The camera array on NASA's ER2 is a tad more sophisticated than simply a DSLR or two. The relatively limited and older IRIS system covers a strip approximately 40 nautical miles wide: exactly what kind of setup could accomplish this on a turboprop? I am not saying it could not be done, but it would take more than a few days of work. The possible selection of cameras on the ER-2 is listed in the first link, the National Imagery Interpretability Rating Scales for civilian and military usage are 2nd and 3rd:
Or any cell customer who is not a fan boy of any tech companies: coverage and quality matter. The iPhone likely won't "change the market" as some dream but it will fill a niche. The ultimate size of the niche depends on how quickly the inevitable first generation problems are sorted out, and when the phone makers produce their responses. Typically Apple has huge margins, @ 50%, so they have plenty of room to cut prices should the need arise, http://www.isuppli.com/news/default.asp?id=7308&m= 1&y=2007 has estimates.
Security threats don't always come from groups with access to large budgets and advanced technology. Requests for information may be "red flagged" and what better way to access a satellite photo of a potential target than free online? That being said, the quality of the imagery on google maps is not up to targeting standards and the choice of blurred imagery seems to be inconsistent. The cooling towers and reactor building at Hanford are on Google, as are those at Diablo Canyon. It appears that there are a few over zealous security officials so concerned by Google maps that they took it upon themselves to demand pixelation.
That is the best advice given yet. My nephew is using my old TI-81, and unless there have been changes in formulae it will do everything that is necessary to get one through math and science. Like Paltin said, get your self an instruction manual and an old TI-* and spend the rest on dinner with a suitable companion.
"Saved" is a bit strong, but there was a DHL A300 hit by an SA-7 over Baghdad that made an emergency landing: http://www.defense-aerospace.com/produit/29222_us. html
Most man-portable SAMs would require a very fortunate shot to bring down something the size of an airliner. The traditional method used by aircraft flying in to high threat environments is a special approach, possibly combined with an automated flare ejection system releasing decoys on final approach. Naturally, this system would cause chaos on approach to most civilian airports. The system deployed on the FedEx DC-10 looks like the best solution if one believes that this is the way to go. The US military is placing its hope for protection from the full range of IR missiles in the Suite of Infrared Countermeasures http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/air craft/systems/siircm.htm but this package is far more than airliners need. The danger to airliners is from missiles with a relatively low effective altitude: an airliner at cruising altitude is not threatened by a guy with a missile on his shoulder.
More info in some research here http://www.afrlhorizons.com/Briefs/Dec03/SN0303.ht ml
Re:Soldier ComfortOther Issues
on
iPods at War
·
· Score: 1
Comfort is relative, especially for front line troops. My grandfather carried books of poetry with him in WW1, many of which I still have. He jotted little notes in them, one mentions that his friend was carrying that book when he was KIA. My father carried books and cards in his bag during WW2. I have a cousin in Afghanistan with the PPCLI and he has an ipod and laptop back at camp, although he gets to return to base more often than my Grandfather or Father did when they were in a combat zone. We exchange podcasts on a regular basis, keeping him up to date on family and ongoing arguments about various current events. He does carry a book of poetry with him that has accompanied 3 generations of our family to war, but that is more of a talisman than anything else.
I have a Powerbook G4 but on my power adapter the DC line does not have the same connection to the adapter as the problem model. The design change may have altered where the stress is on the DC line leading to the failures. Unfortunately there are knee jerk responses regarding every Apple related issue:
1) Kool-aid drinking Mac users immediately proclaim that the problem is completely irrelevant.
2) The anti-mac adherents once again proclaim that Apple is in trouble.
Stuff like this happens with all kinds of hardware, there is not a single manufacturer of mass produced laptops who has not had an issue with power in one way or another: overheating or exploding power adapters and batteries. When does it officially become a "problem?" There actually is a number that Apple, or any manufacturer faced with this possibility, will use to determine if a recall is necessary. They will do a cost-benefit analysis to determine at what point recalling the laptops makes the most sense with respect to losses and publicity. This is the same method used to determine automobile recalls and pretty much any other similar activity.
