That was more of an excuse. The missiles in Turkey where going to be removed anyway. The Atlas, Titan, Titan II, and Polaris meant that the Jupiters in Turkey and Italy where just more trouble than they where worth. From the Wikipedia "By the time that the Turkish Jupiters had been installed, the missiles were already largely obsolete and increasingly vulnerable to Soviet attacks. President John F. Kennedy ordered the removal of all Jupiter MRBMs upon taking office in 1961[citation needed]. The Air Force, however, delayed removal and the President was infuriated to learn that they had not yet been removed more than a year later. All Jupiter MRBM's were removed from service by April 1963, by this point a maneuver useful as a backdoor trade with the Soviets, in exchange for their earlier removal of MRBMs from Cuba."
Actually not really. The US had bases in Europe and Japan that could have reached the USSR the USSR didn't have any forward bases from which they could have launched an attack on the US. The SS-6 Sapwood which launched Sputnik took days to ready for launch and where not based in silos. Here are the facts from GlobalSecurity.org. "The soviets conducted 16 flight tests to ensure the reliability of the new control design. Following the tests in December 1959, the first of the R-7 launch complexes were put on an alert and deployment of the rockets began in January 1960. In January 1960 the Soviets successfully delivered a nose cone into the pacific ocean Eight missile launches were carried out of which seven were successful. In early 1960 theR-7A missile was put on active alert.
The R-7 was never deployed in significant numbers. The missile took too long to fuel, its above ground launch facilities were large and vulnerable to attack. Finally, the system could only be only be held on standby for 24 hours before the propellant seals began to fail. Fewer than ten were believed to be nuclear deployed, wth only one dedicated ICBM pad was built at Baikonur, and six to eight in the Angara complex at Plesetsk. " http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/r-7.htm The US also had the B-36 by the early 50s and just how interceptable it was is still up for debate. The later version could reach altitudes well above the ceiling of the MIG-15 so it may have been a real threat. The B-47 that followed could hit most targets in the USSR until the 1960s and by then the Atlas, Titan I, Titan II, and Polaris where in service along with the B-52.
Not really. He could have not turned it over when it happened because it would have have been played over and over so he put it on his shelf. Now after all these years he is going trough his stuff and giving it away to his friends and family since he is terminally ill and finds the tape. He has decided that it has been long enough and doesn't want this bit of history to die with him. I think an assumption that he has lost his principles is at best miss placed.
It was low enough resolution and from far enough away that I doubt that it would have helped. I remember that some soulless creep of a news person actually shot the families while the explosion happened. That should have never made it to broadcast.
Web apps just don't cut it Google. Apple found that out with the iPhone, Palm has learned that with the Pre. People want to have stuff that runs even when there is no internet even if it is just a game. We also want to carry some media with us so if we are stuck on a plane with no WiFi or anyplace with no WiFi or 3G we can watch or listen to something. Stop working on the Chrome OS and improve Android or just go right to a tablet Linux.
Because it was his memory. It may have his comments on it while he watched. I was watching when it happened and my father found parts on the beach which we did turn in. Over all we just didn't talk about it much. It is kind of hard when you realize that you just saw seven people die in front of your eyes. It is some how different than when you see it on the news. Also that cloud just hung over us the entire day. It felt like it would never go away. Actually even trying to post about that day is hard. So I can see putting it on a shelf and not taking it down until I knew I was going to die.
You can run IE7 and 8 under XP so upgrading is OS isn't required. My guess is that Google "stuck" with IE6 for testing. A lot of people still have IE6. Also isn't or wasn't IE6 still under support from Microsoft? If so then it should have had that security hole fixed. Considering that Microsoft is still selling Windows XP and that OS comes with IE6 in the install Microsoft is still under an obligation to support it.
Funny but that world existed for about 20 years. The US pretty much could have nuked any nation on earth at will from 1945 until around the mid sixties. The old Soviet Union had no effective to deliver a nuclear weapon to the continental US until the early to mid sixties. The USSR could have hit Europe, Japan, and Alaska but odds are that maybe one or two bombers might hive gotten through to the US and the few ICBMs the USSR had would have been destroyed on the ground. That is one of the reasons that the USSR put missiles in Cuba so they could have a workable threat to the US.
Not exactly. You can not buy an nVidia card for the same amount and have 100% of the features work just fine using FOSS drivers. However you can get closed drivers for both ATI and Vidia. Just goes to prove that the myth that if you just release the specs great FOSS drivers will get written quickly and by the community.
Actually I did give him the reference he asked for. and I pointed out there is nothing wrong with "asking" for citations "after" looking yourself. The problem is with DEMANDING a citation and then with totally dismissing inconvenient data.
