Wednesday, November 18, 2015
Long Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B)
Aviation week had two opinion pieces (Commentary) on the LRS-B. Neither of them breathed so much as a word about the contract challenge that they emailed to magazine subscriber's last week. The two commentary pieces called the program well managed, the bids reasonable. Nothing about the contract award. They did say that the costing was based upon "Average Procurement Unit Cost" as opposed to "Unit Recurring Flyaway Cost". Av Week says the Average Procurement Unit Cost includes spares, support equipment and other essential stuff, which the Unit Flyaway did not. Spares can cost. Engines make up roughly a quarter of the cost of an aircraft. Back in the day, we had four spare J75 engines on base to support 20 single engine fighters. If LRS-B is spared to the same level, that increases the price of the engine buy by maybe 20% over the life of the program. Spare gyros, spare radars, spare landing gear, all that is expensive. Support equipment, we used to call that "ground power", air compressors, generator sets, hydraulic mules, tractors, bomb lifts, cockpit ladders, air conditioning sets, tow bars, it all adds up.
Tuesday, November 17, 2015
Taking Syrian Refugees to the US
You know, in that tidal wave of Syrian refugees, there has gotta be some good people, hard workers, people who want to become Americans and who would make good ones. We oughta skim the cream of the crop. Obama wants to take 10,000? Go for it.
Go to the biggest refugee camp, the one closest to Syria. Pitch a big tent. Raise the American flag outside. In side have cold CocaCola and hot coffee, courtesy of the house. Have a bunch of Syrian Americans, who speak Arabic do the interviewing. Ask for their family names, parents, siblings, cousins, uncles, aunts, nieces, and nephews. Run family names against US blacklists. Reject those with Islamist terrorist family. Accept the obvious winners, medical doctors, engineers, technicians, businessmen. Accept married men (they must have wife and kids with them) Accept unaccompanied minors who look like they could get themselves adopted in America. Accept single young men who express a desire to become US citizens, and/or enlist in the US armed forces. Accept Christians, Yazidis, Druze, Jews and any other non Muslims that there might be.
Reject anyone suspected of ISIS leanings, or activity. Reject anyone who admits to criminal activity, drug running, and the like. Reject anyone educated in a madrassa. Reject anyone who looks, acts, talks, or dresses suspiciously. Reject anyone on US blacklists.
Issue a temporary US passport and air tickets to the accepted. Tell them we are offering them a chance to become Americans. Tell them if they show disloyalty to the United States, get caught communicating with Islamic terrorists, or get in trouble with the law, they will be shipped right back here, in handcuffs.
Wanna bet we could fill our quota of refugees with good useful citizens? And let the Europeans cope with the dregs we leave behind? And we could make some heart warming propaganda video showing happy refugees debarking on US soil, finding jobs and housing, sending their children to US public schools.
Go to the biggest refugee camp, the one closest to Syria. Pitch a big tent. Raise the American flag outside. In side have cold CocaCola and hot coffee, courtesy of the house. Have a bunch of Syrian Americans, who speak Arabic do the interviewing. Ask for their family names, parents, siblings, cousins, uncles, aunts, nieces, and nephews. Run family names against US blacklists. Reject those with Islamist terrorist family. Accept the obvious winners, medical doctors, engineers, technicians, businessmen. Accept married men (they must have wife and kids with them) Accept unaccompanied minors who look like they could get themselves adopted in America. Accept single young men who express a desire to become US citizens, and/or enlist in the US armed forces. Accept Christians, Yazidis, Druze, Jews and any other non Muslims that there might be.
Reject anyone suspected of ISIS leanings, or activity. Reject anyone who admits to criminal activity, drug running, and the like. Reject anyone educated in a madrassa. Reject anyone who looks, acts, talks, or dresses suspiciously. Reject anyone on US blacklists.
Issue a temporary US passport and air tickets to the accepted. Tell them we are offering them a chance to become Americans. Tell them if they show disloyalty to the United States, get caught communicating with Islamic terrorists, or get in trouble with the law, they will be shipped right back here, in handcuffs.
Wanna bet we could fill our quota of refugees with good useful citizens? And let the Europeans cope with the dregs we leave behind? And we could make some heart warming propaganda video showing happy refugees debarking on US soil, finding jobs and housing, sending their children to US public schools.
Zap the Islamic Terrorist websites
According to Internet chatter and some input from the newsies, a lot of dangerous ISIS terrorists are recruited, motivated, and launched, via Islamist websites. For example that Major Nedal sp? who did the Fort Hood shooting, Richard Reed the shoe bomber, and others. The flow of young people to Syria to join ISIS is blamed upon Internet recruiting.
If this is so, we ought to shut these sites down. We can do it. The big backbone carriers that power the Internet are all US (last time I looked anyhow) and it would be simple for them to simply drop all traffic to or from Islamic websites into the bit bucket. Poof, no more Islamist website. All that is needed is to have the URL of the Islamic website and it's gone.
This will take some organization but it's doable. Best and nicest would be a court, to which evidence would be presented, condemning the website as Islamist terrorist. Then a court order to the Internet backbone carriers to black hole the website would follow.
The Islamist websites would change their names, or start up new ones as a counter measure. Even if the same offensive website pops up a day later using a different URL, a couple of such moves and they loose their audience. When the fruitcake's favorite hate site stops existing, how do they find it's new address?
And we ought to speak to the search engines. Tell 'em to never display anything from Islamic terrorist websites.
If this is so, we ought to shut these sites down. We can do it. The big backbone carriers that power the Internet are all US (last time I looked anyhow) and it would be simple for them to simply drop all traffic to or from Islamic websites into the bit bucket. Poof, no more Islamist website. All that is needed is to have the URL of the Islamic website and it's gone.
This will take some organization but it's doable. Best and nicest would be a court, to which evidence would be presented, condemning the website as Islamist terrorist. Then a court order to the Internet backbone carriers to black hole the website would follow.
The Islamist websites would change their names, or start up new ones as a counter measure. Even if the same offensive website pops up a day later using a different URL, a couple of such moves and they loose their audience. When the fruitcake's favorite hate site stops existing, how do they find it's new address?
And we ought to speak to the search engines. Tell 'em to never display anything from Islamic terrorist websites.
Monday, November 16, 2015
Massive air strikes.
