Killer-Copter Rebuttal... The Mini-500---Is This the World's Deadliest Sport Helicopter?
J.R. Campbell, Publisher
admission via personal e-mail, has taken to engaging in personal attacks in
order to try and deflect criticism of his company and products. We find this
unfortunate and appropriate corrective action is underway. This is not an
unknown tactic for him.... a man who has threatened, libeled and harassed
his critics around the world.
Also by their own admission, Revolution Helicopter is refusing to detail
what they believe to be "untrue"in stories published in US Aviator, and are
instead engaging in character assassination in a most cowardly manner that
we have seen all too often. It is immaterial as to what anybody may allege
about anyone connected with this story... as these stories are
well-detailed, attrributed appropriately, and may be checked at any time
should anyone feel the need. We welcome the scrutiny and, in fact, sent a
number of copies of this story to industry experts (including Fetters) prior
to publication in case we erred in any detail. Fetters/Al Faris never
responded.
In the meantime, we republish the May/June 1999 story that has apparently
inspired Mohammed Al Faris' (a.k.a. Dennis Fetters) ire in an effort to ask
one simple question... what, if anything, in this story (allowing for the
fact that it was written six months ago) is untrue?
After checking this story, yet again, with a number of civilian and
government people involved, we still maintain that the story was true,
factual, and wholly accurate when we wrote it... and it still appears to be.
Please note one major correction, though, due to the time lapse that has
transpired since it was written and now... EIGHT people have now lost their
lives in this aircraft instead of the seven detailed.
A condensed low resolution PDF file (minus the ads and non-associated
artwork) of this story (about 560k), complete with some photography (also
low-res to save bandwidth) has been posted to
http://www.sportplane.com/images/Mini500mj99a.pdf
Killer-Copter... The Mini-500---
Is This the World's Deadliest Sport Helicopter?
By J.R. "Zoom" Campbell
As you are well aware, US Aviator magazine has often been engaged in a
number of battles that we feel are important to the welfare and safety of
our readers. Believe it or not, we don't go looking for these things. They
seem to find us (grin).
As a matter of fact, I wish we could avoid the struggles, as they detract
from that part of our mission that we most enjoy, i.e., publicizing and
promoting all that is good and right in the world of aviation. It sure isn't
pleasant to be engaged in all the immature name-calling, personal attacks,
interference, and nonsense that often emanates from those about which we
report.
However, the past year has been a deadly one for those of us who may eschew
the world of wings for the world of rotors. The Mini-500 helicopter has
become a focal point for our concern as literally dozens of these embattled
machines have impacted the earth in one form or another. The tally has been
bloody. Seven pilots are dead. Dozens of machines have been trashed.
Hundreds of component failures have been documented and publicized. There is
no excuse for this.
A Tragic Summary
If you believe what Revolution Helicopter tells us, some 500 Mini-500's or
so were sold in the preceding years. We've been able to document that about
100 have been completed. Of those 100 some-odd completed aircraft, we are
aware of over 40 crashes, with some machines having been rebuilt and crashed
two or three times!
Seven of these crashes, which we know of, have resulted in fatalities to
their pilots. At least four of the fatal accidents infer some potential
concern for the mechanical or aerodynamic capabilities of the helicopter.
Engine failure or unsuccessful autorotation is a suspect in a number of
these crashes.... and for troubling reasons. The Mini-500 seems to have
some unacceptable problems when an autorotation is initiated, especially at
higher speeds.
The final production version of the helicopter was modified from the
prototype that I flew several years ago, and one of the results is the now
well-documented fact that the Mini-500 has problems entering autorotation at
high speed. Due to a number of factors, including the inclination and
positioning of the horizontal stabilizer, the faster the Mini-500 goes, the
more pronounced an uncommanded pitch-down one will experience with sudden
power cuts or engine failure.
WHOA: Look Out Below!
This pitch-down can be radical. Above 90 mph, it can be downright
terrifying. The major problem with the pitch-down is that as the aircraft
noses over, the rotor "unloads" slightly and precious rotor RPM, needed for
a successful autorotation and recovery before impact, is robbed.
Worse, after a certain point, a loss of rotor RPM becomes a fatal event
because once the RPM decays below a critical level, the helicopter is not
capable of recovering the rotor energy. As the rotor slows, it becomes more
"aero-elastic". What this means is that the rotor may diverge from its
normal flightpath and position as it slows, and as it becomes more flexible,
it may come into contact with parts of the airframe (and even the pilot...).
This can ruin your whole day.
Particularly troublesome is the lack of sufficient main rotor to tail boom
clearance, which has resulted in dozens of main rotor/boom strikes, some
with fatal result. One pilot, Reinhold Grauer, has had three engine failures
in his Mini-500... and three boom strikes! He has rebuilt the aircraft
twice, spending $15,000 in the process. After the last crash, however, he
decided to cut his losses and will not rebuild his aircraft a third time.
Powered by an otherwise highly-regarded Rotax 582 two-stroke engine, the
Mini-500 has experienced an abnormal amount of "loss of power" incidents.
Okay, it sounds like there is a problem with the 582, right? Not
necessarily. There is some interesting history here. First of all, informed
sources at Rotax tell us, categorically, that they never wanted to see the
582 go into the Mini-500, and it took the threat of legal action and other
negative behavior from Revolution Helicopter's Dennis Fetters to force Rotax
into a situation where they agreed to provide the engines to Fetters, so
long as he took full responsibility for the installation.
Worse, as this design reached "maturity", its original empty weight
increased, and Rotax experts tell us that the 582 is not rated to produce
enough power to safely fly the Mini-500. As a matter-of-fact, the engine
must consistently run at or above 100% max rated power to be able to fly the
machine under a number of real world conditions. Finally, the installation
itself is suspect: A number of builders have indicated that there are
excessive problems with the transmission, belts, bearings, and other
interfaces between the power source and the mechanical systems designed to
drive the rotor. In other words, the deck appears to be stacked against the
582's success.
Another serious group of problems revolves around dozens of frame cracks
that have imperiled nearly 50 helicopters -- so far. Both the early versions
of the Mini-500, called the "Alpha", and its successor, the "Bravo", have
experienced dozens of frame cracks. The so-called "Bravo" was to be the
solution for the "Alpha" frame cracks but "Bravo" frame cracks have appeared
in a great number of machines as well. Most of these frame cracks weren't
too serious, but a number of them did create control or mechanical
difficulties for the helicopter and many of the aircraft showing such
defects have been grounded by their owners.
There are many other problems with this machine. As a matter-of-fact, a
list of machines and their defects compiled by former Mini-500 dealer Fred
Stewart (who has been a true leader in trying to correct this machine's many
faults), is nearly 28 pages long!
Other documented problems include bearing failures, belt failures,
transmission failures, control failures, insufficient component tolerances,
improper or insufficient factory support, serious quality-control defects in
main and tail rotor blades, excessive airframe vibration (blamed for a
number of frame cracks and other mechanical failures), improper hardware
selection, inadequate builder instruction manuals, carbon monoxide
penetration of the cockpit, and far more.
The FAA has not shown a blind eye to this. A number of FAA documents and
NTSB investigative reports document what they considered to be defects in
the design of this aircraft. For instance, Gary Lampert has crashed two
different Mini-500 helicopters due to power failure, but in the March '96
crash of N750GL, one of the investigators noted that he examined the
helicopter and "found the engine to transmission drive belt fragmented, with
rubber transfer throughout the engine compartment. Rubber transfer on the
pulleys showed a forward movement pattern of the belt off the pulley. The
inspector reported that the pulley was designed without a flange or other
means to keep the belt aligned." Part of the cause of the accident was laid
to "the inadequate engine-to-transmission drive belt/pulley design".
Another FAA report, published in FAA AC 43-16, quoted Houston, TX, FSDO
Inspector Fred Maupin. It said that flight control instructions provided by
the factory may be inadequate... further describing them as a "ambiguous"
and that they appeared to "omit specific tolerances, limits, measurements,
dimensions, and other critical criteria which would ensure safe operation."
This AC also asserted that other sections of the maintenance, operations,
and assembly manuals needed to be improved.
The Inspector also noted that components used in the aircraft were of "less
than standard quality" and that correction of that fact should add very
little to the cost of the kit. The Mini-500 has been written up in AC 43-16
again since this initial report, and several FAA staffers have reported
frustration with the Manufacturer's apparent unwillingness to do anything
about the problems they noted.
A Few Case Histories
Mini-500 Builder Ed Randolph got ship number five... and experienced a
number of problems...
According to Ed, he waited for the builder's manual for "nine months, after
the kit was delivered", and reported that he had to disassemble rotor head
blade cones to check that the bearing retainer locks were in their proper
place. He also found that the gas tank had two holes, leaking the first time
it was filled with gas.
He had to ship the engine/rotor tach back to factory due to the fact that
when he keyed his mike, the needles went "south".
At only two hours of total airframe time, his Mini threw a main rotor blade
tip weight, which subsequently went through a nearby metal hangar "like a
bullet". His tail rotor drive shaft bearing retainers came loose on the
bearing and shaft, requiring epoxy to correct and fasten. Shortly
thereafter, his frame cracked for the first time. The factory blamed him for
the failure but Ed believes that excessive vibration in the airframe caused
it. So... with all of 40 hours, the frame was patch welded at the factory.
When his frame was re-welded, the factory also reportedly rebalanced the
aircraft, but upon returning home, Randolph could not get the machine's main
rotor blades to balance according to factory specs. Shortly thereafter, the
frame cracked again in three places! The throttle correlator also broke
loose from the frame. The "Alpha" frame was eventually replaced by the
factory.
