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

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Correct me if I'm wrong... (Score 1) 298

The F-14 was fine for what it was designed for, high speed interception of aircraft and long range engagement using the AIM-154 Phoenix missile.

It was not a dogfighter, regardless of what the movie Top Gun tried to show, it handled like a pig and could not out turn the Mig-29 or Su-27.

You're glossing over the issues the F-14A had with the TF30 engine. The spin that killed Goose in Top Gun wasn't a made up Hollywood plot device, that could and did happen in the real world, because of single engine compressor stalls, and the F-14 didn't reach its full potential until the F-14B variant, with the F110 engine.

I would also submit that you're selling the Tomcat short in the dog fighting arena. Turning radius is only one measure of a dogfighter, at the end of the day teamwork and training matters a lot more, and in those two areas I would put the USN up against any operator of the Mig-29 or Su-27.

The F4F Wildcat turned like a truck but still managed a 6 to 1 kill ratio against the Japanese, even during the dark days of 1942, and held a positive kill ratio against the nimble Zero. Teamwork (see Thach Weave), ruggedness, and the design flaws of the Japanese fighters gave it all the edge it needed to carry out its mission.

The Tomcat was the spiritual successor to the Wildcat, with a lot of the same design philosophies, and wouldn't bet against it when facing any competing fighter of the day.

Comment Technological parity? Not really..... (Score 2, Informative) 298

Yes, both the Germans and Japanese used bolt-repeaters, and both were at technological (though not industrial) parity with the USA.

The Western Allies had the Germans and Japanese beat in electronics (primitive electronic computers, widespread employment of mechanical computers for fire control machines, proximity fuses, and radar), aerospace design (particularly by war's end), and practical nuclear fission.

The Germans had the Allies beat in a select few technological areas, rocketry and chemical weapons come to mind. The former of course came too late to affect the result and the latter was never used for fear of retaliation. The Japanese didn't beat the Allies in any technological realm, theoretical or practical, though they did have a few bits of engineering (the Type 93 torpedo) that came as a very rude surprise for the Allies.

Comment So you support Employer Entitlement Mentality. (Score 1) 323

If you're treating someone that badly that money would not prevent departure, not training them only makes things worse.

You think that the employer is entitled to perfection while the people working for them have to do all the heavy lifting. That is, the employer gets a pass to make arbitrary decisions on requirements while you expect the workers to forgo economies of scale that could be attained through employer-sponsored training.

You are part of the problem and deserve whatever comes your way.

Comment Temp workers == a case for RTW's no closed shop. (Score 1) 323

I've worked at companies where they used temp workers like Kleenex; blow your nose in it once and throw away.

It's one more reason that temporary work (or any similar third party) should not be a condition of accepting/continuing a job.

That is, if you want to be temporary, the company has to make it a competitive advantage (and by virtue of that, greater expense) to go the third party/contractor route.

Comment Kill the guest worker programs with fire. (Score 1) 323

Are Foreign Guest Workers Preferable to Retraining?

No, since their existence is to undermine citizens with a supplicant labor pool. To agree with their existence is un-American in the most possible way.

The only way to fix it is to rip out every single immigration law down to pre-1965 statutes and regulations. Then "handle" the lobbyists that defend a practice that has invited fraud and abuse for as long as it ever existed.

Comment Re:Shuttle was OK, I suppose. (Score 1) 48

This is a textbook illustration of trying to get people, and especially kids, interested in science. If people can't see things like this, they will lose interest. Kids won't study with aspirations of doing things like this. Adults won't approve taxes to help fund the sciences. Our economy will continue to lose ground to the countries that are making science important.

Seeing pictures and videos of the shuttle in action is impressive. Actually seeing it in person, and the displays set up at the Science Center are even more impressive.

Comment Re:hahaha... (Score 1) 132

You may want to familiarize yourself with the concept of rubber hose cryptography.

Granted, the United States Federal Government won't literally beat you with a hose, but they will take away your freedom until you comply with the lawful orders of the courts. The Government will go over your finances with a fine toothed comb, accounting for any and all assets you currently or previously owned, including bitcoin. If you obtained any of those assets via fraud you're going to be on the hook for repayment, plus criminal and civil penalties on top of the fraudulent earnings.

Want to play the "I lost them" card? You can try, but you're still going to be on the hook for the full amount Uncle Sam thinks you owe your victims, plus the aforementioned penalties, and you're not wiping any of that away with a bankruptcy. It will follow you until the day you die.

Bitcoin doesn't spend at the prison commissary, nor am I aware of any reputable criminal defense attorneys that accept payment in bitcoin.

Slashdot Top Deals

Someone is unenthusiastic about your work.

Working...