Care to Comment

[TheRedWorm]

Start answering.

 

[BigAl]

What a mega nonsense! At least 5000gal exploded pretty visible.

Visible, that's the key. Most of the gas turned into big unconstrained fireball outside the tower.

This is what a gas vapor explosion looks like. (60 seconds)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cQOUuJ1DWI

 

[tfk]

Psssst! Tom, are you around? Some chips while watching the brain police in it's natural habitat?

It's too funny.

Yeah, I'm here. But I decided to not respond to the nutty ones anymore. Black hole of time...
You know: Jammonius, Bill Smith, achimspok...

You carry on, now.

Regards,

tom

 

[triforcharity]

These documents were there and it was the only place you could find them. It was the biggest white-collar crime at that time. Nobody would put those documents in his briefcase without trying to commit suicide.
Oh, there was a second scandal of that scale. The Pentagon missed some billions of Dollars.

No hard feelings! It's just money! It's not about love or something real important.

And yet, the guy from Enron was prosecuted, and sent to prison.

The Pentagon money was not "gone" it was, "we spent it on something, but we don't have the receipts".

 

[triforcharity]

I cite:
Conspiracists misrepresent WTC 7's condition
"We’ve already seen an aerial view of the “small pile” left by WTC 7 and the damage it did to 30 West Broadway. Here’s a view from the ground. Keep in mind that WTC 7’s basement was 5 stories deep."
Who is right? You or the Anti-Twoof site?

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf Fema might know if there was a basement or not....

 

[BigAl]

I cite:
Conspiracists misrepresent WTC 7's condition
"We’ve already seen an aerial view of the “small pile” left by WTC 7 and the damage it did to 30 West Broadway. Here’s a view from the ground. Keep in mind that WTC 7’s basement was 5 stories deep."
Who is right? You or the Anti-Twoof site?

Verify quotes much?

That paragraph doesn't exist on that URL.

I any case, WTC7 had little or none in the way of a basement.

 

[pgimeno]

On Saturday, 28 July 1945, at 0940 (while flying in thick fog), a USAAF B-25D crashed into the north side of the Empire State Building.
Cruise speed: 230 mph (200 kn, 370 km/h)

My point: he didn't intend to crash and he did anyway, must not be that hard

Instead let's pick one of the lucky guys:

So, Hanjour had difficulty with the (as we'll see) navigation instruments, with English, failed a night IFR examination and had trouble renting planes because "he could not fly" by FAA's standards. But let me be the one who quotemines now:

In August 2001 [Eddie Shalev] evaluated the flying ability of Hani Hanjour, to determine if Hanjour would be allowed to rent an aircraft from Congressional Air Charters. This is known as "certification." [...]

On his first certification flight a Cessna 172 was used. This is a single engine aircraft. Mr. Shalev sat next to Hanjour and had him fly north from the Gaithersburg airport away from Washington, D.C. Mr. Shalev noticed that Hanjour used a landmark or terrain recognition system for navigation and did not use the VOR or Very High Frequency (VHF) Omni Directional Rangefinder instruments. Mr. Shalev stated that he considered this unusual because basic airmanship requires knowledge of the operation of the VOR. Mr. Shalev selected Clearview airport in northern Maryland as their designation. The airport is located near Westminster, Maryland. Mr. Shalev said that the runway is small at Clearview and difficult to land. Hanjour landed at the airport without any difficulty. Mr. Shalev stated that based on his observations, Hanjour was a "good" pilot. Mr. Shalev thought that Hanjour may have received training from a military pilot because of his use of terrain recognition for navigation.

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Eddie_Shalev

In early 2001, [Hanjour] started training on a Boeing 737 simulator at Pan Am International Flight Academy in Mesa. An instructor there found his work well below standard and discouraged him from continuing. Again, Hanjour persevered; he completed the initial training by the end of March 2001.

http://www.ibiblio.org/ebooks/US/9-11/911Report.htm#p226

[Jarrah] asked to fly the Hudson Corridor, a low-altitude “hallway” along the Hudson River that passes New York landmarks like the World Trade Center. Heavy traffic in the area can make the corridor a dangerous route for an inexperienced pilot. [...]