The French flew a mission to Rakka, some burb in Syria that ISIS calls its capital, today. As retaliation for the Paris massacre on Friday, an air strike on Monday ain't too shabby. Ten fighters dropped twenty bombs. Massive this is not. Even if some Fox newsies call it massive.
In the old days, I would stand on the flight line in the early morning at Korat RTAFB as we launched the morning strike on Hanoi, always 60 F-105's loaded with six 750 pounders apiece. And I always watched the afternoon strike, another 60 aircraft with six bombs apiece take off around 1 o'clock. I'm not gonna call 10 sorties and 20 bombs "massive".
In the old days, I would stand on the flight line in the early morning at Korat RTAFB as we launched the morning strike on Hanoi, always 60 F-105's loaded with six 750 pounders apiece. And I always watched the afternoon strike, another 60 aircraft with six bombs apiece take off around 1 o'clock. I'm not gonna call 10 sorties and 20 bombs "massive".
Obama stays eloquent for 45 minutes on TV
The question all the reporters asked was "What are you gonna do about the Paris massacre?" Obama evaded gracefully, evaded the followup questions, and managed to spend 45 minutes on live TV saying that he isn't going to do anything on account of the Paris massacre. He still wants to bring in a LOT of Syrian refugees to the US. He isn't going to take any action, military or otherwise against ISIS.
Obama claimed that Syrian refugees would be "vetted" before they are allowed into the US. Hah. Tell me about how you gonna do that. Pick up the phone and call Baghdad? And ask if Mohammed so-and-so is an ISIS terrorist? Who's gonna answer that phone? Assad's flunkies? ISIS, the other rebel groups? And even if they wanted to, can they check public records in a country undergoing a civil war? I don't think so.
Syrian refugees are a gamble. Most of 'em are probably harmless refugees, some of 'em are ISIS, some of 'em are Al Quada, some of 'em are other bad things. And they all look alike.
Obama claimed that Syrian refugees would be "vetted" before they are allowed into the US. Hah. Tell me about how you gonna do that. Pick up the phone and call Baghdad? And ask if Mohammed so-and-so is an ISIS terrorist? Who's gonna answer that phone? Assad's flunkies? ISIS, the other rebel groups? And even if they wanted to, can they check public records in a country undergoing a civil war? I don't think so.
Syrian refugees are a gamble. Most of 'em are probably harmless refugees, some of 'em are ISIS, some of 'em are Al Quada, some of 'em are other bad things. And they all look alike.
Sword of Summer, by Rick Riordan
It's out, it has made the WSJ best selling hardback fiction. Subtitled "Magnus Chase and the Gods of Asgard". I enjoyed it. Rick Riordan started writing about Percy Jackson, a teen aged New York kid who gets mixed up with the gods of Greek mythology. Those were good enough to get the first two books made into fairly decent movies. This book has a teen aged Boston street kid get mixed up with the gods of Norse mythology. As a long time resident of Boston, I enjoyed the various local references, Longfellow Bridge, Charles St, Boston Aquarium, Bunker Hill, all places I have been to and know fairly well.
It's a "young adult" book but I liked it, even if I am no longer a young adult. The protagonist is a decent teenager, who is given (stuck with) a horrible problem, he rises to the occasion, and with some help from his friends, wins thru in the end. There is a gutsy girl friend, some strange relatives, and some difficult to handle gods. Good fun.
It's a "young adult" book but I liked it, even if I am no longer a young adult. The protagonist is a decent teenager, who is given (stuck with) a horrible problem, he rises to the occasion, and with some help from his friends, wins thru in the end. There is a gutsy girl friend, some strange relatives, and some difficult to handle gods. Good fun.
Sunday, November 15, 2015
Picking a College
College is VERY expensive. Too expensive to waste. You go to college to improve your prospects of a good job after graduation, to learn something of value, and to graduate, actually get that degree.
You want to avoid colleges like Mizzou, which made nationwide headlines after it's president resigned under pressure from black radicals. No teaching or learning is gonna happen there, not for months, and a showing a Mizzou degree to an employer will get you laughed at now.
So how do you weed out the crazy places? Well, first off, visit their website. What activities do they take pride in? Opening a new laboratory or running off a climate change demo? Check the student groups on campus. Chapters of things like the American Physical Association or IEEE are good signs, chapters of ACLU or SDS are bad signs. Count the faculty, tenured professors and part timer "adjunct" professors. Count the student body. Divide students by faculty members to find the student faculty ratio. Count the number of courses offered. Sort the courses between real learning (English, physics, history, math, etc) and talky talky courses (gender studies, sociology, anthropology, ethnic studies,art history, etc.). Remember that professors of talky-talk courses are apt to egg students on to doing political demos with non negotiable demands.
Visit the campus and talk to students and faculty. Get the students to talk about the faculty. If the students are contemptuous of the faculty, that's a bad sign. If the faculty are contemptuous of students, free market capitalism, American exceptionalism, and first amendment freedoms, that's a bad sign. Read the posters on the bulletin boards. Find some college blogs and read them when you get home.
You are looking for a place with a reasonable campus attitude, like we are all here to learn stuff, and we understand that as American college students we have it pretty good in life. You want to avoid a place full of grievances, racism, class envy, and spite. If everyone is mad at something or somebody, the place may blow up either while you are there, or after you graduate, reducing the value of your expensive degree.
You want to avoid colleges like Mizzou, which made nationwide headlines after it's president resigned under pressure from black radicals. No teaching or learning is gonna happen there, not for months, and a showing a Mizzou degree to an employer will get you laughed at now.
So how do you weed out the crazy places? Well, first off, visit their website. What activities do they take pride in? Opening a new laboratory or running off a climate change demo? Check the student groups on campus. Chapters of things like the American Physical Association or IEEE are good signs, chapters of ACLU or SDS are bad signs. Count the faculty, tenured professors and part timer "adjunct" professors. Count the student body. Divide students by faculty members to find the student faculty ratio. Count the number of courses offered. Sort the courses between real learning (English, physics, history, math, etc) and talky talky courses (gender studies, sociology, anthropology, ethnic studies,art history, etc.). Remember that professors of talky-talk courses are apt to egg students on to doing political demos with non negotiable demands.
Visit the campus and talk to students and faculty. Get the students to talk about the faculty. If the students are contemptuous of the faculty, that's a bad sign. If the faculty are contemptuous of students, free market capitalism, American exceptionalism, and first amendment freedoms, that's a bad sign. Read the posters on the bulletin boards. Find some college blogs and read them when you get home.
