Via: https://www.reddit.com/r/CatastrophicFailure/comments/b85jb3/glider_crash_in_poland/

Passenger (front seat) : 1 broken arm

Pilot (back seat) : minor injuries

The article they link however doesn't list injuries: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6863975/Terrifying-moment-glider-clips-tree-nosedives-ground.html

Now, while I'd love to learn to fly a glider (beyond money, the best place "locally" is Caesar Creek Soaring Club, which is about 3 1/2 hours from me), and I might be out of my element here... it looks like he was going way too fast on his approach. Not sure what the situation was that caused him to come in that fast.

Also looks like he should have went down from the field a bit further, then turned to it, as it seems like he still had enough height left to go another few hundred yards down, turn around, and get lined up.

The video doesn't show if he had the wing spoilers deployed or not. Now I know some say don't deploy spoilers on the turn (though this guy seems to debunk that to some degree https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tC-Yqp-uHo0), so he'd have had to make the turn, then deploy at the last second... again getting to the fact the turn to the landing strip was made too early.

Again, I'm probably out of my element here, but I'd think, had he waited to make the turn to the landing strop, lined up, then deployed the wing spoilers, he'd have been able to bring her down a bit easier... of course he'd probably still have too much speed. That's what I want to know, where was the speed coming from, did he bring her down super fast, was he or the passenger on a time crunch?

I'd kind of love a PG-13 or R-rated Dora where she still acts exactly like the original show (tons of repetition, asks questions with astoundingly obvious answers, reads the simplest of maps like she's doing calculus in her head, super naive, etc), but everyone else is entirely normal, and reacts to her accordingly. "Swiper, no swiping, Swiper no swiping, Swiper..." "Dora what the FUCK?! He has a GUN, stop saying that shit and give him the key!" They seem to do some of that here (paraphrasing "of course she knows the monkey," "she brought a knife on a field trip"), but Dora also appears slightly to behave semi-normally.

Anyway. I started playing this because I have kids who watched the show some years ago, and I hated having to sit through it. Figured I'd show it to them in an "oh man, can you even believe how awful this looks?" sort of way, and then... it doesn't. It actually looks like a relatively ok, fun movie. RFlagg, I think you're right that the recent Jumanji was a huge inspiration; I doubt this will measure up at all. Oh, and for anyone who hasn't seen Jumanji WttJ, it's actually totally worth watching, with or without kids. Clever writing, and the actors all did a great job with their characters (particularly Jack Black, IMHO).

I assume it's not for HFT but everyone else that wants to be on a level playing field. All things being equal, it seems like a pretty attractive exchange for the rest of the traders.

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?

Duh.

Edit: of the 3 groups, which had permits....natives
Of the 3 groups, which was still performing closing ceremonies of a permitted March...natives.
Of the 3 groups, which refrained from insulting the other two....natives.
Of the 3 groups, which tried to defuse rather than escalate....natives.

But the native elder calmly trying to defuse the escalating situation is the one in the wrong in your opinion.


The inevitable attack was against the Israelites, because the kids were getting irate, taking off their clothes, jumping around like madmen, and screaming insults at the Israelites. Before he came in drumming, it sure looked like violence was likely.

I watched it as many times as I'm going to, which was many, and when the elder stops there's plenty of room between everyone, then the kids move closer from every direction.

Look, you can bend over backwards to pretend the kids weren't also instigating, or being rude, or racist, but I must admit I'm floored people can see a gang of white kids gleefully tomahawk chopping and hi-ya-hi-ya-ing undeniably derisively at a native elder (veteran, but who knew that there) while smirking inches from his face as he's surrounded by their jeering buddies and instead of admitting what they see with their own eyes and hear with their ears, pretend the irate screaming kids were being respectful angels not disrespectful racist assholes. I see and hear what's on the video, you find excuses for it and pretend you don't hear racism in their racist taunting.

I'm most floored chaperones on a church field trip didn't just let the kids respond to the provocation of the Israelites (which is moronic and exactly what they wanted), they encouraged it and did nothing when it turned racist against the elder, just egged them on more. So much for Christ's teachings....fuck what he said if someone's teasing you, right? Christ said take an eye for an eye....oh wait, no he didn't.

Since they didn't provide a sampling of their performance on the field, here ya' go. https://youtu.be/4Agfr4NPPhU

On our company campus on the shoreline they built a "Serenity Garden" with a koi pond and stocked it with some beautiful fish. Then the seagulls had a field day with them so they had to make a grid of fishing line criss-crossed across the top of the pond to protect them. Pretty much killed the whole serene effect.

