Omega D5 mixing chamber problem.
jjs
as the image appears on easel. I've moved the mixing chamber as much as it
can move. Alignment is very close.
I have a MF mixing chamber for the same enlarger. It has a cutout for the MF
formats. Can I just replace that cutout with the LF cutout and maybe make a
difference? Sure, I'd try it first, but mucking with two mixing chambers and
possibly ruining both.. well, I thought I'd ask first.
(Oh God, why didn't Leitz make a LF condenser enlarger?) :)
Gregory Blank
4x5 negatives using that lens ?
Or is the problem using some other format with 4x5 DD mix chamber?
You know of course about that bellows lock lever that allows you
to adjust the bellows draw? maybe you need to compress the bellows
a little more around the 6" that the lens focuses at.
In article <10lc1eb...@news.supernews.com>,
"jjs" <jo...@nospam.stafford.nonet> wrote:
--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
jjs
news:bugstopped_-322D...@news.verizon.net...
> Is the fall off during use of the DD mix chamber when printing
> 4x5 negatives using that lens ?
Yes, when printing 4x5 with a 150mm Schneider Componon.
> You know of course about that bellows lock lever that allows you
> to adjust the bellows draw?
Certainly.
Nick Zentena
> Omega D5. 4x5. 150mm Zeiss lens. Light drops off on one corner, upper left
> as the image appears on easel. I've moved the mixing chamber as much as it
> can move. Alignment is very close.
>
> I have a MF mixing chamber for the same enlarger. It has a cutout for the MF
> formats. Can I just replace that cutout with the LF cutout and maybe make a
> difference? Sure, I'd try it first, but mucking with two mixing chambers and
> possibly ruining both.. well, I thought I'd ask first.
I thought the smaller light boxes are for getting the light to cover a
smaller area?
Nick
wheat
news:d4mi22-...@barley.dyndns.org...
> jjs <jo...@nospam.stafford.nonet> wrote:
>> I have a MF mixing chamber for the same enlarger. It has a cutout for the
>> MF
>> formats. Can I just replace that cutout with the LF cutout and maybe make
>> a
>> difference? Sure, I'd try it first, but mucking with two mixing chambers
>> and
>> possibly ruining both.. well, I thought I'd ask first.
> I thought the smaller light boxes are for getting the light to cover a
> smaller area?
It appears from the outside that the only difference is the opening at the
bottom of the mixing chamber, over the carrier. However, I am probably
wrong. The way things have gone lately, I'd bet that I am wrong. Tonight I
will make another effort.
Gregory Blank
smaller negative carrier opening.
In article <d4mi22-...@barley.dyndns.org>,
Nick Zentena <zen...@hophead.dyndns.org> wrote:
> I thought the smaller light boxes are for getting the light to cover a
> smaller area?
>
> Nick
--
jjs
> Actually to compensate for the light loss typical of a
> smaller negative carrier opening.
FYI - I disassembled the 2.25" x 2.75" D5 mixing chamber. Yes, it covers
only 2.75" square. Interesting box. It is made simply of five pieces of
flyweight white styrofoam and translucent plastic on the negative side.
Light enters at the side through a short square mirror-sided corridor. That
makes for really diffuse, cold illumination.
Gregory Blank
The "DD" mixing box is a 5" version and is provided standard
with the Lamp house.(For 4x5)
>, "jjs" <j...@nospam.com>
>wrote:
--
jjs
> What you have is a "DB" mixing box for MF negatives.
>
> The "DD" mixing box is a 5" version and is provided standard
> with the Lamp house.(For 4x5)
Follow the thread, Greg. I said I had one of each, and I disassembled the MF
box because it is expendable and I wanted to see what they are made of.
Turns out the problem was deteriorated foam around the LF box's exit that
fell into the path. Fixed.
Nick Zentena
I wonder is there a standard styrofoam for lining the boxes? I think mine
is still white but I think they need to be relined over time.
