Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #64971 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-01-29 20:24 -0500 |
| Last post | 2025-01-30 12:27 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 101 — 15 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
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 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
| From | "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-06 23:13 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <r9mcnVF7g9vgFTj6nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #65235 |
On 2/6/25 3:38 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > 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. Ah ... you can get 'em all on "Pluto TV". Search on "Dr Who Classic". However you can't pick and choose episodes, they just run kinda like on regular TV. Sometimes they're arranged more "thematically" - might jump whole seasons, whole Doctors, between story arcs. Remember the VERY first one - "Unearthly Child" ? Ran the night JFK was assassinated and thus got an almost zero rating. Somebody at BBC decided to run it again a week later ... an historic decision. Oddly, the initial scene, moving past the salvage yard, was repeated in a MUCH later post-classic episode. In any case insanely low budget, absolute CRAP special effects - but, yet, very effective entertainment, good stories, good dialog, good plot development. Still very watchable even 60 years later. Oh, if so inclined, find the Katy Manning nude photo-shoot where she was draped over 'Daleks'. The 60s WERE more fun ! Western civ is now much more like a leftist TalibanWorld ... Bianca Censori can't even flash her stuff without "outrage" .... SO sad, repressed and political. The very latest "Who" ... can't get 'em in the USA without paying Disney big $$$. They've also gone SO "woke" I'll never watch 'em anyhow. Again, so sad. It'll be a good decade before a reboot, but I may not be alive for that. Anyway, they hit on a near-perfect theme/universe for drama. Would not be surprised to see various evos even 60 years from now. Oh, btw, don't believe in time travel - only The Now, one "Fermi-second" at a time. But the IDEA is still intriguing, so many fictional possibilities. Humans are in no way limited by The Real :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joerg Walther <joerg.walther@magenta.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-06 18:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <5vq9qj5endvvu1efif147ejgkeioe8vpk7@joergwalther.my-fqdn.de> |
| In reply to | #65228 |
WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote: > The BBC series was fairly low-budget and 'crude', > but, IMHO, better than the slick movie version. And Douglas Adams was in it in several cameos, the first one being the scene with the naked man who drowns himself in the ocean while throwing away his last banknotes. -jw- -- And now for something completely different...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | D <nospam@example.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-04 17:29 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <7aa57f29-fd91-e80d-9565-c35888bf9f05@example.net> |
| In reply to | #65185 |
On Tue, 4 Feb 2025, 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." Haha, could just as well be swedish. It is a national sport! =D
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-03 22:48 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <KuqcnWFH49qDEzz6nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #65182 |
On 2/3/25 5:14 PM, D 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. =( Do they send everybody a handbook on How To Poop also, picture version for the toddlers and now-illiterate masses ? :-) USA anyhow, 'ultra-lights' and I think small auto-gyros do not require a license. People build these things in their back yard ... not always correctly alas. There is a REASON bolts on aircraft often have those lock-pins, a REASON you don't use lock-washer bolts from the hardware store on thin-ish aluminum struts and such, a REASON you don't use milk-based glue to stick the cloth to your little dragonfly plane.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-04 05:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m0doc7Fodp8U4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #65189 |
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 22:48:45 -0500, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote: > Do they send everybody a handbook on How To Poop also, > picture version for the toddlers and now-illiterate masses ? https://www.amazon.com/How-Shit-Woods-3rd-Environmentally/dp/1580083633 I think the accepted method these days is to dig a 6" deep cat hole. The other school of thought is something is going to come along and dig it up anyway.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | D <nospam@example.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-04 17:35 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <57e7d940-218d-26e5-552d-2e1fd0a26b37@example.net> |
| In reply to | #65189 |