Hanjour flew the Hudson Corridor, but his instructor declined a second request because of what he considered Hanjour’s poor piloting skills. Shortly thereafter, Hanjour switched to Caldwell Flight Academy in Fairfield, New Jersey, where he rented small aircraft on several occasions during June and July. In one such instance on July 20, Hanjour—likely accompanied by Hazmi—rented a plane from Caldwell and took a practice flight from Fairfield to Gaithersburg, Maryland, a route that would have allowed them to fly near Washington, D.C.

http://www.ibiblio.org/ebooks/US/9-11/911Report.htm#p242

Despite Hanjour's poor reviews, he did have some ability as a pilot, said [Marcel] Bernard of Freeway Airport. "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it," he said.

http://web.archive.org/web/20020405020924/http://www.newsday.com/ny-usflight232380680sep23.story

I can't deny he was a bad pilot. Even the 9/11 Commission said so. Even his handling of the plane denotes that. How does this look for a spiral descent?

Damn, he even ascended while he intended to descend! He did three bumps during the turn! That's a sign of his poor ability.

Maybe because he was so bad a pilot, he was given the biggest target, to reduce the possibilities of screwing up. Even then, he almost crashed into the ground before hitting the big facade of the Pentagon.

Well, it debunks that "nonsense" like brainwashers always debunk nonsense.
let's see:

1) the landscape has neither buildings nor obstacles nor a topography
[qimg]http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/1197/pdrop00025.png[/qimg]

So what? All Hanjour found in his way was lightpoles, because he erred in the low side. The descent speed seems to be similar.

2) Mr. Ruigrok from the National Aerospace Lab is a pilot of small planes and can use the Labs flight simulator 3 times a day if he want.
[qimg]http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/2581/snapshot20100729011853.png[/qimg]

Hanjour could train 3 times a day if he wanted, too. Notice the part that says "He has had some practice, but Hani Hanjour probably did too".

3) The 2nd try of the experienced flightsim user puts the cockpit below the ground
[qimg]http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/7623/snapshot20100729011518.png[/qimg]

After it hits the wall, in my view. Probably trying to reproduce the low impact Hanjour did? I don't think that simulator is made to accurately represent a collision.

4) The filmmaker asks the wrong question
[qimg]http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/4834/snapshot20100729011729.png[/qimg]
[qimg]http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/2660/snapshot20100729011752.png[/qimg]

What was your right question?

Let's say, Hani Hanjour had very limited experience at a flight simulator and wasn't a pilot. He had to fly through a very difficult terrain.

He was a pilot, even if a ****** one. Look at the quotes above.

 

[triforcharity]

Yup and related to thermobaric munitions. A few PSI spread over entire walls does lots of damage dot are useless against steel beams.

This is my favorite video of the effects of a vapor-air explosion 60 sec.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cQOUuJ1DWI

Here's another. About 35 seconds in.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nItMYK-1vBM

Here is another
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kM7pRyEJqes&NR=1&feature=fvwp
25 or so seconds in

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTQWNCeCBvQ&NR=1
That one scares me, as the entire brick chimney falls over

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjAKjdA5Lzw
This is just from gasonline vapor.

 

[R.Mackey]

OK, let's review.

Truther achimspok was challenged to demonstrate that steel structures in unfought fires cannot collapse. In response, he posted a picture. Not only was this attempted Proof By Example logical fallacy, but the structure he chose was a concrete structure, one where the fire was fought vigorously, and in fact it was even a structure built to post-9/11 fire and collapse building codes.

I point this out, and he responds with the following:

Show me the concrete! Is it in the core? So was it the WTC core that collapsed because it was steel? I thought it was the perimeter bowed by the sagged (concrete) floors. Sorry, I was totally wrong.

The structure he picked was the TVCC building, which is perhaps the single most well-known structure fire post-9/11 in the entire world. Yet, amazingly, he knew absolutely nothing about it other than it still stood. I advised him to actually check if his facts were true before making things up, and he responds again, saying that he can't find anything:

Btw, 30 seconds were not enough. Even 30 minutes were not enough. I doubt I can find any information on the structure by googleing around.

