***update -- I was wrong about P-47 having a rotary engine, confused *radial* with rotary. Other than noting that mistake here, I'll leave my original comment unedited below (in which I draw erroneous conclusions based on that brain fart):

@eric3579 and @newtboy -

I was also quite interested in the "advantages" question. My grandfather was an armorer on P-47 "Thunderbolt" aircraft in WW2, and I knew that rotary engines were used in those.

Both of your answers tie in to the strengths of P-47s during the war. They were considered very reliable and resistant to damage (sorta like a WW2-era A-10; they could take a beating and make it back home). And of course, in internal combustion powered aircraft, power to weight ratio is even more important than in automobiles.

So, I'm sure that some of those strengths were at least partially due to the use of a radial engine. Not entirely, because other things in the design played a big role also -- like the fact that the P-47 engine was air cooled, so it didn't need a radiator system. As I understand it, comparatively light damage to a liquid-cooled aircraft like a P-51 that happened to damage the cooling system could disable or force them down for repairs... Not to knock the amazing piece of engineering that the Mustang was, but for sheer ability to take a beating and stay in the air, the Thunderbolt may have been the best US fighter in the war.

That's where arts like japanese jiu jitsu, aikido, hapkido and so on come in very handy.

When someone grabs you (AKA offers their hand to you lol), you just bend their hand in a way it's not supposed to bend and they'll be letting go very quickly

The best thing there is that you can apply the right amount of force that is necessary, and gradually increasing if required. If it's someone like this you would apply just enough to begin causing pain and allow them make up their mind. If they don't stop then you keep applying force until either they let go or they end up on the floor with a broken wrist/elbow/shoulder.

The other cool thing about that is, it works on people twice as big as you, because your body weight > the amount of strength anyone's joint has.

My strength is I knew this information without needing to watch a video about it. My weakness is I had to watch a video about it to realize I knew this already.

Dog fighting does not exist, and has not existed since WW1.

Even in WW2, planes attacked in passes. They start up high, fly down to pick up speed, attack and keep flying so that the enemy cannot catch them.

As that is happening, another pair of planes is already on it's way to make another pass.

Planes do not chase each other dodging around like X-wings and Tie Fighters. Because as soon as you do that their wingman shoots you down.

TopGun trains pilots in BFM and team work skills, not so much dog fighting. While one v one dog-fighting is part of learning good team work skills and becoming familiar with different scenarios, it isn't the focus.

In Vietnam, the missiles and radars were unreliable and missile had to be fired from a fairly close range. That hasn't been the case for some 30 years now, with missiles getting better all of the time with some insane ranges upwards of 80 miles. The plane is becoming more of a launch platform for missiles than anything else. That's why every fighter plane after the F-4 was designed that way primarily. The worlds best fighter is still the F-15 which has a massive radar and the best missiles. And less maneuverability than the F-16. Because they know dog fighting does not happen.



The scenario you mentioned where the planes are flying close together is not realistic - close in air to air combat is 100 miles.

Especially if the enemy plane has better maneuverability(which all Russian planes do already do anyway, apart from the F-16 if lightly loaded).
Pilots know very well the strengths of their planes, they would never put them in a position like that. They would be pinging each other to make their presence known (if a show of force was the desired effect) from over 100 miles away.


None of this makes the F-35 a good plane by any means. But I just don't agree with the reasoning in the comments here and in the media.

For example people keep mentioning the "Jack of all trades" issue. But they ignore the fact that ALL fighter planes built over the last 40 years have been turned into jack of all trades through necessity. Yet nobody criticizes them for it.

I mostly fly the same simulators as the US national guard does. So I'm hoping that it's accurate. But more than that I read a lot of books written by pilots about air to air and air to ground engagements. Which makes me more knowledgeable than 99.99% of the journalists reporting on the F-35. You'll notice that most aviation specific sites don't tend to bag out the F-35 because have a much better idea of how air combat works than the regular media sites.

EDIT: I was not aware they were ignoring failed tests. That's pretty worrying. Do you have more info on it I can read about?

