BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2014, 16:16

Username Protected wrote:

Nate, heads up, Ciholas is actually Crandall disguised as an MU2 pilot

go get em

Good analogy.

I do actually concede though. Cihola is like climbing a mountain of Jello.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2014, 16:35

Username Protected wrote:

Good analogy.

I do actually concede though. Cihola is like climbing a mountain of Jello.

That's good enough for me - I'm out! I was always amazed those twin guys would even try to keep up with JC. :shrug:

Maybe looking at posts per day would be a good gauge of whom to engage. JC is at 6. The new guy is off to a fast 12!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2014, 16:38

Username Protected wrote:

Maybe looking at posts per day would be a good gauge of whom to engage. JC is at 6. The new guy is off to a fast 12!

I'm also a believer that if you want anyone to read your posts (more than the 2-3 folks still left in this thread), you gotta keep it to 3 sentences max.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2014, 16:43

Username Protected wrote:

Maybe looking at posts per day would be a good gauge of whom to engage. JC is at 6. The new guy is off to a fast 12!

I'm also a believer that if you want anyone to read your posts (more than the 2-3 folks still left in this thread), you gotta keep it to 3 sentences max.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2014, 16:45

Username Protected wrote:

Maybe looking at posts per day would be a good gauge of whom to engage. JC is at 6. The new guy is off to a fast 12!

I'm also a believer that if you want anyone to read your posts (more than the 2-3 folks still left in this thread), you gotta keep it to 3 sentences max.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2014, 16:46

Username Protected wrote:

So you are saying my verbosity has been wasted in this thread?

Tim

I understand there's no other way to get your point across when a thread gets as technical (nerdy) as this one has. However, in the end you just lose everyone and it's 3 guys "speculating" about an airplane that hasn't even been released yet (boring).

It's ok. There are other threads to read.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2014, 16:50

Like I said earlier it's the same as the twin vs the single debate.

Except a chute requires restraint and a twin requires training.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2014, 16:54

Username Protected wrote:

Maybe looking at posts per day would be a good gauge of whom to engage. JC is at 6. The new guy is off to a fast 12!

I'm also a believer that if you want anyone to read your posts (more than the 2-3 folks still left in this thread), you gotta keep it to 3 sentences max.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2014, 17:07

It is as if Mr. Spock arrived on BT...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2014, 17:16

He doesn't strike me that way. Just tenacious and opinionated. Not listening to reason.

Like most of us.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 09 Dec 2014, 18:07

Since nate brought up my post about pulling the chute, I'll tell you my position was flying over the desert, around TNP. I looked down from 10k and thought, would I pull this. Seriously - and I had someone with me, the discussion was something like, "I might be able to dead stick it in, hit some damn shrub, or pull the chute and endure all the crap I would get on BT for being a wuss."

Heard this on CNBC today...

Jed Clampett: You hadn't ought to be ashamed of your Pa.
Justin Addison: Ashamed of him? Why Dad was an MIT PHD.
Jed Clampett: You don't need to spell it out, I heard ugly words before.