Aeronautics were not developed nor greatly advanced by military needs, quite the opposite happened. The nations with long range fighters and bombers in the Second World War were those who had developed long range aircraft in the late 20s and 1930s because of civilian air travel needs.
While Germany's bomber and transport fleet were based on short range twin engine (He-111, Ju-88) and tri-engine (Ju-52) designs with a few small production run four engine aircraft, the United States and Great Britain had many longer range and higher payload aircraft because of the need for longer range civilian transport and bombers to project power over the sea approaches.
Jet engine development occurred prior to the war, but it did have it's first mass produced aircraft applications because of the war.
Long distance communications in the form of short wave radio, telegraph, undersea cables didn't occur because of military application, but because of civilian and commercial needs.
Navigation developed because of trade, not because of military needs, unless you count the advent of navigation being Gee, LORAN and GPS.
Yes, every year on the day of the SotU, the Washington Post White House and New York Times will link to an article that is no longer under embargo with the outline of the speech, and a couple minutes after the President starts speaking the full text of the SotU will be out from embargo and printed.
Time the President started was a 9:00 pm, time of the article is 9:13 pm
While for weeks leading up to the SotU the President will use speeches as sounding boards for his ideas, hell NPR was just talking about this yesterday.
Furthermore, on the rebuttal, Congress members will leave the House early to rebut or support the SotU address for the media.
This year there are two rebuttals by Republicans, both will be available right after President Obama is done with his speech.
The problem with the analogy for the Moon and Spanish exploration in the New World is simple.
There was money to be had, hand over fist in the New World, going back and forth to the Moon was a money sink. Even if Apollo 19-20 had been funded and Saturn V production had continued, the Oil Crisis of 1973 would have killed the funding.
NASA needs to get out of manned spaceflight and back to what it was founded for, developing technologies for civilian aviation and aerospace applications.
Increasingly efficient and powerful turbofans are because of military research, your better tank engine technology actually comes from the private sector and is adopted for the military.
Technology goes both ways very quickly between the private sector and military since many military platforms are based on civilian platforms. For example, the C-17 cargo aircraft's engines are derived from the engines for the Boeing 757 and will be an option for the new Russian civilian airliner the Il-96.
The engines of the CRJ-700-900 are derived from the engines designed for the A-10 Warthog.
Its been "reported" that its a match for the F-22, but the fact is that it's only flown a handful of times in very limited envelopes. Theres really no way to tell what this aircraft is capable of and how good it's technology is.
If it's really based on the F-117A, then the stealth technology is at least a full generation behind F-22, and less capable than what Rafale and Eurofighter Typhoon have, not to mention F-22A and F-35 and modern UAVs and UCAV prototypes have.
F-22s capabilities are because of 12 years of test program and refinements of software, the new Chinese fighter is basically were YF-22 and YF-23 were in 1990-91 were or where X-35 and X-32 were in 2000-01.
Plus we don't know the sensor capability of this new aircraft, it's data link capabilities, range, speed, armament.
Its years too early to say it's a match for F-22, F-35, Typhoon or Rafale
Russia has been involved in a high causality war costing them a lot of money and many lives since 1999. The causality rate for Russian combat soldiers in the Second Chechen War was roughly 5 times higher than for US and allied forces during the worst fighting in Iraq at the same period.
The US hasn't had terrorism in apartment buildings, urban mass transit systems or transportation hubs like Russia has, so you can't say what the American response would be.
However when there was a mass shooting at LAX in 2002, they didn't shut down the airport.
Yea, its the same in Oregon, except for the fighting with the Port of Portland, and here in Alaska.
No guns in schools without permission of the administration, court houses, or bars. No permit for carry conceal but if you are stopped or interact with Law Enforcement you have to let them know you have one on you.
There is a Federal program that allows armed air crew - Federal Flight Deck Officers.
Plus in places like Oregon it's technically legal to have a handgun on you up to where TSA screening takes place, although the Port of Portland doesn't agree, there are lawsuits about it.
Slashdot Mirror
Aeronautics were not developed nor greatly advanced by military needs, quite the opposite happened. The nations with long range fighters and bombers in the Second World War were those who had developed long range aircraft in the late 20s and 1930s because of civilian air travel needs.
While Germany's bomber and transport fleet were based on short range twin engine (He-111, Ju-88) and tri-engine (Ju-52) designs with a few small production run four engine aircraft, the United States and Great Britain had many longer range and higher payload aircraft because of the need for longer range civilian transport and bombers to project power over the sea approaches.
Jet engine development occurred prior to the war, but it did have it's first mass produced aircraft applications because of the war.
Long distance communications in the form of short wave radio, telegraph, undersea cables didn't occur because of military application, but because of civilian and commercial needs.
Navigation developed because of trade, not because of military needs, unless you count the advent of navigation being Gee, LORAN and GPS.
Razing a whole town is so 1945?
Tell that to Grozny.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/exclusive-obama-to-declare-the-rules-have-changed--20110125
Theres a pre-release copy of it for tonight.
Or the Mugamma. I read a story about 6-8 years ago about the trials and tribulations of getting anything done in Cairo and it was about going here.
http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/mugamma.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mogamma
Whose son Gamal is in line to succeed him.
