|
Smiling Jack posted:The first documented emp attack against a financial target that I know of was back in the '80s. They've taken steps. Is this attack documented? It's the first that I've heard of it.
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2012 19:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 06:16 |
|
|
Saint Celestine posted:I assume he means protected against EM interference, probably up to EMP devices. If he's talking about this, then I disagree with the idea that google or amazon's data centers are by any means as hardened as military systems that have hardening requirements.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2012 15:07
|
|
|
The comment was about taking out data by hitting datacenters, specifically the Fight Club-style fantasy of zorching the NYSE or major credit centers. You ensure continuity of data by - Storing it in multiple locations, anywhere from multiple drives in the same server all the way to geographically separated (to protect against fire/natural disasters) - Having setups that switch the load to site B instantly and invisibly when site A goes down - Having resilient systems that automatically bring site A back up if it doesn't have permanent physical damage, and get it synced back up and load-sharing with any corruption repaired The absurd lengths that Google/Amazon go to on these three points are well documented - hell, you can Google them - and don't require launching an appeal to authority. The physical datacenters are pretty nuts too (again, mostly protection from natural disaster) but the whole system is 'hardened' in the sense that you have far more than just redundant backups, you have real-time corruption healing and operation goes uninterrupted even if an entire physical site is knocked out. The banks, credit agencies etc obviously have much more reason to be secretive about their networks but I see little reason why they would be less serious about data protection. This has nothing to do with 'military systems' in the sense of AA/SAM defense systems, which are the logical target for this microwave missile thing. For stuff like that, physical location is critical to operation so the specific physical electronics must be protected (obviously it does you no good to failover to another radar array on the other side of the country.) And if this missile can't neutralize something like an S-300 battery, then it's of pretty questionable value. If you're talking military data my original comment was about other governments, i.e. the kind of dudes the US would use this missile against. But I wouldn't count on agencies like DFAS to have the levels of data protection to be completely immune, considering how constantly their data gets jumbled in the best of times.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2012 16:46
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:The comment was about taking out data by hitting datacenters, specifically the Fight Club-style fantasy of zorching the NYSE or major credit centers. You ensure continuity of data by The closest comparison is the C2 infrastructure that may have datacenters, but again I think they'd have different levels of hardening compared to their commercial counterparts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2012 17:01
|
|
|
Bringing it back to the cold war, wasn't this the whole purpose of DARPAnet/the internet in the first place?
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2012 21:28
|
|
|
Hey remember hiw cool aircraft are? I'll be at PIMA in arizona by noon tomorrow in arizona. Aircraft requests?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 08:28
|
|
|
LavistaSays posted:Hey remember hiw cool aircraft are? if they let you, touch the Blackbird that I wasn't really interested in when I was 13 because I was a dumbass
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 09:27
|
|
|
LavistaSays posted:Hey remember hiw cool aircraft are? yeah, this: http://www.pimaair.org/aircraft.php  to try and keep it short, the IL-2, anything Convair, the English Electric Lightning, F-105, and especially the F-8 Crusader? It's too bad the P-39 is in storage.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 18:43
|
|
|
Every direction i turn i want to run over to ______ and snap pics or touch it. Then i look the other way and i want to run there. I feel like a 5 year old. Mr. John Spenckle gave a guided tour of sone hangars... His knowledge of airceaft is unreal. Pics are tough, so many aircraft they get in the way! Such a non problem
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 21:30
|
|
|
LavistaSays posted:Every direction i turn i want to run over to ______ and snap pics or touch it. Then i look the other way and i want to run there. I feel like a 5 year old. Every air and space museum should follow Pima's example and have at least three B-52s on display. Does anyone have any idea what this is? Is that a Tornado?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 21:46
|
|
|
Boomerjinks posted:Every air and space museum should follow Pima's example and have at least three B-52s on display. Yep, tornado.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 22:46
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:Yep, tornado. Paint scheme looks like one of the German Marineflieger IDS's with the earlier '80s paint scheme.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2012 23:09
|
|
|
http://goo.gl/maps/xxmtR I will still never get over how loving ridiculous the Super Guppy is.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 01:20
|
|
|
I love seeing a Super Guppy in flight.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 01:45
|
|
|
Alaan posted:http://goo.gl/maps/xxmtR What is that hiding under the tail of the C-133 in the SW corner? A target drone?
