LOL LOL LOL. Thanks for the quote. The projected program cost is never high; the actual cost is. Ten years from now, the total project cost will be $100 billion and counting but no one will have the guts to cancel the project after spending so much. Just look at the F-35 clusterfuck.
Forget that, look at the YF-23, which lost to the F-22. The YF-23 was based on the B-2, and was faster and stealthier than the F-22. It also used many off-the-shelf components such as the F-15 nose wheel, F/A-18 landing gear, and cockpit components of the F-15E Strike Eagle. The F-22 was more agile because it had vector thrust nozzles, which the YF-23 sacrificed to decrease infrared emissions.
Anyway, you're right about the X-32. The composite technology was eventually ironed out with the advent of the Boeing Dreamliner. Meanwhile, the F-35 is suffering through problems with its advanced hover drive. LOL. The hover capabilities aren't being used to prevent wear and tear on the driveshaft. Jesus.
LOL if you think that scores of military personnel die every year from routine training accidents caused by faulty hardware. The engines on the F-14 Tomcat had a nasty habit of flaming out when the airflow wasn't clean. You know what happened as a result? Top Gun; Goose dies. The F-14 killed more of its pilots than enemy fire every did. You heard about the V-22 Osprey? It began development in the early eighties and kept on crashing and killing all of the Marines aboard. The Osprey entered service in 2007. Thirty men died in developing it.
Running out of oxygen and having to rely on emergency bottled oxygen? Not as bad as having your engines wink out on you or suddenly crashing to the ground.
The ITAR laws are retarded and don't help anyone except foreign companies competing with American companies. PGP was banned but apparently printing out the source code and mailing it was legalâ"freedom of speech, duh!!! Why bother? We're not the only source for dual use technologies. Russia, France, Germany et al are all willing to supply the stuff so who cares?
Derpa derpa derpa no. Dead wrong. The government limits the amount of pseudoephredrine, you can buy to prevent meth cooking. You also can't buy a bunch of dynamite unless you have the proper permits and even if you do, you need to show good use for all the dynamite you're buying. Same thing with ammonium nitrate-legal if you're a farmer or miner, but you have to show how much you're buying so you don't end up going Oklahoma City on someone. Guns are much more "dual-use" than sinus medication and fertilizer, so what makes you think that guns should be subject to less regulation? Oh, right. The Second Amendment. But note that the First Amendment protect free speech, yet we still have laws limiting speech such as libel, etc.
What are you talking about? You do believe in self-defense, right? Microsoft has been running around suing Android manufacturers for patent infringementâ"that's why MS paid $300 million to BN for a share of the Nook business: to settle the lawsuit. Google has to stop Microsoft from hindering the development of Android so why not fight fire with fire?
It wouldn't be routed to a generic Google farm. Google Apps For Government is FISMA certified and runs on segregated servers located solely within the United States. But Google is evil! Well, remember when the government ran its own email servers and twenty-two million emails were lost from the Bush Administration because of allegedly improper backups, then miraculous found and restored after some good governance groups filed a lawsuit? Yeah, that. Google is very good at providing secure and reliable email capability. Why have the US government recreate the wheel if it has the proper assurances that Google will treat the data properly? After all, it's not like the US government rolls its own cell phone or landline services.
You don't have to be smart to firebomb a subway, or to buy a gun and shoot a bunch of people at mall. Real terror wouldn't involve dramatic attacks, but people getting killed while going about their normal lives--shopping, going to bars, taking the train to work, and all sorts of other soft targets that aren't as secured as airlines and government buildings.
No, they're spreading out honeypots so that real planners have to be extra careful when planning their shit. And they're less likely to plot when they can't trust each other. In Iran, the Stuxnet led to a bunch of scientists and folks getting liquidated because the government thought they were spies. Same thing in Iraq when America embarked in the "secret killing program".
The authorities also thwarted the very real plot to bomb subways--that dude lived literally a few blocks away from me in Flushing, Queens, New York. They caught him trying to make TATP with acetone.
This was kind of inevitable once we turned it into a national memorial. Then we had to coddle the rich guys who owned the building instead of seizing it from them under eminent domain, which slowed things down for a long time.