Actually my big problem is with people making really huge claims about subjects they know nothing about. Rogerborg: "I'm not even sure why there's a supposed role for fighters any more anyway. When's the last time a plane was downed by another plane, rather than being bombed on or shot from the ground? " LWATCDR "To answer your question for the US the Iraqi war. For Russia they downed a drone just last year with a fighter. Every time somebody says that Fighters are not needed anymore something happens that prove that idea wrong. Same with Aircraft Carriers and Tanks." Rothberg:"Citations needed. Seriously. You make the assertions, you provide the evidence." I just provided him with data. All he had to do was freaking look it up. But that isn't good enough for Rothberg. Even with the links provided he dismisses said data. Rothberg:"Oh, sorry, I thought we were talking about something relevant, not ancient history, or a silly reference to a RC plane that could have been downed by (sic)hucking rocks at it."
I will give you that shouldn't have let him get under my skin but at the same time this is a clear case of "Let me Google that for you".
I think the point was that the N900 is more open than the iPhone. Which is why I said that running a VM on the iPhone should be possible but not sanctioned.
Not really. Both Macs and iPhones run the same Kernel even if they are for different ISAs. Kind of like how my Android phone, PC, and Router are all running Linux.
No you can ask for a reference politely if you can not find one yourself. In this case it would have taken typing in Russian drone shutdown to get the video of the Russian MIG shooting down the drone. The other references where found on Wikipedia with frankly just a little effort. But in this case the original poster made claim that was outside of common sense. I gave him examples that are all over the internet and the news. Then I get a snotty demand for references. Folks just do a Google or at least be polite. Doesn't matter because the idiot is now claiming that the combat I referenced where too far in the past or just doesn't count. Doesn't matter I should know better than to bother trying to educate people that are ignorant experts.
Actually the iPhone does run OS/X just a different flavor of it. I guess that one could port a VM to the iPhone or iPad if you had the dev kit for it or jail broke it. I would say it is possible but not sanctioned.
That is one thing they don't seem to look at when looking at how much something in the space program costs. Almost everything built is built in the US by US workers. Thousands of good paying "MANUFACTURING" jobs will be lost. It will also hit Mississippi, and Louisiana as well as Florida, Texas, Alabama, and yes California. Hey Obama kept his campaign promise as was posted in Slashdot.
At this point I would love to see you armed with rock going head to head with a predator drone.
Really get a bit of a clue before you post on a subject. Historically it is very common for weapon systems to not be used for long periods of time. That doesn't make them useless. Fighter planes and bombers where not used much at all between the end of WWI and the Spanish Civil War. That was more than a decade. Same for Submarines. Your argument about fighters is not new at all. It was first put forward in the 1920s because it was thought that bombers would fly too fast, too high, and would be flying battleships. Then it was put forward in the 1960s and many fighters where built without guns because it was thought that SAMs and AAMs would replace true fighters. That didn't happen. The same types of arguments have been made about tanks, ships, bombers, and infantry. Usually by people that have no experience with in the military and with little to know knowledge of history. So let's us take a quick look at modern air combat. Modern SAMS are pretty good but they are best at defending small areas. You also have to deal with physics. A SAM's sensors will be limited to line of sight and the height, speed, and distance of the target it can hit will be limited by how big the missile is. So to defeat a fixed SAM site isn't that hard. The Iraqi had a very good system of SAMs but look how few took out US aircraft. To remove a SAM site you first locate it. If it is radar guided it will be about as hard as finding a lighthouse at night. To take it out you use a high speed low flying missile launched by a low flying aircraft getting targeting data from a medium altitude aircraft outside the same envelope. SAMS have a minimum range and reaction time. Before they can launch the site will be destroyed. Of course if you have fighters you send them out and use them to take out the medium range aircraft providing the targeting data and our the weapon launching aircraft. Using aircraft as a sensor platform gives you mobility and long line of sight. Using aircraft as a weapons launching platform gives you mobility and acts to extend the range of the weapon because it can be launched at altitude and speed. Even if you treat a fighter as nothing but a flying SAM site it still gives you a huge amount of flexibility. Yes someday it may be unmanned but not today. Since modern combat aircraft tend to stay in service for decades most people believe that we are seeing the last generation of manned combat aircraft.