Nick
Gregory Blank
Nick Zentena <zen...@hophead.dyndns.org> wrote:
> I wonder is there a standard styrofoam for lining the boxes? I think mine
> is still white but I think they need to be relined over time.
>
> Nick
Omega makes a relining kit for each type of box both of which
are pricey. My Initial thought concerning John's problem was there
was an issue with the foam or the diffuser, sometimes it goes bad over
time. Unfortunately his rather obtuse method of describing the problem
lead me a rather circular thought process.
Won't happen again.
jjs
>(it's about the Omega D5 color head)
> I wonder is there a standard styrofoam for lining the boxes? I think mine
> is still white but I think they need to be relined over time.
Mine were still both perfectly white. The material is a tight, closed cell
type, rather unusual.
jjs
> [...] Unfortunately his rather obtuse method of describing the problem
> lead me a rather circular thought process.
So now I am obtuse. Should I be keeping track of your assessments?
Richard Knoppow
"jjs" <jo...@nospam.stafford.nonet> wrote in message
news:10lcl2t...@news.supernews.com...
fall off with the Zeiss lens but not the Schneider lens?
--
---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dick...@ix.netcom.com
John McGraw
Excuse me, here comes a Tim Allen moment,
I wonder what would happen if the chamber were lined w/ krinkled
aluminium foil? would it harm the evenness of the light? Of course it
would be faster.
cheaper, & ezer to find.
John -Tim Allen- Mcgraw
jjs
news:9ef657ec.04092...@posting.google.com...
Kinkled? I think not. Maybe just paint the interior white. :)
Nick Zentena
I don't know. I was planning to use foil to line the light unit that I
want to build for 5x7. But that's only for B&W. I wonder if foil would taint
the colour of the light? Not an issue for B&W but for colour?
Now if I only can find somebody at the big box hardware store to answer
some questions. Pretty soon I'm just going to rip open the box on my own-)))
Nick
jjs
> I don't know. I was planning to use foil to line the light unit that I
> want to build for 5x7. But that's only for B&W. I wonder if foil would
> taint
> the colour of the light? Not an issue for B&W but for colour?
Foil has no color.
> Now if I only can find somebody at the big box hardware store to answer
> some questions. Pretty soon I'm just going to rip open the box on my
> own-)))
Ask us!
Nick Zentena
>> Now if I only can find somebody at the big box hardware store to answer
>> some questions. Pretty soon I'm just going to rip open the box on my
>> own-)))
>
> Ask us!
>
Can I have the display model?-))) If not how do I wire the fixture to a
normal cord? The display model is hooked up with what looks like half an
extension cord. I'm hoping it's possible for me to do the same. I want to
plug it into an outlet.
Nick
jjs
> Can I have the display model?-))) If not how do I wire the fixture to a
> normal cord? The display model is hooked up with what looks like half an
> extension cord. I'm hoping it's possible for me to do the same. I want to
> plug it into an outlet.
Got me. I can't picture what you are asking about.
Nick Zentena
It's a 2' light fixture using two U shaped tubes. On the bottom is a sheet
of diffusion material. I guess it's designed to be wired into a light switch
but the display model is wired into a normal plug.
Nick
Nicholas O. Lindan
> I wonder what would happen if the chamber were lined w/ krinkled
> aluminium foil?
It would not work very well at all. You would end up with a
'krinkled' light pattern on the negative.
An integrating sphere (cube, what have you these days) works perfectly
only with perfect light scattering on its inside surface. With perfect
scattering there can, of course, be no imaging of the light source and
therefore the light output is completely even. Putting a hole in the
sphere for the light to get out sort of ruins it, but the bigger the
sphere relative to the hole/negative size the more even the light.
Titanium dioxide reemits (the correct term for diffuse 'reflection' is
'elastic scattering' or 'reemission') more light than aluminum foil
reflects, so foil would result in a darker image - assuming you
could get foil to work, which you can't.
> I wonder if foil would taint the colour of the light?
Yes, slightly to the yellow.