However, the building is much more complex than the Empire State Building. Not only is it taller, and more secure due to better construction techniques, but it also will have much more usable interior volume due to its design, which has no interior columns. It also will be LEED Gold certified.
Anyway, China is great for building buildings but they also have problems like ghost cities. In a communist nation, stuff gets done when those in power want them done, but there are literally entire cities that remain empty because the powers that be ordered them built but there was no demand to fill them. It's also notable that AVIC is one of the largest real estate developers in China even though it makes airplanes. That's because it has the rare power to own land and build buildings so that's what it does to make money.
Also, there aren't that many mixed-use buildings in China. That's because you can't own land, so you have to lease the land. The maximum terms of land leases vary for residential and commercial uses, so buildings are either one or the other. LOL. What's going to happen when the leases expire and the land goes back to the government? We'll find out.
The problem was that the WTC schematic was inherently not as secure as the new tower design. The Freedom Tower will have a concrete-reinforced base to protect it against car bombs, reinforced staircases and sprinkler systems (which all shut down after the "core" of the original buildings were severed by the planes on 9/11, leading to uncontrolled fires above the impact area), more staircases with dedicated staircases for firemen (on 9/11, firemen going up slowed people going down, leading to many casualties), and the internal structure, while column-free internally, is more secure than the original design, which pancaked.
LOL, what are you guys, retarded? Nothing should be forgottenâ"it's not a fucking either/or situation. It's not like America is going to forget about the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan anytime soon; we'll be paying for them for the next few generations. We all can remember 9/11 ==> Wars ==> Lots of Dead People ==> Muslims Killing Lots of People ==> People killing people
No, you're incorrect. There are various modes that the Airbus flight system uses. Under normal law, the airplane will not stall no matter what you do. You can pull up on the stick all you want, and the airplane will eventually gun the engines to avoid a stall. However, if the sensors are conflicting, the flight control software degrades into alternate law, which can be stalled. The flight crew might not have understood immediately that the alternative law mode had been engaged, and that a stall was probable. The entire episode took place in eight minutes with the captain being away, leaving two subordinates in charge.
If the crew had diagnosed the situation as a failed pitot tube, all they had to do was to turn the throttle to 85% power, and point the nose up 5 degrees and everything would have been fine. The computer was not providing the angle of attack information to the crew, nor was it giving any indication of the throttle setting. Therefore, there was no way to make see that proper steps were not being followed.
When you introduce a paradigm where the computer does a bunch of the work automagically, there has to be a system that clearly and plainly tells the crew that the computer is not working normally anymore. There was such a mode on the Airbus but it wasn't really clear. For instance, if the stall warning turned off because you're going so slow the airplane believes the sensors must be wrong, the computer should tell you that instead of just turning the stall warning off and leading the crew to think that things are getting better. If the system shuts down because it's getting inconsistent sensor readings because the pitot tube was frozen, then the computer should say, "Autopilot disabled."
There's never a condition that a stall horn should be ignored? What about when the Flight 447 co-pilot finally puts the nose down, speeds up the airplane enough for the computers to work again, and then the stall warning turns on again, thus making the co-pilot pull up?
According to the article, the AoA information is not provided to the pilots. I couldn't believe this. However, you are right. There's a reason the first page on the emergency manual will say, "Fly the plane." The guy was already freaked out by the St. Elmo's Fire, which was causing a metallic smell and glow in the cockpit. Everything else was secondary to the fact that he was freaked out, and the fact that no one else could see what he was doing due to the lack of mechanical change in the controls such as the throttle and stick in the other pilot's seat.
All the crew had to do was set the throttle to 85% and the pitch to 5 angles up for the plane to fly through the storm. But when you're used to having a computer do everything, shit falls apart pretty quickly when you have to make on the spot decisions with faulty sensors and lack of shared information. Do you blame the pilot for not realizing the co-pilot was pulling the plane up during a stall? At one point, the airplane was pointing 40 degrees up. WTF?! The co-pilot was talking about aborting a takeoff even though the plane was at cruising altitude. The computers should be projecting basic flight and throttle info onto a screen somewhere instead of assuming that the people are communicating every step they're doing in an emergency.
