Dave wrote:
dennis@home wrote:


"Dave" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:


"Dave" wrote in message
...


Why would a stealth aircraft require fly by wire?

Because it is shaped to be stealthy rather than to fly.

The C of G can and has been adjusted by adding ballast, made from
spent uranium to the front or back of an aircraft, providing that the
aircraft was designed conventionally as a stable one.

Its amount of stealth does not alter its ability to fly to any extent.

Have you looked at a stealth fighter?

Looked at one? I spent nearly 20 years on them where I worked. We had a
radar building that had bay windows at the back that looked at a mobile
canvas hangar. Each bay window had a radar mounted in it. Aircraft were
only put in there at night when there was heavy cloud cover, so the
satellite's couldn't see the ground.

it is angled because it was the only way to do it with the CAD they
had when it was designed.

It was angled due to the work of the radar people, not CAD

It is more like a flying brick than a plane.

A brick would have been seen without a radar.

The stealth bomber is a much more refined design and flys much better
than the fighter.

If I remember rightly, wasn't it the B1 stealth bomber coming over from
the USA quite a few years ago? Friday, or Saturday?

I am not clued up on the US aircraft, but it was definitely a stealth
model, to take part in a flying display in the UK?

At the time, I was taking all the overtime I could to top up my pension
pot and I was working for the production side of things to see off and
marshal back a Tornado F3. I got him up and running and he came back and
did his fly past to announce he was back and I marshalled him back in.

He raised the canopy and I can't remember if it was the pilot, or
navigator that told me that the stealth bomber was coming in, as he had
seen it on his radar out in the Atlantic.


AIUI the B2 carries and uses a transponder to give radar returns, this
allows it to show up on ATC radars, and obviously on the Tornado. The B2
flew at the RIAT a few years ago, it came on the Saturday and the
Sunday, both flown non stop from the USA. Two F15 fighters escorted the
B2 from somewhere West of the UK, it made one pass down the runway at
Fairford before turning for home!

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...

Well, now you have finally understood...have you worked the the aviation
field (in a technical capacity, not making the tea or sweeping the floor)?

Well know you ask, no and its totally irrelevant as its a physics issue and
not aviation engineering.

"Dave" wrote in message
...

Denis said

The stealth fighters are easy to track if you have a large number of
transmitters and a few well placed receivers. The angles are all computed
to stop stuff being reflected back to the transmitter with the assumption
the receiver is co-located. The bombers have better absorbing surfaces but
you can track them by monitoring the changes in the EM field as they pass
over transmitters.

I said

Do you work in this field then?

So its not aviation you are asking about then, Shame bob was too eagar to
jump in and ask the wrong question then.

Yes I work in physics and computers.

I think this is clear enough.

I have said this in the past.

So what difference does it make?

dennis@home wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message
...


Yes I work in physics and computers.

That, with your blinkered attitude explains why you do not understand how
slavish adherence to speed limits is dangerous!

There is another world than nowt and one, grey. When electrons pop out of
shells they are overtaking or dropping into shells, undertaking! Have you
tried prosecuting them for that?

I thank you for that.

In message , Bob Eager
writes
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:06:06 +0000, The Wanderer wrote:

On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 07:56:17 -0000, dennis@home wrote:

"The Wanderer" wrote in message
...


You still haven't answered the question. Do you (or did you) work in
this field?

What has working in physics got to do with anything? Either you
understand that you can detect the changes or you don't. The people
that design these things know of the problems and use standoff weapons
when possible.
You don't think they would use cruise missiles if they could use cheap
laser guided bombs?

Oh, I wouldn't dream of lecturing others on matters on which I know very
little.

I merely note that you've been asked several times whether you have ever
worked in the aviation field and each time you've obfuscated and failed
to come up with a direct answer. That tells everyone exactly what they
need to know.

He does this wriggling trick (avoiding the question, then pretending he's
misunderstood and answering a different one) time and again. I doubt he's
qualified to dig a hole.

It seems to be about the only thing he IS good at


--
geoff

"Clot" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message
...


