Eight years, four months. That’s what “the Duke” got for selling his office in a time of war. Could have gotten 10 years. Maybe ought to have. But that’s a long fall for a former Navy fighter pilot, Vietnam ace and oh, yeah: US Congressman.
Greek tragedy? Nah. Obscene venality.
< -->
In (a) USA Today poll, when asked, “Which comes closer to your view about Arab and Muslim countries that are allies of the United States?” 45 percent of respondents said, “trust the same as any other ally”; 51 percent said they trust these countries “less than other allies.”
That’s a remarkably honest poll result. Let’s face it, Americans have been told since kindergarten not to judge ethnic and religious groups differently from one another; now slightly more than half are willing to come out and say, “you know, I just don’t trust those guys as much as I trust others.”
… There is no upside to doing the right thing ‚Äì which is to emphasize, as one blogger put it, that there is a difference between Dubai and Damascus. There is tremendous political upside to doing the wrong thing, boldly declaring, ‚ÄúI don‚Äôt care what the Muslim world thinks, I‚Äôm not allowing any Arab country running ports here in America! I don‚Äôt care how much President Bush claims these guys are our allies, I don‚Äôt trust them, and I‚Äôm not going to hand them the keys to the vital entries to our country!‚Äù
…The Bush Administration‚Äôs reaction to the cartoon riots was comparably milquetoast. The violence and threats committed over the cartoons shocked, frightened and really, really angered Americans. They want somebody to smack the Muslim world back onto its heels and set them straight: ‚ÄúIt doesn‚Äôt matter how offensive a cartoon is, you‚Äôre not allowed to riot, burn down embassies and kill people over it.‚Äù
They’re ashamed that Denmark is leading the fight over this.
Yeah, well. Caution is one thing. But low, base, undignified fear makes for bad policy.
Chaotic Synaptic Activity laments the upcoming “last trap of the F-14 Tomcat.” No doubt it will be immediately preceded by the “last compressor stall” and “last adverse yaw departure.”
It was a rough, ungainly beast and I will not miss it. And as for backseaters? Any pilot who needs one should have one.
< -->
Over at her place, FbL points out that there is an on-going need for more help in the VALOUR-IT mission to provide wounded troops with voice-activated laptop solutions that help them start the road to recovery. She held a wonderfully successful fund raising drive late last year, but those funds have all been disbursed. Read here to see what your donation did for those in need.
And if you can spare a bit more, it’d be a nice thing to give of it.
< -->
Heard of Daniel Dennett? He’s a professor of philosopy at Tufts who’s made a bit of a career out of trying to convince religious folks that there’s nothing really in it, actually. Big waste of time. His most recent book (reviewed by a critic here in the NYT) contends, based on the approved historical method of “pretty much what I think probably happened” (i.e. “evolutionary psychology) that religion formed as a kind of social networking skill. The “myspace” of the fourth millenia (BCE). Calls those who think like he does “brights,” meaning that the other 80-odd per cent of us are “dims,” I suppose. All for another day, says I, live and let live. People either choose to believe or choose not to, based on evidence that is ambiguous either way.
No, the only reason I bring the back story on Dennett up is that I read an interesting thing  quoting him yesterday in the Economist. For an avowed atheist, Professor Dennett seems to spend a lot of time thinking about religion:
TOWARDS the end of his elegant, sharp-minded essay on the need to study religion in a dispassionate way (in other words, just as anything else should be studied), Daniel Dennett teasingly asks his readers whether they have heard of a people called the Yahuuz. Among these exotic folk, he informs us, people who reach the age of 80 are expected to commit suicide, and their remains are then gobbled up by the whole tribe. What we would regard as child pornography, they call good clean fun; they also perform, in hilarious public rituals, the things that civilised folk do in a lavatory. If readers are disgusted, Mr Dennett goes on to suggest, they may finally have glimpsed what many Muslims feel about western countries where people drink alcohol, wear skimpy clothes and ignore traditional ideas about the family.
Good heavens, thought I (no pun intended). What a strange set of people, these Yahuuz must be. Where could they come from? Meaning to ensure I omitted them from my next vacation agenda, I Googled them up. And was surprised to find out that pretty much the only reference to this strange tribe was from Dr. Dennet’s quotation in the Economist, or in blogs citing that reference. Most of them uncritically.
Because it just sounds so good to some folks that they just want to believe it.
Even absent evidence. Which I just find, you know: Deliciously ironic.
< -->
Come back and click this link when you think you’re having a bad day. See, it’s all about perspective.