The problem with over-automation is that pilots may not know exactly what to do in case of an emergency, where decisions have to be made in split seconds. I mean, the entire crash took eight minutes to unfold. The Airbus paradigm keeps the pilot out of the loop to minimize fatigue. The crew is used to computers doing all the nitty-gritty stuff. However, when there's a stall warning, it takes way too long for them to realize what's going on.
Not only that, but the computer turned off the STALL warning when its sensors determined that it was going 60 knots in flight and decided it was wrong. It didn't tell the crew that it was shutting down the STALL warning due to sensor failure; it just stopped talking. When the co-pilot finally realized his mistake and began to nose down, the STALL warning turned back on again because the airplane had picked up speed. The co-pilot heard the STALL warning, freaked out, and began to pull up on the stick again. If he had kept nose down, the STALL warning would have gone away once the aircraft had sped up enough to get lift. It's a bizarre system all around.
Sometimes the government will order others to do things on its behalf, and sometimes, these things may fall on its ass. No one will listen to the government if there's a chance that they can get sued for following orders, so the government can do things such as limit liabilities or to assume the liabilities resulting from these actions. If the government wants to spy, it has to have the telcos comply so the government will provide retroactive immunity. If the government wants airplanes made, it wouldn't do if the pilots can sue the fighter jet manufacturers if one of these planes are defectively designed and crashes, so the government will render those companies immune. Lastly, and most saliently, if the government wants companies to manufacture vaccines on its behalf, it has to render those companies immune to lawsuits from those suffering from side effects. That's why the government assumes the liability for the vaccines even though they're made by private companies.
North Korea has run around threatening its neighbors, sinking their ships randomly then threatening war if you try to blame them for sinking the ship, has a large army ready to invade South Korea at a moment's notice, kidnaps civilians from Japan and South Korea using midget submarines so they can be the dictator's playthings, starves their citizenry to retain dictatorial control, but other than that, they're exactly the same as India.
Even if Apple's cloud facilities use tons of energy, it is still a net win for the environment. Think about networked computing in general. Emails and electronic documents have eliminated the need for tons of paper and the energy used to ship them across the globe. Instead of snail mail to Panama, I can just send off an email. Instead of archiving things and photocopying them, which takes up space and energy to air condition/safeguard, I can just put it on discs or store them on the cloud. Even for the provision of web services, instead of everyone rolling their own server with backups, which costs tons of energy, we can have a centralized server farm with more efficient air conditioning, power supplies, and power backups. Big server farms can do stuff like use DC. A guy in his basement? Not so much.
Why do you assume that cyber warfare requires Internet access when the most salient example of modern cyber warfare, Stuxnet, was spread through USB keys? We should airgap utilities and stuff like that, but at the end of the day, cyber warfare will probably involve agents (spies) planting software onto the other sides' hardware. Or spies just turning information over to the other side. I mean, it's like the flip side of encryption and the five dollar wrench. You can give a million bucks to the guy who knows how to access your private network and then have a fucking field day there. Remember, the user is always the greatest security vulnerability.
Also, there may be systems that are required to be accessed by men in the field. Off the top of my head, I remember that CIA paramilitaries involved in the US invasion of Afghanistan were uplinking to CIA computers to get update spymaps and to demand intelligence work product. Even if that network were secure, what if the paramilitary was captured and banged with a wrench? That's the kind of shit we have to worry about. It's great if you can airgap everything, but you might end up with a very unusable system.
That's why the important part is to keep this sucker mobile. The boost phase of any launch is the best time to kill the projectile. It's filled with fuel, easy to see because it's spewing fire, and the countermeasures haven't had a chance to deploy yet. Of course, if you shoot a nuke down, it'll land on populated areas, but fuck them, better them than us, right? I mean, the best minds have thought about this and came to the conclusion that the best answer to countermeasures is to refuse to play the game, and just nail the missiles as they're going up. Hence SDI and all that magical stuff.
