Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #64971 > unrolled thread

M$ 365 Down, Again

Started by"WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net>
First post2025-01-29 20:24 -0500
Last post2025-01-30 12:27 +0000
Articles 20 on this page of 101 — 15 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc


Contents

  M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-29 20:24 -0500
    Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-30 10:34 +0100
    Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-01-30 10:50 +0000
      Re: M$ 365 Down, Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-01-30 11:00 +0000
        Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-30 18:44 +0100
          Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-01-31 15:26 +0100
            Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-31 16:20 -0500
              Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-31 23:49 +0100
                Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-31 20:30 -0500
              Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-02-01 13:07 +0000
            Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-01-31 23:00 +0100
              Re: M$ 365 Down, Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-01 05:25 +0000
                Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-01 01:54 -0500
                  Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-01 14:45 +0100
                Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-01 11:39 +0100
                  Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-01 14:47 +0100
                    Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-01 15:32 +0100
                      Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-01 16:00 +0100
                        Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-02 11:39 +0100
                          Re: M$ 365 Down, Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-02 20:41 +0000
                            Re: M$ 365 Down, Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-02-02 20:46 +0000
                              Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-02 22:01 +0100
                            Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-02 22:00 +0100
                    Re: M$ 365 Down, Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-01 19:38 +0000
                      Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-02-01 19:58 +0000
                        Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Lars Poulsen <lars@cleo.beagle-ears.com> - 2025-02-01 20:40 +0000
                          Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-02 11:45 +0100
                            Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Lars Poulsen <lars@cleo.beagle-ears.com> - 2025-02-02 17:03 +0000
                              Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-02 21:58 +0100
                                Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Lars Poulsen <lars@cleo.beagle-ears.com> - 2025-02-02 21:50 +0000
                                  Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-02-02 22:36 +0000
                                    Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-03 22:53 +0100
                                      Re: M$ 365 Down, Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-04 05:46 +0000
                                        Re: M$ 365 Down, Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-02-04 09:36 +0000
                                        Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-04 17:37 +0100
                                  Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-03 22:52 +0100
                                    Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-03 22:09 -0500
                                      Re: M$ 365 Down, Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-04 05:31 +0000
                                      Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-04 17:30 +0100
                            Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-02 21:29 -0500
                              Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-03 22:55 +0100
                                Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-03 22:17 -0500
                                  Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-04 17:31 +0100
                                    Re: M$ 365 Down, Again not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-02-05 07:02 +1000
                                      Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-05 01:33 -0500
                                        Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Ian <gay@sfuu.ca> - 2025-02-04 23:54 -0800
                                        Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-05 11:18 +0100
                                          Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-05 22:19 -0500
                                            Re: M$ 365 Down, Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-02-06 10:35 +0000
                                              Re: M$ 365 Down, Again not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-02-07 06:28 +1000
                                                Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-06 22:30 -0500
                                                  Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> - 2025-02-07 15:39 +1000
                                                    Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-07 00:55 -0500
                                                      Re: M$ 365 Down, Again not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2025-02-08 07:24 +1000
                                                    Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2025-02-07 16:19 +0000
                                                      Re: M$ 365 Down, Again vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-02-07 17:38 +0000
                                                  Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-07 10:22 +0100
                                                    Re: M$ 365 Down, Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-02-07 12:42 +0000
                                              Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-06 22:09 -0500
                                            Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-06 23:53 +0100
                                              Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-06 23:27 -0500
                                                Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-07 10:23 +0100
                                      Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-05 11:04 +0100
                            Re: M$ 365 Down, Again John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2025-02-03 10:38 -0800
                              Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-03 20:27 +0100
                                Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-03 23:15 +0100
                                  Re: M$ 365 Down, Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-04 05:35 +0000
                                  Re: M$ 365 Down, Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-02-04 09:41 +0000
                                    Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-04 13:07 +0100
                                    Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-04 17:39 +0100
                              Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-03 23:14 +0100
                                Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-02-04 00:36 +0000
                                  Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-03 22:56 -0500
                                    Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Joerg Walther <joerg.walther@magenta.de> - 2025-02-05 09:54 +0100
                                    Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-02-05 19:32 +0000
                                      Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-05 22:23 -0500
                                        Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-02-06 04:50 +0000
                                          Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-06 00:45 -0500
                                            Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Joerg Walther <joerg.walther@magenta.de> - 2025-02-06 18:12 +0100
                                            Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-02-06 20:38 +0000
                                              Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-06 23:13 -0500
                                        Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Joerg Walther <joerg.walther@magenta.de> - 2025-02-06 18:10 +0100
                                  Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-04 17:29 +0100
                                Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-03 22:48 -0500
                                  Re: M$ 365 Down, Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-04 05:54 +0000
                                  Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-04 17:35 +0100
                        Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-02 11:44 +0100
                          Re: M$ 365 Down, Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-02 20:45 +0000
                            Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-02 22:01 +0100
                          Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-02 21:26 -0500
                            Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2025-02-03 04:17 +0000
                              Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-03 01:29 -0500
                                Re: M$ 365 Down, Again The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2025-02-03 09:45 +0000
                                  Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-02-03 09:08 -0500
                            Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-03 22:54 +0100
                  Re: M$ 365 Down, Again rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2025-02-01 19:36 +0000
                    Re: M$ 365 Down, Again D <nospam@example.net> - 2025-02-02 11:42 +0100
                Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2025-02-01 14:44 +0100
        Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-01-31 13:35 +0000
      Re: M$ 365 Down, Again "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> - 2025-01-30 06:14 -0500
        Re: M$ 365 Down, Again Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2025-01-30 12:27 +0000