Yes I work in physics and computers.

That, with your blinkered attitude explains why you do not understand how
slavish adherence to speed limits is dangerous!

I have never suggested slavish adherence to speed limits.
I have stated that you drive at the maximum safe speed upto and including
the speed limit.
If you think it is dangerous to do so then where is your evidence or even a
logical reason why it would be more dangerous than speeding?

In message , Clot
writes
dennis@home wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message
...


Yes I work in physics and computers.

That, with your blinkered attitude explains why you do not understand how
slavish adherence to speed limits is dangerous!

He should understand that there is but one universal speed limit

anything else is just modelling

Dennis is just jealous of people who have cars that can actually reach
the NSLs


There is another world than nowt and one, grey. When electrons pop out of
shells they are overtaking or dropping into shells, undertaking! Have you
tried prosecuting them for that?

I thank you for that.



--
geoff

Vernon wrote:
Dave wrote:

At the time, I was taking all the overtime I could to top up my
pension pot and I was working for the production side of things to see
off and marshal back a Tornado F3. I got him up and running and he
came back and did his fly past to announce he was back and I
marshalled him back in.

He raised the canopy and I can't remember if it was the pilot, or
navigator that told me that the stealth bomber was coming in, as he
had seen it on his radar out in the Atlantic.


AIUI the B2 carries and uses a transponder to give radar returns,

I take it that this would be IFF then. That is logical.

this
allows it to show up on ATC radars, and obviously on the Tornado. The B2
flew at the RIAT a few years ago, it came on the Saturday and the
Sunday, both flown non stop from the USA. Two F15 fighters escorted the
B2 from somewhere West of the UK, it made one pass down the runway at
Fairford before turning for home!

That all adds up, but it must have been more that 12 years ago since I
had that experience. Possibly 15 or more, thinking about it. I've been
left ten years now.

My job was testing and commissioning systems for flight, but I saw
nothing wrong with dropping down a rung or two to earn a bit more money :-)

Dave

dennis@home wrote:
"Clot" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message
...


Yes I work in physics and computers.

That, with your blinkered attitude explains why you do not
understand how slavish adherence to speed limits is dangerous!

I have never suggested slavish adherence to speed limits.
I have stated that you drive at the maximum safe speed upto and
including the speed limit.
If you think it is dangerous to do so then where is your evidence or
even a logical reason why it would be more dangerous than speeding?

I'm not going to bother to check through previous posts on this, though I am
confident that you have indicated as much in the past. You have also
indicated that it is wrong (legally correct) and dangerous to exceed a speed
limit. This is far from the truth. You have advocated slavish gorping at the
speedometer to ensure that one did not exceed the limit to the extent that
one could be a danger to other road users by not anticipating hazards from
ahead, sides and behind.

Conversation over.

geoff wrote:
In message , Bob Eager
writes
On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 15:06:06 +0000, The Wanderer wrote:

On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 07:56:17 -0000, dennis@home wrote:

"The Wanderer" wrote in message
...


You still haven't answered the question. Do you (or did you) work
in this field?

What has working in physics got to do with anything? Either you
understand that you can detect the changes or you don't. The people
that design these things know of the problems and use standoff
weapons when possible.
You don't think they would use cruise missiles if they could use
cheap laser guided bombs?

Oh, I wouldn't dream of lecturing others on matters on which I know
very little.

I merely note that you've been asked several times whether you have
ever worked in the aviation field and each time you've obfuscated
and failed to come up with a direct answer. That tells everyone
exactly what they need to know.

He does this wriggling trick (avoiding the question, then pretending
he's misunderstood and answering a different one) time and again. I
doubt he's qualified to dig a hole.

It seems to be about the only thing he IS good at

Foolishly, I responded to one of his posts tonight. I have avoided for
months.

Stand by for more abnormal views and approaches to life.

I won't make a response to whatever he next says to me. It would be futile.

geoff wrote:
In message , Clot
writes
dennis@home wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message
...


Yes I work in physics and computers.