Slashdot Mirror
LOL LOL LOL. Thanks for the quote. The projected program cost is never high; the actual cost is. Ten years from now, the total project cost will be $100 billion and counting but no one will have the guts to cancel the project after spending so much. Just look at the F-35 clusterfuck.
Forget that, look at the YF-23, which lost to the F-22. The YF-23 was based on the B-2, and was faster and stealthier than the F-22. It also used many off-the-shelf components such as the F-15 nose wheel, F/A-18 landing gear, and cockpit components of the F-15E Strike Eagle. The F-22 was more agile because it had vector thrust nozzles, which the YF-23 sacrificed to decrease infrared emissions.
Anyway, you're right about the X-32. The composite technology was eventually ironed out with the advent of the Boeing Dreamliner. Meanwhile, the F-35 is suffering through problems with its advanced hover drive. LOL. The hover capabilities aren't being used to prevent wear and tear on the driveshaft. Jesus.
LOL if you think that scores of military personnel die every year from routine training accidents caused by faulty hardware. The engines on the F-14 Tomcat had a nasty habit of flaming out when the airflow wasn't clean. You know what happened as a result? Top Gun; Goose dies. The F-14 killed more of its pilots than enemy fire every did. You heard about the V-22 Osprey? It began development in the early eighties and kept on crashing and killing all of the Marines aboard. The Osprey entered service in 2007. Thirty men died in developing it.
Running out of oxygen and having to rely on emergency bottled oxygen? Not as bad as having your engines wink out on you or suddenly crashing to the ground.
The ITAR laws are retarded and don't help anyone except foreign companies competing with American companies. PGP was banned but apparently printing out the source code and mailing it was legalâ"freedom of speech, duh!!! Why bother? We're not the only source for dual use technologies. Russia, France, Germany et al are all willing to supply the stuff so who cares?
Derpa derpa derpa no. Dead wrong. The government limits the amount of pseudoephredrine, you can buy to prevent meth cooking. You also can't buy a bunch of dynamite unless you have the proper permits and even if you do, you need to show good use for all the dynamite you're buying. Same thing with ammonium nitrate-legal if you're a farmer or miner, but you have to show how much you're buying so you don't end up going Oklahoma City on someone. Guns are much more "dual-use" than sinus medication and fertilizer, so what makes you think that guns should be subject to less regulation? Oh, right. The Second Amendment. But note that the First Amendment protect free speech, yet we still have laws limiting speech such as libel, etc.
What are you talking about? You do believe in self-defense, right? Microsoft has been running around suing Android manufacturers for patent infringementâ"that's why MS paid $300 million to BN for a share of the Nook business: to settle the lawsuit. Google has to stop Microsoft from hindering the development of Android so why not fight fire with fire?
It wouldn't be routed to a generic Google farm. Google Apps For Government is FISMA certified and runs on segregated servers located solely within the United States. But Google is evil! Well, remember when the government ran its own email servers and twenty-two million emails were lost from the Bush Administration because of allegedly improper backups, then miraculous found and restored after some good governance groups filed a lawsuit? Yeah, that. Google is very good at providing secure and reliable email capability. Why have the US government recreate the wheel if it has the proper assurances that Google will treat the data properly? After all, it's not like the US government rolls its own cell phone or landline services.
You don't have to be smart to firebomb a subway, or to buy a gun and shoot a bunch of people at mall. Real terror wouldn't involve dramatic attacks, but people getting killed while going about their normal lives--shopping, going to bars, taking the train to work, and all sorts of other soft targets that aren't as secured as airlines and government buildings.
No, they're spreading out honeypots so that real planners have to be extra careful when planning their shit. And they're less likely to plot when they can't trust each other. In Iran, the Stuxnet led to a bunch of scientists and folks getting liquidated because the government thought they were spies. Same thing in Iraq when America embarked in the "secret killing program".
The authorities also thwarted the very real plot to bomb subways--that dude lived literally a few blocks away from me in Flushing, Queens, New York. They caught him trying to make TATP with acetone.
This was kind of inevitable once we turned it into a national memorial. Then we had to coddle the rich guys who owned the building instead of seizing it from them under eminent domain, which slowed things down for a long time.
