 | | Re: Concerns with Racial Attitudes and Lego
|
|
(...) USA. (...) This is got to be the funniest or at least the most pathetic statement I have read yet in this never ending debate. The USA has done nothing in 211 years about racism? Yes, tere are problems, but I think it will get better over (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Concerns with Racial Attitudes and Lego
|
|
(...) Wow, this is a stupendous day for Lugnet! Tim, John, and I are agreeing on a heated topic! How did this happen?! Dave! (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Concerns with Racial Attitudes and Lego
|
|
"John DiRienzo" <ig88888888@stlnet.com> wrote in message news:G0xz8F.Fon@lugnet.com... (...) into (...) I (...) replies, (...) States, (...) type (...) me (...) After reading through this post of yours, even though you did bring up a touchy subject, (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | John -- please reply (was: Re: Concerns with Racial Attitudes and Lego)
|
|
(...) John, I tried writing you a reply by e-mail and it bounced: ===...=== ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- <ig88888888@stlnet.com> ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to mail.postnet.com.: (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general, lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| |
| | Re: Concerns with Racial Attitudes and Lego
|
|
I put this in lugnet.general because I don't know where it started. We ain't what we oughta be We ain't what we wanta be We ain't what we gonna be But thank God we ain't what we was. -MLK Perhaps some people will be mad at me for bringing this (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: New Chrome Castle Sets
|
|
If you had called me a jerk, Richard, I would not mind, as I look back and I think I was. But calling Lar a jerk. C'mon dude. Extreme? Yes. Intense? Yes. Well mannered? Yes. Right about a lot of things? Yes. A jerk? No. I still like you, but I did (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Secret Agent Theme for 2001? (was: Re: New S@H Catalog)
|
|
Land from what altitude? I doubt if you'd be able to glide all the way in while staying beneath radar... unless these planes have phenomenally good glide characteristics. ~M (24 years ago, 11-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Secret Agent Theme for 2001? (was: Re: New S@H Catalog)
|
|
(...) aviation craft can land from an altitude with engine turned off, just as a glider, by the help of high lift to weight ratio and very low stall velocity, and of course with an able pilot on controls. I think this could be the ultimate silence. (...) (24 years ago, 11-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Secret Agent Theme for 2001? (was: Re: New S@H Catalog)
|
|
(...) 17 tones (metric) normally, 22 tones during wartime, and up to 30 tones max. (requires special order). They are from the TOs (IIRC), so should not be unique to TAF. They were quite good at STOL (without any external boosters or something), (...) (24 years ago, 11-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Secret Agent Theme for 2001? (was: Re: New S@H Catalog)
|
|
(...) A helicopter wouldn't really make much more noise than an OV-10 Bronco, and you get vertical flight too. If it's good enough for the SEALS, it's good enough for me. ;^) Personally, I think the V-22 Osprey is cool as heck, but I wouldn't want (...) (24 years ago, 8-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Secret Agent Theme for 2001? (was: Re: New S@H Catalog)
|
|
(...) Was that the kind with the retro-firing thrusters? If so, I seem to remember some one incident in which the jets were fired while the craft was too high above the runway, and it crashed. Do I recall correctly? Was that a herc? Do they still (...) (24 years ago, 8-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Secret Agent Theme for 2001? (was: Re: New S@H Catalog)
|
|
(...) that the CIA really liked using little Cessna like planes that had an incredible lift to wingspan ratio and could fly at 35mph. I got to watch one take off one day and it took off on a length of runway shorter than my driveway. In terms of (...) (24 years ago, 8-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I'm lucky to be alive
|
|
(...) Surely you must recognize the difference between a defective product (tires) which, upon catastrophic failure, directly cause an accident and a product (SUV's) whose design, in the event of an accident, may be unsafe. The high- bumper in (...) (24 years ago, 8-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: I'm lucky to be alive
|
|
(...) I don't understand why more attention isn't focused on this issue. A few Firestone's wreak some SUVs and you're got a major crisis, but those same SUVs are a major hazard to normal vehicles and there seems to be far less concern about that. (...) (24 years ago, 8-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Secret Agent Theme for 2001? (was: Re: New S@H Catalog)
|
|
(...) That could be a spectator sport, not unlike dropping large melons from the rooftops of tall buildings. "I believe it will land some- where inside this 200-km circle..." (...) commented that the CIA really liked using little Cessna like planes (...) (24 years ago, 8-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Secret Agent Theme for 2001? (was: Re: New S@H Catalog)
|
|
Selçuk Göre <ssgore@superonline.com> wrote: <CHOP OTHER STUFFE> (...) ...When I used to work for an airport maintenance service, my boss commented that the CIA really liked using little Cessna like planes that had an incredible lift to wingspan (...) (24 years ago, 8-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Secret Agent Theme for 2001? (was: Re: New S@H Catalog)
|
|
(...) Of course it is an option, too. But high noise and more restricted operational envelopes of helicopters might be a problem, I'm not sure, just an educated(*) guess. Selçuk (*) I'm an Aeronautical Engineer. (...) (24 years ago, 8-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Secret Agent Theme for 2001? (was: Re: New S@H Catalog)
|
|
(...) If we're going to start talking about dropping people off, then why not just use a UH-60 in its Special Ops configuration? ~Mark (24 years ago, 7-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Secret Agent Theme for 2001? (was: Re: New S@H Catalog)
|
|
(...) IIRC, the SR-71 fleet has been retired completely. Surely there's something replacing it, but nobody's 100% sure what it is (Aurora or something else?)... (...) <sp-response> Matthias Rust. Anyone know where he is now? (Probably flying jumbo (...) (24 years ago, 7-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Secret Agent Theme for 2001? (was: Re: New S@H Catalog)
|
|
(...) right about SR-71, but you don't need anymore since the effective use of spy satellites. But if you want carry and drop something (human, etc.) what can you do with a SR-71? Parachuting it while cruising at an altitude around 100,000 feet, at (...) (24 years ago, 7-Sep-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