> Now if I only can find somebody at the big box hardware store to answer
> some questions. Pretty soon I'm just going to rip open the box on my own-)))
Just buy the whitest white paint you can buy. Applying paint to Styrofoam
is a no-no in general: make sure the solvent in the paint doesn't dissolve
the Styrofoam.
--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.
Remove spaces etc. to reply: n o lindan at net com dot com
psst.. want to buy an f-stop timer? nolindan.com/da/fstop/
John McGraw
> jjs <j...@jj.jj> wrote:
> > "Nick Zentena" <zen...@hophead.dyndns.org> wrote in message
> > news:3r3p22-...@barley.dyndns.org...
>
> > It's a 2' light fixture using two U shaped tubes. On the bottom is a sheet
> of diffusion material. I guess it's designed to be wired into a light switch
> but the display model is wired into a normal plug.
>
> Nick
Hi Nick, now you're becoming obtuse ;-)
Is this light fixture a normal living room, non photographic fixture?
Or is it to an enlarger? Or some other photo application? As I write
this, you're becoming less obtuse :o) In other words this light
fixture (no matter what it's for) does not have a normal US/Can 2 or 3
prong plug @ the end of the wire & you're wondering if it was supposed
to ship that way because it was plugged in @ the store? Do the
instructions or the shipping box give any clues? If it's supposed to
come w/ a plug you're going to return it 4 one that has a plug.
Let me know if I my guess is corect, John
John McGraw
> John McGraw <dudley...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I wonder what would happen if the chamber were lined w/ krinkled
> > aluminium foil?
>
> It would not work very well at all. You would end up with a
> 'krinkled' light pattern on the negative.
>
> An integrating sphere (cube, what have you these days) works perfectly
> only with perfect light scattering on its inside surface. With perfect
> scattering there can, of course, be no imaging of the light source and
> therefore the light output is completely even. Putting a hole in the
> sphere for the light to get out sort of ruins it, but the bigger the
> sphere relative to the hole/negative size the more even the light.
>
> Titanium dioxide reemits (the correct term for diffuse 'reflection' is
> 'elastic scattering' or 'reemission') more light than aluminum foil
> reflects, so foil would result in a darker image - assuming you
> could get foil to work, which you can't.
>
> is a no-no in general: make sure the solvent in the paint doesn't dissolve
> the Styrofoam.
Well, Nicholas at least you're not becoming obtuse!-)
So what U're saying is to use reemitsive Titanium Dioxide to paint the
inside of a diffusion chamber, but it'll dissolve the foam or won't.
What does Titanium Dioxide cost /pint, ounce? BTW Roscoe makes an
extremely krinkled Al foil. Man, it's so krinkled... it's so krinkled;
it's krinkled on the mo-lecular level!
John "the obtuse, or sometimes thick as a brick" McGraw
John McGraw
> > I wonder what would happen if the chamber were lined w/ krinkled
> > aluminium foil?
>
> It would not work very well at all. You would end up with a
> 'krinkled' light pattern on the negative.
>
> An integrating sphere (cube, what have you these days) works perfectly
> only with perfect light scattering on its inside surface. With perfect
> scattering there can, of course, be no imaging of the light source and
> therefore the light output is completely even. Putting a hole in the
> sphere for the light to get out sort of ruins it, but the bigger the
> sphere relative to the hole/negative size the more even the light.
>
> Titanium dioxide reemits (the correct term for diffuse 'reflection' is
> 'elastic scattering' or 'reemission') more light than aluminum foil
> reflects, so foil would result in a darker image - assuming you
> could get foil to work, which you can't.
>
> is a no-no in general: make sure the solvent in the paint doesn't dissolve
> the Styrofoam.
Well, Nicholas at least you're not becoming obtuse!-)
Nick Zentena
>
> Hi Nick, now you're becoming obtuse ;-)
Not the first time-)
>
> Is this light fixture a normal living room, non photographic fixture?
