The Argentineans were not bad pilots in fact considering their equipment and the ineptitude of some of their leaders they gave the Royal Navy a proper spanking. The Argentines would not have succeeded in inflicting such heavy losses on the Royal Navy if they were bad pilots.
Actually, iirc most of their notable ship kills (e.g. HMS Sheffield) were achieved with long-range, surface-skimming, "Exocet" anti-ship missiles. These were sold by the French, and there were as a lot of contraversy and shuttle-diplomacy at the time to get France to cease selling them and giving technical support to Argentina.
When the Argentines ran out of Exocets and had to resort to dropping hard ordnance (ie bombs) close in, they suffered heavy losses. Though, I think they still managed a few kills (e.g. the troop carrier Sir Galahad).
If you want to burn the most calories, you need to exercise the largest muscles in your body - the ones on your legs. I.e. go running, or cycling or even use the other ~75% of your body and do fastish squats (can be done in the comfort of your own home).
Wow.. go take an intro statistics class and learn about correlation and causation - though, even the correlation there seems very weak. I bet your examples can easily be explained by recessions being cyclical, and cherry-picking of examples.
As for productivity, I suspect you're referring to GDP/capita. That's not a measure of worker productivity, but a measure of wealth generation - which (this is the good bit). The USAs high GDP/capita is achieved, in part, by earning money on foreign labour (either by having foreign labour work for US corporations, or by having the fruits of foreign labour invested in US capital markets).
Yes. H1B definitely needs reform to excise the indentured-servitude aspects of it - its obviously bad for the employee, but, being anti-competitive, also inefficient for your economy generally.
As for reforming H1B by eliminating it or reducing the numbers allowed, as some in the US want - great, please do! It'll help us over here, thanks!
Uhm, the guys who invented the transistor, and setup a bunch of well-known semiconductor companies, the traitorous eight, how many were born outside the USA? Of the rest, how many were born to immigrants to the USA?
(The answers: "at least 3" for the first, and "at least 1" for the second).
It's hilarious that a nation whose success was built on waves of immigration can spawn people so ignorant of the contributions of immigrants. The rest of the 1st world doesn't mind though - we'll be glad to take the USAs spot as patron of the world's best & brightest - please do stop your H1-B programme.
IIRC, Intel got the rights to all of Digital Semiconductor's design portfolio, bar AXP, as part of the DEC v Intel lawsuit settlement in about 1997. This included things like the 21x4x tulip NICs, the 21x5x PCI-PCI bridges, the SA-110 StrongARM.
Except the psychological factor isn't ignored. Just the constant, regular drilling in emergency procedures alone helps to mentally prepare pilots to expect and cope with emergencies - even when the one at hand differs from all the ones they've been drilled in. I suspect there's more explicit attention paid to psyschology (e.g. high-status airlines might carry out psychological tests on prospective pilots), but I'd have to consult my local, retired, airline jet pilot.
Further, pilots don't just practice emergencies in simulators, they also will have practiced them in the air. Primarily earlier in their careers on cheaper machinery, when acquiring various kinds of licences. Further, just because their lives are not at risk does not mean there is no stress - their careers are at risk.
Simulator time may be finite, but it's relatively cheap. For a pilot at an earlier stage of their jet, airline career, simulator hours might be a fairly significant percentage of their jet experience. A captain at the peak of their career may have a couple of hundred of simulator hours, which might still represent 1% or more of all the hours they've *ever* flown.
I accept your point that not all emergencies can be foreseen. However, many can be or otherwise result in outcomes common to many kinds of emergencies. I still get the impression you too quickly discount just how well-prepared pilots have to be, by law, to be trusted to fly you and me around.
You're assuming the psychological factor is ignored. It isn't. Just the constant, regular drilling in emergency procedures alone helps condition the pilots psychologically to expect them and cope - even if an emergency at hand differs from all they're trained in. Further, I'm reasonably sure they also go through psychological testing, at least for pilots who make it to flag-carrier status jobs - I'd have to consult my local, retired airline jet pilot though.
Second, you're assuming pilots only train for emergencies in simulators. Which is not the case, particularly in their earlier flight training on cheaper machinery. Further, pilots can log a *lot* of time during a 2 to 4 week simulator course. A captain at the peak of his career may have spent of couple of hundred hours practising emergencies in the simulator - which could well represent 1% or more of *all* the hours he's ever flown in his life.
