tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post6959688182555781096..comments2024-01-03T05:18:54.650-05:00Comments on CDR Salamander: Looking towards the "Terrible 20's"CDR Salamanderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05981221786954902349noreply@blogger.comBlogger41125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-57760978999141734702010-10-14T00:09:26.374-04:002010-10-14T00:09:26.374-04:00Great register, buy generic cialis.
Generic Ciali...Great register, buy generic cialis. <br />Generic Cialis is the brand delegate of the medicate whose on the go ingredient is Tadalafil. Orally administered in the blank of tablets, <br />Stingy Tadalafil is hardened concerning the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED) in men.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-68756919200274036712010-09-16T02:30:43.181-04:002010-09-16T02:30:43.181-04:00ExcellentExcellentAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-14955574998903288532010-02-11T16:36:19.000-05:002010-02-11T16:36:19.000-05:00In fact most telling thing is Chinese are expectin...In fact most telling thing is Chinese are expecting to move man to the moon and establish permanent base by 2020s...ewok40knoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-7905516270880250912010-02-11T16:33:00.000-05:002010-02-11T16:33:00.000-05:00alphas were waving a big sign: catch me if u can.....alphas were waving a big sign: catch me if u can... kinda annoying since they could outrun torpedoes...ewok40knoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-26638497183195478292010-02-11T15:26:30.000-05:002010-02-11T15:26:30.000-05:00 Or Mandarin Oranges... you know, the ones from H... Or Mandarin Oranges... you know, the ones from Holland.. :)AW1 Timnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-265961991076131962010-02-11T13:14:07.000-05:002010-02-11T13:14:07.000-05:00See!!!!
I gotta alot to learn!!!!!!
=-O
So......See!!!!<br /><br />I gotta alot to learn!!!!!!<br /><br /> =-O <br /><br />So...meebbie I will modify my business plan to teaching Mandarins english....sidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-35704465129052585682010-02-11T12:59:15.000-05:002010-02-11T12:59:15.000-05:00I wouldn't pick up Mandarin just yet. Engrish...I wouldn't pick up Mandarin just yet. Engrish, I mean English, will likely be the lingua franca of any world-order, Chinese led or not. Too many infrastructure problems with traditional Chinese alphabet. And don't forget: Mandarin is just another dialect of Chinese; one that not everyone in that giant country is particularly wedded to. They obviously need a common language, but it is not clear that Mandarin Chinese is it.<br /><br />Statistic: there are more people studying English in school in mainland China than there are in the UK and USA combined. <br /><br />When you consider Indian english-language education numbers, it's clear that English is the language that will carry commerce throughout the 21st Century...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-77070108035838660842010-02-11T10:54:36.000-05:002010-02-11T10:54:36.000-05:00That's great until folks realize that the Chin...<em>That's great until folks realize that the Chinese, for one, have demonstrated their capability of destroying a sattelite in orbit</em><br /><br />Here is a decade-plus old <a href="http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/bookrev/friedman.htm" rel="nofollow">book</a> that apprently gained an audience in other places, and <a href="http://mt-milcom.blogspot.com/2007/02/more-fengyun-1c-debris-cataloged-594.html" rel="nofollow">was apparently taken seriously</a>...<br /><br /><strong>Whoever controls space, therefore, will control the world’s oceans. Whoever controls the oceans will control the patterns of global commerce. Whoever controls the patterns of global commerce will be the wealthiest power in the world. Whoever is the wealthiest power in the world will be able to control space. </strong><br /><strong></strong><br />Meanwhile, <a href="http://www.redstate.com/warrior/2010/02/03/manned-space-flight-americas-future-vol-i/" rel="nofollow">back on the home front</a>....<br /><br />I'm thinking of starting up a home school for Mandarin. Kinda figure -that given my rapidly advancing age- it'd be best to connive any angle for staying in the houst instead of being sent to the fields.<br /><br />(<em>and if anyone wants to call me a racist for that last remark...</em><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdVjrBY5-F0" rel="nofollow">BITE ME</a>!)sidnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-21854066962952356532010-02-11T09:51:13.000-05:002010-02-11T09:51:13.000-05:00Oh, and I ain't using viagra yet. My system ma...Oh, and I ain't using viagra yet. My system may have a few kinks, but the plumbing still works fine, thank you very much... 8-) <br /><br />And I've had the pleasure of tracking Yankees, Deltas, Typhoons, Alphas, Echo II, and Victors.<br /><br />Actually, the Alphas were easy to track. In fact, we usually had to turn the volume controls down when they went full-power... heh.AW1 Timnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-4792487975801179922010-02-11T09:48:43.000-05:002010-02-11T09:48:43.000-05:00 Sadly, I can't argue with anything you said.
