Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#81
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 07:54:45 -0400, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote: "John B. Slocomb" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: Did "Navy Yards" build ships? I thought that all navy vessels were built under contract. Portsmouth Navy Yard, in New Hampshire didn't built ships but did do maintenance. The U.S. Army Arsenals may have made small arms but certainly never in the necessary quantities to support a war. Or, at least in every war since the Revolution the Army has obtained small arms from outside sources. -- Cheers, John B. The Portsmouth Navy Yard most certainly DID build submarines until 1969, in 1958 I watched the Growler slide out of the construction shed and into the river, drenching us. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portsmouth_Naval_Shipyard Afterwards I toured a Diesel boat and decided not to join the Navy. Now they only refurbish them at dockside. On their 200th anniversary Open House I walked through the boomer USS Maine. Yes, a while after I wrote that reply I remembered a fellow I talked to about welding and he was telling me about when he worked on submarines and the Union used to take them out on strike at, Portsmouth. I was going to correct my message but you were too fast for me. The Army made service rifles at the Springfield Armory until McNamara closed it. http://www.nps.gov/spar/index.htm The government armories weren't large enough to quickly supply an all-out war because officially our peacetime policies prevented the next one. -jsw Certainly, exactly as I said. -- Cheers, John B. |
#82
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 05:53:05 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:57:03 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 I don't know that the Military ever "made their own stuff" :-) Once upon a time, there were Army Arsenals, and Navy Yards, where the work got done. Indeed there were. It was not all contractors and bids and slush funds Didn't they use soldiers and sailors to build those, keeping the troops in shape and busy during times we were not at war? Take the labor fees away from building a ship and it gets a whole lot cheaper. What do you think it costs to train soldiers and sailors? If I remember correctly when I was in the Service the A.F. calculated that if they got one year's actual use out of guys in some of the technical career fields that they were doing good, which is one of the reasons that they had rather elaborate re-enlistment programs. And the cost of the support system, housing, food, laundry, medical care, retirement, etc. -- Cheers, John B. |
#83
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 10:58:32 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 10:53:02 -0400, "Jim Wilkins" wrote: "Ed Huntress" wrote in message . .. On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 05:53:05 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:57:03 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 I don't know that the Military ever "made their own stuff" :-) Once upon a time, there were Army Arsenals, and Navy Yards, where the work got done. Indeed there were. It was not all contractors and bids and slush funds Didn't they use soldiers and sailors to build those, keeping the troops in shape and busy during times we were not at war? Take the labor fees away from building a ship and it gets a whole lot cheaper. I didn't realize you were such a fan of socialism, Larry. In fact, you're really nudging toward communism there. But that isn't the way it was. My grandfather was a civilian panel carver at the Portsmouth Navy Yard, carving the mahogany filagree around the hatches of officers' quarters on submarines during WWI. Those were civilian workers. -- Ed Huntress Skippers' memoirs mention the assigned crew helping complete the construction work on new submarines, but they don't say how much of that doubled as hands-on training to repair the machinery. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plankowner -jsw The Navy Yard was a major civilian employer in Portsmouth. And, of course, the Bath Iron Works, which built hundreds of Navy ships, was the big employer in Bath, ME. But Bath was a civilian company, wasn't it? -- Cheers, John B. |
#84
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 07:07:19 +0700, John B. Slocomb
wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 10:58:32 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 10:53:02 -0400, "Jim Wilkins" wrote: "Ed Huntress" wrote in message ... On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 05:53:05 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:57:03 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 I don't know that the Military ever "made their own stuff" :-) Once upon a time, there were Army Arsenals, and Navy Yards, where the work got done. Indeed there were. It was not all contractors and bids and slush funds Didn't they use soldiers and sailors to build those, keeping the troops in shape and busy during times we were not at war? Take the labor fees away from building a ship and it gets a whole lot cheaper. I didn't realize you were such a fan of socialism, Larry. In fact, you're really nudging toward communism there. But that isn't the way it was. My grandfather was a civilian panel carver at the Portsmouth Navy Yard, carving the mahogany filagree around the hatches of officers' quarters on submarines during WWI. Those were civilian workers. -- Ed Huntress Skippers' memoirs mention the assigned crew helping complete the construction work on new submarines, but they don't say how much of that doubled as hands-on training to repair the machinery. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plankowner -jsw The Navy Yard was a major civilian employer in Portsmouth. And, of course, the Bath Iron Works, which built hundreds of Navy ships, was the big employer in Bath, ME. But Bath was a civilian company, wasn't it? Yes, and that's part of the point. It's a civilian operation using civilians to build military equipment. Most of the above responds to the statement "Once upon a time, there were Army Arsenals, and Navy Yards, where the work got done." -- Ed Huntress |
#85
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
... On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 07:07:19 +0700, John B. Slocomb wrote: But Bath was a civilian company, wasn't it? Yes, and that's part of the point. It's a civilian operation using civilians to build military equipment. Most of the above responds to the statement "Once upon a time, there were Army Arsenals, and Navy Yards, where the work got done." -- Ed Huntress The "up or out" policy is a primary reason why the military can't maintain the highly skilled technical workforce to operate an armory: http://www.g2mil.com/let.htm "This produces a paranoid officer corps skilled at avoiding blame and evading problems as they focus their attention on the limited number chairs for when the music stops and selection board convenes." -jsw |
#86
