As with all other videos, draws no conclusions whatsoever because >litigation.
On 17/07/2025 in message <105agtn$1960e$12@dont-email.me> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
As with all other videos, draws no conclusions whatsoever because
litigation.
What a pity you and Rod Steel lack the intelligence to do the same.
On 17/07/2025 10:58, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 17/07/2025 in message <105agtn$1960e$12@dont-email.me> The NaturalYou see, I at least am smart enough to know that no one is going to sue me. So I can tell the truth.
Philosopher wrote:
As with all other videos, draws no conclusions whatsoever because
litigation.
What a pity you and Rod Steel lack the intelligence to do the same.
As can the WSJ, because it is big enough .
You on the other hand appear to be unable to draw logical conclusions
from basic facts. You have to be 'told' by an 'expert' in a 'report'.
On 17/07/2025 10:58, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 17/07/2025 in message <105agtn$1960e$12@dont-email.me> The NaturalYou see, I at least am smart enough to know that no one is going to sue
Philosopher wrote:
As with all other videos, draws no conclusions whatsoever because
litigation.
What a pity you and Rod Steel lack the intelligence to do the same.
me.
So I can tell the truth.
As can the WSJ, because it is big enough .
You on the other hand appear to be unable to draw logical conclusions
from basic facts. You have to be 'told' by an 'expert' in a 'report'.
On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 11:31:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/07/2025 10:58, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 17/07/2025 in message <105agtn$1960e$12@dont-email.me> The NaturalYou see, I at least am smart enough to know that no one is going to sue
Philosopher wrote:
As with all other videos, draws no conclusions whatsoever because
litigation.
What a pity you and Rod Steel lack the intelligence to do the same.
me.
So I can tell the truth.
As can the WSJ, because it is big enough .
You on the other hand appear to be unable to draw logical conclusions
from basic facts. You have to be 'told' by an 'expert' in a 'report'.
From the beginning I said it was fuel failure, but didn't believe anybody was foolish enough to switch off the fuel supply.
On 17/07/2025 11:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/07/2025 10:58, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 17/07/2025 in message <105agtn$1960e$12@dont-email.me> The NaturalYou see, I at least am smart enough to know that no one is going to
Philosopher wrote:
As with all other videos, draws no conclusions whatsoever because
litigation.
What a pity you and Rod Steel lack the intelligence to do the same.
sue me.
So I can tell the truth.
Is it important to you that others acknowledge how clever you are?
On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 11:31:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/07/2025 10:58, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 17/07/2025 in message <105agtn$1960e$12@dont-email.me> The NaturalYou see, I at least am smart enough to know that no one is going to sue
Philosopher wrote:
As with all other videos, draws no conclusions whatsoever because
litigation.
What a pity you and Rod Steel lack the intelligence to do the same.
me.
So I can tell the truth.
As can the WSJ, because it is big enough .
You on the other hand appear to be unable to draw logical conclusions
from basic facts. You have to be 'told' by an 'expert' in a 'report'.
From the beginning I said it was fuel failure, but didn't believe
anybody was foolish enough to switch off the fuel supply.
On 17/07/2025 12:55, Smolley wrote:
[quoted text muted]
Well I went from 'clearly both engines failed' to 'clearly someone
switched the fuel off on both engines' as soon as the preliminary report
came out and I had listened to the people who understand 777 fuel
systems.
On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 13:37:23 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/07/2025 12:55, Smolley wrote:
[quoted text muted]
Well I went from 'clearly both engines failed' to 'clearly someone
switched the fuel off on both engines' as soon as the preliminary report
came out and I had listened to the people who understand 777 fuel
systems.
Even without such expert knowledge I would intuitively believe two
switches failing to be less likely than a deliberate (albeit possibly unknowing) action.
On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 11:55:20 +0000, Smolley wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2025 11:31:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/07/2025 10:58, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 17/07/2025 in message <105agtn$1960e$12@dont-email.me> The NaturalYou see, I at least am smart enough to know that no one is going to sue
Philosopher wrote:
As with all other videos, draws no conclusions whatsoever because
litigation.
