Prove That You Know GNU/Linux

[F Russell]

I do not use that abomination called "systemd."

I use the traditional boot scripts that are still enshrined at
Linux From Scratch.

Gentoo updated the "shadow" package from 4.8 to 4.9.

As a consequence, my system would boot but it would ask
for a password.

What the friggin' fuck?

I could not proceed and faced being locked out of my own
GNU/Linux system.

My inittab file contains the entry for system start:

# Run gettys in standard runlevels
1:2345:respawn:/bin/login -f root

This should automatically log me in as "root" user.

This has worked for many, many years but suddenly it asks
me for a fucking password. What the friggin' fuck???!!!

I solved the issue is less than 40 minutes (I had to first boot
with systemrescue USB).

What is the solution?

If you are a TRUE user of GNU/Linux then you will not have
much difficulty.

However, if you are a fucking dilettante user of Ubuntu/Mint
then you won't have a clue.

Therefore, unless you are a TRUE user of GNU/Linux then
please the get the fuck out.


--

Systemd free. D.E. free.

Always and forever.

[Carlos E. R.]

(followup to advocacy refused)

On 29/07/2021 01.44, F Russell wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jul 2021 14:14:12 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>>
>> SOME of us USE linux as a tool, like we use a car to get to places.
>>
>
> A very poor analogy that has been adduced merely to bolster a very
> weak counter-argument.
>
> One cannot effectively USE anything to an effective extent unless one
> understands completely the operation of that thing.
>

Absolutely false.

Millions of efficient drivers know next to nothing about their vehicle's
engines and can not do any repair on them.


--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Rinaldi]

True. Manuals in the 50's told you how to adjust the valves.

Now they tell you not to drink the battery fluid.

Rinaldi

[Richard Kettlewell]

"Carlos E. R." <robin_...@es.invalid> writes:
> (followup to advocacy refused)

If you just want to argue, take it to the advocacy group. That’s what
it’s for. Don’t bother the rest of us.

--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[The Natural Philosopher]

Exactly. Pilots know how to fly. Not how to service engines in flight,.
That's what they have checklists of what to do if engines screw up and
stop,. for example.

I need a platform to browse, write, send emails, construct web sites,
write code, do some video editing and some CAD. ALL I ask is that
whatever lies underneath is stable reasonably bug free and doesn't take
up huge amounts of time to get it to do what I want.
Linux is simply better for me than windows or OS/X. Mint is better than
debian because it has a lot of multimedia support out of the box and its
well put together.

I wouldn't care about that poettering shit except that every time
systemd changes it takes about two months before code works again properly.

No one 'knows' linux. At best some people have quite deep knowledge of
*parts* of it.




--
“it should be clear by now to everyone that activist environmentalism
(or environmental activism) is becoming a general ideology about humans,
about their freedom, about the relationship between the individual and
the state, and about the manipulation of people under the guise of a
'noble' idea. It is not an honest pursuit of 'sustainable development,'
a matter of elementary environmental protection, or a search for
rational mechanisms designed to achieve a healthy environment. Yet
things do occur that make you shake your head and remind yourself that
you live neither in Joseph Stalin’s Communist era, nor in the Orwellian
utopia of 1984.”

Vaclav Klaus

[Carlos E. R.]

On 29/07/2021 19.26, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
> "Carlos E. R." <robin_...@es.invalid> writes:
>> (followup to advocacy refused)
>
> If you just want to argue, take it to the advocacy group. That’s what
> it’s for. Don’t bother the rest of us.
>

Tell that to him, he started the thread here, bothering us. /I/ will not
go to the advocacy groups, I'm not interested.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Richard Kettlewell]

"Carlos E. R." <robin_...@es.invalid> writes:
> On 29/07/2021 19.26, Richard Kettlewell wrote:
>> "Carlos E. R." <robin_...@es.invalid> writes:
>>> (followup to advocacy refused)
>>
>> If you just want to argue, take it to the advocacy group. That’s what
>> it’s for. Don’t bother the rest of us.
>
> Tell that to him, he started the thread here, bothering us. /I/ will not
> go to the advocacy groups, I'm not interested.

Then don’t reply to him.

--
https://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/

[F Russell]

On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 10:53:45 -0600, ray wrote:

>
> One need not be a total jackass to be a 'TRUE user of GNU/Linux'. And
> everyone has to start somewhere.
>

I thank you for your sincere response.

However, it remains that GNU/Linux is *not* for the common man.

This obvious fact has inspired the birth of junk projects such as
GNOME, KDE, freedektop.org, etc. that attempt to lessen the pain
of GNU/Linux adoption by providing supposedly intuitive and
certainly M$ Windows-like GUIs. The popular distros adopt these
projects wholeheartedly.

My point of view is that these tactics will NEVER work. The common
man will NEVER choose GNU/Linux in spite of these futile efforts.
This basic fact has been demonstrated time and time again.

My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
of the hard-core GNU/Linux user -- the user that literally defined
GNU/Linux in the first place.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 30/07/2021 00.20, F Russell wrote:

> My answer is that GNU/Linux developers should just "wise up."
> Stop these foolish desktop GUIs and concentrate on the needs
> of the hard-core GNU/Linux user -- the user that literally defined
> GNU/Linux in the first place.
>

No.

You do that if you wish, and stay there, alone. You will not convince
the millions of Linux users to do as you wish.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[bad sector]

On 7/29/21 3:13 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> Exactly. Pilots know how to fly. Not how to service engines in
> flight,. That's what they have checklists of what to do if engines
> screw up and stop,. for example.

Bullshit, drove airplanes for 24k hours, a thousand jumps
skydiving HaLo, LaLo and LoL but I still don't know how to fly :-(

BTW the AN-2 has an in-flight oil-filling spout IN THE COCKPIT :-)

> I wouldn't care about that poettering shit except that every time
> systemd changes it takes about two months before code works again
> properly.

kill system fucking d, with THAT the OP is on target!
"IT" discourages people form being involved, "IT"
really wants to get rid of involved users.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 30/07/2021 08.12, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 12:11:18 -0500, Rinaldi wrote:
>>
>> On 7/29/21 9:57 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>> (followup to advocacy refused)
>>>>

>>>> One cannot effectively USE anything to an effective extent unless one
>>>> understands completely the operation of that thing.
>>>>
>>> Absolutely false.
>>> Millions of efficient drivers know next to nothing about their
>>> vehicle's engines and can not do any repair on them.
>

> While cars today are more or less computers on wheels some (most?)
> drivers today cannot perform the easiest tasks.
>
> Some years ago I helped a neighbor to move something with his can and
> noticed a warning on the display (heck, in the old days we had just a
> lamp coming on which was probably not even an LED yet) to check the
> oil. I asked him if he noticed. He said something that he had but always
> forgets to pay a visit to the shop. Later I checked it and the level was
> low indeed. Checked the manual (amazing cars today have them not just a
> single page leaflet telling you to check Google for something [1]) what oil
> the car needed. We filled up at the gas station and the warning
> vanished. I wonder how much it would had cost him to have the shop taken
> care of it.