Other problems included the failure of the main rotor gearbox bearings when
installing the main rotor gearbox on the frame. The left front mounting ear
on the gearbox case bottom had turned out to be some .040" thinner than the
other three ears, so the factory had him add a .040" washer between the case
and the frame. The drive belt would not track correctly, so Ed was forced to
drill out the holes in the belt tensioning wheel bracket to reposition.
He also reported the belt guide plate on the cog drive at the centrifugal
clutch came off of the cog drive pulley when disassembling the front plate,
whereupon he also noticed the bearing's outer race had spun in the aluminum
plate, and that the rod ends at the clutch plates, the main rotor pitch
links, and the tail rotor blade pitch links had worn out. He replaced the
affected assemblies with high-quality aircraft rod ends (which only had
80-90 hrs on them).
When the tail rotor control cable nuts came loose, he installed star lock
washers at both ends of the cable. When the 1/4" bolt that threads into the
control mount pivot sleeve on the steel frame came loose, he fixed it with a
drilled head bolt and safety-wired it. He replaced spring lock washers with
star lock washers for greater integrity and prevention of loosening/failure.
His EGT probes failed at 112 hrs... and when he installed the side doors on
his Mini, he noted that the cabin becomes positively pressurized with
residual fumes from the engine compartment! His fixes included gluing in a
foam block at the rear of the cabin console, and the installation of a
carbon monoxide detection system. Finally, the new frame, a "BRAVO" model no
less, has also cracked since its installation.
That's only a few of the problems that Ed encountered... and he noted that
getting warranty support from RHCI was very difficult, often requiring him
to "to go to the factory (to) get nose to nose with Dennis Fetters."
Needless to say, Ed is not a happy camper and despite trying very hard to
work with Fetters, has since become a vocal critic of RHCI. "You simply can'
t work with them... they blame everything on everybody else and have nothing
but excuses where they should be offering solutions!
This is ridiculous!"
OK... that was an EARLY Mini-500... but many of the later kits also boasted
severe problems. Heck, Rheinhold Grauer's thrice crashed Mini was number
404!
Dennis Wolcott had airframe # 385 and experienced frame cracks at 80 hours,
clutch problems, and forward clutch bearing failures. Mini-500 # 0362, owned
by John Haines, has also crashed, experiencing various maladies along the
way, including two frame cracks, and the failure of a tooth in the ring gear
of his transmission. Mini-500 #0354, owned by Phil Calaco, experienced frame
cracks at 50 hours, the forward clutch bearing spinning loose in its
aluminum plate, the failure of his EGT probes, tail rotor blade tips coming
loose, and noted that he (like many others) had a hard time trying to
balance his helicopter.
There's more... so MUCH More... but you get the idea.
Mad as Hell...
In early 1998, a number of disgruntled Mini-500 customers, builders and
pilots gathered together in Dallas, TX, to hold a meeting to examine the
capabilities and disabilities of their helicopter. Representatives of
Revolution Helicopter Corp. were invited to the meeting, but Dennis Fetters
was specifically told to stay away because, by this time, Mr. Fetters having
threatened a number of his own builders and already sued one, had so earned
the enmity of his clientele that they no longer trusted him (as a matter of
fact, several admitted that they feared him).
But Fetters did go, and while his wife Laura attended the meeting, Dennis
rented the meeting room next to the established meeting area and literally
bugged the meeting as it took place. Not only did he bug the meeting, he
admitted to it, and was heard to brag about it several times thereafter.
After the official meeting had ended, Fetters announced a meeting in the
next room during which time Mr. Fetters placed the blame for a number of
helicopter accidents and problems on persons and entities other than
himself. He also announced that there was a conspiracy against Revolution
Helicopter by one of their former dealers, specifically Fred Stewart and a
former employee.
I attempted to question Mr. Fetters during this meeting and did not get
many answers. The few I got were not what I would call straight answers. As
a matter-of-fact, Mr. Fetters refused to acknowledge the fact that his
company had published (a number of times) that various components of this
helicopter boasted a 2000-hour TBO. Even when showing him physical
reproductions of his own manuals, he refused to discuss the matter and
instead indicated that we (US Aviator) were involved in a conspiracy against
poor, embattled Revolution Helicopter.
Folks, that's horse manure, and nearly a year later, it still stinks.
And Where Is Oliver Stone?
The so-called conspiracy between Mr. Stewart and ex-employee of Revolution
Helicopter, specifically a man by the name of Lee Sarouhan, does not appear
to hold much water. Mr. Fetters points to Mr. Stewart's ads in another
magazine looking for helicopter engineers to design a two-place helicopter
as evidence of a so-called conspiracy, and then points to personal e-mail
between Mr. Sarouhan and his father about the embattled state of Revolution
Helicopter as his reason for believing that a conspiracy existed between the
two.
On the face of it, the logic appears faulty. Mr. Stewart's attempts to find
engineering talent by advertising for it publicly certainly would not
undermine any ongoing effort by Revolution Helicopter, because he was
obviously trying to design something from scratch; otherwise why try to hire
engineers to do so?
As to Mr. Sarouhan, he was once the liaison between Revolution Helicopter
and their builders. Lee was admired, respected, and even loved by a great
number of the builders because he went to bat for the customers in a number
of cases where Mr. Fetters refused to replace damaged components or deal
with issues that showed the helicopter to be defective.
As a result, Mr. Stewart and Mr. Sarouhan built up a close relationship,
and as Mr. Sarouhan saw signs that Revolution Helicopter was in bad shape
financially and organizationally, he indicated to Mr. Stewart that if he was
going to start a helicopter company to manufacture a two-place helicopter
(remember now folks, Revolution did not have a two-place helicopter at this
time), he indicated he would like to have a job. So, he did talk to Fred
about working for him if that came to pass -- as would most anyone who was
worried about his or her future employment.
Lawyers As Weapons
One of the more frustrating aspects of the Mini-500 story is the fact that
Revolution Helicopter's Dennis Fetters has used the legal system to
frustrate any potential competition or improvements to his design. Joe
Rinke, a talented helicopter designer from Michigan, developed a unique
turbine engine retrofit for the Mini-500, using a military surplus APU. Even
better, he has designed a number of small parts that eliminate some of the
components prone to failure, or modifies the functions they undertake. Joe
has even designed a five-bladed, semi-rigid rotor system that he has already
flown on his own Mini-500.
Well, Dennis wanted nothing of that (and certainly didn't want any
competition), and sued Rinke for modifying his aircraft, calling up part of
the purchase contract that literally forbids any builder from modifying the
original design of the Mini-500... even if they do so to enhance their own
personal safety! Joe got into a real legal mess over this, and Dennis spent
a lot of money on lawyers succeeding only in getting an injunction that
actually affects Joe's personal machine. I'm surprised Dennis got that far
with this suit, but since this matter was adjudicated in a Missouri court,
one assumes that there was a "hometown advantage".
Fetters has also sued ex-employee Lee Sarouhan, for speaking out on the
dangers and hazards that he personally witnessed while working for
Revolution Helicopter, and those he discovered after leaving the company.
Sarouhan wrote a letter to Kitplanes Editor David Martin, after Martin
parroted and published many of the accusations made by Fetters, in which
Dennis indicated there was a conspiracy to put him out of business and that
an ex-employee (obviously Sarouhan) was conspiring to compete with him in
the design of a new helicopter.
Unfortunately, Martin did not consult with Sarouhan before turning his
letters over to Dennis and his lawyers. Further, Martin reportedly did not
respond to the concerns and hazards voiced by Sarouhan in his letter as well
as his attempts to have his side of the controversy aired as publicly as
Martin had aired Fetter's. Please note that Kitplanes continues to accept
Revolution Helicopter's advertising... 'nuff said.
Revolution's "Pravda"
For quite some time, it appeared that Revolution Helicopter, by claiming
builder and/or pilot error (not to mention all the conspiracy theories) was
actually winning the disinformation campaign it was attempting to wage to
avoid blame for what is now clearly a series of manufacturer-related
defects. According to Fetters, everything was someone else's fault, nothing
was wrong with the Revolution Mini-500, and a combination of builder and
pilot error was blamed at every turn.
For a time this disinformation campaign was pretty effective, and builders,
pilots, and dealers formerly associated with Revolution (including a number
of former employees and former Mini-500 boosters), were accused of a number
of attempts to shut Revolution down, put Fetters out of business, and act on
an agenda that appeared to be quite illicit. The tactic worked for quite
some time, and a number of Mini-500 safety activists were slandered and
libeled, and even accused of crimes.
However, as the accident toll mounted, Fetters' accusations became less and
less believable, and it became far more evident that something was seriously
wrong with the Mini-500.
Then... the unthinkable happened.
Barklage, Burson & Armbruster
The fifth fatal accident to occur in the Mini-500 claimed a pilot with such
extraordinary experience, and in an aircraft that had received such good
care and maintenance, even Revolution Helicopter could not (immediately)
place the blame on either. Allen Barklage was the fifth man to die in a
Mini-500 helicopter.
Allen was possibly one of the most experienced helicopter pilots in North
America. A 30,000-hour veteran helicopter pilot, who most recently informed
St. Louis area residents about the traffic nightmares from his Bell Jet
Ranger and in previous years had fought for his country as a veteran of the
Vietnam conflict, Allen's legacy was a wonder to behold.
As a matter of fact, Allen not only had logged an extraordinary amount of
time in helicopters and built the kind of experience that most of us can
only envy, he also survived an armed hijacking aboard a Bell Jet Ranger some
years ago -- in which he not only disabled and killed the hijacker (in self
defense) but managed to maintain control of the Bell Jet Ranger whilst doing
so.
