Self-published books are looked down on for a reason. I've "bought" some self-published stuff for $0 on amazon. It's pretty bad. It's basically as if the author had an idea for a story, put it down on paper, and submitted the pdf. The stories have potential sometimes, but the writing is just bad. A mix of short 4 word sentences and half a page run on sentences. Descriptions that are just repeated every several pages. Whole books written in the format of: I walked through the door. I looked at the guy. I said this. He said that. I walked back to the other place. I shot the alien. I picked him up. The alien was gross and ugly. I carried him back to the first place.
Just because you self-publish doesn't mean you don't need an editor.
Be that as it may, those are not the people we are talking about here. The topic is published authors at particular publishing houses whining about the retail price placed on their books. Books which they could have easily published, using exactly the same words, without a "publisher."
OK. I'll be in front of the Oyster House in a Marine uniform with 6 of my buddies.
This is a version of cosplay that they could have done better with you as a consultant in the film Philadelphia.
Is she hot?
In a mechanical sort of way, yea I'd say so.
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.
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.
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.
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.
If you didn't have to work so hard, you'd have more time to be depressed.