What a pity you and Rod Steel lack the intelligence to do the same.
me.
So I can tell the truth.
As can the WSJ, because it is big enough .
You on the other hand appear to be unable to draw logical conclusions
from basic facts. You have to be 'told' by an 'expert' in a 'report'.
From the beginning I said it was fuel failure, but didn't believe
anybody was foolish enough to switch off the fuel supply.
If I were investigating anything, I would begin by leaving my "no one
would be that stupid" hat at home.
I refer you to the endless parade of Darwin Awards as a suggestion you
may wish to adopt a similar strategy.
In general, in any incident I *begin* by eliminating the "Surely no one
would .....?" possibilities before proceeding. Saves an awful lot of time.
None of this takes an Einstein. Its just logical inferences drawn from the >data.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ur234kwnhk
15 minutes in, detailed video and diagrams showing exactly how the fuel switches are connected and how they work.
As with all other videos, draws no conclusions whatsoever because litigation.
https://www.wsj.com/world/asia/air-india-crash-senior-pilot-eab72db5
The WSJ is big enough to take any potential litigation, and its readers
want to know whether this is going to hit Air India or Boeing stock.
(The captain did it. Deliberately).
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ur234kwnhkThe time must be approaching, rapidly, when this forum needs to be
15 minutes in, detailed video and diagrams showing exactly how the
fuel switches are connected and how they work.
As with all other videos, draws no conclusions whatsoever because
litigation.
https://www.wsj.com/world/asia/air-india-crash-senior-pilot-eab72db5
The WSJ is big enough to take any potential litigation, and its
readers want to know whether this is going to hit Air India or Boeing
stock.
(The captain did it. Deliberately).
moderated in order to keep out all of the crap like this.
... and what mental disturbance leads people to want to speculate on
accident causes, about which they have no specialist, or inside, knowledge?
On 17/07/2025 in message <105aujb$1cn3a$1@dont-email.me> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
None of this takes an Einstein. Its just logical inferences drawn from
the data.
You mean from the incomplete data we have from a miscellany of sources
which may prove to be incorrect when we get the full report.
The time must be approaching, rapidly, when this forum needs to be >>moderated in order to keep out all of the crap like this.
... and what mental disturbance leads people to want to speculate on >>accident causes, about which they have no specialist, or inside,
knowledge?
I dunno. Ask Jeff Gaines.
And when does technical analysis become 'speculation'
IF you don't want to see it, use the kill file.
Wanker
On 17/07/2025 15:38, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 17/07/2025 in message <105aujb$1cn3a$1@dont-email.me> The Natural >>Philosopher wrote:No. Your ignorance is showing again. The interim report my not be full,
None of this takes an Einstein. Its just logical inferences drawn from >>>the data.
You mean from the incomplete data we have from a miscellany of sources >>which may prove to be incorrect when we get the full report.
but it is never ever comprised of data that is subsequently revised.
This isn't your armchair theorising,. This is real life engineering led >technically competent reporting on a very important matter, and if they >aren't sure they wont say.
I begin to see your problem. You are so stuck in the world of the >ArtStudent™ that you dont even realise its not the real one.
A postModern poppet 'reality is a social construct' 'there are no facts
only opinions' 'the truth is whatever enough people especially people with >letters behind their names say it is'
No wonder the country is going to the dogs
On 17/07/2025 in message <105bfan$1gdtr$2@dont-email.me> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/07/2025 15:38, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 17/07/2025 in message <105aujb$1cn3a$1@dont-email.me> The NaturalNo. Your ignorance is showing again. The interim report my not be
Philosopher wrote:
None of this takes an Einstein. Its just logical inferences drawn
from the data.
You mean from the incomplete data we have from a miscellany of
sources which may prove to be incorrect when we get the full report.
full, but it is never ever comprised of data that is subsequently
revised.
This isn't your armchair theorising,. This is real life engineering
led technically competent reporting on a very important matter, and if
they aren't sure they wont say.