I had the pleasure to fly with Allen some years ago while he was doing his
traffic broadcasting duties, and found him to be an affable, enjoyable
personality filled with experience and so very generous in sharing it,
Amazingly; he resisted opportunities to cop an attitude about it. In other
words, he was impressive as hell, but you wouldn't know it right away unless
you flew with him or talked to him enough to draw out the immense wealth of
experience his life represented.
Unfortunately, while heading off to do a public display in his Mini-500,
Allen suffered an engine failure shortly after take-off that left him few
places to land his crippled aircraft. He tried to stretch his autorotation
to clear some wires and was unable to maintain sufficient rotor energy to be
able to land the aircraft successfully. He hit hard. Allen was critically
injured on impact, was found not to be breathing by medical help as they
appeared on the scene, and suffered insurmountable head and brain damage
that eventually cost him his life.
The Mini-500 community was stunned. Even most of the doubting Thomases, who
had here-to-fore swallowed Revolution Helicopter's line of bull, began to
understand that all the accidents and all the failures and all the
controversy had a basis in fact.
Only a few weeks later, Mark Burson, another Mini-500 pilot who had attended
the February 1998 Mini-500 safety meeting organized by former Mini-500
dealer Fred Stewart, was killed when his aircraft went down in Southern
California. One of the rotor blades was found over a quarter of a mile away
from the impact site of the fuselage and no evidence of engine failure has y
et been established.
The final nail in this coffin-copter happened just a few weeks ago as a
well-known Mini-500 pilot, FAA employee, and budding consumer activist,
Gilbert Armbruster, became missing one Sunday afternoon while out testing a
number of modifications to his helicopter. A massive search was mounted. He
was found three days later in a wooded area, dead.
Details are sketchy at this point and the aircraft accident investigation
is still young, but investigators noted a steep descent path through the
trees suggesting that Gil was in autorotation. Gil had been reported to be
testing a number of modifications recently announced by RHCI, as well as a
few of his own... but there is no data yet to define whether or not these
mods anything to do with Gil's tragic end.
Is the Mini-500 An Orphan?
There has been some new input from RHCI of late that suggests that Mini-500
owners may soon be orphaned by their manufacturer. In e-mail communications
between Fetters and at least one Mini-500 owner, Fetters has indicated that
he does not want to hear about Mini-500 problems anymore.
In these communications Fetters appeared to be bragging about all "the
money" he was making on the Voyager 500, and basically said that he did not
care to hear about the Mini-500 anymore. A number of builders in contact
with Revolution also suggest that Revolution would like to get rid of the
Mini-500 and rid itself of any responsibility for the numerous design and
quality-control deficiencies now known to be a problem with that helicopter.
Shortly before press time, Revolution announced a number of so-called
"fixes" for Mini-500 problems. These solutions appeared to address many of
the same problems that they previously insisted did not exist. Further; many
of these "NEW "solutions appear to be those that were pioneered or
engineered by a number of Mini-500 owners and builders and suggested to RHCI
in the past.
As a matter-of-fact, they bear a striking resemblance not only to those
solutions, but to the very same solutions that Revolution previously claimed
were insufficient to deal with the problems that builders were identifying.
So... has Revolution fixed anything?
Have they copped out?
Are they burying their heads in the sand?
Or, it is it yet another diversionary tactic designed to borrow a little
bit more time so that the Voyager 500 can get to market, Dennis can make
some more bucks, and Mini-500 builders can chase their tails for a while
until the solutions either work or do not (and the dissatisfaction cycle
starts all over again)?
One thing is for certain. Revolution Helicopter wishes the Mini-500
problems would go away, but seem unwilling to do much about them. One way or
another, it seems that Mini-500 owners are on their own, and Voyager 500
owners may not be far behind them.
An Improved Kill Ratio?
Just about the time that one would think the situation couldn't get much
worse, comes the worrisome fact that Revolution is now "flying" a two-place
version of the Mini-500 called the Voyager 500. At various times the company
has boasted that the Voyager 500 maintains component commonality with the
Mini-500 on the order of anywhere from 70 to 80%. This new machine is now
flying with a NEW 130++ horsepower two-stroke manufactured by an otherwise
unheard-of manufacturer.
Pictures of the aircraft show that it has at the very least, hovered, if
you believe their photographic "documentation". The most recent brochure
sent to thousands of potential Voyager 500 customers shows what appears to
be some altered photos of the Voyager 500 in cruising flight over idyllic
farmlands. In this photo, Fetters' lovely wife Laura appears to be occupying
the left side of the aircraft with an unknown male pilot in the right. If
you look closely at certain details in the photograph, one notes that the
collective pitch control is in the full down position, and that when looking
through the clear portion of the canopy (which is momentarily interrupted
the by a portion of the fiberglass fuselage frame), details to the right of
Ms. Fetters appear to be missing -- little things like the right side of
the Y-bar cyclic control, the pilot's knees, and that the scenery through
the clearer portion of the canopy does not seem to match that outside of the
helicopter. For instance, one country road that is partially covered by a
portion of the fuselage shell in the picture is not seen in the
corresponding position in the clear portion of the canopy... and from what
we've been told from people familiar with the locale, the rest of the road
should be there.
Where did the road go?
How can you fly the helicopter with two adults on-board, with some obvious
altitude, with the collective pitch control in the full down position?
Where are some of the interior cockpit's details that should be visible
through the clear canopy?
Or... let's get to the real question:
Has this thing done anything more than hover?
The smart money says no.
We have consulted with a number of former employees of Revolution
Helicopter. Some of these people were intrinsically involved in the flight
test of the Mini-500. Both of those who reported to us, who were involved in
testing the Mini-500, have gone on record to say that they do not believe
that the Mini-500 was ever tested properly.
Both of these gentlemen have indicated that there were a number of quality
control and design related problems that were never effectively dealt with
by the factory. Their attempts to try to get Fetters to listen to their
concerns often fell on deaf ears. The deaths of several of their former
customers and friends were what caused them to come forward.
The truly terrifying import of their words is magnified when you consider
that the Voyager 500 had been promised to builders before the end of
December 1998. At this writing (early March), no one involved sees how the
Voyager 500 could be properly tested in the few months that this machine may
or may not have been flying (much less as early as 12/31/98). No one I have
talked to, with any significant helicopter design and flight test
experience, sees how Revolution can possibly accomplish this task with
sufficient safety margins to be able to offer a properly tested aircraft.
Of course, the most worrisome factor in all of us is that Mini-500 pilots
in the past have been in a position to be able to judge the risks and
hazards they're willing to face, but the ability to carry a passenger now
puts new, probably unknowledgeable, people at risk -- who may have no idea
of the mechanical design history of the single-place cousin that it is based
on, and all the problems it has had.
Face it, if you knew all the things we were telling you in this story,
would you be willing to put anybody you cared about in a Voyager 500? The
fact that the Voyager 500 boasts such component commonality with the
Mini-500 (if Revolution's claim of commonality is to be believed), and the
fact that the Mini-500 still has so many documented problems must be (to
some extent) shared with the Voyager 500.
How in the hell can these people justify putting this machine on the market
without first fixing all of the Mini-500 problems, and then engaging in an
exhaustive, aggressive, and documented flight test program for the Voyager
500?
About the only thing we see happening, if this scenario keeps as it is, is
that Revolution Helicopter's kill ratio may be doubling in the
not-so-distant future. If the Voyager 500's record is at all close to the
kind of record the Mini-500 has had, God help the impact on the sport
aviation movement -- because while the FAA and NTSB have here-to-fore been
willing to allow us to kill ourselves (so to speak), I guarantee you that
the minute we start killing "innocent" passengers this whole mess will come
to a screeching halt. The kind of restrictions sport aviation has been
fearing for years will come to pass!
Be afraid, folks. Be very, very afraid.
Solutions...
As far as US Aviator is concerned, we have attempted to be part of a
progressive series of investigations and possible solutions, and been
interfered with in a number of ways. We have been continually threatened by
Revolution Helicopter with legal action, something that at this point, we
would almost welcome as any intimation of defamation on Revolution's part
can easily be fought with something very simple... the truth. The discovery
process would be brutal for Revolution. We would be forced to ask a lot of
questions that they have been unwilling to answer, thus far.
One of the more disheartening facets to all this is that Mr. Fetters has
made excellent use of USA's harassers and detractors, to try and deflect
criticism from himself. Of note are the positive and supportive comments on
behalf of Revolution made by Anthony Pucillo, who has continued his vendetta
against us with bizarre accusations and outright falsehoods.
I was rather amazed that Mr. Pucillo accused our original Mini-500 report
from last year of being general and nonspecific and treading no new ground.
Further, he intimated that we did not have the expertise to publish what we
did, and that we only followed up on previous stories on the subject.
Interestingly, he is incorrect again. Our original magazine report in the
March/April issue of 1998 was actually written in late 1997, and was
preceded by a publication of much of the data contained in the article, as
well as our concerns about the aircraft, on our Internet site in the fall of
'97. It was the first coverage of its kind on this matter.
Mind you, the folks at AvWeb, an Internet aviation news magazine, did do a
well-researched, very credible piece on the problems with the Mini-500, but
our 4000++ word expose contains much additional info not covered in that
otherwise outstanding article. As usual, Mr. Pucillo seems to enjoy bending
his "facts" to suit his prejudices.
However, the thing I find most unfortunate in this scenario is that his
support of Revolution Helicopter may have kept people from heeding our
warnings and thus endangered those who went ahead and bought or flew
Mini-500s. Of course, his fellow detractors have attempted to crucify us for
our coverage... but the amazing thing in this story is that as a few of
these detractors became more informed about the Mini-500 debacle, they have
toned down their negative rhetoric against us, and some are now turning to
actual support for our position.