... Sadly, I can't argue with anything you said.<br /><br /> In addition, we are now shutting down the entire Loran-C system. Everything will be GPS-centered. That's great until folks realize that the Chinese, for one, have demonstrated their capability of destroying a sattelite in orbit.<br /><br /> There are a lot of useful things out there, but the problem is that our military, like much of our society, has started to use technology as a crutch, instead of a tool. The more we depend upon digital and abandon analog, the worse the fall will be when it comes. It WILL come, too.<br /><br /> Just think, though, how much ASW training and simulator time could be bought for the fleet with the money we spend on the Diversity Diktat.AW1 Timnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-39896572721070463582010-02-11T08:30:45.000-05:002010-02-11T08:30:45.000-05:00Two thoughts (on another exceptionally well-writte...Two thoughts (on another exceptionally well-written piece): A. The spectre of an ASW campaign without MPRA isn't that daunting, simply because the platform won't add much value. The systems are terrific - NAVAIR/PMA-290 continues to field great technology - but the average TACCO and the acoustic operators today would be challenged to find their buttocks with both hands. Harsh as that sounds, it's not a slam on the operators - they're only as good as their training opportunities and cultural environs (i.e. anyone with any ASW experience is either swallowing viagra by the bottlefull or making grass green in some cemetary); and 2. This gradual descent began in the 1990s, when the ordnanceman was pulled from the flight crew to save $...there are, and have been, lots of ways to find submarines, but the MPRA advantage was the P-3's ability to use speed to break/aerate the threat. Once ordies left the crew, the expeditionary weapons loading flexibility soon followed. Realize this will get hooted down by many of my former brethren, but it is what it is.Reverbnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-70858123464623694502010-02-11T07:38:17.000-05:002010-02-11T07:38:17.000-05:00etljim,
accountability doesn't exist with the...etljim,<br /><br />accountability doesn't exist with the service model either... that's what has gotten us into this mess! <br /><br />(I understand your point. Acccountability is still in place, by LNO MOA arrangements, but it<br />also is a double edge sword, no captured airmen and you have plausable denialbility in touchy geo political missions.... ;) )MR T's Haircutnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-85885273545324357572010-02-11T04:24:20.000-05:002010-02-11T04:24:20.000-05:00Accountability doesn't exist with the contract...Accountability doesn't exist with the contractor model of labor...eltjimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-3279464283669059432010-02-11T00:17:12.000-05:002010-02-11T00:17:12.000-05:00I am concerned about all these BURKEs we are buyin...I am concerned about all these BURKEs we are buying. I fear for a repeat of the FLETCHERs/ALLEN M SUMNERs/GEARINGs, when we had literaly hundreds of what were, in thier time, at least as advanced as BURKEs are now, being the only things we were allowed in the late 40's, all through the '50's, and being the bulk of the DD fleet through the '60's suddenly going into block obsolescence. I know that the BURKE actually IS a wonder ship, but they are not going to last forever. <br /><br /> In WWII, a Carrier Task Force was 3 four CV Task Groups, of 2 CV/2 CVL each. We will soon have gone to where we do not even have the ability, even emplying every CVN we own, to put a Task Force to sea. We will have a USAF of 136 fighters. Is that even a full Fighter Wing, much less a Fighter Group? We are gonna build LCSes, a yacht hull bigger than a FLETCHER, with less armament than USCG patrol boat, with no real AA ability, as the only radar is a commercial surface set. <br /><br />We actually ARE doomed, aren't we? I am a Badger, who gets to watch the weasels win. SCOTTtheBADGERnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-85177641797335343772010-02-10T23:53:11.000-05:002010-02-10T23:53:11.000-05:00Well, if the US next 20 years to is to follow the ...Well, if the US next 20 years to is to follow the UK trajectory, news isn't all bad:<br /><br />http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/7137880/Generals-and-admirals-to-be-culled-in-defence-cuts.htmlborhbemonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-39148576213883206432010-02-10T20:58:22.000-05:002010-02-10T20:58:22.000-05:00That's an awful lot of words to just say "...That's an awful lot of words to just say "IT'S THE ECONOMY, STUPID!"