Slashdot Mirror


How To Make 96,000lbs of WWII Machinery Into High-Tech Research Platform

coondoggie writes "The US Naval Research Laboratory is taking a 96,000-pound piece of World War II-era machinery and turning it into a test-bed for leading edge communications and radar applications. The equipment was originally known as a three-axis tilting platform designed to simulate the movements of a large ship at sea. It was built by Westinghouse in 1943 as a gun platform requiring only primitive motion in roll, pitch and yaw, according to the Navy Lab. Specifically it was used as a mechanically operated deck with a heavy machine gun director and a machine gun mount installed. Gun crews and director operators could be trained on the platform under conditions that approximated the movements of a vessel at sea."

150 comments

  1. I'll bet... by Cornwallis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In 1943 it probably cost a few hundred thousand $ to build - if that.

    Today's "updates" will cost $4.3 billion, be obsolete 6 months before completed, take 6 years, be the subject of multiple disciplinary hearings, congressional investigations and DOJ corruption probes, won't work, then ultimately will be outsourced to China for completion prior to being abandoned for a new technology.

    1. Re:I'll bet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      each 1943 dollar is worth a billion 2014 dollars :D

    2. Re:I'll bet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it can be built for $4.3 million and won't be obsolete for two years or so.

      A couple of hundred thousand $ with 1943 currency have about the same value as $4.3 million with current currency if you compensate for inflation and the machine was pretty much obsolete after the war.

      I base my guesstimate on "Nothing really changes."

    3. Re:I'll bet... by symes · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well hello there you little ray of sunshine

    4. Re:I'll bet... by SpzToid · · Score: 2

      Now that's sarcasm. Speaking on behalf of the internet, this time I think we've nailed it.

      --
      You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
    5. Re:I'll bet... by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      They already tell you how much it cost - £96,000, or about $150,000.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    6. Re:I'll bet... by HetMes · · Score: 1

      non-constructive cynicism passes as insightful here?

    7. Re:I'll bet... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Is anybody having better luck than I am coming up with the price of ~100,000 pounds of structural steel in 1943? I assume that a US Naval Research Lab project didn't need to dig ration coupons out of the couch cushions to buy hardware; but we were in the process of gearing up for one of the world's largest exercises in throwing men and materiel into the grinder...

    8. Re:I'll bet... by TWX · · Score: 3, Funny

      We were still using predominately virgin steel in the '40s, so the costs for this material by weight was probably not significantly different than for other forms of steel from the manufacturer. As the raw steel smelter was selling right to the government or to the durable-goods manufacturer, whatever their price was, should be fairly close.

      Or in other words, whoever smelt it, dealt it...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    9. Re:I'll bet... by trongey · · Score: 1

      In 1943 it probably cost a few hundred thousand $ to build - if that.

      Today's "updates" will cost $4.3 billion, be obsolete 6 months before completed, take 6 years, be the subject of multiple disciplinary hearings, congressional investigations and DOJ corruption probes, won't work, then ultimately will be outsourced to China for completion prior to being abandoned for a new technology.

      Of course it will work. It was built for WWII. They made that stuff so you couldn't screw it up. There were still four Iowa class battlships active in the '90s.

      --
      You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
    10. Re:I'll bet... by Capt.Albatross · · Score: 0

      non-constructive cynicism passes as insightful here?

      Troll.

    11. Re:I'll bet... by fuzzywig · · Score: 1

      Defence contractors wouldn't be so good at bilking the government out of money if they hadn't had years of practice. I'm sure when this thing was first built someone made a killing, even if they couldn't aspire to the giddy heights of larceny practised today.

    12. Re:I'll bet... by supercrisp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Clearly the parent hasn't read much history. Military over-expenditures and boondoggles go way, way back. Hell, I was just reading about similar problems in the 14th century.

    13. Re:I'll bet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The problem can't possibly be that today everyone needs to be an engineer just to get inside an office building? In the '40s, engineering was a real profession. You had one or two engineers running the program along with a scientist and you had well-trained technicians doing the rest of the work. This is how you get things done. However, in a society surrounded by technology but insisting on the antique notion of "employment" being necessary to live, what do you do? What CAN you do?

      Create a never-ending growing treadmill of degree requirements. Keep the debt going, and make every remotely technical job require an engineer.

      Here in Montreal it's the same thing. Our bridges are falling apart, in true third-world banana-republic style. We don't even have bananas though. But we have universities! Lots of them!

      A bridge that cost 100M$ 50 years ago and took a year to build will be replaced by a 4B$ dollar bridge that will take 6 years and likely cost 50% more.

      I thought the 3D printing revolution was here? I thought we're all so "productive" now! What are we producing, and who benefits?

    14. Re:I'll bet... by EdIII · · Score: 1

      If you wanted to kick it up a notch say, "wittle" instead of "little".

