Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

What Modern Militaries Can Learn From Battlestar Galactica

Posted by Soulskill on from the graceful-degradation dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Modern warfare these days is all about a 'networked environment.' But what happens when such things that make a modern military work breakdown? How would America's armed forces fight if their computers crashed, could not communicate, or were hit with massive viruses? What then? 'There's wisdom in science fiction. The conceit behind the reboot of the sci-fi epic Battlestar Galactica was that networking military forces exposes them to disaster unless commanders and weapons designers think ahead to the repercussions should an enemy exploit or break the network. The mechanical Cylons, arch foes of humanity, are able to crush the humans' battle fleet and bombard their home worlds with nukes by insinuating viruses into networked computers. They sever contact between capital ships and their fighter forces, and they shut down the fleet's and planets' defenses. Having lost the habit of fighting without networked systems, human crews make easy pickings for Cylon predators.'"

61 of 272 comments (clear)

  1. what? by hypergreatthing · · Score: 5, Insightful

    wtf? get the frack out of here. Comparing battlestar galactica to the modern military.... might as well compare NCIS to police work or star trek to nasa. What can fiction tell us about anything? nothing, because it's not based on real life.
    What does abraham lincoln vampire hunter tell us about colonial life? Lots apparently.

    1. Re: what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Exactly. If they took down our networks we would... not care and keep working?

      People have no idea how little actual military stuff is actually networked.

    2. Re:what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I learned a lot of things from Sci-Fi before I learned them in real life.

        In Star Trek: TNG, for example, I (through the Klingons) learned that Blacks are violent. I also learned that Ferengi (Jews) are greedy. And that women who study Psychology (Counselor Troi) are all ditzy sluts who like to codify common sense through their cleavage. Then, through Voyager's Janeway, I learned that all women over thirty-five are nagging bitches who enjoy being difficult to their families.

      Then, through Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and comic books, I learned that nerd humor is pretty much gay humor - excessively chatty with the only controversy being that all the men wear underwear on the outsides of their clothes.

      Yep, Sci-Fi. I tossed it all in the trash or out the window. Then I got a skateboard and started playing football, then got a girlfriend; and have been a real man ever since.

      -- Ethanol-fueled

    3. Re: what? by Shoten · · Score: 5, Informative

      Exactly. If they took down our networks we would... not care and keep working?

      People have no idea how little actual military stuff is actually networked.

      This is less and less true every year. Without networking, forget about using Predator or Reaper drones, for one thing. Forget about chain of command as well, forget about intelligence...moving in either direction. Most importantly, forget about logistics too.

      --

      For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
    4. Re: what? by F34nor · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There was a story in one of the Iraq books I read, Rise of the Vulcans or something like that where an amsemtrical warfare game sponsored by the US military was stopped when the Marine commander running the "bad guy team" used things like mopeds to move data rendering all the cool e-warfare shit we had useless. Basically the blue team guys thought they could disrupt and destroy a low tech enemy but it didn't work. Old age and treachery will over come youth and enthusiasm every time.

    5. Re: what? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Interesting

      People have no idea how little actual military stuff is actually networked.

      I think they also have no idea how non-critical a lot of the technology is. When I was in the service, were were constantly training for "what if" scenarios. If our radios were jammed, we would communicate with flares, smoke grenades, semaphore flags, signal mirrors, etc. Once a month we would have a "vehicle appreciation day" where we would move every piece of gear in our battalion for twenty clicks (km) using only our LPCs (leather personnel carriers (boots)). Heck, we even trained for a lack of breathable air. There are few things more difficult than trying to sleep with a gas mask on. A "network failure" is not going to stop the US military.

    6. Re: what? by Deltaspectre · · Score: 2

      Or taking advantage of the simulation. I don't know the name of the exercise off the top of my head, but I remember the guy exploiting poorly modeled Jeeps(?) to move information.