I have a dear friend that had a small car (just a few warning lamps,
like oil pressure warning, not level), and brought it to us at the
student residence, after she commented that the car would barely climb a
street and one of us, the son of a mechanic, said he would have a look.

The car was running on three cylinders "or less", and the stick to test
the oil level came out dry.

She did not know she had to check the oil level.

>
>> True. Manuals in the 50's told you how to adjust the valves.
>>
>> Now they tell you not to drink the battery fluid.
>

> Yes, first adjust the valves, then it's safe to drink the battery fluid. ;-)
>
> X'post and F'up2 comp.os.linux.advocacy.

and removed. I will not subscribe there.

> [1] If the car runs on Linux it might instead point to the man page - to
> get a little more ontopic. ;-)

My current car (an Opel Corsa) has a thickish paper manual that is
almost useless, as it contains instructions for about every Corsa with
every variant, making it a mess. When I need to know something, I go to
the garage and ask for advice rather than dig in that horrible manual. I
commented to the seller that with computers nowdays you can print on the
spot a manual that contains only the exact features the car has, but he
said that would be too complex. Of course, he sells cars, not computer
services, he knows not what marvels are possible with computers.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[John Dow]

On 2021-07-27, F Russell <f...@random.info> wrote:
>
> Therefore, unless you are a TRUE user of GNU/Linux then
> please the get the fuck out.

You, sir, are a twat.

J

[The Natural Philosopher]

+1


--
"First, find out who are the people you can not criticise. They are your
oppressors."
- George Orwell

[Bobbie Sellers]

And your choice of words is quite sad.
That is a Troll and responding to a Troll
is the only thing that s/he wants you to do. S/he
won't be reading your reply and you are just
giving the Troll validation by further annoying the
rest of the c.o.l.misc readers.

Selah

bliss-lost in SpaceTime about 13.8 Billion from the BANG!

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2021-07-30, Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 12:11:18 -0500, Rinaldi wrote:
>>

>> On 7/29/21 9:57 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>> (followup to advocacy refused)
>>>

>>>> One cannot effectively USE anything to an effective extent unless one
>>>> understands completely the operation of that thing.
>>>
>>> Absolutely false.
>>> Millions of efficient drivers know next to nothing about their
>>> vehicle's
>>> engines and can not do any repair on them.
>

> While cars today are more or less computers on wheels some (most?)
> drivers today cannot perform the easiest tasks.
>
> Some years ago I helped a neighbor to move something with his can and
> noticed a warning on the display (heck, in the old days we had just a
> lamp coming on which was probably not even an LED yet) to check the
> oil. I asked him if he noticed. He said something that he had but always
> forgets to pay a visit to the shop. Later I checked it and the level was
> low indeed. Checked the manual (amazing cars today have them not just a
> single page leaflet telling you to check Google for something [1]) what
> oil the car needed. We filled up at the gas station and the warning
> vanished. I wonder how much it would had cost him to have the shop taken
> care of it.

Probably less than they'd charge if he ran it until it seized...

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | They don't understand Microsoft
\ / <cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid> | has stolen their car and parked
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | a taxi in their driveway.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Mayayana

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2021-07-30, bad sector <forgetski@postit_INVALID_.gov> wrote:

> On 7/29/21 3:13 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> Exactly. Pilots know how to fly. Not how to service engines in
>> flight,. That's what they have checklists of what to do if engines
>> screw up and stop,. for example.
>
> Bullshit, drove airplanes for 24k hours, a thousand jumps
> skydiving HaLo, LaLo and LoL but I still don't know how to fly :-(

With my paltry 2800 hours (and 2400 jumps) I don't stand a chance,
then. :-)

But at least we learn enough about how an engine works that we know
how - and why - to not do things that might make it screw up and stop.

> BTW the AN-2 has an in-flight oil-filling spout IN THE COCKPIT :-)

So does the Beaver.

[bad sector]

On 7/30/21 2:26 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2021-07-30, bad sector <forgetski@postit_INVALID_.gov> wrote:
>
>> On 7/29/21 3:13 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> Exactly. Pilots know how to fly. Not how to service engines in
>>> flight,. That's what they have checklists of what to do if engines
>>> screw up and stop,. for example.
>>
>> Bullshit, drove airplanes for 24k hours, a thousand jumps
>> skydiving HaLo, LaLo and LoL but I still don't know how to fly :-(
>
> With my paltry 2800 hours (and 2400 jumps) I don't stand a chance,
> then. :-)

At least you kept them in step!

I quit to protect my career from possible even
minor injuries. But I got on TV once with my
demo partner for an interview. The host tried
to put us on the spot with the question "what
do you do if the parachute don't open?" to which
I replied "you think positively and plan your 30
remaining seconds to learn how to fly" (there
wasn't much point in telling him about the reserve)

> But at least we learn enough about how an engine works that we know
> how - and why - to not do things that might make it screw up and stop.
>
>> BTW the AN-2 has an in-flight oil-filling spout IN THE COCKPIT :-)
>
> So does the Beaver.

That's right, it does, it's just that I kneel whenever an
An-2 goes by. The manual says that in the event of an
engine failure in IMC you just "pull the column into your
gut and wait", scarebus don't make'em like that no more.
There's also a multi-engine machine on which I think
significant engine maintenance was possible in-flight.
Nothing like that though on the oldest still-flying
Norseman I flew circa 1970 in the artic, it was serial #13,
had been the property of everyone from the RCMP to
the US or German army, and a huge MOT stamp on
the front page said "Time since new: UNKNOWN" :-)

Back on topic, I love Linux, and WANT to do some
cLi now and then but if I'm forced to do so on every
update then forget it. It's supposed to be a luxury
and not a necessity, it's supposed to give you freedom
and not slavery-d.

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2021-07-30, bad sector <forgetski@postit_INVALID_.gov> wrote:

> On 7/30/21 2:26 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2021-07-30, bad sector <forgetski@postit_INVALID_.gov> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/29/21 3:13 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> Exactly. Pilots know how to fly. Not how to service engines in
>>>> flight,. That's what they have checklists of what to do if engines
>>>> screw up and stop,. for example.
>>>
>>> Bullshit, drove airplanes for 24k hours, a thousand jumps
>>> skydiving HaLo, LaLo and LoL but I still don't know how to fly :-(
>>
>> With my paltry 2800 hours (and 2400 jumps) I don't stand a chance,
>> then. :-)
>
> At least you kept them in step!
>
> I quit to protect my career from possible even
> minor injuries. But I got on TV once with my
> demo partner for an interview. The host tried
> to put us on the spot with the question "what
> do you do if the parachute don't open?" to which
> I replied "you think positively and plan your 30
> remaining seconds to learn how to fly" (there
> wasn't much point in telling him about the reserve)

That sounds like the definition of flying that Douglas Adams
put forth in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series:
it's the art of throwing yourself at the ground and missing.