Just like Syria and North Korea are not monarchies, nor was Iraq going to be one after Saddam died and Qusay took over for him.
Yes, every year on the day of the SotU, the Washington Post White House and New York Times will link to an article that is no longer under embargo with the outline of the speech, and a couple minutes after the President starts speaking the full text of the SotU will be out from embargo and printed.
Example - http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-state-union-address
Time the President started was a 9:00 pm, time of the article is 9:13 pm
While for weeks leading up to the SotU the President will use speeches as sounding boards for his ideas, hell NPR was just talking about this yesterday.
Furthermore, on the rebuttal, Congress members will leave the House early to rebut or support the SotU address for the media.
This year there are two rebuttals by Republicans, both will be available right after President Obama is done with his speech.
Note here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_response_to_the_State_of_the_Union_address - Pre-recorded for some, obviously they had to have some advance knowledge of the speech to record it beforehand.
Because the text of the speech is always distributed to the media before hand.
The problem with the analogy for the Moon and Spanish exploration in the New World is simple.
There was money to be had, hand over fist in the New World, going back and forth to the Moon was a money sink. Even if Apollo 19-20 had been funded and Saturn V production had continued, the Oil Crisis of 1973 would have killed the funding.
NASA needs to get out of manned spaceflight and back to what it was founded for, developing technologies for civilian aviation and aerospace applications.
Yea, the US just launched a rocket on 1-20-11 from Vandenberg.
Increasingly efficient and powerful turbofans are because of military research, your better tank engine technology actually comes from the private sector and is adopted for the military.
Technology goes both ways very quickly between the private sector and military since many military platforms are based on civilian platforms. For example, the C-17 cargo aircraft's engines are derived from the engines for the Boeing 757 and will be an option for the new Russian civilian airliner the Il-96.
The engines of the CRJ-700-900 are derived from the engines designed for the A-10 Warthog.
American stealth bombers work just fine over the desert, B-1B and B-2A work just fine.
The aircraft that was shot down in 1999 was the F-117A, its a small single seat fighter sized aircraft, not a bomber
Paste doesn't work for me in Firefox, Chrome or Safari 95% of the time from WIndows 7 or Mac OS.
Its been "reported" that its a match for the F-22, but the fact is that it's only flown a handful of times in very limited envelopes. Theres really no way to tell what this aircraft is capable of and how good it's technology is.
If it's really based on the F-117A, then the stealth technology is at least a full generation behind F-22, and less capable than what Rafale and Eurofighter Typhoon have, not to mention F-22A and F-35 and modern UAVs and UCAV prototypes have.
F-22s capabilities are because of 12 years of test program and refinements of software, the new Chinese fighter is basically were YF-22 and YF-23 were in 1990-91 were or where X-35 and X-32 were in 2000-01.
Plus we don't know the sensor capability of this new aircraft, it's data link capabilities, range, speed, armament.
Its years too early to say it's a match for F-22, F-35, Typhoon or Rafale
Yea, I misspelled something things there.
Distracted while typing got me really good.
Islamic nationalist from Chechnya most likely.
They do, seen them in SEA, PDX and ANC. They also have alot of chemical sniffers installed in airports and government buildings.
Russia has been involved in a high causality war costing them a lot of money and many lives since 1999. The causality rate for Russian combat soldiers in the Second Chechen War was roughly 5 times higher than for US and allied forces during the worst fighting in Iraq at the same period.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurgency_in_the_North_Caucasus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_War
Moscow theater hostage crisis - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_theater_hostage_crisis
Beslan school hostage crisis - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beslan_school_hostage_crisis
Domodedovo International Airport was the entry point for other terror attacks in the past and so it was one of the, if not the first airport with full body radar scanners - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_aircraft_bombings_of_August_2004
The US hasn't had terrorism in apartment buildings, urban mass transit systems or transportation hubs like Russia has, so you can't say what the American response would be.
However when there was a mass shooting at LAX in 2002, they didn't shut down the airport.
Yea, its the same in Oregon, except for the fighting with the Port of Portland, and here in Alaska.
No guns in schools without permission of the administration, court houses, or bars. No permit for carry conceal but if you are stopped or interact with Law Enforcement you have to let them know you have one on you.
Why would you be stargazing in an area with some of the worst light pollution? Airports are pretty goddamned lit up you know.
There is a Federal program that allows armed air crew - Federal Flight Deck Officers.
Plus in places like Oregon it's technically legal to have a handgun on you up to where TSA screening takes place, although the Port of Portland doesn't agree, there are lawsuits about it.
I have a set of Wiha drivers for computer/electronics, full sets of Trox and security bits for my power drills.
I'm in Anchorage, we have a pretty good local electronics, wiring and electrical supply store here.
Regular Torx, just looked, not sure of the size head it'll take, but it isn't the new pentalobular (of which I ordered a driver yesterday).
On December 31 at the Apple Store in Forum Shops in Vegas, it has Torx heads.
But being an Emperor who is a Catholic who founded something does not make it a Catholic University.
The Apollo Program was started by a Catholic President, does that make it the Vatican's space program?