      --
      My UID is prime... is yours?
    7. Re: what? by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The single biggest issue is GPS. How many 'smart' things simply stop working when our satellites are taken out (either by enemy...or just space junk cascading into the Kessler Syndrome/Effect)

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    8. Re: what? by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 2

      I would agree with you, but sometimes the sum of the pieces is greater than the total. I.e. you can test widget/process A for all manner of failures and B, C, D as well. But testing ALL of them for simultaneous failures simply isn't possible. And while I also agree that it won't 'stop' the military, it will significantly degrade it's effectiveness.

      Which, when fighting a superior force is exactly what you want to do...and is exactly what our enemies would be facing and thus want to do.

      I'm sure it's been thought out and planned, but sometimes a complete 'failure' isn't needed to actually cause enough problems to overcome your opponent.

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    9. Re: what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      You're looking for USMC Lt. General Paul Van Riper and his unorthodox response to the 2002 Millennium Challenge wargame.

    10. Re: what? by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "The single biggest issue is GPS. How many 'smart' things simply stop working when our satellites are taken out "

      Smart things? Our Pilots cant fly without GPS, they do not train them to navigate. Honestly it is mind blowing that the powers that be are that incompetent.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    11. Re: what? by TemporalBeing · · Score: 3, Informative

      Exactly. If they took down our networks we would... not care and keep working?

      People have no idea how little actual military stuff is actually networked.

      This is less and less true every year. Without networking, forget about using Predator or Reaper drones, for one thing. Forget about chain of command as well, forget about intelligence...moving in either direction. Most importantly, forget about logistics too.

      True, the drones and various functions would be disabled. However, the US Military is by design able to function without access to the chain of command - one thing that has been one of our greatest strengths throughout history.

      So losing the network will have some issues, but will not cripple the US Military in any fashion.

      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    12. Re: what? by TemporalBeing · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would agree with you, but sometimes the sum of the pieces is greater than the total. I.e. you can test widget/process A for all manner of failures and B, C, D as well. But testing ALL of them for simultaneous failures simply isn't possible. And while I also agree that it won't 'stop' the military, it will significantly degrade it's effectiveness.

      Even complete failured it trained of equipment is trained for. The military is taught not to rely on equipment to get the job done. Multiple failures are expected, and can easily happen in any combat situation.

      --
      Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away. - Elvis Presley (source: imdb.com)
    13. Re: what? by ArtemaOne · · Score: 2

      You don't understand how we communicate. We have a large number of communication systems that are unrelated to the internet. Drones would work just fine. Chain of command communications would be untouched. I will not list what we have for OPSEC reasons, but it is far more vast than you know.

    14. Re: what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Even without all the geewiz toys the military trains to operate in a low tech environment. A classic example of which is the fact that we've had laser range finders for decades, and we still train our snipers to use the mil system and we give them the math necessary to figure out how to place rounds on targets at unknown distances. Pretty much every soldier learns in basic training how to read a map and use a compass, pilots use maps and terrain features to navigate aided by AWACS and air traffic control, even if the RADAR is being jammed, a good pilot will know where they're at by the terrain around them, and fighting over the ocean or a vast desert is the only places where there aren't enough terrain features to navigate by eye. So I say "meh" to the OP's "OMGsorzS the TOYZ are BROKESESSes",

      Here's the bottom line, the toys are helpful when they work, and a hindrance when they don't, you use them in addition to your base proficiency skills. We had a unknown range cold bore fire exercise one year where the local authorities were allowed to participate, a couple of them came in with laser range finders and were heavily reliant upon them to do their jobs. The shoot was on a rainy day with stupid high humidity, they couldn't get solid numbers from their range finders due to refraction from the high moisture content and ended up missing all their targets. In their defense they said they train for tops a 200 meter shot with the average urban engagement being well under 50 meters so they never really mess with the scope much outside of zeroing it.

    15. Re: what? by Leggman · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I was in the Naval ROTC in college and they made us learn to navigate using a sextant...

