Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Helicopters (Score 1) 133

Well, having been in an (German) Army Helicopter unit the "tight interaction" between ground troops and flying units requires stuff that fixed-wing aircrafts are not really good at. They can't stand still in the air, the cant land vertically in tight spaces (without burning people with jet exhaust like a VTOL jet would) , etc...

Basically anything fast/long-range/big is usually handled by the air force planes (or helicopters), while slow/agile/close coordination with ground troops is handled by the army air corps. Usually with helicopters, although some planes are used by armies, like the Britten-Norman Defender by the British army.

Very true, and try getting the Air Force to support a JAAT (speaking late coldwar here) without 30 days notice or some BS. If you needed close air support, the Navy and the Marines needed to be nearby.

Comment Re:Helicopters (Score 5, Informative) 133

I heard that the army uses helicopters not because they want to but because they have to (Air Force having jurisdiction over planes existing since late 40s as a seperate branch) and that in many missions they use helicopters planes would actually be superior.

Is this true?

The Key West Agreement that formed the Air Force had a stipulation that the Army would not have any armed aircraft. Lather that was re-interpreted as no armed FIXED-WING aircraft.

Side note on the Cheyenne, the helicopter that was to be the scout helicopter for the Cheyenne attack aircraft evolved into the AH-1 Cobra. IIRC, the original scout helicopter for the Cobra was the OH-6, later replaced by the OH-58.

Comment Cheering (Score 1) 13

And not the Bronx kind either. Prediction: Establishment R's will pretend to be Tea Party friendly again while ramping up big party support for the likes of Alexander (TN) and others. Wow, it is almost as if this happened before.

Comment Re:Non News (Score 1) 78

Yes, if only government had been more involved in that debacle, it would clearly have been much better.

Indeed, if only they had. Such as by preventing dumping waste in an inappropriate fashion for decades. But instead they were just doing what they were told, rather than thoroughly investigating the situation.

That would be the local government that had a map of all of the waste, that was stored in a manner well above existing standards, in the same area that the US Army and other government agencies were using substandard procedures and questionable accounting/maps, right? Also, the same local government that caused the first breech of the material by digging through the area to build a drainage system fo a new road.

Comment Re:Shades of the Massachusetts' State Fire Marshal (Score 3, Informative) 78

the Massachusetts' State Fire Marshall, an early form of busybody bureaucrat, forced Goddard to move and this is merely a continuance of that grand governmet tradition.

Correction: my bad. The fire marshall only forced Goddard to move onto a military base, before he moved a few years later to New Mexico.

Comment Re:$2 million is nothing (Score 1) 3

Anyhow, you miss the point. Obviously anybody determined to make nutritious meals can do so. We don't live in Somalia. But like _anything_ the question is what the barriers (costs) to making good choices are. If you have the choice to either schedule and hop a bus to go several miles to a grocery store, or just walk across the street to the liquor store for a bag of potato chips, _most_ people (black, white, rich or poor) will choose the chips, unless they have very strong , healthy habits (unlikely if you grew up in the neighborhood).

Did you miss the point that we have TWO government funded services that will pick you up at your door and take you to any supermarket that you like? Nobody here has to rely on the several bus hops (you should really credit Mrs. Obama when you quote her like that too). Maybe you missed the point because I used too many words and was pissed off as I wrote.

The map is worthless, it does not tell you anything worthwhile.

On another level of point missing, it is the USDA and Mrs. Obama who are proposing the government subsidised supermarket on every block solution, not me.

The map conveniently deleted places that are desperately poor, and remain that way. They also do not have any more stores showing up either. According to you there is no longer a distinction between a convenience store and a supermarket. I don't believe you, neither does the industry you allege to be considering investing in.

The map conveniently added areas that are far from without choice and far from poor. Interestingly enough, one of those areas got a Trader Joe's right after being declared a food desert. Well after being declared a food desert, and after the White House announced Target is one of the stores "teaming" with them to "expand" stores in food deserts, they just happened to expand one in the Trader Joe's food desert.

As for your jackbooted attempts to force people to eat what you dictate, count me out thanks. If you need a jackboot on your neck for that, so be it. Go find someone to engage in that voluntarily with you.

The whole food desert thing is a load of bullshit as the USDA has mapped it. If they gave a damn about the actual problem, they would have an informative map and they would not be rewarding Target for showing up where they would already be putting a store anyway. Same with that Knoxville city council giving $1.5 million to a developer for wooing a Publix into their new development at Sorority Village, in another "food desert." If your idea of "changing attitudes" is putting out a load of obvious falsehoods and expecting everybody to blindly accept the garbage, as you apparently have, then you need a new dictionary.

Slashdot Top Deals

Suggest you just sit there and wait till life gets easier.