Re: Don't click on RLBs post unless you wanna clog your newsreader searching for a million links

[Frank Olson <Use_the_email_links@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Robert L Bass wrote:

> Olson also claims he snap-rolled a Boeing 737 which he says
> Boeing loaned to him and his pals so they could test their
> private theory about a Canadian air crash.

Nope.  I've never claimed to snap-roll a Boeing 737.  Besides, the
obvious "you're lying again", I'll add "Saying so without proof is
misleading and unfair".


> He has never held a
> pilot's license in Canada, the USA or anywhere else.

Tsk!  "Saying so without proof is misleading and unfair."


>
> Tell me you believe that.   :^)

I hope he doesn't.


>
> BTW, several of my clients are Boeing engineers.  One is a
> retired Boeing test pilot.  When they heard Olson's stupid lie
> about doing a *very* sudden inversion in a 737 at 5000 AGL every
> one said the same thing.  He's lying -- it can't be done.  If he
> had done so he'd have stained the terrain.

Heh...  Right...  The "ficticious" engineers and pilots rear their heads
again.  "Saying so without proof is misleading and unfair."


>
> In addition to that, my friends at Boeing also said that the very
> idea that Boeing would lend a brand new airliner to an insurance
> claims adjuster so he could try to duplicate a crash scenario is
> ludicrous.

"Saying so without proof is misleading and unfair."


>
> Here's the best part.  Olson originally claimed that they were
> planning to deploy reverse thrusters *in the air* to see if doing
> so would cause the airplane to suddenly invert

Poppycock...  I *never* said that.


> -- all of this at
> 5000 AGL.  He didn't know (until I told him) that there's no way
> to deploy reverse thrusters on a 737 without weight on the mains.

Wrong again.  There's two little switches on the overhead panel that are
marked "reverser over-ride".  They're covered switches that are "witness
wired" shut.  You have to raise the cover, break the wires to gain
access to the toggles.  Ask your "pilot friend".


> There's an interlock to prevent some moron from doing just that.
> Perhaps Boeing was worried that Olson might someday get a pilot's
> license when they designed the airplane.  :^)

Thank God you never got yours.  Your knowledge of anything aviation
related is about as bad as your knowledge of anything not Napco (and
even that's been proven to be somewhat lacking).


>
> When I pointed this out he changed his story, claiming they "knew
> that all along" but decided that a substitute maneuver --

You're so full of shit your eyes are brown.


>
> Since you claim to know a thing or two about flying, let's see if
> you have the integrity to agree that his story is preposterous.
> I'm betting you'll dodge the question.

You mean like you're "dodging" mine about your supposed "experience" in
the trade?