      --
      You don't eat crackers in the bed of your future or you get all...scratchy! - The Tick
    16. Re: what? by error+303 · · Score: 5, Informative

      A similar thing happened in Operation Millenium in 2002. The US commander, General van Riper, in charge of the "red" team (i.e. middle-eastern nation, i.e. Iran) opted to use non tradiational attacks. In effect he launched every available missle on day one at the "blue" fliceet, overwhelming US missle defense systems, and then proceeded to use skifs and speed boats in suicide attacks to avoid any head on engagements. The "blue" team was overwhelemed on the first day and on the second day US command ordered the war game restarted, with much more tight contraints on egagement and tactics. In effect, General van Riper showed that the US was not ready to engage in asymetric warfare in the middle east, and rather than conceding that, they changed and "rigged" the game to show that the US would achieve an easy an descive vicoty. General van Riper resigned in the middle of the game in protest.

    17. Re:what? by Guspaz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Battlestar Galactica also posited that connecting two computers together with an ethernet cable instantly makes them completely vulnerable to long-distance wireless hacking because "now it's a network and the cylons can hack networks", so I'd take the whole thing with a grain of salt.

    18. Re:what? by phobos512 · · Score: 2

      I just can't see a US commander going "We DIE." Emphasis on the DIE. Plus they don't have those cool little (and incredible noisy) eye piece things. Though I guess they will over the next few years so, awesome.

    19. Re: what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Or he gamed the game. As an example, he had very heavy automatic weapons (50 BMG or higher I forgot) on said skiffs. Except that in the game, they didn't need to fire, or carry their ammo load. Had they done those two things the skiffs would have been unable to maneuver effectively while fully loaded, and only able to fire while fully loaded because any lighter load would have caused the skiff to tip over from the guns recoil. If your argument is that the US Navy (or US Military in general) has blind spots I agree, but you can't prove it by gaming a simulation. It makes for a great internet general's story though...

    20. Re: what? by gl4ss · · Score: 2

      testing for simultaneous failure of everything? what's there to test, in that case wizards did it and you might just as well give up. if the mechanical, by wire and the multiple parallel electronic methods of communication break up then it was the wizards and the aliens in alliance and it's best to dig a hole and stay there and hope nobody panics and launches the nukes(oh wait couldn't do it with simul-mega-break).

      btw. it's the other armies of the world that should train for it than the US, because it's most likely that an attack from the US will cause simultaneous catastrophic failure of the military network. oh wait - every fucking even semi-serious army does it! because they know their centralized network infra is going to be fucked in about ten minutes(making them a tool for peacetime and limited scale operations.. that is just another word for "fixing domestic problems").

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    21. Re: what? by kenwd0elq · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes, and I used to TEACH celestial navigation at the USAF navigator school. Which is now closed.

      GPS is too easy, too inexpensive, and too accurate, so NOBODY actually uses celestial navigation any more. But cel nav requires practice, and it is a "Use It Or Lose It!" skill.

    22. Re:what? by bkmoore · · Score: 2

      ...I also learned that Ferengi (Jews) are greedy...

      Gene Rodenberry, William Shatner and Leonard Nimoy were all of the Jewish faith. Go listen to Adam Sandler's Happy Hanukkah song for proof.

    23. Re: what? by kenwd0elq · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The original article's premise was "The US military may be vulnerable to a cyber-attack, perhaps vaguely similar to the one depicted in Battlestar:Galactica." I was replying to a comment saying, in effect, "we learned how to navigate by the stars at NROTC, so we don't really NEED our fancy GPS systems." I'm saying "Celestial navigation is a great fallback navigation method for when everything else goes to hell, but it takes continuous practice that I don't think people are getting these days."

      DO they still teach cel nav any more? I don't know. But with the LORAN and OMEGA systems closed or closing, being able to find your way back to land might be a handy skill to know, if somebody manages to launch a few tons of 1" polycarbonate cubes into a reverse-trajectory low-Earth orbit.

