non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#125 Feb 6, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
I looked up your bet, I saw it wasn't agreed to and not me... Gee, another pair of lies, by the nutty cheap guy....
Let me guess, you have no point, so you spew childish fantasies.. Nice you're broke & dumb, so at least there's justice.... LOSER~
You said the FAA would release the fleet to fly by March 4th, 2013. It ain't gonna happen, mr low integrity poster.

Judged:

16

16

16

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Maxamillion

Saint Paul, MN

#126 Feb 6, 2013
FYI, my favorite airplane IS Boeing.

The Chicago crash of the DC-10 turned me off on that plane. The DC-10 has flap/slat positioners that retract when hydraulic pressure is lost. When the DC-10 lost an engine because of improper maintenance all lift was lost on the left side of the plane and she rolled over and hit dirt.

One sad thing is the passengers had a view out the front of the plane just like the pilots.

The other sad thing is IF the pilots knew they had lost an engine and simply flown her with that knowledge they could have landed it with the 2 engines.

In fact a DC-10 flight I was on lost an engine and landed without a problem on Oahu. Our engine lost all its oil and was shut down near Hilo and fuel was dumped and we landed as if there was no problem.

Judged:

16

16

16

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#127 Feb 6, 2013
non-starter wrote:
<quoted text>You said the FAA would release the fleet to fly by March 4th, 2013. It ain't gonna happen, mr low integrity poster.
Actually, I wrote-

"I like idiots, they talk a lot, but ignore wager offers, because they lie... The battery rework will take a month or less.

Seems I said nothing about the FAA or the fleet.

Now why do you ALWAYS lie ???

Judged:

24

23

22

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
non-starter

Saint Paul, MN

#128 Feb 7, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
Is their a Aircraft plant in Mn, I don't know about ??? LMAOROTFU~! As for "junk", are you a resident of MN ?
Stupid....Maxamillion DA MORON wrote:
<quoted text>
"Boeing will never fly the 787..."
"All this rework may take 2+ years."
"NOT a quick fix by any means."

You might want to try "there" next time.

Better English Lessons

Home Grammar Lessons Vocabulary Lessons Easier Lessons Phrasal Verbs Strong Collocations Hangman Contact

They're/their/there
Click on the buttons until you find the correct answer

http://www.better-english.com/easier/theyre.h ...

Work on these and get back to me. Usually, before a word that begins with a vowel, we use "an" instead of "a", but that is a lesson for after you master there/their/they're.

As for an airline company in Minnesota, your question was presented as a rhetorical one. I can get you a definition of rhetorical as well, mr low integrity poster.

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#132 Feb 7, 2013
non-starter wrote:

non-starter wrote:
<quoted text>You said the FAA would release the fleet to fly by March 4th, 2013. It ain't gonna happen, mr low integrity poster.
Actually, I wrote-

"I like idiots, they talk a lot, but ignore wager offers, because they lie... The battery rework will take a month or less.

Seems I said nothing about the FAA or the fleet.

Now, why do you ALWAYS lie ???

Broke in character/cash and compensating, right ??? LMAOROTFU~!
Maxamillion

Saint Paul, MN

#133 Feb 7, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, I wrote-
"I like idiots, they talk a lot, but ignore wager offers, because they lie... The battery rework will take a month or less.
Seems I said nothing about the FAA or the fleet.
Now, why do you ALWAYS lie ???
Broke in character/cash and compensating, right ??? LMAOROTFU~!
Boeing is BEGGING the FAA to allow them to fly the 787 in order to recreate the burning battery situation.

Anyone understanding problem: diagnosis/redesign/manufacture /test/recertification/test flight knows Boeing has yet to understand what the problem is. So Boeing is still in the diagnosis stage of problem resolution.

The 787 has a LONG WAY TO GO before it will be carrying passengers if it ever does.
CRASSUS

Green Bay, WI

#134 Feb 7, 2013
I watched the movie Flight yesterday. The pilot was a Jigger. Of course he was an alcoholic and a drug addict. He wound up in prison with the rest of the Jiggers.
CRASSUS

Green Bay, WI

#135 Feb 7, 2013
Did I give away the ending?
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#136 Feb 7, 2013
Maxamillion wrote:
<quoted text>
Boeing is BEGGING the FAA to allow them to fly the 787 in order to recreate the burning battery situation.
Anyone understanding problem: diagnosis/redesign/manufacture /test/recertification/test flight knows Boeing has yet to understand what the problem is. So Boeing is still in the diagnosis stage of problem resolution.
The 787 has a LONG WAY TO GO before it will be carrying passengers if it ever does.
The 787 took off around 10:25 a.m.(9:25 a.m. CT) from Fort Worth, Texas, bound for Everett, Washington. Oops ! Funny, you said they'd NEVER FLY, right wing nut guy ???
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#137 Feb 7, 2013
non-starter wrote:
<quoted text>I don't think it should fly with the current battery technology, and I am unsure how they got a lithium ion system approved in 2007 for use. Toyota determined that the lithium ion system at that time was too high of a risk and used Nickel metal hydride in their Prius.
While there is no free lithium metal in the lithium ion system Boeing is using, they can still catch fire. There are some alternative lower energy density lithium ion systems out there that may be an ok short term substitute, but not sure you can just plug them in in place of the system Yuasa is manufacturing for Boeing. If they can substitute one type for another and have the same footprint, the FAA may let them back in the air with heavy monitoring and testing in a month or two. If the system needs to be re-worked because of different cell voltages or energy densities(need more cells to provide the same amount of back-up power) could easily be 6 months to a year. Government contracts I have worked on easily would take 6 months to prove a concept.
How long, again ???