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message ... "Ed Huntress" wrote in message ... On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 07:07:19 +0700, John B. Slocomb wrote: But Bath was a civilian company, wasn't it? Yes, and that's part of the point. It's a civilian operation using civilians to build military equipment. Most of the above responds to the statement "Once upon a time, there were Army Arsenals, and Navy Yards, where the work got done." -- Ed Huntress The "up or out" policy is a primary reason why the military can't maintain the highly skilled technical workforce to operate an armory: http://www.g2mil.com/let.htm "This produces a paranoid officer corps skilled at avoiding blame and evading problems as they focus their attention on the limited number chairs for when the music stops and selection board convenes." -jsw A corollary problem was that the career demand to rotate through command positions meant that officers temporarily assigned to procurement (buying stuff) slots were novices in the extreme legal and technical complexity of writing government contracts and evaluating contractors' bids, and the probability that they could deliver. I had to keep my RFQs and purchase orders below $5000 to avoid humongous scrutiny and red tape. Mitre assisted them on the more technically complex projects, as did this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense...ion_University "... for providing the Department of Defense Acquisition, Technology and Logistics workforce with a professional career path..." as opposed to having to leave acquisition and command troops to qualify for promotion. |
#87
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On 8/27/2014 3:57 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
Once upon a time, there were Army Arsenals, and Navy Yards, where the work got done. Indeed there were. It was not all contractors and bids and slush funds OTOH, we had Springfield Arsenal pushing their own designs when there were better ones available. The trapdoor Springfield was a scandal long before the Litle Big Horn, the Krag was redesigned and ended up a weaker action with an inferior round to the Norwegian original, and the only thing new and good about the M1903 was the introduction of the 30'06 round. We would have been better off licensing the M98 Mauser. The Garand was finally a rifle for the next war instead of the last one, but they still hadn't worked out the bugs by 1940 and it was never an easy rifle to build. Which is why we built a lot of M1 carbines, easy to make for a lot of manufacturers and to carry by those who weren't primarily riflemen. Then we got the M14, which Congress approved after Springfield lied about being able to reuse Garand tooling to save costs. And that put us back to using a rifle for the last war, not the next one. I won't address the MANY issues of the M16 and its inadequate descendents... David |
#88
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
"David R. Birch" wrote in message
... On 8/27/2014 3:57 AM, Gunner Asch wrote: Once upon a time, there were Army Arsenals, and Navy Yards, where the work got done. Indeed there were. It was not all contractors and bids and slush funds OTOH, we had Springfield Arsenal pushing their own designs when there were better ones available. The trapdoor Springfield was a scandal long before the Litle Big Horn, the Krag was redesigned and ended up a weaker action with an inferior round to the Norwegian original, and the only thing new and good about the M1903 was the introduction of the 30'06 round. We would have been better off licensing the M98 Mauser. The Garand was finally a rifle for the next war instead of the last one, but they still hadn't worked out the bugs by 1940 and it was never an easy rifle to build. Which is why we built a lot of M1 carbines, easy to make for a lot of manufacturers and to carry by those who weren't primarily riflemen. Then we got the M14, which Congress approved after Springfield lied about being able to reuse Garand tooling to save costs. And that put us back to using a rifle for the last war, not the next one. I won't address the MANY issues of the M16 and its inadequate descendents... David Did you get that from "Misfire"? Hallahan's technical understanding is lacking, to be generous. He printed all the dirt he could dig up without sifting it, for an uncritical scandal-seeking audience. -jsw |
#89
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 17:57:11
+0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: Yup. The illustrious McNamara. And General Dynamics was a Texas company :-) But, I'm not sure how much blame actually should be attributed to McNamara personally, other than of course he was the captain of the ship and thus responsible for everything that happened. The lying, cheating, back-biting and stealing that went on there between the various branches of the military and governmental and non-governmental organizations was amazing. The Air Force's number one enemy was the Navy Aviation. The commies came in after the number two enemy - Army Aviation. If you were referring to Vietnam I can't even remember the Navy's A.F. I'm not talking about the SE Asia War games (big grin). No, I'm referring to the ever so more important conflict, the existential battle for survival, waged in the corridors of the Pentagon and Congress. The battle for survival which is in the drafting of the Appropriation Bill. being mentioned when I was there, but there was considerable friction with the Army over the helicopters. Apparently there was some sort of agreement that the Army was supposed to be the only force with armed helicopters and when we built a couple with miniguns the Army complained to MACV. The A.F. argued that they were for "Base Defense" and got to keep them. After the Army Air Force became the US Air Force, the decision was made that basically, if it had wings, it belonged to the Air Force. Helicopters were seen as a way around that restriction, and now drones .... The Warthog was designed from as a support platform for the Vulcan chain gun. Simple, rugged, and it did the job. On the general subject, I recall what General Curry said: 'the best is the enemy of the good'. In his case, it was a better tank in five years, verse the good enough tanks he needed now. Yeah, it would be nice to have the Wonder Weapon, but we need something "now". That ol' cliche about you go to war with the army you have, not the army you wish you had. -- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone." |
#90