As we have always said, truth is its own defense. In this particular case,
while its been hard fought, the word does seem to be getting out. It is a
shame that our efforts were interfered with and harmed.
Okay... despite all this, we went ahead with programs and ideas that we felt
might bring some clarity and progress to the situation.
In October '98, we proposed a meeting of Mini-500 owners builders and pilots
that was ultimately February 6-7, 1999 at the Polk City, FL, Fantasy of
Flight Museum. Inviting a number of industry experts, FAA and NTSB
investigators, and knowledgeable builders and pilots, we put together a
concentrated weekend focusing on the problems, causes, and potential
solutions of the Mini-500 was in order. Both Revolution Helicopter and Mr.
Fetters were invited to the meeting. Mr. Fetter's eventual answer was to
schedule a meeting at his own factory on the exact same day as ours.
Obviously, this was an attempt to draw people away from the meeting we
proposed... even though our meeting was being put under the control of
established builders and pilots of this aircraft, and our only role was
organizational.
Revolution appeared to be very afraid of what might be discussed and
accomplished in such a meeting, and since solutions seem to be the farthest
thing from their minds, I suppose I can understand their response... but am
ashamed for our industry because of what it implies.
The Feds... To the Rescue???
One of the other interesting turnabouts in this story, was the nearly
heroic efforts of some folks that we are often forced to be critical of. In
this case, the efforts of various FAA and NTSB field personnel have been
extraordinary. FAA Inspectors from around the country who have been called
upon to inspect these aircraft or help in accident investigations have been
very verbal and outspoken about the problems they have seen in the Mini-500.
Several times, these problems have been published in FAA AC 43-16. At other
times, FAA and NTSB personnel have documented and compared notes on the
problems of this helicopter in order to prove the disturbing trend that
something was amiss with the Mini-500. Last year, NTSB staffer Robert Pearce
wrote US Aviator a letter requesting that we publicize his search for data
in information on Mini-500 accidents and problems. We did so.
In the meantime, despite being hampered by Mini-500 builders' and owners'
fears of legal reprisals from Revolution Helicopter, Mr. Pearce has put
together extensive documentation showing the dozens of mishaps and problems
to which this helicopter has been heir. Mr. Pearce has forged an excellent
working relationship with the Mini-500 Helicopter community and has
aggressively, though impartially, pursued the truth in this matter. He has
noted that he has gotten poor cooperation from Revolution Helicopter.
Both FAA Administrator Jane Garvey and NTSB Chairman Jim Hall promised
support for the February 6-7, 1999 Mini-500 Builders/Pilots Safety Meeting.
The NTSB's participation was welcome and helpful. The FAA did not show. I
have spoken to Chairman Hall personally and noted that appears to be
concerned and interested in seeing the sport aviation community find
solutions to its own problems.
But... here is where my greatest concerns in this matter (outside of our
legitimate concerns for the personal safety of Mini-500 pilots) lie. Members
of both the FAA and NTSB have indicated to me that there are facets of both
organizations that believe the sport aviation/homebuilt aviation community
has exhibited far too many tragedies like that occurring with the Mini-500.
They are aggressively suggesting greater control and stricter limitations
for all of us who fly SportPlanes. The kind of restrictions they speak of
would severely limit what we do with our aircraft.
Some liken these restrictions to those put on warbirds who, in many cases,
cannot fly beyond 300-600 nautical miles away from their home-drome without
direct permission of their local FSDO. Other restrictions mentioned would
include less access to controlled airspace, limitations on types of
operations (i.e., IFR, etc.), excessive certification regulations, and other
restrictions that would cripple if not destroy the SportPlane movement.
After debacles like the Adventurer Amphibians, Maxair Drifter, CGS Aviation,
Prescott Pusher, the Mohawk/Avid Flyer rip-off, and of course the Mini-500,
the support for such restrictions is growing.
I need not tell you just how many of our freedoms are being threatened by
improperly engineered and shoddily manufactured products, or manufacturers
that show disdain or lack of concern for the personal safety of their
customers. This matter is coming to a head, and the threat to our industry
is considerable.
As such, the meeting we sponsored last February is a prototype for the
kind of pro-active, industry-supported progress we need to make to impress
upon the Feds that we can be responsible for our own destiny.
I hope what I organized (and the excellent results we've seen so far) will
be an example for not only what we can do, but what we should do throughout
the industry, from here on out. This proposal is directly related to the
"Underwriters' Laboratory" watchdog organization that we are hoping to start
later this year in order to head off potentially dangerous or unwise
situations before excessive harm is done to our freedom to fly the aircraft
we choose.
It is our hope that such a program may be what heads off excessive federal
intervention in the future.
Urgent Recommendations
This situation cannot go on as it has... and the sport aviation community
has more power to affect a result than it may realize. Believing this, we
recommend that Mini-500 builders and pilots should immediately, voluntarily
ground their aircraft, OR at least restrict their operations to those that
pose the least potential degree of personal hazard (i.e., don't fly
higher/faster than you are willing to fall).
It is painfully obvious that the difficulties of this helicopter are going
to be an ongoing concern for quite some time. And, of course, there are
additional concerns for those who have bought or may attempt to fly the
two-place version, the so-called Voyager 500, at some time in the future.
At the present time, Revolution Helicopter has missed a significant
deadline, that they imposed upon themselves, to have this machine tested and
introduced by the end of 1998... now we're hearing talk of Oshkosh
availability. Based on the information at our disposal, this seems to be a
highly unrealistic, potentially dangerous goal. No one with whom we
consulted sees how this machine can be tested and in production in such a
period of time, without more of the hazards that we have seen with its
single-place cousin.
While reiterating our original recommendation to voluntarily ground this
helicopter, we also add the following recommendations in the strongest voice
we can muster.
The first is that Revolution Helicopter commit to an aggressive engineering
study of the documented faults of the Mini-500 and that all test and
evaluation data for it and some recently announced "corrections" be made
available to independent engineers and investigators as well as a committee
of builder/pilots who will then report to the rest of the owner community.
This committee should consist of five or six builder/owners who should be
selected from a quorum of same. We suggest that this group be selected from
those who attended 1999 Mini-500 Builder/Pilots Safety Meeting in Polk City,
Florida, on Feb. 6-7, 1999.
We further urge Revolution to back away from their accelerated testing and
production process for the Voyager 500 and slow it down to a point where a
safe helicopter might result. Please!
Since the Voyager 500 boasts so much commonality with the Mini-500
(according to the manufacturer's own statements), Revolution Helicopter can
only benefit from the above-mentioned Mini-500 investigation.
Further, we strongly recommend that Revolution commit to a 500-hour Voyager
500 initial test program, in which at least 250 (or more) of the hours flown
must be documented on one specific conformance aircraft (without significant
problem or failure in that time) prior to the start of any production.
Mind you, we hardly believe that any helicopter can be tested in only 500
hours, but we feel this is a realistic requirement based on what has to be a
worsening cash flow situation at Revolution, and one that may still allow
builders to have a quasi-realistic expectation of what they might be
encountering during the initial operations of their new helicopter.
Obviously, we hope that a continuing and aggressive test program will be
pursued for the Voyager 500 until such time as a combination of engineering,
test, and builder input can produce a proper configuration. Personally, we
all like to see more done to make these helicopters safer, but they are
still "experimental", and I suspect that we, the sport helicopter community,
will have to accept some responsibility for our destiny if we want to build
helicopters from kits.
We also suggest that a similar builder/owners' committee of Voyager 500
purchasers be established ASAP and that they also become an aggressive
interface between Revolution Helicopter and a rest of their 50 or so
reported fellow purchasers.
The Mini-500 community has had some horrendous shocks. People they have
cared about, respected, and admired, have lost their lives and have done so
under questionable circumstances. We all have more questions than we have
answers, but we also have a lot of pain and concern. I can tell you that I
have been in consultation with a number of senior Federal officials, who
have been looking at this series of accidents, and comparing them to other
tragedies and commercial scandals from the sport aviation community. They
are seriously considering the imposition of additional aggressive
regulation. The freedoms we have loved and known may be at great risk
because of all this. I can tell you from my discussions with the late Alan
Barklage and with Gil Armbruster, that they would have hated to see this
happen.
We have an opportunity to show the FEDS that extra regulation is not
needed, and that we are intelligent and considerate consumers, capable of
making good decisions and failing that, correcting our own mistakes or those
forced upon us. I would hope that we all, together, can show the Feds that
we can band together and solve our own problems, rather than have them come
swooping in and do it for us in ways that may set the sport aviation
movement back decades. FMI: For updates please feel free to check the US
Aviator web site at http://www.av8r.net
--
--
Jim Campbell, Publisher, US Aviator
Copyright 1999, All Rights Reserved
Author: SportPlane Resource Guide--Second Edition
http://www.av8r.net
http://www.kindredspirit.com
http://www.sportplane.com
"To sin by silence when they should protest,
makes cowards of men." -Abraham Lincoln
Flygyros
love
Steve
River - Xtreme Aviation
>Deadliest Sport Helicopter?
>From: dfetters dfet...@mwis.net
>Date: Wed, 01 September 1999 11:42 PM EDT
>Message-id: <37CDF21C...@mwis.net>
>
>
>
>J.R. Campbell, Publisher wrote:
>
>
>
>If you read Zoom's stuff, then you should read the link below and see if he
>is
>mentally stable enough to believe.
>
>You will be shocked!!