The 787 took off around 10:25 a.m.(9:25 a.m. CT) from Fort Worth, Texas, bound for Everett, Washington.
Maxamillion

Saint Paul, MN

#138 Feb 7, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
<quoted text>The 787 took off around 10:25 a.m.(9:25 a.m. CT) from Fort Worth, Texas, bound for Everett, Washington. Oops ! Funny, you said they'd NEVER FLY, right wing nut guy ???
It's called returning a lemon to the maker.

Everett IS a Boeing plant location, isn't it? Truth now.
Consistent

Saint Paul, MN

#141 Feb 7, 2013
Maxamillion wrote:
<quoted text>
It's called returning a lemon to the maker.
Everett IS a Boeing plant location, isn't it? Truth now.
Look, Schamhl knows EVERYTHING about EVERY topic!!!

Schmahl for King of the Earth! Schmahl knows all!

Ask him how many black bears an average 787 eats in a year - he'll tell you.

Ask him him how many points Romney is going to win by - he'll tell you.
Maxamillion

Saint Paul, MN

#142 Feb 7, 2013
Everett IS Boeing.

It would be interesting to know how the 787 was flying.

Were staff on board the plane with fire supression devices at each battery?

Was the plane allowed to fly at altitude over 10,000 feet?

Was the plane allowed to fly over populated areas?

Was the landing gear allowed to be retracted?

Did the flight crew have parachutes?

Were ANY passengers allowed to fly on the plane other than needed staff to operate the plane and protect the batteries from fire?

Were the lithium ion batteries even onboard the plane?

Why was the plane flown to Everett? Was the issue parking fees being paid for storing the 787 in Texas?

Was the 787 simply being returned to Boeing because it's a lemon with no possibility of it ever flying again?
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#143 Feb 7, 2013
Poor distraction attempt, dumb*SS ~

Multiple moniker teabagger "reality" ??

CANNOT MATCH THE IRONY !!!

Boeing will never fly the 787..."
"All this rework may take 2+ years."
"NOT a quick fix by any means."
TAKE THE MONTH BET, LIAR !!!
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#144 Feb 7, 2013
Maxamillion wrote:
<quoted text>
Only an idiot like you wouldn't understand the severity/complexity of the 787 failure. Unless they can fix the current design, not possible, they will need to do a redesign of the 2 battery packs and all associated control systems on the 787. Once they think they have a good design, for the second time, the new airplane must go through recertification and flight worthiness tests by the FAA.
All this rework may take 2+ years. Meanwhile the 787 assembly line may not be able to churn out new planes and AirBus may be able to ramp up and capture the entire market.
At that time Boeing will go broke.
Boeing must have bought fuel for the flight on credit, right dumb*ss !??
Maxamillion

Saint Paul, MN

#145 Feb 7, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
Poor distraction attempt, dumb*SS ~
Multiple moniker teabagger "reality" ??
CANNOT MATCH THE IRONY !!!
Boeing will never fly the 787..."
"All this rework may take 2+ years."
"NOT a quick fix by any means."
TAKE THE MONTH BET, LIAR !!!
You never answer a question..
Amused Slew

Seattle, WA

#146 Feb 7, 2013
You're a liar and I disrespect you.
Maxamillion

Saint Paul, MN

#147 Feb 7, 2013
Amused Slew wrote:
You're a liar and I disrespect you.
Did someone say I cared about how you think?

Hint hint, tell somebody who cares..

In the mean time go polish a 787. Would they make good planters?
Lawton

Saint Paul, MN

#148 Feb 7, 2013
Look, Schamhl knows EVERYTHING about EVERY topic!!!

Schmahl for King of the Earth! Schmahl knows all!

Ask him how many black bears an average 787 eats in a year - he'll tell you.

Ask him him how many points Romney is going to win by - he'll tell you.
Maxamillion

Saint Paul, MN

#149 Feb 7, 2013
A "Ferry Flight" was allowed by the FAA.

NO test flights are allowed of the 787. Boeing has no clue as to what the problem is, NONE.

She's GROUNDED!!!

http://www.nwcn.com/news/washington/First-787...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Minneapolis Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Burn Diss Place Down 33 min Sqandered taxdollars 6
Ferguson rioters destroy businesses, police car... 36 min Sqandered taxdollars 18
The Gentle Violent Giant 41 min Sqandered taxdollars 2
Car plows through protesters during Ferguson ra... 43 min Sqandered taxdollars 3
Thousands in Minnesota join outcry over Ferguso... 50 min Sqandered taxdollars 3
Global warming 'undeniable,' scientists say (Jul '10) 2 hr Earthling-1 33,280
How do I explain this to my black students? 2 hr Sqandered taxdollars 22
Minneapolis Dating
Find my Match

Minneapolis People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Minneapolis News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Minneapolis

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 7:15 am PST

NBC Sports 7:15AM
Eddie Lacy wins NFC offensive player of week
NBC Sports 7:55 AM
Belichick on Brady/Rodgers similarities: They both wear No. 12
Bleacher Report 8:19 AM
NFL Week 13: Previewing the Packers vs. Patriots Showdown
Yahoo! Sports 8:29 AM
Throwback Thanksgivings: The Jason Garrett (as QB, not coach) Game
Bleacher Report 9:53 AM
Patriots vs. Packers Betting Odds, Analysis, NFL Pick