You are looking for a place with a reasonable campus attitude, like we are all here to learn stuff, and we understand that as American college students we have it pretty good in life. You want to avoid a place full of grievances, racism, class envy, and spite. If everyone is mad at something or somebody, the place may blow up either while you are there, or after you graduate, reducing the value of your expensive degree.
Democratic TV Debate last night
It came on late, 9 PM. We are down to Hillary, Bernie, and O'Malley. Due to the Paris massacre, they opened up with foreign policy. All three tried to sound tough without talking about sending US forces to deal with ISIS. No one mentioned Obama's troop withdrawal from Iraq that turned the place over to ISIS. O'Malley wanted more and better intelligence. He failed to mention that intelligence does us little good without the will to act on it, to strike the enemy. All three were four square for doing something, but they all avoided promising real action. Everyone was in favor of having the locals, Turks, Sunnis, Saudis, Egyptians, anybody except Israel, get in the fight.
After the first commercial break, they changed the subject to free stuff, how much each candidate would furnish, how high they would set the federal minimum wage ($15 vs $12), and how a few harmless soak-the-rich taxes would pay for it all without raising the national debt. Right.
I went to bed before it was over. God help the United States if any one of those turkeys becomes president.
After the first commercial break, they changed the subject to free stuff, how much each candidate would furnish, how high they would set the federal minimum wage ($15 vs $12), and how a few harmless soak-the-rich taxes would pay for it all without raising the national debt. Right.
I went to bed before it was over. God help the United States if any one of those turkeys becomes president.
Saturday, November 14, 2015
Paris
First, my sincere sympathies for the victims of this unprovoked terrorism. To loose a loved one to terrorism is a greatest sadness I can think of.
The only thing for us to do, is get them before they get us. Obama is worthless for this, he lacks the stones to even call them Islamic extremists. Maybe the French can lead the way, they are a second rank industrialized power, with an army. They could whip a third world insurgency. If they wanted to, they could send a decent sized force to Syria to clean house.
The only thing for us to do, is get them before they get us. Obama is worthless for this, he lacks the stones to even call them Islamic extremists. Maybe the French can lead the way, they are a second rank industrialized power, with an army. They could whip a third world insurgency. If they wanted to, they could send a decent sized force to Syria to clean house.
Washing Windows 8
The Micro$ofties stuffed Windows 8 chock a block full of crapware, programs that suck up RAM and CPU time but don't actually do anything for you. Every so often I go out on a crapware hunt, and I always find something. Today I scored three kills. First off is a program "DasHost.exe". It is supposed to alert you to incoming email, sometimes. My email client, Thunderbird, has been successfully detecting incoming email for years with out it. After a net check, the consensus of opinion was "worthless", so I went after it. It's a service. Services are little (and some times not so little) programs that Windows runs behind your back. They all suck up precious RAM, and hog CPU time. They show up in Task Manager as processes and there is a special Windows program to manage them. Go to Control Panel. Pick Admin. Tools. Pick "Services". Find "Device Association Service. First STOP the Device Association Service. This shuts down the copy running in RAM at that moment. Then hit "properties" and change the startup type to "disabled". That preventsWindows from starting it up on the next boot.
While you are in there, find service "Themes" and give it the same treatment. Themes suppores the fancy Aeroglass look in the display. It sucks up a lot of CPU time and I don't like the look, I prefer the standard old Windows look.
My last kill today was "Power2Go Gadget". This is not a Micro$oft program, and several websites called it useless. It is NOT a service, so you cannot zap it thru the Services program, like Dashost and Themes. I found it with Task Manager, and the Windows 8 Task Manager can stop it, and prevent it from reloading (disable it). I'll double check tomorrow to see if it stays dead, but it's stopped now.
For doing all this, laptop feels livelier, it can keep up with my typing now.
Be careful messing with services. Back in XP, there were a couple of services, Remote Job Entry for one, that were essential to Windows. If you disabled Remote Job Entry in XP, Windows would never boot again. The only fix was to reinstall Windows from scratch, a tedious task, especially if you lacked the install CD-ROM discs. I suspect the Micro$ofties have planted similar booby traps in Win 8, but I don't know what they are. So don't disable anything unless you are sure, or have searched the internet and found an authoritative site like Black Viper to say that you can disable it without a disaster.
While you are in there, find service "Themes" and give it the same treatment. Themes suppores the fancy Aeroglass look in the display. It sucks up a lot of CPU time and I don't like the look, I prefer the standard old Windows look.
My last kill today was "Power2Go Gadget". This is not a Micro$oft program, and several websites called it useless. It is NOT a service, so you cannot zap it thru the Services program, like Dashost and Themes. I found it with Task Manager, and the Windows 8 Task Manager can stop it, and prevent it from reloading (disable it). I'll double check tomorrow to see if it stays dead, but it's stopped now.
For doing all this, laptop feels livelier, it can keep up with my typing now.
Be careful messing with services. Back in XP, there were a couple of services, Remote Job Entry for one, that were essential to Windows. If you disabled Remote Job Entry in XP, Windows would never boot again. The only fix was to reinstall Windows from scratch, a tedious task, especially if you lacked the install CD-ROM discs. I suspect the Micro$ofties have planted similar booby traps in Win 8, but I don't know what they are. So don't disable anything unless you are sure, or have searched the internet and found an authoritative site like Black Viper to say that you can disable it without a disaster.
Friday, November 13, 2015
Doing National Hari-Kari
World War II was a total disaster for Japan. They suffered enormous casualties, we sank their navy, we sank their merchant marine, we nuked their cities, and the ones we didn't nuke, we firebombed. Then we occupied the Home Islands, hauled Japanese leaders up in front of a War Crimes Trial, imposed a new constitution, and rewrote a lot of Japanese law to make it favorable to free market capitalism and democracy. We ran the place until the 1950's.
A worse outcome to a war is hard to imagine.
And the leadership that took Japan to war with the United States knew they would loose. And they did it anyhow. There was an independent staff study by top Japanese academics predicting total disaster. There was Admiral Yamamoto who had spent a lot of time in the US, spoke English well, and he said "For the first six months we shall run wild, but I have absolutely no confidence after that." There was Matsuota, the foreign minister who had grown up as a foster child in California. The Japanese knew that America had a huge population, a vast national territory, highly industrialized, blessed with abundant natural resources, and out weighed and outclassed Japan in every category. They knew war with the US would lead to defeat.
