BoxmanWell USA did just that in Iraq, get access to natural resources, make jobs for american companies paid by Iraqie oil and make Iraq buy military hardware from US.
But unexpected resitance made in unprofitable in the end.
If that was the purpose, why invade Iraq when the United States could have just as cynically invaded Canada and Mexico? Both import far more oil to the US than Iraq ever did or ever will. Besides, it would much easier to invade Canada since their armed forces have been neglected for the past 30 years, their population hasn’t any access to bomb making materials or explosives, and a significant portion of the population (particularly the oil producing Alberta) is sympathetic to the United States… :rolleyes:
In terms of military spending, particularly with respect to aerospace, the United States has benefited significantly (as has the world) with technology and systems that initially were designed for military applications. For example, developing an initially “useless” B-1 bomber ended up providing the core to the most popular jet engine ever manufactured, then there was the useless ARPAnet and SAGE systems, precursors to the modern internet we have come to know and love and sometimes throw international insults and dispersions at each other with, and how can I forget this navigation system that the US developed for its military machine called Navstar, which now inhabits our cars, cellular phones, and even cameras?
Whatever the Ruskies come up with for their stealth bomber program will likewise have unforeseen benefits in terms of technology, manufacturing, materials and R&D. The question is, are the conditions right for some of that technology to be commercialized to the Russians’ economic benefit?
BoxmanI have flown on American countless times for work and leisure. My problems have been with the cabin crews. Don’t get me wrong, most have been just fine, but a significant number have been something approaching miserable. Here’s one example, in particular.
I remember flying on American from JFK to San Juan, Puerto Rico for work (I know, “rough” assignment) and at this time AA was still flying A300-600s down to San Juan. I am looking out the window looking out at the ocean some 37,000+ feet below when I hear a stern “What do you want?” Thinking it is someone else, especially given the tone of the question, I continued to look out the window. Only to hear “WHAT DO YOU WANT?” again. This time I turn toward the Flight Attendant glaring at me with a scowl. Now, I am pretty much stunned. I think to myself “What have I done? Did I hit the overhead service button by accident?” Glancing overhead, I see I didn’t. I then look at the FA, and with a slight bit of annoyance and surprise I say to her “Excuse me?” She says “WHAT … DO… YOU… WANT?!“
Now, I am extremely slow to anger, and I will be the first to assume I am in the wrong if there is any such possibility, but this was beyond the pale for even me. I said, “‘What do you want?’ What are you talking about?” She says “What do you want to drink?” I then said, “That’s what this is about? Is ‘What do you want?‘ the standard form and tone of question during in-flight service now? Ma’am, I apologize for not responding to your first inquiry, but the tone you used wasn’t exactly what one would expect to hear without provocation. I’ll have a Coca-Cola, please. Thank you.”
Now, I am not alone in this criticism of some of the FAs on American. A buddy of mine said it best “When we were kids stewardesses were young, pretty, friendly and accommodating. Now, we’re adults flying for work and someone went and replaced those stewardesses with DMV clerks (Department of Motor Vehicle employees here in the States who you go to to renew your driver’s license and such, who are well renown for being less than friendly or customer service oriented, to say the least.)”
I know the labor atmosphere at American has been anything but great, and no doubt management is just as much to blame, but, don’t take out your misery or frustrations with management out on the customers that are the sole reason for your job’s existence.
BoxmanAvWeek Has the story, apparently it is the Lockheed Martin RQ-170 Sentinel.
What I find interesting is the size of the thing. An estimated 65-foot wingspan with a deep fuselage and a seemingly significant degree of sweep (unlike the Predator, Reaper, Global Hawk, etc. w/long straight wings) on its leading edge? Makes one wonder if that main gear is, as some have speculated, indeed a Grumman-type (seems similar in arrangement to that used on the A-6, F-14, E-2/C-2) taken off the shelf. If that is the case, we could be talking about a UAV (or perhaps UCAV) in the 20,000 lbs. (empty) to 50,000 lbs (fully loaded) range. And of course, I could be totally off base. :rolleyes: Looking forward to seeing/learning more about Sentinel.
U.S. Air Force Reveals Operational Stealth UAV
David Fulghum and Bill Sweetman/Washington
Aviation Week & Space Technology – Ares Blog
December 4, 2009
The secret is out. The U.S. Air Force has confirmed the existence of the “Beast of Kandahar” UAV that was seen flying out of Afghanistan in late 2007. The jet aircraft – a tailless flying wing with sensor pods faired into the upper surface of each wing – is the RQ-170 Sentinel, developed by Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works. An Air Force official revealed to Aviation Week Friday afternoon that the service is “developing a stealthy unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to provide reconnaissance and surveillance support to forward deployed combat forces.”
The USAF statement came after discussion of the UAV emerged here on Ares. “The fielding of the RQ-170 aligns with Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates’ request for increased intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) support to the Combatant Commanders and Air Force Chief of Staff General Norton Schwartz’s vision for an increased USAF reliance on unmanned aircraft,” according to the statement.
