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.

Barky Clouseau: Does your whale bite?
Boat Captain: No.
Barky Clouseau: [bowing down to pet the whale] Nice whalee.
[Whale breaches and bites at Barky Clouseau's muzzle]
Barky Clouseau: I thought you said your whale did not bite!
Boat Captain: That is not my whale.

Made me think of this.

Commander Leonard 'Bones' McCoy, M.D. : Spock, this "child" is about to wipe out every living thing on Earth. Now, what do you suggest we do? Spank it?

Commander Spock: It knows only that it needs, Commander. But, like so many of us... it does not know what.
---------------------

Commander Spock: V'Ger must evolve. Its knowledge has reached the limits of this universe and it must evolve. What it requires of its god, doctor, is the answer to its question, "Is there nothing more"?

Commander Leonard 'Bones' McCoy, M.D.: What more is there than the universe, Spock?

Commander Willard Decker: Other dimensions. Higher levels of being.

Commander Spock: The existence of which cannot be proven logically. Therefore, V'Ger is incapable of believing in them.

Captain James T. Kirk: What it needs in order to evolve... is a human quality. Our capacity to leap beyond logic.

Commander Willard Decker: And joining with its creator might accomplish that.

Commander Leonard 'Bones' McCoy, M.D.: You mean this machine wants to physically join with a human? Is that possible?

Commander Willard Decker: Let's find out.
----------------------------------

So, basically... V'ger needed to get laid?

Congratulations! Your video, Marvel Studios' Captain Marvel - Official Trailer, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 68 Badge!

Forgot your bus pass? That shit don't fly with Captain Marvel.

Your video, Marvel Studios' Captain Marvel - Official Trailer, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Your video, Captain Disillusion: Escherian Stairwell Deconstruction, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 13 Badge!

I concur. He's definitely a loose cannon. Free range. Monster Is Loose. Real life Captain Quint.

The people I saw interviewed mentioned the captain driving fast to get back to the docks as a positive, so my guess is there was major damage but it didn't sink. I only saw footage of the hole in the roof, but never a good shot of the interior.

Nov 2, huh? Having recently seen Ant-Man+Wasp and no Marvel movie until next year, I guess I could use this as a quick fix between now and Captain Marvel.

Your video, Captain D: Coloured Marble Sorting Debunk, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Best description I've heard for a Bowlan knot was from a captain of a scallop boat out of Port Canaveral. He said "...it won't come loose and you can get it loose."

Found a possible alternate embed -- 7:58 instead of 8:08, so I'm not positive it is the same thing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBfHyO57yhI

(I'd invoke that as a backup, but I doont have the power captain!)

*edit*
I'm sure enough this is the same video that I'll upvote. I dunno if the original embed is dead or blocked, but seems like it must be one of the two.

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Captain-EO-starring-Michael-Jackson

Defunctland: The History of Captain EO has been added as a related post - related requested by ant on that post.