      The point is, we DO depend on our electronics, and our military would be crippled if somebody hacked or degraded our electronic communications and navigational systems. Is some knockout cyborg dame going to seduce our only scientist and sink our fleets with gremlins? No, B:G is a fictional and EXTREME case. The fact that science fiction is often extreme and overwrought doesn't mean that the crux of the problem is itself fictional.

  2. Someone just discovered Battlestar Galactica I see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Someone just discovered Battlestar Galactica I see. Old news, militaries already aware of this, nothing to see here, move along.

  3. Aren't we the cylons? by Lifix · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In Battlestar Galactica, the humans are facing the Cylons technologically superior force with advanced cyberweaponry. Doesn't that make us (the USA) the Cylons? Sure China is a threat, but I haven't heard of any damage from any Chinese 'attack.' I have, however, heard of Stuxnet, which had real economic, political and technological consequences.

    --
    In nature, there are neither rewards or punishments, there are only consequences.
  4. Never RELY on any one point of failure by TWiTfan · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Any one point of failure that can render your entire force useless is a problem. A network should be treated as an AID to military forces, not a necessity. Soldiers should, of course, know how to still function if it goes down.

    --
    The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    1. Re:Never RELY on any one point of failure by flayzernax · · Score: 2

      Also those networks should be redundant and decentralized this way its harder to take down an entire network. Even if its treated as only an aid, the side with the aid may have a distinct advantage over the side without. This is were having your network consist of many technologies and generations of hardware is nice. One shouldn't phase out old hardware that still works just because its "obsolete" falling back to networks of short wave radio's when your satellites and drop ships get knocked out of the sky means you are not out of the fight just yet.

      Anyway as far as technical set up the BSG series demonstrates a winning scenario spot on. The Russians did well in this regard and some of their old tanks still work just fine enough to be a problem in places like Syria.

    2. Re:Never RELY on any one point of failure by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 3, Informative

      . Soldiers should, of course, know how to still function if it goes down.

      . . . and more importantly, commanders. Von Clausewitz wrote the importance of not relying on information and command chain systems. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Clausewitz :

      While Clausewitz was intensely aware of the value of intelligence at all levels, he was also very skeptical of the accuracy of much military intelligence: "Many intelligence reports in war are contradictory; even more are false, and most are uncertain.... In short, most intelligence is false." This circumstance is generally described as the fog of war. Such skeptical comments apply only to intelligence at the tactical and operational levels; at the strategic and political levels he constantly stressed the requirement for the best possible understanding of what today would be called strategic and political intelligence. His conclusions were influenced by his experiences in the Prussian Army, which was often in an intelligence fog due partly to the superior abilities of Napoleon's system but even more to the nature of war. Clausewitz acknowledges that friction creates enormous difficulties for the realization of any plan, and the fog of war hinders commanders from knowing what is happening. It is precisely in the context of this challenge that he develops the concept of military genius, whose capabilities are seen above all in the execution of operations.

      So you need an army where units can function independently. Even if you have a great military plan: "No campaign plan survives first contact with the enemy".

      Not really new thinking, at all.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  5. Reciprocity. by Shoten · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What's strange about the whole concept of Battlestar Galactica and the nature of the attack by the Cylons is how one-sided it was. The humans seemed to have an awareness of what cyber warfare is (they reference firewalls and viruses in the series), yet they never seemed to develop any more than a rudimentary defensive capability (CND, in military parlance) and no intelligence or attack capabilities (CNE and CNA) whatsoever. This, despite the fact that their adversary was entirely cybernetic in nature. Um...yeah, no, I don't buy it. Makes for a good story device, yes (and I loved the series), but I don't buy it as actually realistic. Think about the long-distance communication needed for resurrection, for example...WOW. Get access via that, and think of the incredible damage you could do to Cylons...heck, just a denial of service attack would drastically alter the priorities of an attacking Cylon force, since their losses would be magnified in significance.

    --

    For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
    1. Re:Reciprocity. by twotacocombo · · Score: 2

      This was at least partially explained by the Cylon's disappearance for decades. How do you build systems to fight and defend against an enemy you haven't seen in 40 years, but who have also infiltrated your society and military? They know your weaknesses while you can only guess at theirs, with zero time to adapt due to the surprise assaults.