That, with your blinkered attitude explains why you do not
understand how slavish adherence to speed limits is dangerous!

He should understand that there is but one universal speed limit

anything else is just modelling

Dennis is just jealous of people who have cars that can actually reach
the NSLs

One bright, sunny day when the sun was overhead, the road surface dry and
warm with were few vehicles on the road, I inadvertently did 80 in mine
going down a hill on a motorway! dennis wasn't there, thankfully.

Recently, during the great snow of 2010, I started out from home in my car
to shop in town. I had a bend and a road junction ahead to contend with
which was fairly obscurred. I had slowed down and had the vehicle in a
higher gear than I normally would in order not to skid. A driver coming from
the right on the major road that I was approaching, decided to turn left
into the road I was on. But more than that the driver wished to collect a
freind from the house on the left hand side of the junction and went
straight across in front of me. Foretunately, I was prepared and whilst
already using the engine to reduce speed, then lightly applied my brakes and
turned the car into the kerb. Doing only 10 -15 mph , there was no damage to
my steering and the silly B had a comfortable shock.

Dave wrote:
Vernon wrote:
Dave wrote:

At the time, I was taking all the overtime I could to top up my
pension pot and I was working for the production side of things to
see off and marshal back a Tornado F3. I got him up and running and
he came back and did his fly past to announce he was back and I
marshalled him back in.

He raised the canopy and I can't remember if it was the pilot, or
navigator that told me that the stealth bomber was coming in, as he
had seen it on his radar out in the Atlantic.


AIUI the B2 carries and uses a transponder to give radar returns,

I take it that this would be IFF then. That is logical.

this allows it to show up on ATC radars, and obviously on the Tornado.
The B2 flew at the RIAT a few years ago, it came on the Saturday and
the Sunday, both flown non stop from the USA. Two F15 fighters
escorted the B2 from somewhere West of the UK, it made one pass down
the runway at Fairford before turning for home!

That all adds up, but it must have been more that 12 years ago since I
had that experience. Possibly 15 or more, thinking about it. I've been
left ten years now.

My job was testing and commissioning systems for flight, but I saw
nothing wrong with dropping down a rung or two to earn a bit more money
:-)

Dave

It will have IFF/SSR and no doubt will give a response if challenged.
The information I was given implied it was an extra bit of kit that is
bolted on to generate radar returns, so that an ordinary CCWR or perhaps
TCAS could see it, the latter would be useful if it is transiting US
airspace.

On Thu, 18 Feb 2010 20:13:07 -0000, dennis@home wrote:


Oh, I wouldn't dream of lecturing others on matters on which I know very
little.

But you will accuse others of not knowing anything even though you don't
have the knowledge to know if what they say is true?

Where have I questioned the validity of any comments you've made about
aerodynamics in this thread? A simple apology will suffice.


I merely note that you've been asked several times whether you have ever
worked in the aviation field and each time you've obfuscated and failed to
come up with a direct answer. That tells everyone exactly what they need
to
know.

What it tells people is that you are looking for an excuse to try and
discredit someone because they don't agree with you.

As I've said, I haven't offered any comment on aerodynamics anywhere in
this thread. You have. Someone (not me) disagreed with you and asked if you
had ever worked in the aerodynamics industry. I have merely pointed out
that until very recently elsewhere in this thread you have avoided
answering that question. Your logic is flawed

This is usenet. You may make whatever claims about your qualifications or
knowledge you like. Whether other people believe you is up to them.
However, how you interact with others when asked pertinent questions will
guide others towards an opinion on the veracity of your comments.

Or it will very quickly tell them you are a ****wit.



--
The Wanderer

Whenever I look for something, it's always in the last place I look.

in 261432 20100218 193503 Bob Eager wrote:

He does this wriggling trick (avoiding the question, then pretending he's
misunderstood and answering a different one) time and again. I doubt he's
qualified to dig a hole.

Sounds like our last few prime ministers.

"Clot" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:
"Clot" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:
"Dave" wrote in message
...


