Challenger Salvage Chief Conceded Fireball Crossing

[John Maxson]

In late October 1987, AF Col. Ed O'Connor (who directed the
51-L debris recovery) confirmed an in-cloud booster crossing.

===========================================
DANIEL MAXSON: Do the SRBs -- or did they -- cross in
the clouds?
COL. ED O'CONNOR: Ya, the feeling is they did. What
happened is when the aft fixture failed, that SRB rotated out.
So that's why the thrust would force it to *cross* -- after the
*forward* section failed -- cross the path of the other which
was still *attached*!
DANIEL MAXSON: Ya but -- but they were held *together*.
I was told by a NASA expert the SRBs were held together by a
big *ring* of the thrust structure of the external tank. Otherwise
they would have immediately exited the cloud. And that they
went maybe a half-second held together by some kind of an ET
*ring* frame.
COL. ED O'CONNOR: Well, there's *two* things that holds it
together. At the *rear* there's a heavy ring for attachment, and
that's where the *failure* occurred, heating one of those struts
that holds them together and then *ripping* the rest of it out. In
the *top* structure, there's a thrust *beam* that goes through
the intertank area. There's some *ancillary* stuff there. The
forward *held* for a little bit.
DANIEL MAXSON: And it allowed them to cross.
COL. ED O'CONNOR: Ya.
DANIEL MAXSON: Okay.
===========================================

[Given probable cause, a federal judge can order an 'in camera'
inspection of classified (in this case SENSITIVE) film data.]

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)

[Jon Berndt]

A little birdie told me about this:

"John Maxson" > wrote in message

> In late October 1987, AF Col. Ed O'Connor (who directed the
> 51-L debris recovery) confirmed an in-cloud booster crossing.

> COL. ED O'CONNOR: Ya, the feeling is they did. What

"the *feeling* is they did."

Wow. What a ringing endorsement from the salvage chief.

> happened is when the aft fixture failed, that SRB rotated out.

But, *you* wrote that the left SRB tail dropped - due to gravity as you
described. He says they went "out". If they went out, how would they have
rolled the vehicle?

> COL. ED O'CONNOR: Well, there's *two* things that holds it
> together. At the *rear* there's a heavy ring for attachment, and
> that's where the *failure* occurred, heating one of those struts
> that holds them together and then *ripping* the rest of it out.

So ... what was it that "heated" the strut to the point where it failed? An
SRB breech, perhaps? Yes, and we can see the plume from that "blowtorch"
that failed the strut, as he says. Gee, where did that plume go to?

Yet another selective use of a misintepreted quote by an authority who may
be stepping out of his area of expertise.

What's next John? I can see it now:

"Titusville Piggly Wiggly Head Cashier admits RCS firings on ascent."
"KSC's Cafeteria Master Chef Breaks Silence, Reveals He Cooked up O-Ring
Idea."

[Brian Gaff]

I should learn not to read news and eat at the same time. Thanks for a touch
of the absurd that appeals to my sense of humour, and apologies if it was
in bad taste considering the incidents involved.

Brian

--
Brian Gaff....
graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them
Email:
__________________________________________________ __________________________
__________________________________





---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.502 / Virus Database: 300 - Release Date: 18/07/03

[John Maxson]

What you and Lockheed intend to do, Berndt, is attempt
to discredit *any* authority who argues or witnesses in
*any* way against Rogers' O-ring decree.

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)


Jon Berndt > wrote in message
...
>
> Yet another selective use of a misintepreted quote by an
> authority who may be stepping out of his area of expertise.

[Jon Berndt]

"John Maxson" > wrote in message

> What you and Lockheed intend to do, Berndt, is attempt
> to discredit *any* authority who argues or witnesses in
> *any* way against Rogers' O-ring decree.

As you know, I speak for myself alone. I don't intend to discredit anyone.
You've discredited yourself. As for your hypothesis, it's also already been
discredited, ad nausuem.

[Jon Berndt]

"Brian Gaff" > wrote in message

> I should learn not to read news and eat at the same time. Thanks for a
touch
> of the absurd that appeals to my sense of humour, and apologies if it was
> in bad taste considering the incidents involved.
>
> Brian

There is, of course, no humor in the accident, but there periodically is in
watching John Maxson's quest for legitimacy and vindication for his
hypotheses*.

