Hi Cal,
I am fine with you deleting my posts, we do not want to upset Iran now do we 🙂
I'd do it myself if I could.
You're the instigator 🙂 just kidding, I understand this is not a political forum to vent.
I see you have more important things to do like shovel snow.
Rick
I am fine with you deleting my posts, we do not want to upset Iran now do we 🙂
I'd do it myself if I could.
You're the instigator 🙂 just kidding, I understand this is not a political forum to vent.
I see you have more important things to do like shovel snow.
Rick
Them's your bean counters & management overriding quality standards, probably in order to meet delivery dates, not incur financial penalties, meet your monthly/quarterly bookings, keep the stock holders happy, been there done that.
Oops quality is religion imo, Cal are you going to delete this too 🙂
Oops quality is religion imo, Cal are you going to delete this too 🙂
maybe should update this to saying bombings and death too. 🙂
Last edited:
- no, low-range systems use visual chanel for pointing a rocket too. A lot of them (I'm talking about Soviet Union ones), for example SA-8 Gecko.
Last edited:
Dennis Muilenberg will forfeit $14 million in stock awards but still get nearly $60 million in termination payouts and stock cash outs.
So, a guy who slashes costs, slashes standards and safety (because that all costs money) so he can pump up the stock price and cash in causes the deaths of 370 people and he still gets to retire to some paradise island.
So, a guy who slashes costs, slashes standards and safety (because that all costs money) so he can pump up the stock price and cash in causes the deaths of 370 people and he still gets to retire to some paradise island.
Sorry to say Bonsai, it is the "The American Way"
Crime pays sad to say.... one more to delete.
Crime pays sad to say.... one more to delete.
SA-8 has several radars, for target acquisition, target tracking and missile uplink.
Some versions also have SSR (IFF Identification Friend-Foe). There are no versions with visual or IR acquisition.
Jan
Last edited:
I would suggest not trying to argue about air defense systems with Jan. He probably knows more then the rest of the board combined. 
Indeed, which contributed to the weirdness of it all. I remember thinking no-one needs to see us to shoot us down but didn't tell Mrs Stuey this at the time!
To add to the atmosphere, we then flew through a thunderstorm which lit up the cabin like a horror movie.
To add to the atmosphere, we then flew through a thunderstorm which lit up the cabin like a horror movie.
Last edited:
"Forkner has left Boeing and has retained an independent lawyer."
If the press find out where he lives...
Note we don't know how much he knew at the time, so what seems damning when stuck in a news article might not be so in reality.
If the press find out where he lives...
Note we don't know how much he knew at the time, so what seems damning when stuck in a news article might not be so in reality.
VW. Boeing. Australia on fire. In a safety obsessed word careless science seems to have taken over. 99% of the time science is our saviour. When it fails we notice. I did my own bit of science. Australia is not a massive carbon emitter. It's poor people are made to think it caused the problem. They didn't. Sure they export coal so might be a little worse than my snap shot. None the less it's bad science. I don't deny climate change. I just say it started a long time ago. My oppion is all the current oppions are wrong and unhelpful. Like an avalanche it's too late. The reason I say this is we get these problems because science like religion was takes sides. So very sad. Do you know I don't blame VW.because it must have seemed worth the risk. I know nothing of the 737 so leave that to others.
Off topic rant
You can't pump 2.5 trillion tons of C02 - a potent GHG - into the atmosphere in 150 years and not expect there to be repercussions. People laugh when scientists say the global temperature average has gone up by 1.1 C. Stop and think about how much energy it takes to warm a planet by an average of 1.1 C. A more useful visualization is to recognize that the average power per square meter that is trapped by the GH effect and not re-radiated back out to space has gone up by 1W in 150 years i.e. it sounds like nothing given the average power is c. 1.3 kW per square metre. But that's 1 million watts per square kilometre day in and day out - 24 million watt hours per day per square kilometre. All driven by a 40% increase in atmospheric CO2.