Yes I work in physics and computers.

That, with your blinkered attitude explains why you do not
understand how slavish adherence to speed limits is dangerous!

I have never suggested slavish adherence to speed limits.
I have stated that you drive at the maximum safe speed upto and
including the speed limit.
If you think it is dangerous to do so then where is your evidence or
even a logical reason why it would be more dangerous than speeding?

I'm not going to bother to check through previous posts on this, though I
am confident that you have indicated as much in the past. You have also
indicated that it is wrong (legally correct) and dangerous to exceed a
speed limit. This is far from the truth. You have advocated slavish
gorping at the speedometer to ensure that one did not exceed the limit to
the extent that one could be a danger to other road users by not
anticipating hazards from ahead, sides and behind.

More cr@p and lies!

It is a requirement of driving to know how fast you are going and it does
not require you to constantly look at the speedo.
If you are so poor at driving then I recommend you give it up.

Conversation over.

Good! I know you are one of the people that just can't drive and like to
blame everyone else for your problems, now run along and get some points on
your license.

"The Wanderer" wrote in message
...


This is usenet. You may make whatever claims about your qualifications or
knowledge you like. Whether other people believe you is up to them.

This is true, and as it is irrelevant, why do you need to know what I do.

However, how you interact with others when asked pertinent questions will
guide others towards an opinion on the veracity of your comments.

It depends on who the others are and why they are asking questions.


Or it will very quickly tell them you are a ****wit.

Well the fact that I think you are a FW is the reason you didn't get an
answer.

"Bob Martin" wrote in message
om...
in 261432 20100218 193503 Bob Eager wrote:

He does this wriggling trick (avoiding the question, then pretending he's
misunderstood and answering a different one) time and again. I doubt he's
qualified to dig a hole.

Sounds like our last few prime ministers.

There is no need to be that insulting!

"Clot" wrote in message
...

Recently, during the great snow of 2010, I started out from home in my car
to shop in town. I had a bend and a road junction ahead to contend with
which was fairly obscurred. I had slowed down and had the vehicle in a
higher gear than I normally would in order not to skid. A driver coming
from the right on the major road that I was approaching, decided to turn
left into the road I was on. But more than that the driver wished to
collect a freind from the house on the left hand side of the junction and
went straight across in front of me. Foretunately, I was prepared and
whilst already using the engine to reduce speed, then lightly applied my
brakes and turned the car into the kerb. Doing only 10 -15 mph , there was
no damage to my steering and the silly B had a comfortable shock.

Oh look an accident from one of those "I can drive better than you" types
that can exceed speed limits because they are safe drivers.
I had to drive over 1000 miles in that weather, none of it on motorways and
still have a clean record, not even a kerb.
Must be pure luck if one of these super drivers manages to have an accident
and I don't.

On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 07:55:12 -0000, dennis@home wrote:

You didn't address my comments about the completely erroneous claims made
by you about my (lack of) input to the thread. I'm still waiting for the
apology because you were *wrong*.



--
The Wanderer

Cunning linguists do it with words......

"The Wanderer" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 07:55:12 -0000, dennis@home wrote:

You didn't address my comments about the completely erroneous claims made
by you about my (lack of) input to the thread. I'm still waiting for the
apology because you were *wrong*.

You fail to qualify for one.

On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 13:23:04 -0000, dennis@home wrote:

"The Wanderer" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 07:55:12 -0000, dennis@home wrote:

You didn't address my comments about the completely erroneous claims made
by you about my (lack of) input to the thread. I'm still waiting for the
apology because you were *wrong*.

You fail to qualify for one.

Too proud to admit you were completely wrong with your accusations, then?

--
The Wanderer

Faith is a gift from your God
Religion is a gift from the Devil

"The Wanderer" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 13:23:04 -0000, dennis@home wrote:

"The Wanderer" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 07:55:12 -0000, dennis@home wrote:

You didn't address my comments about the completely erroneous claims
made
by you about my (lack of) input to the thread. I'm still waiting for the
apology because you were *wrong*.

