| Re: Collins radio and Braniff Airways 1945 [message #388082 is a reply to message #388049] |
Fri, 25 October 2019 10:43   |
scott
Messages: 4237
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 01:24:31 +0100, Andy Walker wrote:
>>>
>>> On 23/10/2019 20:30, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>>> I read some articles and watched some videos about it. Even a movie was
>>>> made by the Britains in the 1950s about that. [...]
>>>
>>> Practically every conceivable aspect of WW2, apart from the
>>> stuff in the Pacific that we left to John Wayne to describe, was
>>> turned into a movie in the UK in the '50s.
>>
>> Suppose any war spawns movies and series half a decade later. For example
>> did the TV series Magnum P.I. (1980, holy sh**, it'll be 40 years next
>> year!) have a lot references to the Vietnam war just the decade
>> before. And then there was Delta Force with Chuck and many others.
>
> Weren’t Magnum, Rick, and whatsisname, the helicopter pilot, army buddies?
Thomas, Rick and TC (all swabbies) served in Vietnam. It's not
exactly clear why they'd be flying a Huey on extraction missions as
swabbies, however. Dramatic license, I imagine.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Collins radio and Braniff Airways 1945 [message #388083 is a reply to message #388076] |
Fri, 25 October 2019 10:45 |
scott
Messages: 4237
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:23:41 -0400
>> Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Suppose you could tag every drone with an unique ID,
>>
>> Stop right there and reflect on the fact that making a drone from
>> handily obtained components is comfortably easy enough for a fairly bright
>> ten year old.
>>
>
> I don’t claim to be an expert, but I would assume that in making your drone
> the receiver would be an off-the-shelf component, and not something you’d
> whip up from a few transistors and a soldering iron. Just like every
> ethernet chip has a unique id, assign one to every controller and receiver.
Such electronics (remotes and servos) have been hobby shop staples for
decades. Think RC planes and helicopters. There is no fundamental
difference between an RC plane and a drone.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Collins radio and Braniff Airways 1945 [message #388085 is a reply to message #387773] |
Fri, 25 October 2019 10:52 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 18:19:49 -0500, Dave Garland
<dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
> On 10/24/2019 12:14 PM, JimP wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 15:57:12 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
>> wrote:
>>> JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2019 16:17:13 -0400, Andreas Kohlbach
>>>> <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>>>> > On 21 Oct 2019 21:34:03 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On 2019-10-21, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> On Sunday, October 20, 2019 at 12:59:49 PM UTC-4, JimP wrote:
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>>> The Norden was designed in the, then, clear skies of the US Southwest.
>>>> >>>> They didn't work very well in the foggy and rainy skies of Europe.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> I don't know for sure, but I suspect there were other factors
>>>> >>> (like the Jetstream) that the Norden didn't take into account.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Temperature, for instance. The book _The Dam Busters_ mentions
>>>> >> the difficulty in calibrating temperature probes, allowing for
>>>> >> how much of the probe was in the airstream, how fast the aircraft
>>>> >> was flying, etc.
>>>> >
>>>> > Never read about it. But wasn't it easy to find the German dams? Once
>>>> > reaching the target they flew very low to deploy the bouncing bombs. The
>>>> > jet stream should not have any effect at this low altitude.
>>>>
>>>> The jet stream was a problem in Japan.
>>>>
>>>> The Dam Busters flew at 75 feet.
>>>
>>> Over water, nicht wahr?
>>
>> Yes. Over the dam reservoirs. I don't think they flew very high on the
>> way there, didn't want German radar to pick them up.
>>
> Over the reservoirs? They didn't fly from the downstream side, where
> most of the dam is exposed?
No. The bombs were designed to hit the water side of the dam and roll
down the dam wall in such a way as to stay at the dam wall. Instead of
rolling away from the dam. The later wouldn't have busted the dam.
The same guy who invented the Mullberys, and a number of other things.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: Collins radio and Braniff Airways 1945 [message #388086 is a reply to message #388049] |
Fri, 25 October 2019 10:53 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 16:34:25 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 01:24:31 +0100, Andy Walker wrote:
>>>
>>> On 23/10/2019 20:30, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>>> I read some articles and watched some videos about it. Even a movie was
>>>> made by the Britains in the 1950s about that. [...]
>>>
>>> Practically every conceivable aspect of WW2, apart from the
>>> stuff in the Pacific that we left to John Wayne to describe, was
>>> turned into a movie in the UK in the '50s.
>>
>> Suppose any war spawns movies and series half a decade later. For example
>> did the TV series Magnum P.I. (1980, holy sh**, it'll be 40 years next
>> year!) have a lot references to the Vietnam war just the decade
>> before. And then there was Delta Force with Chuck and many others.
>
> Werent Magnum, Rick, and whatsisname, the helicopter pilot, army buddies?
I remember them mentioning that a few times.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: Collins radio and Braniff Airways 1945 [message #388087 is a reply to message #388074] |
Fri, 25 October 2019 10:56 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On 25 Oct 2019 10:50:12 GMT, maus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2019-10-25, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>> On 10/24/2019 6:37 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>
>>> Modern drones are plastic, why would fabric and wood be better?
>>>
>> I'm thinking "invisible to radar", and large enough to carry a
>> destructive payload (what are the US Predator drones who have radar)
>> but anything that doesn't image well with radar works (if you can't
>> see it, it's hard to defend against). The motor would probably be
>> metal, and a little in the electronics, but the payload and flight
>> surfaces nonmetallic. Sure, these days plastic probably better than
>> fabric/wood.