The RQ-170 is flown by the 30th Reconnaissance Squadron at Tonopah Test Range, Nev. – home of the F-117 stealth fighter when the program’s existence was secret – and falls under Air Combat Command’s 432d Wing at Creech Air Force Base, Nev. In Kandahar, the Sentinel was seen operating out of General Atomics Aeronautical Systems’ hangar.
The 30th RS was activated as part of the 57th Operations Group on Sept. 1, 2005, and a squadron patch was approved July 17, 2007. The activation – although not the full meaning of the event – was noted among those who watch for signs of activity in the classified world.
The RQ-170 designation is similar to that of the F-117 – a correct prefix, but out of sequence to avoid obvious guesses of a program’s existence. Technically, the RQ designation denotes an unarmed aircraft rather than the MQ prefix applied to the armed Predator and Reaper UAVs. The USAF phrase, “Support to forward deployed combat forces,” when combined with visible details that suggest a moderate degree of stealth (including a blunt leading edge, simple nozzle and overwing sensor pods) suggests that the Sentinel is a tactical, operations-oriented platform and not a strategic intelligence-gathering design.
Many questions remain about the aircraft’s use. If it is a high-altitude aircraft it is painted an unusual color – medium grey overall, like Predator or Reaper, rather then the dark gray or overall black that provides the best concealment at very high altitudes.
The wingspan appears to be about 65-ft., about the same as an MQ-9 Reaper. With only a few images to judge from – all taken from the left side – the impression is of a rather deep, fat centerbody blended into the outer wings. With its low-observable design, the aircraft could be useful for flying the borders of Iran and peering into China, India and Pakistan for useful data about missile tests and telemetry, as well as gathering signals and multi-spectral intelligence.
BoxmanAgreed with much of what you said…….BTW The protest over the USS George Washington were small in comparison to times past. 😀
There was some consideration of replacing the Gritty Kitty with USS Nimitz, however, someone realized the Japanese government was already taking a political risk in homeporting a nuclear carrier. No need to add salt to the “wound” by basing a ship there named after the leader of the US Navy that was largely responsible for defeating Imperial Japan during WWII.
In terms of economy, efficiency, and combat effectiveness, it makes little sense (other than political cowardice resulting from anti-nuclear power fear mongering) to build a large carrier with anything other than a nuclear powerplant. Perhaps the political solution to this hand-wringing dilemma is to bill large nuclear carriers as furthering the “Green” agenda… :rolleyes:
BoxmanWell, that’s a pretty chilling photo considering what happened with American Airlines 587.
I’m not saying this is what caused this tragedy, and I am sure in the end the events leading to this crash will hopefully be figured out, but a disturbing reminder nonetheless.
BoxmanWhat a horrible and frustrating tragedy. Prayers to the souls on board and their families. 🙁
The report of depressurization and electrical faults is especially ominous. So many years we have come to assume to that a modern airliner could handle turbulence and lightning strikes without incident – and that has indeed been the case for the most part for the past almost 50 years. I have a hard time believing either cold have brought this flight down. Again, this is just gut feeling and perhaps denial in light of whatever facts may come to light over the coming weeks and months.
However, who would have ever thought wake turbulence and rudder correction could overstress a modern airliner’s structure to such a point causing the rudder to snap off and leading to its in-flight break-up and loss of control albeit at far lower altitude (see American Airlines Flight 587 – November 2001)? Who knows what findings will result from this investigation, but I wouldn’t be shocked if it isn’t anything that could be surmised at this point in time.
BoxmanHere’s one from Wikipedia.
Also note, the refueling probe attached to the F4D Skyray’s port-side drop tank.
BoxmanGiven the history of the A400M program and how powerplant selection went, I’d imagine there are some folks at Pratt & Whitney Canada engaging in schadenfreude given the A400M program’s recent fortunes.
That said, I hope the program does get straightened out before it is too late.
BoxmanGoing on memory here, but best I recall, the navigation pod has a terrain following radar (and a fixed IR window) that allows the Strike Eagle to perform the low altitude penetration role formerly performed by the F-111. The nav pod does not have any targeting capability.
BoxmanGiven the Poles’ history for the past almost 70 years, one cannot really blame them for welcoming additional US defenses.
The Russians complaining about a handful of missile defense installations in Poland finds about as much sympathy with me as “reformed” burglars complaining about homeowners installing locks on their doors.
No one doubts the Russians could destroy Poland if they wished. What is apparent is the Russians resent US influence and presence in the area far more than they do the actual systems. Things become much more “complicated” if the Russians choose to make mean faces towards the Poles over some matter or another if there is a significant US investment in Poland’s defenses.
The Russians, if they feel these systems are truly a “provocation” should install a similar number of ABM systems in Cuba or Venezuela. Of course, other than some sound bites from a few politicians for public consumption, such an act would provoke a collective “meh” of bemused indifference from most Americans (“Oh no, the Russians might knock down a few of the ICBMs/SLBMs we intend to intimidate/attack Cuba/Venezuela/ (insert enemy du jour here) with…”)
BoxmanMaybe his fate will soon be known. 🙁
Missing adventurer’s items found
October 1, 2008
CNN
Hikers in California found items belonging to missing adventurer Steve Fossett, officials said Wednesday.