And, they should have known that they didn't need to go to war with the US. Japan's national goal in those days was to take over China. They had made a good start, and there was no reason to beleive that they could not finish the job. Japan was depending upon imports of iron and steel and crude oil from the Unitied States. And we did not approve of a Japanese takeover of China. We finally imposed an embargo (traditional American action) upon Japan.
This put a bind upon the Japanese. They all knew that they would run out of steel and oil in a matter of months. But, there was plenty of oil in Dutch Indonesia, not far away. Hitler had invaded and occupied Holland, which left the Dutch colonial regime in Indonesia kind of blowing in the wind. Japan could have obtained plenty of oil from Indonesia, either by trade or by force.
We, the Americans, would not have approved, but we had Nazi Germany to deal with. The entire American establishment, political, military, business, the papers, all agreed that proper US strategy was to do Germany first. Germany was bigger, stronger, more advanced, and closer than Japan. Plus the isolationists made life difficult for the Roosevelt administration to do anything internationally. The Japanese should have known that they could do pretty much anything they wanted on their side of the Pacific, and all the Americans would do about it is write diplomatic nasty grams.
But, the Japanese plowed ahead and attacked Pearl Harbor. They didn't have to do it, it led to a disastrous military defeat, they knew it would, but they did it anyhow.
A worse outcome to a war is hard to imagine.
And the leadership that took Japan to war with the United States knew they would loose. And they did it anyhow. There was an independent staff study by top Japanese academics predicting total disaster. There was Admiral Yamamoto who had spent a lot of time in the US, spoke English well, and he said "For the first six months we shall run wild, but I have absolutely no confidence after that." There was Matsuota, the foreign minister who had grown up as a foster child in California. The Japanese knew that America had a huge population, a vast national territory, highly industrialized, blessed with abundant natural resources, and out weighed and outclassed Japan in every category. They knew war with the US would lead to defeat.
And, they should have known that they didn't need to go to war with the US. Japan's national goal in those days was to take over China. They had made a good start, and there was no reason to beleive that they could not finish the job. Japan was depending upon imports of iron and steel and crude oil from the Unitied States. And we did not approve of a Japanese takeover of China. We finally imposed an embargo (traditional American action) upon Japan.
This put a bind upon the Japanese. They all knew that they would run out of steel and oil in a matter of months. But, there was plenty of oil in Dutch Indonesia, not far away. Hitler had invaded and occupied Holland, which left the Dutch colonial regime in Indonesia kind of blowing in the wind. Japan could have obtained plenty of oil from Indonesia, either by trade or by force.
We, the Americans, would not have approved, but we had Nazi Germany to deal with. The entire American establishment, political, military, business, the papers, all agreed that proper US strategy was to do Germany first. Germany was bigger, stronger, more advanced, and closer than Japan. Plus the isolationists made life difficult for the Roosevelt administration to do anything internationally. The Japanese should have known that they could do pretty much anything they wanted on their side of the Pacific, and all the Americans would do about it is write diplomatic nasty grams.
But, the Japanese plowed ahead and attacked Pearl Harbor. They didn't have to do it, it led to a disastrous military defeat, they knew it would, but they did it anyhow.
Hoot, the movie
A heart warming flick about three decent kids, who manage to do some good. Came out a long time ago, 2006, low budget ($16 million) didn't make the nut. Too bad.
Logan Lerman has the starring role. In 2006 he was only 13 years old. He plays the role well, at least as well as Daniel Radcliffe played Harry Potter at age 12. A couple of other child actors who I never heard of before play the other members his gang.
Enjoyable. More so than the average new flick today. Netflix has it.
Logan Lerman has the starring role. In 2006 he was only 13 years old. He plays the role well, at least as well as Daniel Radcliffe played Harry Potter at age 12. A couple of other child actors who I never heard of before play the other members his gang.
Enjoyable. More so than the average new flick today. Netflix has it.
Thursday, November 12, 2015
Long Range Strike Bomber (LRS-B) program halted.
The losers (Lockheed Martin and Boeing) filed a protest of the contract award to Northrup Grumman. GAO ordered a stop work for 100 days while they sort thru the paperwork. Take a 3 month schedule hit right there. GAO might, after the 100 day hangup, approve the contract award or order the contract rebid, which will take a year.
The losers objections are unclear, and mostly unpublished. What has come out is the Air Force looked at the bidder's re recurring engineering bids and using a lot of bad past experience doubled all the bids. Not a bad idea, contractors typically bid low to get a foot in the door, thinking that they will be able to get their profit margins back up when the Government orders changes, which it always does. But, what ought to happen when the contractor's underbid, is the government holds them to the original contract. Fifty years ago, Lockheed under bid on the C-5 job. USAF made them eat the difference between what Lockheed spent and what Lockheed bid.
Fifty years later, USAF lacks that kind of stones. And, the last big program USAF put out for bid, the KC-46 tanker job, was a disaster. Boeing protested the award to Airbus, got the contract rebid, and walked away with it. And Boeing is doing cost overruns and schedule slippages right now.
It's hard to tell from where I live want the real story is. Could be, GAO is allowing a frivolous protest to slow the program down. Could be USAF did another KC-46 style bungle. Could be Pentagon procurement regulations are so screwed up that nothing works. Any way, the program is delayed by the bureaucrats, and delays always raise the cost to the taxpayer.
The losers objections are unclear, and mostly unpublished. What has come out is the Air Force looked at the bidder's re recurring engineering bids and using a lot of bad past experience doubled all the bids. Not a bad idea, contractors typically bid low to get a foot in the door, thinking that they will be able to get their profit margins back up when the Government orders changes, which it always does. But, what ought to happen when the contractor's underbid, is the government holds them to the original contract. Fifty years ago, Lockheed under bid on the C-5 job. USAF made them eat the difference between what Lockheed spent and what Lockheed bid.
Fifty years later, USAF lacks that kind of stones. And, the last big program USAF put out for bid, the KC-46 tanker job, was a disaster. Boeing protested the award to Airbus, got the contract rebid, and walked away with it. And Boeing is doing cost overruns and schedule slippages right now.
It's hard to tell from where I live want the real story is. Could be, GAO is allowing a frivolous protest to slow the program down. Could be USAF did another KC-46 style bungle. Could be Pentagon procurement regulations are so screwed up that nothing works. Any way, the program is delayed by the bureaucrats, and delays always raise the cost to the taxpayer.