Motorola used Linux company-wide for firmware development in 1992? That's not impossible, but seems pretty unlikely. Of course, "Linux" might just be laymen for "a Unix."

I don't disbelieve the story, since his primary thing was social engineering, but I don't know if I buy the "I was going to hack the firmware on my phone to fool the feds" angle. He would need their tool chain to build it and then a way to get the modified firmware on the phone. Back then a commercially available handset was probably not field programmable. I don't know that he's been connected to any particular technical hacking achievements.

I think his stories need to be taken with a grain of salt. Plenty of truth, but also exaggeration and self-promotion.

Stopped watching at "The never ending killing fields of Iraq".

Now, if the speaker goes on to accuse Bush Sr. for failing to remove Saddam after having Liberated Kuwait, I judged too quickly. I'm pretty confident though that this is just more of the revisionist history garbage blaming Bush Sr. for Iraq, rather than Saddam's campaign of genocide against his own people and his conquest of Kuwait.

I mean, if you want to rail against American exceptionalism, at least have the decency to blame the presidents prior to Bush(Carter and Reagan) who supported Saddam after the Iranian revolution, rather than the American president who finally took the right side against one of the most brutal tyrants and dictators of his time.

There's a whole specialty field called "display calibration" that goes deep, deep down this rabbit hole. And yes, they (Tom Cruise and the guy whose name you can't hear because Tom interrupts him) are correct. Motion smoothing is violating image fidelity. It should be turned off.

We are stuck with 24 frames per second in movies, forever. Peter Jackson tried 48 frames per second with The Hobbit. It failed because it felt like the "soap opera effect".

But in almost all other video contexts, more FPS is better. Obviously in gaming more is better. YouTube supports up to 60 FPS, as does most decent recording software these days.

The blue shift that almost every TV has when on display is also a result of funky default settings. The human eye perceives a blue light as slightly brighter than a full spectrum light with the same intensity. So it works to sell TVs. And when you switch it off the default color scheme, you're first impression will be that the picture looks muted or even yellowish. This is because you are accustomed to seeing way to much blue.

If you are a true video aficionado, you'll get yourself a color meter for a few hundred bucks and do an amateur display calibration on your set.

If you are a video psycho (of if you sell faithful video experiences to an audience like in a theater) you'll hire a professional to come out with a high end spectrophotometer and calibrate each display input properly using a standardized video source.

Kind of depressing that it's only going to be used for our mistakes. Maybe Sierra will say the best solution will be to just get rid of the bombs. I would think the medical field could make better use of it.

WTF are you talking about?
The CNN article was totally unbiased, simply explaining why some counties missed their deadlines for recounts by 2 minutes (inexperience and ignorance of the process) and so didn't have their recounts count, and why another (properly) invalidated it's own recount because their machines kept breaking and they couldn't verify their own results.
I also don't get what you're saying about their title. Not a bit. Where's the bias there? What?! No recount counts, they're doing them all over....by hand.

Where's the excusing law bending, like the Republican who unapologetically broke state law to allow email and fax voting, but Fox reported that type of voting isn't"normally allowed" not "is specifically forbidden by state law"? Notice any patterns yet?

I just don't see what you're talking about at all.

I've been clear, Fox doesn't have a monopoly on bias, but they are the clear master of the field and are also the most willing to make up their own facts, as they've been caught doing thousands of times.
If CNN has a bias rating of 4/10, Fox is closer to 9/10. If Fox has an honesty rating of 4/10, CNN is closer to 8-9/10. That's what I've been saying all along. They aren't equivalent.

Side note-A federal judge reinstated Acosta's press pass today.

You live in FL?

I live in FL. My work requires me to wear a tie and dress jacket.

I get a lot free time but I have a short leash. I am on call 24 hrs. a day, 6 days a week.

Sometimes my job requires me to walk in the heat or rain to retrieve a dead body out of the woods or an open field or out on the Interstate.

All I know is, no matter the conditions here, it's better than Jersey.

I've been in the medical field service business for 30 years. Fixing / installing Cathlabs, Vascular labs,X ray, Mamo and Ultrasound systems.

The battery or such does not cost an arm or a leg. Its the R&D that goes into it. Its the supply chain warehousing parts and the tax on inventory and all that other stuff like profit.

As far as 3rd party servicing. Apple will loose and have to make their service documents/ tools available. Those tools can be different - but come to the same results.



It is in the OEM interests to keep 3rd party service away for many reasons, not just to hoard more business.

We do provide service manuals and parts to 3Rd party. no problem. They are on the web just to get them.



As far as ripping the customer off. That's wrong. Apple will need to address this. I would not think that is common.

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.