You fail to qualify for one.

Too proud to admit you were completely wrong with your accusations, then?

Too idle to look, maybe if you wasn't such PITA.

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Tim Streater
saying something like:

A Sopwith Camel is unstable (at least in pitch) and certainly predates
electronic controls.

That didn't seem to bother Biggles.

Biggles Snr, you mean, Shirley?

dennis@home wrote:

It is a requirement of driving to know how fast you are going and it
does not require you to constantly look at the speedo.

I have to agree with you here. Under normal circumstances I can keep my
diesel car to a speed limit quite easily, however, I have been driving a
petrol car that I own and another that belongs to our daughter daughter,
for the last 10 days and because they are a little bit more lively, I
find I am breaking the speed limits quite often. Not by more than about
5 MPH though.

Dave

dennis@home wrote:


"The Wanderer" wrote in message
...


This is usenet. You may make whatever claims about your qualifications or
knowledge you like. Whether other people believe you is up to them.

This is true, and as it is irrelevant, why do you need to know what I do.

I asked the original question of your experience and I did so because
you were posting untruths about aircraft. I have spent 26 years working
with them, aerodynamics's, designers, stress engineers, flight test, air
crew, testing aircraft systems and commissioning them for flight, just
to name a few things. The only thing I wouldn't touch was anything that
would go bang. At one point, I even had a head of a department keep
coming down to ask questions on the secondary flying controls so he
could understand how they worked. Things like the high lift, wing sweep
control unit and how it prevented the wings from sweeping while the
flaps were extended. I even showed the man who had spent years testing
the production aircraft fuel systems how to do internal fuel transfers
using the internal fuel pumps and the ground control panel.

Dave

On 19/02/2010 15:25, Grimly Curmudgeon wrote:
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Tim Streater
saying something like:

A Sopwith Camel is unstable (at least in pitch) and certainly predates
electronic controls.

That didn't seem to bother Biggles.

Biggles Snr, you mean, Shirley?

Well that's the interesting part. We have Biggles flying Camels in WW1
so he must have been 20-odd then. Next we have Biggles being very lively
and biffing bad guys in the 50s, when he must have been 60-odd.

Don't know how he did it.

--
Tim

"That the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament
ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of
Parliament"

Bill of Rights 1689

Vernon wrote:
Dave wrote:
Vernon wrote:
Dave wrote:

At the time, I was taking all the overtime I could to top up my
pension pot and I was working for the production side of things to
see off and marshal back a Tornado F3. I got him up and running and
he came back and did his fly past to announce he was back and I
marshalled him back in.

He raised the canopy and I can't remember if it was the pilot, or
navigator that told me that the stealth bomber was coming in, as he
had seen it on his radar out in the Atlantic.


AIUI the B2 carries and uses a transponder to give radar returns,

I take it that this would be IFF then. That is logical.

this allows it to show up on ATC radars, and obviously on the
Tornado. The B2 flew at the RIAT a few years ago, it came on the
Saturday and the Sunday, both flown non stop from the USA. Two F15
fighters escorted the B2 from somewhere West of the UK, it made one
pass down the runway at Fairford before turning for home!

That all adds up, but it must have been more that 12 years ago since I
had that experience. Possibly 15 or more, thinking about it. I've been
left ten years now.

My job was testing and commissioning systems for flight, but I saw
nothing wrong with dropping down a rung or two to earn a bit more
money :-)

Dave

It will have IFF/SSR and no doubt will give a response if challenged.
The information I was given implied it was an extra bit of kit that is
bolted on to generate radar returns, so that an ordinary CCWR or perhaps
TCAS could see it, the latter would be useful if it is transiting US
airspace.

Many thanks for that

Dave

On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:41:37 +0000, Dave wrote:

dennis@home wrote:

It is a requirement of driving to know how fast you are going and it
does not require you to constantly look at the speedo.