Overwhelming the defences with multiple targets would be a better idea. Chaff, decoys, multiple penetrators from a single projectile and myriad other deceptions are available. Possible counter measures available are similar to those used in ICBMs and SLBMs to counter the threat of ABMs.
Traditionally, tanks used increased armour as their passive defence and mobility as an active defence, but those times are changing. An armoured vehicle that is the target of enemy fire may even begin to react automatically when an enemy laser ranging laser is detected by popping smoke and moving the vehicle away from the threat.
You must not remember people like Renee Simard and Wayne & Schuster: they were embarrassing for Canadians. Seriously though, Paul Hellyer has always been kind of a nutcase and to be honest I though he was long dead. Hellyer was the genius behind unification of the Armed Forces, as well as Defence Minister when the Forces took a budget reduction from which they have never recovered. I wonder why anyone is listening to him now except for the over-rated positions he has held in the past.
Interesting ideas. The first point neglects the realities of how & why music consumer decide what to purchase. Is it artistic merit or location on iTMS that decides what is a hit or is it promotion? The big labels are about promotion and traffic building, regardless of what the product is: a single song or an entire CD. By signing artists Apple would have to commit themselves to an entirely different level of marketing and payola. You have to promote music to sell it and I doubt Apple has the financial clout to run a large stable of artists. Think of the effort a to put on a large tour, would Apple suddenly hire people to organize the photo shoots and TV appearances of the artists? I am no fan of the major labels and their short-sighted views on the evolution of music distribution, but it isn't as simple as signing artists and sharing the money.
Point Two would seem to be pretty much moot, not that I am in any way qualified to comment on the law beyond "idiot in the street" level, but an attempt to claim that the digital and analog distribution rights are completely independent of one another must be doomed to failure. The courts will decide the issue without caring how this so-called "90% of the artists and consumers" feels about it.
The RIAA are already owners of "an extinct business model" but they control the commodity because they created the system that goes beyond the single listener. The big radio stations play what the labels want played, as does MTV. The major labels are in the marketing business and music happens to be the object of their promotion. The bulk of music listeners don't buy something because it happens to be on iTMS, rather they go to iTMS to purchase the song that is "cool," or whatever adjective their particular demographic uses, and it became "cool" because of promotion and exposure.
When this came up before many folks claimed that Apple held all the cards, but iTMS is only as profitable as the music they are allowed to sell. Thankfully the major labels are too busy trying to figure out what a computer is to actually get their act together and create their own "exclusive" competitor for iTMS. The market will move to where the songs that they think are "cool" can be purchased, it is as simple as that and iTMS losses a huge number of downloads.
Most cruise ships do not have an armory, a few very well may but the next question then would be "is anyone trained to use the weapons?" Cruise lines generally don't like paying their crews very much, at least the folks one doesn't see, and I just can't see an investment in "security" when it is a relatively simple matter to change cruise routes. The last time a cruise ship was taken by pirates/terrorists was in 1985 when the Achille Lauro was "seajacked" by four terrorists. How can 4 guys take control of a cruise ship with over 400 people on board? It is amazing how easy it is to pacify tourists with a few AKs and some grenades. Shipping companies that transit areas of high pirate activity rarely arm their crews, but many opt for other defensive systems. These include, but are not limited to: electrified railings, audio weapons, and trained security personnel. Some areas, like the Straits of Malacca, have such a high rate of piracy that ship owners are hiring ex-military types as armed security. Maritime piracy is an interesting issue, the well organized gangs in South East Asia may have ties to elements of the Chinese military, or the government of Indonesia. Entire ships have "disappeared" only to be spotted undergoing a paint job and name change in a remote bay. Naturally this is not what the pirates were after in this case, they were out to take as much as they could as quickly as they could and then get off the ship.