>
><http://www.cyberis.net/~jouster/zoom/zoom.html>
>
>
>
Fetters, one question, because your legal name is no longer Dennis Fetters, why
do you use an E-mail address partaining to that name? Just a thought...
River
"Xtreme...Life is too short not to be!"
In memory and honor of Allen Barklage...One of the greatest pilots to ever set
foot on this earth!
dfetters
River - Xtreme Aviation wrote:
>
> Fetters, one question, because your legal name is no longer Dennis Fetters, why
> do you use an E-mail address partaining to that name? Just a thought...
>
> River
You can think? I thought others did your thinking for you.
Bill Phillips
>If you read Zoom's stuff, then you should read the link below and see if he is
>mentally stable enough to believe.
>
>You will be shocked!!
>
><http://www.cyberis.net/~jouster/zoom/zoom.html>
>
What a slimeball tactic. Take the focus off yourself eh Dennis? Say
nothing constructive to support your position but point out all the
slime on your opponent. You never cease to amaze me for you rude low
class behavior. I personally consider you no different than a street
hustler trying to extort a quarter out someone.
Answer these questions here in public Dennis.
1. How much real time does the Voyager have on it?
2. What is Vne?
3. What does the height-velocity curve look like?
4. What is the service ceiling for a hover IGE, and OGE?
5. Why did you use a Rotax 582 in the Mini-500 when Rotax themselves
say not to run it above 6500 rpm for more than 5 minutes but 104% is
the top of the green and is nearly 6800 rpm? Plus, it won't fly with
me in it unless I only carry 3 gallons of fuel and run it at 104%.
Can you fly it at anything less? Tell us Dennis.
6. Why do you use nylock nuts in the engine compartment on all of the
control linkage?
7. Why are there no pinned nuts or PAL nuts on the tailrotor system?
8. Why did you have to put a dramatic negative pitching trim tab
(really an elevator) on the horizontal stabilizer to get it to fly
straight and level? The same trim that reportedly causes a violent
negative pitch over in a real engine failure mode.
9. Why are most if not all of the MR blades in the field warped with
a forward sweep like a banana?
10. Why don't you sell parts to people who YOU tell to ground their
ships because they are unsafe without trying to extort $750 out of
them for nothing?
So, fetters, we don't have to go look up all the slime on Campbell to
see what you are all about. I simply ask you to answer all of these
questions here to everyone's satisfaction.
Additioinally, I have no intention of quiting the IEHA Inc. until I'm
asked to leave. I was having a bad day a few days ago and retract my
resignation. People like Barbanes, Charlie Green and you simply get
to me sometimes. But I am not going away Dennis and neither is Tony.
In fact I'm thinking about scaling up at this point. I'm going to work
twice as hard now because Fred and Joanie have gracefully thrown in
the towel. And God, I can't blame them one bit. They did more than
anyone ever did over the years to try and keep you honest...other than
Joe Rinke who's right up there with them.
My first move this morning will be to call the attorney general's
office and give them all the data I have on the Mini-500. And each
day as I rise out of bed I'm going to think to myself about what I
can do to reduce the kill-ratio on your products?
Answer the questions above Dennis. Answer them right here in this ng
that you read each day and that you have once again decided to become
a participant.
Bill Phillips
Bob Barbanes
as legitimate as some calling themself Badwater Bill or Wingman150 or whatever
in public. "Dennis" could have explained that.
HOWEVER, having said that I am compelled to comment on "Mr Fetters'" response
to Jordan: When we're young and impressionable, we assimilate thoughts and
ideas from many sources. As we mature, we filter through them and try to
develop opinions and ideas of our own. Sometimes it's easy, sometimes it's not.
Jordan's question may have been sassy, but I believe it was sincere.
For a man who markets what has come to be known as a "killer copter" to take
such a cheap shot at a teenager is dumb and inappropriate. Ease off, Muhammed.
Concentrate on making your products better and safer, not belittling others.
Linc
What the hell did I miss?
Linc
Bill Phillips wrote in message <37cf878d...@news.earthlink.net>...
elr...@my-deja.com
dfet...@mwis.net wrote:
>
>
> J.R. Campbell, Publisher wrote:
>
> <BIG SNIP!!>
>
> If you read Zoom's stuff, then you should read the link below and see
if he is
> mentally stable enough to believe.
>
> You will be shocked!!
>
> <http://www.cyberis.net/~jouster/zoom/zoom.html>
>
with us? HI, Dennis/Mohamad , I'm still here spreading the word !! I
thought you stated to your true believers that you would never read or
respond to anyone on these news groups?
Dennis(I won't ever again belittle the Muslem faith by calling you
Mohamad,because they hold that name in high esteem)tell us about the
true reason for moving Mini-500 = N500FD over to static display at S n
F 99? Rumor has it that the bottom end puked & you could not fix it
without letting the cat out of the bag.It sure didn't sound too good
when I was standing behind it listening while you, Stan,& your pilot
were working on it !! I asked Stan Robinson what happened ,but he
wouldn't even talk to me. Sure,disappeared off the flight line after
that,they sound terrible when puke! I'm just thankful one of your
pilots wasn't in the air when it happened. Taking part of investigating
TWO = 2 Mini-500 fatal crashes is enough!!!!! No, I take that back as I
have volunteered to help the NTSB & FAA investigate any crashes of this
death machine,sa you well know !!! Rumor also has it that the Voyager
500 developed "2" frame cracks just by trailering it to S n F & back to
the factory,another rumor is that,that fabulous new engine in the
Voyager-500 spit about a third of # 3 piston out the exhaust at Oshkosh
99. Is that why you didn't hover it the rest of the week? What happened
to the skid legs? Did you have ahard landing & had to cut them off
short or does it try to roll over when landing? Come on,Dennis,please
answer these questions for a concerned customer.
Hi,Dennis & Laura, I'm just like that famous pink bunny, I just keep
going & going, HEE HEE !
Ed Randolph # 005
In memory of Allen, Gil, & others who have gone west before them !
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
River - Xtreme Aviation
LAUGHING ALL THE WAY,
Tony P
> So, fetters, we don't have to go look up all the slime on Campbell to
> see what you are all about.
Sorry, Bill. It ain't "slime" if it's true. It may be irrelevant to
RHCI's merits, but don't forget that Campbell has victims, too. Hell,
look at the slime he just couldn't resist tossing in that RHCI article.
You may not like Fetters, but you have to be careful with whom you
associate yourself by implication, too.
Tony Pucillo
I simply ask you to answer all of these
> questions here to everyone's satisfaction.
>
> Additioinally, I have no intention of quiting the IEHA Inc. until I'm
> asked to leave. I was having a bad day a few days ago and retract my
> resignation. People like Barbanes, Charlie Green and you simply get
> to me sometimes. But I am not going away Dennis and neither is Tony.
> In fact I'm thinking about scaling up at this point. I'm going to work
> twice as hard now because Fred and Joanie have gracefully thrown in
> the towel. And God, I can't blame them one bit. They did more than
> anyone ever did over the years to try and keep you honest...other than
> Joe Rinke who's right up there with them.
>
> My first move this morning will be to call the attorney general's
> office and give them all the data I have on the Mini-500. And each
> day as I rise out of bed I'm going to think to myself about what I
> can do to reduce the kill-ratio on your products?
>
> Answer the questions above Dennis. Answer them right here in this ng
> that you read each day and that you have once again decided to become
> a participant.
>
> Bill Phillips
--
Castigat ridendo mores. <Laughter succeeds where lecturing won't.>
I speak only for myself unless otherwise stated. One personality is
enough, thank you.
J.R. Campbell, Publisher
> Bill:
>
>
> > So, fetters, we don't have to go look up all the slime on Campbell to
> > see what you are all about.
>
> Sorry, Bill. It ain't "slime" if it's true. It may be irrelevant to
> RHCI's merits, but don't forget that Campbell has victims, too. Hell,
> look at the slime he just couldn't resist tossing in that RHCI article.
>
> You may not like Fetters, but you have to be careful with whom you
> associate yourself by implication, too.
>
> Tony Pucillo
What utter crap....
There is no "slime" in my story. There are facts... and there are many more.
As to "victims," I wonder how many more victims Dennis will get to claim
because of his use of tactics and info that Pucillo and others have employed
and provided for over two years in an unceasing series of attacks designed
to shut us up.
The fact is that Fetters has profited immensely from Pucillo's attacks on US
Aviator. Fetters gleefully reported to me that he had received a huge amount
of documentation (of a negative nature) on me from Pucillo shortly after we
started looking into this matter in earnest.
Former RHCI employees confirm Fetters receipt of this hate mail and his
delight in showing it to people in his office, as well as in sending it to
the FAA, NTSB and anyone else he thought he could make points with. In other
words, Fetters is using "weapons" provided (in part) by Pucillo (and by his
associates) to try and save face and sell more machines that will not do
what he promised (and may KILL or INJURE their operators). Worse; he's using
tactics that we believe show striking similarities ("Shoot the Messenger")
to those employed by Pucillo in his sick (IMO) quest to destroy this
magazine and while having made positive and supportive statements about
companies like CGS, Adventure Air, and at one time, even RHCI!
Pucillo has also offered his services TO Fetters (against me) in the event
we were involved in a legal action with RHCI. At other times, he then
reportedly offered to sue Fetters on behalf of various parties...
Which side is he on? REALLY?
Personally; I have yet to see any significant evidence of a positive
contribution (on his part) in regards to the RHCI tragedy... all I've seen
is a limited turnabout on his attacks on our stories when it became so
blatantly obvious that we were right, that further such attacks became
indefensible. Do you folks remember all that? He was basically FOR anyone we
ever criticized and that fact has been exhaustively established.