On Mon, 3 Feb 2025, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote: > On 2/3/25 5:14 PM, D 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. =( > > Do they send everybody a handbook on How To Poop also, > picture version for the toddlers and now-illiterate > masses ? :-) Haha, not yet. BUT! An acquaintance, acquaintance discovered that in his childrens daycare center the children were read the book "the evil orange man" every day. You gotta start educating your socialists early! ;) In another daycare center they had a fundamentalist moslem woman who was always ranting at the children how bad christians are. Sweden in 2025! > USA anyhow, 'ultra-lights' and I think small auto-gyros do > not require a license. People build these things in their > back yard ... not always correctly alas. > > There is a REASON bolts on aircraft often have those > lock-pins, a REASON you don't use lock-washer bolts > from the hardware store on thin-ish aluminum struts > and such, a REASON you don't use milk-based glue to > stick the cloth to your little dragonfly plane.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | D <nospam@example.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-02 11:44 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <793ce21e-0306-d981-cb72-5c219128694a@example.net> |
| In reply to | #65115 |
On Sat, 1 Feb 2025, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2025-02-01, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, 1 Feb 2025 14:47:08 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> >>> Old nautical saying, translating from Spanish: Small craft, big misery. >> >> Other nautical saying: >> >> https://www.hauteresidence.com/olivia-hsu-decker-at-the-monaco-yacht-show/ >> a-pillow-on-a-yacht-saying-a-boat-is-a-hole-in-the-water-surrounded-by- >> wood-into-which-you-pour-money/ > > It's been said that the two happiest days in a boat owner's life > are the day he buys it and the day he sells it. Ok, ok, I get the message! Apparently the yacht idea seems to be a bad one. ;) Now, that leaves me with the one about the single jet engine plane!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-02 20:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m0a3s7F6f09U5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #65136 |
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 11:44:37 +0100, D wrote: > Now, that leaves me with the one about the single jet engine plane! There is a slightly used one available in Philadelphia. Bring a trailer. There was a guy in Vermont who managed to buy a de-militarized MiG. Now there was a conversation piece. https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a25836654/for-sale-one- mig-29-fighter-jet/ You would need a multi-engine rating though.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | D <nospam@example.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-02 22:01 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <5aa64e9f-58ba-d7c5-689d-afbedabb73f2@example.net> |
| In reply to | #65147 |
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025, rbowman wrote: > On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 11:44:37 +0100, D wrote: > >> Now, that leaves me with the one about the single jet engine plane! > > There is a slightly used one available in Philadelphia. Bring a trailer. > > There was a guy in Vermont who managed to buy a de-militarized MiG. Now > there was a conversation piece. > > https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a25836654/for-sale-one- > mig-29-fighter-jet/ > > > You would need a multi-engine rating though. > I think the FLARIS one will be around 1.5-1.8 MUSD, much better value for money! =)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-02 21:26 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <sv2dnWqcrPvutD36nZ2dnZfqn_SdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #65136 |
On 2/2/25 5:44 AM, D wrote: > > > On Sat, 1 Feb 2025, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > >> On 2025-02-01, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 1 Feb 2025 14:47:08 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>> >>>> Old nautical saying, translating from Spanish: Small craft, big misery. >>> >>> Other nautical saying: >>> >>> https://www.hauteresidence.com/olivia-hsu-decker-at-the-monaco-yacht-show/ >>> >>> a-pillow-on-a-yacht-saying-a-boat-is-a-hole-in-the-water-surrounded-by- >>> wood-into-which-you-pour-money/ >> >> It's been said that the two happiest days in a boat owner's life >> are the day he buys it and the day he sells it. > > Ok, ok, I get the message! Apparently the yacht idea seems to be a bad > one. ;) > > Now, that leaves me with the one about the single jet engine plane! A few people make those ... some look snazzy. I think Honda+Piper was working on one but Covid+recession may have ended that. The old BD-5J was maybe the ultimate - but you likely had to have someone stomp on you so you'd settle in the seat :-) There's a mini-jet to be seen in a hanger I pass from time to time, very nice. I'll remember the brand name next time I see it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-03 04:17 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lrXnP.1970348$oR74.350283@fx16.iad> |
| In reply to | #65165 |
On 2025-02-03, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> wrote: > On 2/2/25 5:44 AM, D wrote: > >> Now, that leaves me with the one about the single jet engine plane! > > A few people make those ... some look snazzy. > > I think Honda+Piper was working on one but > Covid+recession may have ended that. I occasionally see a Honda jet. Two engines, though - but if you're spending that much money you might as well have redundancy. > The old BD-5J was maybe the ultimate - but you > likely had to have someone stomp on you so > you'd settle in the seat :-) Yes, I fell in lust with them when they came out. Even the prop version would be a hoot. The gear was retracted by a large handle between your legs, and could be done very fast - at an airshow someone flew down the show line flapping his gear at the crowd. -- /~\ 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]
