search results matching tag: Air Force

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.002 seconds

    Videos (245)     Sift Talk (4)     Blogs (11)     Comments (316)   

Beau schools on schooling: why 'FREE' scares Biff & Babs

luxintenebris says...

https://theintercept.com/2022/08/25/student-loans-debt-reagan/

holds water. at the time, thought with derisive cyniscism 'why is he doing this? maybe he wants to be sure the GOP has enough voters!'

held that thought privately until it became obvious.

yeah. most enlightened (the truly bright) find education a gift that all people should be given. ben franklin, Andrew Carnegie, et al knew the deep effect of education on a people/nation/society.

'sides, doesn't do the US well to have hungry air force personnel mistakenly launch missiles when they thought the button said 'lunch'.

draak13 said:

I think this argument is invalid from the standpoint of what groups of people he is talking about. The people who tend to value free education by supplementing with tax dollars tend to vote democrat. People who want to keep education expensive and withhold tax aid tend to be republican. Particularly in these modern times: the exit polls show that the more educated you are, the more likely you were to vote democrat. The most educated people seem to be electing those who would like to make education low cost.

Given this, the argument that 'education is kept expensive to keep competition down' is unlikely (though not impossible) to come from an educated person...because the statistics show that this tends to not be the values of an educated person. The educated 'club' tends to value exactly the opposite, and wants everyone to be educated.

Portland's Rapid Response Team Quits Over Accountability

Mordhaus says...

I don't have a lot of sympathy for the "protesters" still rioting over George Floyd's death, especially when most of them are white, ultra-progressives who think they are actually accomplishing something by violent anarchy. I do have sympathy for non-violent protesters who are trying to get a message across and keep getting caught up in the violence.

In fact, I feel if a person(like said "reporter") ignores a call to disperse once a "protest" turns into a violent riot, they kinda deserve what they get. I mean, how many people shed a tear over that air force lady who got shot during the capitol riots? Call me old-fashioned, but I believe there is a massive difference between non-violent protests and what has been going on for well over a year now in many cities. Portland being a prominent example.

I doubt every single one of the officers who quit did so over one person, maybe they decided to go with that as an excuse and now they are speaking individually on their reasons. I know that I would be incredibly frustrated at trying to do a job with conflicting orders (until recently) from my bosses. I could be 100% wrong about their actual individual reasons, but I would suspect a lot are just sick of the whole mess.

Plus, in the end, a lot of minorities are actually getting sick of these white kids making a mess of a peaceful protest.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global-race-protests-portland-activis/in-portland-some-black-activists-frustrated-with-white-protesters-idUSKCN24W2
QD

newtboy said:

Those are decent points, but have absolutely zero to do with the mass abandoning of their positions. It was 100% due to one of their own being charged after beating nonviolent protesters. They originally admitted exactly that, and now that they aren't being supported in their walkout, they are coming up with excuses that didn't matter to them the day before the officer was charged.

I think they should have to pay for the training and equipment they now refuse to use.

What are you talking about? You think budget cuts caused time off to be cancelled?! It costs double to not rotate in other officers, because you pay those on duty overtime, it doesn't make it cheaper. Budget cuts were not the issue when these cops were doing crowd control, only now that they're suddenly called to account for their own actions. No time off temporarily, because of extreme circumstances, was not an issue until one of their own was charged. It's certainly not abnormal, and absolutely not because of budget cuts, it costs more.

No prosecutions is the norm, if I recall, over 98% of charges levied at protesters have been dismissed nation wide, mostly because police had no evidence to back the charges they brought. You might note, as described in the article, "Mr. Schmidt immediately announced that he would focus on prosecuting cases of violence or vandalism; protesters who simply resisted arrest or refused to disperse after a police order would not necessarily be charged." They are taking a stand against anarchic violent protesters, but not the peaceful protesters with a legitimate gripe about violent, racist, deadly police acting as an anarchist gang that believes rules only apply to you, not them.