I accept your point that not all emergencies can be foreseen. However very many of them can be, or at least will have end-results that can be. So I still think you unfairly discount just how well-prepared professional transport pilots are required to be..
Being a commercial pilot is a very precarious, insecure profession. You can lose your job at any time through no fault of your own. E.g. fail a medical or, more commonly, become unemployed (airlines operate on very narrow margins, and so are extremely vulnerable to external changes like fuel prices; also, there are simply lots of pilots out there).
oh, that should read '4 years of commercial flying' - i.e. 4 years on top of all the other years of flying they did (such as learning to fly and then gaining the time and experience for their commercial licence).
I did take some exception to the term "battle-hardened" - a fair percentage of pilots who go through serious air emergencies end up dead, and since so few emergencies happen few pilots are experienced with them.
You're misinformed.
All commercial pilots must be experienced in handling a variety of emergencies before they're ever allowed to act as any kind of pilot in a passenger aircraft. Pilots in command must be very experienced (typically at least 4 years of flying - airline seniority systems mean that captains of wide-body jets usually have decades of experience). In either case, for passenger jets, the pilots must, additionally, go through type-specific training - again, including training in emergencies - and this type-specific certification must be renewed regularly (every year typically). E.g. have a look at the UK CAA's "LASORS", available online.
Handling emergencies is the most important task pilots are entrusted with. It's inconceivable that aviation could have attained its remarkable safety record without requiring that pilots being drilled extremely well in that.
You're remembering the popular media speculation of the time, now turned into myth, which, as is often the case, was completely misinformed. See links posted by myself and others above in this sub-thread.
That's a falsehood. The crash was caused by multiple pilot errors (failure to heed his instruments; failure to apply power in time - jets do not react instantly, turbo-fans are particularly slow to do so). I've blogged a bit more about the AF296, Airbus tree crash, including links to a previous/. discussion.
China borders Afghanistan. The very western parts of China have (very) significant muslim, non-Han populations, such as the Uyghurs, many of whom desire independence, some of whom would even consider it offensive to refer to them as 'Chinese'. China does not have the best of human-rights records in dealing with such areas, and additionally it is doing its best to culturally and ethnically dilute these areas with the immigration of Han chinese.
Has my country been under the thumb of a ruthless dictator thug for 25 years, the population starving, little girls stoned to death for the crime of getting raped and the "invaders" come with food and promising to grant us freedom and leave?
Ok, you seem to be suffering from historical amnesia and/or an ignorance of basic information that's easily available from reading. Its depressing that people can expound on the rights/wrongs of actions done in their name in far-flung countries when all they know about it is rubbish like the above.
Who helped bank-roll the Taliban? Next, go read up on the alternatives to the Taliban - are they really better? Do you think it's possible the local populace see the Taliban as less-worse? Next, do you think the Taliban could institute their awful laws without at least some support and even acceptance from the population - i.e. the problems go much deeper than some central government that can be toppled, rather they speak to the culture in the more backward parts of the place (you may have read recently in the news that Karzai legalised rape in marriage). Food: UN food programmes don't need military force to be implemented, and such programmes were in place before the recent US/NATO invasion.
That's only if you use an obsolete form of the Geneva Convention. The post-WWII GC RTPOWs (which pretty much all countries recognise; to which the US is also a signatory, though not a subscribing party - it wasn't ratified by the US senate) afford POW status to irregular combatants, who take up arms against an occupying power.
These protections were brought in precisely to cover people like resistance fighters, as the grand-parent says.
When I was 11 or 12 or so, I had teeth removed at the dentists. For whatever reason I got scared on the chair as they went to sedate me and went into a panic. I'm pretty sure I landed at least a couple of good kicks and punches ("Oooh my solar-plexus.." one of the men cried, I'll always remember) in the minute or two before they managed to hold me down and anaesthetise me.
So I note the line "more comfortable for.... healthcare providers" in the article and don't doubt it's for real.;)
Slashdot Mirror
The Argentineans were not bad pilots in fact considering their equipment and the ineptitude of some of their leaders they gave the Royal Navy a proper spanking. The Argentines would not have succeeded in inflicting such heavy losses on the Royal Navy if they were bad pilots.
Actually, iirc most of their notable ship kills (e.g. HMS Sheffield) were achieved with long-range, surface-skimming, "Exocet" anti-ship missiles. These were sold by the French, and there were as a lot of contraversy and shuttle-diplomacy at the time to get France to cease selling them and giving technical support to Argentina.