    15. Re:I'll bet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " be obsolete 6 months before completed,"

      Correction; "be obsolete 6 months before Original completion date, but take twice as long as expected"

      Lazy Bastard

    16. Re:I'll bet... by toddestan · · Score: 1

      There are still WWII-era ships serving in other navies around the world.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRP_Rajah_Humabon_(PF-11)

    17. Re:I'll bet... by cwsumner · · Score: 1

      Actually, fleecing the government in WWII could quite easily get you -hung-. It was classed as treason!

  2. What language is this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    headline? goofball?

  3. Jodrell Bank by Molt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This type of reuse of ex-military kit quite often happens, although not normally so long after it was originally used. I'm not sure if it's still running on the same engines but I know that the Lovell Radio Telescope at Jodrell Bank (UK), at one time the largest movable dish telescope, originally had a lot of parts cannibalised from engines taken from two battleships. Lovell, the maker of the telescope, had also previously been using quite a lot of reclaimed military kit for his astronomical observations before the actual radio telescope was built.

    --
    404 Not Found: No such file or resource as '.sig'
    1. Re:Jodrell Bank by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it wasn't the engines it was part of the turret training gear.

    2. Re:Jodrell Bank by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This type of reuse of ex-military kit quite often happens, although not normally so long after it was originally used. I'm not sure if it's still running on the same engines but I know that the Lovell Radio Telescope at Jodrell Bank (UK), at one time the largest movable dish telescope, originally had a lot of parts cannibalised from engines taken from two battleships. Lovell, the maker of the telescope, had also previously been using quite a lot of reclaimed military kit for his astronomical observations before the actual radio telescope was built.

      After WWII German Würzburg 'Riese' GCI radar antennas were repurposed for radio astronomy. Some of them remained in use at least into the 1980s. I wonder if any are still in use?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Würzburg_radar
      http://www.astron.nl/~leeuwen/video/dloo/JAHH9p3.pdf

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    3. Re:Jodrell Bank by AlecC · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not engine parts - the main bearings that carry the dish are gun turret bearings from battleships. Since they are so central to the structure, I doubt they have been replaced.

      I like their pigeon prevention mechanisms as well - two nests of peregrine falcons, one in each support.

      --
      Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    4. Re:Jodrell Bank by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      also main bearings from battleship gun turrets
      - I believe they are still in use

    5. Re:Jodrell Bank by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2

      The hypoxia research lab where I work has a USAF hypobaric chamber dating back to the early 1950s, still perfectly functional. So not quite that old, but pretty impressive when you think about it.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    6. Re:Jodrell Bank by cusco · · Score: 2

      There is a little old observatory on the grounds of the University of Washington, built in the 1890s when the U was still well out of town. The bearings for the dome (which is small enough to be moved by hand) are Civil War surplus iron cannon balls.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  4. WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Viol8 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Isn't it about time a technical site such as slashdot started using metric units , eg kilos? You know, for the rest of the world outside the USA who has no clue what the hell 96,000 lbs means? Even in the UK hardly anyone under the age of 60 uses lbs as a measurement any more.

    1. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Sockatume · · Score: 5, Funny

      You need to use measurements people have an intuitive grasp of. Nobody in the US knows how much a kilo "feels like" but 96,000 lb is a readily comprehensible number.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    2. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by CharlieG · · Score: 1

      Maybe because the source article (yes I read it) used those obsolete terms, and the /. author didn't bother to convert them for your convenience?

      --
      -- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso
    3. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll go get some pop-corn!
      Bring on the metric vs ancient units-foght! 8-)

    4. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      I realise you're probably one of those americans who've never gone beyond your borders, but there is a world outside the USA where approx 6.7 billion people live and some of us there do read this site. And it would be nice on a *technical* site to have standard units used that the majority of the world understands.

    5. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by SpzToid · · Score: 2

      Assuming the rest of the world has access to something like Google, one might do a simple conversion with a search term as follows:

      96,000 lbs = kilos

      Here's a working example:

      http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=96%2C000+lbs+%3D+kilos

      I know this isn't a perfect solution, but I'm used to converting foreign texts in a similar fashion. This works for me in edge cases like this, however YMMV.

      --
      You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
    6. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by amalcolm · · Score: 1

      But US != world. Viol8 was pointing out that most of the world DOES have an intuitive feel for kilos, for example, as they weight themselves, their food etc. in kilos

      --
      Time for bed, said Zebedee - boing
    7. Re: WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same argument can be reversed. Use SI units like a good scientist (a scientist/technician using imperial units is a real bad scientist/technician) and US people living in the past using obsolete and obscure units can use Google to catch up with the rest of the world. You (the US) are the exception, not the rule and norm.

    8. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by DrXym · · Score: 2

      I very much doubt you know what 96,000lb "feels like" either.