"There I was at 2500 feet with nothing but a silkworm and a
sewing machine..."

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 30/07/2021 19:26, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2021-07-30, bad sector <forgetski@postit_INVALID_.gov> wrote:
>
>> On 7/29/21 3:13 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> Exactly. Pilots know how to fly. Not how to service engines in
>>> flight,. That's what they have checklists of what to do if engines
>>> screw up and stop,. for example.
>>
>> Bullshit, drove airplanes for 24k hours, a thousand jumps
>> skydiving HaLo, LaLo and LoL but I still don't know how to fly :-(
>
> With my paltry 2800 hours (and 2400 jumps) I don't stand a chance,
> then. :-)
>
> But at least we learn enough about how an engine works that we know
> how - and why - to not do things that might make it screw up and stop.

Or not. The Bristol Mercury WWII aircraft engine was well known for
pausing for several seconds with no power at all if you rammed the
throttles open.
An airbus crashed at an airshow because the pilots didnt realise how
long it takes to spool an engine up from idle ...because mostly you
don't - landing is normally done in medium power high drag. Response is
fairly fast. From idle it takes something like 15 seconds to get go
around power.

Pilots have to deal with stuff specific to flying te aircraft, not
debugging its internal systems.

I recommend te you tube 'Mentour pilot' channel where an airline pilot
explains exactly what they do in emergencies of one kind or another, and
mostly it boils down to 'RTFM on thaat fault and get the aircraft down
on the ground (or in a river!) ASAP where qualified engineers can fix it

>
>> BTW the AN-2 has an in-flight oil-filling spout IN THE COCKPIT :-)
>
> So does the Beaver.
>

I am impressed.

Cf the Ercoupe which had so little elevator control that it couldn't be
spun.
Or trimmed properly :-)

--
"What do you think about Gay Marriage?"
"I don't."
"Don't what?"
"Think about Gay Marriage."

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 30/07/2021 20:12, bad sector wrote:
>>> BTW the AN-2 has an in-flight oil-filling spout IN THE COCKPIT :-)
>>
>> So does the Beaver.
>
> That's right, it does, it's just that I kneel whenever an
> An-2 goes by. The manual says that in the event of an
> engine failure in IMC you just "pull the column into your
> gut and wait", scarebus don't make'em like that no more.
> There's also a multi-engine machine on which I think
> significant engine maintenance was possible in-flight.

Isn't there a story of a guy who crawled out in a bombers wing in WW2 to
save the aircraft?

"Having bombed the target, Jackson's Lancaster (serial ME669) was
attacked by a German night fighter and a fuel tank in the starboard wing
caught fire. Jackson, already wounded from shell splinters, strapped on
a parachute and equipped himself with a fire extinguisher before
climbing out of the aircraft and onto the wing, whilst the aeroplane was
flying at 140 miles per hour (230 km/h), in order to put out the fire.
He gripped the air intake on the leading edge of the wing with one hand,
and fought the fire with the other. The flames seared his hands, face,
and clothes. The fighter returned and hit the bomber with a burst of
gunfire that sent two bullets into his legs. The burst also swept him
off the wing.

He fell 20,000 feet (6,100 m), but his smouldering and holed parachute
worked well enough to save his life. He suffered further injuries upon
landing, including a broken ankle, but managed to crawl to a nearby
German village the next morning, where he was paraded through the street.

He spent 10 months recovering in hospital before being transferred to
the Stalag IX-C prisoner-of-war camp."

and...

"On the return flight, while over the Zuider Zee on the Dutch coast,
Ward's Wellington was attacked by a German Bf 110 night fighter. The
attack opened a fuel tank in the starboard wing, and caused a fire
around the rear of the starboard engine. After initial attempts to put
out the flames using fire extinguishers directed through a hole made in
the fuselage of the Wellington failed, Widdowson ordered the crew to
bail out. However, Ward proposed that he climb out and try and smother
the fire using an engine cover. He crawled out through the astrodome on
the top of the fuselage, secured by a rope. Making his way down the side
and along the wing of the aircraft, he kicked or tore holes in the
fuselage's covering fabric with a fire axe to give himself hand-and
foot-holes.[2][6][7][8]

He soon reached the engine and attempted to smother the flames with a
canvas cover. With the fire out, he stuffed the cover into the hole from
which fuel from a petrol line, damaged in the night fighter attack, had
leaked and exacerbated the fire. Ward, now exhausted, gingerly made his
way back to the astrodome with the navigator, Sergeant Joe Lawson of the
RNZAF, keeping tension on the rope tethered to Ward and assisting him
back into the aircraft. Although the cover shortly blew away by the
slipstream, the remnants of the fire had burnt itself out and the plane
was now safe. Instead of the crew having to bail out, the aircraft made
an emergency landing, without flaps or brakes, at Newmarket. The
Wellington ran into a hedge and fence at the end of the runway and was
written off"

That's a bit like patching the kernel on a live running multiuser
system....


--
"Anyone who believes that the laws of physics are mere social
conventions is invited to try transgressing those conventions from the
windows of my apartment. (I live on the twenty-first floor.) "

Alan Sokal

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 30/07/2021 19:26, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> On 2021-07-30, Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 12:11:18 -0500, Rinaldi wrote:
>>>
>>> On 7/29/21 9:57 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>> (followup to advocacy refused)
>>>>
>>>>> One cannot effectively USE anything to an effective extent unless one
>>>>> understands completely the operation of that thing.
>>>>
>>>> Absolutely false.
>>>> Millions of efficient drivers know next to nothing about their
>>>> vehicle's
>>>> engines and can not do any repair on them.
>>
>> While cars today are more or less computers on wheels some (most?)
>> drivers today cannot perform the easiest tasks.
>>
>> Some years ago I helped a neighbor to move something with his can and
>> noticed a warning on the display (heck, in the old days we had just a
>> lamp coming on which was probably not even an LED yet) to check the
>> oil. I asked him if he noticed. He said something that he had but always
>> forgets to pay a visit to the shop. Later I checked it and the level was
>> low indeed. Checked the manual (amazing cars today have them not just a
>> single page leaflet telling you to check Google for something [1]) what
>> oil the car needed. We filled up at the gas station and the warning
>> vanished. I wonder how much it would had cost him to have the shop taken
>> care of it.
>
> Probably less than they'd charge if he ran it until it seized...
>

some companies used to run their car fleets by buying new, and selling a
year later - with 100,000 miles on the clock and no service record
whatsoever. They didn't even bother to check the oil.