There are few prosecutions in large part because police declare riots when all participants are peaceful and not causing damage, and police are almost always the one's giving the orders to remove the people they declared "rioters", and in most cases they have zero evidence to back up their declarations, and are as violent as possible, beating peaceful videographers and reporters who were trapped and could not disperse, then charging them with refusal to disperse and resisting arrest, even violence against police for attacking police batons with their faces.
(Edit: remember the freeway shutdown when they marched on the freeway, and police blocked them from exiting or continuing while a second group of police came from behind, forcing them into a small fenced in area with no exit, then charged them all with refusal to disperse and the few that tried to disperse were charged with attacking police officers who blocked every escape route, violently attacking anyone trying to leave...all on live tv?)
Many peaceful protests became riots only after police moved in to violently disperse protests, fully 1/2 were riots because counter protesters and bad right wing actors like proud and boogaloo boys were planting bombs, shooting crowds, starting fires, driving through crowds, and murdering police in an effort to paint protesters as violent anarchists. That is verified fact directly from the DOJ investigation.

It's not a Portland only thing, police abandoning their communities because, as they indicated to the DA, "“It was like, ‘There’s our team and there’s their team, and you are on their team and you’re not on our team. And we’ve never had a D.A. not be on our team before,’” Police assume they are on a team against citizens, and won't do their jobs if, by doing them wrong with bias and malice, they might be prosecuted. They are used to immunity, and don't know how to do their jobs without it because they are abusers of power.

One day after charges were levied they quit in solidarity with the criminal abusive cop, and came up with fake excuses later.

You seem to have missed "the Justice Department said that the city’s Police Bureau was violating its own use-of-force policies during crowd-control operations, and that supervisors were not properly investigating complaints." part.

BSR (Member Profile)

The Looters

newtboy says...

Liar. That was Ben Carson's order. That one piece of furniture cost over 6 times the budget allowed by law to refurnish his office, and wasn't his only purchase.

Now explain this one too....
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/06/air-force-trump-scottish-retreat-1484337

$11 million wasted in extra fuel alone paid to foreign fuel companies instead of using American airports and American fuels purely to give Trump $7.5 million per year and save his failing club....that's $18.5 million per year for this one scheme to personally enrich himself on taxpayer money, laws against EXACTLY that be damned.

When are you going to stop making yourself look like a worthless piece of shit and stop making up easily debunked lies to try to defend Trump? It's within your control, but you insist on insulting yourself by being not just a constant liar, but a really really bad one. You're better than this, aren't you?

bobknight33 said:

That was ordered Obama Admin and deliver under Trumps.

Go blame someone else.

*lies

C-note (Member Profile)

Giuliani/Trump Donors/Associates Arrested Fleeing The U.S.

This Presidential Seal Does Not Look Like The Others

BSR says...

Trump wants to be president until the day he dies. The reason is, he will be charged with obstruction once he leaves office.

His only hope is to jump on Air Force One and ask Putin for Asylum.

Yes. He's trapped. What more does Muller need to say?

bobknight33 said:

Trump is kicking Ass and taking names.

Sill a nothing burger during Muller hearings yesterday.

Dems lost bigly yesterday and will loss by landslide in 2020.

How This Cyclist Hit 184MPH and Set the World Record

BSR says...

Again, SHE'S NOT A PRO! She doesn't take anything away from the pros but also gives them a chance to break her record. (If they got the guts)

Unrelated, this is me back in 2011 making a 2,500 mile bike trip which I did in 3 months. It was something I did to see if I actually wanted to bike across country. From Cape Canaveral beach to Vandenberg Air Force Base. I would carry a sample of sand from the east and then dump it on the beach in the west.

Due to circumstances beyond my control I still haven't been able to make that trip. But I loved every minute of the trip I did.

https://imgur.com/4LjMuiP

newtboy said:

I think pro riders don't go for this record because they don't see it as a legitimate riding record, just a dangerous equipment test.