    9. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Squeeze many diamonds out of that tight ass? The original freaking article uses the pound figure, dummy....and the fact it was posted here doesn't require andy conversion unless YOU need it.

      Idiot.

    10. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe because the source article (yes I read it) used those obsolete terms, and the /. author didn't bother to convert them for your convenience?

      /., a site for Dumericans, run by Dumericans. But they'll take the ad-impressions from dirty foreigners anyway.

    11. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by djmurdoch · · Score: 1

      I very much doubt you know what 96,000lb "feels like" either.

      It feels quite a bit like 96,000 tons, but quite a bit different from 96,000 grains.

      Or in metric: it feels pretty much the same as 96,000 tonnes, but different from 96,000 mg.

    12. Re: WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why yes, we're exceptional, and this is an american website. Don't like it? Build your own slashdot; we've got a (metric) ton of slashtards to send your way. That's about all that's left.

    13. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I very much doubt you know what 96,000lb "feels like" either.

      It feels quite a bit like 96,000 tons, but quite a bit different from 96,000 grains.

      Or in metric: it feels pretty much the same as 96,000 tonnes, but different from 96,000 mg.

      So in your world 1lb feels the same as 1 ton? 96,000lbs = 48 tons, just a little less than 96,000 tons...

    14. Re: WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You (the US) are the exception, not the rule and norm.

      Yes, we ARE exceptional people, aren't we?

      You need to look at history, and see that the USA got to kick ass in war and help rebuild countries they defeated while remaining the only "superpower" around today - all using feet and inches and degrees F, which we still use, and will continue to use.

      So Fuck Off, world!

    15. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      That's the joke.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    16. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by GoChickenFat · · Score: 1

      Its a US story about a US installation. Why convert that to kilos? Should we also convert every US story that uses Dollars to some other currency? What else is too offensive for you that would need to be converted? Why not just use google to do the conversion for you if it bothers you that much.

    17. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by mhajicek · · Score: 2

      As far as "feels like" I think he's right. 10,000 pounds and 100,000 pounds feel the same; they both instantly crush the observer.

    18. Re: WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by mhajicek · · Score: 1

      Take a look around. The US is diminishing and others are rising.

    19. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      For rough calculations, 1 lb = 0.5 Kg. For Fahrenheit to Celsius, subtract 30 and divide by 2.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    20. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People are familiar with what a US dollar is. Go back to analogy school.

    21. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by dfenstrate · · Score: 2

      Isn't it about time a technical site such as slashdot started using metric units , eg kilos? You know, for the rest of the world outside the USA who has no clue what the hell 96,000 lbs means? Even in the UK hardly anyone under the age of 60 uses lbs as a measurement any more.

      Explain 'Stones"

      --
      Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
    22. Re: WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      48 tonnes?

      Man, 96,000lb made it sound staggeringly enormous. Instead it's like maybe a 2 trailer road train (b double).

      Big deal.

    23. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by TheloniousToady · · Score: 1

      Judging by the fact that summaries so frequently contain simple errors (this one seemed to be missing an "a" - which sounds kinda stereotypically Japanese in the context of WWII: I then read "Pratform" instead of "Platform"), it seems as though they post the summaries without editing. If that's the case, the units are whatever the submitter submitted. Maybe he's simply an American who prefers pounds, or someone from the UK over 60.

      So, if you use your preferred units in the article summaries that you submit yourself, I doubt they would change them. Even if you use "stone".

    24. Re: WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. Fuck off USA. Fuck you.
      I will continue to ridicule you for using retarded units. You are increasingly becoming the laughingstock of the world.

      Your school system is horribly bad, your politicians the worst any democracy has ever seen, debts are ginormous. And having the NSA doesn't make you quite likeable.

      You are in a downward spiral.

      And no. You aren't the only superpower. China and Russia are not to be underestimated. India has still a very long way to go but might get there. The EU has already a larger economy than the USA.

      Behaving like an arrogant asshole would isolate the USA.

      Get real.

    25. Re: WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Currencies are not covered by the SI units. Your comparison is ridiculous.

    26. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Dunno. But in Canada our units seem to depend on what we're measuring.

      I measure my body weight in pounds. But I purchase food in grams/mg/Kg.

      The temperature outside is in Celcius. But my oven is set in Fahrenheit.

      We measure our properties for Real Estate purposes in metres. But building materials and construction labour is sold in terms of square feet.

      I buy bags of fertilizer by the Kg, but dirt by the yard.

      Day-to-day it works for us, but the more I think about it the less sense it makes. I blame our southern neighbour for some of this nonsense :)

    27. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by LoRdTAW · · Score: 1
    28. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Peter+Simpson · · Score: 1

      In the late 70s, there was a push to get the US to go metric. Protests from the auto industry that the costs would force them out of business, IIRC, squashed the effort. I don't really understand why we haven't gone metric -- $DEITY knows we all have metric tools to work on our Toyotas, Nissans and Hondas. And the industries (those that are left) have retooled several times since the 70s. It's frustrating being the last holdout, and for no good reason.

