Starfish PrimeEmployers ‘privatising’ profits is the opposite of socialism. As is taxpayer subsidy of a process that supports this, if this is what is happening.
It would never have been mistaken for ‘leftist’ once.
When people look back on all this in 100 years time they will be amazed at how in a time of mass communication an educated and free nation could be led to believe black is white and private exploitation of an economic imbalance at a cost to the taxpayer is ‘leftist’.
Not when the taxpayer is socialising the costs. If the employers actually had to pay a high enough wage such that immigrants paid there fair share of tax+NI, they wouldn’t be hiring foreigners. The EU subscription is also socialist. Furthermore, see the use of the term, “far right,” used increasingly to describe people against immigration.
Starfish PrimeWell certainly make one ill. More than one GB restaurant has forgotten to purge the little gastropods first
On our hols to France this summer my middle son (who is keen to try anything once) was absolutely gutted to order Steak Hachette au Cheval to find that it was just BEEF steak minced and reformed with a fried egg sat on top (‘Like a rider on ‘orseback n’est pa?’) rather than the actual Horse he thought he’d ordered
Let me guess, you paid a fortune and were still hungry afterwards.
Starfish PrimeA good question.. there is that urge to consider this dish as traditionally Argentinian but frankly, I have no reasons it really belongs there..
It’s as British as anything.
Starfish PrimeNow, that thread starts to make sense :angel:
What is important is how you prepare and cook the meat as well as how the beef was raised.
The problem with the British is that they have no clue how to cook a piece of meat properly… not to mention the rest of the meal (wine, sauce, spices).The same goes for every meals, including snails and frog legs… if you know how to cook it well, it’s gonna be delicious.
As British steak is a disater most of time… a single bite of British snails would probably kill you. :very_drunk:
We don’t eat snails, we leave them be to slither along the ground. If one made it to a dinner plate, it would be definite cause for a refund.
Starfish Primeactually, in case I understood well, he claims ASRAAM shot something behind using HMD…
now, unless he thinks his pet plane has a tail gunner, he, by definition, said the target was not in shooters six (180°) since no human can look straight behind himself and, therefore, can’t with, his HMD, designate the target staying there, unless he turns the aircraft around to bring the target to his 4-5 o’clock at best…
Sure they can, how do you think people reverse in cars? Show me a source saying that a second plane designated the target.
Starfish PrimeYou are asking me why when I just gave you the definition in the previous post. Can’t you read? You even quoted it.
You said, “how do you know it is 180deg,” because the link says “tail chase.”
And a frontal hemisphere shot is when two planes are closing, not the case for OTS shot.
Starfish PrimeI know, because you are assuming that the plane is climbing at 60° angle. Like I said, it is only your false assumption!
Is there any mention of the 60° climb angle in the chart?
Is there any mention of the 60° climb angle for any official max climb rate for any modern fighter plane?This is the key sentence!
If you change the climb angle for EF2000 (from 60 to 77°), you have to change the speed in order to maintain the same climb rate of 315 m/s. And if you do that you have to look at the Mig-29 chart again, because for the new speed (M0.95) you will have different SEP.[ATTACH=CONFIG]248826[/ATTACH]
Look at that, at M0.95 Mig-29 has 340 m/s SEP.
How that compares to 315 m/s SEP for EF2000?Now it looks like EF2000 doesn’t have almost TWO TIMES higher SEP, it actually has lower SEP than Mig-29!
You see how retarded your “theory/assumptions” are!
Now you claim that we have some very specific points where they are the same, but when Andraxxus said the same thing (345m/s in the chart is actual climb rate) suddenly he is wrong?!
Let’s see where are that very specific points according to your theory:
Here is one!
[ATTACH=CONFIG]248824[/ATTACH]
Ups, here is another one!
[ATTACH=CONFIG]248825[/ATTACH]
Now, let me explain this “phenomenon”.
If I take any point between 1 and 2,4Mach, I will have actual climb rate and SEP showing the same value according to your theory.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]248823[/ATTACH]
For example, at 1,7M and 11 km (approximately 502 m/s at that height), Mig-29 will have about 185 m/s SEP. So, at 22° climb angle the Mig-29 will have 185 m/s actual climb rate.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]248827[/ATTACH]
When we look at this, we can see that you have a lot of “very specific points” where SEP on the graph/chart is actual climb rate!
Basically you had to change the climb angle for every example in order for your theory to be valid using trigonometry (since you were comparing apples and oranges in your previous posts).
What I need from you now, is to make the same right-angled triangle chart for 306 m/s (0,9M) at sea level, like I did in my example/s.
Since looking at the chart you were able to find the actual climb rate, climb angle and SEP for every speed, I think you won’t have any problem doing the same for 345 m/s SEP at 306 m/s.To summarize, I need right-angled triangle chart where you can visually show actual climb rate, climb angle and SEP for 306 m/s (0,9M) at sea level.
Can you do that for me?
Let me re-phrase it then, there is no point on that chart where the MiG-29 has sufficient SEP to climb at 345m/s. It has 345m/s SEP at one speed, which is insufficient to attain that climb rate at any angle.