There are alternatives to iTunes, many people already use them, but they often don't have the major labels on board. I like Emusic.com and have found a ton of stuff there that iTMS would never touch. The cost per download is well below $.99 per song but they don't have much in the way of "top 40" stuff or whatever crap the major labels spew out. If the major labels want to setup their own service and charge twice as much per song as iTMS they will still have a market: that range of people who buy into the promotion and the folks who can't let go of the hits catalog back to the 60's. If the bulk of the sales at iTMS are from these major labels the traffic will follow the product. The major labels are not stupid enough to try to force people back to the record stores, but they are willing to maximize their profits from the online market. The smaller labels are simply trying to get their product out there and are happy with service that ends up costing the listener less than $.30 per song but the major labels want profits for their corporate empires.
My wife still has my old Rio PMP300, and two flash cards. She uses it while running and has had no problems except the dial needs to be glued back on every few months. It looks pretty funny side by side with my iPod, but when I first got the Rio it was pretty much the only game in town. Since then I have had a Creative Nomad and 2 iPods (sold) but somehow that PMP 300 survived. It is one thing to be first to market, but that doesn't offer any guarantees.
The facts of the crash are not as cut and dried as either of you state and many are wrong. The pilot survived, along with most of the people on board, and was found guilty of manslaughter in the 3 fatalities connected to the crash. The funny thing is that two primary claims of the pilot in his defence were Operational Engineering Bulletins from Airbus Industrie regarding:
In a nutshell, the bulletins state that the engines didn't respond "normally" to throttle input and that barometric altitude indicator did not comply with airworthiness regulations. Air France chose not to share this information with the pilots. Naturally, this is the kind of thing that the data recorders could shine some light on. The data supported the claims that it was pilot error and the case was closed.
In 1998 it was determined that the data that was supposedly from the flight had been compromised. The flight data and cockpit voice recorders had been tampered with during a 10 day period when they were not in the hands of the magistrate's office. They were in the hands of the French Civil Aviation Authority (DGAC), contrary to their own regulations. The funniest thing is that one of the boxes presented as coming from the crashed A320 spontaneously changed its markings during the interim. An independent body from Switzerland determined that there had been a switch by comparing photos of the CVR being recovered from the crash site with the one presented as evidence.
While the "official" verdict was pilot error there is enough evidence to call that verdict into question. Who lost the least with the verdict? Airbus was introducing an advanced aircraft and attempting to challenge Boeing, and they were selling the "advanced" electronics of the 320 series: even admitting that there may be an issue with the system would have had devastating consequences.
The onboard computers did lead to a few incidents with the A320. In 93 a Lufthansa pilot made a landing with a very low sink rate, so low the flight computers would not allow the deployment of thrust reversers or brakes for a number of seconds. The plane ended up going off the runway. I guess you could make too soft a landing.
Admittedly they seem to have solved those problems, and I have no qualms flying in an Airbus but then again I flew Aeroflot a couple of times.
I believe the yield of the early bombs wasn't that different from that of some later tactical nukes. Hiroshima was @ 15kt and Nagasaki was @20kt as I recall and one definition of tactical nukes is a yield under 1 megaton. The accuracy and weight of the weapons would have placed some limitations on employment is a tactical role. The doctrine for using tactical nukes wasn't developed until the 50's and even then was an organizational nightmare.
Where did you acquire this information? I have never seen reference to any plan to use atomic weapons as tactical support during the invasions of Kyushu or Honshu. Most sources place the total number of US nukes produced in December 1945 at 6: one for the test, two dropped on Japan, one that was ready for assembly in mid August and two more produced sometime after hostilities ended. If the war had continued the Army Air Force would have continued down the list of planned atomic target cities rather than use one of their few weapons in an unplanned tactical support mission. It sounds like one of the more outlandish claims of the plans for Operation Olympic.
