"Token" wrote in message
om...
"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...
"John R Weiss" wrote in message
. net...
"Token" wrote...

I believe the term is "thread creep"? Usenet threads have a
tendency
to wander afield from the original post, but I do not see my posting
as being very far afield.

The term is, "channging the subject so you can be right.


Ah...so that is what you do in so many of these threads? Here I
thought it was raising a related point.

Let's review, I stuck to the subject of airliners and token sock changed the
subject and told me I am wrong. In another branch of this thread, we were
discussing shooting an airliner with a 50 calibre rifle, shooting a specific
kind of exploding ammunition, to hit an engine and Weiss piped in about any
rifle hitting the airplane at all.

Ooops, you are projecting, token sock. Perhaps you would feel more at home
in a South Park episode.

Your earlier post "Those heat seakers don't chase high bypass
engines
very well." would seem to indicate you wished to depart from the
original thread by introducing the shooting of "heat seakers" at
HBPR
engines (thus broadening the field from Igla since Igla has never
fired on a commercial HBPR engine).

On airliners, consistent with the title of the thread. Of course, token
sock, you could have added in your branch to the thread without
insisting I
am wrong, but you chose to be a flamer.

Of course, you have conveniently neglected to mention the other part
of the title of the thread, Igla. I still ask you to produce
information that indicates that an Igla has ever been fired at an HBPR
engined commercial aircraft.

Also, in my original post, please quote what I said that was a flame.

No, token sock, you were rude and suggested a completely differen flight
profile as your proof that I am wrong. If you wanted to create a different
branch to the thread, all you had to do was avoud being an ass.

I pointed out that you were wrong about HBPR engines and the Igla, and
to prevent any misunderstanding of what I meant I clearly stated as it
applies to the A-10. I never implied or said that I was trying to
claim anything about airliners.

Do you really want me to repost your original post?

If I am wrong, and you are correct, provide some information on when
an Igla was fired at an HBPR equipped commercial airliner. If you can
name one it will lend some credibility to what you say, if you can
name two, you will have built a case.

Either way, right now the thread is speculation. The only airliners I know
of that were taken out by manpads were 727s.

Possibly your only error here is inferring that Tarver wished to do
anything but
confuse the issue in a discussion which has gone way over his head.

No Weiss, it is a reading and comprehension problem you and the token
sock
share. As well as a penchant for changing the subject, so you can be
right,
in your own little fantasy world.


"token sock"? That is twice you have directed derogatory comments at
me, in response to nothing but information from me. If I am the sock,
you are my puppet, and I am sure you find sock puppets very amusing.
Even when you are only amusing yourself. Dance puppet, dance.

What else do you think using a character from South Park as a handle would
get you?

I have seen you add MSEE/PE to your sig. I never questioned your
right to add such. Now I wonder, how did you manage to defend a
thesis on such incomplete blanket statements?

History. Plus it is a dumb idea to have commercial airliners spend
$billions on anti-missile defense. Doing so would make common carriers go
bankrupt.