She's very tight but I don't wonder if this is a performance so practiced as to be muscle memory. Like that one person everyone knows that can play one song on the piano so well it's amazing but ask them to play anything else and they simply cant. 'Oh I've been practicing this one song... for years'.

There's a reason the some drummers on youtube, etc, have a big following and others that appear as good, do not. It's because those drummers release new performances all the time with completely different styles and genres of music just NAIL it.

Criticalthud is completely right on this subject as well. I was self-taught myself but always played to my strengths, what I learned to.. metal. Until I got older and fell out of that scene and realized I wasn't nearly as good a drummer as my youth had led me to believe. It took a long time but I changed that.

in my own practice, for a long, long time i found myself practicing my strengths, and i never really got far. Spun my wheels a lot. It appealed to my ego, but that was it. I think we tend to do this a lot as a society.
After a Berklee Music workshop in which I learned that most 7th graders had better fundamentals than myself, I almost quit music. I was pretty down. but...I kept working on getting over myself, and began focusing on my weaknesses instead of my strengths..., which really made me feel considerably retarded, but I kept at it.
With drumming, the weakness is generally the left side. And it was with me. No left side = no independence. So i worked at that, a lot. and in my late 30's, my muscianship took a huge positive step forward.
I'd say, practice your weaknesses, play your strengths. you can do it.
the approach dictates what you get. imho.

Look at the atrophy of her leg muscles (flat on her back for a month in a cast) and the nasty purple scar along her back at the :44 second mark---about lumbar spine. Looks like she got a set of steel rods on either side of her crushed vertebrae.

You're right; she didn't sever her spinal cord; but she's still lost muscle and has to bring the strength and power back to her back, and develop the ability to start standing again---and the water, I think, floats her to take most of the weight off as she starts to move...

But I could be wrong.

"Cowardice
Are you serious?
Apologies for freedom, I can’t handle this.
When freedom rings, answer the call!
On your feet, stand up tall!
Freedom's on our shoulders, USA!
Enemies of freedom face the music, c'mon boys, take them down
President Donald Trump knows how to make America great
Deal from strength or get crushed every time"

I love NdGT, but he's making a lot of assumptions here.

First he's comparing two fictional spacecraft, while knowing next to nothing about the relative strengths and weaknesses of their weapons systems, materials or engines.

It could be that phasers are to the Millennium Falcon what muskets are to a tank or vice versa.

Even then, Falcon v Enterprise isn't really an even match up. Maybe Falcon v runabout or Enterprise v Star Destroyer?

As for BB-8, how does he know that it's a smooth surface?

Finally, aliens might find kissing weird, or they might not. It's not even unique to one species on this planet, and it's almost certainly an evolved behavior. If aliens evolved on a similar planet, there's a chance they might evolve similar traits. Unlikely, but not impossible.

Some bits it glosses over :

Puppet dictatorship is basically a description of every US and Soviet backed b-list nation on earth back then. The fact that it's a puppet state shouldn't be used to imply anything.
For example, the U.S.S.R. had modernization programs for its satellite states, building power plants, roads, hospitals, universities, etc, in an attempt to fast forward development and catch up with the west asap. They also did this while spouting secular rhetoric.
In a general attempt to undermine soviet efforts (*both sides tried to contain each other's influence world wide), the U.S. looked for any groups within the U.S.S.R. satellite nations that would be an 'in' for U.S. power/influence. For Afghanistan, this was the people most offended by the U.S.S.R.'s [secular] agenda, and most likely to make good on foreign anti-soviet backing - the religious Jihadists. Everyone knew very well what it would mean for the local people if Jihadists took over Afghanistan - but at the time, the soviets were considered a bigger problem than Jihadists (possibility of nuclear annihilation), so better to have Jihadists in power than soviets.