Page 4 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  Next page →


#65243

From"WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net>
Date2025-02-06 23:27 -0500
Message-ID<KLydnVR0VNVWFjj6nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@earthlink.com>
In reply to#65236
On 2/6/25 5:53 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2025-02-06 04:19, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>> On 2/5/25 5:18 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>> On 2025-02-05 07:33, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>> On 2/4/25 4:02 PM, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>>>> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 3 Feb 2025, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>>>>>   Zeps are technically "better", but the framework
>>>>>>>   is subject to stress and can snap - even if it
>>>>>>>   was upgraded to titanium. Blimps spread the load
>>>>>>>   across the entire envelope and can thus survive
>>>>>>>   sudden wind gusts better. They may kinda fold
>>>>>>>   and shimmy, but don't snap.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   Hmmmm ... maybe a 'hybrid' is possible now -
>>>>>>>   a blimp, but 'stiffened' a bit with like
>>>>>>>   graphite ribs so it's not SO floppy ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I heard about an experimental concept that does not use a gas for 
>>>>>> lift,
>>>>>> but vacuum! Very fascinating!
>>>>>
>>>>> More theoretical than experimental - the materials might be
>>>>> possible but I don't think anyone can make them yet.
>>>>
>>>>    Um, no, CAN'T be made. Ever SEEN any kind of vac
>>>>    vessel even slightly compromised ? INSTANT total
>>>>    CRUSH. Maybe an unobtanium sphere .....
>>>
>>> Ever seen electrical bulbs? Some are vacuum filled.
>>> There were also electronic valves, CRT tubes...
>>
>>    Well, as an experiment, WEIGH the glass envelope
>>    on those vac tubes ... then extrapolate that for
>>    a 200-foot flying vessel.
>>
>>    Oh, both valves and old light-bulbs BREAK very
>>    easily.
>>
>>    Modern incandescent bulbs are filled with argon.
>>    This is better and the gas/pressure helps suppress
>>    filament boil-off.
> 
> I know. I happen to have one vacuum bulb at hand reach, and the bottom 
> part (the part facing the floor) is darkened by evaporated metal deposits.
> 
>>
>>    Anyway, sorry, I just CAN'T see any sort of useful
>>    and safe vacuum blimp. One goose bumps into the
>>    thing and it will all implode in an instant.
> 
> Oh, I know that vacuum filled blimps are impossible.
> 
>>
>>    Hmmm ... MAYbe there can be a 'gas' lighter than
>>    hydrogen - some kind of exotic matter ? Perhaps
>>    some high electrostatic charge - center electrode
>>    and envelope both negatively charged, then the
>>    vacuum would not SEEM to be a vacuum so far as
>>    the structural components are concerned. Sounds
>>    kinda sparky alas.
> 
> Force fields :-)

   Well ... show me one that's practical  :-)

   In THEORY you could use positronium gas ... but
   if any of those electrons wander elsewhere ....


