DIYbanter - View Single Post

[email protected]

On Tue, 24 Aug 2010 06:18:42 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 20:26:51 -0500, "
wrote:

On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 19:39:56 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 17:48:48 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:

wrote:

On Mon, 23 Aug 2010 15:47:52 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:

Phil Hobbs wrote:

Dave wrote:
On 22/08/2010 02:08, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

It was a fast plane, but a poor design.

Fast it was, but poor design NO.

They spent wads of money to
build and maintain them, then junked the entire fleet. It was noisy and
very fuel inefficient.

As is any super fast jet. I should know, I spent many years working in
that environment.

That forced the fares so high that they weren't
able to compete with better planes from multiple countries.

Lots of passengers enjoyed the fact they could spend the day shopping in
another continent and be home for tea.

Dave
Oh, come on. Anything designed in England in the 1960s has to leak oil.

Even their lightbulbs.

Many years ago in a previous life, radio host Don Imus brought me his
Triumph Motorcycle to look at because the headlight as in fact,
leaking oil!

Long story short: Bad oil pressure sending unit had it's wire lead
encased in a plastic spaghetti tube that ran up along the frame to the
headlight housing. Oil was running up through the spaghetti tubing and
collecting in the headlight housing. When he parked, it would drip
out.

One look at Imus, and you knew it wasn't hair oil. ;-)

He was very well lubricated, himself, back when I knew him.

But not with oil. He used white, dry, "lubricant". THat was when he was
funny.

He was drinking copious quantities of vodka in those days, and he
wasn't all that funny in person. In fact, he was quite rude and
unpleasant. His then wife, Harriet, however was a sweetheart, and some
of his friends were fun to be around.

I don't doubt you at all. That was the scuttlebutt around NY.