I begin to see your problem. You are so stuck in the world of the
ArtStudent™ that you dont even realise its not the real one.
A postModern poppet 'reality is a social construct' 'there are no
facts only opinions' 'the truth is whatever enough people especially
people with letters behind their names say it is'
No wonder the country is going to the dogs
Until we have the final report everybody's ignorance is equal, including yours.
On 17/07/2025 in message <105bf08$1gdtr$1@dont-email.me> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
The time must be approaching, rapidly, when this forum needs to be
moderated in order to keep out all of the crap like this.
... and what mental disturbance leads people to want to speculate on
accident causes, about which they have no specialist, or inside,
knowledge?
I dunno. Ask Jeff Gaines.
And when does technical analysis become 'speculation'
IF you don't want to see it, use the kill file.
Wanker
As I have said many times until the final report is published what you
say is just speculation however clever you think you are. You really
ought to zip it out of respect for the families of the bereaved.
Do you have good enough manners to do that?
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ur234kwnhkThe time must be approaching, rapidly, when this forum needs to be
15 minutes in, detailed video and diagrams showing exactly how the
fuel switches are connected and how they work.
As with all other videos, draws no conclusions whatsoever because
litigation.
https://www.wsj.com/world/asia/air-india-crash-senior-pilot-eab72db5
The WSJ is big enough to take any potential litigation, and its
readers want to know whether this is going to hit Air India or Boeing
stock.
(The captain did it. Deliberately).
moderated in order to keep out all of the crap like this.
... and what mental disturbance leads people to want to speculate on
accident causes, about which they have no specialist, or inside, knowledge?
People want a simple world where everything has a simple answer.
"There! I've invented a simple answer. Job done!"
As I have said many times until the final report is published what youWhen in a hole, stop digging.
say is just speculation however clever you think you are. You really
ought to zip it out of respect for the families of the bereaved.
Do you have good enough manners to do that?
On 17/07/2025 in message <105bhrh$1gdtr$11@dont-email.me> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
As I have said many times until the final report is published what you >>>say is just speculation however clever you think you are. You really >>>ought to zip it out of respect for the families of the bereaved.When in a hole, stop digging.
Do you have good enough manners to do that?
Apparently not, very sad.
On 17/07/2025 20:14, Sam Plusnet wrote:
And that, in a nutshell, is the Labour Party.
People want a simple world where everything has a simple answer.
"There! I've invented a simple answer. Job done!"
People not getting paid enough?
RAISE MINIMUM WAGE!
Thick people without degrees not getting paid enough?
GIVE THEM A POINTLESS DEGREE!
No one over the age of 20 votes Labour
LOWER THE VOTING AGE TO 10!
On 17/07/2025 21:48, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 17/07/2025 in message <105bhrh$1gdtr$11@dont-email.me> The Natural >>Philosopher wrote:Can I suggest that rather than multiple posters theorising on the cause(s)
As I have said many times until the final report is published what you >>>>say is just speculation however clever you think you are. You really >>>>ought to zip it out of respect for the families of the bereaved.When in a hole, stop digging.
Do you have good enough manners to do that?
Apparently not, very sad.
of the crash that you either wait for the final report or, in the
meantime, you have a look at Mentour Pilot on YouTube with his informed
and very measured insights and commentary?
Frank
in the meantime, you have a look at Mentour Pilot on YouTube
You can suggest anything you like and we are free to ignore your
suggestion and rub your nose in the fact that Petter didnt do that
and has no more access to the info that matters than anyone else
Frank wrote:
in the meantime, you have a look at Mentour Pilot on YouTube
So, second-hand speculation is acceptable?
On 17/07/2025 21:48, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 17/07/2025 in message <105bhrh$1gdtr$11@dont-email.me> The NaturalCan I suggest that rather than multiple posters theorising on the
Philosopher wrote:
As I have said many times until the final report is published whatWhen in a hole, stop digging.
you say is just speculation however clever you think you are. You
really ought to zip it out of respect for the families of the bereaved. >>>>
Do you have good enough manners to do that?