Fetters has been HELPED immensely by Pucillo's war against USA... remember
that--especially if we don't survive his unending legal machinations, law
suits, personal attacks, interference in our business, and other bizarre
efforts to do one thing and one thing only... WIPE OUT US Aviator and Jim
Campbell. In any way you care to characterize it, it comes down to one
thing... VENDETTA... and we're sick and tired of it... and of the fact that
good people have been led astray by this nonsense.
Its amusing to watch such tactics be used in such a "slimy" way finally be
called such... when they've been employed for a long time by others with
such glee and reckless disregard for the facts and the damage they have
done.
(Flames & obfuscations sure to follow... the hatred espoused and employed by
this man knows few bounds).
Jerry J
I wish you would quit beating around the bush and just say what's on your
mind.
JJ
Tony P <a...@flite.net> wrote in article <37D02EF9...@flite.net>...
> "J.R. Campbell, Publisher" wrote:
long snip
> Oh, and where are the required circulation figures for 1996, 1997 and
> 1998?
>
>
> Tony Pucillo
Tony P
I know, I was too damned indirect again, wasn't I??
Tony Pucillo
--
John H Ousterhout
To me it assesses the US Aviator - Jim Campbell situation
perfectly,
"Shame on you Mr.Campbell, for being the exact person you
warned your readers about."
- from a post on rah by former US Aviator fan -
- John (ex rah/15) Ousterhout -
Since the gang at RHCI can't even make a good huyperlink,
here's where to read about Jim 'Captain Zoom' Campbell:
http://www.cyberis.net/~jouster/
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Micbloo
>What the hell did I miss?
>
>Linc
Dont worry about it. Go back to sleep.
:O)
Gerard
tom c
not going away Dennis and neither is Tony.
J.R. Campbell, Publisher wrote in message <7qp98l$lre$1...@news.gate.net>...
>Tony P <a...@flite.net> wrote in message news:37D00CA0...@flite.net...
>> Bill:
If Tony Pucillio is working as legal council for IEHA inc.. then that makes
him your attorney by proxy :)
Snicker, heh heh heh, Bahahahahawawawawa!
Tom Cooper
edt...@erols.com
>
> Tony
>
> I wish you would quit beating around the bush and just say what's on your
> mind.
He *does* have a bad habit of using facts to counter blather. He
clearly attended the wrong journalism school.
mikepatt...@spammindspring.com
That was Miss Geeter's ruler 'cross your fingers, young man.
"tom c" <th...@spambitesptd.net> wrote:
>-Additioinally, I have no intention of quitting the IEHA Inc.... . But I am
>-not going away Dennis and neither is Tony.
>-
>-J.R. Campbell, Publisher wrote in message <7qp98l$lre$1...@news.gate.net>...
>->Tony P <a...@flite.net> wrote in message news:37D00CA0...@flite.net...
>->> Bill:
>-
>-
>-If Tony Pucillio is working as legal council for IEHA inc.. then that makes
>-him your attorney by proxy :)
>-Snicker, heh heh heh, Bahahahahawawawawa!
>-Tom Cooper
>-
Gun Control:
The theory that a woman found dead in an alley,
strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally
superior to a woman explaining to police how her
attacker got that fatal bullet wound.
Jerry Springer
>
> Hey "River" or "Extreem", I thought your legal
> name was Jordan Morgan.
And now he is trying to sell a Bonanza under the
name of Jordan Wirsz.
In article
> <19990902000248...@ng-cp1.aol.com>,
> wingm...@aol.com (River - Xtreme Aviation)
> wrote:
> > >Subject: Re: Killer-Copter Rebuttal... The
> Mini-500---Is This the World's
> > >Deadliest Sport Helicopter?
> > >From: dfetters dfet...@mwis.net
> > >Date: Wed, 01 September 1999 11:42 PM EDT
> > >Message-id: <37CDF21C...@mwis.net>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >J.R. Campbell, Publisher wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >If you read Zoom's stuff, then you should read
> the link below and see if he
> > >is
> > >mentally stable enough to believe.
> > >
> > >You will be shocked!!
> > >
> >
> ><http://www.cyberis.net/~jouster/zoom/zoom.html>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Fetters, one question, because your legal name
> is no longer Dennis Fetters, why
> > do you use an E-mail address partaining to that
> name? Just a thought...
> >
> > River
> >
> > "Xtreme...Life is too short not to be!"
> >
> > In memory and honor of Allen Barklage...One of
> the greatest pilots to ever set
> > foot on this earth!
> >
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
--
Jerry Springer|RV-6 First Flight 7/14/89|Hillsboro,OR|jsf...@teleport.com
shann...@my-deja.com
Shaber CJ
has lowered into gutter talk. If you want to build, build a rotorway. Let's
cut the gutter talk and exchange ideas on viable aircraft.
Craig
Badwater Bill
<jsf...@teleport.com> wrote:
>shann...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>
>> Hey "River" or "Extreem", I thought your legal
>> name was Jordan Morgan.
>
>And now he is trying to sell a Bonanza under the
>name of Jordan Wirsz.
You see what a pushy little jerk he is. He knows this is no place to
advertise. But, he's Jordan, the kid. He can get away with it. The
rules are for everyone else, right Jordan?
Bill Phillips
River - Xtreme Aviation
He knows this is no place to
>advertise.
--I DIDN'T advertise here Bill. I advertised on RAH and RAM to sell the
Bonanza. I'm TRYING to earn some cash for my flying lessons!!!...Its just that
its hard for me to sell a Bonanza when Jerry and Dave Hyde keep following me
around trying to destroy the market for me.
But, he's Jordan, the kid.
--Yeah. So?
He can get away with it. The
>rules are for everyone else, right Jordan?
>
--LOL, now what makes you say that Bill? What does my advertising a Bonanza
have ANYTHING to do with my name, where I advertise, or anything? Come on Bill,
this is getting a little ridiculous.
>Bill Phillips
snowb...@my-deja.com
In article <19990907004604...@ng-fe1.aol.com>,
wingm...@aol.com (River - Xtreme Aviation) wrote:
> --I DIDN'T advertise here Bill.
Free clue Jordan. I am reading this post in RAH.
You DID advertise "here", you say so yourself. Take
a look at where your posts are going.
> I advertised on RAH and RAM to sell the Bonanza.
RAM(arketplace) is an appropriate place to advertise.
RAH, RAS, RAI, RAP etc are not.
> I'm TRYING to earn some cash for my flying lessons!!!
I guess I wonder how you can "sell" a Bonanza for someone
else (serve as a broker?) when as I understand it, you aren't
yet old enough to execute a legally binding contract?
Just curious about how this works. Personally, inability
of the seller's "agent" to enter into a legally binding
contract would factor into my decision whether or not to
offer on a plane.
Seems like a regular job as a lineboy, fastfood worker etc
might be more effective.
> >He can get away with it. The
> >rules are for everyone else, right Jordan?
Now THIS is a tad ironic given that it's also against USENET
rules to post binary files to a non-binary newsgroup, and
Bill has done this more than once.
Not ragging on that, just pointing out the inconsistancy of
someone who breaks "the rules" chiding another for it.
Snowbird
John H Ousterhout
> Bonanza. I'm TRYING to earn some cash for my flying
> lessons!!!...Its just that its hard for me to sell a
> Bonanza when Jerry and Dave Hyde keep following me
> around trying to destroy the market for me.
It sounds like you learned a lot from Jim Campbell when you
worked for him. You sound like him now -- and you will
receive the same amount of respect as he does if you
continue.
- John Ousterhout -
Dave Hyde
> Its just that its hard for me to sell a Bonanza
> when Jerry and Dave Hyde keep following me
> around trying to destroy the market for me.
Excuse me? Has someone posted something under
my name regarding this Bonanza? Please post a
reference or learn to aim better.
Addressing (accurately) the prop AD issues
(among others) people have raised would
help your 'market' more than taking pot-
shots at people who question your experience.
Whaddya do for an encore? Put out a rag-a-zine?
Sue? Or just send me another nasty e-mail?
Dave 'rambler' Hyde
na...@brick.net
Russell Kent
dfetters
J.R. Campbell, Publisher wrote:
<BIG SNIP!!>
If you read Zoom's stuff, then you should read the link below and see if he is
Tony P
> It sure isn't pleasant to be engaged in all the immature name-calling, personal attacks,
> interference, and nonsense that often emanates from those about which we report.
About "which"?? Are airplanes sending nasty letters lately? But it must
not be pleasant to smear personal enemies, either. I'm sure it creates
pangs of regret to use that soapbox to toss snide little smears at those
who don't genuflect.
> Lawyers As Weapons One of the more frustrating aspects of the Mini-500 story is the fact that
> Revolution Helicopter's Dennis Fetters has used the legal system to frustrate any potential competition or >improvements to his design.
Yes, Dennis has deterred competition by legal bullying. But from this
source, that announcement is funny. Someday I'll publish a listing of
the lawsuits filed by Mr. Campbell against critics, and a much longer
list of just KNOWN threats of litigation against thos who've expressed
just negative OPINION.
>One of the more disheartening facets to all this is that Mr. Fetters has made excellent use of USA's harassers >and detractors, to try and deflect criticism from himself.
Ah, here comes the conspiracy again! Grab a trenchcoat and pay rapt
attention!
>Of note are the positive and supportive comments on behalf of Revolution made by Anthony Pucillo,
Sure. Expressing doubts as to the credibility of one James R. Campbell
as a source of information about a target is "supportive" of his
target. Yep, I'm supportive of ANY target Campbell tries to use to prop
up his own wobbly credentials as a savior of aviation. Based on
experience, I insist on proof before accepting his claims, then I look
for his ulterior motive. And I almost always seem to find one.
