Search results

he has no clue about anything. I begun to make a list of all the things we answered and all the questions he dodged. It is just too long. P.S. His explanation on the radome is pure comedy.

He won't answer.

Which has been thoroughly proven over and over and over again. Yet, his "you're idiot" argument is still there.. it seems it works for everything...

disbelieve what ? simple common sense and educated responses with credible sources or the fantasies of a 10year old ? The thing is .. why does the quote refer to a "boundary" ... does he know why the term is used, and what it means? will you just for once simply tell us what this is ?

his source is : Radar Glossary Page 7 - Super Glossary

hey guys I see we are at it again.. This aeronautics genius is stunning the crowds with feats of amazing knowledge again! Right!!! Hey genius ... MiG-21 with extended nose cone MiG-21 with retracted nose cone care to explain how the first case increases RCS ?

Man, I for one read everything. I have made a personal trail of busting that begun quite some time ago. There hasn't been a single ..not 1 point that he has made that has gone unanswered by at least one member of this forum, yet he hasn't answered to a single question. And I am not talking...

Really???? my test has not finished yet? WOW !!!! right genius... first of all I have no idea what you mean with image source code. I am assuming you are implying I found where you got your equation from. Or even worse, you tried to find my equation on the net ???? :rofl: Let me save you...

This is an optimisation cost function for model predictive control. See how quickly we respond to your supposed challenges.. it is you who have failed time and time again to respond to any of the questions posed in this forum. So now that your challenge has been met, what is described by...

it is, and I have to give him credit for persistence too. But he has been busted more times than a mythbuster's myth..

Guys the point I was trying to make was that a specific member should answer this simple question.

On the same subject, let's remind the readers that he never replied to us, what this equation is; . and it has been a few days since he was asked.

denial about what ? what am I in denial of ?

I think it is apparent to anyone now that his game is playing with words. I still feel sorry about all the damage he inflicts on credibility in here.

Again you comprehension problem shows. Half of the time you don't even know what you are asking. You know why though. Just to mess up the discussion.

First you said that a given plane has no nacelles, then when it was shown that it does, you started the air-intake nonsense, i.e. that an air-intake is not part of the nacelle then when it was shown to you, you said "it doesn't mean it is in or covered by the nacelle" then it does not =...

in·te·grate    1. to bring together or incorporate (parts) into a whole. 2. to make up, combine, or complete to produce a whole or a larger unit, as parts do. this simply means that if the air-intake is an integrated part of the nacelle, in plain english it means they are...

care to explain to all of us what integrated means then, so as to prove to us that you are not the idiot ?

Are you here again ? did you not have enough whooping and being made a fool for everyone here to see with your ignorance and stubbornness ? you seem to like wikipedia alot .. well here you are : Components of jet engines - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Let's see what...

are you referring to us ? we are the trolls ?