 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / RVs / December 2006Cummins Lift Pump Early Warning Problem with ULSD
Uh oh. <http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/18714819/srt/pa/pging/1/ page/1.cfm> or http://preview.tinyurl.com/vaow7 > http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/18714819/srt/pa/p > ging/1/page/1.cfm Too bad there's no way to make those @#$%^&* tree-huggers pay for the replacement. If they want to cause engine damage then they should pay for not only the parts and labor but the downtime as well. $1,000/hour [$24,000/day] for downtime while waiting for repairs to be complete would be about right. The bill could be split between the Sierra Club and the DNC. Of course, it's a similar situation to that with televisions that won't be able to receive any signals once the mandated switch-over to HD-only transmission: it'll be up to the consumer to pay for either a new TV or an add-on tuner. The honorable thing would be for the Networks to provide either the tuner/converter boxes or replacement wide-screen HDTVs that provide the same image height as the existing TVs.  SignatureQuotation from the Graphic Queer: "I have always advocated the death of the human being and I see that I was right all along. This earth will be so much better off once we are no longer part of the mix." >Of course, it's a similar situation to that with televisions that won't be >able to receive any signals once the mandated switch-over to HD-only >transmission Hard to be similar, when there is NO mandated switch-over to HD (only or otherwise). None planned, either. SignatureDon Bradner donb (not don) at arcatapet dot com www.arcatapet.net >>Of course, it's a similar situation to that with televisions that won't be >>able to receive any signals once the mandated switch-over to HD-only >>transmission > > Hard to be similar, when there is NO mandated switch-over to HD (only > or otherwise). None planned, either. You might wish to revise that statement, Don, since (1.) every electronics outlet has signs up stating that, by Federal Law, no NTSC equipment is to be sold after 12/31/2007 or 2008 and (2.) the broadcasting of NTSC signals is to terminate soon thereafter according to the FCC. While there were, a couple of years ago, proposals of inexpensive [<$50] set-top boxes to be supplied, that movement seems to have died off. The "push" to HDTV serves 2 purposes: 1. The "freeing up" of significant broadcast bandwidth, especially in the VHF range. 2. The TV manufacturers/importers/sellers get to sell a LOT of new TV sets. Broadcasters in many areas have already begun to "simulcast" on both NTSC and HD and have already announced their intended compliance with the mandated HD-only transmission per FCC timeframe. > The "push" to HDTV serves 2 purposes: > 1. The "freeing up" of significant broadcast bandwidth, especially in the VHF range. > 2. The TV manufacturers/importers/sellers get to sell a LOT of new TV sets. > > Broadcasters in many areas have already begun to "simulcast" on both NTSC and HD and have already announced their intended compliance with the mandated HD-only transmission per FCC timeframe. And 3. A large black market for TV output cards will pop up so people can use big (now free because they're otherwise useless) TVs as computer monitors. And by "people", I mean "me"... Right, I better get on that TV output card soon. .. > You might wish to revise that statement, Don, since (1.) every electronics > outlet has signs up stating that, by Federal Law, no NTSC equipment is to be > sold after 12/31/2007 or 2008 and (2.) the broadcasting of NTSC signals is to > terminate soon thereafter according to the FCC. rare for Don to be wrong on a technical issue, but you are right and he is wrong Signature-------------------------------------------------------- Personal e-mail is the n7bsn but at amsat.org This posting address is a spam-trap and seldom read RV and Camping FAQ can be found at http://www.ralphandellen.us/rv > .. > > You might wish to revise that statement, Don, since (1.) every electronics [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > RV and Camping FAQ can be found at > http://www.ralphandellen.us/rv Switch over is slated for 2009.... > >>Of course, it's a similar situation to that with televisions that won't be > >>able to receive any signals once the mandated switch-over to HD-only [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Broadcasters in many areas have already begun to "simulcast" on both NTSC and HD and have already announced their intended compliance with the mandated HD-only transmission per FCC timeframe. The HD-only requirement is a myth. The law requires only digital transmission and makes no reference to the resolution of the signal. Therefore, SD will continue to be broadcast as long as the transmitting station wishes to do so. I do expect set-top boxes to be available when they are needed. Not everyone in the US will buy a new TV just to accommodate a digital signal and there will be plenty