A weathered sweat shirt, cash and a pilot identification card with Fossett’s name were found Tuesday near Mammoth Lakes, police Chief Randy Schienle said. The ID did not have a photo, he said.
“We’re not certain that it belongs to Steve Fossett but it certainly has his name on the I.D.,” Schienle said.
BoxmanAh! So she sacked the Public Safety Commissioner for refusing to sack her brother-in-law when he divorced her sister.
No abuse of authority there, then….. :rolleyes:
Considering the person fired was investigated by the Alaska State Police and found to have used a Taser on his stepson, illegally shot a moose, drank beer in his patrol car on at least one occasion, and told others his father-in-law would “eat a f’ing lead bullet” if he helped his daughter get an attorney for the divorce, those who support the Obama/Biden ticket are probably welcome by McCain/Palin to bring this up. A Democrat is running the investigation in Alaska and has stated publicly that Gov. Palin has cooperated througout the investigation.
Also, Obama has to be wary of the “PUMAs” (“Party Unity My A**!”), Democrat and Independent registered voting women who supported Hillary and viewed the Mainstream Media and the Obama campaign as being biased towards Obama and/or sexist. They have been vocal the past 24 hours in expressing their support for McCain since the selection of Palin as his running mate. Basing their attacks on Palin on the firing of a seemingly bad character will likely only serve to infuriate these female voters further (see here – HillaryClintonForum.net).
Besides, it is not like she associates with unrepentant terrorists or is the product of a notoriously corrupt Chicago political machine. In contrast, Palin rise to governor because she stood up against corruption by members of the very powerful Republican Party in Alaska.
No matter where you fall on the political spectrum here in the US, this will be an incredibly interesting election year.
BoxmanAh! So she sacked the Public Safety Commissioner for refusing to sack her brother-in-law when he divorced her sister.
No abuse of authority there, then….. :rolleyes:
Considering the person fired was investigated by the Alaska State Police and found to have used a Taser on his stepson, illegally shot a moose, drank beer in his patrol car on at least one occasion, and told others his father-in-law would “eat a f’ing lead bullet” if he helped his daughter get an attorney for the divorce, those who support the Obama/Biden ticket are probably welcome by McCain/Palin to bring this up. A Democrat is running the investigation in Alaska and has stated publicly that Gov. Palin has cooperated througout the investigation.
Also, Obama has to be wary of the “PUMAs” (“Party Unity My A**!”), Democrat and Independent registered voting women who supported Hillary and viewed the Mainstream Media and the Obama campaign as being biased towards Obama and/or sexist. They have been vocal the past 24 hours in expressing their support for McCain since the selection of Palin as his running mate. Basing their attacks on Palin on the firing of a seemingly bad character will likely only serve to infuriate these female voters further (see here – HillaryClintonForum.net).
Besides, it is not like she associates with unrepentant terrorists or is the product of a notoriously corrupt Chicago political machine. In contrast, Palin rise to governor because she stood up against corruption by members of the very powerful Republican Party in Alaska.
No matter where you fall on the political spectrum here in the US, this will be an incredibly interesting election year.
BoxmanThe shame of it all is that these new tankers are desperately needed by the USAF. Who knows how long this will set back the recapitalization of the USAF tanker fleet already?
We, the US, should have had at least a dozen 767-based tankers rolling off the production line per year at least ten years ago. However, for the better part of the 1990s the defense budget was slashed and we coasted off of the procurement Ronald Reagan implemented in his rebuilding of the US military during the 1980s.
As stated in a previous thread, I wish Boeing had put forth a better proposal. As I view things today however, the US would have had a much more capable tanker fleet with 120+ NG/EADS A330-200 based tankers, as compared to the same number of 767-based tankers.
The bottom line is an aircraft type that should have been recapitalized at least of decade ago will go even longer without replacement.
BoxmanFor nationalistic reasons, I would have preferred that Boeing had won the contract. Well, maybe a better way of putting it is I wish Boeing had put forth a better proposal.
My primary concern is that we get the new tankers into the inventory as soon as possible. Unfortunately, we had a procurement “holiday” (as some have put it) during the 1990s. Essentially coasting off of the procurement programs initiated in the 1980s. We should have been buying at least a dozen or so tankers per year in a multi-year procurement program similar to the C-17 prgram (which itself came perilously close to cancellation). Well, we didn’t and now we are heading towards (or are in the midst of) a train wreck.
NG/EADS won. And, to my non-professional eyes, their A330-200 based proposal appears to offer the most capability for the dollar. 115-plus wide-body tankers with a couple of wing mounted drogues and a boom offer tremendous capability and NG/EADS claims they can have dozens in service in short order.
These tankers are desperately needed. Let’s get thru this protest ASAP, and get these tankers in the air as soon as possible.
BTW – Can anyone confirm the NG/EADS KC-45 proposal includes a centerline drogue next to the boom (a’la KC-10)? The artist renderings I have seen haven’t made that clear.
Sign In
