---------------------------------------------------------- Commander-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 10/10/08: 18 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 07:04 AM - Re: HHO (willis robison) 2. 08:16 AM - Re: HHO (Chris) 3. 09:55 AM - Re: HHO (Don) 4. 10:03 AM - Re: HHO (Don) 5. 10:16 AM - Re: HHO (John Vormbaum) 6. 11:04 AM - Re: HHO (Robert S. Randazzo) 7. 11:42 AM - Re: HHO (John Vormbaum) 8. 12:12 PM - Re: HHO (Chris) 9. 12:32 PM - Re: HHO (willis robison) 10. 01:16 PM - Re: HHO (Chris) 11. 01:44 PM - Re: HHO (willis robison) 12. 03:32 PM - Re: HHO (Chris) 13. 04:14 PM - Re: HHO (John Vormbaum) 14. 04:23 PM - Re: HHO (Robert S. Randazzo) 15. 04:48 PM - Re: HHO (John Vormbaum) 16. 04:57 PM - Re: HHO (Robert S. Randazzo) 17. 05:01 PM - Re: HHO (Tom Fisher) 18. 05:17 PM - Re: HHO (John Vormbaum) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 07:04:23 AM PST US From: willis robison Subject: RE: Commander-List: HHO And you wonder why they dont let pilots work on aircraft...... - --- On Thu, 10/9/08, Jim Addington wrote: From: Jim Addington Subject: RE: Commander-List: HHO Don, A friend of mine and I were talking about it and he says it is 34 times as efficient as gas and it did not sound that hard to do. He was interested in getting a car to run on it. One problem is if the Hydrogen leaks past the rings it g ets into the crank case and can cause a really big explosion. I talked to o ne of my late wife=A2s cousins and he said he and some of his friends got a lawn mower to work on it. I was very surprised at how simple it is and won der why some one is not really pushing hard for it. The friend is really go od at electronics and said it could be done for less than $100. He has a ce rtain amount of BS to him but he is a very smart person. Jim From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-lis t-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Don Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 9:48 PM Subject: Commander-List: HHO - Commanderland; - Have any of you been reading or viewing on www.youtube.com anything on the HHO, which is the process of electrolysis to break down water into H & O an d feeding it into the air intake.- Some make claims of 30% up to several hundred per cent increase in gas mileage including using it on an 18 wheele r to double the mileage.- I was talking to my Commander and my Credit Car d and both thought it would be a good idea.- Has anyone looked into this in the auto industry and other than the FAA, would it work in Commanders, p robably take several units.-- Just thinking out loud. - Don - ---------- - The Commander-List Email Forum - -------------- - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ---> http ://forums.matronics.com------------ - List Contribu tion Web Site --------------------- --------- -Matt Dralle, List Admin. - =0A=0A=0A ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 08:16:47 AM PST US From: Chris Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO Don wrote: > > Have any of you been reading or viewing on www.youtube.com > anything on the HHO, which is the process of > electrolysis to break down water into H & O and feeding it into the > air intake. I never cease to be amazed at the number of people who think this will work (no personal insult intended Don). Let's take as a given that "burning" a fuel releases energy. In a piston engine, some of this energy is turned into mechanical motion, but a lot is lost to heat. Net loss in the energy conversion - agreed? Now we take that mechanical motion and generate electricity. Quite a bit of energy lost in that conversion as well. Now we take the electricity and via electrolysis, split a molecule. Certainly a net loss of energy there as well, not to mention that even a huge electrolysis cell generates a tiny amount of hydrogen unless fed *huge* amounts of electricity. Next we're going to take that fuel we created by so many lossy steps, burn it, and get more energy out than we put into it's creation ????? chris ps: I have some "carbon offsets" I'm willing to sell cheap. I'll take $45/flight hour for them. Less than 75 hours available, so get 'em quick. ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 09:55:31 AM PST US From: "Don" Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO Chris; I have read a great deal of the arguments, and I realize there is no such thing as 'perpetual motion', this said, I have also read many things that were quote 'impossible' until, something was changed and then it worked, Mr. Firestone comes to mind with I believe it was sulfur, as well as Mr. Edison and carbon. So I usually don't just 'write something off', just because so far it hasn't worked. I also read that God probably made the perfect compressed hydrogen, its call H2O, something like 1,800 to one compressions. I try and keep and open mind, one day I firmly believe, a revolutionary change will happen to greatly improve our internal combustions engine. No thanks on the 'carbon credits', I can just put the money in the NYSE, but I prefer gold. Don ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris" Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 11:15 