So, to summarize:

1. Poster achimspok made up a bunch of "facts," out of thin air, to support his argument
2. When corrected, which was inevitable given the extremely common nature of the knowledge required, he made excuses, and never any concession to reality
3. He ultimately admits he doesn't even know how to find out whether what he was parroting is even true

Since then, of course, he's been pinballing between subjects -- none of which he understands, and none of which we haven't already dealt with -- like a cracked-out jackrabbit.

There's no point talking to you, achimspok. Nor is there any point challenging you. You won't convince anyone of anything. You are no threat to anyone. Heck, the way you behave, I wonder if you've even convinced yourself.

I don't expect your behavior to change, of course. I'm only writing this to clarify to anyone else who's curious exactly why you've joined my Ignore list, before the inevitable distortions from you begin. If you have any questions about that policy, please see this post.

P.S.: One last thing:

(I don't want to cite Macky.)

Does anyone have any idea what this is about?

 

[Tony Szamboti]

OK, let's review.

Truther achimspok was challenged to demonstrate that steel structures in unfought fires cannot collapse. In response, he posted a picture. Not only was this attempted Proof By Example logical fallacy, but the structure he chose was a concrete structure, one where the fire was fought vigorously, and in fact it was even a structure built to post-9/11 fire and collapse building codes.

I point this out, and he responds with the following:



The structure he picked was the TVCC building, which is perhaps the single most well-known structure fire post-9/11 in the entire world. Yet, amazingly, he knew absolutely nothing about it other than it still stood. I advised him to actually check if his facts were true before making things up, and he responds again, saying that he can't find anything:



So, to summarize:

1. Poster achimspok made up a bunch of "facts," out of thin air, to support his argument
   [*]When corrected, which was inevitable given the extremely common nature of the knowledge required, he made excuses, and never any concession to reality
2. He ultimately admits he doesn't even know how to find out whether what he was parroting is even true

Since then, of course, he's been pinballing between subjects -- none of which he understands, and none of which we haven't already dealt with -- like a cracked-out jackrabbit.

There's no point talking to you, achimspok. Nor is there any point challenging you. You won't convince anyone of anything. You are no threat to anyone. Heck, the way you behave, I wonder if you've even convinced yourself.

I don't expect your behavior to change, of course. I'm only writing this to clarify to anyone else who's curious exactly why you've joined my Ignore list, before the inevitable distortions from you begin. If you have any questions about that policy, please see this post.

P.S.: One last thing:



Does anyone have any idea what this is about?

Ryan, you really should take the log out of your own eye before making any claims that someone else isn't seeing things right.

During our Hardfire debate you constantly attempted to berate me concerning the energy absorbed by the columns during failure, saying that I was overestimating it due to my use of a factor of safety of 3.00 to 1 for the central core columns, which you claimed was much lower citing the NIST report and gloatingly stating that they don't make those kinds of errors. Although the actual in-service factor of safety of the core columns has been rigourously shown to be 3.00 to 1 in the months since then, you have failed to admit your error, despite entreaties to do so and correct the record.

You also claimed, during the debate, that the North Tower tilted 8 degrees before it started to descend. In the months since that has been shown to be thoroughly erroneous, as it has been found that the tilt of the upper section of the building was only about 1 degree when the hinge area on the north face broke and the entire upper section started to descend.

Will you finally go on record that you were wrong about these two things? It shouldn't be all that hard, as it seems the reason for your errors was your desire to unflinchingly accept the NIST report at face value, and most of us have been been guilty at times of uncritically accepting official pronouncements only to find out later they were wrong.

 

[achimspok]

No remote control. These were stock jets silly! Try reality next time you waste 8 years spewing lies.

How long do you trained your always the same answer sentence?
How often have you failed in using it!

You first should realize that these planes had GPS.
You should also realize that modern obstacle warning systems use topography maps.
Bad weather? ...use the autolanding system!
Read the 911myth article and have a laugh. Yes, the pilots only would have to go downstairs and to cut some wires to gain control and fly by hand. The pilots were stabbed? WAF!
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=20048&view=findpost&p=10785708

Ok, Chomsky - Not on topic; BUT
There are no RADAR holes, you are telling a lie.

Look where the plane allegedly disappears! In a region of double radar coverage even at 5000ft. If there are "holes" at usual cruising altitude then right above the station. Know what? Therefore usually those stations reaching as far as the next station to prevent the so called "cone of silence".
Can you see any cone of silence marked in the image? No? Why is it? What do you think about the radius at 10000ft?

