David Hingtgen

Whoops, didn't see them there. Luckily I can re-vote (cuz I'm a mod).

Would it have been that hard to offer a few CHOICES? Like I mentioned earlier--how about some of the ones they already give away free with the Arcade system? UNO, Pac-Man, or maybe basic/old yet fun ones like Marble Madness.

I like. Mostly. Front's a lot better than the back. Would like a SIDE view though.

http://gizmodo.com/346462/lego-master-comp...-starship-model

http://kotaku.com/346573/xbla-apology-game...aled-+-undertow The free XBLA game is Undertow. Download it free on Live from Jan 23 to Jan 27. If you already own it, you're supposed to call 1-800MYXBOX for.....something.

meh_cd: My area/theaters too, though we just got Sweeney Todd finally.

The 777 uses cables from the yoke/pedals/throttles to send the signals, the computer interprets the signals and commands the servos/hydraulics. It uses every system in combination. That is technically FBW, but a more mechanical version than most. F-18 is the same I think. Airbus uses electonics for both the signals from the pilots and computer interpretation (same as F-16), while the 787 goes all the way and even has electronic motors and servos instead of hydraulics for the actual movement of the surfaces. Current statement from the AAIB (UK version of NTSB) says the autothrottle commanded a thrust increase and neither engine responded. After several unresponsive commands the pilots took manual control of the throttles and the engines still refused to increase thrust, and the plane basically came down at idle. Don't know why/how electronics went out, 2 idling engines should be more than enough, though maybe it was just the passengers over-reacting to their TV screens shutting off---IFE is the first thing to go of course when the generators can't keep up. Just because you can't watch reruns any more in business class doesn't mean the pilots lost THEIR screens... Pilot's statement is misinterpreted a lot, he said he got no power when he needed it. That is not a LOSS of power, that means NO INCREASE. PS---the plane is so going to be scrapped. I got out my best 777 schematics and the inboard wing is similar to other recent Boeings, 2 of the 3 main wing-to-fuselage attachments are damaged/destroyed on the left (mid attachment has to be deformed/disturbed if not disconnected, aft one totally destroyed), I doubt the right wing fared much better. There is footage of it landing, but I can only find what I believe is the censored version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYwQ4EHQY8Y I doubt the tape actually stopped right there. Liveleak has more footage from a few secs earlier, but it's still just what was shown on broadcast TV.

Red(pink) and gold Movie Starscream's out: http://page.auctions.yahoo.co.jp/jp/auction/109366097 Rare Japanese HD-DVD offer or something. Good luck getting one. Though it'd go well with a Nora...

They could go for "makes sense for continuity" instead of strict established visual canon and it'd work very well I think: Make the Ent look like it actually COULD be fairly easily modified into the movie version through a long refit. (If you've ever seen any of the complaints/comparisons between TOS and TMP Enterprise, you know what I'm talking about)

Another line to cross off your sig list?

Yeah, looks to me to be chrome truck parts, grey robot parts.

I find acrylics to be far better for preventing brush strokes, but it still varies brand-by-brand. I like Pollyscale the best by far followed by Testor's Acryl. Also--thinner's better, but don't go so thin it dries before it self-levels. Tried flow-aid? Hunt it down, it helps. http://www.liquitex.com/Products/addflowaid.cfm Found mine at a Dick Blick, but any art store etc should have it. Works for both brushing and spraying. Does reduce opacity just a tad. But 3 good coats looks a lot better than 2 "ok" coats. SOFT brush. LONG bristles. Minimal strokes (match brush size to area being painted). Assume 10 sec working time.

New Lackey Viper! Awesome.