Actually he made this statment. "I'm not even sure why there's a supposed role for fighters any more anyway. When's the last time a plane was downed by another plane," As well as a discussion of how to counter air power which was also deeply flawed. I simply told him that the US did shoot down aircraft in the Iraqi war. It was on the news people and documented all over the place. It was about as DUMB to say that I need to give references than if I made the statment that Aircraft dropped bombs on the Iraqi war. Also if in doubt get off your lazy butt and check your own facts. If you can not find them then the correct reply is. "I couldn't find a single reference to x do you have any?" So I will make some other statements with no references. The US landed on the Moon in 1969. Bill Clinton was president, and water is wet.
I thought it was with a sidewinder but I could be wrong. A Strike Eagle is supposed to have taken out a helicopter in flight with a lgb which is just showing off in my book.
The Japanese built the F4 and F15 locally after buying a few from the US. I am not sure that we would be willing to do that with the F-22 after the Toshiba incident.
Dude are you too lazy to use Google or do just never listen to the news? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-15_Eagle "According to the USAF, its F-15Cs had 34 confirmed kills of Iraqi aircraft during the 1991 Gulf War, mostly by missile fire: five MiG-29 "Fulcrums", two MiG-25 "Foxbats", eight MiG-23 "Floggers", two MiG-21 "Fishbeds", two Su-25 "Frogfoots", four Su-22 "Fitters", one Su-7, six Mirage F1s, one Il-76 cargo plane, one Pilatus PC-9 trainer, and two Mi-8 helicopters. " I left out Bosnia "USAF F-15Cs shot down four Yugoslav MiG-29s using AIM-120 missiles during NATO's 1999 intervention in Kosovo, Operation Allied Force.[48]" And that is just the F-15 in US service. The F-16 has a few kills as does the F-18 and the A-10 even has an aerial kill to it's credit. As I said this is just the US.
Here is the YouTube video of the Russian's shooting down a drone over Georgia http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNpABtIKERg And the BBC Story. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7358761.stm Just get off the internet if you really expect people to do all your work for you. You make a statment like "When's the last time a plane was downed by another plane, rather than being bombed on or shot from the ground? " and I tell you the answer but your too freaking lazy to Google it yourself to see if it is valid? What the heck....
Wow I may have to try this out. I never knew that it existed. Thanks for the link. Wow I know that sounded so much like a plant it wasn't funny but I had never heard of it before.
Slashdot Mirror
That was more of an excuse. The missiles in Turkey where going to be removed anyway. The Atlas, Titan, Titan II, and Polaris meant that the Jupiters in Turkey and Italy where just more trouble than they where worth.
From the Wikipedia
"By the time that the Turkish Jupiters had been installed, the missiles were already largely obsolete and increasingly vulnerable to Soviet attacks. President John F. Kennedy ordered the removal of all Jupiter MRBMs upon taking office in 1961[citation needed]. The Air Force, however, delayed removal and the President was infuriated to learn that they had not yet been removed more than a year later. All Jupiter MRBM's were removed from service by April 1963, by this point a maneuver useful as a backdoor trade with the Soviets, in exchange for their earlier removal of MRBMs from Cuba."
Actually not really.
The US had bases in Europe and Japan that could have reached the USSR the USSR didn't have any forward bases from which they could have launched an attack on the US.
The SS-6 Sapwood which launched Sputnik took days to ready for launch and where not based in silos.
Here are the facts from GlobalSecurity.org.
"The soviets conducted 16 flight tests to ensure the reliability of the new control design. Following the tests in December 1959, the first of the R-7 launch complexes were put on an alert and deployment of the rockets began in January 1960. In January 1960 the Soviets successfully delivered a nose cone into the pacific ocean Eight missile launches were carried out of which seven were successful. In early 1960 theR-7A missile was put on active alert.
The R-7 was never deployed in significant numbers. The missile took too long to fuel, its above ground launch facilities were large and vulnerable to attack. Finally, the system could only be only be held on standby for 24 hours before the propellant seals began to fail. Fewer than ten were believed to be nuclear deployed, wth only one dedicated ICBM pad was built at Baikonur, and six to eight in the Angara complex at Plesetsk. "
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/r-7.htm
The US also had the B-36 by the early 50s and just how interceptable it was is still up for debate. The later version could reach altitudes well above the ceiling of the MIG-15 so it may have been a real threat. The B-47 that followed could hit most targets in the USSR until the 1960s and by then the Atlas, Titan I, Titan II, and Polaris where in service along with the B-52.
Actually I was close enough to see some of the parts impact the water.
Not really.
He could have not turned it over when it happened because it would have have been played over and over so he put it on his shelf.
Now after all these years he is going trough his stuff and giving it away to his friends and family since he is terminally ill and finds the tape. He has decided that it has been long enough and doesn't want this bit of history to die with him.
I think an assumption that he has lost his principles is at best miss placed.
Still converts to JS.