| From | "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-03 01:29 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <GlidnbYFkcbf_z36nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #65169 |
On 2/2/25 11:17 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2025-02-03, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> wrote: > >> On 2/2/25 5:44 AM, D wrote: >> >>> Now, that leaves me with the one about the single jet engine plane! >> >> A few people make those ... some look snazzy. >> >> I think Honda+Piper was working on one but >> Covid+recession may have ended that. > > I occasionally see a Honda jet. Two engines, though - > but if you're spending that much money you might as > well have redundancy. Um ... check the specs. One engine MIGHT not be enough to hold it up :-) Could extend your death-glide though ... find a wide highway and watch for wires. That's always the pickle ... more engines also equals more chance of engine failure. It is reported that Charles Lindbergh was a test pilot for the DC-3. He got it up to take- off speed, raised the gear - then cut one engine to see if it'd still climb :-) >> The old BD-5J was maybe the ultimate - but you >> likely had to have someone stomp on you so >> you'd settle in the seat :-) > > Yes, I fell in lust with them when they came out. Even the > prop version would be a hoot. The gear was retracted by a > large handle between your legs, and could be done very fast - > at an airshow someone flew down the show line flapping his gear > at the crowd. Wonderful little planes ! Alas Bede went broke. I think one of the 5J's was featured in a Bond movie.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-03 09:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vnq38j$16nij$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #65170 |
On 03/02/2025 06:29, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote: > It is reported that Charles Lindbergh was a > test pilot for the DC-3. He got it up to take- > off speed, raised the gear - then cut one engine > to see if it'd still climb If he did it was a damn stupid thing to do. In a twin there is a speed range in which although the aircraft has the power to climb, rudder authority is so lacking that using full power will net you an uncontrollable yaw. Most WWI twins suffered from this. They could fly and land on one, but not take off. -- The biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with what it actually is.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-03 09:08 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tnednTrwQsZsUD36nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #65171 |
On 2/3/25 4:45 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 03/02/2025 06:29, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote: >> It is reported that Charles Lindbergh was a >> test pilot for the DC-3. He got it up to take- >> off speed, raised the gear - then cut one engine >> to see if it'd still climb > > If he did it was a damn stupid thing to do. They'd made promises - so he put it to the acid test. I *presume* he had enough room ahead to at least pancake ... but daredevils are daredevils. > In a twin there is a speed range in which although the aircraft has the > power to climb, rudder authority is so lacking that using full power > will net you an uncontrollable yaw. > Most WWI twins suffered from this. They could fly and land on one, but > not take off. The DC-3 is pretty "floaty". Maybe, apparently according to the old story, it could take off - even if just barely. The thing was likely NOT loaded however.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | D <nospam@example.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-03 22:54 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <c16a8c3c-133a-dc60-b857-6b2f9f9664c7@example.net> |
| In reply to | #65165 |
On Sun, 2 Feb 2025, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote: > On 2/2/25 5:44 AM, D wrote: >> >> >> On Sat, 1 Feb 2025, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >> >>> On 2025-02-01, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 1 Feb 2025 14:47:08 +0100, Carlos E.R. wrote: >>>> >>>>> Old nautical saying, translating from Spanish: Small craft, big misery. >>>> >>>> Other nautical saying: >>>> >>>> https://www.hauteresidence.com/olivia-hsu-decker-at-the-monaco-yacht-show/ >>>> a-pillow-on-a-yacht-saying-a-boat-is-a-hole-in-the-water-surrounded-by- >>>> wood-into-which-you-pour-money/ >>> >>> It's been said that the two happiest days in a boat owner's life >>> are the day he buys it and the day he sells it. >> >> Ok, ok, I get the message! Apparently the yacht idea seems to be a bad one. >> ;) >> >> Now, that leaves me with the one about the single jet engine plane! > > > A few people make those ... some look snazzy. > > I think Honda+Piper was working on one but > Covid+recession may have ended that. > > The old BD-5J was maybe the ultimate - but you > likely had to have someone stomp on you so > you'd settle in the seat :-) > > There's a mini-jet to be seen in a hanger I pass > from time to time, very nice. I'll remember the > brand name next time I see it. > Have a look at this! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flaris_LAR01 ! =D