The attempts at myth making aside, does anyone really care who was first? There are plenty of composers and musicians who experimented wih different hardware and ideas. Folks like Edgar Varese, Andre Popp, Atileo Minneo and Holger Czukay (and many others) show a range of styles and influences expressed by electronic means. Does the chronological appearence of an artist's work have much relevance to if one likes it or not? Just enjoy music and keep listening to different things: it doesn't matter when it came out if you think it is bitchin'.
I like the TM for Improvised Munitions and I recall one title "Field Expedient Explosives" that we nicknamed "bombs from the store" but not sure if it was an FM or TM. I have a few from the late 80's, including the classics FM 100-2-1 "Soviet Army Ops" and FM 100-2-2 "Soviet Army Spec War & RAS." It is funny how many older TMs and FMs are available and still have some nasty information. FM 5-31 "Boobytraps" is a great example: how to make many different everyday things deadly to the user. I remember testing different improvised detonation circuits in the dormitory: pressure plates; trip-wire circuits of foil and clothes pegs; traps on doors and drawers. Hook up a smoke alarm noise maker and a 9 volt and you can have a lot of fun scarring the crap out of your friends.
>The ends never justify the means. When you find yourself using people not as an end unto themselves, find different means.
1: The ends can justify the means: it all depends upon one's personal philosophy. People are not necessarily an end unto themselves but are agents of societal interaction. There is a social contract and sometimes it makes life a bitch.
>I know a girl who been getting hospitalized for months on end ever since she was vaccinated as a child. The vaccine is >responsible for destroying her liver, among other things. Vaccines do nasty things to a percentage of the population.
2: I know of measles clusters, as well as other clusters of preventable (through vaccination) diseases (ie pertussis, mumps) that can be linked directly to groups of parents who decided immunization was bad.
>this applies to all foreign aid (except of course for countries that have been developed thanks to foreign money--current count: >0),
3A: Europe and Japan were rebuilt from US aid following WW2. Israel and Taiwan would be non-existent without US $. I am not a fan of many aid programs, but the Marshall plan worked just fine.
>If you think its ok to make a small percentage of the population who receives vaccines so sick (there's no was she would have >lived long outside a 1st world country, and she's not being killed naturally, this was purely for the betterment of society as a >whole) then why not go whole hog and let the whole lot of them go?
3B: You are comparing an adverse reaction to complete disregard? Is this some bizarre attempt to apply the Prime Directive? Do you apply this bizarre logic to every aspect of life? Should a person forgo risky, but potentially life saving, surgery because there is a chance he/she will end up dead anyway? Are you opposed to organ donation? Donated organs can get rejected. What about other risks in society? Drawing the line at vaccines based upon your reasoning is completely illogical.
>Anyones who's ever been annoyed at the idea of antivirus companies should cringe at the idea of vaccines. You can write all >the code you want to identify and stop a virus, but the vulnerability only goes away when the program gets fixed. Vaccines >don't stay in the gene pool. Natural immunity does.
Comparing computer anti-virus programs to vaccines , and by extension malicious code to disease, is flawed at best. You want natural immunity in a gene pool? Try sickle cell against malaria: immunity @ 75% of the time with a good chance of a crippling disease (sickle cell anemia.) Apparently mother nature accepts that immunity comes with risks. Natural immunity isn't a simple matter either: tetanus has been around in the soil since long before humanity yet for some reason we have never built up resistance.
It is sad when a medical procedure, like vaccination, causes harm to the patient. It was also sad when kids routinely died from things we can barely remember the names of. Do you recall quarantine signs outside your friend's houses? Ever visited somebody in an iron lung? Remember lockjaw? Whooping cough (pertussis)? Pertussis itself has a death rate of @.5% and roughly similar incidence of severe neurological damage. The vaccine has a severe reaction rate of @.001%: does it make more sense to vaccinate or let nature take its course?