    29. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by LoRdTAW · · Score: 1

      Explain 'Stones"

      1. the hard, solid, nonmetallic mineral matter of which rock is made, esp. as a building material.
      "the houses are built of stone" rock, pebble, boulder More (in metaphorical use) weight or lack of feeling, expression, or movement. "Isabel stood as if turned to stone"
      ASTRONOMY: a meteorite made of rock, as opposed to metal.
      MEDICINE: a calculus; a gallstone or kidney stone.

      2. a piece of stone shaped for a purpose, esp. one of commemoration, ceremony, or demarcation.

    30. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by kyrsjo · · Score: 1

      It's a comprehensible number IF you're used to pounds. To most people outside the US, pounds, miles, ounces (in all their weird varieties), galons, miles, yards, fathoms, inches, feet, fahrenheits and other weird US-specific not-base-10 units of measure are only usefull after converting them (mentally or via table and calculator) to the metric system. At least you probably have to learn the metric system at school - other places some of the units are only used as an excuse to practice multiplication (and the conversion constants quickly forgotten).

      And Slashdot, while US-centric on political issues (probably because its the largest single country represented here), is read by many people outside the US. So at least providing both unit systems would be useful.

    31. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The FAQ clearly states that Slashdot is an American site primarily used by Americans catering to Americans.

      I'm not opposed to the switch, but the argument that the site has any moral obligation to was shot down before you even started.

    32. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to doubt this. I used to own an '89 Chevy Camaro and it it needed both SI and SAE wrenches to carry out some maintenance so they can clearly make metric parts.. It was also made in Detroit but painted in Toronto.

    33. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by dfenstrate · · Score: 1

      Explain 'Stones"

      1. the hard, solid, nonmetallic mineral matter of which rock is made, esp. as a building material. "the houses are built of stone" rock, pebble, boulder More (in metaphorical use) weight or lack of feeling, expression, or movement. "Isabel stood as if turned to stone" ASTRONOMY: a meteorite made of rock, as opposed to metal. MEDICINE: a calculus; a gallstone or kidney stone.

      2. a piece of stone shaped for a purpose, esp. one of commemoration, ceremony, or demarcation.

      3. The stone (abbreviation st) is a unit of measure equal to 14 pounds avoirdupois (about 6.35 kg [nb 1]) used in Great Britain and Ireland for measuring human body weight.

      --
      Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
    34. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1 stone = 14 lbs
      1lb = 16ozs

      It's very, very simple.

    35. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/converter/

      What's that? A solution that doesn't involve questioning an entire country for the actions of one "technical" (ha) website... and from an AC no less...

    36. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was made in the US, so it uses US measurements for its weight. If they convert it, you get 43544.9, which isn't a very sexy number.

    37. Re: WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the US is still rising, but others are rising at a faster rate. This is the rule of advancement and not at all threatening. If you have 1.3 Billion people all making $4000 a year it's pretty easy to advance the economy and get them $5000. Holy shit, 25% growth! Unstoppable! If the mean is closer to $40,000 it's a little more difficult to scale especially if you're dumping money into R&D, foreign aid, providing defense for half the planet, etc. The US economy is still chugging along with fairly stable growth which is better than can be said for most of the "Western" economies. Japan for instance (the last country people thought was going to overtake the US has been sitting in decades of stagflation and is now facing a burdensome aging population.) China, India, Brazil, etc all have their strengths but they have a lot of growing up to do before we talk about them in the same context.

      Unless you're just an idiot.

    38. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by stewsters · · Score: 1

      So i just typed it into Google, and it looks like it can do the conversion
      1 lightyear = 1.03461597 × 1014 American football fields
      1 lightyear = 4.70279985 × 1014 chain
      1 lightyear = 2.06923193 × 1016 cubits

    39. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by volmtech · · Score: 1

      You answered your own question. The US automakers did almost go out of business converting to metric, and all those Toyotas and Hondas people bought didn't help either.

    40. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by trongey · · Score: 1

      We in the USA are really sorry that the rest of the world doesn't have the mental capacity to deal with multiple measurement systems. Now run along and play with your cubic centimeter.

      --
      You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
    41. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by trongey · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure a lot of people in the US know what a kilo feels like. Just ask the folks in Colorado and Washington.
      Well, OK, maybe not the whole kilo - unless they toss one in the campfire.

      --
      You never really know how close to the edge you can go until you fall off.
    42. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by bluegutang · · Score: 2

      96,000 lbs is the weight of 300 Americans. Seems pretty intuitive.

