|
Cyrano4747 posted:Hohenschöhnhausen Stasi Prison.. It's out in kinda the suburbs of old east Berlin, so maybe half an hour on the public transit. It was one of the major Stasi prisons where they held and interrogated people, and had a history with both the NKVD (aka pre-KGB KGB) and I think the Gestapo before that. REALLY good tour, REALLY loving interesting. The German language tours are almost all given by former inmates and the English language tours are given by German grad students who have their poo poo dialed pretty tight. English language tours are 3 times a week at specific times, so check the webpage.
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 15:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 12:57 |
|
|
I worked with a guy whose dad worked for the Stasi. My colleague's mother, a teacher, gave her students passages from Mein Kampf to analyse in a literature lesson, and poo poo got reported to whoever was in charge of local education. The fact that her husband was with the Stasi probably saved her. I don't know exactly what the father did, so he could have been anything from a post room worker up. I'm not trying to glorify the Stasi or anything, which I've been accused of before when I mentioned this. The father became a bricklayer after the wall fell, and is now a pretty chill guy who likes to throw house parties for his neighbours and probably drinks too much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
simplefish posted:I worked with a guy whose dad worked for the Stasi. My colleague's mother, a teacher, gave her students passages from Mein Kampf to analyse in a literature lesson, and poo poo got reported to whoever was in charge of local education. The fact that her husband was with the Stasi probably saved her. I don't know exactly what the father did, so he could have been anything from a post room worker up. I'm not trying to glorify the Stasi or anything, which I've been accused of before when I mentioned this. Wait, that teacher was in E. Germany?  As someone who has spent a few years doing a bit of research on E. German education, let me say that that was really, really loving foolish. I mean, holy poo poo. I've seen files on teachers who got denounced as fascist agitators for poo poo waaaaaaaaay more innocuous than that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
Yep. She was looking to get them to say why it was wrong, but "What did you do in school today?" "Mein Kampf" was never going to go smoothly. e: I think it's important to say that I'm telling this to you as it was told to me, and I haven't researched it. I do trust the guy quite a lot though, he's not the sort to tell tall tales, and he was certainly from Karl-Marx-Stadt (Chemnitz) simplefish fucked around with this message at 17:49 on Apr 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
simplefish posted:Yep. She was looking to get them to say why it was wrong, but "What did you do in school today?" "Mein Kampf" was never going to go smoothly. No, I believe it - I've talked to a fair number of E. Germans who ran afoul of the security services. Some of them got in trouble for really innocent poo poo that just ruined their lives, and some of them got in trouble for the kind of crap where you just had to shake your head and wonder what the gently caress they were thinking. Unfortunately most of the latter were idiot kids just trying to be edgy or make a statement which, you know, could be problematic in E. Germany.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Yeah, that's been discussed, but it's not a replacement. There are standard AWACS tasks that the E-737 simply can't support. There's a lot more going on than just reading radar data and telling fighters what's going on around them. Good thing these exist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_E-767 Chop radars off the E-3s, stick them on E-767s, give them aerial refueling capability, then pat self on back for a fiscally-responsible and 'duuuuuuh' move. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Apr 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 20:12
|
|
|
Regarding stuff to see in yurop, there is HMS Belfast in London. Quite fun, but when i went the boilers were under renovation. But a good chance too see a ww2 warship in all its glory.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Good thing these exist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_E-767 OK, so seriously, what's the catch in the E-767? I know the catch for the KC-767 was corruption and general cockgobbling by various parties involved.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Good thing these exist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_E-767 I had never heard of these, that's a pretty nice looking platform. Also, rotodome is incredibly fun to say. Rotodome. Rotodome. ROTODOME I have to wonder if the 777 would be a better platform to develop? It's much younger than the 767, larger, able to fly longer and carry more. I'm also restraining myself from making a joke in really poor taste. You can figure it out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 20:32
|
|
|
Low-observable?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
Propagandalf posted:Low-observable? :headshot:
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 21:05
|
|
Propagandalf posted:Low-observable? 