[Lófő]

On 7/30/21 4:13 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2021-07-30, bad sector <forgetski@postit_INVALID_.gov> wrote:
>
>> On 7/30/21 2:26 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 2021-07-30, bad sector <forgetski@postit_INVALID_.gov> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 7/29/21 3:13 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Exactly. Pilots know how to fly. Not how to service engines in
>>>>> flight,. That's what they have checklists of what to do if engines
>>>>> screw up and stop,. for example.
>>>>
>>>> Bullshit, drove airplanes for 24k hours, a thousand jumps
>>>> skydiving HaLo, LaLo and LoL but I still don't know how to fly :-(
>>>
>>> With my paltry 2800 hours (and 2400 jumps) I don't stand a chance,
>>> then. :-)
>>
>> At least you kept them in step!
>>
>> I quit to protect my career from possible even
>> minor injuries. But I got on TV once with my
>> demo partner for an interview. The host tried
>> to put us on the spot with the question "what
>> do you do if the parachute don't open?" to which
>> I replied "you think positively and plan your 30
>> remaining seconds to learn how to fly" (there
>> wasn't much point in telling him about the reserve)
>
> That sounds like the definition of flying that Douglas Adams
> put forth in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series:
> it's the art of throwing yourself at the ground and missing.

I can tell you that the An-2 and the DC-3 are two
airplanes with which you can do whatever you
like and on which you have to work bloody hard
to cause an accident. An OS should be similar :-)

> "There I was at 2500 feet with nothing but a silkworm and a
> sewing machine..."

And I thought that extreme-ironing took the cake!

[bad sector]

hard to believe some of those stories, I mean it's
hard enough to hang onto a c180 in the slipstream,
but then most are supported by plenty of witnesses

[F Russell]

On Fri, 30 Jul 2021 18:26:11 +0000, some idiot wrote:

>>>>
>>>> Absolutely false.
>>>> Millions of efficient drivers know next to nothing about their
>>>> vehicle's
>>>> engines and can not do any repair on them.
>>

WTF??!! We are "discussing" computer operating systems here
(I would hope) and not cars.

A computer is a general purpose machine. IOW, it does nothing
until it is programmed to do something.

The issue with GNU/Linux is simple: who the fuck does the
programming?

The popular distros, like M$ Windows, think that it is THEY who
do the programming, i.e. make decisions for the user.

I, and many others, emphasize that it is the USER that does
the programming and makes the decisions.

If the user needs help, then let him go to M$/Apphole.

GNU/Linux was never intended for such an unsophisticated
animal.

All who disagree belong in the stables of M$/Apphole.

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2021-07-30, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

> On 30/07/2021 19:26, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> But at least we learn enough about how an engine works that we know
>> how - and why - to not do things that might make it screw up and stop.
>
> Or not. The Bristol Mercury WWII aircraft engine was well known for
> pausing for several seconds with no power at all if you rammed the
> throttles open.

Even engines on some light aircraft will stumble if you open the
throttle too fast. Others will backfire if you close the throttle
too fast. Don't move the throttle too fast.

> An airbus crashed at an airshow because the pilots didnt realise how
> long it takes to spool an engine up from idle ...because mostly you
> don't - landing is normally done in medium power high drag. Response is
> fairly fast. From idle it takes something like 15 seconds to get go
> around power.
>
> Pilots have to deal with stuff specific to flying te aircraft, not
> debugging its internal systems.

Yes, but bits of basic knowledge - like the fact that it takes an
idling turbine a long time to spool up - are good things to have
in your mental toolbox. Especially if you can put them together
with situational awareness and recognize situations you shouldn't
put yourself into.

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2021-07-30, Lófő <gonefishing@_INVALID_.buggeroff.gov> wrote:

> I can tell you that the An-2 and the DC-3 are two
> airplanes with which you can do whatever you
> like and on which you have to work bloody hard
> to cause an accident. An OS should be similar :-)

Yes, but then along came Microsoft. The sad part is
that it appears Seattle is close enough to Redmond to
be infected by the M$ philosophy, hence the 737 MAX fiasco.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 31/07/2021 02.00, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2021-07-30, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 30/07/2021 19:26, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> But at least we learn enough about how an engine works that we know
>>> how - and why - to not do things that might make it screw up and stop.
>>
>> Or not. The Bristol Mercury WWII aircraft engine was well known for
>> pausing for several seconds with no power at all if you rammed the
>> throttles open.
>
> Even engines on some light aircraft will stumble if you open the
> throttle too fast. Others will backfire if you close the throttle
> too fast. Don't move the throttle too fast.

The Austin 1300 had an oil dampener in the throttle control so that it
would move slowly. At least in one direction, I don't remember which.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[The Natural Philosopher]

I am sure there are more untold stories of wartime pilots who tried mid
air fixes that failed.


--
“Progress is precisely that which rules and regulations did not foresee,”

– Ludwig von Mises

[The Natural Philosopher]

Effectively both, but it didn't do anything on a slam throttle shut event.

All SU carbs and many Strombergs had those, the rest had 'acceleration
pumps' that dumped fuel into the intake when you open up the air intake.




--
Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 31/07/2021 09:56, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Jul 2021 22:02:36 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>> [2][6][7][8]
>
> You're the human Wikipedia interface. ;-)
>
In this case I hold up my hand in shame :(


--
“It is hard to imagine a more stupid decision or more dangerous way of
making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people
who pay no price for being wrong.”

Thomas Sowell

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

Le 30-07-2021, Bobbie Sellers <bl...@mouse-potato.com> a écrit :
> That is a Troll

Certainly not. The Trolls are artists. It doesn't suffice to flood a
newsgroup are to post stupid things to become a Troll. It needs a real
brain to make others respond without end on a few messages. It haven't
see any Troll on usenet since a long time.

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

[Carlos E. R.]

On 31/07/2021 09.46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 31/07/2021 01:31, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 31/07/2021 02.00, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> On 2021-07-30, The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 30/07/2021 19:26, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> But at least we learn enough about how an engine works that we know
>>>>> how - and why - to not do things that might make it screw up and stop.
>>>>
>>>> Or not. The Bristol Mercury WWII aircraft engine was well known for
>>>> pausing for several seconds with no power at all if you rammed the
>>>> throttles open.
>>>
>>> Even engines on some light aircraft will stumble if you open the
>>> throttle too fast.  Others will backfire if you close the throttle
>>> too fast.  Don't move the throttle too fast.
>>
>> The Austin 1300 had an oil dampener in the throttle control so that it
>> would move slowly. At least in one direction, I don't remember which.
>>
> Effectively both, but it didn't do anything on a slam throttle shut event.

My father said he never noticed the difference. Nor me, when I learned
to drive on that car. Not actually learning, the driving school had
their own cars.

> All SU carbs and many Strombergs had those, the rest had 'acceleration
> pumps' that dumped fuel into the intake when you open up the air intake.