Still limited to Javascript+Html. Actually they are dropping Gears and going to HTML 5 which is supposed to have some kind of storage model.
Just limiting it to a single language is bad enough but Javascript?
It was low enough resolution and from far enough away that I doubt that it would have helped.
I remember that some soulless creep of a news person actually shot the families while the explosion happened. That should have never made it to broadcast.
Web apps just don't cut it Google. Apple found that out with the iPhone, Palm has learned that with the Pre. People want to have stuff that runs even when there is no internet even if it is just a game.
We also want to carry some media with us so if we are stuck on a plane with no WiFi or anyplace with no WiFi or 3G we can watch or listen to something.
Stop working on the Chrome OS and improve Android or just go right to a tablet Linux.
Because it was his memory. It may have his comments on it while he watched. I was watching when it happened and my father found parts on the beach which we did turn in. Over all we just didn't talk about it much. It is kind of hard when you realize that you just saw seven people die in front of your eyes. It is some how different than when you see it on the news. Also that cloud just hung over us the entire day. It felt like it would never go away.
Actually even trying to post about that day is hard. So I can see putting it on a shelf and not taking it down until I knew I was going to die.
You can run IE7 and 8 under XP so upgrading is OS isn't required.
My guess is that Google "stuck" with IE6 for testing. A lot of people still have IE6. Also isn't or wasn't IE6 still under support from Microsoft?
If so then it should have had that security hole fixed. Considering that Microsoft is still selling Windows XP and that OS comes with IE6 in the install Microsoft is still under an obligation to support it.
Funny but that world existed for about 20 years. The US pretty much could have nuked any nation on earth at will from 1945 until around the mid sixties.
The old Soviet Union had no effective to deliver a nuclear weapon to the continental US until the early to mid sixties.
The USSR could have hit Europe, Japan, and Alaska but odds are that maybe one or two bombers might hive gotten through to the US and the few ICBMs the USSR had would have been destroyed on the ground. That is one of the reasons that the USSR put missiles in Cuba so they could have a workable threat to the US.
Not exactly. You can not buy an nVidia card for the same amount and have 100% of the features work just fine using FOSS drivers.
However you can get closed drivers for both ATI and Vidia.
Just goes to prove that the myth that if you just release the specs great FOSS drivers will get written quickly and by the community.
But they will want power, and metal "maybe".
Actually I did give him the reference he asked for.
and I pointed out there is nothing wrong with "asking" for citations "after" looking yourself.
The problem is with DEMANDING a citation and then with totally dismissing inconvenient data.
Actually my big problem is with people making really huge claims about subjects they know nothing about.
Rogerborg: "I'm not even sure why there's a supposed role for fighters any more anyway. When's the last time a plane was downed by another plane, rather than being bombed on or shot from the ground? "
LWATCDR "To answer your question for the US the Iraqi war. For Russia they downed a drone just last year with a fighter.
Every time somebody says that Fighters are not needed anymore something happens that prove that idea wrong.
Same with Aircraft Carriers and Tanks."
Rothberg:"Citations needed. Seriously. You make the assertions, you provide the evidence."
I just provided him with data. All he had to do was freaking look it up. But that isn't good enough for Rothberg. Even with the links provided he dismisses said data.
Rothberg:"Oh, sorry, I thought we were talking about something relevant, not ancient history, or a silly reference to a RC plane that could have been downed by (sic)hucking rocks at it."
I will give you that shouldn't have let him get under my skin but at the same time this is a clear case of "Let me Google that for you".
I think the point was that the N900 is more open than the iPhone. Which is why I said that running a VM on the iPhone should be possible but not sanctioned.
Not really. Both Macs and iPhones run the same Kernel even if they are for different ISAs. Kind of like how my Android phone, PC, and Router are all running Linux.
No you can ask for a reference politely if you can not find one yourself.
In this case it would have taken typing in Russian drone shutdown to get the video of the Russian MIG shooting down the drone.
The other references where found on Wikipedia with frankly just a little effort.
But in this case the original poster made claim that was outside of common sense. I gave him examples that are all over the internet and the news. Then I get a snotty demand for references.
Folks just do a Google or at least be polite.
Doesn't matter because the idiot is now claiming that the combat I referenced where too far in the past or just doesn't count.
Doesn't matter I should know better than to bother trying to educate people that are ignorant experts.
Actually the iPhone does run OS/X just a different flavor of it.
I guess that one could port a VM to the iPhone or iPad if you had the dev kit for it or jail broke it.
I would say it is possible but not sanctioned.
That is one thing they don't seem to look at when looking at how much something in the space program costs.