<br /><br />Great discussion.xformednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-70101532294440989182010-02-10T20:08:24.000-05:002010-02-10T20:08:24.000-05:00Mike, manning will be outsourced.. contractors can...Mike, manning will be outsourced.. contractors can do it cheaper... and without the need for a flag officerMR T's Haircutnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-84651356716646963362010-02-10T18:48:50.000-05:002010-02-10T18:48:50.000-05:00<span>Aviation seems to be working their way...<span>Aviation seems to be working their way out of the bathtub and although maybe loosing a carrier and not having the desired number of F-22s, there is a plan underway to alleviate the issue. Still not happy about the lack of alternative engine for JSF. 136 seems like a good sidebet to hold on an airframe that by 2035 will make up over 90% of our fighter force. Cost is 8 Bil upfront, but will be alleviated over the lifetime especially when O&S costs considered. Doubling down by the Airforce on UAVs and also Navy increasing play in the UAV arena. Good trends from my perspective. </span><br /><span> </span><br /><span>Don't see the same positive trend in shipbuilding. But hey, LCS will solve all our problems it seems at a cost of under a billion each. I'll leave it at that, it's been discussed at nauseum and I don't want to get Byron spooled up before dinner.</span><br /><span> </span><br /><span>ASW. Gee, how many platforms left to do that? Looking at both SSNs which are coming down in numbers and the VA class may be slowed down, look at P-3s/P-8s, and HS. I know that VADM Dorsett said legacy ISR, but why would P-3s be in there? They found something else to offer after the peace divident, and they actually became pretty good at it. But if you cut P-3/8s for that 2 billion savings, then when you try to get close to Taiwan with your CSGs, who's gonna sweep ahead? The subs? where you gonna get those? Not even going to mention EP-3s/VPU etc which are in a little limbo after the fiasco of CSA, and that whole thing. Without them, how are we going to obtain the type of information they provide from other sources? UAVs? Sure. How long before BAMS or the other programs can provide same type of flexibility? Meanwhile, P-3s are being redstriped left and right, P-8 seems to be in the crosshairs for "savings" so there will likely be a gap. </span><br /><span> </span><br /><span>Sorry for the long disjointed ramblings, but it is so darn frustrating. It seems so simple if just everybody, from the politicians to the uniformed leaders would just drop their "stovepipes" and their earmarks and for once, for once, just do the right thing and not worry about diversity, reelection, legacy, place in history etc. Alas, I'm not holding my breath. </span>claudionoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-26334839184884043642010-02-10T18:48:30.000-05:002010-02-10T18:48:30.000-05:00<span>I am not so sure that GWOT will be won...<span>I am not so sure that GWOT will be won with sounds financial decisions. I don't think the intestinal fortitude and integrity exists across the river from the Pentagon to make the hard decisions. On both sides of the aisle. We are spending north of 55% on non discretionary items. Tack on the interest at about another 5% and youre left with precious little to run defense and all the other stuff. But who will be able to cut the sacred programs, and tell those who feel entitled that the cow is no more? </span><br /><span> </span><br /><span>As a percentage of GDP, we are actually spending less that ever on defense. Up to 4.7% from a nadir of 3% earlier this decade. <a href="http://www.heritage.org/Research/Features/BudgetChartbook/Defense-Spending-on-the-Decline-Despite-War-on-Terror.aspx" rel="nofollow"><span>http://www.heritage.org/Research/Features/BudgetChartbook/Defense-Spending-on-the-Decline-Despite-War-on-Terror.aspx</span></a>. Even so, the budget is huge. 700+ Billion. Let that number rattle around a bit. A lot of money, but we're not spending it as smartly as we should. We tend to spend a lot of time and effort on "transformational" issues, and "better business practices" and other words du jour, which at the end leave us with a lot of money spent and not enough to show for it. Examples are plentiful, and discussed in this forum for quite some time. It seems everything costs a billion. For starters, to think about it, not to actually build anything. Then add more zeroes. </span><br /><span> </span><br /><span>What is to be done. Well, I'd say is to set some priorities first. SSBNX. A must. Period. BMD, also a must. Maybe some of the funding for these along with the funding for AF ICBMs should come from a separate from pot, rather than being alocated under DON, USAF budgets because they tend to skew