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 03:55
|
|
|
ought ten posted:What is that hiding under the tail of the C-133 in the SW corner? A target drone? Almost looks like a General Atomics Predator-style drone, between the long straight wings and the anhedral tailplanes, but it doesn't appear to have a fairing for a satellite receiver in the fuselage, so I dunno.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 05:23
|
|
|
Q-1, maybe? I've never seen one except in photos.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 05:44
|
|
|
Yep. I thought I was seeing a vertical stabilizer, but looking at it again I agree about the tail. The wing shapes had me thinking Predator at first, but without the satellite bulge I started thinking along different lines -- and the red on the wings and tail made me think it wasn't something operational or whatever the right word is. But I think now it must be a General Atomics GNAT, the Predator's predecessor. Edit: Or an ALTUS? Not sure if the GNAT's wings are long enough. 
ought ten fucked around with this message at 05:49 on Nov 5, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 05:46
|
|
|
Predator/-Q-1 has a satellite bulge, ALTUS has a considerably longer wingspan than the Gnat, and based on some very rough guesstimation comparing the drone in question's wingspan to the Cargomaster's I think ALTUS is probably the best guess (running the guesstimation numbers yielded an answer within a couple feet of the ALTUS's published wingspan.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 06:08
|
|
|
OK, what the gently caress is that downsy looking thing in the inner ring towards the NW next to the skyraiders? edit: this guy, on the left: 
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 06:16
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:OK, what the gently caress is that downsy looking thing in the inner ring towards the NW next to the skyraiders? Tracer, predecessor to the Hawkeye.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 06:19
|
|
|
E-1 Tracer, it's the predecessor of the E-2. Based on the S-2 Tracker.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 06:19
|
|
|
daskrolator posted:If he's talking about this, then I disagree with the idea that google or amazon's data centers are by any means as hardened as military systems that have hardening requirements. Probably not as hardened as the military ones that are designed to withstand a full nuclear detonation and are built on springs and whatnot, but hardened against forms of EM attack? I would think some of the more important data centers would be.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2012 06:37
|
|
|
Fairly neat article about the personal relationship that has developed between the Serb AAA commander who shot down that F117 in 1999 and the guy who was piloting it. Apparently they met up as some kind of documentary gimmick and became actual friends. Pretty nifty story. As an aside, I've seen a couple shows and read a few things about that AAA unit and it's a really interesting subject. The commander of it instituted some pretty clever techniques and practices to keep from getting blown the gently caress up and to stay a credible threat to the late 90s USAF with Yugoslav equipment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2012 19:21
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Fairly neat article about the personal relationship that has developed between the Serb AAA commander who shot down that F117 in 1999 and the guy who was piloting it. Apparently they met up as some kind of documentary gimmick and became actual friends. SAM commander AAA is artillery 
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2012 19:27
|
|
|
AntiTank posted:SAM commander True 'nuff.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2012 19:30
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2012 23:56
|
|
|
Is that a shot of all the U-2s shot down over China?
