|
Oh good, that only took 40 years.
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 04:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 08:51 |
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Atomic trains seem almost plausible. Could you post a higher resolution shot of that, or a link to the article? I'm interested in reading more about it, but the mobile app won't give me a clear shot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 06:37
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:Plus building expensive ships goes against many international shipping lines' business model. There's a reason China's the world's shipbuilding capital these days. The reason being that China's shipbuilders are state-funded and don't need to turn a profit. Same as when Korea and Japan dominated the shipbuilding industry. People have short memories. The Chinese shipbuilding industry's infinite line of credit will dry up one day just like it did for Korean and Japanese shipyards.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 08:20
|
|
|
Aciid c0d3r posted:Could you post a higher resolution shot of that, or a link to the article? I'm interested in reading more about it, but the mobile app won't give me a clear shot. linky  
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 13:59
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:The reason being that China's shipbuilders are state-funded and don't need to turn a profit. Same as when Korea and Japan dominated the shipbuilding industry. People have short memories. The Chinese shipbuilding industry's infinite line of credit will dry up one day just like it did for Korean and Japanese shipyards. And the shipping industry will move on to building their hulls wherever it's now cheapest to do so. Shipping lines don't give a poo poo how good the ship is, or whether the yard made a profit. The idea is to get it built for cheap, run it at break even or a profit until the market picks up, then flip it once the market is too high or about to start coming down.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 14:13
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Atomic, everlasting train Hrmm....  
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 14:38
|
|
|
Outside Dawg posted:If you have Netflix or Amazon video, you should check out "Chosin". Gonna throw in a strong recommendation again for "The Cold War", by the same producers as the excellent "The World at War", the Korea episode in that was informative, and when you watch the thing in series you get a good feel for the politics behind it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 15:14
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Hrmm.... The joke's on them, with the reactor in the middle there's no way they are going to get to engineer Ed Harris
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 15:35
|
|
|
I like how the future of rail transport pretty much looked like an EMD E-unit on the outside.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:That's one of the cool things about newer munitions like JDAMs that often gets overlooked, modularity/plug and play is built into the system (sort of). So while the aircraft still needs to be able to a) have the airplane's SMS recognize the munitions and b) physically carry the munition, the first is "just" a software problem with the airplane's OFP while the second is just a geometry and weight problem that honestly isn't too much of a problem with most modern munitions as long as you aren't trying to do something outlandish like shoehorn a JASSM onto a Reaper. The biggest issue historically (compatibility for communicating between the munition and the aircraft) isn't a problem because it's all standardized on a 1760 interface. This kind of easy plug-and-play compatibility isn't strictly a new thing, either. There's a reason Sidewinders have ended up on practically everything that flies and fights.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
Railroads discovered that they tended to not like running high-power locomotives singly on big trains, because if the locomotive doesn't work, the train isn't going anywhere. Maybe put two of these back to back, but if you could buy four regular diesels for its price, well...
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 18:07
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:Railroads discovered that they tended to not like running high-power locomotives singly on big trains, because if the locomotive doesn't work, the train isn't going anywhere. Maybe put two of these back to back, but if you could buy four regular diesels for its price, well... Not to mention in the event of a derailing, all you have to do on current trains is worry about the cargo and a potential HAZMAT situation. With these, even if the reactor vessel never was compromised, every little accident would be treated like the end of the world.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:This kind of easy plug-and-play compatibility isn't strictly a new thing, either. There's a reason Sidewinders have ended up on practically everything that flies and fights. That's like saying "computers talking to each other isn't strictly a new thing, either" around 1991.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
There is a local small Airshow today in Cincinnati. They have a B-17 that you can take a ride on. I am sure its not cheap to take a ride. But I would love to do it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 22:38
|
|
|
_firehawk posted:There is a local small Airshow today in Cincinnati. They have a B-17 that you can take a ride on. I am sure its not cheap to take a ride. But I would love to do it. If you have the money, and won't affect the lives of the people who you may support, go for it. That's definitely a bucket-list entry.
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
_firehawk posted:There is a local small Airshow today in Cincinnati. They have a B-17 that you can take a ride on. I am sure its not cheap to take a ride. But I would love to do it. It cost me ~$400 in 2011, and it was worth it. e: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3373768&userid=58669#post397774152
|
|
#
?