Yes, the pump is the usual thing. Was.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 31/07/2021 10.52, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Jul 2021 21:55:16 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>> The Bristol Mercury WWII aircraft engine was well known for pausing for
>> several seconds with no power at all if you rammed the throttles open.
>

> First versions of Supermarine Spitfires had a similar problem stalling on
> negative Gs, easy prey for ME 109s. The solution, adding a simple ring
> into the fuel line, an idea by Beatrice Shilling, helped winning the
> Battle Of Britain (and probably the war).
>

A ring? Sorry, I don't understand.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 31/07/2021 13.16, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
> Le 30-07-2021, Bobbie Sellers <bl...@mouse-potato.com> a écrit :
>> That is a Troll
>
> Certainly not. The Trolls are artists. It doesn't suffice to flood a
> newsgroup are to post stupid things to become a Troll. It needs a real
> brain to make others respond without end on a few messages. It haven't
> see any Troll on usenet since a long time.
>

Heh :-)

How do we call the rest?

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 7/31/21 4:16 AM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
> Le 30-07-2021, Bobbie Sellers <bl...@mouse-potato.com> a écrit :
>> That is a Troll
>
> Certainly not. The Trolls are artists. It doesn't suffice to flood a
> newsgroup are to post stupid things to become a Troll. It needs a real
> brain to make others respond without end on a few messages. It haven't
> see any Troll on usenet since a long time.
>

A real brain but a twisted need for attention.

bliss - 'Nearly any fool can use a Linux computer. Many do.' After all
here I am...

[bad sector]

my 3000 mk-II had 3 SU carbs that I had to tune by sticking
one end of a hose in my ear and the other near each carb
to listen to the air pitch and adjust as req'd :-)) It had
those tapered fuel controll pins pulled out by the manifold
vacuum (don't remember exactly what I had to adjust though..).

[Stéphane CARPENTIER]

The rest don't always fit in the same box.

For example, there are some flooder in read-only mode who sent a lot of
messages without reading the answers.

Others are only morons who are unable to understand anything answered to
them. They always stay at the same level as if nobody never answered
them.

Fabian would fit in his own box. He despised anyone but himself. He
knows and does nothing but he believes that barking at others would help
Linux.

There is a boat, to, which could find its own box.

[Bobbie Sellers]

The valves were needle valves controlled by vacuum with diaphragms
and you were adjusting the air flow across those diaphragms.

I used older designs but I kept up on what was happening.
Mine were on motorcycles Amals by brand and I preferred a larger
carb to supply multiple intakes but just to Twin cylinder engines.
Adjusting the multiple carbs was a task too demanding for me.
My 1972 R/75 had Bings and seldom required adjustments.

bliss - 'Nearly any fool can use a Linux computer. Many do.' After all
here I am...

--
bliss dash SF 4 ever at dslextreme dot com

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2021-08-01, Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:

> Somewhere I had "ring" in my memory. Looking up Wikipedia now it says
>
>| In March 1941, a metal disc with a hole was fitted in the fuel line,
>| restricting fuel flow to the maximum the engine could consume.
>
> So "disk with a hole" might be considered a ring. :-D

Yes, but that doesn't have as many syllables. :-)
For extra points, call it a "flow restrictor".

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | "Orientate" is an example
\ / <cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid> | of the trend toward
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | polysyllabificationizing.

[Bobbie Sellers]

On 7/31/21 9:55 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2021-08-01, Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 31 Jul 2021 13:29:25 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>
>>> On 31/07/2021 10.52, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 30 Jul 2021 21:55:16 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The Bristol Mercury WWII aircraft engine was well known for pausing for
>>>>> several seconds with no power at all if you rammed the throttles open.
>>>>
>>>> First versions of Supermarine Spitfires had a similar problem stalling on
>>>> negative Gs, easy prey for ME 109s. The solution, adding a simple ring
>>>> into the fuel line, an idea by Beatrice Shilling, helped winning the
>>>> Battle Of Britain (and probably the war).
>>>
>>> A ring? Sorry, I don't understand.
>>
>> Somewhere I had "ring" in my memory. Looking up Wikipedia now it says
>>
>> | In March 1941, a metal disc with a hole was fitted in the fuel line,
>> | restricting fuel flow to the maximum the engine could consume.
>>
>> So "disk with a hole" might be considered a ring. :-D
>
> Yes, but that doesn't have as many syllables. :-)
> For extra points, call it a "flow restrictor".
>
>

An "obturator" is a term that might be valid.
Took me some time to remember that word.
It don't exactly flow...

blis - 'Nearly any fool can use a Linux computer. Many do.' After all
here I was...

[Carlos E. R.]

On 01/08/2021 03.54, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> On Sat, 31 Jul 2021 13:29:25 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>

> Somewhere I had "ring" in my memory. Looking up Wikipedia now it says
>
> | In March 1941, a metal disc with a hole was fitted in the fuel line,
> | restricting fuel flow to the maximum the engine could consume.
>
> So "disk with a hole" might be considered a ring. :-D
>

Curious.

Ah, please, post the link.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 01/08/2021 13.52, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:

> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supermarine_Spitfire#Carburetion_versus_fuel_injection>
>

Thanks :-)

Didn't know any of this.

I have a model of the Hurricane at 1:24 scale, I think it is. Very
detailed. From Airfix, I suppose. Fragile things, they don't survive a
zealeous hired house cleaner, even if I told them to not clean the
cupboard top :-(

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airfix

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Aragorn]

On 01.08.2021 at 09:04, Bud Frede scribbled:

> Bud Frede <fr...@mouse-potato.com> writes:
>
> > John Dow <j...@nelefa.org> writes:
> >
> >> On 2021-07-27, F Russell <f...@random.info> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Therefore, unless you are a TRUE user of GNU/Linux then
> >>> please the get the fuck out.
> >>
> >> You, sir, are a twat.
> >
> > Well, his name is Fucking Russell, so that fits.
>
> Sorry, that was rather insensitive of me. I apologize for my vulgar
> and sexist comment. I was annoyed at usenet trolls this morning and
> should have taken a deep breath before posting in anger.

I'm not so sure that it would be his real name.

In a past longer gone — say over a decade ago — he used to post the
exact rants under the names "Alan Connor" and (occasionally)
"Evergreen", and he stated that "Alan Connor" was not his real name.
So there's no reason to assume that "F. Russell" would be his real name
either — although, admittedly, it's possible.

Dunno. I've binned him a while ago already. <shrug>

--
With respect,
= Aragorn =

[Aragorn]

On 01.08.2021 at 15:11, Carlos E. R. scribbled:

> I have a model of the Hurricane at 1:24 scale, I think it is. Very
> detailed. From Airfix, I suppose. Fragile things, they don't survive a
> zealeous hired house cleaner, even if I told them to not clean the
> cupboard top :-(
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airfix

I built model airplane kits too when I was young — between the ages of
12 and 15 — and Airfix was one of the brands of model kits I used the
most. Others that I used a lot were were Revell, Monogram and
Matchbox.