Almost everything built is built in the US by US workers. Thousands of good paying "MANUFACTURING" jobs will be lost.
It will also hit Mississippi, and Louisiana as well as Florida, Texas, Alabama, and yes California.
Hey Obama kept his campaign promise as was posted in Slashdot.
At this point I would love to see you armed with rock going head to head with a predator drone.
Really get a bit of a clue before you post on a subject. Historically it is very common for weapon systems to not be used for long periods of time. That doesn't make them useless.
Fighter planes and bombers where not used much at all between the end of WWI and the Spanish Civil War. That was more than a decade. Same for Submarines. Your argument about fighters is not new at all. It was first put forward in the 1920s because it was thought that bombers would fly too fast, too high, and would be flying battleships.
Then it was put forward in the 1960s and many fighters where built without guns because it was thought that SAMs and AAMs would replace true fighters. That didn't happen.
The same types of arguments have been made about tanks, ships, bombers, and infantry. Usually by people that have no experience with in the military and with little to know knowledge of history.
So let's us take a quick look at modern air combat. Modern SAMS are pretty good but they are best at defending small areas. You also have to deal with physics. A SAM's sensors will be limited to line of sight and the height, speed, and distance of the target it can hit will be limited by how big the missile is.
So to defeat a fixed SAM site isn't that hard. The Iraqi had a very good system of SAMs but look how few took out US aircraft.
To remove a SAM site you first locate it. If it is radar guided it will be about as hard as finding a lighthouse at night. To take it out you use a high speed low flying missile launched by a low flying aircraft getting targeting data from a medium altitude aircraft outside the same envelope. SAMS have a minimum range and reaction time. Before they can launch the site will be destroyed.
Of course if you have fighters you send them out and use them to take out the medium range aircraft providing the targeting data and our the weapon launching aircraft.
Using aircraft as a sensor platform gives you mobility and long line of sight.
Using aircraft as a weapons launching platform gives you mobility and acts to extend the range of the weapon because it can be launched at altitude and speed. Even if you treat a fighter as nothing but a flying SAM site it still gives you a huge amount of flexibility. Yes someday it may be unmanned but not today. Since modern combat aircraft tend to stay in service for decades most people believe that we are seeing the last generation of manned combat aircraft.
Actually he made this statment.
"I'm not even sure why there's a supposed role for fighters any more anyway. When's the last time a plane was downed by another plane,"
As well as a discussion of how to counter air power which was also deeply flawed.
I simply told him that the US did shoot down aircraft in the Iraqi war. It was on the news people and documented all over the place.
It was about as DUMB to say that I need to give references than if I made the statment that Aircraft dropped bombs on the Iraqi war. Also if in doubt get off your lazy butt and check your own facts. If you can not find them then the correct reply is. "I couldn't find a single reference to x do you have any?"
So I will make some other statements with no references. The US landed on the Moon in 1969.
Bill Clinton was president, and water is wet.
I thought it was with a sidewinder but I could be wrong. A Strike Eagle is supposed to have taken out a helicopter in flight with a lgb which is just showing off in my book.
The Japanese built the F4 and F15 locally after buying a few from the US. I am not sure that we would be willing to do that with the F-22 after the Toshiba incident.
Dude are you too lazy to use Google or do just never listen to the news?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-15_Eagle
"According to the USAF, its F-15Cs had 34 confirmed kills of Iraqi aircraft during the 1991 Gulf War, mostly by missile fire: five MiG-29 "Fulcrums", two MiG-25 "Foxbats", eight MiG-23 "Floggers", two MiG-21 "Fishbeds", two Su-25 "Frogfoots", four Su-22 "Fitters", one Su-7, six Mirage F1s, one Il-76 cargo plane, one Pilatus PC-9 trainer, and two Mi-8 helicopters. "
I left out Bosnia
"USAF F-15Cs shot down four Yugoslav MiG-29s using AIM-120 missiles during NATO's 1999 intervention in Kosovo, Operation Allied Force.[48]"
And that is just the F-15 in US service. The F-16 has a few kills as does the F-18 and the A-10 even has an aerial kill to it's credit.
As I said this is just the US.
Here is the YouTube video of the Russian's shooting down a drone over Georgia http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNpABtIKERg
And the BBC Story. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7358761.stm
Just get off the internet if you really expect people to do all your work for you.
You make a statment like "When's the last time a plane was downed by another plane, rather than being bombed on or shot from the ground? " and I tell you the answer but your too freaking lazy to Google it yourself to see if it is valid?
What the heck....
Wow I may have to try this out. I never knew that it existed. Thanks for the link.
Wow I know that sounded so much like a plant it wasn't funny but I had never heard of it before.