From an interesting (unclas) brief I recently received:
(A) World War II Strategic Bomber had a CEP (ed. - circular error probable, a measure of bombing accuracy) of 1,744 ft., which meant it took 2,794 World War II 500 lb. Bombs to kill a point target.
This equates to the full bomb load of 175 B-17 Bombers.
If one equates this to a modern fighter bomber (like the FA-18E/F, not so much the Tomcat) and the 4 precision weapons it carries: The modern fighter bomber works out to be worth 700 World War II B-17s in a strategic bombardment roll.
Better bombs, much better accuracy. The slideshow goes on to state that 1 FA-18E with four precision weapons is the equivalent of 163 F6F Hellcat dive bombers, and carries a striking force equivalent (by itself) of two World War II aircraft carriers.
Which I thought was kind of cool.
< -->
Well, the weekend beckons. There’s a workout to be had, and a martini to maybe savor.
Y’all have fun!
25 responses so far ↓
1
FbL
// Mar 3, 2006 at 5:40 pm
Thanks so much for pointing out Valour-IT again, Lex.
As of 3 days ago we had a waiting list numbering 30 and no immediate way to reduce it. That’s nearly $25,000 worth of laptops, but we’ve completely run out of Valour-IT donations, and Soldiers’ Angels can’t currently pay for those laptops from general funds (as they have in the past).
Every little bit helps.
2
Dave
// Mar 3, 2006 at 6:00 pm
Yahuuz — I wonder if he’s referring to the Yahoos from Gulliver’s Travels?
3 Charles // Mar 3, 2006 at 8:07 pm
Now I feel old. I remember when the carrier decks that I started to worked carried A-7’s, A-6’s, F-14’s, E-2C, S-3’s, EA-6B’s, and the SH-3. Out of that list the only thing that is flying in to the forseeable future without a replacement is the venerable E-2. Everything else is being covered by the F-18 community. Not that there is nothing wrong with that to a point, but old habits die hard about believing your aircraft are the best. Of course everyone remembers too that as those birds age all the problems that come up and how the powers to be decide to quit supporting, so known problems are pushed off to the side until the shiny and new comes out.
Oh, well here is to the new breed. Hope you do as well as the old breed.
4
Oyster
// Mar 3, 2006 at 10:05 pm
Lex, you made me blow a snot bubble with the Tomcat post. Having been called back up to the platform for an uncountable number of Tomcat yo-yo recoveries due to emergencies of one sort or another, your brief comments made me howl with a combination of laughter and long-latent dread. Thanks for that.
5
sid
// Mar 4, 2006 at 5:21 am
The all Hornet CVW…
http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal2/1001-1100/Gal1027_F-18_Roberts/03.jpg
6
lex
// Mar 4, 2006 at 7:39 am
And not so very far away, sid!
Oyster, remember when we were kids, and waving those guys behind the Connie? That’s when my hair started to turn grey…
I hope so too, Charles.
And I don’t think so, Dave. I think he *whispers* made the whole thing up…
7
Curt
// Mar 4, 2006 at 9:05 am
Years ago, Neil Armstrong narrated a series called “First Flight,” where they actually found some of the WWI era aircraft and flew them and then helped describe the conditions. It struck me that they said the vibration of the rotary engines would just about literally rattle your teeth out, and the pilots tended to have permanent “intestinal” issues from the castor oil used as the main lubricant in the engines. Some of it was captured by the windstream and you just swallowed some of it in the course of your duties.
I’m sure they were glad to see those planes go, too. It’s all about the best technology available, and it could be the F-111B we may have been seeing go about now, but that didn’t happen. The AWG-9 system, I understand, was a component that would have been on that airframe.
I also heard, years ago, that a lot of A-7 pilots met their too early demise due to work task loading, as a result of the lack of modern electronics to reduce the pilot’s workload.
The MiG-25 had it’s use, too, and then we dumped the XB-70, so they turned it into high altitude recon, rather than wasting the effort.
I know I never got to fly, but having the large, ungainly beast as the first line of defense, while I sailed nearby the CV in a AOR full of 6M gals of F-76 and 2M of F-44, it was nice to know the attack would be decremented by the Tomcats.
What will you do when they decide UCAVs are the plane of the moment? They won’t have to worry about pilots “jumping ship” to get a posh job flying the airliners. Some bean counter is probably, at this moment, up in the DC area, figuring that cost-benefit analysis right now, just for the reason to justify UCAVs, and they are hoping they’ll get a MSM or LOM out of the deal.
The time of the Tomcat is past, but, it was great technology of the time, and helped formulate what was better, which you had the pleasure to fly.