I mainly built jets — mostly military, and a few civilian — but I also
had a Saturn V rocket (from Airfix) and a WW-II-era American submarine
(from Revell).

I usually stuck to the 1:72 scale, though. But I remember that Airfix
had a couple of 1:24 scale models in their catalogue at the time, among
which a very detailed Hawker Harrier Jump Jet. ;)

I'm not sure which was the last kit I built, but it was either an F-16
kit from Revell or a "Space: 1999" Eagle Transporter from Airfix. At
that point in time I had already turned 15 and had become fully devoted
to my next big obsession, i.e. electric guitars. :)

[Carlos E. R.]

On 01/08/2021 15.47, Aragorn wrote:
> On 01.08.2021 at 15:11, Carlos E. R. scribbled:
>
>> I have a model of the Hurricane at 1:24 scale, I think it is. Very
>> detailed. From Airfix, I suppose. Fragile things, they don't survive a
>> zealeous hired house cleaner, even if I told them to not clean the
>> cupboard top :-(
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airfix
>
> I built model airplane kits too when I was young — between the ages of
> 12 and 15 — and Airfix was one of the brands of model kits I used the
> most. Others that I used a lot were were Revell, Monogram and
> Matchbox.
>
> I mainly built jets — mostly military, and a few civilian — but I also
> had a Saturn V rocket (from Airfix)

Me too, I have that rocket :-)

And another of the lunar lander - this one I never finished, the paint
instructions were far from clear.

> and a WW-II-era American submarine
> (from Revell).
>
> I usually stuck to the 1:72 scale, though. But I remember that Airfix
> had a couple of 1:24 scale models in their catalogue at the time, among
> which a very detailed Hawker Harrier Jump Jet. ;)
>
> I'm not sure which was the last kit I built, but it was either an F-16
> kit from Revell or a "Space: 1999" Eagle Transporter from Airfix. At
> that point in time I had already turned 15 and had become fully devoted
> to my next big obsession, i.e. electric guitars. :)

:-)

I know the lunar lander was my last. It must be somewhere in a box.


--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[The Natural Philosopher]

There's rather a good You tube video on Miss Shilling's Orifice as it
was politely known. AFAICR the problem was that negative G cause the
floats in the carb float chamber to lift off the needles and fuel gushed
in flooding the engines for several seconds. Restricting the max. rate
of fuel into the carb to a little more than full throttle required,
meant the engine only flooded for a split second and recovered much
quicker.
The ring was something like a washer that was placed in the fuel line or
the fuel lines connecting to the carb. It reduced but did not solve the
problem.
In practice pilots had been taught to roll inverted and use up stick to
get the machine into a dive - it wasn't a war losing issue, it was just
something pilots had to learn how to do - like landing a corsair in a
sideslip so you could actually see the carrier deck :-)

Googling Miss Shilling's Orifice will probably net you a much more
accurate and intersting explanatiun, as I said that is from memory only

--
"I am inclined to tell the truth and dislike people who lie consistently.
This makes me unfit for the company of people of a Left persuasion, and
all women"

[The Natural Philosopher]

didn't you have a vacuum gauge?

What you had to get right was that the mechanical linkages between 2 or
3 carbs were all locked in place so all the carbs were closed by the
same amount - because the idle speed settings on multiple SUs meant that
one idle speed - the highest would render the others irrelevant.
I seem to recall that you slackened off the intercarb couplings, with
the engine running, so the carbs were all operating independently and
then adjusted the idle speed on each carbs for a balanced hiss from each
one (or a balanced vacuum with a meter)

THEN you tightened all the couplings . Once tightened the individual
carb idles settings no longer meant anything - it was just the highest
one that set the idle speed for the whole array

The tapered needles were mechanical engine maps! The taper was ground
in so that fuel was adjusted very accurately according to the manifold
vacuum as the needles slid out of the main jets. Not allowing them to
slide out too fast was the purpose of the dampers. Because in addition
to the needles there was a second throttle attached to them so the
actual butterfly valves didn't actually open the throttles directly -
they created a vaccuum that caused the barrels and needles to rise up
and increase air and fuel flow.

It actually worked very well - BMC style engines equipped with SUs were
much more economical than zenith equipped fords; UK has never had any
oil wells of its own, and economy was important.

The strombergs worked ins a similar fashion but instead of a piston the
vacuum operated a rubber diaphragm I think, still damped

But its all a long time ago now


--
The lifetime of any political organisation is about three years before
its been subverted by the people it tried to warn you about.

Anon.

[The Natural Philosopher]

On 01/08/2021 14:04, Bud Frede wrote:
> Bud Frede <fr...@mouse-potato.com> writes:
>
>> John Dow <j...@nelefa.org> writes:
>>
>>> On 2021-07-27, F Russell <f...@random.info> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Therefore, unless you are a TRUE user of GNU/Linux then
>>>> please the get the fuck out.
>>>
>>> You, sir, are a twat.
>>>
>>
>> Well, his name is Fucking Russell, so that fits.
>
>
> Sorry, that was rather insensitive of me. I apologize for my vulgar and
> sexist comment. I was annoyed at usenet trolls this morning and should
> have taken a deep breath before posting in anger.
>

Please don't apologise, It saved me calling him a cunt


--
A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on
its shoes.

[bad sector]

You said it, I don't remember half as much detail,
but listening to each with a hose was definitely the
method. Mine was a 1962, LOVED it! Also had two
vettes at the same time much later ('73-350 & '74-454)
they were just lawn-mower-class trucks, loads of fun
but no finesse. Man, that Healey was balanced just
perfect, I've heard XKE owners say such things too
but never had one of those. Then I got married,
wife, kids, Rabbits, Pintos; took me forever to crawl
back up and convince her that a bullittish Mustang
was in reality very much a family car :-))))

[The Natural Philosopher]

running an old jaguar xf 3.0s twin v6 turbodiesel 270bhp
That really is a 140mph family car


--
In a Time of Universal Deceit, Telling the Truth Is a Revolutionary Act.

- George Orwell

[Carlos E. R.]

Oh, I can understand that the float at negative G gets wacked and the
chamber floods. I always wondered how to manage a carburator in a plane.

Aviation must be full of those things. There is a jet that is used in
Spain for training purposes only, and also for acrobatics. Well, the
thing is that it is not designed to fly inverted because the oil in the
engine goes to the "roof" and the pump runs dry. Well, the pilots
devised "something" that allow them to fly inverted for some little time
(that they have to control).


--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[bad sector]

On 8/2/21 4:54 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> xf 3.0s twin v6 turbodiesel

"The child is grown, The dream is gone" :-)

Now it's a Subaroo outback and a Totoyahaha Tundra,
everything is digital: puke, puke, puke.