F-18 Criticisms in the 80's mirror those of the F-35 today

Mordhaus says...

Lockheed Martin and the Pentagon say the F-35’s superiority over its rivals lies in its ability to remain undetected, giving it “first look, first shot, first kill.”

Hugh Harkins, a highly respected author on military combat aircraft, called that claim “a marketing and publicity gimmick” in his book on Russia’s Sukhoi Su-35S, a potential opponent of the F-35. He also wrote, “In real terms an aircraft in the class of the F-35 cannot compete with the Su-35S for out and out performance such as speed, climb, altitude, and maneuverability.”

Other critics have been even harsher. Pierre Sprey, a cofounding member of the so-called “fighter mafia” at the Pentagon and a co-designer of the F-16, calls the F-35 an “inherently a terrible airplane” that is the product of “an exceptionally dumb piece of Air Force PR spin.” He has said the F-35 would likely lose a close-in combat encounter to a well-flown MiG-21, a 1950s Soviet fighter design.

Robert Dorr, an Air Force veteran, career diplomat and military air combat historian, wrote in his book “Air Power Abandoned,” “The F-35 demonstrates repeatedly that it can’t live up to promises made for it. … It’s that bad.”

The development of the F-35 has been a mess by any measurement. There are numerous reasons, but they all come back to what F-35 critics would call the jet's original sin: the Pentagon's attempt to make a one-size-fits-all warplane, a Joint Strike Fighter.

History is littered with illustrations of multi-mission aircraft that never quite measured up. Take Germany's WWII Junkers Ju-88, or the 1970s Panavia Tornado, or even the original F/A-18. Today the Hornet is a mainstay of the American military, but when it debuted it lacked the range and payload of the A-7 Corsair and acceleration and climb performance of the F-4 Phantom it was meant to replace.

Yeah, the F/A-18 was trash when it first came out and it took YEARS and multiple changes/fixes to allow it to fully outperform the decades old aircraft it was designed to beat when it was released.

The F35 is not the best at anything it does, it is designed to fully be mediocre at all roles in order to allow it to be a single solution aircraft. That may change with more money, time, and data retrieved from hours spent in actual combat, but as it stands it is what it was designed to be. A jack of all trades and master of none, not something I would want to be flying in a role where I could encounter a master of that role.

As @ChaosEngine says, it is far beyond time that we move to a design where the pilot is not in the plane. There is no reason at this time that we cannot field a plane that could successfully perform it's role with the pilot in a secure location nearby. Such planes could be built cheaper, could perform in g-forces that humans cannot withstand, and would be expendable in a way that current planes are not. However, this would mean that our corporate welfare system for huge defense contractors would take a massive hit. We can't have that, can we?

bobknight33 (Member Profile)

Hypersonic Missile Nonproliferation

scheherazade says...

The Zero's Chinese performance was ignored by the U.S. command prior to pearl harbor, dismissed as exaggeration. That's actually the crux of my point.

Exceptional moments do not change the rule.
Yes on occasion a wildcat would get swiss cheesed and not go down, but 99% of the time when swiss cheesed they went down.
Yes, there were wildcat aces that did fairly well (and Zero aces that did even better), but 99% of wildcat pilots were just trying to not get mauled.

Hellcat didn't enter combat till mid 1943, and it is the correction to the mistake. The F6F should have been the front line fighter at the start of the war... and could have been made sooner had Japanese tech not been ignored/dismissed as exaggeration.


Russian quantity as quality? At the start they were shot down at a higher ratio than the manufacturing counter ratio (by a lot). It was a white wash in favor of the Germans.
It took improvements in Russian tech to turn the tide in the air. Lend-lease only constituted about 10% of their air force at the peak. Russia had to improve their own forces, so they did. By the end, planes like the yak3 were par with the best.


The Mig31 is a slower Mig25 with a digital radar. Their version of the F14, not really ahead of the times, par maybe.