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65252

FromD <nospam@example.net>
Date2025-02-07 10:23 +0100
Message-ID<4198f596-fefe-319d-81e8-56a8b1bae1c0@example.net>
In reply to#65243

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Thu, 6 Feb 2025, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote:

> On 2/6/25 5:53 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2025-02-06 04:19, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>> On 2/5/25 5:18 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>> On 2025-02-05 07:33, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>>> On 2/4/25 4:02 PM, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
>>>>>> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, 3 Feb 2025, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>>>>>>   Zeps are technically "better", but the framework
>>>>>>>>   is subject to stress and can snap - even if it
>>>>>>>>   was upgraded to titanium. Blimps spread the load
>>>>>>>>   across the entire envelope and can thus survive
>>>>>>>>   sudden wind gusts better. They may kinda fold
>>>>>>>>   and shimmy, but don't snap.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>   Hmmmm ... maybe a 'hybrid' is possible now -
>>>>>>>>   a blimp, but 'stiffened' a bit with like
>>>>>>>>   graphite ribs so it's not SO floppy ?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I heard about an experimental concept that does not use a gas for 
>>>>>>> lift,
>>>>>>> but vacuum! Very fascinating!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> More theoretical than experimental - the materials might be
>>>>>> possible but I don't think anyone can make them yet.
>>>>> 
>>>>>    Um, no, CAN'T be made. Ever SEEN any kind of vac
>>>>>    vessel even slightly compromised ? INSTANT total
>>>>>    CRUSH. Maybe an unobtanium sphere .....
>>>> 
>>>> Ever seen electrical bulbs? Some are vacuum filled.
>>>> There were also electronic valves, CRT tubes...
>>> 
>>>    Well, as an experiment, WEIGH the glass envelope
>>>    on those vac tubes ... then extrapolate that for
>>>    a 200-foot flying vessel.
>>> 
>>>    Oh, both valves and old light-bulbs BREAK very
>>>    easily.
>>> 
>>>    Modern incandescent bulbs are filled with argon.
>>>    This is better and the gas/pressure helps suppress
>>>    filament boil-off.
>> 
>> I know. I happen to have one vacuum bulb at hand reach, and the bottom part 
>> (the part facing the floor) is darkened by evaporated metal deposits.
>> 
>>> 
>>>    Anyway, sorry, I just CAN'T see any sort of useful
>>>    and safe vacuum blimp. One goose bumps into the
>>>    thing and it will all implode in an instant.
>> 
>> Oh, I know that vacuum filled blimps are impossible.
>> 
>>> 
>>>    Hmmm ... MAYbe there can be a 'gas' lighter than
>>>    hydrogen - some kind of exotic matter ? Perhaps
>>>    some high electrostatic charge - center electrode
>>>    and envelope both negatively charged, then the
>>>    vacuum would not SEEM to be a vacuum so far as
>>>    the structural components are concerned. Sounds
>>>    kinda sparky alas.
>> 
>> Force fields :-)
>
>  Well ... show me one that's practical  :-)
>
>  In THEORY you could use positronium gas ... but
>  if any of those electrons wander elsewhere ....

I once encountered a man on a mailinglist who was going to have this type 
of thing as his Ph.D. thesis. He said that he could probably solve this. I 
wonder if he will?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65223

FromD <nospam@example.net>
Date2025-02-05 11:04 +0100
Message-ID<6479ece9-d714-69f9-00a8-f0aa7f30e16c@example.net>
In reply to#65216

On Tue, 5 Feb 2025, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:

> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 3 Feb 2025, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>  Zeps are technically "better", but the framework
>>>  is subject to stress and can snap - even if it
>>>  was upgraded to titanium. Blimps spread the load
>>>  across the entire envelope and can thus survive
>>>  sudden wind gusts better. They may kinda fold
>>>  and shimmy, but don't snap.
>>>
>>>  Hmmmm ... maybe a 'hybrid' is possible now -
>>>  a blimp, but 'stiffened' a bit with like
>>>  graphite ribs so it's not SO floppy ?
>>
>> I heard about an experimental concept that does not use a gas for lift,
>> but vacuum! Very fascinating!
>
> More theoretical than experimental - the materials might be
> possible but I don't think anyone can make them yet.