[Carlos E. R.]

Heh :-)

I went into electronics in order to create all those electronics :-)



Only that it was not me in the end.


--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[bad sector]

On 8/2/21 2:26 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
> On 02/08/2021 14.43, bad sector wrote:
>> On 8/2/21 4:54 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> xf 3.0s twin v6 turbodiesel
>>
>> "The child is grown, The dream is gone" :-)
>>
>> Now it's a Subaroo outback and a Totoyahaha Tundra,
>> everything is digital: puke, puke, puke.
>
> Heh :-)
>
> I went into electronics in order to create all those electronics :-)

Fuck you!

In the 70's one of my brothers in law had one of them
Chrysler muscle cars (actually all 3 of them did). This
one was probably a ragtop 'cuda. It was full of bikini girls
cruising at a good clip downhill on a steep 1km stretch
toward a dock at the bottom when he realized he had no
brakes. He put it in reverse and floored it, enter the mother
of all smoke shows, but he managed to stop (I think it
was an automatic). Try THAT with one of todays AI cars
that haven't got a single mechanical control :-)

[bad sector]

On 8/2/21 6:27 PM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:

> On Mon, 2 Aug 2021 16:37:48 -0400, bad sector wrote:
>>
>> In the 70's one of my brothers in law had one of them
>> Chrysler muscle cars (actually all 3 of them did). This
>> one was probably a ragtop 'cuda. It was full of bikini girls
>> cruising at a good clip downhill on a steep 1km stretch
>> toward a dock at the bottom when he realized he had no
>> brakes. He put it in reverse and floored it, enter the mother
>> of all smoke shows, but he managed to stop (I think it
>> was an automatic). Try THAT with one of todays AI cars
>> that haven't got a single mechanical control :-)
>

> Being from Europe all of my cars had manual transmission. My Beetle needed
> some pumping on the pedal to build up pressure to brake. Hydraulics were
> leaking. I could instead also shift to a lower gear. The engine was
> screaming but that slows the car down. And I was always looking for a
> "soft target" (excluding humans and animals) next to the road to bump in
> in case both other options failed.
> --
> Andreas
>
> PGP fingerprint 952B0A9F12C2FD6C9F7E68DAA9C2EA89D1A370E0

My earlier cited Healey ran out gas two blocks from a garage.
I made it on the starter, forget what gear; first electric car ever,
take THAT, Elon :-))

[Paul]

The part that provides closed loop feedback on the engine,
that was a great idea.

But the part the consumer sees, that's just awful.

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2017/05/the-state-of-the-car-computer-forget-horsepower-we-want-megahertz/

Paul

[Carlos E. R.]

On 03/08/2021 00.27, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Aug 2021 16:37:48 -0400, bad sector wrote:
>>

>> In the 70's one of my brothers in law had one of them
>> Chrysler muscle cars (actually all 3 of them did). This
>> one was probably a ragtop 'cuda. It was full of bikini girls
>> cruising at a good clip downhill on a steep 1km stretch
>> toward a dock at the bottom when he realized he had no
>> brakes. He put it in reverse and floored it, enter the mother
>> of all smoke shows, but he managed to stop (I think it
>> was an automatic). Try THAT with one of todays AI cars
>> that haven't got a single mechanical control :-)
>

> Being from Europe all of my cars had manual transmission. My Beetle needed
> some pumping on the pedal to build up pressure to brake. Hydraulics were
> leaking. I could instead also shift to a lower gear. The engine was
> screaming but that slows the car down. And I was always looking for a
> "soft target" (excluding humans and animals) next to the road to bump in
> in case both other options failed.
>

Plus, here all cars have a hand brake, typically operated by cable.


A good AI though, would detect the breakage of the brakes in advance and
would not allow the car to be moved :-p

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 03/08/2021 00.57, Paul wrote:
> Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 02/08/2021 14.43, bad sector wrote:
>>> On 8/2/21 4:54 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> xf 3.0s twin v6 turbodiesel
>>> "The child is grown, The dream is gone" :-)
>>>
>>> Now it's a Subaroo outback and a Totoyahaha Tundra,
>>> everything is digital: puke, puke, puke.
>>
>> Heh :-)
>>
>> I went into electronics in order to create all those electronics :-)
>>
>> Only that it was not me in the end.
>
> The part that provides closed loop feedback on the engine,
> that was a great idea.

There are millions of places where electronics replace and improve on
mechanical controllers. The obvious one is the electronic ignition, and
then the system that controls the advance of the ignition point
according to current engine status and what the human demands at that
moment. Then adding electronic fuel injection system, multitude of
sensors, and a computer to control all that.

Regretfully, the more complex a system is, the more prone to failure it
is. That's something that needs lots of improvement.


Not that I specifically wanted to work on car electronics, but
electronic systems in general, improving on existing systems. But life
had other plans.

>
> But the part the consumer sees, that's just awful.
>
> https://arstechnica.com/cars/2017/05/the-state-of-the-car-computer-forget-horsepower-we-want-megahertz/

That's a totally different aspect.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Jasen Betts]

The last time I ran out of brakes and engine on a hill, I stopped by getting the car
sideways on a wide gravelly patch.


--
Jasen.

[bad sector]

On 8/2/21 6:27 PM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Aug 2021 16:37:48 -0400, bad sector wrote:
>>

>> In the 70's one of my brothers in law had one of them
>> Chrysler muscle cars (actually all 3 of them did). This
>> one was probably a ragtop 'cuda. It was full of bikini girls
>> cruising at a good clip downhill on a steep 1km stretch
>> toward a dock at the bottom when he realized he had no
>> brakes. He put it in reverse and floored it, enter the mother
>> of all smoke shows, but he managed to stop (I think it
>> was an automatic). Try THAT with one of todays AI cars
>> that haven't got a single mechanical control :-)
>

> Being from Europe all of my cars had manual transmission. My Beetle needed
> some pumping on the pedal to build up pressure to brake. Hydraulics were
> leaking. I could instead also shift to a lower gear. The engine was
> screaming but that slows the car down. And I was always looking for a
> "soft target" (excluding humans and animals) next to the road to bump in
> in case both other options failed.

[Aragorn]

On 02.08.2021 at 18:37, bad sector scribbled:

Actually, the first ever electric car was built somewhere in the 1920s.
;)

[bad sector]

The human brain is unbelievably capable; admittedly that's
a conditional state. Still, thanks to electronics and digital
services today's cars are so loaded with suicidal safety-traps
that I wonder if we evolved from monkeys or they from us!

[Aragorn]

On 03.08.2021 at 06:19, bad sector scribbled:

> The human brain is unbelievably capable; admittedly that's
> a conditional state. Still, thanks to electronics and digital
> services today's cars are so loaded with suicidal safety-traps
> that I wonder if we evolved from monkeys or they from us!