of companies that will make set-top boxes. BTW, IIRC, the FCC only controls BROADCAST signals, not cable or satellite. So those two delivery systems could go right on with their analog transmissions and probably will. >You might wish to revise that statement, Don, since (1.) every electronics outlet has signs up stating that, by Federal Law, no NTSC equipment is to be sold after 12/31/2007 or 2008 and (2.) the broadcasting of NTSC signals is to terminate soon thereafter according to the FCC. Well, so far this morning, only 1 in 3 replies realizes that you are wrong in your conclusion based on the above correct statement. That shows just how widespread the "myth of mandated HD" is, when 3 out of 4 posters believe it! As noted, your statement above is roughly correct. Digital is mandated. Now, read it again, and again, and tell me where you find HD, or High Def? Digital is mandated. Digital is not HD. A high percentage of stations in this country have zero plans at this point to broadcast HD, although most have at least a test signal up on digital. I repeat, there is no mandated HD. Ever. Digital-to-analog convertors will be a dime-a-dozen. SignatureDon Bradner donb (not don) at arcatapet dot com www.arcatapet.net >While there were, a couple of years ago, proposals of inexpensive [<$50] set-top boxes to be supplied, that movement seems to have died off. Since there was no plan to have them available yet, that doesn't exactly equate to dying off. Apropos to your earlier comment: >The honorable thing would be for the Networks to provide either > the tuner/converter boxes or replacement wide-screen HDTVs >that provide the same image height as the existing TVs. While I've debunked the HD part, I didn't address the cost issue for converters. The law that forces DTV (not HDTV) takes the money from the auction of the freed-up spectrum and distributes it in several ways. One is the availability of up to two $40 coupons for every household for use to buy converters. Roughly $3 Billion available. You think that there won't be just a few companies happy to take that money? SignatureDon Bradner donb (not don) at arcatapet dot com www.arcatapet.net >>>Of course, it's a similar situation to that with televisions that won't >>>be [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > and HD and have already announced their intended compliance with the > mandated HD-only transmission per FCC timeframe. It is always so reassuring to know, that we can always depend on you for the wrong information, and in turn I would like to offer you this free offer of a bouquet of skunk cabbage, redeemable at any time. Rudy >Too bad there's no way to make those @#$%^&* tree-huggers pay for the >replacement. Why should they? Woo is paying for tha damage to air from them???. Look they got on gasoline over 30 years ago about sulpher and it is long overdue to get it out of diesel fuel. Detriot has know that LSD and ULSD was coming for a long time but has choosen to avoid the issue in their designs. Austrailia has been using low sulpher fuel for years but detriot has choosen to take the cheap way out and ignore it. Blame the tree hugger if you want but the real blame is on Detriot for exploiting a loop hole in emissions for years with their designs knowing that one day it would close. Diesel are also bad NOx poluters and have escape serious regs on them for years (reg that have be required on gas engines for over 30 years now). TIme to level the playing field because where it not for regs on gas motors today they woul be different animals too.ANother way to look at it,it is another reason to buy a new vehicle of your old one does not like the new fuel which is good for Detriots pocket book but bad for yours. Below is a link to some info I have put together on LSD and ULSD and with it a link to some info on problem that the Aussies are having with the new fuel. http://forum.snoman.com/viewtopic.php?t=227 ----------------- TheSnoMan.com > >Too bad there's no way to make those @#$%^&* tree-huggers pay for the > >replacement. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > in their designs. Austrailia has been using low sulpher fuel for years > but detriot has choosen to take the cheap way out and ignore it..... Europe also, One thing that ULSD will allow, is import of those excellent European diesel car engines Signature-------------------------------------------------------- Personal e-mail is the n7bsn but at amsat.org This posting address is a spam-trap and seldom read RV and Camping FAQ can be found at http://www.ralphandellen.us/rv >Uh oh. > ><http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/18714819/srt/pa/pging/1/ page/1.cfm> >or >http://preview.tinyurl.com/vaow7 Thank you for posting that. A friend just bought a 1992, 38' Alfa and I was able to pass the info on to him so he can check to see if it was (or needs to be) updated before he gets ready to set off on his first long trip. From Randy & Val 1990 30' Rexhal Airex |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.