    43. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by djmurdoch · · Score: 1

      96,000lbs = 48 tons, just a little less than 96,000 tons...

      Feels the same when you drop it on your foot.

    44. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      I know you're joking, but quite seriously: one liter of water weighs one kilogram. (This is no longer exact since the units have been more precisely defined, but it's close enough.) So if you know what a two-liter bottle of soda feels like, you know roughly what two kilos feel like. Figuring out what 48000 such bottles feels like might be a bit tougher, but at least it's a point of reference.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    45. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      96,000 lbs of cold steel feels like my ex-wife.

    46. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by AbrasiveCat · · Score: 1

      Just divide by 2 (2.2 actually) and you will have kg. And don't expect the US to change any time soon. Sorry, it is us.

    47. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by fast+turtle · · Score: 1

      Now why in hell should /. start using the metric system when even though the U.S. was supposed to be metric back in 1850 by Treaty, we still haven't switched?

      --
      Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
    48. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by fast+turtle · · Score: 1

      So post them yourself then. We American's don't think in metric, don't use it and don't give a damn about anyone who's not an American. Sorry but the fucking poster is the one you need to bitch at as /. doesn't have editors

      --
      Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
    49. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need to use measurements people have an intuitive grasp of. Nobody in the US knows how much a kilo "feels like" but 96,000 lb is a readily comprehensible number.

      On the other hand, everyone in the US knows what lifting two truck trailers feels like.

    50. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot is owned by Dice Holdings, which is a US-based company. Few people in the US care about kilos (myself included), so pounds is the correct unit of measure.

    51. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by CWCheese · · Score: 1

      Isn't it about time a technical site such as slashdot started using metric units , eg kilos? You know, for the rest of the world outside the USA who has no clue what the hell 96,000 lbs means? Even in the UK hardly anyone under the age of 60 uses lbs as a measurement any more.

      I vote for English units, thus the platform weighs in at nearly 6900 stone.

      --
      Have a Day!
    52. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt it's all out fault.

      You have similar British ancestry to us and we got our units system from them originally. I expect that if the US ever tried to convert we'd end up in the same mess as some industries/business would convert while others would hold out, and in general people would keep using whatever's familiar and refuse to use the new system except when they have to because no one deals in the old units anymore.

    53. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by cellocgw · · Score: 1

      Explain 'Stones"

      Stones: noun, obsolete: groundbreaking rock/blues group

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
    54. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Conversions are easy unless you need exactness. A kilo is a few ounces more than two pounds. A litre is a little more than a quart (quarter gallon). A meter is a few inches longer than a yard. A kilometer is .6 mile. Simple.

      As to using metric units for a WWII era American device that was designed and built using imperial units, why? Just take the weight of the thing and divide by two and it's a little heavier than that. Precision isn't necessary and why should someone else convert their measurements to yours? Look, it's a hundred miles from Springfield, IL to St Louis, MO. It's 217.8 km from London to Dublin.

      When in Rome, dude.

    55. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by naris · · Score: 1

      You know, the USA inherited those units of measure from the UK....

    56. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by naris · · Score: 1

      Except that the article did not originate on slashdot. You should bring up your concern with networkworld, the other technical site that did originate the article. Which is where the quote of 96000 lbs came from.

    57. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by naris · · Score: 1

      <sarcasm>"Stones" are what the author of the complaint about units of measure used on this 'murican site has. Can also be referenced as "Big Brass Ones" </sarcasm>

    58. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by cusco · · Score: 1

      We know grams pretty well, Seattle has long been known for having "the best-lit closets in America". I haven't seen kilos of weed since it stopped coming from Colombia.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    59. Re: WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The people who hate the USA the most are often the ones who most need to thank the USA and its history of exceptionalism, innovation, perseverance, ingenuity, and of rising to the occasion.

      If you don't understand what makes the USA different than (and exceptional to) the rest of the free world, come here and learn.

    60. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by chaim79 · · Score: 1

      Some of us there do read this site.

      The target audience for this site is American English speaking technical people, just because other people read the site doesn't mean they should change things from the target audience to pander to a minor fraction of readers.

      You want an American site to pander to you and you call us arrogant and self-important.

      --
      DEMETRIUS: Villain, what hast thou done?
      AARON: Villain, I have done thy mother.
      Shakespeare invents 'your mom'
    61. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by yurtinus · · Score: 1

      Everybody in the US knows what a kilo is... At least they aren't measuring it in stones...

      --
      +1 Disagree
    62. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You may buy food in grams/mg/Kg, but fresh products are generally advertisted in large writing as per LB (Turkey, $0.99/LB) but on your receipts they charge you per KG.

      Very annoying :(

    63. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's true. Plus you're presumably all too busy learning Mandarin anyway. Since that's all you'll need to know about science or manufacturing once you've finished squandering your huge headstart in STEM over China.