Try this: http://www.almansur.com/jollyrogers/bravoturkeys.htm In addition to what happened to VF-84 originally: http://www.almansur.com/jollyrogers/vagabondshijacked.htm There's more, but those are among the most detailed. But it won't happen any more. The Navy said "no more" and all names/numbers are forever fixed now. "103", even if it becomes "SVFA-103" in 2042 after being disestablished in 2019 as VFA-103, will forever be known as the Jolly Rogers. And no other squadron will become "103". (Squadrons were renamed and/or renumbered all the time in the 50's and 60's--could get VERY confusing, go read up on VF-211 and VF-24 back then) It's part of the reason the Sundowners are back as VFC-111. PS--what do you mean by "since at the time there was also a exististing VFA-84 hornet outfit, too." There never was a VFA-84. Numbers are unique, regardless of squadron type. If there's a VF-84, then there is no VFA-84, VMFA-84, VA-84, or anything else.

IMHO, if you want more orders, add the other 1/60 valks. YF-19, VF-0, Sv-51, and the upcoming YF-21. There's more than just the VF-1 that suffers from nasty thick Yamato stickers!

Either that, or complete and instant failure of all systems at the same time. Which would be one hell of a bug/glitch in the software. Personally, I think even the most face-saving pilot would admit if he ran out of fuel. It'd come out quickly anyways. Still---ripping the wings open with no fire...

It's getting worse, not better. Live for PC's not working lately. And today, MS Messenger is down.

Oh, well, honestly I have to say, the overall design IS the truck equivalent of ricey, or at the very least "very unusual". Sorry if it was mis-interpreted as saying it's ugly or that I hated it. I don't LIKE it, but it's not awful. It's just "obviously a generic design from some Hollywood guy with no sense of truck paint/design/history". It may even look nice. It's just, "not what any real trucker would ever do". I guess my main complaint is really "it's not very realistic, especially not a good "disguise" for a robot trying to blend in". Since it's so very atypical. (you know I like realistic vehicle modes above all else) But I said that many months ago, and haven't said anything more since.

Best pic of the damage: http://www.flightglobal.com/AirSpace/photo...4/original.aspx The big pale grey vertical piece with ribbing? (just above the rescue vehicle with barricade striping's ladder). That's the connection between the left main gear mount and the rear spar/rear fuselage main frame (I'm unsure of the 777's exact design there). There is probably no stronger piece in a 777. And it's ripped through the wing and is pointing straight up. (it's supposed to be horizontal)

Can't see/tell anything. But I think the font's wrong on the hull! PS---a "make you want to shoot the TV like Elvis" moment I heard/saw very recently on one of the many E!/Access Hollywood etc type shows: "A long time ago, in a galaxy far away---that's right fans, a new Star Trek movie is coming!"

Revoltech Chun-Li, awesome. I just hope she's in scale with the "new standard" Fraulein style body. I don't want to end up with 4 or 5 different scales. Revy should remain the lone "odd scale" one.

I only just found out about the BA 777. Normally everybody tells me, as they all know I'm interested. Current rumor is that it ran out of fuel. Also, the plane is totalled/write-off. First 777 hull loss. But still 0 fatalities. A340 has a similar record, with 3? losses but no fatalities. Newer-design airliners are either lucky, or actually safer in a crash.

From talking to people, it seems they often don't have the slightest clue what their family member does in the armed forces. If they say "I think he's an F-14 pilot for the Thunderbirds in the Marines" it probably actually means they work on torpedo electronics on a submarine in the Navy. It's sad how clueless many people are about the jobs in the military of their closest relatives. Half the time I ask "what branch" and they'll say "oh, Navy or Army, the one with all the guns". Children however, are the exception. If a 12-year-old girl has a dad who's an F-18 pilot, she can probably tell the F-14/15/16/18 apart and know who flies what. My guess--Ranka may suspect something, but only because it was "a valk", not that she noticed what type it was or the squadron markings, etc.

Lean mean grilling machine.

How is the F-35 more modern? Newer, yes, but that doesn't mean more advanced. It's a stripped-down F-22. F-22 has the absolute best of everything. The F-35 has "the best stuff the US is willing to sell to friendly nations". Arguing the F-35 is better due to being a more recent design is like saying a 2008 Ford Taurus is better than a 2005 Lambo Murcielago because it was built a few years later...