However, the building is much more complex than the Empire State Building. Not only is it taller, and more secure due to better construction techniques, but it also will have much more usable interior volume due to its design, which has no interior columns. It also will be LEED Gold certified.
Anyway, China is great for building buildings but they also have problems like ghost cities. In a communist nation, stuff gets done when those in power want them done, but there are literally entire cities that remain empty because the powers that be ordered them built but there was no demand to fill them. It's also notable that AVIC is one of the largest real estate developers in China even though it makes airplanes. That's because it has the rare power to own land and build buildings so that's what it does to make money.
Also, there aren't that many mixed-use buildings in China. That's because you can't own land, so you have to lease the land. The maximum terms of land leases vary for residential and commercial uses, so buildings are either one or the other. LOL. What's going to happen when the leases expire and the land goes back to the government? We'll find out.
The problem was that the WTC schematic was inherently not as secure as the new tower design. The Freedom Tower will have a concrete-reinforced base to protect it against car bombs, reinforced staircases and sprinkler systems (which all shut down after the "core" of the original buildings were severed by the planes on 9/11, leading to uncontrolled fires above the impact area), more staircases with dedicated staircases for firemen (on 9/11, firemen going up slowed people going down, leading to many casualties), and the internal structure, while column-free internally, is more secure than the original design, which pancaked.
LOL, what are you guys, retarded? Nothing should be forgottenâ"it's not a fucking either/or situation. It's not like America is going to forget about the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan anytime soon; we'll be paying for them for the next few generations. We all can remember 9/11 ==> Wars ==> Lots of Dead People ==> Muslims Killing Lots of People ==> People killing people
That's probably why the stunt was carried out in Mexico. Pretty sure the FAA doesn't get to regulate stuff there.
No, you're incorrect. There are various modes that the Airbus flight system uses. Under normal law, the airplane will not stall no matter what you do. You can pull up on the stick all you want, and the airplane will eventually gun the engines to avoid a stall. However, if the sensors are conflicting, the flight control software degrades into alternate law, which can be stalled. The flight crew might not have understood immediately that the alternative law mode had been engaged, and that a stall was probable. The entire episode took place in eight minutes with the captain being away, leaving two subordinates in charge.
If the crew had diagnosed the situation as a failed pitot tube, all they had to do was to turn the throttle to 85% power, and point the nose up 5 degrees and everything would have been fine. The computer was not providing the angle of attack information to the crew, nor was it giving any indication of the throttle setting. Therefore, there was no way to make see that proper steps were not being followed.
When you introduce a paradigm where the computer does a bunch of the work automagically, there has to be a system that clearly and plainly tells the crew that the computer is not working normally anymore. There was such a mode on the Airbus but it wasn't really clear. For instance, if the stall warning turned off because you're going so slow the airplane believes the sensors must be wrong, the computer should tell you that instead of just turning the stall warning off and leading the crew to think that things are getting better. If the system shuts down because it's getting inconsistent sensor readings because the pitot tube was frozen, then the computer should say, "Autopilot disabled."
There's never a condition that a stall horn should be ignored? What about when the Flight 447 co-pilot finally puts the nose down, speeds up the airplane enough for the computers to work again, and then the stall warning turns on again, thus making the co-pilot pull up?
According to the article, the AoA information is not provided to the pilots. I couldn't believe this. However, you are right. There's a reason the first page on the emergency manual will say, "Fly the plane." The guy was already freaked out by the St. Elmo's Fire, which was causing a metallic smell and glow in the cockpit. Everything else was secondary to the fact that he was freaked out, and the fact that no one else could see what he was doing due to the lack of mechanical change in the controls such as the throttle and stick in the other pilot's seat.
All the crew had to do was set the throttle to 85% and the pitch to 5 angles up for the plane to fly through the storm. But when you're used to having a computer do everything, shit falls apart pretty quickly when you have to make on the spot decisions with faulty sensors and lack of shared information. Do you blame the pilot for not realizing the co-pilot was pulling the plane up during a stall? At one point, the airplane was pointing 40 degrees up. WTF?! The co-pilot was talking about aborting a takeoff even though the plane was at cruising altitude. The computers should be projecting basic flight and throttle info onto a screen somewhere instead of assuming that the people are communicating every step they're doing in an emergency.