No war games interfered with anything, war games would have more experience and more personnel on duty, you are being silly and making up a moronic fantasy.

Yes, that's the **** you've been told. Sleep well!

Edited by LashL: 

To properly mask profanity. See Rule 10.

The interviewed General said it was quick and easy to switch from exercise to real world. Where were the quick and fast jets? Have you seen any of it? ...even if the alleged aa77 flew around for 1 hour after the towers were hit and circled for minutes less than 10 miles from the Pentagon.

Btw, in London 7/7 - the big "Al Qaeda" terror attack - 3 subway trains and one bus - coincidentally a security corporation had an exercise 'how to act in a terror attack on 3 subway trains'. Coincidentally they "switched from exercise to real world" on the very same subway stations it actually happened.

Sorry, Hani had to circle because doing a 360 turn is the only way to loose altitude and be on course for the Pentagon after he messed up and failed to descend from altitude;

LOL
Did you notice that he left his downwards spiral at the right angle and altitude to reach the target? How fast can you calculate your bank angle to get the right diameter for your descent rate?
So it was much easier and more secure to point the plane at the target.

You are not much of a pilot are you!!?? Vne, you don't understand flying, they were over Vmo for how long super researcher who believes insane delusions?

Search for "overspeed warning" in this thread!

Hani was only over Vmo for seconds; I have flown my Boeing jet over Vmo for seconds; it was ready to go faster at 70 feet MSL. I flew Boeing jets since 1976; what have you done to understand the truth as you spew idiotic poppycock!?

Be honest,

Edited by LashL: 

Do not change a member's name in order to insult.

What was the fastest dive you ever leveled precisely?

I cite your college:

VMO (and MMO) are exceeded in flight test on every single aircraft. Even VDF/MDF (or VNE) are not ABSOLUTE limits - they are the limits beyond which it is no longer known to be safe - not the limits where it is known to be dangerous. Margins between VMO and VDF are typically of the order of 50-75 kts (just like the old VMO/VNE splits); margins between MMO and MDF are typically of the order of 0.05M-0.07M.

It is fairly well established that Vmo is about 400 mph at sea level, but no solid numbers for Vne have been documented.

The B757-200 however has a Vmo below 10,000 ft of just 250 knots because the windshield isn't certified to withstand birdstrike above 313 knots.

http://www.pprune.org/tech-log/282962-vmo-absolute-aerodynamic-limit.html

Vmo=400mph
+ 75kts (86.3mph)
estimated VNE = 486mph

final speed
"UA175" = 586mph
"AA11" = 493mph
"AA77" = 530mph

So if you are a pilot then you are a deliberate liar

Edited by LashL: 

Do not change a member's name in order to insult.

Flight 11 was not over max dive speed!

Who said so?

LOL, you have no clue! Flight 175 was over Vmo and dive speed for a short period.

How do you know? Have you seen a FDR? According to RADES it was in free fall for a moment! I imagine these 5 hijackers + to dead bodies in a tiny cockpit hitting the overhead panel while the plane banks and levels.
I analyzed the final 12 seconds covered by several cameras. What do you know about it?

A fellow Boeing pilot flew his large (300,000 pound class) Boeing jet over Vmo at low attitude for minutes...

...risking a bird strike at 251kts? WOW!

...and only pulled off some skin under the leading edge of the wing. Boeing jets can get up to .9 to .95 MACH; the only reason there are speed limits low is due to the pressure, thicker air, can damage the aircraft.

You say it man, you say it!

The only limit to the jets used to kill on 911 was the ability of the engine to function under the high speeds at High Q; ask a jet engine engineer to explain before you go spread more idiotic lies.

Seems you have some questions too.

The terrorists you attempt to apologize for took credit for their deed; you are trying to blame who?

Who took credit? Is there any terrorist or Muslim organization who took responsibility? What sense makes an act of terrorism without taking responsibility? None, zero!
Who blamed the Muslims without any shred of evidence?

Edited by LashL: 

Do not change a member's name in order to insult.

Up there is a little riddle for you! Surprise me with an answer that makes any sense!

lol, you have no flight knowledge; bet you are void of physics too. BTW, all the planes that flew over Vmo on 911 crashed.