    64. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a world outside the USA where approx 6.7 billion people live and some of us there do read this site. And it would be nice on a *technical* site to have standard units used that the majority of the world understands.

      That's great! Create your own site and use whatever measurement standard you want! This site was created by Americans, for Americans, and on the American-invented Internet.

    65. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      American? I suspect you mean the United States of America distinctly, as opposed the various other nations on the two American continents?
      So where is the .us after the .org?

    66. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by cwsumner · · Score: 1

      Judging by the fact that summaries so frequently contain simple errors (this one seemed to be missing an "a" - which sounds kinda stereotypically Japanese in the context of WWII: I then read "Pratform" instead of "Platform"), it seems as though they post the summaries without editing. If that's the case, the units are whatever the submitter submitted. ...

      On slashdot, "they" is us. And we don't get to change text, just rate it...

    67. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by TheloniousToady · · Score: 1

      On slashdot, "they" is us.

      Or, to paraphrase Pogo, "We have met the enemy and they is us."

      And we don't get to change text, just rate it...

      So even the Slashgods don't have the power to fix summaries? If so, I guess that explains a lot. But surely if they don't already have that power, at least they have the power to grant that new power to themselves. Or am I overestimating them again?

    68. Re:WW2 machiny and WW2 units of measurement by cwsumner · · Score: 1

      And we don't get to change text, just rate it...

      So even the Slashgods don't have the power to fix summaries? If so, I guess that explains a lot. But surely if they don't already have that power, at least they have the power to grant that new power to themselves. Or am I overestimating them again?

      I think they would rather not...
      The idea was that the readers would do all the work. 8-)

  5. What you're forgetting, though... by swb · · Score: 2

    ...is that yacht builder Sea Ray and several Mercedes Benz dealers will see a significant boost in revenue.

  6. come again? by tommeke100 · · Score: 2

    So it was used back then as a platform to simulate movement at sea, and that's exactly what they are going to use it for now (after a few upgrades).
    The F-16 jets were created in the 70s and are still upgraded to this day. I don't see how this is that different.

    1. Re:come again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take a look at the operational history of the B-52 or the Chinook

    2. Re:come again? by schlachter · · Score: 1

      can't see how it's different? because the F-16 is not used for simulating movement at sea. obviously.

      --
      My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
    3. Re:come again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or the M-2 (Ma Deuce) or the 1911 Colt .45.

      if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

  7. Death & Taxes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ahh, American Ingenuity! Your average American's tax dollars hard at work... father's tax dollars.... grandfather's tax dollars?

    1. Re:Death & Taxes by necro81 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if you are trolling, making a bad joke, or are just on the anti-gub'mint bandwagon. But I'll ask anyway: would you feel better if the NRL scrapped it for the $3000 worth of steel it contains, and then built something new from scratch? I'm sure fathers and grandfathers would appreciate that repurposing is often a money-saving technique.

    2. Re:Death & Taxes by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1

      No, this is America - these are are children's children's tax dollars hard at work.

      --
      This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
  8. Re: Anonymous Coward - fuck you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Just marked your comment as spam.

    Also you are a racist. Just because our family has the habit of giving each family member the same name we shouldn't be belittled. We are the Coward family. It all started with Grandpa Anonymous. He liked his name so much he gave the name to his daughter. Now it's a Coward family tradition. Can you imagine 50 family members all named Anonymous? It's stressful enough. Thank you.

    I don't know if this mischievous boy of a nephew Anonymous caused trouble again. Sorry on behalf of the Coward family.

    Yours Miss Anonymous Coward.

  9. This is far better than the more common practice by IgnorantMotherFucker · · Score: 1

    My grandfather served in the Aleutian Islands during the Korean War. They found a floating crane had been sunk in the bay. They pulled it up out of the water, repaired it, and actually got it working again. So the people at Grandpa's navy base proudly told the Pentagon what they'd accomplished. The Pentagon's reply? They were ordered to sink it back into the bay. Otherwise it would cut into sales of newly-manufactured floating cranes.

    --
    Please mail me URLs of software employers.
  10. Bitch, bitch, bitch by Dr.+Zim · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm one of those Americans that HAS traveled abroad and I cordially invite you to create your own *technical* site with whatever units of measurement you see fit. The fact that you're even able to complain about this 'problem' is due to DARPA. You know them, they're the US agency responsible for the development of the internet.

    Everyone wants to bitch about our units of measurement, but nobody seems to have any trouble accepting our units of currency.

    --
    (name withheld by request)
    1. Re:Bitch, bitch, bitch by bluegutang · · Score: 1

      Everyone wants to bitch about our units of measurement, but nobody seems to have any trouble accepting our units of currency.

      The currency that has "metric" units (dollars and cents)?
      I wonder why.