Slashdot Mirror
The camera array on NASA's ER2 is a tad more sophisticated than simply a DSLR or two. The relatively limited and older IRIS system covers a strip approximately 40 nautical miles wide: exactly what kind of setup could accomplish this on a turboprop? I am not saying it could not be done, but it would take more than a few days of work. The possible selection of cameras on the ER-2 is listed in the first link, the National Imagery Interpretability Rating Scales for civilian and military usage are 2nd and 3rd:
i /ER-2/cameras.html
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/research/AirSc
http://www.fas.org/irp/imint/niirs_c/guide.htm
http://www.fas.org/irp/imint/niirs.htm
Or any cell customer who is not a fan boy of any tech companies: coverage and quality matter. The iPhone likely won't "change the market" as some dream but it will fill a niche. The ultimate size of the niche depends on how quickly the inevitable first generation problems are sorted out, and when the phone makers produce their responses. Typically Apple has huge margins, @ 50%, so they have plenty of room to cut prices should the need arise, http://www.isuppli.com/news/default.asp?id=7308&m= 1&y=2007 has estimates.
Security threats don't always come from groups with access to large budgets and advanced technology. Requests for information may be "red flagged" and what better way to access a satellite photo of a potential target than free online? That being said, the quality of the imagery on google maps is not up to targeting standards and the choice of blurred imagery seems to be inconsistent. The cooling towers and reactor building at Hanford are on Google, as are those at Diablo Canyon. It appears that there are a few over zealous security officials so concerned by Google maps that they took it upon themselves to demand pixelation.
That is the best advice given yet. My nephew is using my old TI-81, and unless there have been changes in formulae it will do everything that is necessary to get one through math and science. Like Paltin said, get your self an instruction manual and an old TI-* and spend the rest on dinner with a suitable companion.
"Saved" is a bit strong, but there was a DHL A300 hit by an SA-7 over Baghdad that made an emergency landing: http://www.defense-aerospace.com/produit/29222_us. html
Most man-portable SAMs would require a very fortunate shot to bring down something the size of an airliner. The traditional method used by aircraft flying in to high threat environments is a special approach, possibly combined with an automated flare ejection system releasing decoys on final approach. Naturally, this system would cause chaos on approach to most civilian airports. The system deployed on the FedEx DC-10 looks like the best solution if one believes that this is the way to go. The US military is placing its hope for protection from the full range of IR missiles in the Suite of Infrared Countermeasures http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/air craft/systems/siircm.htm but this package is far more than airliners need. The danger to airliners is from missiles with a relatively low effective altitude: an airliner at cruising altitude is not threatened by a guy with a missile on his shoulder.
More info in some research here http://www.afrlhorizons.com/Briefs/Dec03/SN0303.ht ml
Comfort is relative, especially for front line troops. My grandfather carried books of poetry with him in WW1, many of which I still have. He jotted little notes in them, one mentions that his friend was carrying that book when he was KIA. My father carried books and cards in his bag during WW2. I have a cousin in Afghanistan with the PPCLI and he has an ipod and laptop back at camp, although he gets to return to base more often than my Grandfather or Father did when they were in a combat zone. We exchange podcasts on a regular basis, keeping him up to date on family and ongoing arguments about various current events. He does carry a book of poetry with him that has accompanied 3 generations of our family to war, but that is more of a talisman than anything else.
I have a Powerbook G4 but on my power adapter the DC line does not have the same connection to the adapter as the problem model. The design change may have altered where the stress is on the DC line leading to the failures. Unfortunately there are knee jerk responses regarding every Apple related issue:
1) Kool-aid drinking Mac users immediately proclaim that the problem is completely irrelevant.
2) The anti-mac adherents once again proclaim that Apple is in trouble.
Stuff like this happens with all kinds of hardware, there is not a single manufacturer of mass produced laptops who has not had an issue with power in one way or another: overheating or exploding power adapters and batteries. When does it officially become a "problem?" There actually is a number that Apple, or any manufacturer faced with this possibility, will use to determine if a recall is necessary. They will do a cost-benefit analysis to determine at what point recalling the laptops makes the most sense with respect to losses and publicity. This is the same method used to determine automobile recalls and pretty much any other similar activity.