Note: My use of hypothesis comes from Marriam Webster (www.m-w.com):

HYPOTHESIS implies insufficient evidence to provide more than a tentative
explanation <a hypothesis explaining the extinction of the dinosaurs>.
THEORY implies a greater range of evidence and greater likelihood of truth
<the theory of evolution>.
LAW implies a statement of order and relation in nature that has been found
to be invariable under the same conditions <the law of gravitation>.

Jon

-- of course I speak only for myself.

[John Maxson]

Jon Berndt > wrote in message
...
> "John Maxson" > wrote in message
>
> > What you and Lockheed intend to do, Berndt, is attempt
> > to discredit *any* authority who argues or witnesses in
> > *any* way against Rogers' O-ring decree.
>
> As you know, I speak for myself alone. I don't intend to
> discredit anyone.

Nevertheless, the world knows that you just *did* -- *again*!
I repeat, with no uneasiness whatsoever, that you are a liar.

You clearly are as badly burnt to a crisp and as out of whack
in your unfounded allegations as your highly-touted but plainly
worthless efforts to kill-file yourself from the engineering truth.

You are as blind as a bat; you are battier than a bat, and like a
bat, you fly off haphazardly at night looking for bugs to convert
to hermetically-sealed guana (like the bugs in your sim programs).

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)

[LooseChanj]

On or about Tue, 22 Jul 2003 23:48:31 -0500, Jon Berndt >
made the sensational claim that:
> What's next John? I can see it now:
>
> "Titusville Piggly Wiggly Head Cashier admits RCS firings on ascent."

Titusville doesn't have a Piggly Wiggly. Not that that would stop Maxson
from making the statement anyhow.
--
This is a siggy | To E-mail, do note | This space is for rent
It's properly formatted | who you mean to reply-to | Inquire within if you
No person, none, care | and it will reach me | Would like your ad here

[John Maxson]

If you had no need for your quest for legitimacy, you
could have pointed to a NASA disproof of the fireball
crossing in January 2001 (or in January 1986 or 1987).

You could not then, and you cannot now. You (like Dan)
must constantly resort to admonitions of "stay tuned,"
even in the face of facts conclusively proving you both
(like NASA and Lockheed) to be 51-L frauds.

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)


Jon Berndt > wrote in message
...
>
> There is, of course, no humor in the accident, but there
> periodically is in watching John Maxson's quest for
> legitimacy and vindication for his hypotheses*.

[Jon Berndt]

"LooseChanj" > wrote in message news:y7wTa.6332

> > What's next John? I can see it now:
> >
> > "Titusville Piggly Wiggly Head Cashier admits RCS firings on ascent."
>
> Titusville doesn't have a Piggly Wiggly. Not that that would stop Maxson
> from making the statement anyhow.

It actually might make it _more_ likely - you couldn't trace it.

[John Maxson]

Jon Berndt > wrote in message
...
> "LooseChanj" >
> wrote in message news:y7wTa.6332
> > Jon Berndt wrote:
>
> > > What's next John? I can see it now:
> > >
> > > "Titusville Piggly Wiggly Head Cashier admits RCS
> > > firings on ascent."
> >
> > Titusville doesn't have a Piggly Wiggly. Not that that
> > would stop Maxson from making the statement anyhow.
>
> It actually might make it _more_ likely - you couldn't trace it.

This defamation is from the keyboard of Jon Berndt (out),
an avid user of 'X-No-Archive: yes.'

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)

[Terrence Daniels]

"Jon Berndt" > wrote in message
...
> What's next John? I can see it now:
>
> "Titusville Piggly Wiggly Head Cashier admits RCS firings on ascent."

"Rolling On The Floor Laughing"

BTW John, sorry to be a pain-in-the-butt nitpicker but it's been driving me
nuts:

Breech: Part of the gun that holds the cartridge & does the firing
Breach: Hole or break in something. < This is the one for SRB discussions

Oh, and: "John S. Berndt's abuse is hosted by hal-pc dot org", just in case
JTM forgets. ;)

[John Maxson]

Terrence Daniels > wrote
in message thlink.net...
>
> "Rolling On The Floor Laughing"

If O'Connor didn't know what he was looking for, he
shouldn't have been looking. Laugh that one off.