When the Argentines ran out of Exocets and had to resort to dropping hard ordnance (ie bombs) close in, they suffered heavy losses. Though, I think they still managed a few kills (e.g. the troop carrier Sir Galahad).
Yep, and bite each other's ears, punch each other's noses, etc..
(Also, I hope whoever modded you troll gets punished in m2).
Well, I was taught to drop the second s, and I'm not /that/ archaic.
It's fine to drop the 2nd s, at least in British english. Though, there doesn't seem to be any hard and fast rule..
Absolute rubbish..
You can get 250mp/h motorcycles for much less than $550k.
If you want to burn the most calories, you need to exercise the largest muscles in your body - the ones on your legs. I.e. go running, or cycling or even use the other ~75% of your body and do fastish squats (can be done in the comfort of your own home).
Wow.. go take an intro statistics class and learn about correlation and causation - though, even the correlation there seems very weak. I bet your examples can easily be explained by recessions being cyclical, and cherry-picking of examples.
As for productivity, I suspect you're referring to GDP/capita. That's not a measure of worker productivity, but a measure of wealth generation - which (this is the good bit). The USAs high GDP/capita is achieved, in part, by earning money on foreign labour (either by having foreign labour work for US corporations, or by having the fruits of foreign labour invested in US capital markets).
Yes. H1B definitely needs reform to excise the indentured-servitude aspects of it - its obviously bad for the employee, but, being anti-competitive, also inefficient for your economy generally.
As for reforming H1B by eliminating it or reducing the numbers allowed, as some in the US want - great, please do! It'll help us over here, thanks!
Uhm, the guys who invented the transistor, and setup a bunch of well-known semiconductor companies, the traitorous eight, how many were born outside the USA? Of the rest, how many were born to immigrants to the USA?
(The answers: "at least 3" for the first, and "at least 1" for the second).
It's hilarious that a nation whose success was built on waves of immigration can spawn people so ignorant of the contributions of immigrants. The rest of the 1st world doesn't mind though - we'll be glad to take the USAs spot as patron of the world's best & brightest - please do stop your H1-B programme.
IIRC, Intel got the rights to all of Digital Semiconductor's design portfolio, bar AXP, as part of the DEC v Intel lawsuit settlement in about 1997. This included things like the 21x4x tulip NICs, the 21x5x PCI-PCI bridges, the SA-110 StrongARM.
Except the psychological factor isn't ignored. Just the constant, regular drilling in emergency procedures alone helps to mentally prepare pilots to expect and cope with emergencies - even when the one at hand differs from all the ones they've been drilled in. I suspect there's more explicit attention paid to psyschology (e.g. high-status airlines might carry out psychological tests on prospective pilots), but I'd have to consult my local, retired, airline jet pilot.
Further, pilots don't just practice emergencies in simulators, they also will have practiced them in the air. Primarily earlier in their careers on cheaper machinery, when acquiring various kinds of licences. Further, just because their lives are not at risk does not mean there is no stress - their careers are at risk.
Simulator time may be finite, but it's relatively cheap. For a pilot at an earlier stage of their jet, airline career, simulator hours might be a fairly significant percentage of their jet experience. A captain at the peak of their career may have a couple of hundred of simulator hours, which might still represent 1% or more of all the hours they've *ever* flown.
I accept your point that not all emergencies can be foreseen. However, many can be or otherwise result in outcomes common to many kinds of emergencies. I still get the impression you too quickly discount just how well-prepared pilots have to be, by law, to be trusted to fly you and me around.
You're assuming the psychological factor is ignored. It isn't. Just the constant, regular drilling in emergency procedures alone helps condition the pilots psychologically to expect them and cope - even if an emergency at hand differs from all they're trained in. Further, I'm reasonably sure they also go through psychological testing, at least for pilots who make it to flag-carrier status jobs - I'd have to consult my local, retired airline jet pilot though.
Second, you're assuming pilots only train for emergencies in simulators. Which is not the case, particularly in their earlier flight training on cheaper machinery. Further, pilots can log a *lot* of time during a 2 to 4 week simulator course. A captain at the peak of his career may have spent of couple of hundred hours practising emergencies in the simulator - which could well represent 1% or more of *all* the hours he's ever flown in his life.
