This looks like a game of high-stakes chicken. There are a set of international collision regulations (COLREGS) that every cadet all over the world has to learn by heart to gain a certificate of competency.

Sometimes these rules are inaccurately reduced to "right of way" rules. In fact, the rules oblige actions on all ships in a potential collision situation: one will be the "stand-on vessel", and the other will be the "give-way vessel": obliged to make an early and obvious maneuver to avoid the collision, in a prescribed direction (generally turn to starboard). The ships involved can instead get on the radio and negotiate a different plan, but absent that, these are the rules.

One rule governs overtaking, where the vessel being overtaken is the "stand-on vessel" and the vessel overtaking is the "give-way vessel". Another governs crossing, where in a crossing path situation the vessel which has the other ship to port (on the left, looking forward) is the "stand-on vessel" and the other is the "give-way vessel".

So in the situation we see in the video, the ship in which we are standing is clearly to port of the other vessel and so would be the "give-way" vessel. It should have made a slight starboard turn much much much earlier to pass behind the other vessel.

Except what if the other vessel overtook this ship and passed in front? This happens sometimes, where a vessel in a hurry and in the "give-way" position decides to make an early change to put it in the "stand-on" position and force the other ship to move. This is what's known internationally as a "dick move" and probably criminal.

Unless we have the full radar track for both ships we can't know who was at fault. Since they thankfully didn't collide, the MAIB won't have to figure this out and send anyone to jail.

So

I don't know how it is in the states, but in this country if you want to go through gender reassignment you will get it for free on the NHS. Its a long road, it isn't easy, they make it hard etc, but like anything else that poses a risk to somebodies health it is paid for by the state. I feel like a lot of people consider reassignment a sort of frivolous sex thing but being unable to escape the body in which you are born is, you know, desperately depressing. I don't think I am exaggerating when I say that surgery and hormone treatment are potentially lifesaving, and certainly greatly improve the quality of life in most cases.

Couple of things I don't understand - Is this the military saying they will no longer pay for treatments associated with gender reassignment, or is this a blanket ban on transgender men and women from serving in the military? One wonders why the military can't spend even a fraction of the amount is spends on toys on its servicemen/women...

Anyhoo. It's a distraction. Not trying to suggest that it is a minor thing for those affected, but I really think this is to divert the left and win back support from the right. It sucks dreadfully that a minority group is again used as target for political maneuvering and it is worthy of resistance but I can't help but feel we are playing into their hand by doing so.

@bobknight33 I pity you.

You know how fucking win this is because she actually admits it. Cornering an angry woman with a response so good they actually capitulate (rather than digging something up that you did in the past to shift the battleground ; ) is one of the hardest relationship maneuvers, and this lad stuck the fucking landing.

Well done sir, well done!

Can't wait to see what he does to pimp it up... =)

Diagram of re-entry for the Soyuz:
---------------------------------------------
http://spaceflight101.com/soyuz-tma-20m/wp-content/uploads/sites/77/2016/09/6618866_orig.jpg

Orbital Module:
---------------------
It houses all the equipment that will not be needed for reentry, such as experiments, cameras or cargo. The module also contains a toilet, docking avionics and communications gear. Internal volume is 6 m³, living space 5 m³. On the latest Soyuz versions (since Soyuz TM), a small window was introduced, providing the crew with a forward view.

Service Module:
---------------------
It has a pressurized container shaped like a bulging can that contains systems for temperature control, electric power supply, long-range radio communications, radio telemetry, and instruments for orientation and control. A non-pressurized part of the service module (Propulsion compartment, AO) contains the main engine and a liquid-fuelled propulsion system for maneuvering in orbit and initiating the descent back to Earth. The ship also has a system of low-thrust engines for orientation, attached to the Intermediate compartment. Outside the service module are the sensors for the orientation system and the solar array, which is oriented towards the sun by rotating the ship.


Consequences of bad jettisons:
------------------------------------------
The services modules are jettisoned before the spacecraft hits the atmosphere. A failure or partial jettison of the modules means that the capsule will not enter the atmosphere heat shield first which can lead to a number of scenarios:
- Capsule pushed off course (by hundreds of km)
- High sustained g-loads on reentry
- Plasma on reentry can burn through the craft if the heat shield is not exposed and oriented properly resulting in loss of crew.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_5
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_TMA-10
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soyuz_TMA-10

A Bootlegger is similar, but a little different. Wherein a Bootlegger starts with the vehicle moving forward and ending the opposite direction, a J-turn starts with the vehicle moving in reverse and ending opposite.

Granted there are lots of terms thrown around for these maneuvers.

My rational was that it must take some serious skill to think it was a good idea (sarcasm). Happy to remove the tag if out of place.

Side note, watching again I noticed after the rollover that not only was the bass dropped with the sub flying out, but looks like a gun flies out alongside it? Range Rover + subwoofer + gun = instant cred?

So many questions...

Is anyone else just baffled by this move?... this had to be one of the most politically stupid maneuvers I've ever seen.

Who really told McConnel to do this...

He, and MANY of his contemporaries are unbearable cowards but he isn't politically stupid.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by Mordhaus.

Shortened version of *dupeof=https://videosift.com/video/Grappler-Police-Bumper-No-more-PIT-maneuver

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by newtboy. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

Never did a stint as a commercial driver, but passed all the courses and went through down to the Michigan Decision Driving training grounds and did runs in trucks with jacknife scenarios, etc.

He's not drifting there. His trailer brakes are locked up. And because of inertia and ice his trailer is trying to pass his cab.

