Another nasty holiday season on RBT

On Sun, 20 Jan 2019 09:15:51 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 8:59:43 AM UTC-8, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 11:59:05 -0800 (PST), wrote:


...just to fly in that pile of junk which was nothing more than a B29 with
bigger engines on it and a bigger tail to offset the increased torque
of those engines...

The taller vertical stabilizer was to improve yaw control if the B-50
lost an engine. The wing structure was reinforced to compensate for
the increased roll torque of the more powerful engines.

http://www.skytamer.com/Boeing_B-50J(KB).html
"Enlarged vertical tail and rudder (to maintain adequate yaw
control during engine-out conditions)".


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Jeff, the engines were almost twice the size of the original engines on a B29. Of course they were worried about an engine out condition but normal flying required the increased vertical stabilizer (note the name) because they did not have contra-rotating engines.

Physically twice the size but very similar in power output. In fact a
R-3350 turbo compound, as used in the Super Constellation produced
slightly more power then the R-4360 used on the B-50.
--

Cheers,

John B.

On Sun, 20 Jan 2019 09:33:56 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 2:19:21 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 12:29:09 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 9:46:59 AM UTC-8, jbeattie wrote:
On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 8:43:46 AM UTC-8, Mark J. wrote:
On 1/18/2019 8:02 AM, wrote:
On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 5:31:41 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
For Heaven's sake! Tom is an old man, who is in ill health and suffers
from brain damage. The thought that he is going to beat anyone up is
just another one of his fantasies, like flying around in the bomb bay
of airplanes at 5,000 feet over Vietnam.

And yet that is what happened. But then since you've done so little you wouldn't understand that life is strange and wonderful. The tail gunner in a B52D is actually in the tail. The way to get from the back pressurized compartment to the front is via a very narrow 6" wide shelf. The only way to do this is to put one knee in front of the other and scoot along while holding yourself on the shelf by slipping two fingers per hand between the gap in the vertical and horizontal ribs of the aircraft. On the ground this is scary since you're at least 10' above the bottom of the bomb bays. Because of the curvature of the hull you have to lean your body out over the bays so not many people would do that.

The A/C asked me to go to the gunner's position to find out what the heck was wrong with him since he sounded like he was going nuts. It turned out to be nothing since he was just watching the SAMs bursting around us.

So I went back there before the bomb run and came back after the bomb run. You cannot breath the air above 10,000 feet and remain conscious.

Funny that I've done it at least six times on a bicycle. Is it when you
don't have a bicycle handy that you lose consciousness?

Riding across the US, I went over Hoosier Pass in Colorado at 11,500 and remained conscious -- and in fact felt pretty peppy. More recently, however, I almost passed out riding in Utah at 10,715 -- but only because I was trying to keep up with my son. The grade wasn't that bad -- just long. https://bbrelje.wordpress.com/2013/0...ghway-cycling/

Time for a ride in the fog!

-- Jay Beattie.

People raised at or near sea level usually have altitude sickness at 10,000 ft or higher. This is medical fact so why are you guys trying to deny it?

Is it your pretense that aircraft are NOT pressurized above 10,000 feet? Jumping in with both feet with that fool Slocumb?

Tom, I worked at the Freeport copper mine, in Indonesia, where the
maintenence facality was located at 10,000 ft. The actual open pit
mining was higher.

Your problem Tom, other then the lies that you tell, is the fact that
you continue to talk about things that you know nothing about.
--

Cheers,

John B.

The edge of that pit is at 16,000 ft. But of course you worked there without oxygen since you're superman.

Are you sure of this? After all you first told us that 10,000 ft. was
the limit and now you are up to 16,000. what's next? 20,000, 30,000 ?

By the way, it seems that people jump out of airplanes (without
oxygen) at 18,000 ft
https://www.jumptown.com/about/artic...-need-to-know/

Want to change your statement?
--

Cheers,

John B.

On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 5:56:03 PM UTC-5, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Sun, 20 Jan 2019 12:43:56 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 11:38:50 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/20/2019 11:59 AM, wrote:
On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 8:28:42 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/20/2019 10:23 AM, wrote:
On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 1:51:09 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/19/2019 1:59 PM, wrote:
On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 5:57:00 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 16:55:35 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 4:01:23 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 08:02:29 -0800 (PST), wrote:
On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 5:31:41 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:56:04 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote:
jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 1:33:53 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 8:42:52 PM UTC-8, Ralph Barone wrote:
jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 4:04:05 PM UTC-8, wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 7:25:47 AM UTC-8, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 9:56:58 AM UTC-5, wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 2:15:27 AM UTC-8, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 5:06:44 AM UTC-5, Andre Jute wrote:

-snip just oodles of text-


Sitting in a meeting with some of the world's best engineers and chemists. the engineers said that making a chemical assay machine required two IBM supercomputers. At the time these were $3 Million apiece. I said, "I can do it with a micro processor." I delivered ahead of schedule and below budget so if you said, "It's him or me" you would have been shown the door immediately.
-final snip-

That would be around 1990 right? Sounds familiar.