I am fairly convinced that humans evolved from lemmings. :p

[Carlos E. R.]

On 03/08/2021 10.26, Jasen Betts wrote:
> On 2021-08-02, bad sector <forgetski@postit_INVALID_.gov> wrote:
>> On 8/2/21 2:26 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>> On 02/08/2021 14.43, bad sector wrote:
>>>> On 8/2/21 4:54 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

...

> The last time I ran out of brakes and engine on a hill, I stopped by getting the car
> sideways on a wide gravelly patch.

Last time? So it has happened to you more than once? Wow.

It has never happened to me, nor to anyone I know. How do you do
maintenance? Here cars are subject to mandatory periodical inspections,
and of course the brakes are inspected with some care.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Aragorn]

On 03.08.2021 at 06:40, Andreas Kohlbach scribbled:

> On Mon, 2 Aug 2021 18:37:18 -0400, bad sector wrote:
> >
> > My earlier cited Healey ran out gas two blocks from a garage.
> > I made it on the starter, forget what gear; first electric car ever,
> > take THAT, Elon :-))
>

> Yes, the starter. I forgot about this.
>
> Similar, when my battery died I pushed the car on the road which
> conveniently went downhill just behind the house. Putting on 2nd gear
> and releasing the clutch would start the engine.

Been there too a couple of times. ;)

> AFAIK this is not working with automatic transmission.

Nope, it wouldn't work, indeed. A torque converter automatic has no
mechanical linkage between the flywheel and the driven wheels [*]. It's
essentially an oil pump, and it relies on the running engine for
providing torque to the transmission.

By consequence, a torque converter automatic with a non-running engine
is by definition always in "neutral" until the engine's running.

Using the inertia of the vehicle in order to jump-start the engine only
works with a manual, and for that matter, one that has a clutch pedal —
it also wouldn't work with an automated manual that has an electrically
controlled clutch, and dual-clutch transmissions are completely reliant
on electronics, so that wouldn't work either.


[*] Or that is to say, modern torque converter automatics do have a
mechanical link between the engine and the wheels when the torque
converter locks, but this only happens when the rpm of the engine
and the transmission are fully in sync, and thus it would require
the engine to be running.

Locking torque converters have been around for a long time already
— albeit that to the best of my knowledge, GM was the only
manufacturer that implemented it — but they would only lock in the
highest gear on 3-speed automatics or in the two highest gears on
4-speed automatics whereby the top gear was an overdrive and top
speed was attained in third gear. It was only with the advent of
6-speed automatics — under political pressure with regard to lower
emissions and higher fuel economy — that a mechanical torque
converter lock became implemented in all forward gears, including
first gear (but not in reverse).

[bad sector]

In the old days we built whatever we wanted and
went on the road with it. I was 13 and all I needed
to get my unlimited driver license was $2 and be
tall enough for the city clerk to see me behind the
counter. Just like that I was licensed to drive any
road train. Now I need a bloody inquisition and a
papal bull (pun intended) to get freakin' lawn mower
trailer hooked up.

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2021-08-02, bad sector <forgetski@postit_INVALID_.gov> wrote:

That reminds me of a bumper sticker I recently saw on a minivan:

I used to be cool.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | They don't understand Microsoft
\ / <cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid> | has stolen their car and parked
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | a taxi in their driveway.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | -- Mayayana

[Charlie Gibbs]

On 2021-08-03, Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 2 Aug 2021 18:37:18 -0400, bad sector wrote:
>

>> My earlier cited Healey ran out gas two blocks from a garage.
>> I made it on the starter, forget what gear; first electric car ever,
>> take THAT, Elon :-))
>

> Yes, the starter. I forgot about this.
>
> Similar, when my battery died I pushed the car on the road which
> conveniently went downhill just behind the house. Putting on 2nd gear and

> releasing the clutch would start the engine. AFAIK this is not working
> with automatic transmission.

Yup, been there too.

My favourite bit of engineering was in my 1984 Honda Civic.
The fan belt was also the timing belt that drove the camshaft,
and when the water pump seized the teeth were stripped off.
Except for about a quarter of an inch along one edge, which
was enough to keep the camshaft turning. I like to think
that the offset of the pulleys was deliberate for this very
reason. I was able to limp to my mechanic half a mile at a
time, stopping to let the engine cool in between.

[Jasen Betts]

The car had broken motor and was being towed to a mechanic (it should
have been on a truck or trailer but money was tight)

The previous was a light truck with dodgy gearbox, it jumped out of second
gear on a steep descent, and applying the brakes hard would cause the rear
wheels to lift off the road. I has a choice steer with both hands,
try to get it back into gear and steer one handed, apply the brakes
harder and loose all steering.

It ended leaving the road and busting a few small trees that were
growing wild on the road reserve. no extra damage was done to the
truck.

--
Jasen.

[Carlos E. R.]

On 03/08/2021 20.32, Jasen Betts wrote:
> On 2021-08-03, Carlos E. R. <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 03/08/2021 10.26, Jasen Betts wrote:
>>> On 2021-08-02, bad sector <forgetski@postit_INVALID_.gov> wrote:
>>>> On 8/2/21 2:26 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>>>> On 02/08/2021 14.43, bad sector wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/2/21 4:54 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> The last time I ran out of brakes and engine on a hill, I stopped by getting the car
>>> sideways on a wide gravelly patch.
>>
>> Last time? So it has happened to you more than once? Wow.
>>
>> It has never happened to me, nor to anyone I know. How do you do
>> maintenance? Here cars are subject to mandatory periodical inspections,
>> and of course the brakes are inspected with some care.
>
> The car had broken motor and was being towed to a mechanic (it should
> have been on a truck or trailer but money was tight)

{chuckle}

I don't think towing a car is legal here nowdays :-P

Or has to be done with a metal bar, not a chain or rope.

I do remember my father and my getting towed once, when I was a kid. The
thick rope broke a few times, but I think we managed to get to a village
with repair shops. The car was very small: google "seat 600" to see it.

> The previous was a light truck with dodgy gearbox, it jumped out of second
> gear on a steep descent, and applying the brakes hard would cause the rear
> wheels to lift off the road. I has a choice steer with both hands,
> try to get it back into gear and steer one handed, apply the brakes
> harder and loose all steering.
>
> It ended leaving the road and busting a few small trees that were
> growing wild on the road reserve. no extra damage was done to the
> truck.

Yes, the only cases I heard about of broken brakes were trucks or buses.


--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

[Peter Köhlmann]

Am 03.08.21 um 12:35 schrieb Aragorn:

Some humans maybe. And then there are the Snit-types, with ancestors who
were to become cockroaches. And the rest has ancestors who became humans
and/or monkeys

[John Dow]

My wife runs a motorcycle training school. I'd be inclined
to agree :)

J