20 Best Handguns
Washington Times internet posting here. They show nice big pictures of 20 different handguns, nineteen of 'em automatic pistols, and one snub nosed revolver chambered for a ridiculous load. The automatics are a mix of full sized service pistols and tiny belly guns. Most of 'em were just under $500, which is significant money for most of us.
First time buyers should be aware that it is extremely difficult to hit anything with a pistol. If you can find a pistol that fits your hand properly, you can vastly improve your chances of hitting the bad guy. A story. Back in USAF they issued us .38 revolvers for target practice and qualification. The issue revolvers were in miserable shape. All the checkering was worn off the wooden grips, the grips had been marinated in gun oil for 20 years and they were slippery. Each shot made the grip twist in the hand, throwing your aim off for the next shot. The grips were too small to get all your fingers around, my pinkie finger either waved free in air, or slipped underneath the butt and damn near dislocated with each shot. My target shooting was miserable with the issue .38
Later, on a sandpit shooting afternoon, a friend let me shoot his commercial .38 revolver. It had nice big wood grips, good sharp checkering, nice and dry, good smooth trigger, shot like a dream.
Before you shell out $500 for a handgun, you want to shoot the thing, say twenty rounds, and see if it agrees with you. Then think about revolvers. A home defense gun might spend 20 years in a night table drawer, loaded, unloved, unlubricated, but that one time something bad happens, you want it to work. A double action (pulling the trigger cocks the hammer) revolver is good for this. You just pull the trigger and the gun goes bang. No safeties, no slide to work, no magazine releases to avoid. And it stores loaded, and un cocked, all the springs uncompressed. In automatics, the magazine spring is fully compressed when the magazine is loaded and the hammer or striker is cocked. Over the years, compressed springs can weaken, or even break.
Pistols come in various sizes, too damn big (Dirty Harry's .44), service pistol (cop's holster gun) and pocket pistols. Service pistols shoot best, they have enough weight to soak up the recoil of a decent load, a long enough sight radius to be easy to aim, big enough grips. Unless you are planning to carry the gun in your pocket, there is no reason to mess around with pocket pistols. They are harder to shoot, harder to get a hit with, and are often chambered for wimpy little loads that won't stop a bad guy, but just make him mad.
You want a handgun chambered for a standard, widely available load. These are .38 Special, 9 mm Luger, and .45 ACP. There are a lot of other loads out there. Any thing less than .38 special isn't big enough, anything more than .45 ACP is too damn big. The lighter the gun, the harder it will kick, which throws your accuracy off. The shorter the barrel, the fiercer the report. For example, the classic 1911 .45 government model automatic pistol weighs 39 ounces, has a 5 inch barrel, and handles the big .45 ACP load reasonably well. I have seen ads for little pocket pistols weighing only 14 ounces, with 3 inch barrels chambered for .45. I would not care to shoot one, too much kick, too loud a report.
First time buyers should be aware that it is extremely difficult to hit anything with a pistol. If you can find a pistol that fits your hand properly, you can vastly improve your chances of hitting the bad guy. A story. Back in USAF they issued us .38 revolvers for target practice and qualification. The issue revolvers were in miserable shape. All the checkering was worn off the wooden grips, the grips had been marinated in gun oil for 20 years and they were slippery. Each shot made the grip twist in the hand, throwing your aim off for the next shot. The grips were too small to get all your fingers around, my pinkie finger either waved free in air, or slipped underneath the butt and damn near dislocated with each shot. My target shooting was miserable with the issue .38
Later, on a sandpit shooting afternoon, a friend let me shoot his commercial .38 revolver. It had nice big wood grips, good sharp checkering, nice and dry, good smooth trigger, shot like a dream.
Before you shell out $500 for a handgun, you want to shoot the thing, say twenty rounds, and see if it agrees with you. Then think about revolvers. A home defense gun might spend 20 years in a night table drawer, loaded, unloved, unlubricated, but that one time something bad happens, you want it to work. A double action (pulling the trigger cocks the hammer) revolver is good for this. You just pull the trigger and the gun goes bang. No safeties, no slide to work, no magazine releases to avoid. And it stores loaded, and un cocked, all the springs uncompressed. In automatics, the magazine spring is fully compressed when the magazine is loaded and the hammer or striker is cocked. Over the years, compressed springs can weaken, or even break.
Pistols come in various sizes, too damn big (Dirty Harry's .44), service pistol (cop's holster gun) and pocket pistols. Service pistols shoot best, they have enough weight to soak up the recoil of a decent load, a long enough sight radius to be easy to aim, big enough grips. Unless you are planning to carry the gun in your pocket, there is no reason to mess around with pocket pistols. They are harder to shoot, harder to get a hit with, and are often chambered for wimpy little loads that won't stop a bad guy, but just make him mad.
You want a handgun chambered for a standard, widely available load. These are .38 Special, 9 mm Luger, and .45 ACP. There are a lot of other loads out there. Any thing less than .38 special isn't big enough, anything more than .45 ACP is too damn big. The lighter the gun, the harder it will kick, which throws your accuracy off. The shorter the barrel, the fiercer the report. For example, the classic 1911 .45 government model automatic pistol weighs 39 ounces, has a 5 inch barrel, and handles the big .45 ACP load reasonably well. I have seen ads for little pocket pistols weighing only 14 ounces, with 3 inch barrels chambered for .45. I would not care to shoot one, too much kick, too loud a report.
Wednesday, November 11, 2015
Debate Watch Party
We had another one. Not bad. Chris Christy came on strong on the junior debate. Fox and WSJ did a highly professional job with the questions and with the moderation, far far superior to those CNBC clowns last month. In the main event, everybody looked pretty good. I didn't see a clear cut winner, everyone looked pretty good. No body choked up.
Tuesday, November 10, 2015
Headlights, auto turn off
Used to be, headlights were on a switch on the dash. They came on when you pulled a knob out, and went off when you pushed the knob in.
Simple days, long gone. Now the car's microprocessor leaves the headlights on to give you some light to get to the door and find the front door key.
Except, the microprocessor doesn't get it right. Either the headlights go off too soon, leaving you fumbling in the dark, or they stay on too long, leaving you standing out in the rain, watching to make sure the microprocessor does finally turn the headlights off, to avoid running down the battery. Most of us have experienced a car with a flat battery after someone failed to turn ALL the lights off. And we don't trust microprocessors to get it right.
