Military flight operations and the FAA

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"B2431" wrote in message
...

Right, you don't have a clue how a transport is instrumented for air
data,
Dan.

A pitot tube provids both static and pitot ports, but the pitot tube is
unreliable, so 40 years ago most transports switched to static ports
and
pitot ports.

So Dan, what did you do in the Air force? I hope it was some job where
you
might have at least some knowledge of avionics; otherwise, you mostly
speak
out of turn.

No such thing as a pitot port, never has been.

Poor Dan, off into denial.

A pitot tube only provides pitot
pressure. A pitot-static tube provides both.

My goodness, Dan, you really are clueless.

Say again what you did in the air force, Dan.

john P. Tarver, MS/PE


Compare the two systems for us, John.
Tell us about the pitot tube on say, a 757
and the pitot-static tube on a 767.
You *do* know that they are completely
different type systems???
Why do I get the feeling that you don't!
In my 27 years at UAL, I replaced dozens
and leak tested hundreds of both types.
Then tell us which type is used on the 727?
How about the 737? (and don't forget those
ELF tubes up on the vert. stab.)
I've tried to explain all of this to you in the
Tarver Chronicles.
http://home.att.net/~j.knoyle/the_ta...hronicles.html
What the hell is a screened over static port on a 727?

"Jim Knoyle" wrote in message
...

I don't reply to archive trolls, village idiot Knoyle.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Jim Knoyle" wrote in message
...

I don't reply to archive trolls, village idiot Knoyle.


You also snip the material that you can't (or won't)
answer, but just in case, I'll repeat the question(s).
We notice that you can't answer the question the
way that Dan words it either. :-)

Dan and I think that you don't know a pitot-static
system for doughnuts. :-)

(repeat of tarver's snippage)
Compare the two systems for us, John.
Tell us about the pitot tube on say, a 757
and the pitot-static tube on a 767.
You *do* know that they are completely
different type systems???
Why do I get the feeling that you don't!
In my 27 years at UAL, I replaced dozens
and leak tested hundreds of both types.
Then tell us which type is used on the 727?
How about the 737? (and don't forget those
ELF tubes up on the vert. stab.)
I've tried to explain all of this to you in the
Tarver Chronicles.
http://home.att.net/~j.knoyle/the_ta...hronicles.html
What the hell is a screened over static port on a 727?

"Jim Knoyle" wrote in message ...
"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Jim Knoyle" wrote in message
...

I don't reply to archive trolls, village idiot Knoyle.


You also snip the material that you can't (or won't)
answer, but just in case, I'll repeat the question(s).
We notice that you can't answer the question the
way that Dan words it either. :-)

Dan and I think that you don't know a pitot-static
system for doughnuts. :-)

(repeat of tarver's snippage)
Compare the two systems for us, John.
Tell us about the pitot tube on say, a 757
and the pitot-static tube on a 767.
You *do* know that they are completely
different type systems???
Why do I get the feeling that you don't!
In my 27 years at UAL, I replaced dozens
and leak tested hundreds of both types.
Then tell us which type is used on the 727?
How about the 737? (and don't forget those
ELF tubes up on the vert. stab.)
I've tried to explain all of this to you in the
Tarver Chronicles.
http://home.att.net/~j.knoyle/the_ta...hronicles.html
What the hell is a screened over static port on a 727?

Here's a tough one for JT. How do you screen over an opening that is
approximately 1/16" in diamter?

Tom

"B2431" wrote in message
...

snip

So why not answer my questions?

I am.

I was in avionics most of my 20 years.

It is fantastic that you dodged my question and then believe i have some
obligation to answer you, Dan. If you mean to ask why you have been in my
killfile for so long, it is because you are a prick.

"B2431" wrote in message
...

snip

So why not answer my questions?

I am.

I was in avionics most of my 20 years.

It is fantastic that you dodged my question and then believe i have some
obligation to answer you, Dan. If you mean to ask why you have been in my
killfile for so long, it is because you are a prick.

Pay attention, Tarver, I did answer your question. Once again you resorted to
personal attacks and vulgarity instead of backing up your claims. If you can't
do it be man enough to say you can't.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

"B2431" wrote in message
...

"B2431" wrote in message
...

snip

So why not answer my questions?

I am.

I was in avionics most of my 20 years.

It is fantastic that you dodged my question and then believe i have some
obligation to answer you, Dan. If you mean to ask why you have been in
my
killfile for so long, it is because you are a prick.

Pay attention, Tarver, I did answer your question. Once again you resorted
to
personal attacks and vulgarity instead of backing up your claims. If you
can't
do it be man enough to say you can't.