Jul 26, 2014 22:56
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:The reason being that China's shipbuilders are state-funded and don't need to turn a profit. Same as when Korea and Japan dominated the shipbuilding industry. People have short memories. The Chinese shipbuilding industry's infinite line of credit will dry up one day just like it did for Korean and Japanese shipyards. Eh, it's also that Chinese shipbuilding is a tool of Chinese foreign policy and trade policy. For instance, in Africa, where China is making a major push for infrastructure development contracts and such. Ethiopian Logistics and Shipping Enterprise (the state-run shipping entity) was convinced to buy 9 new freighters from China despite the fact that their inland logistics cannot handle the load they have existing due to lack of trucks available and delays in the ports. Basically they're buying freighters they can't really do anything with (doubly so since they're a landlocked country. These freighters have to go to Sudan, Somalia, Somaliland, or Djibouti). In exchange for this, China gives them incredibly concessional financing rates that are basically money-losing on things like road development, bridge construction, etc. The private contractors (and sometimes state-run) that go out and do this are entirely subsidized by the Chinese government: they don't care that they're losing immense amounts of money because they're getting it back from these lucrative ship construction contracts. Variations of this, they do across Africa -- it solves Chinese employment issues, gets them lucrative follow-on contracts, and has given them an immense amount of influence in the region at the expense of the West.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 02:23
|
|
|
While I agree with Leif.'s points (Especially regarding China's use of shipbuilding as a tool for domestic economic policy), let's all remember that we live in a world where Liberia is one of the top three countries for merchant tonnage. How much tonnage a country owns as little to nothing to do with how much it imports / exports. See also the US merchant fleet and the Marshall Islands.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 05:55
|
|
|
http://giant.gfycat.com/DapperFeistyBullmastiff.webm
Steeltalon fucked around with this message at 07:16 on Jul 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 07:13
|
|
|
 Airshow today! JBER in Anchorage, AK Right in the gate we got a B-52  Ohhhh F-22  So sexy   Oh poo poo! Is that a B2 Spirit?!  gently caress yeah it is!   F-15   F-16  These are from Eielson I think? We don't have F-16s in Anchorage  Some godless commie exhaust cover in these F-16s  F-22 Flyby with B2  F-22 Heritage flight with 2 P-51 Mustangs   F-16 Thunderbird  Thunderbirds doing their best B2 impersonation  I have more pictures of the Tbirds but I'm a terrible photographer and they were flying real fast so they were kinda blurry.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 09:27
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:This kind of easy plug-and-play compatibility isn't strictly a new thing, either. There's a reason Sidewinders have ended up on practically everything that flies and fights. Sidewinders are the exception that proves the rule. It's an IR missile that needs no support from or communication with the aircraft beyond communicating tone to the pilot. That's rare when it comes to guided munitions, most are going to require some type of data exchange with the aircraft. And even with the Sidewinder, there are massive increases in functionality and performance with the datalink that the -9X gets. And from a test set perspective AIM-9Ms and prior still require a relatively large/bulky unique test set, contrast that with the CMBRE the -9X requires. Leif. posted:(doubly so since they're a landlocked country. These freighters have to go to Sudan, Somalia, Somaliland, or Djibouti) Well there's always Eritrea too. Oh wait TheDon01 posted:These are from Eielson I think? We don't have F-16s in Anchorage Yeah they're the 18th AGRS up at Eielson, hence the exhaust cover.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 10:05
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Sidewinders are the exception that proves the rule. It's an IR missile that needs no support from or communication with the aircraft beyond communicating tone to the pilot. That's rare when it comes to guided munitions, most are going to require some type of data exchange with the aircraft. And even with the Sidewinder, there are massive increases in functionality and performance with the datalink that the -9X gets. I think this has been posted here before, but the AIM-9X is crazy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YMSfg26YSQ
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 14:36
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Atomic trains seem almost plausible. Holy crap, was there anything they didn't try to slap a reactor to?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 15:28
|
|
|
Saint Celestine posted:Holy crap, was there anything they didn't try to slap a reactor to? Jayne Mansfield.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
I got four things from being in the Air Force: a handful of awesome friends I'd have never met otherwise, an appreciation for closing down multiple bars in a night after working 12+ hours that day, the GI Bill, and a weird fuzzy feeling when I see pictures of a plane I've flown on. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 16:39
|
|
|
TheDon01 posted:F-22 Heritage flight with 2 P-51 Mustangs The F-22 can remain slow enough to fly in formation with P-51s? Neat.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Yeah they're the 18th AGRS up at Eielson, hence the exhaust cover. Is that some sort of snow/arctic camo? It's loving awesome whatever it is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
uPen posted:The F-22 can remain slow enough to fly in formation with P-51s? Neat. P-51s are pretty fast.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
uPen posted:The F-22 can remain slow enough to fly in formation with P-51s? Neat. Not just P-51s!  This was at the Planes of Fame airshow in Chino, California. I'm very jealous of TheDon for getting an active B-52, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
Doctor Grape Ape posted:Is that some sort of snow/arctic camo? It's loving awesome whatever it is. That's an aggressor squadron, they pretend to be various flavors of MiG and Su. It's mostly to make them Russian-y.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 18:01
|
|
|
Propagandalf posted:That's an aggressor squadron, they pretend to be various flavors of MiG and Su. It's mostly to make them Russian-y. That makes it even more awesome. I thought they looked sort of Russian-y but couldn't figure out why they would purposefully paint them that way, alas, this is the missing piece.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 18:07
|
|
|
What it is like to ride in a U2 Dragon Lady with James May https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1PmYItnlY5M
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 19:30
|
|
|
uPen posted:The F-22 can remain slow enough to fly in formation with P-51s? Neat. Look at how high the F-22 nose is pointing though - it's trying to go as slow as possible whereas the P-51 dudes are probably firewalling it (and having more fun) (this is a slight exaggeration; P-51s cruised at over 350 mph so it's not like the Raptor is in imminent danger of stalling out of the air) Psion fucked around with this message at 22:17 on Jul 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
Psion posted:Look at how high the F-22 nose is pointing though - it's trying to go as slow as possible whereas the P-51 dudes are probably firewalling it (and having more fun) Looks like he has his flaps down a little bit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
TheDon01 posted:Some godless commie exhaust cover in these F-16s I dig the hell out of this, that's awesome.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 23:18
|
|
|
Yeah, the Mustang and Raptor probably have no problem flying together. These guys did, though (not cold war, but certainly old school AIRPOWER): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6PnKUEFX8g There's some technical stuff at the beginning if you're into that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
movax posted:I dig the hell out of this, that's awesome. Click to embiggen 
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2014 23:39
|
|
|
Fucknag posted:Yeah, the Mustang and Raptor probably have no problem flying together.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:We did 'assist' in the security of USSR's arsenal when they fell, so there are parallels. Can someone link any articles or talk about the US securing the Soviets nuclear arsenal?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 00:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 08:51 |
|
|
Waroduce posted:Can someone link any articles or talk about the US securing the Soviets nuclear arsenal? I read a book about it called One Point Safe from the dollar general bargain bin so it's probably being given away on amazon.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2014 00:53
|
|