Overwhelming the defences with multiple targets would be a better idea. Chaff, decoys, multiple penetrators from a single projectile and myriad other deceptions are available. Possible counter measures available are similar to those used in ICBMs and SLBMs to counter the threat of ABMs.
Traditionally, tanks used increased armour as their passive defence and mobility as an active defence, but those times are changing. An armoured vehicle that is the target of enemy fire may even begin to react automatically when an enemy laser ranging laser is detected by popping smoke and moving the vehicle away from the threat.
You must not remember people like Renee Simard and Wayne & Schuster: they were embarrassing for Canadians. Seriously though, Paul Hellyer has always been kind of a nutcase and to be honest I though he was long dead. Hellyer was the genius behind unification of the Armed Forces, as well as Defence Minister when the Forces took a budget reduction from which they have never recovered. I wonder why anyone is listening to him now except for the over-rated positions he has held in the past.
Interesting ideas. The first point neglects the realities of how & why music consumer decide what to purchase. Is it artistic merit or location on iTMS that decides what is a hit or is it promotion? The big labels are about promotion and traffic building, regardless of what the product is: a single song or an entire CD. By signing artists Apple would have to commit themselves to an entirely different level of marketing and payola. You have to promote music to sell it and I doubt Apple has the financial clout to run a large stable of artists. Think of the effort a to put on a large tour, would Apple suddenly hire people to organize the photo shoots and TV appearances of the artists? I am no fan of the major labels and their short-sighted views on the evolution of music distribution, but it isn't as simple as signing artists and sharing the money.
Point Two would seem to be pretty much moot, not that I am in any way qualified to comment on the law beyond "idiot in the street" level, but an attempt to claim that the digital and analog distribution rights are completely independent of one another must be doomed to failure. The courts will decide the issue without caring how this so-called "90% of the artists and consumers" feels about it.
The RIAA are already owners of "an extinct business model" but they control the commodity because they created the system that goes beyond the single listener. The big radio stations play what the labels want played, as does MTV. The major labels are in the marketing business and music happens to be the object of their promotion. The bulk of music listeners don't buy something because it happens to be on iTMS, rather they go to iTMS to purchase the song that is "cool," or whatever adjective their particular demographic uses, and it became "cool" because of promotion and exposure.
When this came up before many folks claimed that Apple held all the cards, but iTMS is only as profitable as the music they are allowed to sell. Thankfully the major labels are too busy trying to figure out what a computer is to actually get their act together and create their own "exclusive" competitor for iTMS. The market will move to where the songs that they think are "cool" can be purchased, it is as simple as that and iTMS losses a huge number of downloads.
Most cruise ships do not have an armory, a few very well may but the next question then would be "is anyone trained to use the weapons?" Cruise lines generally don't like paying their crews very much, at least the folks one doesn't see, and I just can't see an investment in "security" when it is a relatively simple matter to change cruise routes. The last time a cruise ship was taken by pirates/terrorists was in 1985 when the Achille Lauro was "seajacked" by four terrorists. How can 4 guys take control of a cruise ship with over 400 people on board? It is amazing how easy it is to pacify tourists with a few AKs and some grenades. Shipping companies that transit areas of high pirate activity rarely arm their crews, but many opt for other defensive systems. These include, but are not limited to: electrified railings, audio weapons, and trained security personnel. Some areas, like the Straits of Malacca, have such a high rate of piracy that ship owners are hiring ex-military types as armed security. Maritime piracy is an interesting issue, the well organized gangs in South East Asia may have ties to elements of the Chinese military, or the government of Indonesia. Entire ships have "disappeared" only to be spotted undergoing a paint job and name change in a remote bay. Naturally this is not what the pirates were after in this case, they were out to take as much as they could as quickly as they could and then get off the ship.