the numbers and then others start crying uncle cause their piece of the pie is not as large. Know its been tried before without success but maybe another run at it. Look at basics. Protection of SLOCs. A must. But we're sucking at it in the HOA. Impotent against degenerates running around in small boats with AKs and RPGs. Yet our 3 billion dollar destroyers, UAVs from seychelles and CTF 151 with a good number of assets are unable to curtail the number of incidents. </span>claudionoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-56293681200745165312010-02-10T18:10:14.000-05:002010-02-10T18:10:14.000-05:00hey! but they will have carriers! and SSBNs... and...hey! but they will have carriers! and SSBNs... and there will be some destroyers, perhaps as much as 6!ewok40knoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-22848381918123893732010-02-10T17:42:52.000-05:002010-02-10T17:42:52.000-05:00The wording is because some entitlements are off t...The wording is because some entitlements are off the table even before the budget starts (Soc Sec, Medicare). The structure of the game makes the moves the way they are.Chapnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-66240555364234015752010-02-10T17:26:20.000-05:002010-02-10T17:26:20.000-05:00What worries me is that theater commanders and the...What worries me is that theater commanders and their staffs have an insatiable appetite for information. BAMS can provide quite a bit...but not without people. Manning will require some very creative solutions.Mike M.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-84157794379886643192010-02-10T17:18:59.000-05:002010-02-10T17:18:59.000-05:00The Bank of England was created because England ne...The Bank of England was created because England needed a better financial system to fight France and Spain. They consolidated the strategic victory of Admiral Rooke at Malaga financially. France Under Louis the XIV was completely ruined financially from the on-and-off wars with England/United Provinces. The long term end result being the French Revolution. <br /><br />The English won their Empire by sound financial decisions. The US won the Cold war by sound financial decisions. <br /><br />Most likely we will win the Global War on Terror with sound financial decisions. One can make all the arugments they want about glorious victories in battle. But, the only way to consolodate those victories into strategic longer term lasting results is via finance. <br /><br />Again, France lost it's chance to dominate Europe because it could not finance any more war. The Soviet Union could not afford to keep up militarily with the US. Are we going to be able to finance our military for all that is asked of it? And, I am not even getting into what happened to the infrastructure of France durring the War of Spanish Succession.<br /><br />You're absolutely right in this post that what is happening to the RN is a forcast of things to come if we do not change in the next few budget cycles.YNSNnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-47513844432652580592010-02-10T15:53:13.000-05:002010-02-10T15:53:13.000-05:00Your quote: "<span>If you assume that t...Your quote: "<span>If you assume that the USN will maintain surface ship and submarine forces of approximately the same size as today, ..<span>"</span></span><br /><br />No, actually what I have been saying for years is that all this talk about "313" etc has been a complete bluff, hope, desire, fantasy, and perhaps a lie we told ourselves. Our fleet will continue to shrink as with at static SCN or decreasing one and the products of the lost decade being an unaffordable per ship Tiffany Navy (DDG-1000, LCS, LPD-17) putting us behind the 8-ball - combined with a maintenance and PMS situation that will not create the conditions for us to get an affordable life-cycle cost for the 30-40 years we are trying to get out of our ships - the reality is that we are getting smaller. <br /><br />Until Navy leadership adopts step one (which some have, but not the critical mass needed) of the 12 step program, we cannot start the decade long process of fixing the problem<br /><br />Thank you for your comments though - please find a nom du blog and comment more. Good contribution.cdrsalamandernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-18917240710473641762010-02-10T15:34:40.000-05:002010-02-10T15:34:40.000-05:00defense dividend of 1990s is going back to bite us...defense dividend of 1990s is going back to bite us after 30 years when legacy systems need badly to be replaced... and prolonged wars of 2000s have eaten the transformation of the forces to XXI century much like Vietnam has eaten whole generation of projects in the 1960s. ewok40knoreply@blogger.com