Apparently not, very sad.
cause(s) of the crash that you either wait for the final report or, in
the meantime, you have a look at Mentour Pilot on YouTube with his
informed and very measured insights and commentary?
Frank
On 18/07/2025 08:42, Andy Burns wrote:
Frank wrote:No, he doesn't speculate and any observation he makes is well informed
in the meantime, you have a look at Mentour Pilot on YouTube
So, second-hand speculation is acceptable?
from experience as a pilot.
Frank
On 17/07/2025 21:14, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/07/2025 20:14, Sam Plusnet wrote:
And that, in a nutshell, is the Labour Party.
People want a simple world where everything has a simple answer.
"There! I've invented a simple answer. Job done!"
People not getting paid enough?
RAISE MINIMUM WAGE!
Thick people without degrees not getting paid enough?
GIVE THEM A POINTLESS DEGREE!
No one over the age of 20 votes Labour
LOWER THE VOTING AGE TO 10!
I suspect that the latter may backfire on them, in more than one way but mainly the younger voter will not vote in the way they want.
Frank wrote:
in the meantime, you have a look at Mentour Pilot on YouTube
So, second-hand speculation is acceptable?
On 18/07/2025 08:42, Andy Burns wrote:
[quoted text muted]In fact Petter has been extremely careful to limit the sepculatin and
merely interpret the facts using his better information base.
He doesn't waste time speculating about how the switches accidentally
got flipped.
On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 10:48:01 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 18/07/2025 08:42, Andy Burns wrote:
[quoted text muted]In fact Petter has been extremely careful to limit the sepculatin and
merely interpret the facts using his better information base.
He doesn't waste time speculating about how the switches accidentally
got flipped.
A digression-but-not-digression is to note that despite the enormous sums spent on the Apollo programme, Buzz Aldrin was still able to break a
switch as he re-entered the lunar lander.
On 18/07/2025 08:42, Andy Burns wrote:
Frank wrote:In fact Petter has been extremely careful to limit the sepculatin and
in the meantime, you have a look at Mentour Pilot on YouTube
So, second-hand speculation is acceptable?
merely interpret the facts using his better information base.
He doesn't waste time speculating about how the switches accidentally
got flipped. Or saying 'we wont know till yhe final report - he knows
too well that the conclusion of many final reports is 'we don't know'
.He states that for the reasons stated, its almost impossible to do it accidentally. And stops there.
Likewise he points out that the interim report is there largely to act
as a vehicle for instigating any aircraft groundings, emergency remedial actions or airline shortcomings.
The FACT that none of the above were issues suggests overwhelmingly - to someone who understands the purpose of accident investigations, that
nothing was found wrong with the aircraft or the airline or its
maintenance standards.
He never draws positive conclusions though, he leaves that to your own intelligence - assuming you have any.
Now the media dam has broken everyone feels safe in saying what everyone
has been thinking, and the captain is taking the blame.
News that reports what *someone else has said* is not legally actionable.
On 18/07/2025 10:48, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 18/07/2025 08:42, Andy Burns wrote:Thanks. That's exactly why I recommended him. As for Rodders...
Frank wrote:In fact Petter has been extremely careful to limit the sepculatin and
in the meantime, you have a look at Mentour Pilot on YouTube
So, second-hand speculation is acceptable?
merely interpret the facts using his better information base.
He doesn't waste time speculating about how the switches accidentally
got flipped. Or saying 'we wont know till yhe final report - he knows
too well that the conclusion of many final reports is 'we don't know'
.He states that for the reasons stated, its almost impossible to do it
accidentally. And stops there.
Likewise he points out that the interim report is there largely to act
as a vehicle for instigating any aircraft groundings, emergency remedial
actions or airline shortcomings.
The FACT that none of the above were issues suggests overwhelmingly - to
someone who understands the purpose of accident investigations, that
nothing was found wrong with the aircraft or the airline or its
maintenance standards.