Indeed!

And your point is what about terrorists with full throttle for the last 20 seconds?

Edited by LashL: 

Do not change a member's name in order to insult.

Real passports...

Have you ever heard about Alomaris passport? Where was it found?

, darn, and their DNA was real too.

If you want to identify DNA you need some DNA of a first grade relative. Did the FBI ask Attas daddy for some spittle? I never heard about that. And btw which Atta? The one who tried to buy a crop duster in the US while the other Atta was observed by the CIA in Hamburg?

Why can't you figure out the easy stuff after 8 years?

You say it man, you say it!
The only thing you have right about 911?

We have DNA of the terrorists you are tying to say never existed.

"We?" Who is we? Do you have access? I will ask Attas daddy!

Sad you get everything wrong about 911 as you spew off topic nonsense.

Yes, I know. You don't like that "off-topic" 9/11 stuff. You like it to talk about VMO. And you like it to send others to school. End of discussion, right?

Edited by LashL: 

Removed breach of Rule 0 and 12

There are people they never found, and tons of other stuff never found. The Black Boxes are not made to be in collapsing buildings, the two tallest buildings in NYC at one time. Are they?

Even passports are not made to be in collapsing buildings, right? Black boxes have "beepers" as far as I know? Passports don't.

Sorry the data in the new readout is not displaced! The raw FDR for Flt 77 was always there, it has to be decoded. There is no offset unless the programmer messed up on the data.
If you say it. At which subframe "AA77" reached the altitude of let's say 1028ft?
old FDR @ 147142
new FDR @ 146741

You can use that offset for the entire FDR. Have fun!

The decode by p4t dolts was not properly lined up, and had one less second than the NTSB decode. Warren's decode matches exactly the NTSB, and p4t decode and has up to impact. Warren found the missing seconds, but they were never missing, they were not decoded.

Did P4T an own read out? Or did the NTSB provide a .fdr and a .csv file?

Why does the FBI need the black boxes to solve the terrorist's plot? Wake up, the dolt terrorists left a trail easier than McVeigh.

You say it! They left tons of clues, right? ...and some of it changed shape and size. Pilots uniforms become wedding suits and more like that. Seriously, solve my riddle and you are my man.

Wake up, you have had 8 years to figure out 911, something the Passengers on Flight 93 did in minutes! lol, you can't figure out 911 given the answers. Sad, and off topic.

Btw, where are Iraqs WMDs? Sorry.

LOL, Hani became a pilot; he persisted because he wanted to kill Americans for UBL. Your are off topic!

You makes me cry. 8 years wasted for nothing but... VMO

Btw, is UBL on the FBI most wanted list for 9/11? I mean, they have shown us a "confession tape", right?

 

[achimspok]

Yup and related to thermobaric munitions. A few PSI spread over entire walls does lots of damage dot are useless against steel beams.

This is my favorite video of the effects of a vapor-air explosion 60 sec.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cQOUuJ1DWI

Here is my favorite video of the effects of TNT.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vb3y6m-buco

 

[BigAl]

how long do you trained your always the same answer sentence?
How often have you failed in using it!

You first should realize that these planes had gps

wrong.

 

[achimspok]

So if the aircraft were the ones tha took off that day with the passengers and crew, why bother with anything else? Why would you need a fake passport? Why destroy the black boxes if they had genuine flight data for the day?

I'm not sure they had. Even the FDR for the aa77 is a little bit of strange, isn't it.

Your theory has more holes than a swiss cheese?

ditto!
Honestly, I don't see any of my questions answered - just one! Seemingly the CCTV rested on 4 concrete pillars. Macky masturbates since than but wouldn't even touch any other question.

Who controlled the aircraft?

Who did 9/11?

How did they do it?

Maybe per home calling system. There are several ways to do it.

Where were they when they did it?

At breakfast? What an idiotic question...

Did they have line of sight?

Do you mean something like "50 miles out, 40 miles out."
No, I don't think so.

If not how could they be sure the aircraft would hit?

What do you think about the way a cruise missile hit? Do you think there is a boy with an antenna around turning little knobs?

Why was it any weasier than having fanatics determined to kill themselvesthat also had commercial licenses?

