SpaceBanter.com - View Single Post

**[email protected]** · July 13th 16, 04:14 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.physics,sci.astro

In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote:
wrote:

In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote:
wrote:

In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote:
wrote:

In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote:
wrote:

In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote:
wrote:

In sci.physics Fred J. McCall wrote:
wrote:

snip

Ford sells the trucks it makes, SpaceX only sells delivery service.

Which is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'.

Correct; selling delivery service is irrelevant to the idea of 'production'.

But producing the ****ing vehicles to perform that service with is
not.

When "producing" is defined in an extremely narrow sense of the word simply
to provoke an argument.

You mean like what you're doing, where you have to narrow the
definition of "produce" to only include things put forward for direct
commercial sale?

Which is the commonly used definition of production when talking about
a company.

Bull****.

Yes, you are full of it.

No, I'm just buried under it from you shoveling so much.

Let me make it clear. Your statement about the "commonly used
definition of production" is incorrect. It is false. It is a lie.

Says you, tosser.

Says pretty much everyone but you, ******. Try buying a dictionary.
Try asking anyone who actually knows what SpaceX and the Falcon
booster are whether SpaceX produces the Falcon booster.

No wonder you know nothing about 14 CFR.

Well hot flash, the aviation regs in the UK are essentially identical
to the US.

--
Jim Pennino