He never draws positive conclusions though, he leaves that to your own
intelligence - assuming you have any.
Now the media dam has broken everyone feels safe in saying what everyone
has been thinking, and the captain is taking the blame.
News that reports what *someone else has said* is not legally actionable.
Frank
On 17/07/2025 19:36, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 17/07/2025 in message <105bfan$1gdtr$2@dont-email.me> The NaturalSadly untrue
Philosopher wrote:
On 17/07/2025 15:38, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 17/07/2025 in message <105aujb$1cn3a$1@dont-email.me> The NaturalNo. Your ignorance is showing again. The interim report my not be
Philosopher wrote:
None of this takes an Einstein. Its just logical inferences drawn
from the data.
You mean from the incomplete data we have from a miscellany of
sources which may prove to be incorrect when we get the full report.
full, but it is never ever comprised of data that is subsequently
revised.
This isn't your armchair theorising,. This is real life engineering
led technically competent reporting on a very important matter, and
if they aren't sure they wont say.
I begin to see your problem. You are so stuck in the world of the
ArtStudent™ that you dont even realise its not the real one.
A postModern poppet 'reality is a social construct' 'there are no
facts only opinions' 'the truth is whatever enough people especially
people with letters behind their names say it is'
No wonder the country is going to the dogs
Until we have the final report everybody's ignorance is equal,
including yours.
On 17/07/2025 20:01, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/07/2025 19:36, Jeff Gaines wrote:Is this despite the information saying the two cutoff switches were
On 17/07/2025 in message <105bfan$1gdtr$2@dont-email.me> The NaturalSadly untrue
Philosopher wrote:
On 17/07/2025 15:38, Jeff Gaines wrote:
On 17/07/2025 in message <105aujb$1cn3a$1@dont-email.me> TheNo. Your ignorance is showing again. The interim report my not be
Natural Philosopher wrote:
None of this takes an Einstein. Its just logical inferences drawn
from the data.
You mean from the incomplete data we have from a miscellany of
sources which may prove to be incorrect when we get the full report. >>>>>
full, but it is never ever comprised of data that is subsequently
revised.
This isn't your armchair theorising,. This is real life engineering
led technically competent reporting on a very important matter, and
if they aren't sure they wont say.
I begin to see your problem. You are so stuck in the world of the
ArtStudent™ that you dont even realise its not the real one.
A postModern poppet 'reality is a social construct' 'there are no
facts only opinions' 'the truth is whatever enough people especially
people with letters behind their names say it is'
No wonder the country is going to the dogs
Until we have the final report everybody's ignorance is equal,
including yours.
moved from run to shut-off 1 second apart?
Is this despite the information saying the two cutoff switches wereUntil we have the final report everybody's ignorance is equal,Sadly untrue
including yours.
moved from run to shut-off 1 second apart?
On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 15:15:24 +1000, alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
On 17/07/2025 21:14, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 17/07/2025 20:14, Sam Plusnet wrote:
And that, in a nutshell, is the Labour Party.
People want a simple world where everything has a simple answer.
"There! I've invented a simple answer. Job done!"
People not getting paid enough?
RAISE MINIMUM WAGE!
Thick people without degrees not getting paid enough?
GIVE THEM A POINTLESS DEGREE!
No one over the age of 20 votes Labour
LOWER THE VOTING AGE TO 10!
I suspect that the latter may backfire on them, in more than one way
but mainly the younger voter will not vote in the way they want.
Unlikely that many will vote for other than Labour.
More likely that few will bother to vote at all, particularly as ID
will be required
News that reports what *someone else has said* is not legally actionable.
In message <105d58h$1voed$4@dont-email.me>, at 10:48:01 on Fri, 18 Jul
2025, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> remarked:
News that reports what *someone else has said* is not legally actionable.
Of course it is, it's potentially republishing a libel.