AM Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO > > Don wrote: >> >> Have any of you been reading or viewing on www.youtube.com >> anything on the HHO, which is the process of >> electrolysis to break down water into H & O and feeding it into the >> air intake. > > I never cease to be amazed at the number of people who think this will > work (no personal insult intended Don). > Let's take as a given that "burning" a fuel releases energy. In a > piston engine, some of this energy is turned into mechanical motion, but > a lot is lost to heat. Net loss in the energy conversion - agreed? Now > we take that mechanical motion and generate electricity. Quite a bit of > energy lost in that conversion as well. Now we take the electricity and > via electrolysis, split a molecule. Certainly a net loss of energy > there as well, not to mention that even a huge electrolysis cell > generates a tiny amount of hydrogen unless fed *huge* amounts of > electricity. Next we're going to take that fuel we created by so many > lossy steps, burn it, and get more energy out than we put into it's > creation ????? > > > chris > > ps: I have some "carbon offsets" I'm willing to sell cheap. I'll take > $45/flight hour for them. Less than 75 hours available, so get 'em quick. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 7:19 PM ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 10:03:45 AM PST US From: "Don" Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO I thought they did, have lots of pilot friends who are also A&P and also AI's. ----- Original Message ----- From: willis robison To: commander-list@matronics.com Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 10:02 AM Subject: RE: Commander-List: HHO And you wonder why they dont let pilots work on aircraft...... --- On Thu, 10/9/08, Jim Addington wrote: From: Jim Addington Subject: RE: Commander-List: HHO To: commander-list@matronics.com Date: Thursday, October 9, 2008, 9:17 PM Don, A friend of mine and I were talking about it and he says it is 34 times as efficient as gas and it did not sound that hard to do. He was interested in getting a car to run on it. One problem is if the Hydrogen leaks past the rings it gets into the crank case and can cause a really big explosion. I talked to one of my late wife=A2s cousins and he said he and some of his friends got a lawn mower to work on it. I was very surprised at how simple it is and wonder why some one is not really pushing hard for it. The friend is really good at electronics and said it could be done for less than $100. He has a certain amount of BS to him but he is a very smart person. Jim ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Don Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 9:48 PM To: Commander-list@matronics.com Subject: Commander-List: HHO Commanderland; Have any of you been reading or viewing on www.youtube.com anything on the HHO, which is the process of electrolysis to break down water into H & O and feeding it into the air intake. Some make claims of 30% up to several hundred per cent increase in gas mileage including using it on an 18 wheeler to double the mileage. I was talking to my Commander and my Credit Card and both thought it would be a good idea. Has anyone looked into this in the auto industry and other than the FAA, would it work in Commanders, probably take several units. Just thinking out loud. Don - The Commander-List Email Forum - - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS ---> http://forums.matronics.com - List Contribution Web Site - -Matt Dralle, List Admin. " target=_blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List =nofollow>http://forums.matronics.com blank rel=nofollow>http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com 10/8/2008 7:19 PM ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 10:16:10 AM PST US From: John Vormbaum Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO Don, I love your sense of optimism, and yes, things thought impossible have been conquered. But sulfur, Firestone, Edison and carbon didn't violate the First Law of Thermodynamics. The HHO thing is the worst sort of pathological science. You can't generate MORE energy by recombining H & O2 (combusting) than you used when splitting the H2O in the first place. If you had a 100% efficient (as in, no loss to heat or mechanical inefficiency) method of both splitting & recombining them, you'd end up with exactly a net-Zero energy production. I think, if this actually worked, that you could just plug a couple of electrodes into the ocean and turn the world into a small sun, right? Perhaps someone will come up with a nice, simple Cold Fusion powerplant. What ever happened to Fleischmann & Pons anyway? /John Don wrote: > > Chris; > > I have read a great deal of the arguments, and I realize there is no > such thing as 'perpetual motion', this said, I have also read many > things that were quote 'impossible' until, something was changed and > then it worked, Mr. Firestone comes to mind with I believe it was > sulfur, as well as Mr. Edison and carbon. So I usually don't just > 'write something off', just because so far it hasn't worked. I also > read that God probably made the perfect compressed hydrogen, its call > H2O, something like 1,800 to one compressions. I try and keep and open > mind, one day I firmly believe, a revolutionary change will happen to > greatly improve our internal combustions engine. > > No thanks on the 'carbon credits', I can just put the money in the > NYSE, but I prefer gold. > > Don > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris" > To: > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 11:15 AM > Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO > > >> >> Don wrote: >>> >>> Have any of you been reading or viewing on www.youtube.com >>> anything on the HHO, which is the process of >>> electrolysis to break down water into H & O and feeding it into the >>> air intake. >> >> I never cease to be amazed at the number of people who think this will >> work (no personal insult intended Don). >> Let's take as a given that "burning" a fuel releases energy. In a >> piston engine, some of this energy is turned into mechanical motion, but >> a lot is lost to heat. Net loss in the energy conversion - agreed? Now >> we take that mechanical motion and generate electricity. Quite a bit of >> energy lost in that conversion as well. Now we take the electricity and >> via electrolysis, split a molecule. Certainly a net loss of energy >> there as well, not to mention that even a huge electrolysis cell >> generates a tiny amount of hydrogen unless fed *huge* amounts of >> electricity. Next we're going to take that fuel we created by so many >> lossy steps, burn it, and get more energy out than we put into it's >> creation ????? >> >> >> chris >> >> ps: I have some "carbon offsets" I'm willing to sell cheap. I'll take >> $45/flight hour for them. Less than 75 hours available, so get 'em >> quick. >> >> >> >> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com > 7:19 PM > > ________________________________ Message 6 _____________________________________ Time: 11:04:11 AM PST US From: "Robert S. Randazzo" Subject: RE: Commander-List: HHO John- So this extension chord I'm running over to lake tahoe isn't gonna work either????? Robert S. Randazzo N414C -----Original Message----- From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Vormbaum Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 10:16 AM Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO Don, I love your sense of optimism, and yes, things thought impossible have been conquered. But sulfur, Firestone, Edison and carbon didn't violate the First Law of Thermodynamics. The HHO thing is the worst sort of pathological science. You can't generate MORE energy by recombining H & O2 (combusting) than you used when splitting the H2O in the first place. If you had a 100% efficient (as in, no loss to heat or mechanical inefficiency) method of both splitting & recombining them, you'd end up with exactly a net-Zero energy production. I think, if this actually worked, that you could just plug a couple of electrodes into the ocean and turn the world into a small sun, right? Perhaps someone will come up with a nice, simple Cold Fusion powerplant. What ever happened to Fleischmann & Pons anyway? /John Don wrote: > > Chris; > > I have read a great deal of the arguments, and I realize there is no > such thing as 'perpetual motion', this said, I have also read many > things that were quote 'impossible' until, something was changed and > then it worked, Mr. Firestone comes to mind with I believe it was > sulfur, as well as Mr. Edison and carbon. So I usually don't just > 'write something off', just because so far it hasn't worked. I also > read that God probably made the perfect compressed hydrogen, its call > H2O, something like 1,800 to one compressions. I try and keep and open > mind, one day I firmly believe, a revolutionary change will happen to > greatly improve our internal combustions engine. > > No thanks on the 'carbon credits', I can just put the money in the > NYSE, but I prefer gold. > > Don > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris" > To: > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 11:15 AM > Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO > > >> >> Don wrote: >>> >>> Have any of you been reading or viewing on www.youtube.com >>> anything on the HHO, which is the process of >>> electrolysis to break down water into H & O and feeding it into the >>> air intake. >> >> I never cease to be amazed at the number of people who think this will >> work (no personal insult intended Don). >> Let's take as a given that "burning" a fuel releases energy. In a >> piston engine, some of this energy is turned into mechanical motion, but >> a lot is lost to heat. Net loss in the energy conversion - agreed? Now >> we take that mechanical motion and generate electricity. Quite a bit of >> energy lost in that conversion as well. Now we take the electricity and >> via electrolysis, split a molecule. Certainly a net loss of energy >> there as well, not to mention that even a huge electrolysis cell >> generates a tiny amount of hydrogen unless fed *huge* amounts of >> electricity. Next we're going to take that fuel we created by so many >> lossy steps, burn it, and get more energy out than we put into it's >> creation ????? >> >> >> chris >> >> ps: I have some "carbon offsets" I'm willing to sell cheap. I'll take >> $45/flight hour for them. Less than 75 hours available, so get 'em >> quick. >> >> >> >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > > > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com > 7:19 PM > > ________________________________ Message 7 _____________________________________ Time: 11:42:00 AM PST US From: John Vormbaum Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO Sure, but you gotta plug it into a really BIG wall socket. Robert S. Randazzo wrote: > > John- > > So this extension chord I'm running over to lake tahoe isn't gonna work > either????? > > Robert S. Randazzo > N414C > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John > Vormbaum > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 10:16 AM > To: commander-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO > > > Don, > > I love your sense of optimism, and yes, things thought impossible have > been conquered. But sulfur, Firestone, Edison and carbon didn't violate > the First Law of Thermodynamics. The HHO thing is the worst sort of > pathological science. You can't generate MORE energy by recombining H & > O2 (combusting) than you used when splitting the H2O in the first place. > If you had a 100% efficient (as in, no loss to heat or mechanical > inefficiency) method of both splitting & recombining them, you'd end up > with exactly a net-Zero energy production. > > I think, if this actually worked, that you could just plug a couple of > electrodes into the ocean and turn the world into a small sun, right? > > Perhaps someone will come up with a nice, simple Cold Fusion powerplant. > What ever happened to Fleischmann & Pons anyway? > > /John > > Don wrote: > >> >> Chris; >> >> I have read a great deal of the arguments, and I realize there is no >> such thing as 'perpetual motion', this said, I have also read many >> things that were quote 'impossible' until, something was changed and >> then it worked, Mr. Firestone comes to mind with I believe it was >> sulfur, as well as Mr. Edison and carbon. So I usually don't just >> 'write something off', just because so far it hasn't worked. I also >> read that God probably made the perfect compressed hydrogen, its call >> H2O, something like 1,800 to one compressions. I try and keep and open >> mind, one day I firmly believe, a revolutionary change will happen to >> greatly improve our internal combustions engine. >> >> No thanks on the 'carbon credits', I can just put the money in the >> NYSE, but I prefer gold. >> >> Don >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris" >> To: >> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 11:15 AM >> Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO >> >> >> >>> >>> Don wrote: >>> >>>> Have any of you been reading or viewing on www.youtube.com >>>> anything on the HHO, which is the process of >>>> electrolysis to break down water into H & O and feeding it into the >>>> air intake. >>>> >>> I never cease to be amazed at the number of people who think this will >>> work (no personal insult intended Don). >>> Let's take as a given that "burning" a fuel releases energy. In a >>> piston engine, some of this energy is turned into mechanical motion, but >>> a lot is lost to heat. Net loss in the energy conversion - agreed? Now >>> we take that mechanical motion and generate electricity. Quite a bit of >>> energy lost in that conversion as well. Now we take the electricity and >>> via electrolysis, split a molecule. Certainly a net loss of energy >>> there as well, not to mention that even a huge electrolysis cell >>> generates a tiny amount of hydrogen unless fed *huge* amounts of >>> electricity. Next we're going to take that fuel we created by so many >>> lossy steps, burn it, and get more energy out than we put into it's >>> creation ????? >>> >>> >>> chris >>> >>> ps: I have some "carbon offsets" I'm willing to sell cheap. I'll take >>> $45/flight hour for them. Less than 75 hours available, so get 'em >>> quick. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > >> >> >> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com >> 7:19 PM >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 8 _____________________________________ Time: 12:12:08 PM PST US From: Chris Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO John Vormbaum wrote: > > Perhaps someone will come up with a nice, simple Cold Fusion powerplant. John, I purchased the DeLorean used in the movie "Back to the future" off ebay a few years ago. I've since reversed engineered the "Mr. Fusion" module and intend to make the design public very soon. Before I do that, I'm investing heavily in banana peel and empty beer can futures as that's where I think I'll make my millions. I've also broken the 88mph barrier and am now flying my Aztec entirely on half-empty beer cans. The only significant technical issue that I've run into is that I have to drink the first half of the can for it to work right. The eight hour "bottle-to-throttle" rule has significantly impacted my flying unfortunately. I'm trying to get an STC for my new designated autopilot design, but at least one tea-totaling fed at the local FSDO office has been quite opposed to the whole idea. I'm hoping that if I take him out to a topless bar and get him highly intoxicated that he'll be more willing to sign off on the field approval. Always something holding up progress.... Chris ________________________________ Message 9 _____________________________________ Time: 12:32:24 PM PST US From: willis robison Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO Now- now...enough pilot bashing.