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)

[John Maxson]

Your message has no future; try mine: http://tinyurl.com/h874 .

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)



OM <om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_research _facility.org>
wrote in message ...
>
> ...You mean like how John Maxson manages to stay sane for half
> of one post, usually at the start of a troll thread he creates?
>
> ...I just had a really hilarious thought: Bob representing the
> Maxsons. Talk about the damned leading the damned!
>
>
> OM
>
> --
>
> "No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
> his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
> poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society
>
> - General George S. Patton, Jr

[Jon Berndt]

"Terrence Daniels" >

> > "Titusville Piggly Wiggly Head Cashier admits RCS firings on ascent."
>
> "Rolling On The Floor Laughing"
>
> BTW John, sorry to be a pain-in-the-butt nitpicker but it's been driving
me
> nuts:
>
> Breech: Part of the gun that holds the cartridge & does the firing
> Breach: Hole or break in something. < This is the one for SRB
discussions

You are absolutely right! Thanks.

Jon

[Charleston]

"John Maxson" > wrote in message
...

> In late October 1987, AF Col. Ed O'Connor (who directed the
> 51-L debris recovery) confirmed an in-cloud booster crossing.

I did speak with Colonel O' Connor, three time in 1986, and zero times in
1987. In fact I did not speak with the good Colonel again until June 1996,
FWIW. The conversation below appears to be yours. I vividly recall you
telling me all about that phone call. Check your notes. The NASA expert to
whom you refer is in fact Sam Beddingfield. It was Sam, who told you that
there is no SRB thrust (cross beam) running between the two SRBs. Only
after I showed you a NASA diagram clearly showing that beam, did you concede
that Sam was wrong. This is not the first time you have gotten the
important facts wrong. Shall I quote you?

> ===========================================
> DANIEL MAXSON: Do the SRBs -- or did they -- cross in
> the clouds?
> COL. ED O'CONNOR: Ya, the feeling is they did. What
> happened is when the aft fixture failed, that SRB rotated out.
> So that's why the thrust would force it to *cross* -- after the
> *forward* section failed -- cross the path of the other which
> was still *attached*!
> DANIEL MAXSON: Ya but -- but they were held *together*.
> I was told by a NASA expert the SRBs were held together by a
> big *ring* of the thrust structure of the external tank. Otherwise
> they would have immediately exited the cloud. And that they
> went maybe a half-second held together by some kind of an ET
> *ring* frame.
> COL. ED O'CONNOR: Well, there's *two* things that holds it
> together. At the *rear* there's a heavy ring for attachment, and
> that's where the *failure* occurred, heating one of those struts
> that holds them together and then *ripping* the rest of it out. In
> the *top* structure, there's a thrust *beam* that goes through
> the intertank area. There's some *ancillary* stuff there. The
> forward *held* for a little bit.
> DANIEL MAXSON: And it allowed them to cross.
> COL. ED O'CONNOR: Ya.
> DANIEL MAXSON: Okay.
> ===========================================

--

Daniel
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC

[Charleston]

--

Daniel
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC
"John Maxson" > wrote in message
...
> If you had no need for your quest for legitimacy, you
> could have pointed to a NASA disproof of the fireball
> crossing in January 2001 (or in January 1986 or 1987).
>
> You could not then, and you cannot now. You (like Dan)
> must constantly resort to admonitions of "stay tuned,"
> even in the face of facts conclusively proving you both
> (like NASA and Lockheed) to be 51-L frauds.
>
> --
> John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
> Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)
>
>
> Jon Berndt > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > There is, of course, no humor in the accident, but there
> > periodically is in watching John Maxson's quest for
> > legitimacy and vindication for his hypotheses*.
>
>

[Charleston]

"Charleston" > wrote in message
news:gWKTa.30591$zy.6976@fed1read06...

Oops. Sorry about that, but stay tuned.