My brother's medical research imaging lab building included
a full floor for a Cray with cooling systems. He changed the
whole department over to some mini processors in parallel
which by then outperformed a supercomputer for graphics
rendering.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

I seem to remember it as 1986 or so. It was the fist time an 8008 came out. Later I increased the size and power by using the 8080. The IBM's were the most powerful available. Since De. Mullis didn't have any money in his research grant for that he was stuck giving me the project instead of the two PhD's. That didn't make them exactly my friends and the moment I finished the final product I was out the door.

I later got a job with another company and made a liquid handler with 50 times the ability.

I'm not heavily into computer technology, but I bet there are people
here who would be very interested in exactly how you did the job of two
IBM supercomputers with an 8008 microprocessor. Or even an 8080.

Can you give us the technical details, please?


--
- Frank Krygowski

Because you have no technical knowledge and no understanding of human desires you ain't enough to know that it didn't require a large computer to begin with but two PhD's wanted a nice Supercomputer of their own.

The project they proposed would have cost $10 Million in 1986 dollars when Dr. Mullis had about one and a half.

You don't have any technical knowledge but you know the difference between an 8008 and an 8080. So tell us what those differences were.

Quit deflecting. Do you even _remember_ the technical details? If so,
what were they? I'm giving you a chance to prove your technical
brilliance, Tom!

If you can't remember, I'll accept "I just don't remember" as your
answer. Just be honest.


--
- Frank Krygowski

Tell us Frank - what in the hell are you asking me questions about things that you wouldn't understand anyway?
https://www.bing.com/images/search?q...& FORM=IQFRBA

This is several pictures of the 1200 and 1600. All of the robotics, electronics and programming was done by me. They changed the case and shape several times later. So what? What does this tell you?

It had three axis of motion and a pump and Peltier drives. What does that tell you? I want to know what is inside of your screwed up brain? What are you doing on a bicycle group to begin with? Is it because you used to ride a bicycle 15 years ago?


Of course we believe you... yet another effort to bolster your self
image and prove that you are as good as anyone rather then the failure
that you really are.
--

Cheers,

John B.

If Tom is so bad then why don't people simply ignore him so that those who have him Killfiled don't have to see the posts? Same with Jute.

Cheers

On Sun, 20 Jan 2019 14:38:45 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 1/20/2019 11:59 AM, wrote:
On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 8:28:42 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/20/2019 10:23 AM, wrote:
On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 1:51:09 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/19/2019 1:59 PM, wrote:
On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 5:57:00 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 16:55:35 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 4:01:23 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 08:02:29 -0800 (PST),
wrote:
On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 5:31:41 PM UTC-8, John B.
Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:56:04 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote:
jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 1:33:53 PM UTC-8,
wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 8:42:52 PM UTC-8, Ralph
Barone wrote:
jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 4:04:05 PM UTC-8,
wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 7:25:47 AM UTC-8, Sir
Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 9:56:58 AM UTC-5,
wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 2:15:27 AM UTC-8,
Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 5:06:44 AM UTC-5,
Andre Jute wrote:

-snip just oodles of text-


Sitting in a meeting with some of the world's best engineers and
chemists. the engineers said that making a chemical assay machine
required two IBM supercomputers. At the time these were $3 Million
apiece. I said, "I can do it with a micro processor." I delivered
ahead of schedule and below budget so if you said, "It's him or me"
you would have been shown the door immediately.
-final snip-

That would be around 1990 right? Sounds familiar.

My brother's medical research imaging lab building included a full
floor for a Cray with cooling systems. He changed the whole
department over to some mini processors in parallel which by then
outperformed a supercomputer for graphics rendering.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

I seem to remember it as 1986 or so. It was the fist time an 8008
came out. Later I increased the size and power by using the 8080. The
IBM's were the most powerful available. Since De. Mullis didn't have
any money in his research grant for that he was stuck giving me the
project instead of the two PhD's. That didn't make them exactly my
friends and the moment I finished the final product I was out the
door.

I later got a job with another company and made a liquid handler with
50 times the ability.