This is the truth!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65173

FromJohn Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com>
Date2025-02-03 10:38 -0800
Message-ID<20250203103843.0000459e@gmail.com>
In reply to#65137
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 11:45:25 +0100
D <nospam@example.net> wrote:

> > Same with airplanes.
> 
> Damn it Lars! So that one is out too? ;)

There's always ultralights - nothin' but a go-kart, a box fan, and a
big ol' parasail. Depending on your local regulations, may not even
need a license...!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65174

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2025-02-03 20:27 +0100
Message-ID<5uh77lx5nm.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#65173
On 2025-02-03 19:38, John Ames wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 11:45:25 +0100
> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
> 
>>> Same with airplanes.
>>
>> Damn it Lars! So that one is out too? ;)
> 
> There's always ultralights - nothin' but a go-kart, a box fan, and a
> big ol' parasail. Depending on your local regulations, may not even
> need a license...!
> 

Forbidden in my entire area, because there is a military airport in the 
province.

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65183

FromD <nospam@example.net>
Date2025-02-03 23:15 +0100
Message-ID<a077e079-96a8-0193-2e7c-830393f96ffb@example.net>
In reply to#65174

On Mon, 3 Feb 2025, Carlos E.R. wrote:

> On 2025-02-03 19:38, John Ames wrote:
>> On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 11:45:25 +0100
>> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>> 
>>>> Same with airplanes.
>>> 
>>> Damn it Lars! So that one is out too? ;)
>> 
>> There's always ultralights - nothin' but a go-kart, a box fan, and a
>> big ol' parasail. Depending on your local regulations, may not even
>> need a license...!
>> 
>
> Forbidden in my entire area, because there is a military airport in the 
> province.

Easy. Equip it with rockets and shoot down any approaching aircraft!

The spanish airforce sometimes trains close to my house in south 
eastern spain. I've never seen it myself but my father saw two planes
flying through a low ravine once. Very powerful sight!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65193

Fromrbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Date2025-02-04 05:35 +0000
Message-ID<m0dn9gFodp8U2@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#65183
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 23:15:42 +0100, D wrote:

> The spanish airforce sometimes trains close to my house in south eastern
> spain. I've never seen it myself but my father saw two planes flying
> through a low ravine once. Very powerful sight!

I spent several winters in southern Arizona about 50 miles south of the 
Gila Bend AFB and the Cabeza Prieta Game Refuge / Barry Goldwater Bombing 
Range. They tended to play their reindeer games near the border. 

The refuge was a nice place to hike but you had to call up to see if they 
were planning to shoot the place up that day. I guess the wildlife got 
used to it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65199

FromThe Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Date2025-02-04 09:41 +0000
Message-ID<vnsncl$1psvd$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#65183
On 03/02/2025 22:15, D wrote:

> The spanish airforce sometimes trains close to my house in south eastern 
> spain. I've never seen it myself but my father saw two planes
> flying through a low ravine once. Very powerful sight!

If that turns you on google "Mach loop you tube"

Looking down on aircraft dong 400mph+ with the observer holding up a 
sign saying 'hi mom'...

-- 
“Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”

H.L. Mencken, A Mencken Chrestomathy

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65200

From"Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid>
Date2025-02-04 13:07 +0100
Message-ID<ngc97lx3hk.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
In reply to#65199
On 2025-02-04 10:41, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 03/02/2025 22:15, D wrote:
> 
>> The spanish airforce sometimes trains close to my house in south 
>> eastern spain. I've never seen it myself but my father saw two planes
>> flying through a low ravine once. Very powerful sight!
> 
> If that turns you on google "Mach loop you tube"
> 
> Looking down on aircraft dong 400mph+ with the observer holding up a 
> sign saying 'hi mom'...
> 

Google finds several, but the first one I watched has that sign at the 
very end.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9utt3tXHp0

https://machloop.co.uk/

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65211

FromD <nospam@example.net>
Date2025-02-04 17:39 +0100
Message-ID<05466bdf-c6e4-14fe-257d-2f51a77e4de7@example.net>
In reply to#65199

On Tue, 4 Feb 2025, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 03/02/2025 22:15, D wrote:
>
>> The spanish airforce sometimes trains close to my house in south eastern 
>> spain. I've never seen it myself but my father saw two planes
>> flying through a low ravine once. Very powerful sight!
>
> If that turns you on google "Mach loop you tube"
>
> Looking down on aircraft dong 400mph+ with the observer holding up a sign 
> saying 'hi mom'...