    2. Re:Reciprocity. by BitZtream · · Score: 2

      Did you watch the series?

      Long distances mean no resurection. Destroy the resurrection ship, and they suddenly fear death.

      It was done.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    3. Re:Reciprocity. by TWiTfan · · Score: 2

      I think the point of the opening miniseries was that humans had become complacent in their defenses, since they hadn't even seen any Cylons for 40 years. And in those 40 years, the cylons had advanced far beyond what humans ever expected them to.

      And during the course of the series, they did develop some defenses (discovering/attacking Resurrection ships and adapting the cylon virus to use as a weapon themselves, for example). But it's hard to do a lot of R&D when you're running for your lives and just trying to survive most of the time.

      --
      The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    4. Re:Reciprocity. by Shoten · · Score: 2

      This was at least partially explained by the Cylon's disappearance for decades. How do you build systems to fight and defend against an enemy you haven't seen in 40 years, but who have also infiltrated your society and military? They know your weaknesses while you can only guess at theirs, with zero time to adapt due to the surprise assaults.

      An excellent question, and I'm glad you asked it. Simply...the way the Cylons did with humans. You aren't at war with them, but that doesn't mean you go totally off the grid as far as the other is concerned. This, too, is an inaccuracy of what an armistice looks like. North and South Korea skirmish, raid, and spy. NATO and Warsaw Pact...same thing. In this case, it'd be easier for the humans, because again, CNE is incredibly effective against an opponent that is entirely electronic in nature and 100% networked, down to every last entity. If you're barely at peace with someone that you just fought a horrifyingly intense war with, the last thing you want to do is STOP WATCHING THEM.

      --

      For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
    5. Re:Reciprocity. by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Moreover, there was the episode where the Cylons were dying of an encephalitis virus which was incurable and had a 100% fatality rate and which was so virulent, that it would infect the resurrection ship if any victims resurrected since it would be carried over.

      Lee Adama put 2 and 2 together and hatched a plan to commit genocide against the Cylons, but Helo "Goody-Twoshoes" Agathon killed the captive Cylon victims before they could carry out the plan.

      What I want to know is why Agathon was not blown out an airlock for that piece of mutiny that resulted in casualties against the humans due to an aborted attack.

  6. Re:Lesson one: don't re-reboot by TWiTfan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sorry, but the Battlestar Galactica reboot was FAR superior to the original. And I say that as someone who was a huge fan of the original. It should be the textbook case for how to do a reboot right.

    --
    The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
  7. Looking back instead - Wargames, from 1983 by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 2

    This is not very new:

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086567/?ref_=ttqt_qt_tt

    "a back door into a military central computer in which reality is confused with game-playing, possibly starting World War III"

    So where is the news, except the setting?

  8. Ridiculous by Grashnak · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Modern war - that is, every war the US has fought in the last decade, has been fought largely by infantrymen, light armor and close air support. All of which function just fine without a networked environment.

    Maybe you learn the difference between sci fi and reality.

    --
    Life needs more saving throws.
    1. Re:Ridiculous by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Infantry, and even light armor, perhaps. Close air support, not so much. The technical term for close air support that's not in proper communication with the ground troops is "friendly fire."

    2. Re:Ridiculous by bkmoore · · Score: 3, Interesting

      True, a lot of people on /. seem to be confusing StarCraft for real command and control. If the network all went down, it wouldn't make a huge difference, at least at the Battalion level or below. We'd all just pull out our laminated maps and grease markers and keep on executing the mission. Almost all communication is encrypted radio anyway. Most Computers in the military are used for doing inane things such as making PowerPoint slides. In that sense, loss of computing might be a tactical advantage.

  9. Re:Or Star Trek, Dr. Who, Terminator, or WarGames by Nyder · · Score: 2

    What's so special about BattleStar Galactica? Why is this on /. to begin with?

