If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"redc1c4" wrote in message ... Tarver Engineering wrote: "Scott Ferrin" wrote in message ... On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 08:55:16 -0800, "Tarver Engineering" wrote: So what I wrote in the first place is correct. "You men like the 8 inchers added to the F-22 wings? " That is what Lockmart said publicly about their airplane. cite please. No. I don't have any need, or desire, to convence clueless socks of anything. Although your quote from lockmart is interesting, it is very far from being anything difinitive, as lockmart has already been caught lying several times WRT the F-22. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Tarver Engineering wrote:
So what I wrote in the first place is correct. Of course I would not necessarily believe lockmart that the titanium "is working" as the program has a history of hiding deficiencies. Those deficiencies covered up include these same tail cracks, which wa a story broken by Reuters 6 months after the delamination was discovered. The only way to know if the third attempt to fix the F-22's tail is to fly the airplane 500 hours. what you wrote in the first place in the thread is: "You men like the 8 inchers added to the F-22 wings? " how that squares with Lockheed's reply, and the picture provided, is something i'll leave to you to explain. redc1c4, it's sure to be entertaining, but unlikely to be educational. -- "Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear considerable watching." Army Officer's Guide |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"redc1c4" wrote in message ... Tarver Engineering wrote: So what I wrote in the first place is correct. Of course I would not necessarily believe lockmart that the titanium "is working" as the program has a history of hiding deficiencies. Those deficiencies covered up include these same tail cracks, which wa a story broken by Reuters 6 months after the delamination was discovered. The only way to know if the third attempt to fix the F-22's tail is to fly the airplane 500 hours. what you wrote in the first place in the thread is: "You men like the 8 inchers added to the F-22 wings? " how that squares with Lockheed's reply, and the picture provided, is something i'll leave to you to explain. Lockmart is trying to peddle strike three in their series of tail fixes as one that has already worked, but it is going to take 500 hours of flight to know that. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 09:21:04 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote: "redc1c4" wrote in message . .. Tarver Engineering wrote: So what I wrote in the first place is correct. Of course I would not necessarily believe lockmart that the titanium "is working" as the program has a history of hiding deficiencies. Those deficiencies covered up include these same tail cracks, which wa a story broken by Reuters 6 months after the delamination was discovered. The only way to know if the third attempt to fix the F-22's tail is to fly the airplane 500 hours. what you wrote in the first place in the thread is: "You men like the 8 inchers added to the F-22 wings? " how that squares with Lockheed's reply, and the picture provided, is something i'll leave to you to explain. Lockmart is trying to peddle strike three in their series of tail fixes as one that has already worked, but it is going to take 500 hours of flight to know that. Show us a picture of those strakes poser. (I'd have flushed your ass to the kill file long ago but this is just too damn entertaining. You're good for laughs if nothing else.) |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Tarver Engineering" wrote: So what I wrote in the first place is correct. Except for the whole the remaining part where you were *certain* that all production aircraft have them... -- cirby at cfl.rr.com Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Chad Irby" wrote in message . com... In article , "Tarver Engineering" wrote: So what I wrote in the first place is correct. Except for the whole the remaining part where you were *certain* that all production aircraft have them... I never wrote that, Irby, but I can see how you'd like to save face. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:
"Chad Irby" wrote: "Tarver Engineering" wrote: So what I wrote in the first place is correct. Except for the whole the remaining part where you were *certain* that all production aircraft have them... I never wrote that, Irby, Not in those exact words, but that was certainly what you were contending for the last week or so. And we're still waiting for those photos showing *any* of them on production aircraft. -- cirby at cfl.rr.com Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations. Slam on brakes accordingly. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Chad Irby" wrote in message . com... "Tarver Engineering" wrote: "Chad Irby" wrote: "Tarver Engineering" wrote: So what I wrote in the first place is correct. Except for the whole the remaining part where you were *certain* that all production aircraft have them... I never wrote that, Irby, Not in those exact words, but that was certainly what you were contending for the last week or so. Trying to put words in my mouth is not going to work, Irby. And we're still waiting for those photos showing *any* of them on production aircraft. I never offered you photos. Once Lockmart produces any two F-22's the same, then we can discuss production configuration. Unit there are at least 500 hours on AV 19, there is no reason to believe Lockmart has solved their structural problems. Besides that, Irby, you have already been caugt being dishonest in this thread. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 09:56:44 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
wrote: "Chad Irby" wrote in message .com... In article , "Tarver Engineering" wrote: So what I wrote in the first place is correct. Except for the whole the remaining part where you were *certain* that all production aircraft have them... I never wrote that, Irby, but I can see how you'd like to save face. As opposed to you, who'd rather continue to loook like a clueless poser. Pictures of those strakes baby LOL! |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message ... On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 09:56:44 -0800, "Tarver Engineering" wrote: "Chad Irby" wrote in message .com... In article , "Tarver Engineering" wrote: So what I wrote in the first place is correct. Except for the whole the remaining part where you were *certain* that all production aircraft have them... I never wrote that, Irby, but I can see how you'd like to save face. As opposed to you, who'd rather continue to loook like a clueless poser. Pictures of those strakes baby LOL! Speakin' of cclueless ... Bwahahahahaha |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Answer on CEF ILS RWY 23 questions | Paul Tomblin | Instrument Flight Rules | 21 | October 17th 04 04:18 PM |
Dennis Fetters Mini 500 | EmailMe | Home Built | 70 | June 21st 04 09:36 PM |
The answer to the gasoline problem | Veeduber | Home Built | 4 | May 22nd 04 08:58 PM |