I'm not heavily into computer technology, but I bet there are people
here who would be very interested in exactly how you did the job of
two IBM supercomputers with an 8008 microprocessor. Or even an 8080.

Can you give us the technical details, please?

Lol, I'm not holding my breath that Tommie can produce such. I wonder
what broke with the 8008 machne that it had to be completey rebuilt with
an 8080.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Because you have no technical knowledge and no understanding of human
desires you ain't enough to know that it didn't require a large
computer to begin with but two PhD's wanted a nice Supercomputer of
their own.

The project they proposed would have cost $10 Million in 1986 dollars
when Dr. Mullis had about one and a half.

You don't have any technical knowledge but you know the difference
between an 8008 and an 8080. So tell us what those differences were.

Quit deflecting. Do you even _remember_ the technical details? If so,
what were they? I'm giving you a chance to prove your technical
brilliance, Tom!

If you can't remember, I'll accept "I just don't remember" as your
answer. Just be honest.

Don't hold your breath.

On Sun, 20 Jan 2019 09:11:19 -0800, Earls61 wrote:

“I seem to remember it as 1986 or so. It was the fist time an 8008 came
out.�

The 8008 was introduced in 1972.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_8008

Maybe you’re thinking of the intel 386...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_80386

They came out in the 80s.

Naah, the whole story reeks of a student project that was set on some
course the Tommie "audited", aka he failed,

IME, in the 70's they were still teaching you how to design your own
circuitry to pfovide logic from flip-flops, etc. shifting the project up
to something based on 8008 or 8080 might have been the decade later
shift. or a micro-controller course.

On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 05:05:38 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jan 2019 14:38:45 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 1/20/2019 11:59 AM, wrote:
On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 8:28:42 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 1/20/2019 10:23 AM, wrote:
On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 1:51:09 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/19/2019 1:59 PM, wrote:
On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 5:57:00 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 16:55:35 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 4:01:23 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 08:02:29 -0800 (PST),
wrote:
On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 5:31:41 PM UTC-8, John B.
Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:56:04 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote:
jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 1:33:53 PM UTC-8,
wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 8:42:52 PM UTC-8, Ralph
Barone wrote:
jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 4:04:05 PM UTC-8,
wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 7:25:47 AM UTC-8, Sir
Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 9:56:58 AM UTC-5,
wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 2:15:27 AM UTC-8,
Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 5:06:44 AM UTC-5,
Andre Jute wrote:

-snip just oodles of text-


Sitting in a meeting with some of the world's best engineers and
chemists. the engineers said that making a chemical assay machine
required two IBM supercomputers. At the time these were $3 Million
apiece. I said, "I can do it with a micro processor." I delivered
ahead of schedule and below budget so if you said, "It's him or me"
you would have been shown the door immediately.
-final snip-

That would be around 1990 right? Sounds familiar.

My brother's medical research imaging lab building included a full
floor for a Cray with cooling systems. He changed the whole
department over to some mini processors in parallel which by then
outperformed a supercomputer for graphics rendering.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

I seem to remember it as 1986 or so. It was the fist time an 8008
came out. Later I increased the size and power by using the 8080. The
IBM's were the most powerful available. Since De. Mullis didn't have
any money in his research grant for that he was stuck giving me the
project instead of the two PhD's. That didn't make them exactly my
friends and the moment I finished the final product I was out the
door.

I later got a job with another company and made a liquid handler with
50 times the ability.

I'm not heavily into computer technology, but I bet there are people
here who would be very interested in exactly how you did the job of
two IBM supercomputers with an 8008 microprocessor. Or even an 8080.

Can you give us the technical details, please?

Lol, I'm not holding my breath that Tommie can produce such. I wonder
what broke with the 8008 machne that it had to be completey rebuilt with
an 8080.

I seem to remember that in order to run CP/M you needed to have an
8080. Didn't they even make a 8080 card for the Apple II?

--

Cheers,

John B.