So, how about some of the stories of the planes that made your hair turn grey, as a tribute to those who flew them? I suspect that will be excellent reading for us all, to see the real inside view.
8
sid
// Mar 4, 2006 at 10:42 am
>And not so very far away, sid!
Guess we shall see if VAdm Kent Lee?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s dream of a neo version of the late WWII all F6F deck was the right way to go…
9
badbob
// Mar 4, 2006 at 12:00 pm
Re- Dennet: Take him away in a black helo one night and put him on the ground in Yemen to sell his theories…
Re- Tomcats: A couple more stinking months and they’ll be gone. Can’t leave ‘em alone, eh?
Re- the Brief: I think I saw it a while ago (out of China Lake or PG Scol). All hype folks. Notice Lex said “point target”. They don’t move much. Also, the “not so much Tomcat”..yeah- but they have been such innovators for systems (please remember it was designed as an interceptor of Badgers, Backfires and Bears) that sometimes the big programs have to copy what they’ve done! Thank G we had ‘em in OEF, also the fact that our enemy is not a air sophisticated threat…..
There is no doubt Lex, that the accuracy is literally thousands of per cent better but the whole discussion is counter-productive. The budgeteers say, Well OK- then we need less strike aircraft, right? Modern GPS weapons are accurate deadly but we haven’t perfected the art of being in two (or more places) at once, at least not in the USN. (USAF maybe)
Charles: In my way of thinking we had more genetic diversity then. You know. That same scientific principle that ensures the survival of a species (Naval Air).
I don’t want to keep harping on it but we are only carrying about 2/3 the aircraft we carried on the same supercarriers in Charles day. When will the bean-counters notice that?
Sid- great analogy- possibly would of made sense back then, when they’re weren’t that many options. The builder of this neo-dream is a certain “BlackJack” but the architects are mostly retired now I think.
We shall see but they’ll all be looking good in their sea-mist BDUs………
B2
10
Subsunk
// Mar 4, 2006 at 4:44 pm
Just to educate us uninitiated squids, CAPT Lex, what would be the advertised CEP for the F/A-18 and its normal or usual complement of weapons? I do remember the advertised CEP for the Trident II D-5 missile system was approximately 300 ft. Of course the explosive on the end of it was slightly larger than 500 or even 2000 pounds of TNT (along the order of 100,000 tons of TNT). But in our actual testing we frequently got closer than 40 ft from center of target (after a flight of over 4000 nautical miles).
Imagine how difficult this would be in 1940 and how today, both our jets and our missiles are programmed and capable of making this look like child’s play. Not to mention the knowledge required for your average Navy pilot — (Is there such an animal in our Navy, I wonder? I fairly doubt that any Man or Woman piloting one of our aircraft can be denoted as “average” unless the comparison is made to some other Navy or Air Force. Is this a great country or what?) — to fly over 300 miles to find and hit a target the size of a Toyota with accuracy over 70% of the time.
How does this Trident II accuracy compare to the accuracy of the F/A-18s and F -14s of the modern Navy? Just asking since it is an unclassified brief.
Subsunk
11
Subsunk
// Mar 4, 2006 at 4:45 pm
That, and I’m a seriously demented geek on these subjects.
Subsunk
12
sid
// Mar 5, 2006 at 10:29 am
So would not an A-3 equivalent be equal to no less than 3 WWII CVs at an unrefueled radius of 1000nm then (six Mk-82s)?
I mean it really isnt a function of the aircraft as much as it is the weapons themselves, so wouldnt it be more effective to have more weapons and a longer range per aircraft?
13
sid
// Mar 5, 2006 at 10:32 am
oops. make that six Mk-83s 8 Mk-82s or 4 Mk-84s
14
lex
// Mar 5, 2006 at 7:33 pm
Subsunk - the advertised CEP of an LGB is well within the effective radius, so long as the pilot finds the target and both the laser and the bomb function properly. For the GPS-guided munitions, the CEP is small enough so as to be a non-factor, considering the warhead size. Hit to kill - one jet four targets, rather than four jets one target.
And as for songs singing the praise of Tomcat crews, you might just have to wait a bit longer
15
Skippy-san
// Mar 5, 2006 at 11:40 pm
I found it interesting the news paper about Duke had an add for a “Rancho Bernado” country club on it…….am I the only who finds the irony in that?
16
badbob
// Mar 6, 2006 at 12:22 pm
Subsunk,
Scratch, scratch.