- I think its cute you know enough thermo to order a latte.- but if you were really good, you'd figure a way to fi le STC's without an act of-Congress. - Yeah we could use more efficient engines.....but what-we really need is a streamlined STC process-to put modern engines on-some great flying (ye t older) air frames.-(and I dont mean turbocharged chevy's) - So....Back to the "COMMANDER' list topics. - - Bud --- On Fri, 10/10/08, Chris wrote: From: Chris Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO John Vormbaum wrote: > > Perhaps someone will come up with a nice, simple Cold Fusion powerplant. John, I purchased the DeLorean used in the movie "Back to the future" off ebay a few years ago. I've since reversed engineered the "Mr. Fusion" module and intend to make the design public very soon. Before I do that, I'm investing heavily in banana peel and empty beer can futures as that's where I think I'll make my millions. I've also broken the 88mph barrier and am now flying my Aztec entirely on half-empty beer cans. The only significant technical issue that I've run into is that I have to drink the first half of the can for it to work right. The eight hour "bottle-to-throttle" rule has significantly impacted my flying unfortunately. I'm trying to get an STC for my new designated autopilot design, but at least one tea-totaling fed at the local FSDO office has been quite opposed to the whole idea. I'm hoping that if I take him out to a topless bar and get him highly intoxicated that he'll be more willing to sign off on the field approval. Always something holding up progress.... Chris =0A=0A=0A ________________________________ Message 10 ____________________________________ Time: 01:16:38 PM PST US From: Chris Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO Don wrote: > I try and keep and open mind, one day I firmly believe, a > revolutionary change will happen to greatly improve our internal > combustions engine. Well Don, I applaud your positive outlook. From a purely scientific perspective, there are very few areas to improve a traditional Otto cycle engine. Even if some new miracle material were to arrive that would allow unlimited temperature operation, basic physics still apply. Small efficiency gains could be had, but there is simply no room for huge improvement. Energy out equals energy in minus losses. As long as the "energy in" part involves oxidation of petroleum products, you are limited by that reaction. Most likely, someone will eventually come up with an efficient means of directly generating electricity from a chemical reaction and the next "great advancement" in transportation will involve electric motors. I'm not aware of any ground-breaking technology in that arena currently under development though. cheers, Chris ________________________________ Message 11 ____________________________________ Time: 01:44:37 PM PST US From: willis robison Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO >From an engineering and Thermodynamics standpoint, the internal combustion engine (at least the Otto Cycle) is pretty maxed out.- For regular piston -gasoline pushrod or overhead cam engines the total efficiency is dictated by the maximum pressure you can obtain.- Lately, higher compression and h igher temperatures have pushed the efficiency to the limits obtainable with current materials (aluminum blocks, nitrided steel cylinders etc).- comp uter control of the mixture took it to another level, but noone will allow a micro controller on an AC without going through an extensive Qual process .- - Newer High Temperature materials may increase this but absolute "e" is stil l = [T(high) - T(low)]/T(low). - Diesel's are less dependent on T(high) but are still dependent on the Max p ressure.- Thats why they are so good at being turbocharged at high altitu de.- Same goes for Brayton cycle engines (jets).- in that case the limi ts are [P(high) - P(low)]P(low).- - Now you know why those old---GSO-480's are still popular.- Lots of juice and still efficient at high altitude if you roll back on the throttles. (bu t who would?) - bud --- On Fri, 10/10/08, Chris wrote: From: Chris Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO Don wrote: > I try and keep and open mind, one day I firmly believe, a > revolutionary change will happen to greatly improve our internal > combustions engine. Well Don, I applaud your positive outlook. From a purely scientific perspective, there are very few areas to improve a traditional Otto cycle engine. Even if some new miracle material were to arrive that would allow unlimited temperature operation, basic physics still apply. Small efficiency gains could be had, but there is simply no room for huge improvement. Energy out equals energy in minus losses. As long as the "energy in" part involves