I accept your point that not all emergencies can be foreseen. However very many of them can be, or at least will have end-results that can be. So I still think you unfairly discount just how well-prepared professional transport pilots are required to be..
Being a commercial pilot is a very precarious, insecure profession. You can lose your job at any time through no fault of your own. E.g. fail a medical or, more commonly, become unemployed (airlines operate on very narrow margins, and so are extremely vulnerable to external changes like fuel prices; also, there are simply lots of pilots out there).
oh, that should read '4 years of commercial flying' - i.e. 4 years on top of all the other years of flying they did (such as learning to fly and then gaining the time and experience for their commercial licence).
I did take some exception to the term "battle-hardened" - a fair percentage of pilots who go through serious air emergencies end up dead, and since so few emergencies happen few pilots are experienced with them.
You're misinformed.
All commercial pilots must be experienced in handling a variety of emergencies before they're ever allowed to act as any kind of pilot in a passenger aircraft. Pilots in command must be very experienced (typically at least 4 years of flying - airline seniority systems mean that captains of wide-body jets usually have decades of experience). In either case, for passenger jets, the pilots must, additionally, go through type-specific training - again, including training in emergencies - and this type-specific certification must be renewed regularly (every year typically). E.g. have a look at the UK CAA's "LASORS", available online.
Handling emergencies is the most important task pilots are entrusted with. It's inconceivable that aviation could have attained its remarkable safety record without requiring that pilots being drilled extremely well in that.
You're remembering the popular media speculation of the time, now turned into myth, which, as is often the case, was completely misinformed. See links posted by myself and others above in this sub-thread.
And see also the links to the crash report posted by another commentator below.
That's a falsehood. The crash was caused by multiple pilot errors (failure to heed his instruments; failure to apply power in time - jets do not react instantly, turbo-fans are particularly slow to do so). I've blogged a bit more about the AF296, Airbus tree crash, including links to a previous /. discussion.
Basically, you're repeating a myth.
China borders Afghanistan. The very western parts of China have (very) significant muslim, non-Han populations, such as the Uyghurs, many of whom desire independence, some of whom would even consider it offensive to refer to them as 'Chinese'. China does not have the best of human-rights records in dealing with such areas, and additionally it is doing its best to culturally and ethnically dilute these areas with the immigration of Han chinese.
Has my country been under the thumb of a ruthless dictator thug for 25 years, the population starving, little girls stoned to death for the crime of getting raped and the "invaders" come with food and promising to grant us freedom and leave?
Ok, you seem to be suffering from historical amnesia and/or an ignorance of basic information that's easily available from reading. Its depressing that people can expound on the rights/wrongs of actions done in their name in far-flung countries when all they know about it is rubbish like the above.
Who helped bank-roll the Taliban? Next, go read up on the alternatives to the Taliban - are they really better? Do you think it's possible the local populace see the Taliban as less-worse? Next, do you think the Taliban could institute their awful laws without at least some support and even acceptance from the population - i.e. the problems go much deeper than some central government that can be toppled, rather they speak to the culture in the more backward parts of the place (you may have read recently in the news that Karzai legalised rape in marriage). Food: UN food programmes don't need military force to be implemented, and such programmes were in place before the recent US/NATO invasion.
That's only if you use an obsolete form of the Geneva Convention. The post-WWII GC RTPOWs (which pretty much all countries recognise; to which the US is also a signatory, though not a subscribing party - it wasn't ratified by the US senate) afford POW status to irregular combatants, who take up arms against an occupying power.
These protections were brought in precisely to cover people like resistance fighters, as the grand-parent says.
They were caught with weapons in hand
How surprising is it to find Afghani males with weapons?
or with large weapon caches.
Again, how unusual would that be in a tribal country that has had no effective national government since the early 1980s?
Hell, if the USA were somehow occupied, the same could be said of many USAsian households (in the south particularly).
I'm referring to the binary-only driver for the Broadcom wireless, as shipped with several Broadcom 47xx based LinkSys routers.
Why do you think it's not derived from Linux?
When I was 11 or 12 or so, I had teeth removed at the dentists. For whatever reason I got scared on the chair as they went to sedate me and went into a panic. I'm pretty sure I landed at least a couple of good kicks and punches ("Oooh my solar-plexus.." one of the men cried, I'll always remember) in the minute or two before they managed to hold me down and anaesthetise me.
So I note the line "more comfortable for .... healthcare providers" in the article and don't doubt it's for real. ;)