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
The JSDF E-767s actually don't have air-refueling equipment, if Wikipedia is to be believed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:The JSDF E-767s actually don't have air-refueling equipment, if Wikipedia is to be believed. I think the JSDF doesn't do air refueling, period, because that would give them range past the Home Islands and that means the JASDF would be able to conduct offensive operations, which it isn't allowed to.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:The JSDF E-767s actually don't have air-refueling equipment, if Wikipedia is to be believed. ArchangeI posted:I think the JSDF doesn't do air refueling, period, because that would give them range past the Home Islands and that means the JASDF would be able to conduct offensive operations, which it isn't allowed to. They do air refueling as they do have a couple KC-767 aircraft...however, Yenko is correct that their E-767s aren't air-refueling capable. The thought process there is that like ArchangeI said that would give them significant range past the Home Islands and would support offensive operations. So their KC-767s are used pretty much only to support the fighters, with the idea being that even in defense aerial combat the fighters will be relatively short-legged and will need tanker support, particularly on the periphery...i.e. northern Hokkaido near the Kurils or the southern Ryukyus/Senkakus. e: That said, it wouldn't be that much of a complication to get air to air refueling capability put on any notional E-767 the USAF was going to operate...but the problem there is that all you're doing is putting still relatively old tech on a slightly less old platform. I just don't really see the value added in spinning up a whole new procurement program to barely move the ball forward. StandardVC10 posted:This is also why their indigenous jet transport, the Kawasaki C-1, has such a short range. I believe the new one they're working on, the C-2, doesn't have that problem. You won't see it outside of Japan regardless, though, because IIRC they still don't want to export military equipment. That just changed. iyaayas01 fucked around with this message at 22:32 on Apr 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
ArchangeI posted:I think the JSDF doesn't do air refueling, period, because that would give them range past the Home Islands and that means the JASDF would be able to conduct offensive operations, which it isn't allowed to. This is also why their indigenous jet transport, the Kawasaki C-1, has such a short range. I believe the new one they're working on, the C-2, doesn't have that problem. You won't see it outside of Japan regardless, though, because IIRC they still don't want to export military equipment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:They do air refueling as they do have a couple KC-767 aircraft...however, Yenko is correct that their E-767s aren't air-refueling capable. The thought process there is that like ArchangeI said that would give them significant range past the Home Islands and would support offensive operations. So their KC-767s are used pretty much only to support the fighters, with the idea being that even in defense aerial combat the fighters will be relatively short-legged and will need tanker support, particularly on the periphery...i.e. northern Hokkaido near the Kurils or the southern Ryukyus/Senkakus. I don't think it would terribly difficult to add that capability; I imagine most of the cost would come from the validation, testing, etc (unless there's an AR capable 767 variant around that I am completely blanking on).
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
movax posted:OK, so seriously, what's the catch in the E-767? I know the catch for the KC-767 was corruption and general cockgobbling by various parties involved. What catch? Japan bought them, they exist. The Air Force can't get money to replace planes that are older and in worse shape. The E-3 is very far down the priority list for replacement, and honestly upgrades are more appropriate anyway. But the AF can't even afford THAT. Edit: it took most of a decade to get the crew seats replaced due to funding issues. And of course the new ones didn't fit with the scopes properly. 
Godholio fucked around with this message at 22:43 on Apr 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 22:40
|
|
|
movax posted:I don't think it would terribly difficult to add that capability; I imagine most of the cost would come from the validation, testing, etc (unless there's an AR capable 767 variant around that I am completely blanking on). I'm pretty sure the KC-46 is going to be receive capable. e: But like Godholio said, we have like 500 fiscal/acquisition priorities that are higher than an E-3 replacement, and it's really not value added to replace an old airplane with old equipment with a slightly less old airplane with the same old equipment, especially when the old airplane with the old equipment does the job reasonably well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:I'm pretty sure the KC-46 is going to be receive capable. If not, that would be tremendously dumb. Consolidation is a great option to have.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2014 22:44
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Any kind of warm fuzzy nostalgia for communist Europe that you might have accidentally picked up Sounds like they should be sending Russians through there by the busload.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
Might have got in late with this, but the Wallace collection is absolutely worth a trip if anyones in London - in fact I insist that any London-bound goons contact me and I'll go there with them, I love it so.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 03:58
|
|
|
Godholio posted:If not, that would be tremendously dumb. Consolidation is a great option to have.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 04:33
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:As long as you're not the one being consol'd into The running joke in AWACS was that if there was ever a HVAA killer (MiG-25/31, or other high/fast flyer heading for the AWACS/JSTARS/tanker areas) we'd turn and just "forget" to warn the tankers until it was too late for them to catch up to us, even with their bigger engines.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 04:46
|
|
|
The running joke in tankers is to keep an eye on the AWACS, and if you see them turn tail, you don't have to outrun the bear (Foxbat)...
Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 20:23 on Apr 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
Well, Moscow was fun. Looks like no tank museum trip for me, at least I did get a better look at the Krivak they've got parked in the river while sitting in traffic this morning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 05:47
|
|
|
This seems like it would be an unusually bad time to visit Moscow.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 09:17
|
|
|
movax posted:OK, so seriously, what's the catch in the E-767? I know the catch for the KC-767 was corruption and general cockgobbling by various parties involved. Our version of the E-767 did exist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_E-10_MC2A We sold it to Bahrain for them to convert it into a VIP transport. As for 'why,' you can read the explanation given on Wikipedia and believe it all you want, but the simple fact remains that unless something benefits tons of key congressional districts it has near-zero chance of being adequately or fully funded if the need it's meant to augment or replace is still operating...even if said means are being held together by duct tape. BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 10:30 on Apr 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 10:28
|
|
|
It's not congressional districts, it wasn't an air force priority so it died there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 12:04
|
|
|
The E-10 was a loving retarded idea because like Godholio already pointed out GMTI and AWACS aircraft have completely different everything, and it makes no sense to put both capabilities on the same airframe. Even after the decision was made to split off the two capabilities it wasn't a priority because we have a finite amount of dollars and, as has already been pointed out, we have a shitload of other acquisition priorities. Not everything comes back to the evil MIC and corrupt Congressmen.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 13:56
|
|
|
In all seriousness, the E-10 would have been a technical clusterfuck to rival the F-35B, except each airframe would have been $750M+. And tactically awkward.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 19:53
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:This seems like it would be an unusually bad time to visit Moscow. Not much of a choice when it comes to work, but yeah, definitely an uncomfortable time to be there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
Godholio posted:And tactically awkward. I'm loling pretty hard imagining an ASO and whatever the equivalent is on the JSTARS yelling contradictory instructions at the flight deck.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 00:14
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:I'm loling pretty hard imagining an ASO and whatever the equivalent is on the JSTARS yelling contradictory instructions at the flight deck. As an SD, I would too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 00:34
|
|
|
Godholio posted:As an SD, I would too. I got to visit a bunch of AWACS crewmembers at Tinker the other day. I kept expecting 1LTs to have operational experience, then forgot that you guys actually train your officers up a fair amount before sending them downrange, in contrast with the Army who will send someone downrange roughly 90 days after they got out of officer basic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 01:48
|
|
|
It varies a bit, but generally they pin on 1Lt a few weeks before finishing the training pipeline and getting to the line squadron. Then it can take anywhere from a week to a month to get them fully qual'd. Only one 2Lt made it to the squadron before pinning on the whole time I was there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
Burannnnnn  Cadets visiting the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
So how much of the Buran was a copy / paste of the STS?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 17:50
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:So how much of the Buran was a copy / paste of the STS? It was less copy/paste than monkey see, monkey assume it's used for covert spy stuff/space weapons. The Soviets took NASA's specs for the payload capacity and said we've got to do at least that. The interiors were fairly different with Buran, I believe, having an extra level but the outsides looked so similar because they used the same reentry materials. It was fully automated though and it's only flight was a successful unmanned trip.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 12:57 |
|
|
How do the costs compare when using a reusable spacecraft like the Shuttle vs. one use rockets like the Soyuz. I have to imagine all the maintenance/man hours that takes place to make sure the Shuttle is ready to use again would probably be getting really close to the cost of something like a Soyuz. Is this why the Orion is more Apollo than Shuttle?
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2014 19:39
|
|