oxidation of petroleum products, you are limited by that reaction. Most likely, someone will eventually come up with an efficient means of directly generating electricity from a chemical reaction and the next "great advancement" in transportation will involve electric motors. I'm not aware of any ground-breaking technology in that arena currently under development though. cheers, Chris =0A=0A=0A ________________________________ Message 12 ____________________________________ Time: 03:32:14 PM PST US From: Chris Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO willis robison wrote: > Now- now...enough pilot bashing. I think its cute you know enough > thermo to order a latte. but if you were really good, you'd figure a > way to file STC's without an act of Congress. > No way I'd ever bash John - he's an old buddy and I'm pretty sure he knows I was just rolling with his humor about cold fusion. I've heard of a drink called a latte, but don't think it's made it to Oklahoma yet, so I'll just stick with the beer. I think it's more likely to perfect cold fusion than streamline STC's....... :-) chris ________________________________ Message 13 ____________________________________ Time: 04:14:18 PM PST US From: John Vormbaum Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO Chris, remember, ANY Delorean will exceed 88mph, IF you have the proper Flux Capacitor and a power source that can generate 1.21 Gigawatts. Chris wrote: > > willis robison wrote: >> Now- now...enough pilot bashing. I think its cute you know enough >> thermo to order a latte. but if you were really good, you'd figure a >> way to file STC's without an act of Congress. >> > > No way I'd ever bash John - he's an old buddy and I'm pretty sure he > knows I was just rolling with his humor about cold fusion. > I've heard of a drink called a latte, but don't think it's made it to > Oklahoma yet, so I'll just stick with the beer. I think it's more > likely to perfect cold fusion than streamline STC's....... > :-) > chris > > > . > ________________________________ Message 14 ____________________________________ Time: 04:23:26 PM PST US From: "Robert S. Randazzo" Subject: RE: Commander-List: HHO John- I have a flux capacitor good to 1.21Gw powering all the electric displays we just put into N414C... I have a spare on the shelf in the hangar just in case we have to send one out for overhaul. You guys can borrow it if I get a ride in the delorean OR the bear-can burning commander. Robert S. Randazzo N414C -----Original Message----- From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Vormbaum Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 4:14 PM Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO Chris, remember, ANY Delorean will exceed 88mph, IF you have the proper Flux Capacitor and a power source that can generate 1.21 Gigawatts. Chris wrote: > > willis robison wrote: >> Now- now...enough pilot bashing. I think its cute you know enough >> thermo to order a latte. but if you were really good, you'd figure a >> way to file STC's without an act of Congress. >> > > No way I'd ever bash John - he's an old buddy and I'm pretty sure he > knows I was just rolling with his humor about cold fusion. > I've heard of a drink called a latte, but don't think it's made it to > Oklahoma yet, so I'll just stick with the beer. I think it's more > likely to perfect cold fusion than streamline STC's....... > :-) > chris > > > . > ________________________________ Message 15 ____________________________________ Time: 04:48:23 PM PST US From: John Vormbaum Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO Deal! Right now the only kind of flying I can do is hangar flying. Makes me want to drink 1.21 Gigabeers and blow my flux into the porcelain capacitor. Luckily I've matured (well, a little) and will instead remain stoic until I have new engines hung on 3CC. /John Robert S. Randazzo wrote: > > John- > > I have a flux capacitor good to 1.21Gw powering all the electric displays we > just put into N414C... I have a spare on the shelf in the hangar just in > case we have to send one out for overhaul. > > You guys can borrow it if I get a ride in the delorean OR the bear-can > burning commander. > > Robert S. Randazzo > N414C > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John > Vormbaum > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 4:14 PM > To: commander-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO > > > Chris, remember, ANY Delorean will exceed 88mph, IF you have the proper > Flux Capacitor and a power source that can generate 1.21 Gigawatts. > > Chris wrote: > >> >> willis robison wrote: >> >>> Now- now...enough pilot bashing. I think its cute you know enough >>> thermo to order a latte. but if you were really good, you'd figure a >>> way to file STC's without an act of Congress. >>> >>> >> No way I'd ever bash John - he's an old buddy and I'm pretty sure he >> knows I was just rolling with his humor about cold fusion. >> I've heard of a drink called a latte, but don't think it's made it to >> Oklahoma yet, so I'll just stick with the beer. I think it's more >> likely to perfect cold fusion than streamline STC's....... >> :-) >> chris >> >> >> >> >> >> . >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 16 ____________________________________ Time: 04:57:02 PM PST US From: "Robert S. Randazzo" Subject: RE: Commander-List: HHO John- How much longer, you think? Rob -----Original Message----- From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John Vormbaum Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 4:48 PM Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO Deal! Right now the only kind of flying I can do is hangar flying. Makes me want to drink 1.21 Gigabeers and blow my flux into the porcelain capacitor. Luckily I've matured (well, a little) and will instead remain stoic until I have new engines hung on 3CC. /John Robert S. Randazzo wrote: > > John- > > I have a flux capacitor good to 1.21Gw powering all the electric displays we > just put into N414C... I have a spare on the shelf in the hangar just in > case we have to send one out for overhaul. > > You guys can borrow it if I get a ride in the delorean OR the bear-can > burning commander. > > Robert S. Randazzo > N414C > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com > [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of John > Vormbaum > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 4:14 PM > To: commander-list@matronics.com > Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO > > > Chris, remember, ANY Delorean will exceed 88mph, IF you have the proper > Flux Capacitor and a power source that can generate 1.21 Gigawatts. > > Chris wrote: > >> >> willis robison wrote: >> >>> Now- now...enough pilot bashing. I think its cute you know enough >>> thermo to order a latte. but if you were really good, you'd figure a >>> way to file STC's without an act of Congress. >>> >>> >> No way I'd ever bash John - he's an old buddy and I'm pretty sure he >> knows I was just rolling with his humor about cold fusion. >> I've heard of a drink called a latte, but don't think it's made it to >> Oklahoma yet, so I'll just stick with the beer. I think it's more >> likely to perfect cold fusion than streamline STC's....... >> :-) >> chris >> >> >> >> >> >> . >> >> > > > ________________________________ Message 17 ____________________________________ Time: 05:01:55 PM PST US From: "Tom Fisher" Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO Back in the early 70's I used to fly John Delorean around in helicopters at his plant in Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada. Tom C-GISS ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Vormbaum" Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 4:14 PM Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO > > Chris, remember, ANY Delorean will exceed 88mph, IF you have the proper > Flux Capacitor and a power source that can generate 1.21 Gigawatts. > > Chris wrote: >> >> willis robison wrote: >>> Now- now...enough pilot bashing. I think its cute you know enough >>> thermo to order a latte. but if you were really good, you'd figure a >>> way to file STC's without an act of Congress. >>> >> >> No way I'd ever bash John - he's an old buddy and I'm pretty sure he >> knows I was just rolling with his humor about cold fusion. >> I've heard of a drink called a latte, but don't think it's made it to >> Oklahoma yet, so I'll just stick with the beer. I think it's more likely >> to perfect cold fusion than streamline STC's....... >> :-) >> chris >> >> >> >> >> >> . >> > > > ________________________________ Message 18 ____________________________________ Time: 05:17:32 PM PST US From: John Vormbaum Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO Cool! In the 80's I imagine he didn't need a helicopter, as he was generally very "high" for most of that decade from what I remember. Tom Fisher wrote: > > > Back in the early 70's I used to fly John Delorean around in > helicopters at his plant in Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada. > Tom > C-GISS > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Vormbaum" > To: > Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 4:14 PM > Subject: Re: Commander-List: HHO > > >> >> Chris, remember, ANY Delorean will exceed 88mph, IF you have the >> proper Flux Capacitor and a power source that can generate 1.21 >> Gigawatts. >> >> Chris wrote: >>> >>> willis robison wrote: >>>> Now- now...enough pilot bashing. I think its cute you know enough >>>> thermo to order a latte. but if you were really good, you'd figure >>>> a way to file STC's without an act of Congress. >>>> >>> >>> No way I'd ever bash John - he's an old buddy and I'm pretty sure he >>> knows I was just rolling with his humor about cold fusion. >>> I've heard of a drink called a latte, but don't think it's made it >>> to Oklahoma yet, so I'll just stick with the beer. I think it's >>> more likely to perfect cold fusion than streamline STC's....... >>> :-) >>> chris >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> . >>> >> >> >> >> >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message commander-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Commander-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/commander-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/commander-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.