    It's covered under the Nerds part. Why are you on this site again?

    --
    Be seeing you...
  10. Hard ware Network Kill switches by gurps_npc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When facing an enemy whose ability to infiltrate your IT network far exceeds yours to keep them out you should: 1) Only network equipment that actually needs to be networked together. As in targeting system with weapon. 2) Create no physical links at all between systems that don't need to be networked together. 3) Honeypot them into a virtual trap.. (Never understood why they never tried this in Galactica). You want them THINK they have compromised your system, especially whey they have not.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  11. I don't know... by Chessucat · · Score: 2

    ... mayhaps the Navy could learn to design hatches to make a cricket sound when opened?!?

    --
    "I'm a dirty white tomcat, enter my world..."
  12. ITS A TV SHOW, the cylons should have won by alen · · Score: 2

    the whole point of tech in the military is to shorten the decision making cycle. most times you don't know where the enemy is, so you have scouts looking for him. once they sight the enemy it has to be reported to the highest levels command so that the general and everyone below him has a clear picture of the battle.

    in the old days it was done by radio and scouts on feet and wheels. now its done by drones, cameras and the data is networked to everyone. this allows you to make decisions where to attack faster.

    since the humans in BSG were so far behind the cylons technologically, they should have been exterminated in the first few episodes. but you need lots of episodes to make money and the good guys to win to make people watch

    scientifically it was a dumb show. robots using eyes instead of heat, sonar, radar and other sensors to find humans hiding on the planet and out in space

    1. Re:ITS A TV SHOW, the cylons should have won by colinrichardday · · Score: 2

      in the old days it was done by radio

      So that's how Wellington defeated Napoleon at Waterloo.

  13. Re:Lesson one: don't re-reboot by PhxBlue · · Score: 2

    Caprica was a spinoff, not a reboot.

    --
    !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
  14. Re:But maybe the enemy is running Windows XP by TWiTfan · · Score: 2

    Be sure to bring a Mac though. Aliens don't use Windows.

    --
    The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
  15. The argument suffers a bit for referencing fiction by Karmashock · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I completely agree with the premise that you want to design weapons platforms from the ground up assuming a broad spectrum of threats. Be those direct physical attacks or more subtle network intrusions.

    War.

    What will one human mind do to overcome the machinations of another hostile human mind? Anything. Everything.

    Be prepared for anything. Biological. Nuclear. Chemical. Hackers. Sexy honey pot assassins. Everything is on the table.

    Let your guard down anywhere and you've told the enemy how to kill you.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  16. Actually, by Minwee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since the Cylons were able to dominate the colonial computer networks because they manufactured most of the key parts, wasn't the lesson of Battlestar Galactica more like "Hey, maybe it might not be such a good idea to outsource production of all of your really important defense stuff to the people you are going to use it to defend yourself against?"

  17. Re:Lesson one: don't re-reboot by hackula · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Speak for yourself. BSG was great, and DS9 was the best ST series.

  18. Re:History also teaches by Zedrick · · Score: 3, Informative

    > Germany were sometimes tactically frozen is their rigid command system

    Huh? Ever heard of kampfgruppe? Germany probably had the least rigid command system of all WW2 participants, unless you count various partisan groups.

    Or did you mean Japan and the Soviets?

  19. Squadron of F-22's Lost Crossing the Date Line by Cassini2 · · Score: 4, Informative

    While attempting its first overseas deployment to the Kadena Air Base in Okinawa, Japan, on 11 February 2007, six F-22s of 27th Fighter Squadron flying from Hickam AFB, Hawaii, experienced multiple system failures while crossing the International Date Line (or 180th meridian of longitude) caused by software errors.[230][231][232] The fighters were able to return to Hawaii by following tanker aircraft.

    From wikipedia. The references are:
    230 "F-22 Squadron Shot Down by the International Date Line." Defense Industry Daily, 1 March 2007. Retrieved: 31 August 2011.
    231 "This Week at War". CNN, 24 February 2007.
    232 Johnson, Maj. Dani. "Raptors arrive at Kadena." US Air Force, 19 February 2007. Retrieved: 9 May 2010.