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 00:08
|
|
|
grover posted:Is that a shot of all the U-2s shot down over China? Yes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 00:08
|
|
|
poo poo, I was wondering where Something Awful did its airplanechat. Given that this thread is over 100 pages it's probably already been brought up, but the OP mentioning the rocket-salvo interceptor strategy from the 1950s reminded me of the amusing/terrifying anecdote of Battle of Palmdale. Also: jealous of the guy going to Pima. I went there once and did the AMARG bus tour but I had a lovely camera at the time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 01:56
|
|
|
It's not just Airplane chat here, there's a lot of weird and wonderful cold war technological and espionage freakery as well. For only 100 pages, this thread is well worth reading from the start.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 02:58
|
|
|
Memento1979 posted:It's not just Airplane chat here, there's a lot of weird and wonderful cold war technological and espionage freakery as well. For only 100 pages, this thread is well worth reading from the start. I've covered a bunch of it, I just saw the F-89 Scorpion and FFARs in the beginning and thought "this is a thread I need to get in on." For content, something out of the "good airframes are hard to kill" department, just in case the Tu-4 chat didn't get far enough. Here's a turboprop AWACS B-29 from China. The project didn't get off the ground but it's kind of amazing to me that the B-29 airframe survived going from the USA to Russia to China and was still recognizable enough to look loving strange as hell with Russian turboprops and a radome. Especially since popular coverage of the B-29 tends to end at Nagasaki while in fact it was a major player in Korea and so on. And then it happened again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 03:11
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:poo poo, I was wondering where Something Awful did its airplanechat. Given that this thread is over 100 pages it's probably already been brought up, but the OP mentioning the rocket-salvo interceptor strategy from the 1950s reminded me of the amusing/terrifying anecdote of Battle of Palmdale. There's a lot more general airplane chat in this AI thread too http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3276654 , including a bunch of pictures from n. korea on the last couple of pages and some very nice zeppelin chat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 03:37
|
|
|
Another crash? Hope for their sake they didn't wipe out quite as many generals and colonels this time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 10:05
|
|
|
Sjurygg posted:Another crash? Hope for their sake they didn't wipe out quite as many generals and colonels this time. Not what I was talking about, just the general concept. There's an Antonov An-12 under there somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 16:06
|
|
|
That's a hilarious case of too-smart-for-our-own-good jet age thinking.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 22:32
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:poo poo, I was wondering where Something Awful did its airplanechat. Given that this thread is over 100 pages it's probably already been brought up, but the OP mentioning the rocket-salvo interceptor strategy from the 1950s reminded me of the amusing/terrifying anecdote of Battle of Palmdale. Oh wow, that's something else entirely. Hadn't heard of that before, good story.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2012 23:47
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:Not what I was talking about, just the general concept. There's an Antonov An-12 under there somewhere. There's also the KJ-2000, built on an Il-76 platform. Strangely the wiki page doesn't mention it's lackluster safety record. One crashed with a significant portion of the design team aboard several years ago.
|
|
#
?
Nov 8, 2012 22:53
|
|
|
With all the relief efforts going on in Staten Island and New Jersey after the hurricane, I'm seeing a ton of military choppers flying thru the Manhattan airspace. CH-53s, UH-1 Hueys, UH-60s, Jayhawks, some Pave or Sea Hawks (I can't tell from where I'm from, they're gray with a FLIR turret and some have a refueling probe) and very rarely CH-47s. This is a weird mix as it's a combined effort of at least the Marines (does the navy still use Super Sea Stallions for transport?), Army, Coast Guard and Navy or Air Force. Anyone know the units doing relief work now? I know the Marines are from the Wasp now. edit: it's weird apparently the C-27J Spartans are flying missions as well, I thought they got pulled from service? (http://www.janes.com/products/janes/defence-security-report.aspx?ID=1065973118) Funny how they're not actually redundant in service. quote:The USAF said the twin-turboprop C-27J (dubbed C-27B in US service) was chosen for this mission as it "has access a wide range of airfields, including short, unprepared strips while transporting heavy loads", adding that the aircraft can get into smaller unprepared airfields that are off-limits to larger types, such as the Boeing C-17A Globemaster III and the Lockheed Martin C-130 Hercules. Suicide Watch fucked around with this message at 16:07 on Nov 9, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 15:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 06:16 |
|
|
Suicide Watch posted:Funny how they're not actually redundant in service. Let's never forget the Air Force's constant enemy, ever since they were first founded. Russia, North Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and guerrillas have never presented a threat so serious as the looming danger of letting the Army have an airplane. Against such a terrible enemy, sometimes it's necessary to sacrifice less-important ideals like "operational effectiveness" and "national defense." Don't get me wrong, the Air Force still believes in them - it's just that, sometimes, when you're down in the cubes pushing reams of paperwork, the lines get a little blurry. Bureaucratic war is hell.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2012 16:24
|
|
