:g8hm7u$cge$1
>> @kirk.hotze.com:
>>
>>> Ricky schrieb:
>>>> I'd be interested in what you say are Agent's problems since they
give
>>>> a 30 day money-back test drive (which I'm on), understanding that I
>>>> rarely go far beyond reading, posting and replying to 3 Usenet
groups
>>>> under 3 I.D.s
>>>
>>> what I read here:
>>>
http://www.forteinc.com/agent/faq.php#D8212751186A878A852571C800049E02
>>> this gives really good possibilities: if a posting is x-posted to
>>> *.kook* or *.flonk* then killfile the posting. This and a couple
more
>>> rules will do the job, IMHO.
>>
>>
>>
>> Yeh, good luck with that.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>>
>
> It just thrills you to mock someone's attempts to avoid your bull****,
> doesn't it?
>
>
>

Absolutely, it's what we live for.


Bertie