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 20:28:46 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote: On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 07:07:19 +0700, John B. Slocomb wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 10:58:32 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 10:53:02 -0400, "Jim Wilkins" wrote: "Ed Huntress" wrote in message m... On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 05:53:05 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:57:03 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 I don't know that the Military ever "made their own stuff" :-) Once upon a time, there were Army Arsenals, and Navy Yards, where the work got done. Indeed there were. It was not all contractors and bids and slush funds Didn't they use soldiers and sailors to build those, keeping the troops in shape and busy during times we were not at war? Take the labor fees away from building a ship and it gets a whole lot cheaper. I didn't realize you were such a fan of socialism, Larry. In fact, you're really nudging toward communism there. But that isn't the way it was. My grandfather was a civilian panel carver at the Portsmouth Navy Yard, carving the mahogany filagree around the hatches of officers' quarters on submarines during WWI. Those were civilian workers. -- Ed Huntress Skippers' memoirs mention the assigned crew helping complete the construction work on new submarines, but they don't say how much of that doubled as hands-on training to repair the machinery. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plankowner -jsw The Navy Yard was a major civilian employer in Portsmouth. And, of course, the Bath Iron Works, which built hundreds of Navy ships, was the big employer in Bath, ME. But Bath was a civilian company, wasn't it? Yes, and that's part of the point. It's a civilian operation using civilians to build military equipment. Most of the above responds to the statement "Once upon a time, there were Army Arsenals, and Navy Yards, where the work got done." A great deal of the military's support activity is civilian. Edwards AFB, the flight test center, is very largely civilian. When I was there the metal working shops were all civilian and it appeared to be the same in all the shops. I believe that Springfield Armory, that someone mentioned was largely civilian. -- Cheers, John B. |
#91
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 02:47:17 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 17:57:11 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: Yup. The illustrious McNamara. And General Dynamics was a Texas company :-) But, I'm not sure how much blame actually should be attributed to McNamara personally, other than of course he was the captain of the ship and thus responsible for everything that happened. The lying, cheating, back-biting and stealing that went on there between the various branches of the military and governmental and non-governmental organizations was amazing. The Air Force's number one enemy was the Navy Aviation. The commies came in after the number two enemy - Army Aviation. If you were referring to Vietnam I can't even remember the Navy's A.F. I'm not talking about the SE Asia War games (big grin). No, I'm referring to the ever so more important conflict, the existential battle for survival, waged in the corridors of the Pentagon and Congress. The battle for survival which is in the drafting of the Appropriation Bill. A great deal of very fast and fancy footwork goes on at that level :-) But you are right. Using a cheap airplane to sink an expensive battle ship was really dirty pool :-) being mentioned when I was there, but there was considerable friction with the Army over the helicopters. Apparently there was some sort of agreement that the Army was supposed to be the only force with armed helicopters and when we built a couple with miniguns the Army complained to MACV. The A.F. argued that they were for "Base Defense" and got to keep them. After the Army Air Force became the US Air Force, the decision was made that basically, if it had wings, it belonged to the Air Force. Helicopters were seen as a way around that restriction, and now drones ... Not to mention the battles between the rocket shooters and the big bomber boys :-) The Warthog was designed from as a support platform for the Vulcan chain gun. Simple, rugged, and it did the job. On the general subject, I recall what General Curry said: 'the best is the enemy of the good'. In his case, it was a better tank in five years, verse the good enough tanks he needed now. Yeah, it would be nice to have the Wonder Weapon, but we need something "now". That ol' cliche about you go to war with the army you have, not the army you wish you had. -- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone." -- Cheers, John B. |
#92
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On 8/27/2014 8:37 PM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"David R. Birch" wrote in message ... On 8/27/2014 3:57 AM, Gunner Asch wrote: Once upon a time, there were Army Arsenals, and Navy Yards, where the work got done. Indeed there were. It was not all contractors and bids and slush funds OTOH, we had Springfield Arsenal pushing their own designs when there were better ones available. The trapdoor Springfield was a scandal long before the Litle Big Horn, the Krag was redesigned and ended up a weaker action with an inferior round to the Norwegian original, and the only thing new and good about the M1903 was the introduction of the 30'06 round. We would have been better off licensing the M98 Mauser. The Garand was finally a rifle for the next war instead of the last one, but they still hadn't worked out the bugs by 1940 and it was never an easy rifle to build. Which is why we built a lot of M1 carbines, easy to make for a lot of manufacturers and to carry by those who weren't primarily riflemen. Then we got the M14, which Congress approved after Springfield lied about being able to reuse Garand tooling to save costs. And that put us back to using a rifle for the last war, not the next one. I won't address the MANY issues of the M16 and its inadequate descendents... David Did you get that from "Misfire"? Hallahan's technical understanding is lacking, to be generous. He printed all the dirt he could dig up without sifting it, for an uncritical scandal-seeking audience. -jsw I haven't read that book, I just pay attention. David |
#93
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
John B. Slocomb on Thu, 28 Aug 2014 07:07:19
+0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 05:53:05 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:57:03 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 I don't know that the Military ever "made their own stuff" :-) Once upon a time, there were Army Arsenals, and Navy Yards, where the work got done. Indeed there were. It was not all contractors and bids and slush funds Didn't they use soldiers and sailors to build those, keeping the troops in shape and busy during times we were not at war? Take the labor fees away from building a ship and it gets a whole lot cheaper. What do you think it costs to train soldiers and sailors? If I remember correctly when I was in the Service the A.F. calculated that if they got one year's actual use out of guys in some of the technical career fields that they were doing good, which is one of the reasons that they had rather elaborate re-enlistment programs. And the cost of the support system, housing, food, laundry, medical care, retirement, etc. that's today. "Back then..." (when ever "back then" was) - I do not know enough to say definitively. However, that said, what I'm understanding is that back in the day (usually of Wooden Ships and Iron Men) - the navy had yards where the Navy had ships built, outfitted and overhauled. It was Navy paymasters in charge. There may have been _civilian_ workers, but they worked for the Navy. I understand as well, that a lot of the Roman Roads were ... occupational deployments of the Legion to keep them busy and out of trouble. The Roman Road was in many senses a wall laying on the on the ground. -- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone." |
#94
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
John B. Slocomb on Thu, 28 Aug 2014 18:13:41