On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 17:51:02 +0700, John B. Slocomb wrote:

On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 05:05:38 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Jan 2019 14:38:45 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 1/20/2019 11:59 AM, wrote:
On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 8:28:42 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
On 1/20/2019 10:23 AM, wrote:
On Saturday, January 19, 2019 at 1:51:09 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
On 1/19/2019 1:59 PM, wrote:
On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 5:57:00 PM UTC-8, John B. Slocomb
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 16:55:35 -0800 (PST),
wrote:

On Friday, January 18, 2019 at 4:01:23 PM UTC-8, John B.
Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 08:02:29 -0800 (PST),
wrote:
On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 5:31:41 PM UTC-8, John B.
Slocomb wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:56:04 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote:
jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, January 17, 2019 at 1:33:53 PM UTC-8,
wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 8:42:52 PM UTC-8, Ralph
Barone wrote:
jbeattie wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 4:04:05 PM UTC-8,
wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 7:25:47 AM UTC-8,
Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 9:56:58 AM UTC-5,
wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 2:15:27 AM UTC-8,
Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, January 16, 2019 at 5:06:44 AM UTC-5,
Andre Jute wrote:

-snip just oodles of text-


Sitting in a meeting with some of the world's best engineers and
chemists. the engineers said that making a chemical assay machine
required two IBM supercomputers. At the time these were $3
Million apiece. I said, "I can do it with a micro processor." I
delivered ahead of schedule and below budget so if you said,
"It's him or me"
you would have been shown the door immediately.
-final snip-

That would be around 1990 right? Sounds familiar.

My brother's medical research imaging lab building included a full
floor for a Cray with cooling systems. He changed the whole
department over to some mini processors in parallel which by then
outperformed a supercomputer for graphics rendering.

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

I seem to remember it as 1986 or so. It was the fist time an 8008
came out. Later I increased the size and power by using the 8080.
The IBM's were the most powerful available. Since De. Mullis didn't
have any money in his research grant for that he was stuck giving
me the project instead of the two PhD's. That didn't make them
exactly my friends and the moment I finished the final product I
was out the door.

I later got a job with another company and made a liquid handler
with 50 times the ability.

I'm not heavily into computer technology, but I bet there are people
here who would be very interested in exactly how you did the job of
two IBM supercomputers with an 8008 microprocessor. Or even an 8080.

Can you give us the technical details, please?

Lol, I'm not holding my breath that Tommie can produce such. I wonder
what broke with the 8008 machne that it had to be completey rebuilt with
an 8080.

I seem to remember that in order to run CP/M you needed to have an 8080.
Didn't they even make a 8080 card for the Apple II?

I don't know the full details of what chips went where in the 70s, but I
do know that by the time that he claims to have carried out this
wonderful project, I had two Z80 CP/M luggable computer, complete with
SIO, PIO and S100 bus that would have eaten his project with barely a
burp. These were Australian designed and built, and primarily aimed at
industral processes, so imagine what was available in the USA in the
early 80s.

In fact, if I could remember what my Fidonet details were, and there were
an archive of Rec.Bicycle.? , I might have even been poking my head in
there via these machines as they were my office machines for a few years
at that the time before we shelled out on a 80286.

As usual, Tommie suddenly gets all shy with real details of why a "chip"
could replace a task requiring a "supercomputer".

On Sunday, January 20, 2019 at 3:43:58 PM UTC-5, wrote:

This is several pictures of the 1200 and 1600. All of the robotics,
electronics and programming was done by me. They changed the case
and shape several times later. So what? What does this tell you?


then the following questions shouldn't be too hard:

what was the programming language?

What compiler did you use?

Was it run from resident or removable media?

If resident, how was the file loaded into the resident device?

Was the program a state machine, or some aspect of real-time processing?

On Monday, January 21, 2019 at 12:17:41 AM UTC-5, news18 wrote:
On Sun, 20 Jan 2019 09:11:19 -0800, Earls61 wrote:

“I seem to remember it as 1986 or so. It was the fist time an 8008 came
out.�

The 8008 was introduced in 1972.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_8008

Maybe you’re thinking of the intel 386...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_80386

They came out in the 80s.

Naah, the whole story reeks of a student project that was set on some
course the Tommie "audited", aka he failed,

IME, in the 70's they were still teaching you how to design your own
circuitry to pfovide logic from flip-flops, etc. shifting the project up
to something based on 8008 or 8080 might have been the decade later
shift. or a micro-controller course.

My guess is that he was actually an assembly technician, maybe ran some sort of production level programming tool (like something from the Data I/O family) to program EEproms (not quite was most of us think of when we say we programmed something).

Bascially we have here a guy that claims to have developed microcomputers for a major university, enhanced power delivery systems for a particle collide, and designed a telephone system for an office building, but couldn't figure out he had to lube his chain or the links would bind.

On 1/21/2019 7:43 AM, news18 wrote:

As usual, Tommie suddenly gets all shy with real details of why a "chip"
could replace a task requiring a "supercomputer".


But he showed us a photograph and used the word "Peltier." Why, oh why,
aren't we suitably impressed? ;-)


--
- Frank Krygowski