> "John Maxson" > wrote in message
> ...
> > If you had no need for your quest for legitimacy, you
> > could have pointed to a NASA disproof of the fireball
> > crossing in January 2001 (or in January 1986 or 1987).


--

Daniel
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC

[John Maxson]

Charleston >
wrote in message news:D1KTa.30050$zy.946@fed1read06...
> "John Maxson" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > In late October 1987, AF Col. Ed O'Connor (who directed the
> > 51-L debris recovery) confirmed an in-cloud booster crossing.
>
> I did speak with Colonel O' Connor, three time in 1986, and zero times in
> 1987. In fact I did not speak with the good Colonel again until June
1996,
> FWIW. The conversation below appears to be yours. I vividly recall you
> telling me all about that phone call. Check your notes.

You must be in this real deep, trying to bald-face lie your way out
of your conversation with Ed in October 1987. You are a fraud.

> The NASA expert to whom you refer is in fact Sam Beddingfield.
> It was Sam, who told you that there is no SRB thrust (cross beam)
> running between the two SRBs. Only after I showed you a NASA
> diagram clearly showing that beam, did you concede that Sam was
> wrong.

This is a pack of lies. You've reached the bottom of the barrel.

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)

[Jon Berndt]

"John Maxson" > wrote in message

> > "Rolling On The Floor Laughing"
>
> If O'Connor didn't know what he was looking for, he
> shouldn't have been looking. Laugh that one off.
>
> John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)

O'Connor sure knew where the right SRB *landed*. And he knew how to
identify a right SRB from a left one:

--- start ---
COLONEL O'CONNOR: ...

It is a confirmed aft segment component. It is a confirmed ET attach
portion. The external surface is darkened and blistered. The ET attach stud
hole spacing and deformation is consistent with this case segment being from
a 90 to 180 degree quadrant on a segment.

It is most probably a right SRB component. Because of the lack of any
identification number or anything that can definitely tie it to the right
SRB, we have to qualify it being right at this time. We are continuing the
evaluation at this time. We brought other engineers in. We have been
reviewing the other stacked SRB's at the Cape, looking for other identifying
features.

CHAIRMAN ROGERS: Why would you say «most probably» if you don't know which
it is?

COLONEL O'CONNOR: Looking at the propellant depth, the inhibitor shape, we
have about 20, possibly 25, inferential characteristics would say it is the
right SRB. We have nothing that would point it toward being the left SRB.

But we don't have that crisp nice part number stamped on the side that would
let us really track it down and say for sure.

CHAIRMAN ROGERS: Thank you.

--- end ---

[Jon Berndt]

"John Maxson" > wrote in message news:bfok00
>
> You must be in this real deep, trying to bald-face lie your way out
> of your conversation with Ed in October 1987. You are a fraud.
>
> This is a pack of lies. You've reached the bottom of the barrel.
>
> John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)

Like I said, boy are you in for a surprise. Until then (various permissions
obtained, etc.) you might want to refrain from labeling anyone else as a
"fraud".

I've let you out of the killfile for a very good reason.

Jon

[John Maxson]

Jon Berndt > wrote in message
...
>
> O'Connor sure knew where the right SRB *landed*.

Prove it. You'll find the "location" suddenly *changed*.

> And he knew how to identify a right SRB from a left one:
>
> --- start ---
> COLONEL O'CONNOR: ...
>
> It is a confirmed aft segment component. It is a confirmed ET attach
> portion. The external surface is darkened and blistered. The ET attach
stud
> hole spacing and deformation is consistent with this case segment being
from
> a 90 to 180 degree quadrant on a segment.
>
> It is most probably a right SRB component. Because of the lack of any
> identification number or anything that can definitely tie it to the right
> SRB, we have to qualify it being right at this time. We are continuing the
> evaluation at this time. We brought other engineers in. We have been
> reviewing the other stacked SRB's at the Cape, looking for other
identifying
> features.
>
> CHAIRMAN ROGERS: Why would you say «most probably» if you don't know which
> it is?
>
> COLONEL O'CONNOR: Looking at the propellant depth, the inhibitor shape, we
> have about 20, possibly 25, inferential characteristics would say it is
the
> right SRB. We have nothing that would point it toward being the left SRB.
>
> But we don't have that crisp nice part number stamped on the side that
would
> let us really track it down and say for sure.
>
> CHAIRMAN ROGERS: Thank you.
>
> --- end ---

Nevertheless, when you go look at what O'Connor ultimately
used to identify that piece as right SRB, you will find that
exactly *none* of those "about 20, possibly 25, inferential
characteristics" were used for the final identification. It was
wholly dependent upon just two Thiokol "hole shims," as
I've said here so many times before. It was very ambiguous!