    2. Re:Bitch, bitch, bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      decimal =/= metric

    3. Re:Bitch, bitch, bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has "decimal" units, which are wholly distinct from "metric" units. "Metric" units may be typically described in terms of decimal units, but that does not make them the same thing.

    4. Re:Bitch, bitch, bitch by cusco · · Score: 1

      Actually DARPA just takes credit for what a bunch of university system admins and some HP, IBM and DEC techs had already done on their own. Salescritters saw what they had done and said "We can charge for this!" DARPA mostly paid for writing down the spec. Internetworking was such an obvious development that it would have happened within the next year or two anyway.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    5. Re:Bitch, bitch, bitch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Misinformation is insightful now? While DARPA did work on it there were dozens of network implementations done by private enterprise. If I remember it right the final spec was basically a copy of a private spec, and it was good for whichever company it was because they were able to sell right away as what they used was already compliant.

  11. The payload is not much by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 2

    Works out to some 42000 Kg. But the picture shows the platform was getting its three degrees of freedom by very heavy gimbals. Though the whole apparatus is very heavy but the payload is not likely to more than any modern aircraft simulation platforms. Modern designs would use six hydraulic jacks and electronics to get not just three rotational degrees of freedom, but also limited degrees of freedom in translation. So wondering why someone would go through the trouble of rescuing that relic. The inertia of the gimbals is so high compared to the payload, upgrading the motors and electronics is going to be so expensive, it is probably cheaper to build a platform of similar capability using modern technology.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:The payload is not much by onepoint · · Score: 3, Interesting

      While what your saying is correct, I think it's more for the ability to handle weight. ...
      while the platform is about 42MT ( 96,000 lbs in case someone needs that )
      the original machine gun turret has a low weight of about 80MT ( the Yamato's were in excess of 2200MT )

      so I'm thinking it's for that ability.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    2. Re:The payload is not much by DocSavage64109 · · Score: 1

      It's possible that the gimbals more accurately reflect the motion of a ship buffeted by waves than 6 hydraulic jacks would. It would certainly be a more difficult test for the electronics to compensate.

    3. Re:The payload is not much by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      Six hydraulic jack system has more degrees of freedom, range of translation and range of rotation than the gimbal system. Three points on the platform, each supported by two hydraulic jacks. They connect to three points on the floor to maximize the range of motion. They are incredibly agile, they can simulate up to 8 G pulls and turns. They take advantage of the threshold of sensitivity of human bodies, especially the viscosity of the fluids in the inner ear tubes (I don't know its name in English, it is called arai vatta kungiliangaL in Tamil). Thus they jerk up 8 G and withdraw the acceleration below the threshold of humans. Thus the platform does not undergo sustained 8G but human pilot feels sustained 8G acceleration. Compared to the six jack system, the gimbal is primitive. If the six jack system is a 2013 Tesla, gimbals are 1937 Rolls Royce Silver Ghost.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    4. Re:The payload is not much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > inner ear tubes (I don't know its name in English

      semicircular canals, of which there are three:

              the horizontal semicircular canal (also known as the lateral semicircular canal),
              superior semicircular canal (also known as the anterior semicircular canal),
              and the posterior semicircular canal.

    5. Re:The payload is not much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read "MT" as megaton. Seems like a reasonable bomb.

    6. Re:The payload is not much by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      I remember the diagram from high school, the tamil term seems to be a literal translation. Thanks for the info,

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  12. In the future by Dareth · · Score: 2, Funny

    They should print US currency on soft rolls of paper. Then people can't say it isn't worth a crap!

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  13. Came for a tutorial by rebelwarlock · · Score: 1

    Was disappointed.

  14. I'm in the US by Dareth · · Score: 1

    I'm in the US and I guesstimate a kilo to be just under a half pound. So divide the number of pounds in half, then you have a rough value for the conversion.

    So 1000 kilograms is around 500 lbs. Just don't use it as a conversion of a woman's weight. You may well feel the pain of that "rounding" error.

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
    1. Re:I'm in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Awesome, but completely wrong.

      Try 1Kg = 2.2lbs

      1000Kg = 2200lbs

      1lb = 454g

      (Assuming UK lbs, not sure if you yanks bastardised them as well).

    2. Re:I'm in the US by nicomede · · Score: 1

      I'm in Europe and you seem to be using Imperial Arithmetics as well as Imperial Units, leading to some confusion in my brain.

    3. Re:I'm in the US by onepoint · · Score: 1

      also in the US, but I am shocked at your lack knowledge. a kilo is about 2.2 lbs ( you did it opposite ). talking about in the terms what a kilo feels like ... 2 good study books and a cup of coffee, or 2 t-bone stakes before placing on the grill ... I would not be surprised that you could find similar measurements of what a kilo feels like ( I can not grasp how many pints of beer it would be, but I would guess about 3 )
      a bottle of wine feels less than a pound but not near a kilo, a bottle of champagne feels closer to kilo....