F15 is faster than either mig29 or Su27 (roughly Mig31 speed).
F16/F18, at altitude, are moderately slower, but a wash at sea level.

Why would they shoot and run?
We have awacs, we would know they are coming, so the only chance to shoot would be at max range. Max range shots are throw-away shots, they basically won't hit unless the target is unaware, which it won't be unaware because of the RWR. Just a slight turn and the missile can't follow after tens of miles of coasting and losing energy.


Chinese railgun is in sea trials, right now. Not some lab test. It wouldn't be on a ship without first having the gun proven, the mount proven, the fire control proven, stationary testing completed, etc.
2025 is the estimate for fleet wide usage.
Try finding a picture of a U.S. railgun aboard a U.S. ship.


Why would a laser rifle not work, when you can buy crap like this : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7baI2Nyi5rI
There's ones made in China, too : https://www.sanwulasers.com/customurl.aspx?type=Product&key=7wblue&shop=
That will light paper on fire ~instantly, and it's just a pitiful hand held laser pointer.
An actual weapon would be orders of magnitude stronger than a handheld toy.
It's an excellent covert operations weapon, silently blinding and starting fires form kilometers away.


Russia does not need to sink a U.S. carrier for no reason.
And the U.S. has no interest in giving Russia proper a need to defend from a U.S. carrier. For the very reasons you mentioned.


What Russia can do is proliferate such a missile, and effectively deprecate the U.S. carrier group as a military unit.

We need carriers to get our air force to wherever we need it to be.
If everyone had these missiles, we would have no way to deliver our air force by naval means.

Russia has land access to Europe, Asia, Africa. They can send planes to anywhere they need to go, from land bases. Russia doesn't /need/ a navy.

Most of the planet does not have a navy worth sinking. It's just us. This is the kind of weapon that disproportionately affects us.

-scheherazade

Mordhaus said:

A big part of the Zero's reputation came from racking up kills in China against a lot of second-rate planes with poorly-trained pilots. After all, there was a reason that the Republic of China hired the American Volunteer Group to help out during the Second Sino-Japanese War – Chinese pilots had a hard time cutting it.

The Wildcat was deficient in many ways versus the Zero, but it still had superior firepower via ammo loadout. The Zero carried very few 20mm rounds, most of it's ammo was 7.7mm. There are records of Japanese pilots unloading all their 7.7mm ammo on a Wildcat and it was still flyable. On the flip side, the Wildcat had an ample supply of .50 cal.

Stanley "Swede" Vejtasa was able to score seven kills against Japanese planes in one day with a Wildcat.

Yes, the discovery of the Akutan Zero helped the United States beat this plane. But MilitaryFactory.com notes that the Hellcat's first flight was on June 26, 1942 – three weeks after the raid on Dutch Harbor that lead to the fateful crash-landing of the Mitsubishi A6M flown by Tadayoshi Koga.

Marine Captain Kenneth Walsh described how he knew to roll to the right at high speed to lose a Zero on his tail. Walsh would end World War II with 17 kills. The Zero also had trouble in dives, thanks to a bad carburetor.

We were behind in technology for many reasons, but once the Hellcat started replacing the Wildcat, the Japanese Air Superiority was over. Even if they had maintained a lead in technology, as Russia showed in WW2, quantity has a quality all of it's own. We were always going to be able to field more pilots and planes than Japan would be able to.

As far as Soviet rockets, once we were stunned by the launch of Sputnik, we kicked into high gear. You can say what you will of reliability, consistency, and dependability, but exactly how many manned Soviet missions landed on the moon and returned? Other than Buran, which was almost a copy of our Space Shuttle, how many shuttles did the USSR field?

The Soviets did build some things that were very sophisticated and were, for a while, better than what we could field. The Mig-31 is a great example. We briefly lagged behind but have a much superior air capability now. The only advantages the Mig and Sukhoi have is speed, they can fire all their missiles and flee. If they are engaged however, they will lose if pilots are equally skilled.