Actually, the Mini-500 case is an anomaly, to me. Campbell has been
under such scrutiny, and such pressure from the builders' organization
and its members to keep it clean and keep the personality crap out of
it, that Campbell has probably done a better-than-usual job. (I've said
before that his last article would probably have been one of his best,
had he only kept the paranoid ranting out of it -- but not a chance.)
"Support"?? Yep, Pucillo rendered LOTS of support, like:
8/98: "I have no horse in this race (whether the Mini500 is
wonderful or terrible) but if you're a friend of Steve, you might try to
convince him that posting under his own name and mentioning his
experience will go a long way toward improving credibility." or
11/98 "It's time for the builders to organize and take control of their
own direction. I refuse to take sides in the actual controversy, but as
a hopefully-neutral observer, I see no builder representation or
spokesman."
11/98: "I think the builders need to organize and speak with one
RATIONAL, non-hysterical voice for that to happen. I don't believe
hurling invective on either side helps much. Nor does destroying the
value of the aircraft with unselective, grossly negative publicity or
by destroying the manufacturer (just my opinion)."
[Maybe he means not "supporting" RHCI, but criticizing Campbell?]:
10/98 "The mistake here is in assuming that anybody claims that
everything Mr.Campbell says is wrong. Campbell is a master of running in
the same direction as the crowd, shouting 'follow me.' .... One needs to
separate the Mini500 issue from the Campbell issue. Is there a problem
with the Mini500? Sounds like there may be. Is Campbell's presence on
the bandwagon constructive in getting it solved? I have my doubts.
....And for what it's worth, I suspect Dennis Fetters won't cooperate
with anything Campbell puts himself in front of. And also for what it's
worth, I suggest considering whether the goal is promoting Jim Campbell
or promoting a
solution. .... The question is, does one believe there is a problem with
this aircraft, or indeed does one believe anything else, on the basis of
CAMPBELL's assertions. And there are a lot of people in aviation who
would check their watch twice if Campbell told them the time, three
times if he had a reason to lie."
11/98 "Clearly, Campbell is not always wrong in his criticisms, but it
does not follow that they are credible merely because he publishes
them. He waited until after Avweb and others had addressed the Mini500
problem in detail and quite professionally to publish his "expose." I
can predict the outcome of the Super Bowl in the third quarter, too, but
whom would I impress if I showed up at the stadium in a Packers outfit
and changed to a Broncos shirt late in the game? Remember that it was
Campbell who issued a glowing report on the Mini500, and that it was
that report upon which many presumably relied in purchasing. He did not
have the technical expertise to analyze the design when he praised it,
and he still lacked that technical expertise when he attacked it."
12/98 "I'm gonna wait and see what tomorrow brings before deciding just
what Fetters is ..... But I have a bad feeling about the way a certain
journalist's presence is polarizing things."
12/98: "In defense of Fetters, let me say that at this point, the Mini
500 is almost certainly a liability ... yet he's still spending time and
money on it. .... I am unable to cast Fetters in the role of scoundrel
here. Temperamental? ... Maybe. Prone to pop off and say things he
probably shouldn't then not to back off? Maybe. Yet he has been
maligned beyond all reason, and maligned by some of the best." [i.e.
Campbell]
[As of this date, Fetters had been clever enough to avoid provable,
public lies. And whatever else he may have done under public scrutiny,
Campbell's early rhetoric DID polarize things -- and gave Fetters a way
out of the "fish or cut bait" trap others were attempting to quietly set
for him.]
12/98 "Well, if Dennis said this I'm disappointed and disgusted, and
I've done my best to defer any judgment here. .... This sounds like war
with innocent builders and is likely to be taken that way by those those
who DO wish him ill."
[Anybody who considers this "support" of RHCI isn't paying attention,
or is bent on distortion. In fact, even though Fetters eventually
proved to my satisfaction that he was acting in bad faith, I'll stand on
every word of this as posted, when posted.]
>who has continued his vendetta against us with bizarre accusations and outright falsehoods.
"Bizarre" accusations like "Campbell has repeatedly lied in the
magazine" or "has repeatedly lied about his credentials and experience"
and "Campbell has stiffed the company creditors and took the company
assets, then started publishing the magazine in the name of a
nonexistent corporation" and "Campbell has used his magazine to attack
people he had personal disputes with and has distorted facts beyond
recognition." Yep. I said 'em. And that's my viewpoint. Anybody who
wants to know why, just ask.
> I was rather amazed that Mr. Pucillo accused our original Mini-500 report from last year of being general and >nonspecific and treading no new ground.
Hmm. Campbell gave the Mini-500 a glowing report in both the magazine
and the Sportplane Resource Guide. He even gave the COMPANY the highest
rating of any helicopter company, equal to decades-old Rotorway. RHCI
was handing out reprints -- and US Aviator SELLS reprints -- when the
400+ builders bought their kits. Then after THREE YEARS, right after
Avweb broke the story, Campbell got religion and posted bulletins
contradicting all his previous pollyanna stuff. Read his
late-'97/early'98 Web article and you decide whether he knew what he was
blowing off about or merely puffing. It consists of essentially nothing
but builder anecdotes, utterly without technical analysis or research.
Contrast that with the REASSURING puffery he published and stood upon
for three years. Here's what he said about the Mini-500 in 1994:
"The machine is built on a rugged 4130 chromoly-steel-welded tube
structure"
[A "rugged" structure?]
"Power is conducted to the tail rotor transmission via a long aluminum
drive shaft that is well-supported by a number of bearings inside the
beefy, five-inch aluminum tail boom."
[A "beefy" tail?]
"Power comes courtesy of a single, two-stroke Rotax 582 with dual CDI
ignition producing 67 hp. The excellent power-to-weight ratio of this
little liquid-cooled, oil-injected engine seems to be tailor-made for
this bird and this application."
["tailor-made for this application"?]
"the temperature range inside the Mini-500 (which also has an
additional six-bladed fan to cool the engine chamber, by the way) should
be fairly constant, and lend itself to reliable operation."
[temperature should be stable and the engine reliable?? based on WHAT
expertise?]
"The Revolution folks are definitely playing a very conservative game
with this aircraft."
[RHCI took exceptional care to design and build this??? Huh??]
"I'm impressed. The Revolution is a very forgiving little helicopter...
which is just what it is going to need to be."
["forgiving"? It took 3 years to figure out it was a "killer copter"
as he now says?]
"I have seen hovering autorotations performed as high as 15 ft without
any problem and I personally found myself quite comfortable in the 5 to
10 ft range. There is little pitching associated with a power-cut and
the Mini really holds its energy well. An autorotation approach of about
55 mph will be great..."
["little pitching associated with power-cut"? Huh?]
"I ... can verify that there has indeed been a significant effort to
guard against airframe failures and component difficulties... one can
plainly see that Revolution is doing everything they reasonably can to
safeguard their bird, and their customers, from potential harm."
[He could "verify" that RHCI did everything reasonable to protect
customers??]
"The machine flies very well, especially in a number of critical flight
regimes. The power-off characteristics seem quite good..."
["power-off characteristics" are "quite good"?]
"The quality of workmanship seems high; the engineering seems more than
up to snuff"
["quality of workmanship"? "engineering up to snuff"?? Based on what
expertise or analysis?]
Sorry, here's the truth as I see it: Most novice rotorcraft customers
would be quite leary -- as would their wives -- of this thing. I would;
I KNOW my limitations, but after reading that article, I'd have figured
I could handle this. Only by explaining why the danger of falling out
of the sky, autorotation, engine failure, etc., could this realistically
be marketable to novices. And the article addresses each of those
fears. It almost seems tailored to portray this particular aircraft as
an ideal project for the beginner. This from the man who derides
mainstream publications for a "see-no-evil" approach to advertisers.
And for presumably three years, Fetters handed it out to buyers and they
read the SRG where he lauded the company too. Did he know what he was
talking about for three years, from '94 through '97? Or starting in
December '97? Or never? And is he now leading the march or climbing on
a bandwagon so he can be credited with all the BLATTING from the tubas??
>Further, he intimated that we did not have the expertise to publish what we did, and that we only followed up >on previous stories on the subject.
Nope, didn't "intimate" anything. I said then and will say again, that
for James R. Campbell with a high school education, and add-on
rotorcraft ticket and no demonstrated technical education or
proficiency, to pass judgment upon the design of a complex rotorcraft --
one which even fixed-wing designers haven't the craft to analyze --
evidences gross arrogance. Read the statements above and compare them
to the current knowledge about the Mini-500, some of the flaws of which
are claimed to be apparent on sight to an aviation mechanic. Clearly,
doing more than parroting the anecdotal experiences of builders was
beyond him. In fairness, his later (1999) article was far better, since
it relied upon the analysis of experts who DID know of what they spoke
and it addressed the flaws in some detail. (Of course, he just COULDN'T
resist biting and gouging a few enemies before he was finished. Sad
spectacle.)
> Interestingly, he is incorrect again. Our original magazine report in theMarch/April issue of 1998 was >actually written in late 1997,
Duh, it was on the Web page.
>and was preceded by a publication of much of the data contained in the article, as well as our concerns about the aircraft, on our Internet site in the fall of '97. It was the first coverage of its kind on this matter.
Nonsense. The Web page article followed the Avweb investigative piece
by several weeks if not a month or more. Prove otherwise.