+0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 02:47:17 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 17:57:11 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: Yup. The illustrious McNamara. And General Dynamics was a Texas company :-) But, I'm not sure how much blame actually should be attributed to McNamara personally, other than of course he was the captain of the ship and thus responsible for everything that happened. The lying, cheating, back-biting and stealing that went on there between the various branches of the military and governmental and non-governmental organizations was amazing. The Air Force's number one enemy was the Navy Aviation. The commies came in after the number two enemy - Army Aviation. If you were referring to Vietnam I can't even remember the Navy's A.F. I'm not talking about the SE Asia War games (big grin). No, I'm referring to the ever so more important conflict, the existential battle for survival, waged in the corridors of the Pentagon and Congress. The battle for survival which is in the drafting of the Appropriation Bill. A great deal of very fast and fancy footwork goes on at that level :-) But you are right. Using a cheap airplane to sink an expensive battle ship was really dirty pool :-) Or worse - not having a program ready to go, and having to buy a _Navy_ designed airplane. being mentioned when I was there, but there was considerable friction with the Army over the helicopters. Apparently there was some sort of agreement that the Army was supposed to be the only force with armed helicopters and when we built a couple with miniguns the Army complained to MACV. The A.F. argued that they were for "Base Defense" and got to keep them. After the Army Air Force became the US Air Force, the decision was made that basically, if it had wings, it belonged to the Air Force. Helicopters were seen as a way around that restriction, and now drones ... Not to mention the battles between the rocket shooters and the big bomber boys :-) A replay of the Battle Ship Admirals ... -- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone." |
#95
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
"pyotr filipivich" wrote in message
news John B. Slocomb on Thu, 28 Aug 2014 07:07:19 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 05:53:05 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:57:03 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 I understand as well, that a lot of the Roman Roads were ... occupational deployments of the Legion to keep them busy and out of trouble. The Roman Road was in many senses a wall laying on the on the ground. -- pyotr filipivich During WW1 British Army practice was to rotate troops between guarding the trenches and support or construction duty behind them. Much of the duty was digging, including laying turf-covered hidden railroad tracks that allowed heavy guns to be brought up and fired from positions unknown to enemy artillery plotters at night and then moved back to safety before dawn. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatigue_duty -jsw |
#96
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 22:18:59 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote: John B. Slocomb on Thu, 28 Aug 2014 07:07:19 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 05:53:05 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:57:03 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 I don't know that the Military ever "made their own stuff" :-) Once upon a time, there were Army Arsenals, and Navy Yards, where the work got done. Indeed there were. It was not all contractors and bids and slush funds Didn't they use soldiers and sailors to build those, keeping the troops in shape and busy during times we were not at war? Take the labor fees away from building a ship and it gets a whole lot cheaper. What do you think it costs to train soldiers and sailors? If I remember correctly when I was in the Service the A.F. calculated that if they got one year's actual use out of guys in some of the technical career fields that they were doing good, which is one of the reasons that they had rather elaborate re-enlistment programs. And the cost of the support system, housing, food, laundry, medical care, retirement, etc. that's today. "Back then..." (when ever "back then" was) - I do not know enough to say definitively. However, that said, what I'm understanding is that back in the day (usually of Wooden Ships and Iron Men) - the navy had yards where the Navy had ships built, outfitted and overhauled. It was Navy paymasters in charge. There may have been _civilian_ workers, but they worked for the Navy. From what I've seen of civilians working for the Government I'd guess that a straight out cost plus contract with a civilian yard would be cheaper :-) I understand as well, that a lot of the Roman Roads were ... occupational deployments of the Legion to keep them busy and out of trouble. The Roman Road was in many senses a wall laying on the on the ground. I believe that you are correct, but road building must have been part of almost any Roman campaign, particularly outside Italy as with no roads it is very difficult to move large numbers of men and supplies. -- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone." -- Cheers, John B. |
#97
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 22:18:59 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote: John B. Slocomb on Thu, 28 Aug 2014 18:13:41 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 02:47:17 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 17:57:11 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: Yup. The illustrious McNamara. And General Dynamics was a Texas company :-) But, I'm not sure how much blame actually should be attributed to McNamara personally, other than of course he was the captain of the ship and thus responsible for everything that happened. The lying, cheating, back-biting and stealing that went on there between the various branches of the military and governmental and non-governmental organizations was amazing. The Air Force's number one enemy was the Navy Aviation. The commies came in after the number two enemy - Army Aviation. If you were referring to Vietnam I can't even remember the Navy's A.F. I'm not talking about the SE Asia War games (big grin). No, I'm referring to the ever so more important conflict, the existential battle for survival, waged in the corridors of the Pentagon and Congress. The battle for survival which is in the drafting of the Appropriation Bill. A great deal of very fast and fancy footwork goes on at that level :-) But you are right. Using a cheap airplane to sink an expensive battle ship was really dirty pool :-) Or worse - not having a program ready to go, and having to buy a _Navy_ designed airplane. being mentioned when I was there, but there was considerable friction with the Army over the helicopters. Apparently there was some sort of agreement that the Army was supposed to be the only force with armed helicopters and when we built a couple with miniguns the Army complained to MACV. The A.F. argued that they were for "Base Defense" and got to keep them. After the Army Air Force became the US Air Force, the decision was made that basically, if it had wings, it belonged to the Air Force. Helicopters were seen as a way around that restriction, and now drones ... Not to mention the battles between the rocket shooters and the big bomber boys :-) A replay of the Battle Ship Admirals ... -- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone." I suppose that now it is the unmanned aircraft guys against the manned aircraft. -- Cheers, John B. |