No Dan, you posted some bull**** about being in avionics for 20 years, while
at the same time demonstrating that you don't know that a "pitot tube" is.
At this point I suspect you were an out in 12 Air force NCO that never got
close to an airplane.

I say again, what did you do in the Air Force, Dan?

"B2431" wrote in message
...

snip

So why not answer my questions?

I am.

I was in avionics most of my 20 years.

It is fantastic that you dodged my question and then believe i have some
obligation to answer you, Dan. If you mean to ask why you have been in
my
killfile for so long, it is because you are a prick.

Pay attention, Tarver, I did answer your question. Once again you resorted
to
personal attacks and vulgarity instead of backing up your claims. If you
can't
do it be man enough to say you can't.

No Dan, you posted some bull**** about being in avionics for 20 years, while
at the same time demonstrating that you don't know that a "pitot tube" is.
At this point I suspect you were an out in 12 Air force NCO that never got
close to an airplane.

I say again, what did you do in the Air Force, Dan?

I told you and you still refuse to answer my questions.

I know the difference between a pitot tube and a pitot-static tube having
changed enough of them.

Next time you see a C-130 take a look at the side of the fuselage. See the
ports that look like pepper shakers? Those are static ports. Look at the pitot
tube. Now look at the inside of the nose wheel well where the pitot tube is
mounted. You will see exactly ONE #4 hose connected to each tube. That is for
pitot pressure.

Now look at an F-4E's pitot-static tube. Notice it has small holes a few inches
back from the tip. Now open the radome. You will notice TWO #4 nylon tubes
connectint to the pitiot-static tube. One is for static and the other is for
pitot pressure.

Now answer my questions. Name one airctaft with a "pitot port" and describe how
it is mounted. Now tell me what TTU-205, MB-1 and TTU-229 test sets are for.

Can you do that without personal attacks or vulgarity?

Now go look up AFSC 325X1.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired.

"B2431" wrote in message
...

"B2431" wrote in message
...

snip

So why not answer my questions?

I am.

I was in avionics most of my 20 years.

It is fantastic that you dodged my question and then believe i have
some
obligation to answer you, Dan. If you mean to ask why you have been
in
my
killfile for so long, it is because you are a prick.

Pay attention, Tarver, I did answer your question. Once again you
resorted to
personal attacks and vulgarity instead of backing up your claims. If
you can't
do it be man enough to say you can't.

No Dan, you posted some bull**** about being in avionics for 20 years,
while
at the same time demonstrating that you don't know that a "pitot tube"
is.
At this point I suspect you were an out in 12 Air force NCO that never
got
close to an airplane.

I say again, what did you do in the Air Force, Dan?

I told you and you still refuse to answer my questions.

No you didn't, you just wrote that you worked avionics in your lifeetime.
We can know that is a lie, since Dan doesn;t know what a pitot tube is.

I'll gpo wit Dan being a 12 and out loser, as that is where he is now.

Simple, did and dione.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"B2431" wrote in message
...

"B2431" wrote in message
...

snip

So why not answer my questions?

I am.

I was in avionics most of my 20 years.

It is fantastic that you dodged my question and then believe i have
some
obligation to answer you, Dan. If you mean to ask why you have been
in
my
killfile for so long, it is because you are a prick.

Pay attention, Tarver, I did answer your question. Once again you
resorted to
personal attacks and vulgarity instead of backing up your claims. If
you can't
do it be man enough to say you can't.

No Dan, you posted some bull**** about being in avionics for 20 years,
while
at the same time demonstrating that you don't know that a "pitot tube"
is.
At this point I suspect you were an out in 12 Air force NCO that never
got
close to an airplane.

I say again, what did you do in the Air Force, Dan?

I told you and you still refuse to answer my questions.

No you didn't, you just wrote that you worked avionics in your lifeetime.
We can know that is a lie, since Dan doesn;t know what a pitot tube is.

I'll gpo wit Dan being a 12 and out loser, as that is where he is now.

Simple, did and dione.


John,
I would like to hear your comment on these facts. Of the
two types of pitot and pitot/static systems most commonly
found on commercial aircraft, the combined probe includes
the pitot tube *and* two static ports, S1 and S2. This is
the most complex and state of the art appearing hardware,
what with 3 individual functions. This is the type probe used
on the 747, 767 and 737 except for those two simple pitot
tubes used for ELF up on the 737 vertical stab.
The other type, the simple single function pitot tube, along
with the separate, flush mounted static ports located on the
side of the fuselage several feet away from the pitot tubes
make up the other system that we will find used on the DC10,
the 727, the 757 and of all critters, the 777!!!

What was that crap you were giving us a day or so ago about
all modern airliners made within the last 20 years or so?
You aren't going to force me to go digging in Google again?

JK