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)

[Charleston]

"John Maxson" > wrote in message
...

> You must be in this real deep, trying to bald-face lie your way out
> of your conversation with Ed in October 1987. You are a fraud....

I don't have time now, but I have a few of your posts over the past several
months which will clarify what you have claimed versus what is true. You
are very good at name calling. It's a shame you are not better at
identifying facts when you see them. I notice you had no quotes ""
bracketing what you allege I said. Slippery.

> This is a pack of lies. You've reached the bottom of the barrel.

Speaking of density...

--

Daniel
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC

[John Maxson]

I'm getting a little sick of your conspiratorial threats, as
well as your know it all attitude about Mission 51-L.

You act as if you were born before I was. Those two
pieces of aft SRB debris you're harping on now don't
match, and you can't *make* them match! They were
obtained *after* the Air Force destroyed the boosters.
You are not expert enough to determine how much of
the damage sustained was due to RSD.

If you are ignorant enough to think you can convince
readers that you can "let me out" of some box you keep
me confined in, you need plenty of help. I post freely
and independently of your imagined constraints.

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)


Jon Berndt > wrote in message
...
> "John Maxson" >
> wrote in message news:bfok00
> >
> > You must be in this real deep, trying to bald-face lie your way out
> > of your conversation with Ed in October 1987. You are a fraud.
> >
> > This is a pack of lies. You've reached the bottom of the barrel.
>
> Like I said, boy are you in for a surprise. Until then (various
> permissions obtained, etc.) you might want to refrain from
> labeling anyone else as a "fraud".
>
> I've let you out of the killfile for a very good reason.
>
> Jon

[Jon Berndt]

"John Maxson" > wrote in message

> I'm getting a little sick of your conspiratorial threats, as
> well as your know it all attitude about Mission 51-L.


You have for a long time posted quotes here from others in apparent support
of your hypothesis. You have also quoted people in your book. What I am
finding out explains a lot.

For now, let's just say that not all of the people you have mentioned over
the years in purported support of you are inaccessible. And, further, let's
say that there's more to the story than what you are giving us.

> You act as if you were born before I was. Those two
> pieces of aft SRB debris you're harping on now don't
> match, and you can't *make* them match! They were
> obtained *after* the Air Force destroyed the boosters.
> You are not expert enough to determine how much of
> the damage sustained was due to RSD.

I won't argue with you there. That's not my point. I do know what went
into the fireball, and what came out. Enough said for now.

You're in for a surprise.

Jon

[John Maxson]

More idle threats and intimidation from the cream-puff
biologist turned aerospace expert and 51-L authority.

Surely you think you are old enough to be my father,
from the sound of your relentless efforts to discredit,
defame, and libel me for trying to stop the 51-L launch.

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)



Charleston > wrote
in message news:SnRTa.33478$zy.2094@fed1read06...
> "John Maxson" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> > You must be in this real deep, trying to bald-face lie your way out
> > of your conversation with Ed in October 1987. You are a fraud....
>
> I don't have time now, but I have a few of your posts over the past
several
> months which will clarify what you have claimed versus what is true. You
> are very good at name calling. It's a shame you are not better at
> identifying facts when you see them. I notice you had no quotes ""
> bracketing what you allege I said. Slippery.

[John Maxson]

Jon Berndt > wrote in message
...
>
> You have for a long time posted quotes here from others in
> apparent support of your hypothesis.

Wrong! I have posted quotes, but not in support of what you
libelously try to twist into "hypothesis."

> You have also quoted people in your book.

Most authors do, when their books are historical.

> What I am finding out explains a lot.

That's what the crystal ball gazers and oiigi-board swamis say.