#98
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
John B. Slocomb on Fri, 29 Aug 2014 18:20:07
+0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 22:18:59 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Thu, 28 Aug 2014 07:07:19 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 05:53:05 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:57:03 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 I don't know that the Military ever "made their own stuff" :-) Once upon a time, there were Army Arsenals, and Navy Yards, where the work got done. Indeed there were. It was not all contractors and bids and slush funds Didn't they use soldiers and sailors to build those, keeping the troops in shape and busy during times we were not at war? Take the labor fees away from building a ship and it gets a whole lot cheaper. What do you think it costs to train soldiers and sailors? If I remember correctly when I was in the Service the A.F. calculated that if they got one year's actual use out of guys in some of the technical career fields that they were doing good, which is one of the reasons that they had rather elaborate re-enlistment programs. And the cost of the support system, housing, food, laundry, medical care, retirement, etc. that's today. "Back then..." (when ever "back then" was) - I do not know enough to say definitively. However, that said, what I'm understanding is that back in the day (usually of Wooden Ships and Iron Men) - the navy had yards where the Navy had ships built, outfitted and overhauled. It was Navy paymasters in charge. There may have been _civilian_ workers, but they worked for the Navy. From what I've seen of civilians working for the Government I'd guess that a straight out cost plus contract with a civilian yard would be cheaper :-) Some things never have changed, eh? I understand as well, that a lot of the Roman Roads were ... occupational deployments of the Legion to keep them busy and out of trouble. The Roman Road was in many senses a wall laying on the on the ground. I believe that you are correct, but road building must have been part of almost any Roman campaign, particularly outside Italy as with no roads it is very difficult to move large numbers of men and supplies. Which then let you move a legion or two to someplace new, where they could build roads, aqueducts, sewers, public baths, fora, schools, vineyards and city walls. "But aside from all that, what have the Romans done for us?" -- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone." |
#99
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
John B. Slocomb on Fri, 29 Aug 2014 18:20:07
+0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 22:18:59 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Thu, 28 Aug 2014 18:13:41 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 02:47:17 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 17:57:11 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: Yup. The illustrious McNamara. And General Dynamics was a Texas company :-) But, I'm not sure how much blame actually should be attributed to McNamara personally, other than of course he was the captain of the ship and thus responsible for everything that happened. The lying, cheating, back-biting and stealing that went on there between the various branches of the military and governmental and non-governmental organizations was amazing. The Air Force's number one enemy was the Navy Aviation. The commies came in after the number two enemy - Army Aviation. If you were referring to Vietnam I can't even remember the Navy's A.F. I'm not talking about the SE Asia War games (big grin). No, I'm referring to the ever so more important conflict, the existential battle for survival, waged in the corridors of the Pentagon and Congress. The battle for survival which is in the drafting of the Appropriation Bill. A great deal of very fast and fancy footwork goes on at that level :-) But you are right. Using a cheap airplane to sink an expensive battle ship was really dirty pool :-) Or worse - not having a program ready to go, and having to buy a _Navy_ designed airplane. being mentioned when I was there, but there was considerable friction with the Army over the helicopters. Apparently there was some sort of agreement that the Army was supposed to be the only force with armed helicopters and when we built a couple with miniguns the Army complained to MACV. The A.F. argued that they were for "Base Defense" and got to keep them. After the Army Air Force became the US Air Force, the decision was made that basically, if it had wings, it belonged to the Air Force. Helicopters were seen as a way around that restriction, and now drones ... Not to mention the battles between the rocket shooters and the big bomber boys :-) A replay of the Battle Ship Admirals ... -- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone." I suppose that now it is the unmanned aircraft guys against the manned aircraft. Steam vs Sail, Sail vs Oars, etc. My own opinion is that as technological innovations come along, they get applied to _everything_, from the practical to the "patent medicine". E.G., when the gasoline engine was invented, it was not long before someone applied on to powering a wagon, a motorcycle, a boat, a washing machine. I'm sure that some bright 'lad' even considered mounting didloes to one. "Just a minute honey, I need to prime the carburetor." -- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone." |
#100
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 09:54:18 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote: John B. Slocomb on Fri, 29 Aug 2014 18:20:07 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 22:18:59 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Thu, 28 Aug 2014 07:07:19 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 05:53:05 -0700, Larry Jaques wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:57:03 -0700, Gunner Asch wrote: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 I don't know that the Military ever "made their own stuff" :-) Once upon a time, there were Army Arsenals, and Navy Yards, where the work got done. Indeed there were. It was not all contractors and bids and slush funds Didn't they use soldiers and sailors to build those, keeping the troops in shape and busy during times we were not at war? Take the labor fees away from building a ship and it gets a whole lot cheaper. What do you think it costs to train soldiers and sailors? If I remember correctly when I was in the Service the A.F. calculated that if they got one year's actual use out of guys in some of the technical career fields that they were doing good, which is one of the reasons that they had rather elaborate re-enlistment programs. And the cost of the support system, housing, food, laundry, medical care, retirement, etc. that's today. "Back then..." (when ever "back then" was) - I do not know enough to say definitively. However, that said, what I'm understanding is that back in the day (usually of Wooden Ships and Iron Men) - the navy had yards where the Navy had ships built, outfitted and overhauled. It was Navy paymasters in charge. There may have been _civilian_ workers, but they worked for the Navy. From what I've seen of civilians working for the Government I'd guess that a straight out cost plus contract with a civilian yard would be cheaper :-) Some things never have changed, eh? I understand as well, that a lot of the Roman Roads were ... occupational deployments of the Legion to keep them busy and out of trouble. The Roman Road was in many senses a wall laying on the on the ground. I believe that you are correct, but road building must have been part of almost any Roman campaign, particularly outside Italy as with no roads it is very difficult to move large numbers of men and supplies. Which then let you move a legion or two to someplace new, where they could build roads, aqueducts, sewers, public baths, fora, schools, vineyards and city walls. "But aside from all that, what have the Romans done for us?" Contributed a lot of language that is used by lawyers :-) -- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone." -- Cheers, John B. |