I agree, even if the Australians became a zero carbon emissions economy tomorrow it would change nothing for them. Australia was recognized years ago as 'ground zero' for AGW - fragile desert continent not really designed for humans, farming etc etc. As I said a few weeks back, until the big 4 (C, I, A and E) slash their carbon emissions we will continue to suffer the effects of AGW.
Close of off topic rant
You can't pump 2.5 trillion tons of C02 - a potent GHG - into the atmosphere in 150 years and not expect there to be repercussions. People laugh when scientists say the global temperature average has gone up by 1.1 C. Stop and think about how much energy it takes to warm a planet by an average of 1.1 C. A more useful visualization is to recognize that the average power per square meter that is trapped by the GH effect and not re-radiated back out to space has gone up by 1W in 150 years i.e. it sounds like nothing given the average power is c. 1.3 kW per square metre. But that's 1 million watts per square kilometre day in and day out - 24 million watt hours per day per square kilometre. All driven by a 40% increase in atmospheric CO2.
I agree, even if the Australians became a zero carbon emissions economy tomorrow it would change nothing for them. Australia was recognized years ago as 'ground zero' for AGW - fragile desert continent not really designed for humans, farming etc etc. As I said a few weeks back, until the big 4 (C, I, A and E) slash their carbon emissions we will continue to suffer the effects of AGW.
Close of off topic rant
Pls do not be shy, spell them for a simplton, like myself, so there is know doubt who you are referring too.
(China, India, USA and Europe)? correct me if I am wrong.
Bit concerned that you maybe lumping Canada in with the USA, for which, at least I, would take offense too.
(China, India, USA and Europe)? correct me if I am wrong.
Bit concerned that you maybe lumping Canada in with the USA, for which, at least I, would take offense too.
All these things are related. I think when I hear MPs talk about electric aircraft I really wonder. Thunderbirds had Fireflash as atomic. I laughed until I realised the USSR killed test pilots testing it. Or was I suckered in by misinformation?
??? Canada is one of the worst per capita offenders for green house gass emissions. Its cold here and we are very spread out. Heating and shipping/transportation fuel costs are some of the highest in the world. All the pick up trucks and SUVs dont help.
Canada is slightly worse than Australia. Well it would be as it gets cold. Vietnam isn't great. I didn't look at the UK. My guess is average. China seems bad until one realises about right for it's population. The elephant in the room with climate change is it is related to population When I told my son this he thought I meant eugenics. I most certainly didn't.
What's the point of all this? The 737 series has met the challenges of greater efficiency whilst being efficient in using much of the series before. So sad that someone somewhere messed up.
My view is we clean up ships. Pay countries money they can't ignore to maintain forests and jungles. Clean our city's air irrespective of climate change, although I doubt it will change much it's worthy. Accept aircraft are what they are. Pay third world pensions so as to halt population growth. Italy has a shrinking birth rate. That provides it's possible. The energy of kerosene per unit mass is hard to beat and given a free world air travel will grow, we have to sort this out. I would give everyone on the planet 10000 air miles a year tax free. After that you pay.My boss would use that up quickly. I think sometimes people get on an aircraft as an alternative to the telephone.
What's the point of all this? The 737 series has met the challenges of greater efficiency whilst being efficient in using much of the series before. So sad that someone somewhere messed up.
My view is we clean up ships. Pay countries money they can't ignore to maintain forests and jungles. Clean our city's air irrespective of climate change, although I doubt it will change much it's worthy. Accept aircraft are what they are. Pay third world pensions so as to halt population growth. Italy has a shrinking birth rate. That provides it's possible. The energy of kerosene per unit mass is hard to beat and given a free world air travel will grow, we have to sort this out. I would give everyone on the planet 10000 air miles a year tax free. After that you pay.My boss would use that up quickly. I think sometimes people get on an aircraft as an alternative to the telephone.
One thing the Port of Vancouver is doing is to allow cruise ships to plug in while at dock instead of running their generators. I remember being surprised by the stated emissions reduction while in port.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.