Posted by tleemay on August 10, 2001 at 19:43:19:
In Reply to: Re: The Streamlining Issue Pt.2 posted by seldom seen slim on August 10, 2001 at 17:52:08:
"Don't get trite with me when scrutiny is applied
to your post."
Too late... kind cool huh? So you are above this
type of discussion? It's hard to accept any type
of scrutiny from someone who posts anonymously.
The numbers, both sets, were generated by Tom. He
defined the data, not I. If you wish to accuse
Tom of bad numbers, go ahead and present your own
so that he can refute them or agree with them. If
you want to accuse me of posting Tom's inaccurate
numbers, then go ahead - it's no skin off my nose
because I really don't care how a BP/wing stacks
up to backpack. I have never claimed to be a wiz
figuring the hydrodynamics of equipment in the
water and their efficiencies. To quote seahunt,
'don't hold your breath' waiting me to explain the
numbers... E-mail Tom like I did.
I reached him at H2Opressure@yahoo.com, you can
do the same. You are the one claiming he is wrong,
provide your counter data and call him on it. It's
a simple as that. He works for Boeing peforming
similar and perhaps much more extensive
calculations on a regular basis... he is the
author of the numbers AND a professional. I did
not have anything to do with his calculations
other than asking him to create calculation model
for a backpack. I didn't even specify what type or
brand - he decided that.
Even Ben agreed that his numbers were really
close to what he worked out - albiet Tom's were
higher. But the important thing was the
difference between streamlined and not, BP and
backpack, not the overall number.
One for you, and it's real simple since you
brought it up; please define what a sock puppet
is. E-mail me directly with your answer. Or, I
will be on the Great Escape this Sunday if you
wish to discuss it in person, that is if you still
don't get it.
Otherwise, go away -
Post a Followup