Mostly the microprocessors start timing the head light turnoff time from when the ignition is turned off. Bad idea. Better results would be had by starting the turnoff timer when the driver's door opens and closes. The driver may have some packages on the passenger's seat he needs to bring into the house. Which requires some fumbling around in the dark. For that matter, the microprocessor should check for other door openings and closings. The driver may have some groceries in the back seat, and the headlamp timeout should start when the last door is closed.
It will take Detroit about 50 years to get this right.
Simple days, long gone. Now the car's microprocessor leaves the headlights on to give you some light to get to the door and find the front door key.
Except, the microprocessor doesn't get it right. Either the headlights go off too soon, leaving you fumbling in the dark, or they stay on too long, leaving you standing out in the rain, watching to make sure the microprocessor does finally turn the headlights off, to avoid running down the battery. Most of us have experienced a car with a flat battery after someone failed to turn ALL the lights off. And we don't trust microprocessors to get it right.
Mostly the microprocessors start timing the head light turnoff time from when the ignition is turned off. Bad idea. Better results would be had by starting the turnoff timer when the driver's door opens and closes. The driver may have some packages on the passenger's seat he needs to bring into the house. Which requires some fumbling around in the dark. For that matter, the microprocessor should check for other door openings and closings. The driver may have some groceries in the back seat, and the headlamp timeout should start when the last door is closed.
It will take Detroit about 50 years to get this right.
Specter, the movie
It's a Bond movie. I'd rate it medium good against all the other Bond movies. We don't watch Bond movies to see character development, true love, political points made, conventional tragedy, or Shakespearean eloquence. We go to Bond movies for the action, the pretty Bond-girl, the evil Bond-villain, Q's lethal gadgets, the car chases, the fighting, and the shooting. In this vein, Spectre delivers.
Daniel Craig delivers a satisfying Bond. He plays a taciturn, driven Bond, with some scores to settle, and some lost loves to mourn. He has an icy stare. And a good right hook. He needs a better tailor, his suits don't fit him very well. Bond has no sense of humor, never cracks a joke or uses a pun. This is one serious and scary dud
Lea Seydoux makes a decent Bond girl. She is plenty good looking enough, and has some of her own issues. We see her standing up to 007 and making it work for her and for Bond.
The movie suffers from some poor technical work. The soundman doesn't capture all the dialog. It could be worse, but a fair number of bits of dialog were unintelligible. It was not a full fledged curse of the soundman, but more like just bad wishes from the soundman. And the camera man was into under exposure. A lot of scenes were just annoyingly DARK, the only thing you could see was the actor's face, and sometimes not even that. I'd find myself saying, "Open up your damn lens" to the screen. When the camera man did set the exposure properly, he would introduce a misty soft focus effect similar to filling the set with smoke. Also annoying. At least we didn't have to put up with 3-D goggles.
The car chase didn't seem very real, not real the way Steve McQueen's Mustang blasting thru San Francisco did in Bullitt.. The cars sort of floated and pulled off some unbelievably sharp turns into alleys at speed, to the point where I figured I was watching CGI.
A lot of plot holes. For openers, Bond manages to get from London to Rome, with his car (Q's hottest newest Aston Martin) in one quick cut-to-black. You'd think at least a shot of driving the Aston onto a Channel car ferry would be in order. Bond manages to collapse an entire 6 story masonry building with a few rifle shots. There is a lot of travel, but it is never clear where they are going to, coming from or traveling thru. The Bond-villain goes from fairly handsome, to horribly scarred and I never knew how. There is some high level skullduggery between the new M, and a snivel service weasel dubbed C which is unclear. Bond confronts the father of the Bond-girl with a lot of snarling back and forth which was unclear to me, and the resolution of the face-off is brutal and weird and unexplained. Ah well, it's a Bond movie and it don't have to make sense.
Anyhow, if you like Bond movies, this one is pretty good. The critics panned it, but the critics don't like Bond movies, they like Shakespeare, which Bond movies are not.
Daniel Craig delivers a satisfying Bond. He plays a taciturn, driven Bond, with some scores to settle, and some lost loves to mourn. He has an icy stare. And a good right hook. He needs a better tailor, his suits don't fit him very well. Bond has no sense of humor, never cracks a joke or uses a pun. This is one serious and scary dud
Lea Seydoux makes a decent Bond girl. She is plenty good looking enough, and has some of her own issues. We see her standing up to 007 and making it work for her and for Bond.
The movie suffers from some poor technical work. The soundman doesn't capture all the dialog. It could be worse, but a fair number of bits of dialog were unintelligible. It was not a full fledged curse of the soundman, but more like just bad wishes from the soundman. And the camera man was into under exposure. A lot of scenes were just annoyingly DARK, the only thing you could see was the actor's face, and sometimes not even that. I'd find myself saying, "Open up your damn lens" to the screen. When the camera man did set the exposure properly, he would introduce a misty soft focus effect similar to filling the set with smoke. Also annoying. At least we didn't have to put up with 3-D goggles.
The car chase didn't seem very real, not real the way Steve McQueen's Mustang blasting thru San Francisco did in Bullitt.. The cars sort of floated and pulled off some unbelievably sharp turns into alleys at speed, to the point where I figured I was watching CGI.
A lot of plot holes. For openers, Bond manages to get from London to Rome, with his car (Q's hottest newest Aston Martin) in one quick cut-to-black. You'd think at least a shot of driving the Aston onto a Channel car ferry would be in order. Bond manages to collapse an entire 6 story masonry building with a few rifle shots. There is a lot of travel, but it is never clear where they are going to, coming from or traveling thru. The Bond-villain goes from fairly handsome, to horribly scarred and I never knew how. There is some high level skullduggery between the new M, and a snivel service weasel dubbed C which is unclear. Bond confronts the father of the Bond-girl with a lot of snarling back and forth which was unclear to me, and the resolution of the face-off is brutal and weird and unexplained. Ah well, it's a Bond movie and it don't have to make sense.
Anyhow, if you like Bond movies, this one is pretty good. The critics panned it, but the critics don't like Bond movies, they like Shakespeare, which Bond movies are not.
Monday, November 9, 2015
Gitmo
Obama has been trying to close the place since he was elected. Seems to be very firm on it. Has not had much luck. The thugs still in Gitmo are really bad people who will go back to waging guerrilla war on the middle east if we turn 'em loose.
These guys are in Gitmo for waging war on the US. They were captured on foriegn battlefields. They aren't regular criminals, in stir for murder, rape, arson, and drug dealing. They are in stir for fighting against the US armed forces. Under the laws of war, we are entitled to hold them prisoners until the war is over. Which isn't gonna happen anytime soon. It's more humane than what used to happen in the bad old days.
The intense opposition to closing Gitmo and moving the prisoners to stateside lockups comes from the public distrust of US judges. The public fears judges will turn these guys loose inside the country because they have not been accused, let alone convicted of a crime in court. The normal civilian law of the United States, based on the 13th amendment, requires conviction of a crime in order to hold people in jail. These guys haven't committed crimes in the ordinary civilian sense of the word. They are Islamist fighters, who will burn, bomb, and kill if let out. It's preventative detention, but US law doesn't allow preventative detention.
And US judges, cut from fairly stupid cloth, might well turn them loose.
These guys are in Gitmo for waging war on the US. They were captured on foriegn battlefields. They aren't regular criminals, in stir for murder, rape, arson, and drug dealing. They are in stir for fighting against the US armed forces. Under the laws of war, we are entitled to hold them prisoners until the war is over. Which isn't gonna happen anytime soon. It's more humane than what used to happen in the bad old days.
The intense opposition to closing Gitmo and moving the prisoners to stateside lockups comes from the public distrust of US judges. The public fears judges will turn these guys loose inside the country because they have not been accused, let alone convicted of a crime in court. The normal civilian law of the United States, based on the 13th amendment, requires conviction of a crime in order to hold people in jail. These guys haven't committed crimes in the ordinary civilian sense of the word. They are Islamist fighters, who will burn, bomb, and kill if let out. It's preventative detention, but US law doesn't allow preventative detention.
And US judges, cut from fairly stupid cloth, might well turn them loose.
Sunday, November 8, 2015
Syria
Syria a smallish wartorn middle east country just to the north of Israel. Has been run by the Assad family and the Alawite sect for decades, maybe more. Dunno just how the Alawites differ from Sunni or Shia, but its enough to matter somehow. Could be the Sunni and or the Shia detest the Alawites. Could be the Sunni would rather have the Alawites running things than the Shia. Or vice versa. I don't know, and our clueless newsies have no idea either.
The current Assad running Syria, a certain Bashar, fairly recent heir to the throne, has not been doing well. He has angered a sizable portion of his population to the point of armed rebellion against his regime. ISIS has set up shop and controls a big slice of Syria. Other "moderate" non-ISIS but anti Assad rebel groups are active, but probably not as active as ISIS. By now, Assad's control of the country is shaky, ISIS is as strong (or stronger) than he is. The Russians have decided to back Assad, probably in return for basing rights in Syria. Assad needs all the support he can get.
US policy, such as it is, favors dumping Bashar Assad. Not a a bad idea, but for it to work, we have to have someone to replace him with. We need a name, and we don't have one. ISIS has a name, Allah. The "moderate" rebels must have some leaders, but who ever they are, they haven't made it onto US TV news. Until we find a Syrian leader with some name recognition, at least inside Syria, and some popularity, our anti Assad, anti ISIS operations are going exactly nowhere.
We should be talking to the Israeli's about Syria. They have agents in Syria, who actually speak the language, and a much better idea of who is who, and which end is up, than CIA ever will. To bad Obama has been dissing Netanyahu. The Israelis are less likely to level with Obama than with someone who has supported Israel over the years.
The current Assad running Syria, a certain Bashar, fairly recent heir to the throne, has not been doing well. He has angered a sizable portion of his population to the point of armed rebellion against his regime. ISIS has set up shop and controls a big slice of Syria. Other "moderate" non-ISIS but anti Assad rebel groups are active, but probably not as active as ISIS. By now, Assad's control of the country is shaky, ISIS is as strong (or stronger) than he is. The Russians have decided to back Assad, probably in return for basing rights in Syria. Assad needs all the support he can get.
US policy, such as it is, favors dumping Bashar Assad. Not a a bad idea, but for it to work, we have to have someone to replace him with. We need a name, and we don't have one. ISIS has a name, Allah. The "moderate" rebels must have some leaders, but who ever they are, they haven't made it onto US TV news. Until we find a Syrian leader with some name recognition, at least inside Syria, and some popularity, our anti Assad, anti ISIS operations are going exactly nowhere.
We should be talking to the Israeli's about Syria. They have agents in Syria, who actually speak the language, and a much better idea of who is who, and which end is up, than CIA ever will. To bad Obama has been dissing Netanyahu. The Israelis are less likely to level with Obama than with someone who has supported Israel over the years.
Saturday, November 7, 2015
Flak for Ben Carson
The MSM, democrats to a man, are shooting at Ben Carson. They been getting plenty of coverage on TV. They have been checking out Carson's autobiography, published years and years ago, and claiming that Carson claims things that they cannot verify, or uses more enthusiast language than they can approve of. This morning's Wall St Journal did not defend Carson much, but they did pooh pooh some of the nastier slams on Carson.
As far as the West Point scholarship thing goes, Carson, was top ROTC cadet, black, with excellent grades. I'm sure someone said "Son, you ought to go to West Point, you are a natural, put your name in and they will accept you". Was I Carson, writing my autobiography fifty years later, I could easily write that I was offered a scholarship to West Point, even if I never put in my paperwork to attend. I'm not going to get excited about this smear from the likes of the MSM. Especially as I like Carson.
Carson does understand that dirt sticks. He has been on TV, calling his harassers to be liars. That's good. Mud sticks, if he doesn't call the MSM on this, we voters will begin to think that maybe there is something to the stories. Romney didn't understand this, and it lost him the presidency.
As far as the West Point scholarship thing goes, Carson, was top ROTC cadet, black, with excellent grades. I'm sure someone said "Son, you ought to go to West Point, you are a natural, put your name in and they will accept you". Was I Carson, writing my autobiography fifty years later, I could easily write that I was offered a scholarship to West Point, even if I never put in my paperwork to attend. I'm not going to get excited about this smear from the likes of the MSM. Especially as I like Carson.