On 19/07/2025 08:12, Roland Perry wrote:
In message <105d58h$1voed$4@dont-email.me>, at 10:48:01 on Fri, 18
Jul 2025, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> remarked:
News that reports what *someone else has said* is not legally >>>actionable.Of course it is, it's potentially republishing a libel.
I don't think that is actionable because it isn't technically
re-publication.
Otherwise the BBC would be awash with lawsuits.
On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 17:13:59 +1000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:
In message <op.29vcz9axbyq249@pvr2.lan>, at 17:13:11 on Fri, 18 Jul
2025, Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> remarked:
On Fri, 18 Jul 2025 15:15:24 +1000, alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> >>>wrote:
On 17/07/2025 21:14, The Natural Philosopher wrote:Unlikely that many will vote for other than Labour.
On 17/07/2025 20:14, Sam Plusnet wrote:
And that, in a nutshell, is the Labour Party.
People want a simple world where everything has a simple answer.
"There! I've invented a simple answer. Job done!"
People not getting paid enough?
RAISE MINIMUM WAGE!
Thick people without degrees not getting paid enough?
GIVE THEM A POINTLESS DEGREE!
No one over the age of 20 votes Labour
LOWER THE VOTING AGE TO 10!
I suspect that the latter may backfire on them, in more than one
way but mainly the younger voter will not vote in the way they want. >>>
More likely that few will bother to vote at all, particularly as ID
will be required
They are also relaxing the ID requirement.
Not relaxing, just making it easier for 16 year olds to have ID
I suspect that the latter may backfire on them, in more than one >>>>>>way but mainly the younger voter will not vote in the way they want. >>>>>Unlikely that many will vote for other than Labour.
More likely that few will bother to vote at all, particularly as
ID will be required
They are also relaxing the ID requirement.
Not relaxing, just making it easier for 16 year olds to have ID
"Making it easier", is exactly what "relaxing" means.
Nope, not with proving that you are who you say you are when you don't
have a drivers license
Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> remarked:
I suspect that the latter may backfire on them, in more than one >>>>>>> way but mainly the younger voter will not vote in the way
they want.
Unlikely that many will vote for other than Labour.
More likely that few will bother to vote at all, particularly as
ID will be required
They are also relaxing the ID requirement.
Not relaxing, just making it easier for 16 year olds to have ID
"Making it easier", is exactly what "relaxing" means.
Nope, not with proving that you are who you say you are when you don't
have a drivers license
Do try to keep up! The relaxation is permitting **UK-issued bank cards**
to be used as ID.
On Tue, 22 Jul 2025 14:18:07 +1000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:
In message <op.29y66hlcbyq249@pvr2.lan>, at 18:57:43 on Sun, 20 Jul
2025, Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> remarked:
I suspect that the latter may backfire on them, in more than one >>>>>>>> way but mainly the younger voter will not vote in the way
they want.
Unlikely that many will vote for other than Labour.
More likely that few will bother to vote at all, particularly as >>>>>>> ID will be required
They are also relaxing the ID requirement.
Not relaxing, just making it easier for 16 year olds to have ID
"Making it easier", is exactly what "relaxing" means.
Nope, not with proving that you are who you say you are when you
don't have a drivers license
Do try to keep up!
I am keeping up fine, thanks
The relaxation is permitting **UK-issued bank cards** to be used as ID.
Because 16 and 17 year olds wont have driver's
licenses and are less likely to have passports etc
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ur234kwnhkThe time must be approaching, rapidly, when this forum needs to be
15 minutes in, detailed video and diagrams showing exactly how the
fuel switches are connected and how they work.
As with all other videos, draws no conclusions whatsoever because >>litigation.
https://www.wsj.com/world/asia/air-india-crash-senior-pilot-eab72db5
The WSJ is big enough to take any potential litigation, and its
readers want to know whether this is going to hit Air India or Boeing >>stock.
(The captain did it. Deliberately).
moderated in order to keep out all of the crap like this.
... and what mental disturbance leads people to want to speculate on
accident causes, about which they have no specialist, or inside,
knowledge?
