Friday Linkzookery – 31 Aug 2009

Troops who crashed wedding criticised
US troops crashed a wedding and “breached Irish neutrality.”
US soldiers ‘did not gatecrash wedding’
Except that they were there by invitation of the bride and groom.

A Petition to Name the Next United States Navy Nuclear-powered Aircraft Carrier the USS ENTERPRISE
Some yahoo submitted a Congressional bill to name CVN 79 or CVN 80 the USS Barry Goldwater.

Who’s afraid of the big, bad Chinese aircraft carrier?
The Varyag.

House Reverses Itself, Votes To Kill F-22 Buy
To be honest, I really thought this would end up going through. My guess is that another attempt will be made soon.

It’s Official – Ridley Scott is Directing the Alien Prequel!
That loud noise you just heard was Murdoc’s disappointment that an already-ruined franchise is going to be even ruineder. This is one of the only cases where a movie with a character waking up and realizing that the past few movies were all a bad dream is actually a GOOD idea.

Tactical Assault Flintlock
Replica Revolutionary War rifle has NYPD all worked up.

Air Force tests anti-ground C-130 laser
Advanced Tactical Laser (ATL) incinerates test dummy.

US Air Force seeks 60 airlifters for irregular warfare
Looking for something in the King Air 350 class. Despite so much “fighter jock” mentality, there seems to be a persistent irregular warfare faction in the USAF.

Ernie Pyle
Great site at the Indiana University School of Journalism

‘Clunkers’ program runs out of cash
What a joke.

Used F-16s for Iraqi air defense?
High-hours Vipers for the Iraqis? Sell them used birds cheap, buy new F-16s for the USAF to replace them.

2 wheels from C-5A Galaxy jet out of Westover Air Reserve Base fall into woods in Belchertown
Oops.

USAF slammed for pranging Predators on manual
USAF using fully qualified human pilots to handle unmanned aircraft at all times has resulted in unnecessary, expensive crashes.

The 187th Carnival of Homeschooling
Lots of Homeschooling links.

facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Comments

  • AW1 Tim says:

    Black powder weapons, except those which use in-line mechanisms, are exempt from federal forearms laws, and the laws of almost every state. In fact, if you read the Federal definition of a firearm from the 1968 gun control act, you will find that it specifically exempts antique weapons, and replicas thereof as even being a “firearm” for the purposes of the act. That definition has never been changed.

    And UPS will not only deliver a muzzle loader to your door, they will also deliver black powder.

    respects,

  • Nadnerbus says:

    Federal “forearms” laws? I never knew. I bet I’m committing a double felony carrying around my Popeye sized guns =P

    Even out here in the Californialand you can get black powder guns without any of the usual DROS and crap. They are considered curio and are not subject to the rest of the firearms laws. NYPD needs to pull their heads out of their ass.

    Also, I’ll still be disappointed with any Alien movie that doesn’t have some cool guns and stuff. If they could get James Cameron to collaborate though, I might have a nerdgasm.

  • AW1 Tim says:

    Sigh…. everyone wants to be an editor these days… :)

  • Nadnerbus says:

    Sorry, sometimes I just can’t help myself. I know, its like the next type of humor up from puns, but just below fart jokes.

  • Formerly known as Skeptic says:

    Also for clarity, according to the linked story, the Air Force did not “incinerate” a “test dummy” (as cool as that would be ;)) with the ATL. It was a “dummy target” which was further described as a “target board” and they only claimed to have hit it. The damage, if any, was not described. I complain incessantly about the MSM having misleading headlines that don’t reflect what is in the actual story. I would hope you in the new media would do better with your links. That’s one of the reasons I’m here.

  • Murdoc says:

    RE: Incinerated Test Dummy

    This is a bit interesting. When I added the link to that story, I dropped the word “target” from “test dummy target.” However, the word “incinerated” was in the story. I can’t specifically recall if it was worded “incinerated test dummy target” or if it was something a bit different, but the word “incinerated” was in the story.

    Now it isn’t.

  • Murdoc says:

    Duh. A quick look at the article via Google’s cache shows that they originally did write “incinerated test dummy target.” Not sure when they changed it.

    Did you email them about it?

  • Formerly known as Skeptic says:

    Well, I cant very well fault you guys for accurately reporting a story that then changes, can I?! I really don’t like this whole “stealth edit” thing that you fell prey to here either.

  • Toejam says:

    http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=55338

    Rest in Peace Captain.

    Thank you for your service and for making the ultimate sacrifice in defense of the United States.

  • P.M.Lawrence says:

    That Varyag article has an error. “Shi Lang… the Ming Dynasty admiral who conquered Taiwan in 1681″ should be “… the Manchu (Qing) Dynasty admiral who conquered Taiwan from the Ming Dynasty…”. According to wikipedia he had previously been with the Mings, but defected.

    There is a profound misunderstanding in “In short, the military dynamic in the Pacific is changing. But it is not because the Chinese may one day gain a small number of their own, far-worse aircraft carriers. It is what they are planning to do to overcome our own aircraft carriers and other traditional strengths.”

    The thing is, they need a combined approach to make it work, just as the mediaeval English armies with archers still needed knights (those got separated at Bannockburn, leading to disaster). Aircraft carriers are necessary for the Chinese to shape any fight. Without them, opposing forces would not need to deploy their own and they wouldn’t be vulnerable to Chinese submarines etc. Also, without them, Chinese naval operations wouldn’t be able to support advances within range of land based aircraft – and within range of aircraft from other aircraft carriers, kept in locations secure from submarines etc.

    Incidentally, that polarising, locking, shaping role is why battleships were not useless in the Second World War; they were just unable to be used directly and traditionally. Think Channel Dash, not Yamato.

Comments Closed