There are alternatives to iTunes, many people already use them, but they often don't have the major labels on board. I like Emusic.com and have found a ton of stuff there that iTMS would never touch. The cost per download is well below $.99 per song but they don't have much in the way of "top 40" stuff or whatever crap the major labels spew out. If the major labels want to setup their own service and charge twice as much per song as iTMS they will still have a market: that range of people who buy into the promotion and the folks who can't let go of the hits catalog back to the 60's. If the bulk of the sales at iTMS are from these major labels the traffic will follow the product. The major labels are not stupid enough to try to force people back to the record stores, but they are willing to maximize their profits from the online market. The smaller labels are simply trying to get their product out there and are happy with service that ends up costing the listener less than $.30 per song but the major labels want profits for their corporate empires.
My wife still has my old Rio PMP300, and two flash cards. She uses it while running and has had no problems except the dial needs to be glued back on every few months. It looks pretty funny side by side with my iPod, but when I first got the Rio it was pretty much the only game in town. Since then I have had a Creative Nomad and 2 iPods (sold) but somehow that PMP 300 survived. It is one thing to be first to market, but that doesn't offer any guarantees.
The facts of the crash are not as cut and dried as either of you state and many are wrong. The pilot survived, along with most of the people on board, and was found guilty of manslaughter in the 3 fatalities connected to the crash. The funny thing is that two primary claims of the pilot in his defence were Operational Engineering Bulletins from Airbus Industrie regarding:
OEB 19/1 Engine Acceleration Deficiency at Low Altitude
OEB 06/2 Barometric Cross Setting Check
In a nutshell, the bulletins state that the engines didn't respond "normally" to throttle input and that barometric altitude indicator did not comply with airworthiness regulations. Air France chose not to share this information with the pilots. Naturally, this is the kind of thing that the data recorders could shine some light on. The data supported the claims that it was pilot error and the case was closed.
In 1998 it was determined that the data that was supposedly from the flight had been compromised. The flight data and cockpit voice recorders had been tampered with during a 10 day period when they were not in the hands of the magistrate's office. They were in the hands of the French Civil Aviation Authority (DGAC), contrary to their own regulations. The funniest thing is that one of the boxes presented as coming from the crashed A320 spontaneously changed its markings during the interim. An independent body from Switzerland determined that there had been a switch by comparing photos of the CVR being recovered from the crash site with the one presented as evidence.
While the "official" verdict was pilot error there is enough evidence to call that verdict into question. Who lost the least with the verdict? Airbus was introducing an advanced aircraft and attempting to challenge Boeing, and they were selling the "advanced" electronics of the 320 series: even admitting that there may be an issue with the system would have had devastating consequences.
The onboard computers did lead to a few incidents with the A320. In 93 a Lufthansa pilot made a landing with a very low sink rate, so low the flight computers would not allow the deployment of thrust reversers or brakes for a number of seconds. The plane ended up going off the runway. I guess you could make too soft a landing.
Admittedly they seem to have solved those problems, and I have no qualms flying in an Airbus but then again I flew Aeroflot a couple of times.
I believe the yield of the early bombs wasn't that different from that of some later tactical nukes. Hiroshima was @ 15kt and Nagasaki was @20kt as I recall and one definition of tactical nukes is a yield under 1 megaton. The accuracy and weight of the weapons would have placed some limitations on employment is a tactical role. The doctrine for using tactical nukes wasn't developed until the 50's and even then was an organizational nightmare.
Where did you acquire this information? I have never seen reference to any plan to use atomic weapons as tactical support during the invasions of Kyushu or Honshu. Most sources place the total number of US nukes produced in December 1945 at 6: one for the test, two dropped on Japan, one that was ready for assembly in mid August and two more produced sometime after hostilities ended. If the war had continued the Army Air Force would have continued down the list of planned atomic target cities rather than use one of their few weapons in an unplanned tactical support mission. It sounds like one of the more outlandish claims of the plans for Operation Olympic.