It's a ceiling fixture. Things labeled photographic tend to cost 10X and
some times work worse-(
> fixture (no matter what it's for) does not have a normal US/Can 2 or 3
> prong plug @ the end of the wire & you're wondering if it was supposed
> to ship that way because it was plugged in @ the store? Do the
> instructions or the shipping box give any clues? If it's supposed to
> come w/ a plug you're going to return it 4 one that has a plug.
Well I haven't bought it yet. I can't ever get anybody in the store that
knows anything. The funny thing is the display is right near the lunch room
so you'd think my chances of getting some help would be better not worse. I
don't think it's supposed to ship with a plug so I'm wondering how hard it
would be to wire one in. Obviously it's possible because they did it with
the display.
Nick
jjs
> John McGraw <dudley...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Nick, now you're becoming obtuse ;-)
>
> Not the first time-)
>
>>
>> Is this light fixture a normal living room, non photographic fixture?
>
> It's a ceiling fixture. Things labeled photographic tend to cost 10X and
> some times work worse-(
ooooh! Well, sure you can rewire it to put a switch in-line. However, if you
are making an enlarging head out of it, and it's an incandescent bulb,
beware of grave heat issues. Fire is a Bad Thing(tm).
Donald Qualls
> So what U're saying is to use reemitsive Titanium Dioxide to paint the
> inside of a diffusion chamber, but it'll dissolve the foam or won't.
> What does Titanium Dioxide cost /pint, ounce? BTW Roscoe makes an
> extremely krinkled Al foil. Man, it's so krinkled... it's so krinkled;
> it's krinkled on the mo-lecular level!
Go to a large drug/etc. store or any art supply store (college
bookstore, sometimes school supplies or office supply store) and get a
small tube of titanium white water color. The contents will have a
consistency like toothpaste, and can be thinned with tap water (but use
distilled water if your tap water has a lot of minerals in it) to a
viscosity that will brush easily with a foam brush (about like whole
milk is just right). The water color and foam brush together shouldn't
cost as much as five dollars, and water color won't eat the existing foam.
--
I may be a scwewy wabbit, but I'm not going to Alcatwaz!
-- E. J. Fudd, 1954
Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer
Lathe Building Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/HomebuiltLathe.htm
Speedway 7x12 Lathe Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/my7x12.htm
Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth
and don't expect them to be perfect.
jjs
> Go to a large drug/etc. store or any art supply store (college bookstore,
> sometimes school supplies or office supply store) and get a small tube of
> titanium white water color. [...]
Ya know, sometimes it scares me how many odd resources you understand. :)
But I missed a big part of this: is the light source hot or cold?
Nick Zentena
>
> ooooh! Well, sure you can rewire it to put a switch in-line. However, if you
> are making an enlarging head out of it, and it's an incandescent bulb,
> beware of grave heat issues. Fire is a Bad Thing(tm).
>
No it's fluorescent. Two 40 watt tubes I think. Could be 32watts. So heat
should be okay but I've got warm up issues. It's always something-)
Nick
jjs
Hey, Nick, it really IS always something. What you are up against is what
the whole industry has beening coping with. But consider this - keep the
lamp on at all time and use a shutter on the enlarging lens. oops. That's
been done.
Seriously, my friend, we can probably find an inexpensive enlarger for you
at a reasonable price. Make pictures. Don't reinvent the wheel.
Donald Qualls
>
> Ya know, sometimes it scares me how many odd resources you understand. :)
That comes from having had far too many hobbies over the past
twenty-five years -- RPG playing, miniature figurine painting, oil
painting (pictures), photography (off and on since about 1970), building
and flying model airplanes ranging from indoor models weighing a few
grams to outdoor R/C weighing 4-5 pounds, model rockets over about the
same weight range, computers (building, programming, and using at
various times for various purposes), writing, shooting, reloading, and
gunsmithing, machining, telescope making -- I'm sure I could think of a
few more. Add on top of that the things I've done for a living, ranging
from book seller to motorcycle courier and cab driver to telephone
survey taker to customer service rep for a bank to tech support for an
internet company to nail gun mechanic. Throw in a dash of inventiveness
and a highly retentive memory...