    1. Re:Squadron of F-22's Lost Crossing the Date Line by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The tanker was there anyway. it also had to return to Hickam with the F-22's to tank them on the way.
      The software glitch was a one time thing, in a brand new aircraft. Fixed within 36 hours.

      But yes. Let's continue the theme that the pilots suck, the aircraft are useless, and up until recent times, each and every deployment (be it people or a new machine) went perfectly.

  20. Re:Lesson one: don't re-reboot by TWiTfan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    DS9 was the best ST series

    I was beginning to think I was the only one who thought that. It was the only ST series, to me, that seemed even remotely realistic. All the others were set in some bullshit socialist utopia where no one needed or wanted money; the Federation was a bunch of flawless boy scouts; greed, lust, deceit, and religion were nonexistent; and no one thought it even remotely strange that crewmen were bringing their families aboard battleships. The characters on DS9 felt much more like real human beings (and aliens).

    --
    The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
  21. Re:Someone just discovered Battlestar Galactica I by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2

    Damn! Someone, maybe a military research project group, should invent a robust networking system resistant to outages and automatically rerouting through many other connections. It could connect various military networks, and if any site goes down due to a bomb, rerouting is instantaneous.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  22. Re:Next up on Slashdot.... by VortexCortex · · Score: 4, Funny

    What Congress can learn from Watching PokeMon Cartoons....

    Always repeat your name as often as possible so you're more likely to get chosen.

    NEXT!

  23. Never Underestimate 'em by Molochi · · Score: 4, Funny

    Never underestimate the bandwidth of a fleet moped riders wearing backpacks full of flashdrives.

    Back in my day it took tapes and stationwagons

    --
    "The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
  24. Re:Lesson one: don't re-reboot by nine-times · · Score: 2

    Not only did they show a world beyond the federation where money and greed were still present, but they showed the seedy underbelly of the federation. The main characters sometimes engaged in unethical behavior. There was the whole deal with Bashir being genetically engineered. There were assassinations. There was section 31.

    It was also one of the earliest shows of its type to frequently have multi-episode (even multi-season) plot-lines. They had a whole season where they had to flee the station and couldn't return. That show was really good.

  25. Already working that by 1369IC · · Score: 2

    The Army's already working things to work in GPS-denied environments. Here's a story. Full disclosure, I work at the Army's R&D command.

  26. Re:History also teaches by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

    I think (assume? Hope?) he meant Japan and Russia. Germany, as you say, was known for encouraging and rewarding tactical initiative. In Russia, doing that would get you shot (even if it worked) and in Japan, it simply didn't occur to anybody.

    --
    Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  27. Re:Lesson one: don't re-reboot by ImprovOmega · · Score: 2

    DS9 was the best ST series

    I was beginning to think I was the only one who thought that. It was the only ST series, to me, that seemed even remotely realistic. All the others were set in some bullshit socialist utopia where no one needed or wanted money; the Federation was a bunch of flawless boy scouts; greed, lust, deceit, and religion were nonexistent; and no one thought it even remotely strange that crewmen were bringing their families aboard battleships. The characters on DS9 felt much more like real human beings (and aliens).

    DS9 was more of a direct social commentary. The remainder of the Star Trek series are set in a post-scarcity culture. In fact one of the recurring themes in Star Trek TNG was bullshit reasons why they couldn't magic up the parts that they required. Think about it. Their power sources are orders of magnitude greater than required to sustain life functions (to the point where they convert pure energy back into mass for stupid shit like tea-cups and guitars), so anything that your neighbor has that you might want you just magic up on your home replicator or whatever. Starships have power problems only because they're limited in what they can carry on board, planet based installations wouldn't have that limitation.

    So other than the occasional sociopathically imperial minded alien species, what is there to fight over in such a culture as that? Certainly most of the internal pressures are gone.