The attempts at myth making aside, does anyone really care who was first? There are plenty of composers and musicians who experimented wih different hardware and ideas. Folks like Edgar Varese, Andre Popp, Atileo Minneo and Holger Czukay (and many others) show a range of styles and influences expressed by electronic means. Does the chronological appearence of an artist's work have much relevance to if one likes it or not? Just enjoy music and keep listening to different things: it doesn't matter when it came out if you think it is bitchin'.
I like the TM for Improvised Munitions and I recall one title "Field Expedient Explosives" that we nicknamed "bombs from the store" but not sure if it was an FM or TM. I have a few from the late 80's, including the classics FM 100-2-1 "Soviet Army Ops" and FM 100-2-2 "Soviet Army Spec War & RAS." It is funny how many older TMs and FMs are available and still have some nasty information. FM 5-31 "Boobytraps" is a great example: how to make many different everyday things deadly to the user. I remember testing different improvised detonation circuits in the dormitory: pressure plates; trip-wire circuits of foil and clothes pegs; traps on doors and drawers. Hook up a smoke alarm noise maker and a 9 volt and you can have a lot of fun scarring the crap out of your friends.
Point by point.
.5% and roughly similar incidence of severe neurological damage. The vaccine has a severe reaction rate of @ .001%: does it make more sense to vaccinate or let nature take its course?
>The ends never justify the means. When you find yourself using people not as an end unto themselves, find different means.
1: The ends can justify the means: it all depends upon one's personal philosophy. People are not necessarily an end unto themselves but are agents of societal interaction. There is a social contract and sometimes it makes life a bitch.
>I know a girl who been getting hospitalized for months on end ever since she was vaccinated as a child. The vaccine is >responsible for destroying her liver, among other things. Vaccines do nasty things to a percentage of the population.
2: I know of measles clusters, as well as other clusters of preventable (through vaccination) diseases (ie pertussis, mumps) that can be linked directly to groups of parents who decided immunization was bad.
>this applies to all foreign aid (except of course for countries that have been developed thanks to foreign money--current count: >0),
3A: Europe and Japan were rebuilt from US aid following WW2. Israel and Taiwan would be non-existent without US $. I am not a fan of many aid programs, but the Marshall plan worked just fine.
>If you think its ok to make a small percentage of the population who receives vaccines so sick (there's no was she would have >lived long outside a 1st world country, and she's not being killed naturally, this was purely for the betterment of society as a >whole) then why not go whole hog and let the whole lot of them go?
3B: You are comparing an adverse reaction to complete disregard? Is this some bizarre attempt to apply the Prime Directive? Do you apply this bizarre logic to every aspect of life? Should a person forgo risky, but potentially life saving, surgery because there is a chance he/she will end up dead anyway? Are you opposed to organ donation? Donated organs can get rejected. What about other risks in society? Drawing the line at vaccines based upon your reasoning is completely illogical.
>Anyones who's ever been annoyed at the idea of antivirus companies should cringe at the idea of vaccines. You can write all >the code you want to identify and stop a virus, but the vulnerability only goes away when the program gets fixed. Vaccines >don't stay in the gene pool. Natural immunity does.
Comparing computer anti-virus programs to vaccines , and by extension malicious code to disease, is flawed at best. You want natural immunity in a gene pool? Try sickle cell against malaria: immunity @ 75% of the time with a good chance of a crippling disease (sickle cell anemia.) Apparently mother nature accepts that immunity comes with risks. Natural immunity isn't a simple matter either: tetanus has been around in the soil since long before humanity yet for some reason we have never built up resistance.
It is sad when a medical procedure, like vaccination, causes harm to the patient. It was also sad when kids routinely died from things we can barely remember the names of. Do you recall quarantine signs outside your friend's houses? Ever visited somebody in an iron lung? Remember lockjaw? Whooping cough (pertussis)? Pertussis itself has a death rate of @