> But I missed a big part of this: is the light source hot or cold?
I gather it's a hot light -- few cold lights use a mixing box, unless
they're for color (and not many are).
Nick Zentena
>
> Seriously, my friend, we can probably find an inexpensive enlarger for you
> at a reasonable price. Make pictures. Don't reinvent the wheel.
I thought I had a shot at an Elwood awhile back. While I tried to decide
if it would fit in the house somebody else grabbed it. The other thing is
I've got too many enlargers now. It's starting to become a collection-(
Nick
jjs
news:unJ6d.9910$zA3.2...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
> jjs wrote:
>> Ya know, sometimes it scares me how many odd resources you understand. :)
>
> That comes from having had far too many hobbies over the past twenty-five
Gads, that reminds me of yet more stuff I should get rid of. Handloading
stuff. Forgot all about it.
Donald Qualls
Heck, now that I'm in "good ol' boy" country, I'll probably get back
into the gunsmithing and handloading. Got some nifty ideas for reviving
and revising a 1960s method of shooting subcaliber from a revolver that
should let me duplicate the .221 Fireball ballistics in a six-shooter
with a ten inch barrel. All it requires is a scrap .22 centerfire
barrel, a few odds and ends, and a place to set my lathe back up (and I
think I have the lathe space figured).
Yeah, it's OT...
The problem with getting rid of stuff you no longer use, at least from
my point of view, is then you have to buy it all again when your
interests cycle back around to that area again. I still have an R/C
model I built 20 years ago; the engine is shot, and it needs new radio
gear, but the structure and covering need less repairs than they did
after some flying sessions; I could have it back in the air in a weekend
(if I had $100 to spend on an engine and minor stuff -- got a modern
radio I've never installed). Likewise, I still have the reloading press
I bought, used, in 1981 even though I haven't loaded a round in more
than ten years.
This habit made my return to photography last year a lot easier -- I
still had my Spotmatic from college (around 1980), along with two
Minolta 16 cameras and my Olympus Pen EES-2, all of which I bought used
between 1979 and about 1982.
It does, however, make moving a major pain in the arse...
jjs
> Heck, now that I'm in "good ol' boy" country, I'll probably get back into
> the gunsmithing and handloading. Got some nifty ideas for reviving and
> revising a 1960s method of shooting subcaliber from a revolver that should
> let me duplicate the .221 Fireball ballistics in a six-shooter with a ten
> inch barrel.
Hey, I used to live in Wildcat caliber country: Roswell, NM. Shortened 458
W/M, bizarre .177 configurations were old hat even back then. But yeah, this
is OT, but then again we like LF. Some things just go together.
Michael Scare Petey
NG needs.
In article <10lolmv...@news.supernews.com>, "jjs" <j...@jj.jj>
wrote:
jjs
news:justawanker-9D4E...@news.verizon.net...
> Great a couple more nuts with guns, just what the world and this
> NG needs.
Well, look who came out of the woodwork with another fake name. Guns? What
can I tell you, but I've lived where they are considered tools. Not
everywhere is Urban California.
jjs
"John Bartley" <old...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:Li%6d.27366$tT2.1...@news20.bellglobal.com...
> Michael Scare Petey wrote:
>
>>Great a couple more nuts with guns, just what the world and this
>>NG needs.
>>
>
> . Seriously though, my wife and I have a place in Northern Ontario where
> we're going to build a house and retire in a few years. We go up there
> twice a year to clear bush, fish, have a few drinks etc...We have to carry
> something heavy in the bush because of the bear problem. In our case it's
> a .30-30. And yes, both it and we are registered, trained etc. It's not
> really an option with the number of bears around..
I'd use a 35 Reminton round in case of bears, but whatever works for you is
a good thing. Is it not amusing that so many people don't realize what a big
world we live in and project their little urban views on the rest of us?