I have to agree with you here. Under normal circumstances I can keep my
diesel car to a speed limit quite easily, however, I have been driving a
petrol car that I own and another that belongs to our daughter daughter,
for the last 10 days and because they are a little bit more lively, I
find I am breaking the speed limits quite often. Not by more than about
5 MPH though.

Funnily enough. I had exactly the same problem. When I changed from a
petrol S-Max to a diesel S-Max! I found the diesel behaved very
differently...




--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

"Dave" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:


"The Wanderer" wrote in message
...


This is usenet. You may make whatever claims about your qualifications
or
knowledge you like. Whether other people believe you is up to them.

This is true, and as it is irrelevant, why do you need to know what I do.

I asked the original question of your experience and I did so because you
were posting untruths about aircraft.


Which bits were untrue?

Bob Eager wrote:
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:41:37 +0000, Dave wrote:

dennis@home wrote:

It is a requirement of driving to know how fast you are going and it
does not require you to constantly look at the speedo.
I have to agree with you here. Under normal circumstances I can keep my
diesel car to a speed limit quite easily, however, I have been driving a
petrol car that I own and another that belongs to our daughter daughter,
for the last 10 days and because they are a little bit more lively, I
find I am breaking the speed limits quite often. Not by more than about
5 MPH though.

Funnily enough. I had exactly the same problem. When I changed from a
petrol S-Max to a diesel S-Max! I found the diesel behaved very
differently...

Yes, mine is a bit slow until I floor it to get the turbo into action.
Wife doesn't like driving it, says it is too slow. It's superb for mile
eating on the fast roads though.

Dave

"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:41:37 +0000, Dave wrote:

dennis@home wrote:

It is a requirement of driving to know how fast you are going and it
does not require you to constantly look at the speedo.

I have to agree with you here. Under normal circumstances I can keep my
diesel car to a speed limit quite easily, however, I have been driving a
petrol car that I own and another that belongs to our daughter daughter,
for the last 10 days and because they are a little bit more lively, I
find I am breaking the speed limits quite often. Not by more than about
5 MPH though.

Funnily enough. I had exactly the same problem. When I changed from a
petrol S-Max to a diesel S-Max! I found the diesel behaved very
differently...

Funny enough so far this week I have driven a diesel astra, a petrol corsa,
a diesel smart and a petrol smart soft top.
They all sound different but the roadside furniture passes at the same rate.

On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 19:34:47 +0000, Dave wrote:

Bob Eager wrote:
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:41:37 +0000, Dave wrote:

dennis@home wrote:

It is a requirement of driving to know how fast you are going and it
does not require you to constantly look at the speedo.
I have to agree with you here. Under normal circumstances I can keep
my diesel car to a speed limit quite easily, however, I have been
driving a petrol car that I own and another that belongs to our
daughter daughter, for the last 10 days and because they are a little
bit more lively, I find I am breaking the speed limits quite often.
Not by more than about 5 MPH though.

Funnily enough. I had exactly the same problem. When I changed from a
petrol S-Max to a diesel S-Max! I found the diesel behaved very
differently...

Yes, mine is a bit slow until I floor it to get the turbo into action.
Wife doesn't like driving it, says it is too slow. It's superb for mile
eating on the fast roads though.

It was the turbo that kept catching me out....if I accelerated the way I
used to on the petrol one, I'd find it going much faster than I expected,
very quickly! On the whole it goes much better than the petrol one
did...and much more economically, too.

--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

In message , "dennis@home"
writes


"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:41:37 +0000, Dave wrote:

dennis@home wrote:

It is a requirement of driving to know how fast you are going and it
does not require you to constantly look at the speedo.

I have to agree with you here. Under normal circumstances I can keep my
diesel car to a speed limit quite easily, however, I have been driving a
petrol car that I own and another that belongs to our daughter daughter,
for the last 10 days and because they are a little bit more lively, I
find I am breaking the speed limits quite often. Not by more than about
5 MPH though.

Funnily enough. I had exactly the same problem. When I changed from a
petrol S-Max to a diesel S-Max! I found the diesel behaved very
differently...

