View Single Post
  #167  
Old November 4th 03, 07:05 PM
clare @ snyder.on .ca
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 13:16:54 GMT,
(Corky Scott) wrote:

On Mon, 03 Nov 2003 16:33:12 -0600, You know who
wrote:

Bruce says:
BOb,

What attacks against certified types? My comments have obviously been
sarcastic exaggerations only in response to your equally sarcastic
exaggerations against auto-conversions. 8-O I report one incident of
in-flight coolant loss and you paint the concept of water cooling as a
dangerous and deadly defect of auto-conversions. And you accuse ME of
spin!


BOb says:
What erroneous, warped and distorted BULL****.
Now, you 'dastardly' dare spin MY words in front of me??'
Looks like you are taking a page out of Corky's book.
The more I say, the more you and he twist them.
What futility it is to deal with you two gems.


Actually, Bruce is correct here, he does not attack certified engines.
He has stated previously numerous times, that if certified engines
were reasonably priced, he'd have no problem using one. The same goes
for me. They are cranky, balky and awkward to start and prone to
early overhaul, but do have an enviable safety record.

Bruce says:
Auto engine conversions are a safe alternative, subject to the
same failure modes that stop certified types. Auto conversions do not
explosively deconstruct any more frequently than do certified types.


BOb says:
I'm not going to mince any more words over this.


Ha ha, good joke. Folks, when has BOb ever minced words?

Until you attempt to certify your auto conversion via the FAA
your don't know what got, much less be able to TRUTHFULLY
lay claim to equality/parity with certified engines. In short.....
your position is patently absurd without authoritative data
that is all but an impossibility to collect.

Details of installation and operation disseminated widely will
eventually bring auto conversion failure rates in line with that of
certified types.


Hahahahahahhahahhahaaa...

No ****ING WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But, I can't top this.
Color me gone. bfg


We can only hope.

Barnyard BOb -- over 50 years of successful f(r)ight (little bit of Corky editing here)


Here's the problem: BOb keeps moving the target. At no time in any of
the discussions I've seen in this group, since before the group was
this group, has anyone suggested that for an auto conversion to be
viable it had to be certified. In fact the reality is exactly
opposite this concept: the FAA allows us to use alternative engines
without needing certification. But what's good enough, and legal for
the FAA isn't good enough for BOb Urban. He now demands that in
addition to testing the engine in flight to what, 500, 1,000, 1,500,
2,000 hours (who knows, he don't say) anyone who converts an auto
engine to airplane engine must also go through the impossibly
expensive process of certifying it. Not so that the FAA accepts it as
a viable engine, no, this is only for BOb Urban.

All I can say is that's pretty cheeky, given that it's not necessary.

You've threatened to leave before BOb, are you really going or just
tantalizing again?

Corky Scott

PS, do you re-read what you write before you post?


What do you mean RE read, it's obvious from a lot of his posts he
doesn't even read what he's responding to.