wilhelmNot forgetting CG changes that come with all of what SOC mentioned above and the weight distribution over the length of different engines. 😉
wilhelmThats right. I spoke to the representative at Ysterplaat on Saturday and he stated that it saved well over a ton in weight. I took a photo of the nose of ATE’s Super Hind before it flew, as well as the front fuselage mock-up of the Mk V, A13x. I will post it once I have downloaded my images.I also thought it looked like the AH-56.
wilhelmI went to the airshow on Saturday. The 4 ship formation happened on Sunday, so I did not get any pics. They did come screaming over my head in a diamond 4 formation over the suburb of Milnerton, which is very close to Ysterplaat. They were low and beautiful!!
wilhelmAn aerobatics aircraft has crashed into Table Bay, Cape Town, according to unconfirmed reports on Friday afternoon.
According to eyewitnesses accounts on Cape Talk radio the incident happened about 4pm.
Helicopters are reported to be circling the area where the “Dolphin” Nan older type of Czechoslovakian aerobatics plane – was seen to crash into the water.
Eyewitnesses said two groups of four planes each were practising formation flying at the time.
One flew too low and hit the water raising “a huge spout of water”.
Air Force spokesperson, Captain Ronald Maseko, confirmed “an incident took place”, but said he had no details and could not comment immediately.
Oh know. I think it is an L-29 from the SASOL TIGERS… 🙁
wilhelmIndeed, but you didn’t point that out when you replied with a simple “yes” to my question about your reply to SOC’s statement.
Anyway, I understand what you meant. I think it’s time to end this chain.
ok 😉
But leave flex alone, I like him. He is saying that violent death is violent death, whatever the weapon used.
wilhelmIndeed, but you didn’t point that out when you replied with a simple “yes” to my question about your reply to SOC’s statement.
Anyway, I understand what you meant. I think it’s time to end this chain.
ok 😉
But leave flex alone, I like him. He is saying that violent death is violent death, whatever the weapon used.
wilhelmIt’s a little quieter today for some reason. It might be ‘cos it’s a trade day. Anyhow, I’ll be going tomorrow. I have a crappy digital camera that isn’t the best, but I will take some piccies…
wilhelmQuote: Viper
Originally Posted by wilhelm
The reference to SOC was based on my opinion that if faced with a catastrophic invasion, to preserve it’s survival the US admin would most likely use WMD’s.As I’ve stated before; I fully understand this.
Look, here’s the way I perceived it at first:
SOC wrote
Quote:
We haven’t used nuclear weapons since 1945.To which you replied (as you later confirmed)
Quote:
Your statement about the US having nukes yet not using them is false.This can seem a bit odd at first glance, don’t you think?
Yes Viper, it can seem odd. It can seem odd when you do not read the entire text and understand what is being said. If you quote, you should quote the entire text that I’m answering to. Not just the first sentence. This was my explanation to you before.
Wilhelm said:
Viper, I was quoting in context of what the US would do if faced with an invasion of their country, and that they would employ WMD as a last resort to stave off a catastrophic collapse. Sort of explains why Saddam didn’t have WMD’s as he would have done the same when the US was at the gates of Baghdad.
This is the full quote by Sean.
We haven’t used nuclear weapons since 1945. That doesn’t mean we don’t have any more of them. Plus, Saddam didn’t use them in 1991 either, when he most definitely DID have them. Why didn’t he use them then either? Plus, when we were outside Baghdad, he might have considered that he’d potentially be gassing himself as well.
I was replying to the statement. Not the first sentence. I stated that his statement was (in my opinion) false , as I do not think Saddam would have cared who he would have potentially gassed. I do not think he would have hesitated to use WMD’s if he had them. Now, SOC did not throw a hissy at this mild argument of mine. Nobody did..except you. Perhaps I could have phrasesd it a tad better, but I think the forum members understood. Do you now? 😉 :p
wilhelmQuote: Viper
Originally Posted by wilhelm
The reference to SOC was based on my opinion that if faced with a catastrophic invasion, to preserve it’s survival the US admin would most likely use WMD’s.As I’ve stated before; I fully understand this.
Look, here’s the way I perceived it at first:
SOC wrote
Quote:
We haven’t used nuclear weapons since 1945.To which you replied (as you later confirmed)
Quote:
Your statement about the US having nukes yet not using them is false.This can seem a bit odd at first glance, don’t you think?