> Mind you, the folks at AvWeb, an Internet aviation news magazine, did do a well-researched, very credible >piece on the problems with the Mini-500, but our 4000++ word expose contains much additional info not covered Lin that otherwise outstanding article. As usual, Mr. Pucillo seems to enjoy bending his "facts" to suit his >prejudices.
Ah, so Avweb WAS first (I thought he just said NOT), after Campbell
remained silent for three years -- all the while Fetters handed out his
glowing article and builders experienced the problems he belatedly
published.
> However, the thing I find most unfortunate in this scenario is that his support of Revolution Helicopter may >have kept people from heeding our warnings and thus endangered those who went ahead and bought or flew
>Mini-500s. Of course, his fellow detractors have attempted to crucify us for our coverage... but the amazing >thing in this story is that as a few of these detractors became more informed about the Mini-500 debacle, they >have toned down their negative rhetoric against us, and some are now turning to actual support for our >position.
Typical Campbell arrogance. Those who wouldn't believe HIS word --
with good reason -- if 12 bishops swore to his story "support [his]
position" when they ultimately conclude he isn't lying NOW even though
he's contradicting what he said BEFORE. As I said before, the issue
ISN'T whether the Mini-500 was good or bad, it's whether ANYBODY ought
to take that as established by the words of one James R. Campbell, or
whether they need to dig out the truth themselves. Just compare the
180-degree change in posture from lauding an advertiser to attacking a
former advertiser, in this case (did that have anything to do with the
silence? Only the shadow knows, and he won't tell).
> As we have always said, truth is its own defense.
Yep. Only I scooped him on that. "Vincit omnia veritas, vincit qui
patutur."
NOW: Perhaps somebody should ask this consumer advocate:
Have the people who ordered the GPS Guide advertised for delivery by
Oshkosh '97 gotten them? (I know, the terrorists made it disappear. No,
the author defaulted. Hell, Pucillo must have MADE him default. Or
maybe it was failure to pay the last installment.) Or refunds? Or the
people who ordered Howard Fried's FAA Enforcement Book (hey, wasn't that
at the printers?) And where are the books -- five in total of them,
isn't it? being sold on the Web page that don't even exist yet? Or is
he warning people that the average delivery period on books advertised
for order is over 2 years late -- after multiple representations that
they're completed, at the printers, etc.?? (Don't believe me? I'll
print up a batch of the claims made for the SRG 2nd in the order forms
and ads if you want.)
Tony P
> What utter crap....
Talk to your lawyer. I didn't address you and I won't now.
> The fact is that Fetters has profited immensely from Pucillo's attacks on US
> Aviator. Fetters gleefully reported to me that he had received a huge amount
> of documentation (of a negative nature) on me from Pucillo shortly after we
> started looking into this matter in earnest.
Hmm, NOW Fetters is credible, eh? Must mean all that "terrorist" stuff
on Jouster's Web page (<http://www.cyberis.net/~jouster>) ?? You know,
the official court documents and stuff, slimy as they are?
> Former RHCI employees confirm Fetters receipt of this hate mail
"hate mail"?? Judge Capp would find that description of her Order
interesting. And Judge Lazzara, and the Lakeland police.
>In other words, Fetters is using "weapons" provided (in part) by Pucillo (and by his
> associates) to try and save face and sell more machines that will not do
> what he promised (and may KILL or INJURE their operators).
Ah, the police documents and court documents that resulted from
Campbell's behavior were the fault of PUCILLO, not of Campbell's own
conduct? Why am I not surprised.
And pointing out that Campbell has no credibility KILLS people, but
three years of touting the Mini-500 as wonderful and RHCI as a fine,
top-rated company until over 400 people had bought them DOESN'T kill
people??? Pointing out that Campbell didn't know what he was talking
about KILLS people. NOT knowing what he was talking about when he
touted this machine DIDN'T?? Odd, but seems typical Campbell thinking,
that.
> Worse; he's using tactics that we believe show striking similarities ("Shoot the Messenger")
> to those employed by Pucillo in his sick (IMO) quest to destroy this
> magazine and while having made positive and supportive statements about
> companies like CGS, Adventure Air, and at one time, even RHCI!
And Pucillo's resembled Slusarczyk's, which resembled Jacobs', which
resembled Hitlaws, which resembled Don Jones', which resembled
Blackwell's, which resembled Porter's and Troyer's and Wanttaja's and
Judy Wood's and Ramey's and Billy Henderson's. Yep, all the same.
Refusing to be silenced by threats, and telling the truth as best they
can. It's downright nefarious.
Sure. Everybody who criticizes Campbell does it to keep him from
telling the truth -- NOT to tell the truth about his credibility and
lack of it. Yep. I "supported" all these people by asserting that this
man lacks credibility, that they should seek objective information for
themselves, and that he has a history of using his magazine to attack
persons with whom he has personal disputes. Boy, THERE's a hot news
bulletin.
> Pucillo has also offered his services TO Fetters (against me) in the event
> we were involved in a legal action with RHCI.
Sure. And a lot of other people. I told Fetters, as I've told many
other folks, that if this man Campbell started bullying or threatening
him to keep him silent about the truth, "call me." I don't like threats
of frivolous lawsuits like Campbell dishes out to those who post
negative opinions or tell undesired truths about him. Want a list of
threats made in just the past YEAR -- and just those we know about?
> At other times, he then reportedly offered to sue Fetters on behalf of various parties...
Hmm. Gosh, I don't remember offering to sue Fetters. I'd sure like
specifics. Perhaps he means when I responded to FETTERS frivolous
threats of a defamation suit (very Zoomlike, in fact) sent to a critic.
(Remember, I hate legal bullying and threats of frivolous suits.) Or
perhaps when I stated the opinion that RHCI's contract contains
unenforceable contracts, that a court would probably strike down.
> Which side is he on? REALLY?
Are my choices (a) Jim Campbell or (b) RHCI?? Sorry, I choose (c) "the
builders"
I choose the builders, who are victimized BOTH by companies who sell
bad products and magazines who tout them and get advertising revenues
and reprint sales or other revenues for years before finally "blowing
the whistle" and trying to ignore their own previous behavior. And by
journalists who then try to re-establish their flagging credibility by
climbing on a useful bandwagon. I choose the builders, who are
victimized as the Adventure Air builders were, by hysterical and vicious
attacks that destroy the value of their investments with inept and
retaliatory rhetoric.
> Personally; I have yet to see any significant evidence of a positive
> contribution (on his part) in regards to the RHCI tragedy... all I've seen
> is a limited turnabout on his attacks on our stories when it became so
> blatantly obvious that we were right, that further such attacks became
> indefensible. Do you folks remember all that?
I'll let the builders' organization and its officers decide if my
contributions have been "significant."
But did I stop "attacking" the inept stories? When did I do that? Let
me say it again: Mr. Campbell lacks the technical training and knowledge
and has no business making pronouncements on the fitness of a helicopter
design. Yet he did so, in glowing terms, to the detriment of 400+ RHCI
customers, if the later reports are accurate.
>He was basically FOR anyone we ever criticized and that fact has been exhaustively established.
Nope. Only those who tell the truth. And those who are abused,
threatened, harassed, sued or falsely accused. I have often corrected
those who exaggerated or spread unverifiable rumors. The truth is bad
enough and I hate it when people exaggerate.
> Fetters has been HELPED immensely by Pucillo's war against USA... remember
> that--especially if we don't survive
Ah, if Mr. Campbell once AGAIN stiffs the company creditors, once AGAIN
can't operate at a profit, it's Pucillo who's responsible. NOT the
third and final ejection from Sun & Fun. NOT the expense of frivolous
lawsuits. NOT the loss of credibility due to his own history. NOT
gross business ineptitude. NOT unpaid taxes or landlords or printers or
authors or trade creditors.
Just like in '96 when the magazine shut off for ten months. "The
terrorists made me do it." These "terrorists" have been around since
1990, at least. From Bubba who was supposedly contracted to break
Campbell's legs, to Yoder, Jacob, Hitlaw, Bawcom, Conrad, Thompson,
Blackwell, Brady, Wanttaja, Porter, Hitlaw, Laurel Ramey (a girl
terrorist, no less), Troyer, Robie, the Lakeland Police, etc. A cast of
thousands, terrorists all.
>his unending legal machinations, law suits, personal attacks, interference in our business, and other bizarre
> efforts to do one thing and one thing only... WIPE OUT US Aviator and Jim Campbell. In any way you care to >characterize it, it comes down to one thing... VENDETTA... and we're sick and tired of it...
Ah, there's that mouse in his pocket again. He and the mouse are sick
of it all. And I thought a vendetta was a horse's head in your bed. Or
was that Martha and the Vendettas?
>and of the fact that good people have been led astray by this nonsense.
Let the "good people" weigh the evidence and judge for themselves -- so
they are NOT led astray.
> Its amusing to watch such tactics be used in such a "slimy" way finally be
> called such... when they've been employed for a long time by others with
> such glee and reckless disregard for the facts and the damage they have
> done.
Glee? Nothing has given me greater sadness in my life than witnessing
this spectacle for the past 2 years, after months of vocal support for
something I believed in, before being exposed to the real personality.
> (Flames & obfuscations sure to follow... the hatred espoused and employed by
> this man knows few bounds).
Hmmm. I'm looking back to see where I espoused hatred. Lemme see.
Nope, I can't find it.
John H Ousterhout
> Killer-Copter... The Mini-500--- Is This the World's
> Deadliest Sport Helicopter?
(A) Even a blind pig finds an occasional truffle.
(B) The lesser of two evils is still evil.
(C) Pot, kettle, black!
- John Ousterhout -
http://www.cyberis.net/~jouster