In message <mdsg76F6qp7U1@mid.individual.net>, No mail
<nomail@aolbin.com> writes
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ur234kwnhkThe time must be approaching, rapidly, when this forum needs to be >moderated in order to keep out all of the crap like this.
15 minutes in, detailed video and diagrams showing exactly how
the
fuel switches are connected and how they work.
As with all other videos, draws no conclusions whatsoever
because
litigation.
https://www.wsj.com/world/asia/air-india-crash-senior-pilot-eab72db5
The WSJ is big enough to take any potential litigation, and its
readers want to know whether this is going to hit Air India or
Boeing stock.
(The captain did it. Deliberately).
... and what mental disturbance leads people to want to speculate on >accident causes, about which they have no specialist, or inside,
knowledge?
Maybe someone should raise an RFD for a uk group where miscellaneous
topics can be discussed
In message <mdsg76F6qp7U1@mid.individual.net>, No mailPrivate moderated newsgroups simply become echo chambers matching the
<nomail@aolbin.com> writes
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ur234kwnhkThe time must be approaching, rapidly, when this forum needs to be
15 minutes in, detailed video and diagrams showing exactly how the
fuel switches are connected and how they work.
As with all other videos, draws no conclusions whatsoever because
litigation.
https://www.wsj.com/world/asia/air-india-crash-senior-pilot-eab72db5
The WSJ is big enough to take any potential litigation, and its
readers want to know whether this is going to hit Air India or Boeing
stock.
(The captain did it. Deliberately).
moderated in order to keep out all of the crap like this.
... and what mental disturbance leads people to want to speculate on
accident causes, about which they have no specialist, or inside,
knowledge?
Maybe someone should raise an RFD for a uk group where miscellaneous
topics can be discussed
Brian
On 22/07/2025 07:46 AM, Rod Speed wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jul 2025 14:18:07 +1000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
wrote:
In message <op.29y66hlcbyq249@pvr2.lan>, at 18:57:43 on Sun, 20 Jul
2025, Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> remarked:
I suspect that the latter may backfire on them, in more than one >>>>>>>>> way but mainly the younger voter will not vote in the way >>>>>>>>> they want.
Unlikely that many will vote for other than Labour.
More likely that few will bother to vote at all, particularly as >>>>>>>> ID will be required
They are also relaxing the ID requirement.
Not relaxing, just making it easier for 16 year olds to have ID
"Making it easier", is exactly what "relaxing" means.
Nope, not with proving that you are who you say you are when you
don't have a drivers license
Do try to keep up!
I am keeping up fine, thanks
The relaxation is permitting **UK-issued bank cards** to be used as ID. >>Because 16 and 17 year olds wont have driver's
licenses and are less likely to have passports etc
A 16 yr-old can get a provisional driving licence for a moped. That rule
is still in place. And the licence will bear the photograph submitted
with the application.
On 24/07/2025 07:11, brian wrote:
In message <mdsg76F6qp7U1@mid.individual.net>, No mailPrivate moderated newsgroups simply become echo chambers matching the
<nomail@aolbin.com> writes
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ur234kwnhkThe time must be approaching, rapidly, when this forum needs to be
15 minutes in, detailed video and diagrams showing exactly how the
fuel switches are connected and how they work.
As with all other videos, draws no conclusions whatsoever because
litigation.
https://www.wsj.com/world/asia/air-india-crash-senior-pilot-eab72db5 >>>> The WSJ is big enough to take any potential litigation, and its
readers want to know whether this is going to hit Air India or
Boeing stock.
(The captain did it. Deliberately).
moderated in order to keep out all of the crap like this.
... and what mental disturbance leads people to want to speculate on
accident causes, about which they have no specialist, or inside,
knowledge?
Maybe someone should raise an RFD for a uk group where miscellaneous
topics can be discussed
Brian
bigotry of their moderators exactly.
Newsgroups with a narrow focus either get spammed out of existence or
die from, boredom.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 00:45:16 |
| Calls: | 10,387 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 14,061 |
| Messages: | 6,416,723 |