> For now, let's just say that not all of the people you have
> mentioned over the years in purported support of you are
> inaccessible.

I certainly hope not!

> And, further, let's say that there's more to the story than
> what you are giving us.

What story, yours? I've always said my book is condensed.

> I do know what went into the fireball, and what came out.

I seriously doubt that. I doubt if anyone does.

> Enough said for now.

More than enough, from you. Even when you're trying to
be intimidating, you're pathetically redundant and boring.

> You're in for a surprise.

The Challenger catastrophe didn't surprise me, but it shook
the world. You and Dan are very sick little puppies. Save
your intimidation for people like Mosley and Balettie. I'm
sick of your conspiratorial threats, defamation, and libel.

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)

[Terrence Daniels]

"Jon Berndt" > wrote in message
...
> "John Maxson" > wrote in message
>
> > > "Rolling On The Floor Laughing"
> >
> > If O'Connor didn't know what he was looking for, he
> > shouldn't have been looking. Laugh that one off.
> >
> > John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)

This'll be an exercise in futility, addressing you directly again, but I
guess I'm a sap.

News flash: You know there are REAL problems out there that need to be
solved at NASA? Take a look at how your recent threads contrast with what's
being discussed now at the top of the group. Think hard.

That is all.

Terrence Adam Daniels, Art Student (And future Fine Wine Store Employee)

P.S. My abuse is hosted by earthlink.net, I've got nothing to hide.

[John Maxson]

Think hard about the contrast, yourself, Van Gogh. Can't you
stand the truth? With your attitude, why do you read my posts?

The Ham scam is little more than a rerun of the Mulloy gambit.
Without positive proof of cause, Oberg and company are just
so much hot air. Get a non-partisan investigation by Congress.

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)


Terrence Daniels > wrote
in message arthlink.net...
>
> This'll be an exercise in futility, addressing you directly again, but I
> guess I'm a sap.
>
> News flash: You know there are REAL problems out there that need to be
> solved at NASA? Take a look at how your recent threads contrast with
what's
> being discussed now at the top of the group. Think hard.
>
> That is all.
>
> Terrence Adam Daniels, Art Student (And future Fine Wine Store Employee)

[John Maxson]

Bob Mosley posts his constant abuse via Giganews.

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)



OM <om@our_blessed_lady_mary_of_the_holy_NASA_research _facility.org>
wrote in message ...
> ...Someone passed this on to me in e-mail this morning, and I simply
> *had* to respond to what has to be the biggest foot John's put in his
> mouth so far:
>
> "John Maxson, Usenet Troll" > babbled:
>
> > I'm getting a little sick of your conspiratorial threats, as
> > well as your know it all attitude about Mission 51-L.
>
> ...Pot. Kettle. Maxson.
>
> "We now return John Maxson back to Killfile Hell, where the tortures
> of the damned are already in eternal progress..."
>
>
> OM
>
> --
>
> "No ******* ever won a war by dying for | http://www.io.com/~o_m
> his country. He won it by making the other | Sergeant-At-Arms
> poor dumb ******* die for his country." | Human O-Ring Society
>
> - General George S. Patton, Jr

[John Maxson]

Jon Berndt > wrote in message
...
>
> O'Connor sure knew where the right SRB *landed*. And
> he knew how to identify a right SRB from a left one:

Oh, well then, where did he mention the key, black ID band?

It's rather obvious, Jon, that you've jumped out of your
bunker due to shock from O'Connor's concession that the
51-L boosters crossed in the fireball.

It's equally obvious that you've started this new thread as
a defensive measure, to distract from his concession. So
explain why O'Connor didn't *quickly locate* and then
*recover* the all important pieces with the black ID band.

--
John Thomas Maxson, Retired Engineer (Aerospace)
Author, The Betrayal of Mission 51-L (www.mission51l.com)

[Charleston]

"John Maxson" > wrote in message
...
> Think hard about the contrast, yourself, Van Gogh. Can't you
> stand the truth? With your attitude, why do you read my posts?
>
> Get a non-partisan investigation by Congress.

LOLBHI.

--

Daniel
Mount Charleston, not Charleston, SC