Also, Assad's release of prisoners was officially part of an amnesty for political prisoners - something the people and foreign groups were asking for.
Saying that Assad tolerated AQ or Isis is misleading. These groups gained power during the Arab spring, when a large portion of the civilian population wanted a new government, but lacked the military power to force change. Militants stepped into the situation by /graciously/ offering their military strength, in exchange for economic/resource/political support to help make it happen. After a short while, these groups coopted the entire effort against Assad. Once they were established, they simply put the people under their boot, effectively replacing Assad with something even worse within the regions they held. Assad lacked/lacks the military power and support to expel the militant groups, so they fight to a stalemate. But a stalemate is by no means tolerance.
One similarity that Syria has to Afghanistan, is that the anti-government kernel within the population that birthed the revolt, did so for anti-secular reasons. In Syria's case, it was in large part people from the region that had earlier attempted an Islamist uprising during Assad's father's reign (which was put down by the government, culminating in the 'hama massacre', leaving some intense anti-government sentiment in the region).
In any case, the available choices for power in Syria are 'political dictatorship' or 'religious dictatorship'. Whoever wins, regular people lose. It's not as if regular people have the arms necessary to force anyone to listen to them. Anyone with any brains or initiative knows that their best option is neither, so they leave (hence all the refugees).

The video also omits the ambiguous alliances in the region. Early on, you had the UAE, Saudis, and Turks supporting ISIS - because an enemy of your enemy is your friend. It wasn't until ISIS started to encroach on them that they tempered their support. Turkey remains ambiguous, by some accounts being the gateway/laundromat for ISIS oil sales... because ISIS is a solution to the 'Kurdish problem' for Turkey.
If you watch some of the VICE documentaries, you can see interviews where locals on the Turkish border say that militants and arms cross form Turkey into Syria to join ISIS every night.
Then you have countries like Iran and Syria fighting ISIS, but by official accounts these countries are the west's enemy. Recently, French leadership (after the Paris bombings) has stated that they are done playing politics, and just want to get rid of ISIS in the most practical manner possible, and are willing to work with Russia and Assad to do it.

It's worth noting that ISIS' main enemy/target is 'non Sunni Islam'. U.S./Europe tend to only mention ISIS attacks on their persons/places, and it leaves western people thinking that ISIS is against the west - but in fact the west is merely an afterthought for ISIS. For every one attack on a western asset/person, there are countless attacks on Shia, etc.

-scheherazade

Not just cardiac fitness though (and of course, the mental toughness requirement).

But one of the things is that later in BUDS/SEALS training, the boat teams have to lift a boat up over their heads (and logs too) and carry them on sand. This is a non-trivial requirement for upper body strength...

So: I don't know. Maybe, just maybe, decathletes?

Hi. I'm a social justice warrior. Well, I prefer social justice rogue, cos you know, dexterity is sexier than strength.

Anywaaaaaay. I think I whine less than all you mofos in the comments whining about all the whiners

The "snap" clapping did make me snort out a bit of my drink though. Fair play.

Man Wall!

focus, strength and precision.
well done

It is weird that they just skipped over the part where they soaked the whole thing in epoxy to give it the strength it needed to work.

It is also weird to here packaging folk referring to that material as "cardboard" rather than "corrugated" or "corrugated fiberboard". In industry circles, "cardboard" is solid, not a multi-layered material with corrugations.

I have nothing against Obama (I dont live over there), he says as little as possible and says it well enough. There is little he can do in this situation and doesnt have much to win or lose. I misunderstood about the upvotes, now I get it - you are apologizing for posting a video related to a horrible incident. I think thats not a problem in this case - you have to try to sneak reality in among the cute kids and puppies - thats why i voted for it.

I understand that timing and information availability is an issue, but by yesterday it was already very clear that this very much belongs in the religion channel. While the motivation of these people may be complicated, its the religious aspect that gives them the moral strength to do horrible deeds. If they just hated someone or wanted something they could demonstrate or throw stones at shop windows and police cars. Frenchmen do that regularly. The only thing these guys seem to specifically want is for us to be as muslim as they are.

Respect needs to go both ways. You have to play hard to get respect.