Carson does understand that dirt sticks. He has been on TV, calling his harassers to be liars. That's good. Mud sticks, if he doesn't call the MSM on this, we voters will begin to think that maybe there is something to the stories. Romney didn't understand this, and it lost him the presidency.
Too Damn Long. Vote it down
Trans Pacific Trade that is. It is 2 million words, 2000 pages, and that's too much. It would take months to figure out what it will do. Passing it just gives to bureaucrats the power to do any thing they want. In that much verbiage a bureaucrat can always find a paragraph to justify what ever he is doing or wants to do. Passing another super-obfusticator bill is Congress abdicating to the bureaucracy.
Congress ought to have a policy, never pass any bill, treaty, whatever that is longer than the US constitution.
Congress ought to have a policy, never pass any bill, treaty, whatever that is longer than the US constitution.
Friday, November 6, 2015
Drug Overdoses
It's getting bad. This year death's from drug overdoses exceed deaths from car accidents. Car accidents have been running around 50,000 deaths a year, for a long time. By way of comparison, total deaths from the entire Viet Nam war are only 50,000. Ten years of war in the jungle didn't kill as many as car accidents killed in a single year. And now deaths from drug overdoses have risen to the same appalling level.
The MSM don't talk about why the increase in drug deaths. Could it be, Obama's Great Depression 2.0 threw a lot of men out of work? And the depression and poverty caused by unemployment drives a lot of guys to drugs and suicide? You don't hear the MSM talking about that. Doesn't fit The Narrative.
You do hear a lot of talk in the MSM about setting up "drug courts". Dunno about that. Seems like we need drug treatment programs more than courts. We got plenty of plain old courts. Most judges are intelligent enough to sentence first offenders, even if they been doing a little dealing to feed their habit, to drug rehab rather than jail. Everybody knows that jail is bad for people. First offenders come out of jail in worse shape than they went in.
The MSM don't talk about why the increase in drug deaths. Could it be, Obama's Great Depression 2.0 threw a lot of men out of work? And the depression and poverty caused by unemployment drives a lot of guys to drugs and suicide? You don't hear the MSM talking about that. Doesn't fit The Narrative.
You do hear a lot of talk in the MSM about setting up "drug courts". Dunno about that. Seems like we need drug treatment programs more than courts. We got plenty of plain old courts. Most judges are intelligent enough to sentence first offenders, even if they been doing a little dealing to feed their habit, to drug rehab rather than jail. Everybody knows that jail is bad for people. First offenders come out of jail in worse shape than they went in.
No bailouts, Let 'em sink. Nobody too big to fail
Dear old Uncle Sam has gotten into the habit of bailing out big companies that get into trouble. GM, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and AIG are the most flagrant examples. The usual excuse is that allowing a big boy to go belly up will scare the market, causing a lot of other big boys to croak. Causing a lot of money to be lost.
And, we passed a law, Dodd-Frank, which makes bailouts policy. Dodd-Frank sets up which companies will get bailouts, how much.
The real problem with bailouts, is they urge on crazy behavior. In no-bailout world, company management is pretty careful about the risks it runs. If they do something really risky, and it fails, the company is toast, they and everyone in the company are out of work, the investors loose everything. All around badness.
But when Uncle Sam says he will bailout companies, all bets are off. Now management can do all those crazy things, and if they fail, the company survives, they keep their jobs, and the investors are untouched (mostly). No pain. And without pain, nobody learns anything. No pain, no gain.
We ought to repeal Dodd-Frank. We ought to make it real clear world wide that we don't bail out nobody, and we need to carry thru, and actually flush some loser down the drain, just to make the point.
To run a capitalist society, which has made us all rich, you need capital. We cannot afford to flush capital down the drain doing mortgage backed securities, credit default swaps, futures trading, derivatives trading, and all those other risky gambling games they run on Wall St.
And, we passed a law, Dodd-Frank, which makes bailouts policy. Dodd-Frank sets up which companies will get bailouts, how much.
The real problem with bailouts, is they urge on crazy behavior. In no-bailout world, company management is pretty careful about the risks it runs. If they do something really risky, and it fails, the company is toast, they and everyone in the company are out of work, the investors loose everything. All around badness.
But when Uncle Sam says he will bailout companies, all bets are off. Now management can do all those crazy things, and if they fail, the company survives, they keep their jobs, and the investors are untouched (mostly). No pain. And without pain, nobody learns anything. No pain, no gain.
We ought to repeal Dodd-Frank. We ought to make it real clear world wide that we don't bail out nobody, and we need to carry thru, and actually flush some loser down the drain, just to make the point.
To run a capitalist society, which has made us all rich, you need capital. We cannot afford to flush capital down the drain doing mortgage backed securities, credit default swaps, futures trading, derivatives trading, and all those other risky gambling games they run on Wall St.
Thursday, November 5, 2015
New Canadian government drops F-35
The new government in Canada, with whats-his-name Trudeau has fulfilled a campaign promise to drop out of the F-35 program. Canada was going to buy 65 fighters at something like $80-90 million a piece. That's going away. The F-35 program people are smiling and saying the program is still on track. Right. And every air framer in the world is hustling salesman to Toronto peddling fighters.
More on Long Range Strike Bomber LRS-B
According to Aviation Week, it is going to be another flying wing, like the B2, only about half the size of the B2 to get the costs down. They say the rather short range (2500 miles) comes from the "Tank on the way in, Tank on the way out" tactic. Tankers to stay 500 miles off the enemy coast to be safe from SAMs and fighters. Aviation Week has a map showing the LRS-B being able to reach everywhere inside China. And they think Northrup Grumman got the job 'cause of their B2 experience, and that Lockheed Martin has the F35 contract, and Boeing has the KC-46 contract.
Cis
As in cis-gendered. New one on me. First ran across the term/prefix while web surfing. Finally looked it up and apparently it means "not trans" as in "not trans gendered" The trans gender activists felt the need for a word to apply to everyone who is not in their group, i.e. regular people. If you are doing a culture war, it helps to have a word for the enemy.
In the real world then cis-gendered means girls who think they are girls and want to grow up to be women, and boys who think they are boys and want to grow up to be men. In short, kids who lack psychological hangups about their sexuality.
Why does the invention of this new trendy word bother me?
In the real world then cis-gendered means girls who think they are girls and want to grow up to be women, and boys who think they are boys and want to grow up to be men. In short, kids who lack psychological hangups about their sexuality.
Why does the invention of this new trendy word bother me?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)