Yes Viper, it can seem odd. It can seem odd when you do not read the entire text and understand what is being said. If you quote, you should quote the entire text that I’m answering to. Not just the first sentence. This was my explanation to you before.
Wilhelm said:
Viper, I was quoting in context of what the US would do if faced with an invasion of their country, and that they would employ WMD as a last resort to stave off a catastrophic collapse. Sort of explains why Saddam didn’t have WMD’s as he would have done the same when the US was at the gates of Baghdad.
This is the full quote by Sean.
We haven’t used nuclear weapons since 1945. That doesn’t mean we don’t have any more of them. Plus, Saddam didn’t use them in 1991 either, when he most definitely DID have them. Why didn’t he use them then either? Plus, when we were outside Baghdad, he might have considered that he’d potentially be gassing himself as well.
I was replying to the statement. Not the first sentence. I stated that his statement was (in my opinion) false , as I do not think Saddam would have cared who he would have potentially gassed. I do not think he would have hesitated to use WMD’s if he had them. Now, SOC did not throw a hissy at this mild argument of mine. Nobody did..except you. Perhaps I could have phrasesd it a tad better, but I think the forum members understood. Do you now? 😉 :p
wilhelmyes, one of the Lightnings is silver and has RAF roundels. I’m lucky enough to work about 2km away from Ysterplaat right on the normal landing flight path. So I get to see these planes from very close up. And ‘cos it is a family business, I get to look at them anytime i want. :diablo: 😎
wilhelmBetween November and December 1955, SASOL delivered their first batch of coal-derived petrol for sale in South Africa. It produces 40% of South Africa’s liquid transport fuels as well as most of the countries chemical building blocks.
wilhelmThe technology has been used for many years. I got this advertising blurb from the SASOL website.
“The history of Sasol began in 1927 when a White Paper was tabled in Parliament
to investigate the establishment of a South African oil-from-coal industry.
It was realised then that, because South Africa did not have crude oil reserves, the country’s balance of payments had to be protected against increasing crude oil imports. After many years of research and international negotiations, the South African Coal Oil and Gas Corporation was formed in 1950.
From its first eight drums of creosote to the acquisition of the German CONDEA Group in 2001, Sasol is a company whose success has been founded on innovative thinking. Major milestones include our first automotive fuel (1955), the construction of the National Petroleum Refiners of South Africa (1967) and the establishment in 1990 of our first international marketing company, Sasol Chemicals Europe, which paved the way for our globalisation programme.
The company has developed world-leading technology for the conversion of low grade coal into value-added synfuels and chemicals. Today our operational footprint extends to more than 20 countries and we export to over 100. Sasol is one of the top five publicly listed companies in South Africa and is quoted on the JSE and the NYSE.”
wilhelmSouth Africa has massive coal deposits and during the Apartheid years, generated I think 45% of it’s oil using coal to liquid fuels processes. I may be slightly out on the percentage , but it’s pretty close. Still , a very impressive amount considering it is in the top 10% largest economies in the world.(based on total GDP and the number of countries there are.) SASOL is probably the world leader in this technology and has recently won a massive order to help China set up a similar system. SASOL has been doing this refinement process for many years now and it makes perfect sense given that oil reseves will not last forever. I’ll try find a link.
wilhelmDouble post. See below.
wilhelmwilhelm,
I understand the context of invasion which you referred to, but I don’t perceive your statement in answer to SOC (quotation in previous post) as having anything to do with a potential counter-invasion sceneario. We’re talking about events which have actually taken place since World War II. Is it your opinion that the U.S. has employed nuclear weapons against live targets in foreign theatres of operations after Nagasaki? Smaller, tactical employments which I don’t know about or something like that?
Viper :confused: I said that somebody like Saddam would have used WMD’s in defense of Baghdad if he had them. Particularly as he had used them before in less threatening circumstances to himself, and that he knew he would probably face a war crimes/crimes against humanity charge. The reference to SOC was based on my opinion that if faced with a catastrophic invasion, to preserve it’s survival the US admin would most likely use WMD’s. I haven’t the slightest clue what you are babbeling on about that the US has used WMD’s post Hiroshima. Everybody knows they have not. It’s called an example :confused: Do you grasp this now? The context was that if he didn’t use WMD’s then, he didn’t have them. Get it?
Sign In