#101
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 10:29:09 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote: John B. Slocomb on Fri, 29 Aug 2014 18:20:07 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 22:18:59 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Thu, 28 Aug 2014 18:13:41 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 02:47:17 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 17:57:11 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: Yup. The illustrious McNamara. And General Dynamics was a Texas company :-) But, I'm not sure how much blame actually should be attributed to McNamara personally, other than of course he was the captain of the ship and thus responsible for everything that happened. The lying, cheating, back-biting and stealing that went on there between the various branches of the military and governmental and non-governmental organizations was amazing. The Air Force's number one enemy was the Navy Aviation. The commies came in after the number two enemy - Army Aviation. If you were referring to Vietnam I can't even remember the Navy's A.F. I'm not talking about the SE Asia War games (big grin). No, I'm referring to the ever so more important conflict, the existential battle for survival, waged in the corridors of the Pentagon and Congress. The battle for survival which is in the drafting of the Appropriation Bill. A great deal of very fast and fancy footwork goes on at that level :-) But you are right. Using a cheap airplane to sink an expensive battle ship was really dirty pool :-) Or worse - not having a program ready to go, and having to buy a _Navy_ designed airplane. being mentioned when I was there, but there was considerable friction with the Army over the helicopters. Apparently there was some sort of agreement that the Army was supposed to be the only force with armed helicopters and when we built a couple with miniguns the Army complained to MACV. The A.F. argued that they were for "Base Defense" and got to keep them. After the Army Air Force became the US Air Force, the decision was made that basically, if it had wings, it belonged to the Air Force. Helicopters were seen as a way around that restriction, and now drones ... Not to mention the battles between the rocket shooters and the big bomber boys :-) A replay of the Battle Ship Admirals ... -- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone." I suppose that now it is the unmanned aircraft guys against the manned aircraft. Steam vs Sail, Sail vs Oars, etc. My own opinion is that as technological innovations come along, they get applied to _everything_, from the practical to the "patent medicine". E.G., when the gasoline engine was invented, it was not long before someone applied on to powering a wagon, a motorcycle, a boat, a washing machine. I'm sure that some bright 'lad' even considered mounting didloes to one. "Just a minute honey, I need to prime the carburetor." -- I'm not sure that all innovations, internal combustion engines for example, are designed in isolation. The steam Engine, if I remember correctly, was designed specifically to pump water out of mines, and later used for transportation. pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone." -- Cheers, John B. |
#102
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Sunday, August 17, 2014 8:04:00 PM UTC-7, jon_banquer wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l73IyO1Qdqo Just like to point out that slow Eddy lied again when he claimed no one reads discussions I start. No one participates in my LinkedIn group either, slow Eddy :) http://lnkd.in/bvFimum slow Eddy has been making a complete fool out of himself on Usenet for decades. Good thing Mark Wieber lies more and is more outrageous with his lies, right slow Eddy. |
#103
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 10:29:09 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote: My own opinion is that as technological innovations come along, they get applied to _everything_, from the practical to the "patent medicine". E.G., when the gasoline engine was invented, it was not long before someone applied on to powering a wagon, a motorcycle, a boat, a washing machine. I'm sure that some bright 'lad' even considered mounting didloes to one. "Just a minute honey, I need to prime the carburetor." http://www.wmmr.com/shows/preston-an...PhotoID=769300 http://gizmodo.com/5466997/the-steam...-machines-nsfw etcetc "At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child, miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats." PJ O'Rourke |
#104
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
John B. Slocomb on Sat, 30 Aug 2014 07:49:16
+0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 10:29:09 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Fri, 29 Aug 2014 18:20:07 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 22:18:59 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Thu, 28 Aug 2014 18:13:41 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 02:47:17 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 17:57:11 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: Yup. The illustrious McNamara. And General Dynamics was a Texas company :-) But, I'm not sure how much blame actually should be attributed to McNamara personally, other than of course he was the captain of the ship and thus responsible for everything that happened. The lying, cheating, back-biting and stealing that went on there between the various branches of the military and governmental and non-governmental organizations was amazing. The Air Force's number one enemy was the Navy Aviation. The commies came in after the number two enemy - Army Aviation. If you were referring to Vietnam I can't even remember the Navy's A.F. I'm not talking about the SE Asia War games (big grin). No, I'm referring to the ever so more important conflict, the existential battle for survival, waged in the corridors of the Pentagon and Congress. The battle for survival which is in the drafting of the Appropriation Bill. A great deal of very fast and fancy footwork goes on at that level :-) But you are right. Using a cheap airplane to sink an expensive battle ship was really dirty pool :-) Or worse - not having a program ready to go, and