Funny enough so far this week I have driven a diesel astra, a petrol
corsa, a diesel smart and a petrol smart soft top.


They all sound different but the roadside furniture passes at the same
rate.

You mean that you drive so slowly that even stationary objects overtake
you ?

There's a surprise



--
geoff

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Tim Streater
saying something like:

That didn't seem to bother Biggles.

Biggles Snr, you mean, Shirley?

Well that's the interesting part. We have Biggles flying Camels in WW1
so he must have been 20-odd then. Next we have Biggles being very lively
and biffing bad guys in the 50s, when he must have been 60-odd.

Don't know how he did it.

Britain's first Terracotta Warrior. Wheeled out in times of national
crisis and put back in the cupboard when it gets a bit quiet.

"geoff" wrote in message
...


You mean that you drive so slowly that even stationary objects overtake
you ?

Well geoff if the stationary objects aren't passing you then you are also
stationary.


There's a surprise

I guess there are a lot of surprises for you.
I blame the education system and your parents for failing you.

In message , "dennis@home"
writes


"geoff" wrote in message
...


You mean that you drive so slowly that even stationary objects
overtake you ?

Well geoff if the stationary objects aren't passing you then you are
also stationary.

Yeah. At least drivel is entertaining



There's a surprise

I guess there are a lot of surprises for you.
I blame the education system and your parents for failing you.

--
geoff

Bob Eager wrote:

It was the turbo that kept catching me out....if I accelerated the way I
used to on the petrol one, I'd find it going much faster than I expected,
very quickly!

:-)

On the whole it goes much better than the petrol one
did...and much more economically, too.

I find I need between £10-00 to £15 pounds of fuel a week for pottering
around. After I got back with the daughters car 8 days ago, I had about
a quarter of a tank of petrol and had to put some more in a week later.
I only do about 120 to 130 miles a week. It uses far more petrol. Can't
wait to get my diesel back next week.

Dave

dennis@home wrote:


"Bob Eager" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 17:41:37 +0000, Dave wrote:

dennis@home wrote:

It is a requirement of driving to know how fast you are going and it
does not require you to constantly look at the speedo.

I have to agree with you here. Under normal circumstances I can keep my
diesel car to a speed limit quite easily, however, I have been driving a
petrol car that I own and another that belongs to our daughter daughter,
for the last 10 days and because they are a little bit more lively, I
find I am breaking the speed limits quite often. Not by more than about
5 MPH though.

Funnily enough. I had exactly the same problem. When I changed from a
petrol S-Max to a diesel S-Max! I found the diesel behaved very
differently...

Funny enough so far this week I have driven a diesel astra, a petrol
corsa, a diesel smart and a petrol smart soft top.
They all sound different but the roadside furniture passes at the same
rate.

They are all tuned down cars though.

Do you have a lot of furniture charity shops around you?

Dave

On Fri, 19 Feb 2010 23:16:32 +0000, Dave wrote:

Bob Eager wrote:

It was the turbo that kept catching me out....if I accelerated the way
I used to on the petrol one, I'd find it going much faster than I
expected, very quickly!

:-)

On the whole it goes much better than the petrol one did...and much
more economically, too.

I find I need between £10-00 to £15 pounds of fuel a week for pottering
around. After I got back with the daughters car 8 days ago, I had about
a quarter of a tank of petrol and had to put some more in a week later.
I only do about 120 to 130 miles a week. It uses far more petrol. Can't
wait to get my diesel back next week.

Yup. My petrol Galaxy did about 27mpg most of the time (a lot of short
journeys). The petrol S-Max raised that to 33mpg, and the diesel S-Max is
at about 40mpg, and more pleasant to drive. On a journey to the Lake
District and back, loaded right up with four passengers and camping gear,
it did 47mpg!



--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

"Dave" wrote in message
...


They are all tuned down cars though.

They all exceed the speed limits if you let them.


Do you have a lot of furniture charity shops around you?

No idea, do you want me to ask the neigbours if they have any for you?
I don't need any as having cheap cars keeps my bank balance at a few tens of
£k.