Because it is pretty difficult to find 20 young men who love to die and who love it over years and who face an immense future guilt they have to cope over years. ...having girlfriend in the meantime, watching table dance.

Who even needed two bags full of evidence. LOL

Indeed.

 

[achimspok]

OK, let's review.

Truther achimspok was challenged to demonstrate that steel structures in unfought fires cannot collapse. In response, he posted a picture. Not only was this attempted Proof By Example logical fallacy, but the structure he chose was a concrete structure, one where the fire was fought vigorously, and in fact it was even a structure built to post-9/11 fire and collapse building codes.

I point this out, and he responds with the following:



The structure he picked was the TVCC building, which is perhaps the single most well-known structure fire post-9/11 in the entire world. Yet, amazingly, he knew absolutely nothing about it other than it still stood. I advised him to actually check if his facts were true before making things up, and he responds again, saying that he can't find anything:



So, to summarize:

1. Poster achimspok made up a bunch of "facts," out of thin air, to support his argument
2. When corrected, which was inevitable given the extremely common nature of the knowledge required, he made excuses, and never any concession to reality
3. He ultimately admits he doesn't even know how to find out whether what he was parroting is even true

Since then, of course, he's been pinballing between subjects -- none of which he understands, and none of which we haven't already dealt with -- like a cracked-out jackrabbit.

There's no point talking to you, achimspok. Nor is there any point challenging you. You won't convince anyone of anything. You are no threat to anyone. Heck, the way you behave, I wonder if you've even convinced yourself.

I don't expect your behavior to change, of course. I'm only writing this to clarify to anyone else who's curious exactly why you've joined my Ignore list, before the inevitable distortions from you begin. If you have any questions about that policy, please see this post.

P.S.: One last thing:

Does anyone have any idea what this is about?

Your masturbation misses the point. You switched in with one question at a point when 20 or more of my questions were still unanswered. Cherry picking tiny successies? Hit and run?

I will ignore you too. Peace and happiness!

 

[achimspok]

My point: he didn't intend to crash and he did anyway, must not be that hard

I hope you understand the nonsense.

So, Hanjour had difficulty with the (as we'll see) navigation instruments, with English, failed a night IFR examination and had trouble renting planes because "he could not fly" by FAA's standards. But let me be the one who quotemines now:

The problem is, he didn't "point the plane at"...

I can't deny he was a bad pilot. Even the 9/11 Commission said so. Even his handling of the plane denotes that. How does this look for a spiral descent?

[qimg]http://11-s.eu.org/11-s/Julio-descenso2.PNG[/qimg]

Damn, he even ascended while he intended to descend! He did three bumps during the turn! That's a sign of his poor ability.

If you say so. You could even try some altitude:distance ratio of 50000:1. The entire fly would look like a short trembling.

Maybe because he was so bad a pilot...

Show me the takeoff in the same relation.

What was your right question?

Practice near zero. Small sim training. Didn't pointed the plane...

He got certificates even if...

 

[achimspok]

wrong.

FDR: GPS OPER

Good night

 

[Grizzly Bear]

EDIT: Ah screw it... why leave a reply up to somebody I ignored right after posting?

Also... another addendum

OK, let's review.

Truther achimspok was challenged to demonstrate that steel structures in unfought fires cannot collapse. In response, he posted a picture. Not only was this attempted Proof By Example logical fallacy, but the structure he chose was a concrete structure, one where the fire was fought vigorously, and in fact it was even a structure built to post-9/11 fire and collapse building codes.

I don't need to tell you things you already know (my patience just finally snapped) but I've given up on any hope that these people are capable of doing the few minutes of googling required to figure this stuff out. Not one of these CD proponents has shown any capacity to do it, ever. Until they learn it I see nothing that justifies taking them seriously anymore.

 

[fess]

Let's say, Hani Hanjour had very limited experience at a flight simulator and wasn't a pilot. He had to fly through a very difficult terrain.

...but you may believe what you've been told if you feel better with it.

The terrain usually does get a little difficult when flying lower than a lamppost.

Any chance you may stay on one subject instead of flittering around like “Tinker Bell”.

 

[BigAl]

FDR: GPS OPER

Good night

Huh?