261–270 of 365 posts
I worked on the control systems for Predators and Reapers back in the mid and late 00s, and the inefficiencies around process were enormous. Safety is extremely important, so you expect some slowness as a result, but it got pretty extreme. I remember one time having to do 6 weeks of testing around a one-line code change because a "helpful" dev fixed a small bug that had no practical impact. Yet because it changed the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Viewed independently, I think VZ, Ukraine, and Iran look like a hodgepodge of strange actions. There is a consistent view that joins them, namely as we approach the end of the davidson window, putting pressure on China and Russia via oil restrictions might help dissuade a larger war in the Pacific. This is just a personal opinion, but lines up with Ukraine (burning refineries), EU (seizing sanctioned tankers FINALLY)…
Nobody made Russia decide to invade Ukraine, without which there would be no burning refineries.
Germany plays Russian anthem like you've never heard it before (Dec 12, 2021)
(did he cry ?)
I’m no military expert by any means but US appears to be obsessed with destroying some super important target to win, like they did with killing Iran leaders only to find out that new leader replace the perished. The same with the other stuff, they have super important radar and super important ships that need to be defended and a failure creates irreplaceable loses. Iran on the other hand, just like with their super…
HN has been compromised by propaganda bots that can't decide between "The US is a paper tiger that can't win anything" and "The US is bullying poor Iran". Only a fool would think the US can't win militarily. Here's how: 1. Flatten Kharg 2. Flatten a dozen roads critical to transportation infrastructure 3. Continue the blockade 4. Stonewall peace attempts 5. Wait 5-6 weeks and win The Trump administration isn't doing…
The reason the trump administration is suing for peace is because the midterms are coming up, and the situation for Republicans looks dire.
> The Defense Innovation Unit notice called for drones capable of carrying many different sensor and weapons payloads up to 2,800 pounds and flying with a combat radius of at least 2,300 nautical miles—or 8,000 nautical miles on a one-way strike mission—while executing the same missions that the MQ-9A Reaper drone currently performs for the US military I feel like they might be taking the wrong lesson from this. The…
Partly, but I think there also is a feedback loop. Reapers are expensive, so they must reliably reach their targets. That makes them more expensive (need to be faster, more reliable, less visible on radar, etc), so fewer get ordered, so they must get even more powerful and reliable. That makes them more expensive, etc.
Also, being very expensive, you want them to be able to return home after a mission. That again increases weight, costs.
Result: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_MQ-9_Reaper says only 575 got built over a period of about 20 years. In comparison, the USA built about 96,000 aircraft in 1944 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_aircraft_product...), reaching that total in about two days.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right, I can see the need for both, but that suggests to me that they could differentiate the sensor package + loiter drone significantly from the shahed clone (which, given that it is a one-way trip, has a very similar operational radius) Does one really need to bring along 2,500 kg of ordinance, when we can launch another $50,000 shahed-equivalent at whatever hard targets the loitering drone locates?
Yes because the lag between Hellfire and target is way less than "launch Shahed and wait 20 minutes". A continuum of strike times has value, all the way up to hypersonics.
While I am critical of Ukraine being in talks to join the EU (which IMHO it shouldn't), I am quite happy that we in EU kind of have built good relationships with Ukraine - military drone construction knowledge and expierience will become a key technology field, as cooperations between Ukraine and Europe after the war (however that will look like) will probably strengthen europes defense capabilities.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
not a fan of defending billionairs, but is mostly a useless populist slogan* You can do full Dekulakization ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dekulakization ) on them and it won't change anything in current economic situation. Confiscating 100% of all billionaire wealth (~$8.4T) covers - ~1.1 years of federal spending (~$7.4T) - ~4.4 years of deficits (~$1.9T) - ~23% of debt (~$36T): and pretty much kills US ability to…
IMO its a useful populist slogan because it solves a different problem: The power that comes with being a billionaire. E.g. its all well and good to focus on fixing democracy instead, but if (some specific) billionaires are focused on deploying their wealth to destroy democracy, then what? I've generally come around to believe that we need to limit wealth from a purely power / control point of view.
If you get rid of wealthy people's power, what takes its place other than politicians?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>just completely exit like Afghanistan We can't just completely exit Iran without a time machine. Dufus Donny attempting to escape his Epstein folly by kicking the hornet's nest and now Iran holds the gulf hostage for as long as they want.
guess what, Iran will hold the gulf hostage regardless if US is there or not exactly like the nightmare Afghanistan is for women there now left to the Taliban regardless if US was there or not it would have happened world is an absolutely horrible place filled with monsters you can't say all these countries should be saved by US and then end USAID to let a million people die with food and medication already paid for…
The Middle-East's bad record on human rights can be traced back to in large part to the meddling of the US, because it serves the interests of Israel and because of oil. In the time of Nasser, the Middle-East was a different place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
HN has been compromised by propaganda bots that can't decide between "The US is a paper tiger that can't win anything" and "The US is bullying poor Iran". Only a fool would think the US can't win militarily. Here's how: 1. Flatten Kharg 2. Flatten a dozen roads critical to transportation infrastructure 3. Continue the blockade 4. Stonewall peace attempts 5. Wait 5-6 weeks and win The Trump administration isn't doing…
The military is just there to enact political aims. The military could leave Iran a radioactive wasteland for that matter. The reason the trump administration is suing for peace is because the midterms are coming up, and the situation for Republicans looks dire.
I thought this at first, but I’m not sure at this point.
The republican establishment has slaughtered the more populist anti-war wing of the party in primaries across the country. The democratic establishment has begun to do the same against their populist candidates. Politicians go on TV and brag about how they’re going to be eating lobster when asked about the state of the economy on their constituents. Every election post I see in a state with a couple contentious ones coming up is filled to the brim with boomers explaining how they’ll always vote on party loyalty, to the point of completely ignoring any of a candidates positions or motives.
These are not the actions of groups who are concerned about upcoming elections.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, the anti-regulation people when NASA experiments: "look at all these failures! Cut NASA funding and give public funds to the guy who purchases elections!" The same people when SpaceX blows up a bunch of rockets: "wow, look at the innovation, they move so fast! Cut NASA funding and give public funds to the guy who purchases elections!"
NASA's failures as of late are less "dramatic explosions" and more "delays", "cost overruns" and "lack of ambition so severe it borders on criminal". The last time NASA caught any serious flak was what, the Starliner shitshow? And that was just splash damage from Boeing getting dunked on by everyone at once.
I'm not sure what timeline you're thinking about, but JWST was launched pretty recently and it's pretty ambitious. But more to the point of my earlier post, NASA's "lack of ambition" is probably directly attributable to the "small government" people who penalize ambition in the public sector and praise it in the private, government contractor sector. The incentives to be ambitious in government are perverse when every "failure" is scrutinized and condemned by people who want government to fail so that they can justify taking public money and dumping it into private bank accounts.