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    4. Re:I'm in the US by Dareth · · Score: 1

      Yeah I swapped my units. But you appear to be cooking vampires. t-bone stakes indeed. ;)

      --

      I only look human.
      My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
    5. Re:I'm in the US by fast+turtle · · Score: 1

      2 T-Bone steaks? Those aint Texan Steaks then being that small. Remember, everything in Texas is bigger, including our women and food

      --
      Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
    6. Re:I'm in the US by onepoint · · Score: 1

      Yes you are correct, 1 Texas t-bone stake before grilling is at lease 1 kilo maybe even more. Sorry should have clarified.
      1 Texas t-bone steak had a height ( thickness ) of about a 3 fingers
      while the ones I'm grilling are about 1 finger

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    7. Re:I'm in the US by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      You have that backwards. A kilo is 2.2 pounds. Double, not half. You're confusing it with miles and km; a mile is .6 km.

  15. Blow up doll. by unixcorn · · Score: 1

    So they have a device to mimic the sea in Chesapeake Beach, Maryland which is next to the sea. It seems to me they could be better served by simply taking a boat out and training with the real thing. This is like having sex with a blow up doll while your wife is in the bed next to you.

    1. Re:Blow up doll. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      On the days it isn't wet and/or blowing then the simulator might be needed.

    2. Re:Blow up doll. by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1

      On the days it isn't wet and/or blowing then the simulator might be needed.

      LOL

      --
      This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
    3. Re:Blow up doll. by PPH · · Score: 1

      Well, there's the cost of running an entire ship vs this platform. And the time lost going out and returning between tests.

      And there are some things a blow up doll will let me do that the wife objects to. Just saying.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    4. Re:Blow up doll. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chesapeake Beach is located along the western shore of the Chesapeake Bay, not the ocean.

  16. Re:WW2 machinery and WW2 units of measurement by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

    You know, for the rest of the world outside the USA who has no clue what the hell 96,000 lbs means and aren't bright enough or are too lazy to perform the conversion?

    There, fixed that for you.
     
    When I encounter an unfamiliar measurement, I familiarize myself with it. Or I use Google or some other service to convert it into a measurement I *am* familiar with. What I don't do is insist that other people alter their behavior to suit me.

  17. bring it on: WOII technical records by fonske · · Score: 1

    Eperlecques (near Watten, France) V2 launcher bunker: 120000 cubic meter of concrete
    I guess the bombing campaign by the Allies ("Crossbow") was also a record.
    The bunker remained intact but the oxygen compressors were too much of an explosion hasard during the earth quakes caused by the "tallboy"-bombs so that the V2 launching got postponed until the end of the war happened.

  18. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No.

  19. US bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are 3 rough categories of people in the world:

    1) Those who are not free
    2) Those who live in the USA
    3) Those who should be thankful or the USA.

    1. Re:US bashing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Typo corrected.

      There are 3 rough categories of people in the world:

      1) Those who are not free
      2) Those who live in the USA
      3) Those who should be thankful for the USA.

  20. 96,000lbs of Wii Machinery? by Jaysu · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't want to be the guy to wire that one up.

    --
    It has been said that 63% of all statistics are made up
  21. Odd by nobuddy · · Score: 1

    I thought the metric system was a decimal system. Who knew it was divided in to parts of 50,25,10,5 and 1 like the US currency system. Learn something new every day.

    1. Re:Odd by kyrsjo · · Score: 1

      When discussing a value measured in dollars, would you usually say "135 $" or "2x50 $ + 3x10$ + 5$"? Who cares what notes are currently circulating. And you forgot the 100$ bills and cents, and I've never seen 25$ bills...

  22. You can buy a kilo at the drugstore. by nobuddy · · Score: 1

    Great for parties.

  23. Not quite the same by nobuddy · · Score: 1

    If you poke a hole in your wife while trying something new, she does not just make a whistling sound and fly away. (Ok, maybe- depending on the location of the hole.)

    the point is experimentation without the disaster involved with failure when tested at sea.

    "chief, the turret bolts failed, and it slid off the platform."

    Option A: "get the crane and put it back on."
    Option B: "get a diving crew, survey the wreckage, and determine if recovery is feasible. Notify supply to start the build on a replacement just in case."

  24. So what you are saying by DarthVain · · Score: 1

    ...is that the Death Star was made from obsolete Star Destroyers?

  25. Non Tarrif Barriers by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

    Nuff Said

  26. Haha, you made my day :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems everyone is a coward these days ;)

    Signed by,
    Anonymous

  27. Cool by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    I know exactly where this is. It overlooks the bay. A lot of really old crap on that base.