That is at M0.93, which equates to 316m/s climb rate at 90deg.
The EF is not 315m/s, it is ‘more than 25%’ greater than F-16. So only when we have an official SEP chart for the F-16 can we know the true value. All we know now for the F-16 is >50,000ft/min (>254m/s), which puts EF climb rate at >318m/s. In reality, the F-16’s climb rate is probably over 300m/s, putting the EF much higher. You can see the F-16 is at 1200FPS (Feet Per Second) SEP at some points in the sea level turn chart above.
That was always my point to Andraxxus. You have to find a value where SEP = X m/s and Vsin(gamma) = X m/s. You can’t just say SEP = X, therefore climb rate = X too. The maximum climb rate at 306m/s is 306m/s at a 90deg climb angle, hence 345m/s (that Andraxxus claimed for the MiG-29) is impossible.
Starfish PrimeAll these are excellent.. but I don’t consider them British, if you ask me..
Well they’re very normal dishes in the UK (beef and chicken a little more than duck and venison perhaps). What country do you consider a beef steak dish to be from?
Starfish PrimeStarfish, there’s nothing particularly ‘left’ about a liberal immigration policy, or liberal thinking generally. To see how off-beam your thesis is, you only need to look at the elected governing parties over the period – for a Labour government to become electable it had to lose all sign of the left, while remaining liberal. I agree society had become more liberal over the past few decades, by the dictionary definition of liberal. However at the same time the ‘man in the street’ has -for example – gone from believing unions are necessary, through ‘necessary evil’ to just evil. That’s one of many measures by which we have plainly moved to the right.
Interestingly you are following a more phenomenal trend, which is the confusion of socialism with liberalsm in the minds of the illiberal.
Well, this is the problem, it’s not seen as leftist anymore when in fact it’s extremely leftist. And if you want to see the socialism, it’s because the taxpayer is left to pick up the costs of this low income migration, while the employers privatise the profits and the money earned exits the country, along with the subsidisation that already exists via the EU subscription fee and bailouts.
Starfish PrimeAll well-and-good if you examine population numbers in isolation; not so convincing an argument if you examine the age demographic of the population. All government policy, particularly pension and welfare policy, is built on a slow but steady increase in working population to cover the steady and predicted increase in the number of pensioners (and particularly public-sector pensioners).
If all the immigration from the last ten years was wiped-out the United Kingdom would be short of about two million workers even if unemployment was zero. What would be the effect on British businesses and GDP growth if we could not fill those jobs? What about the skills shortage?
What would happen to the large and growing UK national debt if GDP stagnated or started to fall?
Sadly, it doesn’t work out that way. The immigration is all low income, and of the employed portion of it, 25% pay less than zero net tax. Even in terms of gross tax, the average A8 migrant pays less than a third of the combined tax+NI of the average UK employee, even though that average has now been dragged down by the migration. Additionally they impose an added burden on public services, which is yet to even be paid for.
Always two sides to every coin. What happens to the deficit if we start actually paying for the required public service expansions? If GDP stagnates but the deficit turns into a surplus due to a reduced burden on public services and benefits then that’s still better than the status quo.
Starfish PrimeSnails are excellent with garlic butter..
So is a nice beef steak or venison, or indeed chicken or duck. Sure beats pigeons, snails and frog’s legs.
Hmmm… likes snails, hates F-35….
Starfish PrimeSattelite intel??
Lets have a look at that shall we;
In Stan/Pak and Iraq the major intel is now coming from UAV, and not satt intel. Why?, cause climate is far more an issue for satt than it is by UAV. There would be a delayed time laps with any satt com intel.
In Serbia, we clearly could see how little inpact all of NATO satt intel really had.
So take a country like Russia which is just so much larger in land mass, and you would see my point. In order to spot anything with comsatt, you would have to know beforehand where to point them. Its like looking with a flashlight in the dark. You could be lucky, but nah. I just don’t buy this.
Depends on how rapidly changing the picture you’re observing is. In Iraq/Trashcanistan you’re dealing with a lot of highly mobile noddies, so you need up to the second information. For large SAM systems defending fixed assets, the speed of information is less important, so a string of satellites orbiting past at regular intervals will do.
Starfish PrimeSounds familiar. I remember a prototype British system in the early 2000s (it was particularly interesting because of who I worked for at the time) which was quickly removed from the website of the firm which produced it, & Lockheed Martin talking about such a system in the late 1990s.
Yeah, Roke Manor and BAE set up something.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4299-cellphone-radar-tracks-traffic-flow/
http://www.popsci.com/military-aviation-space/article/2001-12/stealth-threat
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1309952/Mobile-telephone-masts-can-detect-stealth-bombers.html
Starfish PrimeAs an innocent bystander I’d love to make a comparison of French and British cousine for you guys, but, honestly.. I am not aware of Britain having any cousine, at all.. 🙂
That’s because we only do cuisine. Cooking cousins is against the law.
Starfish PrimeThey might have to legally allow them to compete, meaning Chinese receive disclosures to allow them to be competitive which incidentally allows the Chinese insight into IAF capabilities…
Unlikely, they’re mortal enemies.
Sign In