As @newtboy has said, I am sure that Russia and China are working on military advancements, but the technology simply doesn't exist to make a Hypersonic missile possible at this point.

China is fielding a man portable rifle that can inflict pain, not kill, and there is no hard evidence that it works.

There is no proof that the Chinese have figured out the technology for an operational rail gun on land, let alone the sea. We also have created successful railguns, the problem is POWERING them repeatedly, especially onboard a ship. If they figured out a power source that will pull it off, then it is possible, but there is no concrete proof other than a photo of a weapon attached to a ship. Our experts are guessing they might have it functional by 2025, might...

China has shown that long range QEEC is possible. It has been around but they created the first one capable of doing it from space. The problem is, they had to jury rig it. Photons, or light, can only go through about 100 kilometers of optic fiber before getting too dim to reliably carry data. As a result, the signal needs to be relayed by a node, which decrypts and re-encrypts the data before passing it on. This process makes the nodes susceptible to hacking. There are 32 of these nodes for the Beijing-Shanghai quantum link alone.

The main issue with warfare today is that it really doesn't matter unless the battle is between one of the big 3. Which means that ANY action could provoke Nuclear conflict. Is Russia going to hypersonic missile one of our carriers without Nukes become an option on the table as a retaliation? Is China going to railgun a ship and risk nuclear war?

Hell no, no more than we would expect to blow up some major Russian or Chinese piece of military hardware without severe escalation! Which means we can create all the technological terrors we like, because we WON'T use them unless they somehow provide us a defense against nuclear annihilation.

So just like China and Russia steal stuff from us to build military hardware to counter ours, if they create something that is significantly better, we will began trying to duplicate it. The only thing which would screw this system to hell is if one of us actually did begin developing a successful counter measure to nukes. If that happens, both of the other nations are quite likely to threaten IMMEDIATE thermonuclear war to prevent that country from developing enough of the counter measures to break the tie.

The Day Liberty Died

bcglorf says...

This.

I get there is plenty of room to criticise Israeli actions and call them too aggressive. This is just not such an example, in any way, shape or form.

As vil said, this happened when Israel was actively at war. Nasser had blocked Israeli shipping and moved Egpytian forces onto the border. Israel then made a pre-emptive strike wiping out the Egyptian air-force, and then launching a ground offensive. The USS Liberty was running as an unmarked ship in the wrong place at the wrong time and Israel hit it too.

Israel knew it was a US military vessel or they didn't. If they didn't, it's highly possible they decided the unmarked military vessel was a threat and hit it. If they did, they decided it was a good idea to hit an American owned military vessel while starting/engaging a war with Egypt.

I can't reason out any situation where Israel thinks it's a good idea to deliberately kill and engage the US here, it's all bad for them. The most reasonable explanation is they attacked an unmarked military vessel in a war zone because they knew it wasn't their own.

vil said:

6 day war under way, standing orders to sink anything that moves near the shore, unmarked ship. Either pick a side or get out of the way.

18 Teachers In Oklahoma Calling It Quits

wtfcaniuse says...

One of my teacher's had a poster of that.
"It will be a great day when our schools get all the money they need and the air force has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber"
- Robert Fulghum

On a side note, they teach dance at school?

StukaFox said:

Let's reverse the budgets of the DoD and the DoE -- let the generals hold a bake sale to buy another B1 bomber.

A-10 Thunderbolt II Brrrrrtt Compilation

Ashenkase says...

It's the A-10's gun firing at 4200 rounds per minute, 70 per second:

The General Electric GAU-8/A Avenger is a 30mm hydraulically driven seven-barrel Gatling-type cannon that is typically mounted to the United States Air Force's Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II. It is capable of firing 4,200 rounds per minute.

Here is a gun test of the system:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33teK7L4DM4

moonsammy said:

Cool, but what's the "BRRRRT" noise about?

How to combat roll into a fireman's carry



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon