SpyBot Update 03/03/05

"Rick T" wrote in message
...
Shane wrote:
Two here, H.

My hunch is there's nothing to worry about, it's merely annoying.
Depending
on how easily annoyed is one. btw I've been looking at damn Yankee
warbirds
lately. Shame you lot don't still use North American

NARockwellBoeing... you never wondered how a commercial airliner
builder produced the F22 Raptor ? ("hmm lessee, if we streamline the
lounge area can we make Mach2 ?")

Firstly I think of Boeing as being a one-time bomber maker that makes
commercial airliners. And the B-47 stratojet has it's moments. Secondly I
thought the Boeing fighters were a consequence of their buying MD! Thirdly I
did think maybe I ought to specify *old* North American g!


/Vaught

They subcontract stuff. Dunno where the design team went

products. And
how come I can't find any (*any* mind, let alone high res!) shots of
Blue
Angels from the F4 days?

173,000 hits for phantom+blue angels (no hi-res tho)

But pics? Even www.navy.mil only has hornets. Only pics of BA Phantoms I've
found are of a single, static, display aircraft in Germany (and a couple of
non-blue aircraft).


Shane

Shane wrote:
"Rick T" wrote in message
...

Shane wrote:

Two here, H.

My hunch is there's nothing to worry about, it's merely annoying.

Depending

on how easily annoyed is one. btw I've been looking at damn Yankee

warbirds

lately. Shame you lot don't still use North American

NARockwellBoeing... you never wondered how a commercial airliner
builder produced the F22 Raptor ? ("hmm lessee, if we streamline the
lounge area can we make Mach2 ?")


Firstly I think of Boeing as being a one-time bomber maker that makes
commercial airliners. And the B-47 stratojet has it's moments.

as did the 29 & 52... but Boeing made alot more commercial aircraft than
military.

Secondly I
thought the Boeing fighters were a consequence of their buying MD!

F22 development preceded MD acquisition ("google is your friend")...
though I'll grant you it doesn't look particularly NAish.

'k there was a P-26 but that was awhile ago.

Thirdly I
did think maybe I ought to specify *old* North American g!

"new" (post wwII) NA was pretty cool looking, too (X15, F107, F108), I
think the Sabreliner definitely looked like it came from NA.



/Vaught

They subcontract stuff. Dunno where the design team went


products. And
how come I can't find any (*any* mind, let alone high res!) shots of

Blue

Angels from the F4 days?

173,000 hits for phantom+blue angels (no hi-res tho)


But pics? Even www.navy.mil only has hornets. Only pics of BA Phantoms I've
found are of a single, static, display aircraft in Germany (and a couple of
non-blue aircraft).

According to their site, the Blue Angels only had F-4s for a year then
moved to Skyhawks.


Rick




Shane

"Rick T" wrote in message
...
Shane wrote:
"Rick T" wrote in message
...

Shane wrote:

Two here, H.

My hunch is there's nothing to worry about, it's merely annoying.

Depending

on how easily annoyed is one. btw I've been looking at damn Yankee

warbirds

lately. Shame you lot don't still use North American

NARockwellBoeing... you never wondered how a commercial airliner
builder produced the F22 Raptor ? ("hmm lessee, if we streamline the
lounge area can we make Mach2 ?")


Firstly I think of Boeing as being a one-time bomber maker that makes
commercial airliners. And the B-47 stratojet has it's moments.

as did the 29 & 52... but Boeing made alot more commercial aircraft than
military.


afaik Boeing were small potatos before WWII and it's the Fortresses that
made the company what it is today. It was looking at the B-17 at the museum
down the road where I first saw lines of the 737's I spend so much time in
these days, in (big-assed bird!)

Secondly I
thought the Boeing fighters were a consequence of their buying MD!

F22 development preceded MD acquisition ("google is your friend")...
though I'll grant you it doesn't look particularly NAish.

You have to realise, Rick, I'm mostly interested in British stuff and old
stuff. Same with bikes, trains etc etc. Some modern stuff is exciting, but
none of it has a lot of soul. I'm really not going to be googling modern
American jet fighters (and particularly not Boeing when I found they charge
for access to their history galleries! I suppose they need to make up for
losing JSF investment? They've got a lot of cheek! I wouldn't go up in a 737
200 series for love or money!).

Pics of the modern stuff, they're like one of the few air-to-air shots you
can find of the F-100 - in which it's firing a rocket salvo at the ground in
Viet Nam - I can't look at them without feeling like I'm tacitly approving
of a war that actually makes me sick to the back teeth.


'k there was a P-26 but that was awhile ago.

Thirdly I
did think maybe I ought to specify *old* North American g!

"new" (post wwII) NA was pretty cool looking, too (X15, F107, F108), I
think the Sabreliner definitely looked like it came from NA.


Apart from the prop stuff, it's the F-86/F-100 I like. Everything's too
bloody square these days!




/Vaught

They subcontract stuff. Dunno where the design team went


products. And
how come I can't find any (*any* mind, let alone high res!) shots of

Blue

Angels from the F4 days?

173,000 hits for phantom+blue angels (no hi-res tho)


But pics? Even www.navy.mil only has hornets. Only pics of BA Phantoms
I've
found are of a single, static, display aircraft in Germany (and a couple
of
non-blue aircraft).

According to their site, the Blue Angels only had F-4s for a year then
moved to Skyhawks.


I guess they didn't have anyone loved 'em enough to take a decent camera up.

Shane

These: http://www.aviationwallpaper.com/007.htm?


Shane


"Heather" wrote in message
...
Oops....did you want pictures of the F-4 or the Thunderbirds.....misread
this. (rummaging in my pictures.....nah, didn't take any of them....just
our Snowbirds)

Figgs

"Shane" wrote in message
...
Two here, H.

My hunch is there's nothing to worry about, it's merely annoying.
Depending
on how easily annoyed is one. btw I've been looking at damn Yankee
warbirds
lately. Shame you lot don't still use North American/Vaught products.
And
how come I can't find any (*any* mind, let alone high res!) shots of
Blue
Angels from the F4 days?


Shane


"heirloom" wrote in message
...
Hi All,
(disregarding a prior and goodly portion in the rest of this
thread)
The odd part of this scenario is that the number of products, that are
dropped from blocking, seems to differ. Mine symptom is 2, Dan has 3,
Heather has 6. My total number of products is 1988/1986, Dan is
looking
at
2077!, Tom has 1993. Did we all download the same file? In my SB
Updates
folder, the includes.zip file shows to be 564Kb, (577,106 bytes) in
Properties. Certainly hope that we are not looking at something
ill......no
other symptoms, yet.
Heirloom, old and going to make the world
safer
this
weekend

"Dapper Dan" wrote in message
...
Mike
For your guidance only. I also use IMMUNIZE and like other have
reported, I have "2077 bad products already blocked. 3 additional
protections possible". I do the Immunize again (this time using the
green button) and it appears to do so however upon rechecking, I
receive the same message (2077 with 3 additional ).
Hadn't noticed this before, although it's possible that it has been
like this for a while.

Dan

"Mike M" wrote in message
...
I've just installed SpyBot on a virgin Win Me system, updated the
SpyBot
definitions and then immunized the system. 1988 out 1988 are now
blocked.
I wonder what the two are that won't activate on your or Heather's
systems?
--
Mike Maltby MS-MVP



heirloom wrote:

Hey silj,
Something strange is happening with the Spybot. I
immunized
and it reported 1988 products blocked.....but, it you click on
"Check
Again", it tells me only 1986 are blocked, with two disabled. I
run
immunize again and, once again, it informs me 1988 products
blocked........the cycle does repeat itself.
What say you, oh, Spybot guru??

http://www.boeing.com/companyoffices...ages/f4/f4.htm
Hey Shane,
Give the above site a shot........I think you will find all that you
desire.
Heirloom, old and that ought to do it

"Shane" wrote in message
...
Two here, H.

My hunch is there's nothing to worry about, it's merely annoying.
Depending
on how easily annoyed is one. btw I've been looking at damn Yankee
warbirds
lately. Shame you lot don't still use North American/Vaught products. And
how come I can't find any (*any* mind, let alone high res!) shots of Blue
Angels from the F4 days?


Shane


"heirloom" wrote in message
...
Hi All,
(disregarding a prior and goodly portion in the rest of this
thread)
The odd part of this scenario is that the number of products, that are
dropped from blocking, seems to differ. Mine symptom is 2, Dan has 3,
Heather has 6. My total number of products is 1988/1986, Dan is looking
at
2077!, Tom has 1993. Did we all download the same file? In my SB
Updates
folder, the includes.zip file shows to be 564Kb, (577,106 bytes) in
Properties. Certainly hope that we are not looking at something
ill......no
other symptoms, yet.
Heirloom, old and going to make the world safer
this
weekend

"Dapper Dan" wrote in message
...
Mike
For your guidance only. I also use IMMUNIZE and like other have
reported, I have "2077 bad products already blocked. 3 additional
protections possible". I do the Immunize again (this time using the
green button) and it appears to do so however upon rechecking, I
receive the same message (2077 with 3 additional ).
Hadn't noticed this before, although it's possible that it has been
like this for a while.

Dan

"Mike M" wrote in message
...
I've just installed SpyBot on a virgin Win Me system, updated the
SpyBot
definitions and then immunized the system. 1988 out 1988 are now
blocked.
I wonder what the two are that won't activate on your or Heather's
systems?
--
Mike Maltby MS-MVP



heirloom wrote:

Hey silj,
Something strange is happening with the Spybot. I
immunized
and it reported 1988 products blocked.....but, it you click on
"Check
Again", it tells me only 1986 are blocked, with two disabled. I
run
immunize again and, once again, it informs me 1988 products
blocked........the cycle does repeat itself.
What say you, oh, Spybot guru??

Shane wrote:
"Rick T" wrote in message
...

Shane wrote:

"Rick T" wrote in message
...


Shane wrote:


Two here, H.

My hunch is there's nothing to worry about, it's merely annoying.

Depending


on how easily annoyed is one. btw I've been looking at damn Yankee

warbirds


lately. Shame you lot don't still use North American

NARockwellBoeing... you never wondered how a commercial airliner
builder produced the F22 Raptor ? ("hmm lessee, if we streamline the
lounge area can we make Mach2 ?")


Firstly I think of Boeing as being a one-time bomber maker that makes
commercial airliners. And the B-47 stratojet has it's moments.

as did the 29 & 52... but Boeing made alot more commercial aircraft than
military.

afaik Boeing were small potatos before WWII

their model 247 was competition for the dc2/3, p26 was a frontline
fighter... and I think they had a production bomber (not sure).

and it's the Fortresses that
made the company what it is today. It was looking at the B-17 at the museum
down the road where I first saw lines of the 737's I spend so much time in
these days, in (big-assed bird!)


Secondly I
thought the Boeing fighters were a consequence of their buying MD!

F22 development preceded MD acquisition ("google is your friend")...
though I'll grant you it doesn't look particularly NAish.


You have to realise, Rick, I'm mostly interested in British stuff and old
stuff.

mostly ww2 USA stuff here... fair bit of overflow though. That Typhoon
Eurofighter is a bloody neat looking craft and doesn't have the
"designed in cyberspace" look. How's it handle in -40C ?

Last innovative one they made here in the early 60s got brutally axed by
politics.

Same with bikes, trains etc etc. Some modern stuff is exciting, but
none of it has a lot of soul.

yeah, they're all computer-designed , total lack of "graceful".

I'm really not going to be googling modern
American jet fighters (and particularly not Boeing when I found they charge
for access to their history galleries! I suppose they need to make up for
losing JSF investment? They've got a lot of cheek! I wouldn't go up in a 737
200 series for love or money!).

Pics of the modern stuff, they're like one of the few air-to-air shots you
can find of the F-100 - in which it's firing a rocket salvo at the ground in
Viet Nam - I can't look at them without feeling like I'm tacitly approving
of a war that actually makes me sick to the back teeth.

F100s were used for quite awhile by the USAF aerobatics team (golden
eagles?) but their paint scheme's different (silver with black/white/red
accents). I don't think many Supersabres made it into Vietnam. (bit of a
brainsplit here... we had homegrown cf100s)



'k there was a P-26 but that was awhile ago.


Thirdly I
did think maybe I ought to specify *old* North American g!

"new" (post wwII) NA was pretty cool looking, too (X15, F107, F108), I
think the Sabreliner definitely looked like it came from NA.



Apart from the prop stuff, it's the F-86/F-100 I like. Everything's too
bloody square these days!

I think most was all Kirnberger(sp?) inspired, like the Skunkworks was
Kelly.

Me, I like most everything old with a DH tag these days.





/Vaught

They subcontract stuff. Dunno where the design team went



products. And
how come I can't find any (*any* mind, let alone high res!) shots of

Blue


Angels from the F4 days?

173,000 hits for phantom+blue angels (no hi-res tho)


But pics? Even www.navy.mil only has hornets. Only pics of BA Phantoms

I've

found are of a single, static, display aircraft in Germany (and a couple

of

non-blue aircraft).

According to their site, the Blue Angels only had F-4s for a year then
moved to Skyhawks.



I guess they didn't have anyone loved 'em enough to take a decent camera up.

well the f4s were primarily land-based fighters whereas a4s were
designed as navy jets... maybe a bit of politics in there. Or maybe the
F4 has the "viet nam stigma" since that's the time period when it
reigned the skies.


Rick

Shane