having to buy a _Navy_ designed airplane. being mentioned when I was there, but there was considerable friction with the Army over the helicopters. Apparently there was some sort of agreement that the Army was supposed to be the only force with armed helicopters and when we built a couple with miniguns the Army complained to MACV. The A.F. argued that they were for "Base Defense" and got to keep them. After the Army Air Force became the US Air Force, the decision was made that basically, if it had wings, it belonged to the Air Force. Helicopters were seen as a way around that restriction, and now drones... Not to mention the battles between the rocket shooters and the big bomber boys :-) A replay of the Battle Ship Admirals ... I suppose that now it is the unmanned aircraft guys against the manned aircraft. Steam vs Sail, Sail vs Oars, etc. My own opinion is that as technological innovations come along, they get applied to _everything_, from the practical to the "patent medicine". E.G., when the gasoline engine was invented, it was not long before someone applied on to powering a wagon, a motorcycle, a boat, a washing machine. I'm sure that some bright 'lad' even considered mounting didloes to one. "Just a minute honey, I need to prime the carburetor." I'm not sure that all innovations, internal combustion engines for example, are designed in isolation. The steam Engine, if I remember correctly, was designed specifically to pump water out of mines, and later used for transportation. "We have this thing, what else can we do with it?" Steam engines cam out of the technology for boring cannon barrels. Once they realized they could pump water, they figured "power source" and started putting Engine on what ever they could fit one too. Some where in the files I have the designs for a steam powered model airplane. -- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone." |
#105
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
Gunner Asch on Sat, 30 Aug 2014 08:43:25 -0700
typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 10:29:09 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: My own opinion is that as technological innovations come along, they get applied to _everything_, from the practical to the "patent medicine". E.G., when the gasoline engine was invented, it was not long before someone applied on to powering a wagon, a motorcycle, a boat, a washing machine. I'm sure that some bright 'lad' even considered mounting didloes to one. "Just a minute honey, I need to prime the carburetor." http://www.wmmr.com/shows/preston-an...PhotoID=769300 http://gizmodo.com/5466997/the-steam...-machines-nsfw Like I said - guys will try to figure out how to use a new technology to either make things go fast, or be used for sex. Tis the nature of the beast. -- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone." |
#106
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
"pyotr filipivich" wrote in message
... John B. Slocomb on Sat, 30 Aug 2014 07:49:16 I'm not sure that all innovations, internal combustion engines for example, are designed in isolation. The steam Engine, if I remember correctly, was designed specifically to pump water out of mines, and later used for transportation. "We have this thing, what else can we do with it?" Steam engines cam out of the technology for boring cannon barrels. Once they realized they could pump water, they figured "power source" and started putting Engine on what ever they could fit one too. Some where in the files I have the designs for a steam powered model airplane. -- pyotr filipivich The first steam machine that performed useful work was Thomas Savery's 1698 pump, which applied the steam pressure and vacuum directly to the water it sucked up and then blew out of the mine. The only moving parts were manually operated steam and water valves, except when the walls of the boiler decided to make a run for freedom. The result of explosions was that steam under pressure was avoided for a century, instead the Newcomen (and Watt) engine condensed unpressurized steam to create a vacuum that pulled the piston down. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History...e_steam_engine Watt didn't really "discover" that steam pressure was useful by watching a teakettle, in fact he actively opposed attempts to employ steam under pressure. The real unheralded genius who developed the high pressure steam engine was Oliver Evans, safely out of Watt's reach in Philadelphia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Evans -jsw |
#107
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message
... "pyotr filipivich" wrote in message ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Evans -jsw To show how innovative and far ahead of his time Evans was, he experimented with pressurizing the firebox and injecting water directly into the flame to flash into steam, in effect the burner of a jet engine. He demonstrated that high pressure combustion was possible, and also that a continuous supercharged air and fuel flow was hopelessly impossible with the low tech of the time. -jsw |
#108
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Sat, 30 Aug 2014 08:53:19 -0700, pyotr filipivich
wrote: John B. Slocomb on Sat, 30 Aug 2014 07:49:16 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 10:29:09 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Fri, 29 Aug 2014 18:20:07 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 22:18:59 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Thu, 28 Aug 2014 18:13:41 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Thu, 28 Aug 2014 02:47:17 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 17:57:11 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: On Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:02:12 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote: John B. Slocomb on Wed, 27 Aug 2014 08:31:17 +0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: Yup. The illustrious McNamara. And General Dynamics was a Texas company :-) But, I'm not sure how much blame actually should be attributed to McNamara personally, other than of course he was the captain of the ship and thus responsible for everything that happened. The lying, cheating, back-biting and stealing that went on there between the various branches of the military and governmental and non-governmental organizations was amazing. The Air Force's number one enemy was the Navy Aviation. The commies came in after the number two enemy - Army Aviation. If you were referring to Vietnam I can't even remember the Navy's A.F. I'm not talking about the SE Asia War games (big grin). No, I'm referring to the ever so more important conflict, the existential battle for survival, waged in the corridors of the Pentagon and Congress. The battle for survival which is in the drafting of the Appropriation Bill. A great deal of very fast and fancy footwork goes on at that level :-) But you are right. Using a cheap airplane to sink an expensive battle ship was really dirty pool :-) Or worse - not having a program ready to go, and having to buy a _Navy_ designed airplane. being mentioned when I was there, but there was considerable friction with the Army over the helicopters. Apparently there was some sort of agreement that the Army was supposed to be the only force with armed helicopters and when we built