1. DDz Quorum DD_Fenrir Posted October 26, 2010 1. DDz Quorum Posted October 26, 2010 A unique screenie from tonight's gathering, winning caption gets an inflatable dart board! X Quote
1. DDz Quorum Pooka Posted October 26, 2010 1. DDz Quorum Posted October 26, 2010 Some swabbie will be busy scraping off that warning. Pooka Quote
Cold_Gambler Posted October 27, 2010 Posted October 27, 2010 "Spinning Propellers" are the least of our concerns... Quote
GreyKnight Posted October 27, 2010 Posted October 27, 2010 Deck Gunner - "I see the 3 stooges made it back this time." Quote
1. DDz Quorum Painless Posted October 27, 2010 1. DDz Quorum Posted October 27, 2010 ~S~ "One flash of her shapely underside and the gentlemen aeroplanes lost it " ~S~ P. Quote
T_O_A_D Posted October 28, 2010 Posted October 28, 2010 You put your big nose in, You fold your big wings back, You flip your plane about, You do the Hokey Pokey, and you turn your self around That's whats its all about. Quote
Kimosabi Posted October 28, 2010 Posted October 28, 2010 "My loneliness, is killing mee *aand IIII*. I must confess, I still believe *still believe*, when I'm not with you I lose my mind, give me a siiiign, Hit me baby, one more time!" Quote
Pappy Posted October 30, 2010 Posted October 30, 2010 "Fighter group to Tower, we are unfamiliar with the area... Request direction to the airport" Quote
Sweper Posted October 30, 2010 Posted October 30, 2010 You picki´n guys. Btw, I think it is me in flames behind the artillery Quote
Jediteo Posted October 30, 2010 Posted October 30, 2010 The dichotomy presented here concerning the landings begs the question what can be defined as a a landing. Surely the stationary propellers of the landed aircraft indicates a landed aircraft, as proposed by the warning written on the ship itself. The juxtaposition of which lends it self to a slight tang of sarcastic comedy to an otherwise stressful situation. Concerning the duality of what can be considered a landing, one can only surmise that the aircraft cannot be fully determined. This state of rest can be compared to Schrödinger Hellcat, where a plane can both be seen as crashed or landed until observed. Ergo, one can suggest that the three aircraft detailed above can both be described as landed and crashed, as neither definition is sufficient to fully describe the state of the vehicles nor completely exclude them from the two possible explanations. However, if we add non-positivist material into the study, the adage "any landing you walk away from" lends itself to label these wrecked aircraft as landings, however, such non-empirical methodology can easily lead to conjecture based solely on personal observation. This would bring the above picture into the field of art, as a sufficent depth in personal reaction could be invoked into inner meanings of the picture. However, that is beyond the scope of this enquiry, and will not be dwelled upon further. In conclusion, the plane cannot be truly determined by the term described above, and a new form of attribute is required to be assigned to the state of flight presented above. And yes, Jedi is very bored. Quote
Shadrach Posted October 30, 2010 Posted October 30, 2010 That reads like one of Mrs Shadrachs shopping lists. Quote
1. DDz Quorum Friar Posted October 30, 2010 1. DDz Quorum Posted October 30, 2010 @Jedi - LOL! Excellent post from the home of all knowledge on the net - jedipedia!. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.