I think Lex is saying that you need to think of an F-18E as a MIRV that gets to be re-used
Notice he didn’t use the F-model S-hornet in his discussion- too TOMCAT like, I reckon. Lex would rather have 200 lbs of fuel than 200lbs of NFO! (about 1/3 a day pass of gas)
Or maybe he meant, one jet for 4 target, if they’re not too far apart.
Sid: how about an A-6 type capable jet with J-weps (16 individual “booms”). Plus 50% more range and bring greater back! Now we might get by with less jets!
I still like the idea of lots of strikers with lots of J-weps and lot’s of range! IMO, 2/3 is all we’ve got!
B2
17
Steve
// Mar 9, 2006 at 11:34 am
From the F-14 comment:
[And as for backseaters? Any pilot who needs one should have one.]
C’mon, Lex. Typical comment from a FAG puke that was fed way too much raw meat laced with testosterone in the FRS. One anchor or two, it makes no difference. We’ve all seen good and bad specimens of both.
Did I ever tell you about the Hornet driver that USS Boat launched to splash a burning E-2 flying on auto-pilot after the crew bailed? Fox two and… wait for it… a miss! Had to send a Tomcat to gun it down before it caused international concern. Too bad the Hornet driver didn’t have help other than Betty to figure the angles.
Won’t be long until the E-2 crews and Hornet drivers are sitting at consoles on the ship or the beach “flying” their UAVs to the fight!
18
lex
// Mar 9, 2006 at 12:54 pm
Of course you’re right, Steve and one of the best officers I ever worked for was a Tomcat RIO. Which fact, of course, never stopped me from giving him shite.
It’s nothing personal - just bidness
19
Steve
// Mar 9, 2006 at 2:38 pm
All in good sport. I had to lob one back at ya! I do enjoy reading your material. The Rythms saga causes my computer to waft out the familiar odor of JP - I swear. BTW, I hope the UAV technology augments (not replaces) traditional aviation. The sea stories just won’t be the same. I can hear them now speaking a dialect understandable only by those that ride the halfpipe in winter and think that Joe Boxer makes outerwear. God help us!
20
FbL
// Mar 9, 2006 at 5:30 pm
Just listen to the old men complain about those whippersnappers…
21
Subsunk
// Mar 9, 2006 at 6:53 pm
Ahhhh, so the rivalry between Tomcat Jockeys and Hornet Hellions is only slightly less intense than a fully developed oil fire. Guess I’ll just go deep and go under that storm. See you gents on the other side of the hurricane. Don’t fall overboard or run out of fuel before you’re done smacking each other on the cheek. (I meant the other kind of smacking and the other kind of cheek —- you guys figure it out).
Subsunk
22
badbob
// Mar 10, 2006 at 1:55 pm
Don’t call him a FAG Steve, this site is too sensitive for that! (I had to crawl on my knees for forgiveness to be allowed to post)
BTW, how does it feel to be worth 1/3 of a pass (day) in a Hornet?
Tell me more about this burning E-2 story and the Hornet angle. News to me. Ha-Ha.
Gotta love the Hornet spirit! But it must be horrible staring at that fuel totalizer for that whole hour airborne. Sure must put a crimp on any turning fight!
Just pulling scabs folks.
B2
23 Neptunus Lex » Aluminum overcast // Mar 15, 2006 at 12:49 pm
[...] Even now, all these years later, it’s hard for me to say goodbye to the F-14. Not because I’ll miss it all that?Ǭ†much - I think I’ve made my feelings clear on that score - but because momma always told me that if I couldn’t say anything nice, then I oughtn’t to say anything at all. [...]
24
Pinch
// Mar 15, 2006 at 2:31 pm
Thanks for the link, Lex. I understand not everyone will miss the turkey, especially some from the “other” side of the tracks (or base, in Oceana’s case), but what the heck.
With regards to those of the single-seat flavor (”Nose gunners”….”voice actuated autopilots”…) who would champion the old saying of a NFO (RIO, WSO, GIB, RO, whatever) being not much more than the loss of 200 lbs of extra fuel, it merely adds an underscore to the saying “What do you want? An additional 30 seconds of a burner wave-off or a reliable drinking buddy who’ll hang with you all night?”
25 The Wood Shed » The Future of Military Aviation // Jul 12, 2006 at 2:08 pm
[...] Some good-natured jabs over at Lex’s place, the old single seat vs multi seat rivalry, got me wondering how long until it’s “zero seat” in the air. Googled UCAV and the first hit was quite an education. Check this out for a graduate study in the future of air warfare. I’m all for saving lives and minimizing risk but I guess I’m too old school to be comfortable with the idea of completely removing the human intellect from the cockpit. [...]
Leave a Comment