Thank you, very beautiful!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65182

FromD <nospam@example.net>
Date2025-02-03 23:14 +0100
Message-ID<d517766b-68e3-2f2f-a1ad-aac320b4ab3f@example.net>
In reply to#65173

On Mon, 3 Feb 2025, John Ames wrote:

> On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 11:45:25 +0100
> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>
>>> Same with airplanes.
>>
>> Damn it Lars! So that one is out too? ;)
>
> There's always ultralights - nothin' but a go-kart, a box fan, and a
> big ol' parasail. Depending on your local regulations, may not even
> need a license...!

Hah... I live in europe. You need a government license to breathe in 
europe. =(

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65185

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2025-02-04 00:36 +0000
Message-ID<9idoP.2208279$FOb4.1325268@fx15.iad>
In reply to#65182
On 2025-02-03, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Feb 2025, John Ames wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 11:45:25 +0100
>> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> Same with airplanes.
>>>
>>> Damn it Lars! So that one is out too? ;)
>>
>> There's always ultralights - nothin' but a go-kart, a box fan, and a
>> big ol' parasail. Depending on your local regulations, may not even
>> need a license...!
>
> Hah... I live in europe. You need a government license to breathe in 
> europe. =(

The other day we re-watched the movie version of _The Hitchhiker's Guide
to the Galaxy_ (RIP Alan Rickman) and I picked up a new favourite line.
As our heroes attempted to negotiate the Vogon bureaucracy to save Trillian
from being fed to the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal, Arthur Dent took
the lead with the words: "I'm British.  I know how to queue."

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Growth for the sake of
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  growth is the ideology
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  of the cancer cell.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |    -- Edward Abbey

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65191

From"WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net>
Date2025-02-03 22:56 -0500
Message-ID<_-acnVu08PyaDTz6nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@earthlink.com>
In reply to#65185
On 2/3/25 7:36 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2025-02-03, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, 3 Feb 2025, John Ames wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 11:45:25 +0100
>>> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Same with airplanes.
>>>>
>>>> Damn it Lars! So that one is out too? ;)
>>>
>>> There's always ultralights - nothin' but a go-kart, a box fan, and a
>>> big ol' parasail. Depending on your local regulations, may not even
>>> need a license...!
>>
>> Hah... I live in europe. You need a government license to breathe in
>> europe. =(
> 
> The other day we re-watched the movie version of _The Hitchhiker's Guide
> to the Galaxy_ (RIP Alan Rickman) and I picked up a new favourite line.
> As our heroes attempted to negotiate the Vogon bureaucracy to save Trillian
> from being fed to the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal, Arthur Dent took
> the lead with the words: "I'm British.  I know how to queue.


   That WAS a good line, and probably tells us a
   lot about Brits  :-)

   Still liked the old BBC series better - found
   it on a discounted DVD ! Contained more jewels
   of wisdom from Adams.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65221

FromJoerg Walther <joerg.walther@magenta.de>
Date2025-02-05 09:54 +0100
Message-ID<hn96qjhkukfmol324f50mt3nfsi7v6m5qs@joergwalther.my-fqdn.de>
In reply to#65191
WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote:

>   Still liked the old BBC series better - found
>   it on a discounted DVD ! Contained more jewels
>   of wisdom from Adams.

The old series is WAY better than the movie, and btw, it's out on BluRay
now, with much better picture and with additional material, can't
recommend this enough.

-jw-
-- 
And now for something completely different...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65226

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2025-02-05 19:32 +0000
Message-ID<31PoP.609495$px2.12770@fx13.iad>
In reply to#65191
On 2025-02-04, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> wrote:

> On 2/3/25 7:36 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> 
>> The other day we re-watched the movie version of _The Hitchhiker's Guide
>> to the Galaxy_ (RIP Alan Rickman) and I picked up a new favourite line.
>> As our heroes attempted to negotiate the Vogon bureaucracy to save Trillian
>> from being fed to the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal, Arthur Dent took
>> the lead with the words: "I'm British.  I know how to queue.
>
>    That WAS a good line, and probably tells us a
>    lot about Brits  :-)
>
>    Still liked the old BBC series better - found
>    it on a discounted DVD ! Contained more jewels
>    of wisdom from Adams.

I'll have to dig it out again and give it another look.

Fun fact: the robot that played Marvin in the old series appears
(as an anonymous robot) in the movie, in the scene I mentioned above.

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Growth for the sake of
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  growth is the ideology
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  of the cancer cell.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |    -- Edward Abbey

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65228

From"WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net>
Date2025-02-05 22:23 -0500
Message-ID<DD2dnTURqquvtjn6nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@earthlink.com>
In reply to#65226
On 2/5/25 2:32 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2025-02-04, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
> 
>> On 2/3/25 7:36 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> The other day we re-watched the movie version of _The Hitchhiker's Guide
>>> to the Galaxy_ (RIP Alan Rickman) and I picked up a new favourite line.
>>> As our heroes attempted to negotiate the Vogon bureaucracy to save Trillian
>>> from being fed to the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal, Arthur Dent took
>>> the lead with the words: "I'm British.  I know how to queue.
>>
>>     That WAS a good line, and probably tells us a
>>     lot about Brits  :-)
>>
>>     Still liked the old BBC series better - found
>>     it on a discounted DVD ! Contained more jewels
>>     of wisdom from Adams.
> 
> I'll have to dig it out again and give it another look.
> 
> Fun fact: the robot that played Marvin in the old series appears
> (as an anonymous robot) in the movie, in the scene I mentioned above.


   Ah yes, I spotted him in the crowd  :-)

   The BBC series was fairly low-budget and 'crude',
   but, IMHO, better than the slick movie version.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65229

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2025-02-06 04:50 +0000
Message-ID<ScXoP.308269$zX7.15080@fx37.iad>
In reply to#65228
On 2025-02-06, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> wrote:

> On 2/5/25 2:32 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2025-02-04, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2/3/25 7:36 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>
>>>> The other day we re-watched the movie version of _The Hitchhiker's Guide
>>>> to the Galaxy_ (RIP Alan Rickman) and I picked up a new favourite line.
>>>> As our heroes attempted to negotiate the Vogon bureaucracy to save Trillian
>>>> from being fed to the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal, Arthur Dent took
>>>> the lead with the words: "I'm British.  I know how to queue.
>>>
>>>     That WAS a good line, and probably tells us a
>>>     lot about Brits  :-)
>>>
>>>     Still liked the old BBC series better - found
>>>     it on a discounted DVD ! Contained more jewels
>>>     of wisdom from Adams.
>> 
>> I'll have to dig it out again and give it another look.
>> 
>> Fun fact: the robot that played Marvin in the old series appears
>> (as an anonymous robot) in the movie, in the scene I mentioned above.
>
>    Ah yes, I spotted him in the crowd  :-)
>
>    The BBC series was fairly low-budget and 'crude',
>    but, IMHO, better than the slick movie version.

Perhaps, but you have to admit that the scene on the Magrathea
factory floor is magnificent in the new version.

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Growth for the sake of
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  growth is the ideology
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  of the cancer cell.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |    -- Edward Abbey

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65230

From"WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net>
Date2025-02-06 00:45 -0500
Message-ID<8eSdnYjKeo7t0Tn6nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@earthlink.com>
In reply to#65229
On 2/5/25 11:50 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2025-02-06, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
> 
>> On 2/5/25 2:32 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 2025-02-04, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2/3/25 7:36 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The other day we re-watched the movie version of _The Hitchhiker's Guide
>>>>> to the Galaxy_ (RIP Alan Rickman) and I picked up a new favourite line.
>>>>> As our heroes attempted to negotiate the Vogon bureaucracy to save Trillian
>>>>> from being fed to the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal, Arthur Dent took
>>>>> the lead with the words: "I'm British.  I know how to queue.
>>>>
>>>>      That WAS a good line, and probably tells us a
>>>>      lot about Brits  :-)
>>>>
>>>>      Still liked the old BBC series better - found
>>>>      it on a discounted DVD ! Contained more jewels
>>>>      of wisdom from Adams.
>>>
>>> I'll have to dig it out again and give it another look.
>>>
>>> Fun fact: the robot that played Marvin in the old series appears
>>> (as an anonymous robot) in the movie, in the scene I mentioned above.
>>
>>     Ah yes, I spotted him in the crowd  :-)
>>
>>     The BBC series was fairly low-budget and 'crude',
>>     but, IMHO, better than the slick movie version.
> 
> Perhaps, but you have to admit that the scene on the Magrathea
> factory floor is magnificent in the new version.