a couple with miniguns the Army complained to MACV. The A.F. argued that they were for "Base Defense" and got to keep them. After the Army Air Force became the US Air Force, the decision was made that basically, if it had wings, it belonged to the Air Force. Helicopters were seen as a way around that restriction, and now drones... Not to mention the battles between the rocket shooters and the big bomber boys :-) A replay of the Battle Ship Admirals ... I suppose that now it is the unmanned aircraft guys against the manned aircraft. Steam vs Sail, Sail vs Oars, etc. My own opinion is that as technological innovations come along, they get applied to _everything_, from the practical to the "patent medicine". E.G., when the gasoline engine was invented, it was not long before someone applied on to powering a wagon, a motorcycle, a boat, a washing machine. I'm sure that some bright 'lad' even considered mounting didloes to one. "Just a minute honey, I need to prime the carburetor." I'm not sure that all innovations, internal combustion engines for example, are designed in isolation. The steam Engine, if I remember correctly, was designed specifically to pump water out of mines, and later used for transportation. "We have this thing, what else can we do with it?" Steam engines cam out of the technology for boring cannon barrels. Once they realized they could pump water, they figured "power source" and started putting Engine on what ever they could fit one too. Some where in the files I have the designs for a steam powered model airplane. -- pyotr filipivich "With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone." http://www.elfie.org/~croaker/individ.html "At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child, miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats." PJ O'Rourke |
#110
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Sunday, August 24, 2014 10:10:54 PM UTC-4, Richard wrote:
On 8/24/2014 10:29 PM, pyotr filipivich wrote: Gunner on Sun, 24 Aug 2014 13:28:16 -0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following: It's a national treasure. The Air Force wants to kill it: http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/the...-bu-1562789528 This airframe should be kept. I'd say a wing of them for special ops. They are special and maybe 30 kept with the 270 or so kept for parts. Keep troops trained as pilots and ground advisers if needed. You need more of them than that. It is Close Air Support. Something which you need right now, not in twenty minutes. "If I wanted it in twenty minutes, I would have asked for it in twenty minutes!" I am reminded of a story form the Korean war, to the effect that the Air Force jets would check in with the FAC (Forward Air Controller - the target designator) and tell him "I've got a couple bombs and twenty minutes." Meanwhile,the Navy/Marines in the A-1 (Later known as the Sandy) would check in with "I've got bombs, rockets and about an hour and a half to kill." Simply cost effective. If a central American country goes wacko or some people within do it might be just the trick. A billion dollar machine that flies to fast and can't turn or hide isn't needed. Seems like they, the DOD, thinks we can fight a war sitting on our sofa waiting for updates. Yep. http://www.military.com/video/off-duty/humor/drone-operator-vs-vista-support/663148157001/ Personally, I think the entire fleet should be transferred to the Army. They LOVE that ugly thing. At least the guys on the ground do. Hell yes!!!! Air Force still seems to want billion dollar super jets. Tech wienies are like that. Good folks if you have deep pockets The Air Force is still enamored of the FB-111 concept: One plane to do it all - badly. I'm not too positive about these numbers, but --- F35 $98 to 116 million per aircraft F22 $420 million per plane Ed Heinemann's little A4 hot-rod - $1 million per aircraft - in 1954 dollars. Do you think 420 A4s could defeat a single F22? I certainly do. Still Richard, the 1950's A4 isn't worth it, because it can't take hits and keep flying as you can see with this film clip: -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tynni6wpYZ0 Even today, this is the problem with the F-18. It could run into other planes on the flight deck: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LY_mgjrMFc The f-35 solves that problem by landing like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XnZXQYG-LQ |
#111
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Thursday, September 4, 2014 10:16:14 AM UTC-4, Richard wrote:
On 9/5/2014 9:52 AM, wrote: Still Richard, the 1950's A4 isn't worth it, because it can't take hits and keep flying as you can see with this film clip: -- https://www.youtube..com/watch?v=Tynni6wpYZ0 Even today, this is the problem with the F-18. It could run into other planes on the flight deck: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LY_mgjrMFc The f-35 solves that problem by landing like this: https://www.youtube..com/watch?v=1XnZXQYG-LQ Don't try to bate me, boy. THIS does not look very "survivable" to me: -- https://www.google.com/search?q=a-10...20%3B800%3B485 |
#112
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Saturday, September 6, 2014 9:33:09 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Thursday, September 4, 2014 10:16:14 AM UTC-4, Richard wrote: On 9/5/2014 9:52 AM, wrote: Still Richard, the 1950's A4 isn't worth it, because it can't take hits and keep flying as you can see with this film clip: -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tynni6wpYZ0 Even today, this is the problem with the F-18. It could run into other planes on the flight deck: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LY_mgjrMFc The f-35 solves that problem by landing like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XnZXQYG-LQ Don't try to bate me, boy. THIS does not look very "survivable" to me: -- https://www.google.com/search?q=a-10...20%3B800%3B485 www.tinyurl.com |
#113
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
|
|||
|
|||
How The A-10 Warthog Became 'The Most Survivable Plane Ever Built'
On Saturday, September 6, 2014 2:12:35 PM UTC-4, jon_banquer wrote:
On Saturday, September 6, 2014 9:33:09 AM UTC-7, wrote: On Thursday, September 4, 2014 10:16:14 AM UTC-4, Richard wrote: On 9/5/2014 9:52 AM, wrote: Still Richard, the 1950's A4 isn't worth it, because it can't take hits and keep flying as you can see with this film clip: -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tynni6wpYZ0 Even today, this is the problem with the F-18. It could run into other planes on the flight deck: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LY_mgjrMFc The f-35 solves that problem by landing like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1XnZXQYG-LQ Don't try to bate me, boy. THIS does not look very "survivable" to me: -- https://www.google.com/search?q=a-10...20%3B800%3B485 www.tinyurl.com Thanks jon, I'll try to start using that cite. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Angle of Sharpening Plane on hand plane | Woodworking Plans and Photos | |||
built in or built under single oven? | UK diy | |||
Router plane vs Plough plane | Woodworking | |||
Plane ignorant person needs some plane advice. | Woodworking | |||
Darwin Awards: Man rails against seatbelts, then killed in survivable rollover. | Metalworking |