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-01 19:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <m07bd2FnopbU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #65098 |
On Sat, 1 Feb 2025 11:39:43 +0100, D wrote: > Or maybe I should buy a small yacht? I hear 60-90 ft should be enough to > take me over the atlantic when the season and weather permits. https://goodoldboat.com/book-review-the-boat-who-wouldnt-float/ It will keep you busy. I've sailed the coast of Maine up into New Brunswick in an International 500 yawl similar to this: https://owningdrift.home.blog/ Unfortunately the hull on this one has been painted except for the transom. It's a mahogany hull and shouldn't be disguised. Of course that means buying sandpaper by the ream, beer by the gallon, and whiling away the spring sanding and varnishing. Then comes the fateful day of launching. Wooden boats dry out and leak like a sieve when reintroduced to the water. Put a high volume pump aboard and hope for the best. The mantra at that point is 'She'll make up.' It was fun but it took care of my around the world sailing aspirations. I like to walk and I can't walk on water.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | D <nospam@example.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-02 11:42 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <5f0d6c6f-e875-acfe-510a-b9716a9c083a@example.net> |
| In reply to | #65109 |
On Sat, 1 Feb 2025, rbowman wrote: > On Sat, 1 Feb 2025 11:39:43 +0100, D wrote: > >> Or maybe I should buy a small yacht? I hear 60-90 ft should be enough to >> take me over the atlantic when the season and weather permits. > > https://goodoldboat.com/book-review-the-boat-who-wouldnt-float/ > > It will keep you busy. I've sailed the coast of Maine up into New > Brunswick in an International 500 yawl similar to this: > > https://owningdrift.home.blog/ > > Unfortunately the hull on this one has been painted except for the > transom. It's a mahogany hull and shouldn't be disguised. Of course that This is the truth! Wooden boats are very beautiful! > means buying sandpaper by the ream, beer by the gallon, and whiling away > the spring sanding and varnishing. Then comes the fateful day of > launching. Wooden boats dry out and leak like a sieve when reintroduced to > the water. Put a high volume pump aboard and hope for the best. The mantra > at that point is 'She'll make up.' This is the truth! Even though I find these types of boats very beautiful, I would never dream of buying that type of boat myself. For that to be reasonable you must have the passion or an old boat that's been within the family for generations. > It was fun but it took care of my around the world sailing aspirations. I > like to walk and I can't walk on water. It is because you are strong enough in your faith!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-02-01 14:44 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <o2l17lxehq.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #65086 |
On 2025-02-01 06:25, rbowman wrote: > On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 23:00:03 +0100, D wrote: > >> Reminds me of when I was young. There was a flight simulator on windows >> 3.11 I think, and the main joy was to crash the planes into buildings in >> the most spectacular way. After you did that, they have like a re-run of >> the crash. > > I had the original Microsoft Flight Simulator on DOS. All I can say it's a > good thing I could fly a real Lark better than the simulator. In the 80's, that floppy was used to find out how "compatible" was an IBM compatible PC. -- Cheers, Carlos.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-31 13:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <vnijik$3gm8i$1@andyburns.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #64988 |
The Natural Philosopher wrote: > Andy Burns wrote: >>> the 365 service health page? (which shows no current or recent >> problems of that type). > > Almost certainly. Admitting to faults can cost a large company serious > money if the customers are on service guarantee contracts M365 only has a "three nines" SLA.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" <WokieSux283@ud0s4.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-01-30 06:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <kimdnZQEQ5OPwgb6nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #64987 |
On 1/30/25 5:50 AM, Andy Burns wrote: > "WokieSux282@ud0s4.net" wrote: > >> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-14339365/Microsoft- >> users-report-issues-365-services-outage.html >> >> Microsoft is down across the US as users report issues >> with 365 services. >> >> Downdetector, a website that tracks online outages, shows >> major problems with the website, Outlook and logging >> into accounts. >> >> Issues hit Microsoft 365 services around 12:30pm ET. >> >> . . . >> >> Trust yer everything to M$ ! :-) >> >> DownDetector indicates there are still problems >> even now at 20:24 est. >> >> I guess they'll blame "updates" again. > Because the Daily Mail and DownDetector are *such* good tools compared > to the 365 service health page? (which shows no current or recent > problems of that type). > > <https://admin.cloud.microsoft/?#/servicehealth/history> > > requires login ... Sure ... ask M$ if there's any prob with M$ stuff :-) "Move along ! Nothing to see here !"
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web