The goal is to maintain control but keep as low a speed as possible, so you give power to the cab to pull the trailer back into line in a normal situation. In this case he doesn't want to accelerate because there's no safe ground to regain control on, so he's going to aim for keeping the cab going at equal to or just slightly faster than the trailer.

As soon as he hits a clear patch of pavement or level ground then a little bit of acceleration from the cab pulls the trailer back in line behind the cab, drop the acceleration as the drag from the trailer slows you down, etc.

A good reason to always wait before pulling back in after passing a truck on the highway. In an emergency their maneuvers can take long distances when fully loaded. If something goes wrong during your passing maneuver your want to be as far out of their way as possible.

At the end of the day, we are talking about an unarmed teen girl. There are levels of reasonable force and levels of excessive force. This is clearly in the excessive region.

The sad thing is, it seems to be a maneuver that cops are wont to default to with kids. In the related video, a school officer body slammed a 12 year old girl. Elsewhere in Texas, an officer bodyslammed a teen girl for being at a pool party without a pass. That case is being taken to court, by the way, with the taxpayers possibly on the hook for 5 million.

We are doing something wrong when the only move that an officer can do to take an underage individual down is a bodyslam. This isn't fake wrestling, that isn't a canvas ring with some shock absorbing capabilities, and she isn't an actor who knows how to take a fall. Real and permanent damage could happen.

Officers can and have been hit or killed while deploying spike belts and I'm not sure if they still try to shoot out tires these days.

The PIT maneuver can work quite well but different factors like speed, traffic and apparently trailers even can affect it.

I remember seeing this video years ago, this guy almost managed to defeat it on driving skills alone!

*related=http://videosift.com/video/Mustang-Police-Chase


But who knows if this will perform well in real world situations, we might never see this on a real vehicle but I thought the idea was nifty!

Grappler Police Bumper - No more PIT maneuver has been added as a related post - related requested by hazmat22 on that post.

Your video, Grappler Police Bumper - No more PIT maneuver, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

\

Published on Apr 14, 2016

The aerobatics skills of Russian pilots over the US destroyer Donald Cook in the Baltic Sea left the Pentagon and other US official running for cover in Washington over “aggressive close interactions” with Russian fighters jets.
Trends
Russia-NATO relations
Releasing the footage of Russian jet flybys in the vicinity of the destroyer, the US Navy said that its vessel has encountered multiple “aggressive flight maneuvers ...within close proximity of the ship,” some as close as 30 feet (10 meters) on Monday and Tuesday.

The set of incidents took place as the US ship, which had sailed from the Polish port of Gdynia, was conducting exercises with its NATO ally Poland in the Baltic Sea. The Navy announced that the SU-24 first flew over Donald Cook on Monday as US sailors were rehearsing “deck landing drills with an allied [Polish] military helicopter”. The numerous close-range, low altitude encounters were witnessed at 3:00pm local time, forcing the commander of the ship to suspend helicopter refueling on the deck until the Russian jets departed the area.

The next day, the Navy said, Russia caused concern among US sailors when a Russian KA-27 Helix helicopter flew seven times over the ship at low altitude in international waters at around 5:00pm. Some 40 minutes later, two Russian SU-24 jets allegedly made a further 11 “close-range and low altitude passes”.

“The Russian aircraft flew in a simulated attack profile and failed to respond to repeated safety advisories in both English and Russian. USS Donald Cook’s commanding officer deemed several of these maneuvers as unsafe and unprofessional,” the Navy said.

Judging by the videos released by the US Navy, the sailors were nonplussed by the Russian aerobatic skills. They gathered on the top deck of the destroyer to watch the Russian pilots.

“He is on the deck below the bridge lane...It looks like he’ll be coming in across the flight deck, coming in low, bridge wing level...Over the bow, right turn, over the bow...” the voiceover on the footage states in what looks more like an instructor’s advice on how to maneuver in open waters, rather than the panic that the central command presented it to be. At least on the video no one can be seen running for cover.

According to a US defense official who spoke with Defense News, sailors aboard the Donald Cook claimed that the Russian jets’ low altitude stirred waters and created wake underneath the ship. US personnel on the American vessels, also claimed that Su-24 was “wings clean,” meaning no armaments were present on the Russian jets that could have posed a threat to US operations in the Baltic.

Yet at the same time, the official noted, that this week's incidents are “more aggressive than anything we’ve seen in some time,” as the SU-24 appeared to be flying in a “simulated attack profile.”

The Russian overflights have caused panic over in Washington, with White House spokesman Josh Earnest calling the actions of the Russian pilots “provocative” and “inconsistent with professional norms of militaries.”

“I hear the Russians are up to their old tricks again in the EUCOM [US European Command] AOR [area of responsibility],” Operation Inherent Resolve spokesman Col. Steve Warren said during a briefing on Wednesday, adding that the US is “concerned with this behavior.”

“We have deep concerns about the unsafe and unprofessional Russian flight maneuvers. These actions have the potential to unnecessarily escalate tensions between countries, and could result in a miscalculation or accident that could cause serious injury or death,” the US European Command said in a statement.

In the meantime Adm. John Richardson, the chief of naval operations, thanked the US crew for keeping their cool during the stressful situation.

“Bravo Zulu to the crew of USS Donald Cook for their initiative and toughness in how they handled themselves during this incident,” the admiral said on Facebook.

Russia has yet to comment on the incidents but most likely the Russian air craft flew from the Kaliningrad region, bordering Poland. Kaliningrad is the headquarters of the Russian Baltic Fleet, which also includes the Chernyakhovsk, Donskoye, and Kaliningrad Chkalovsk air bases.

Description Credits: Russia Today

Video Credits: Defense Media Activity - Navy