Gawd help these poor bastards should they ever imagine having a Genuine
Wildlife Experience. They are sure food.
Donald Qualls
Sure -- big negatives, big guns, right? :)
Donald Qualls
> Michael Scare Petey wrote:
>
>> Great a couple more nuts with guns, just what the world and this
>> NG needs.
>>
>
> Hehehe - I like your new moniker - it's a great play on your real one
> :-) . Seriously though, my wife and I have a place in Northern Ontario
> where we're going to build a house and retire in a few years. We go up
> there twice a year to clear bush, fish, have a few drinks etc...We have
> to carry something heavy in the bush because of the bear problem. In our
> case it's a .30-30. And yes, both it and we are registered, trained
> etc. It's not really an option with the number of bears around..
May I suggest you check with an expert before you carry that .30-30 into
bear country again? With a perfect shot, you might kill a black bear
with it, but it'll probably just annoy a grizzly -- and you do *not*
want to be in the position of dealing with an annoyed griz with only a
.30-30 on you.
Heck, I don't know if you'll ever see a grizzly in Ontario -- but if you
do, and it decides it wants to make trouble (as they occasionally do for
no known reason), you'll want something more along the lines of a .300
Winchester Magnum than a cartridge originally made for black powder...
For my money, I'd prefer a .45-70 -- yep, it's another black powder
cartridge, but one that was just on the light side for bison (the .45-90
and .50-110 were preferred unless you had to carry the gun yourself) and
with modern loadings in a modern rifle is perfectly adequate for grizzly.
jjs
> May I suggest you check with an expert before you carry that .30-30 into
> bear country again? [...]
Okay, I'll hike with you any day.
ON TOPIC - Now realize I come from a pretty-much fronteer mentality and I'm
not accustomed to the overpopulation craziness. Molly and I took at trip to
Glacier this year. At the entrance to one trail (God knows, I hate trails)
there was a sign that declared DANGER WILD BEARS and on the next line was NO
FIREARMS ALLOWED.
Now what kinda friggin sense does that make?
I'd rather make pictures on the southside of Chicago than Glacier.
Donald Qualls
> "Donald Qualls" <sil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> news:Pz17d.13285$zA3.2...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
>
>
> not accustomed to the overpopulation craziness. Molly and I took at trip to
> Glacier this year. At the entrance to one trail (God knows, I hate trails)
> there was a sign that declared DANGER WILD BEARS and on the next line was NO
> FIREARMS ALLOWED.
>
> Now what kinda friggin sense does that make?
Same sense as prohibiting weapons in airliners -- which, as far as I can
see, just makes certain the hijackers are the only armed people on
board. If you really want to keep armed people off the flights, just
make everyone (passengers, attendants, and flight crew) fly naked.
Let's see *anyone* sneak a weapon on board that way...
> I'd rather make pictures on the southside of Chicago than Glacier.
Not me. If you understand how a bear thinks, you and the bear can reach
an agreement in 99.9% of situations (usually, the agreement reached is
that the bear gets what he/she wants, and you can salvage whatever is
left after the bear leaves). You can't reach that kind of arrangement
with a mugger jacked up on crack and looking for $5 for the next hit;
he'll kill you if you're too slow opening your wallet, or if you prove
to him you haven't got $5 -- and he might just twig to the fact that
your photo equipment would bring more than $5 at a pawn shop, where a
bear will usually leave your cameras and film alone if you haven't got
any food in the camera bag.
Personally, I think a 12 ga. with #3s works better on muggers -- less
likely to kill somebody three blocks up -- but for a bear you need a
solid slug (12 ga. slug works okay, but IMO lacks penetration compared
to a higher velocity jacketed bullet).
The real moral of that sign, though, is to stay the heck away from bears
in national parks! If you're going to go into bear country, make sure
it's someplace where it's legal to carry an appropriate weapon.
jjs
> jjs wrote:
>> "Donald Qualls" <sil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>> news:Pz17d.13285$zA3.2...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
>>
>>
>> ON TOPIC - Now realize I come from a pretty-much fronteer mentality and
>> I'm not accustomed to the overpopulation craziness. Molly and I took at
>> trip to Glacier this year. At the entrance to one trail (God knows, I
>> hate trails) there was a sign that declared DANGER WILD BEARS and on the
>> next line was NO FIREARMS ALLOWED.
>>
>> Now what kinda friggin sense does that make?
> Not me. If you understand how a bear thinks,
There is a real bear-feeder's (AKA Greenies) bit that says "The first charge
of the bear is just a challenge. They charge at you and stop at 3 feet. Or
they don't." Now gimmie a friggin break.
> [...] You can't reach that kind of arrangement with a mugger jacked up on
> crack and looking for $5 for the next hit;
Never said I could. I am armed. I shoot the fucker dead on the spot. What's
the problem?
Udie Lafing
terrorist would blow himself up knowing he was going into
the afterlife with a pig.
In article <Cv27d.46465$ci3.2...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
Donald Qualls <sil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> Same sense as prohibiting weapons in airliners -- which, as far as I can
> see, just makes certain the hijackers are the only armed people on
> board. If you really want to keep armed people off the flights, just
> make everyone (passengers, attendants, and flight crew) fly naked.
> Let's see *anyone* sneak a weapon on board that way...
--
?
?
?
?
LOL
jjs
"Udie Lafing" <banisha...@wastedtime.com> wrote in message
news:banishalthought-EA...@news.verizon.net...
> Better yet put pigs on board, no self respecting muslim
> terrorist would blow himself up knowing he was going into
> the afterlife with a pig.
There are already always two armed plain-clothes cops on each big flight.
Udie Lafing
Donald Qualls
> "Donald Qualls" <sil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
> news:Cv27d.46465$ci3.2...@twister.southeast.rr.com...
>
>>Not me. If you understand how a bear thinks,
>
>
> There is a real bear-feeder's (AKA Greenies) bit that says "The first charge
> of the bear is just a challenge. They charge at you and stop at 3 feet. Or
> they don't." Now gimmie a friggin break.
Heh. And then they totally forget to mention that the bear considers it
a challenge if you stand taller than he does -- so he'll rear up to get
taller than you, etc. And if you don't then back down in approved bear
fashion (which mostly involves slinking away, like a scared cat crossing
a big lawn), he'll decide you want to fight to prove who's tougher.
Between bears, the fight wouldn't normally be fatal, but you're not a
bear. And of course if you're dealing with a sow and there are cubs
involved, it's never about challenge, it's about you leaving the area
faster than mama bear can chase you (and you can't; even a fat black
bear that lives in the dump and never travels as much as a quarter mile
can outrun an Olympic sprinter for long enough to catch him).
Climb a tree? How fast can you climb, anyway?
>>[...] You can't reach that kind of arrangement with a mugger jacked up on
>>crack and looking for $5 for the next hit;
>
>
> Never said I could. I am armed. I shoot the fucker dead on the spot. What's
> the problem?
The problem is the legalities of going armed. If the mugger hasn't
shown you at least a knife, you'll probably go down for manslaughter.
And in some places where you might not expect it, it's getting to be
quite a challenge to go armed in "civilized" country without expecting
you'll go to jail on a weapons charge even if the shooting is completely
righteous.
Here in North Carolina, for instance, it appears I'll be required to
take several hours of classes on firearm safety (stuff I learned before
1970, but they'll expect their phrases parroted back on the test), and
prove I can disassemble my weapon (sorry, guys, there is no recommended
disassembly for a Dan Wesson revolver, and none needed for routine
cleaning, even if I can find the spanner that came with the piece when I
bought it in 1981), in order to obtain a permit to carry it. Back in
Washington state, with twice the population of NC, and living in a city
bigger than Raleigh and Charlotte combined, I got my permit by simply
filling out a form and submitting to a police check to verify I didn't
have a criminal record.
Of course, I can carry a camera anywhere I want -- I wonder if I could
come up with a camera that incorporates a Taser??
John McGraw
> terrorist would blow himself up knowing he was going into
> the afterlife with a pig.
LOL
My curiosity got the better of my pride of not wanting to admit
ignorance of the Muslim religion. Is there some truth to this pig
thing? I thought it was just not eating pork.
Thanks for any info, John
Gregory Blank
Thinking back to a Karate teacher I once had, he stated in class one
time,.."Nothing gives you more personal satisfaction than being able to
tear an opponent apart with your own BEAR hands". I believe that was
well spoke,....and seeing him and Mr Ed Parker in action, further state
seeing is believing.
In article <JRi7d.14241$zA3.2...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
Donald Qualls <sil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
--
LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank
"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
Donald Qualls
I'm not an expert, either, but as I understand it there is a requirement
for purification after any contact, even simple touch, of any kind of
swine or swine product (even pigskin leather or a hog's knuckle bones
for dice). That's not so impossible, the purification is inconvenient
but not difficult or onerous. The thing is, if a Muslim dies while
touching the pig, he can't purify himself afterward, and will enter into
the afterlife impure -- this is sure to cost him, like a Catholic
suicide dying with the unconfessed sin still on his tab.
Of course, not all terrorists are Muslim, but a great many seem to be
the past few years. Perhaps it would be enough to upholster airline
seating with pigskin leather...
Udie Lafing
"Hog Wash Airlines"
Better still instead of bomb scanners at the check in
they could install a little pig that each potential
traveler is required to pet as they board the plane.
In article <Fsl7d.49135$ci3.2...@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
Donald Qualls <sil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> Of course, not all terrorists are Muslim, but a great many seem to be
> the past few years. Perhaps it would be enough to upholster airline
> seating with pigskin leather...
--
Donald Qualls
> Or maybe they could get by, simply with a renaming
> "Hog Wash Airlines"
>
> Better still instead of bomb scanners at the check in
> they could install a little pig that each potential
> traveler is required to pet as they board the plane.
No, that would never fly -- that would be instantly (and rightly)
challenged by the ACLU as regligious discrimination. For that matter,
so would anything else that would lead Muslims to avoid the flight
because of the risk (however slight) that they might die aboard the
plane without an opportunity to purify themselves.
I still like the idea I heard a few years back (long before 9/11, in
fact, when hijacking was the issue, not terrorism as such) that all
adult passengers be issued a .357 Magnum revolver with six rounds of
Glaser Safety Slugs on boarding (and required to turn it in when they
deplane, of course -- can't have those things going out in the real
world). Armoring a fuselage to prevent those slugs penetrating would
have cost a ton or two per aircraft (obviously deducted from payload),
but even with body armor, a 'jacker would have lasted about 2.5 seconds
from announcing his intentions...
Udie Lafing
Donald Qualls <sil...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> No, that would never fly -- that would be instantly (and rightly)
> challenged by the ACLU as regligious discrimination. For that matter,
> so would anything else that would lead Muslims to avoid the flight
> because of the risk (however slight) that they might die aboard the
> plane without an opportunity to purify themselves.
Maybe it would its worth a try,....you know when Hogs fl.
>
> I still like the idea I heard a few years back (long before 9/11, in
> fact, when hijacking was the issue, not terrorism as such) that all
> adult passengers be issued a .357 Magnum revolver with six rounds of
> Glaser Safety Slugs on boarding (and required to turn it in when they
> deplane, of course -- can't have those things going out in the real
> world). Armoring a fuselage to prevent those slugs penetrating would
> have cost a ton or two per aircraft (obviously deducted from payload),
> but even with body armor, a 'jacker would have lasted about 2.5 seconds
> from announcing his intentions...
Maybe serving Pork Barbarque is the answer or mandatory Pork Yogurt on
morning flights.