The problem with over-automation is that pilots may not know exactly what to do in case of an emergency, where decisions have to be made in split seconds. I mean, the entire crash took eight minutes to unfold. The Airbus paradigm keeps the pilot out of the loop to minimize fatigue. The crew is used to computers doing all the nitty-gritty stuff. However, when there's a stall warning, it takes way too long for them to realize what's going on.
Not only that, but the computer turned off the STALL warning when its sensors determined that it was going 60 knots in flight and decided it was wrong. It didn't tell the crew that it was shutting down the STALL warning due to sensor failure; it just stopped talking. When the co-pilot finally realized his mistake and began to nose down, the STALL warning turned back on again because the airplane had picked up speed. The co-pilot heard the STALL warning, freaked out, and began to pull up on the stick again. If he had kept nose down, the STALL warning would have gone away once the aircraft had sped up enough to get lift. It's a bizarre system all around.
Sometimes the government will order others to do things on its behalf, and sometimes, these things may fall on its ass. No one will listen to the government if there's a chance that they can get sued for following orders, so the government can do things such as limit liabilities or to assume the liabilities resulting from these actions. If the government wants to spy, it has to have the telcos comply so the government will provide retroactive immunity. If the government wants airplanes made, it wouldn't do if the pilots can sue the fighter jet manufacturers if one of these planes are defectively designed and crashes, so the government will render those companies immune. Lastly, and most saliently, if the government wants companies to manufacture vaccines on its behalf, it has to render those companies immune to lawsuits from those suffering from side effects. That's why the government assumes the liability for the vaccines even though they're made by private companies.
North Korea has run around threatening its neighbors, sinking their ships randomly then threatening war if you try to blame them for sinking the ship, has a large army ready to invade South Korea at a moment's notice, kidnaps civilians from Japan and South Korea using midget submarines so they can be the dictator's playthings, starves their citizenry to retain dictatorial control, but other than that, they're exactly the same as India.
Even if Apple's cloud facilities use tons of energy, it is still a net win for the environment. Think about networked computing in general. Emails and electronic documents have eliminated the need for tons of paper and the energy used to ship them across the globe. Instead of snail mail to Panama, I can just send off an email. Instead of archiving things and photocopying them, which takes up space and energy to air condition/safeguard, I can just put it on discs or store them on the cloud. Even for the provision of web services, instead of everyone rolling their own server with backups, which costs tons of energy, we can have a centralized server farm with more efficient air conditioning, power supplies, and power backups. Big server farms can do stuff like use DC. A guy in his basement? Not so much.
Why do you assume that cyber warfare requires Internet access when the most salient example of modern cyber warfare, Stuxnet, was spread through USB keys? We should airgap utilities and stuff like that, but at the end of the day, cyber warfare will probably involve agents (spies) planting software onto the other sides' hardware. Or spies just turning information over to the other side. I mean, it's like the flip side of encryption and the five dollar wrench. You can give a million bucks to the guy who knows how to access your private network and then have a fucking field day there. Remember, the user is always the greatest security vulnerability.
Also, there may be systems that are required to be accessed by men in the field. Off the top of my head, I remember that CIA paramilitaries involved in the US invasion of Afghanistan were uplinking to CIA computers to get update spymaps and to demand intelligence work product. Even if that network were secure, what if the paramilitary was captured and banged with a wrench? That's the kind of shit we have to worry about. It's great if you can airgap everything, but you might end up with a very unusable system.
That's why the important part is to keep this sucker mobile. The boost phase of any launch is the best time to kill the projectile. It's filled with fuel, easy to see because it's spewing fire, and the countermeasures haven't had a chance to deploy yet. Of course, if you shoot a nuke down, it'll land on populated areas, but fuck them, better them than us, right? I mean, the best minds have thought about this and came to the conclusion that the best answer to countermeasures is to refuse to play the game, and just nail the missiles as they're going up. Hence SDI and all that magical stuff.