   That WAS magnificent, perhaps the best scene
   in the movie. BBC didn't have the budget or
   tech for that

   I am a bit saddened at how special effects
   have come to drive film/TV. Even if not as
   spiffy, good dialogue and plot structure
   made for a better product.

   Was watching a Jon Pertwee "Dr. Who" the
   other day. Very low budget - but it still
   worked quite well, told a good story.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65233

FromJoerg Walther <joerg.walther@magenta.de>
Date2025-02-06 18:12 +0100
Message-ID<d8r9qjpak5cmr3le25r0tbefg853rcbfng@joergwalther.my-fqdn.de>
In reply to#65230
WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote:

>   That WAS magnificent, perhaps the best scene
>   in the movie. BBC didn't have the budget or
>   tech for that

There was no tech involved in the making of the special effects, this
was all hand-drawn in a slow, painstaking process, picture by picture.
The guy who made this later won a prize for this. When I watched it for
the first time as a kid I thought this was computer-generated...

-jw-
-- 
And now for something completely different...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#65235

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2025-02-06 20:38 +0000
Message-ID<l59pP.35417$ikh8.2019@fx17.iad>
In reply to#65230
On 2025-02-06, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> wrote:

> On 2/5/25 11:50 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2025-02-06, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2/5/25 2:32 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2025-02-04, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2/3/25 7:36 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The other day we re-watched the movie version of _The Hitchhiker's
>>>>>> Guide to the Galaxy_ (RIP Alan Rickman) and I picked up a new
>>>>>> favourite line.  As our heroes attempted to negotiate the Vogon
>>>>>> bureaucracy to save Trillian from being fed to the Ravenous
>>>>>> Bugblatter Beast of Traal, Arthur Dent took the lead with the
>>>>>> words: "I'm British.  I know how to queue."
>>>>>
>>>>>      That WAS a good line, and probably tells us a
>>>>>      lot about Brits  :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>      Still liked the old BBC series better - found
>>>>>      it on a discounted DVD ! Contained more jewels
>>>>>      of wisdom from Adams.
>>>>
>>>> I'll have to dig it out again and give it another look.
>>>>
>>>> Fun fact: the robot that played Marvin in the old series appears
>>>> (as an anonymous robot) in the movie, in the scene I mentioned above.
>>>
>>>     Ah yes, I spotted him in the crowd  :-)
>>>
>>>     The BBC series was fairly low-budget and 'crude',
>>>     but, IMHO, better than the slick movie version.
>> 
>> Perhaps, but you have to admit that the scene on the Magrathea
>> factory floor is magnificent in the new version.
>
>    That WAS magnificent, perhaps the best scene
>    in the movie.

I think so.  I eagerly await it each time I watch the movie.

>    BBC didn't have the budget or tech for that
>
>    I am a bit saddened at how special effects
>    have come to drive film/TV. Even if not as
>    spiffy, good dialogue and plot structure
>    made for a better product.

Indeed.  It's a shame when there are all sorts of
wonderful effects with nothing to back them up.

>    Was watching a Jon Pertwee "Dr. Who" the
>    other day. Very low budget - but it still
>    worked quite well, told a good story.

We found the original Doctor Who episodes on one of the
streaming services (Prime, I think) and have been working
our way through them.  They actually hold together
reasonably well.

-- 
/~\  Charlie Gibbs                  |  Growth for the sake of
\ /  <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>      |  growth is the ideology
 X   I'm really at ac.dekanfrus     |  of the cancer cell.
/ \  if you read it the right way.  |    -- Edward Abbey

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 4 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc


csiph-web