>>
>> I just liked the image of a Fokker D.VII killer drone.
>
> AFAIRead, Hanna Reitsch (sp?) had a doodlebug (V) altered so it could be
> flown by a person. I wonder whay that was never developed :)
I saw some movie years ago about that. They couldn't figure out why
the V-1 kept crashing, so she got them to modify one so she could fly
it.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: Collins radio and Braniff Airways 1945 [message #388088 is a reply to message #388078] |
Fri, 25 October 2019 13:05 |
mausg
Messages: 2483
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2019-10-25, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> maus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>> On 2019-10-25, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>>> On 10/24/2019 6:37 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Modern drones are plastic, why would fabric and wood be better?
>>>>
>>> I'm thinking "invisible to radar", and large enough to carry a
>>> destructive payload (what are the US Predator drones who have radar)
>>> but anything that doesn't image well with radar works (if you can't
>>> see it, it's hard to defend against). The motor would probably be
>>> metal, and a little in the electronics, but the payload and flight
>>> surfaces nonmetallic. Sure, these days plastic probably better than
>>> fabric/wood.
>>>
>>> I just liked the image of a Fokker D.VII killer drone.
>>
>> AFAIRead, Hanna Reitsch (sp?) had a doodlebug (V) altered so it could be
>> flown by a person. I wonder whay that was never developed :)
>>
>>
>
> Toward the end of the war the Germans were coming up with all kinds of
> stuff. I think they had a piloted rocket plane intended to go after
> bombers, but Hitler vetoed it because it would have been suicide flight
> for the pilot.
>
Komet. the name, I think, not necessarily suicidel, but with no
undercarriage, to save weight, hurt pilots severely on the very hard landing.
--
Maus@ireland.xxx
Will rant for food.
You are taking the IPCC, right?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Collins radio and Braniff Airways 1945 [message #388089 is a reply to message #388088] |
Fri, 25 October 2019 13:31 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On 25 Oct 2019 17:05:36 GMT, maus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2019-10-25, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> maus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>>> On 2019-10-25, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>>>> On 10/24/2019 6:37 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Modern drones are plastic, why would fabric and wood be better?
>>>> >
>>>> I'm thinking "invisible to radar", and large enough to carry a
>>>> destructive payload (what are the US Predator drones who have radar)
>>>> but anything that doesn't image well with radar works (if you can't
>>>> see it, it's hard to defend against). The motor would probably be
>>>> metal, and a little in the electronics, but the payload and flight
>>>> surfaces nonmetallic. Sure, these days plastic probably better than
>>>> fabric/wood.
>>>>
>>>> I just liked the image of a Fokker D.VII killer drone.
>>>
>>> AFAIRead, Hanna Reitsch (sp?) had a doodlebug (V) altered so it could be
>>> flown by a person. I wonder whay that was never developed :)
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Toward the end of the war the Germans were coming up with all kinds of
>> stuff. I think they had a piloted rocket plane intended to go after
>> bombers, but Hitler vetoed it because it would have been suicide flight
>> for the pilot.
>>
>
> Komet. the name, I think, not necessarily suicidel, but with no
> undercarriage, to save weight, hurt pilots severely on the very hard landing.
That was their rocket plane to attack Allied bombers. They had to be
careful as the wheels that dropped off after they left the runway
could bounce back up and hit the rocket plane. An explosion typically
resulted. The fuel was extremely volitile.
The undercarraige had skids for landing.
Allied fighters couldn't stop them in the air, but found they were
just gliders as they went back to their home fields. Thats when the
P-51s shot them down. Some fuel fumes still in the Komet, boom.
--
Jim
|
|
|
|
| Re: Collins radio and Braniff Airways 1945 [message #388090 is a reply to message #388072] |
Fri, 25 October 2019 13:40 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2019-10-25, maus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2019-10-24, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:23:41 -0400
>> Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Suppose you could tag every drone with an unique ID,
>>
>> Stop right there and reflect on the fact that making a drone from
>> handily obtained components is comfortably easy enough for a fairly bright
>> ten year old.
>
> +1. Like the invention of fire.
"A power so great it can only be used for good or evil!"
-- Firesign Theatre
--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ "Alexa, define 'bugging'."
|
|
|
|
| Re: Collins radio and Braniff Airways 1945 [message #388092 is a reply to message #388076] |
Fri, 25 October 2019 20:36 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 07:01:17 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:23:41 -0400
>> Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Suppose you could tag every drone with an unique ID,
>>
>> Stop right there and reflect on the fact that making a drone from
>> handily obtained components is comfortably easy enough for a fairly bright
>> ten year old.
>>
>
> I dont claim to be an expert, but I would assume that in making your drone
> the receiver would be an off-the-shelf component, and not something youd
> whip up from a few transistors and a soldering iron. Just like every
> ethernet chip has a unique id, assign one to every controller and receiver.
So you're suggesting that EVERY RF chip made in the ENTIRE WORLD will
have this tag on it?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Collins radio and Braniff Airways 1945 [message #388093 is a reply to message #388078] |
Fri, 25 October 2019 20:46 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 07:01:23 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> maus <mausg@mail.com> wrote:
>> On 2019-10-25, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>>> On 10/24/2019 6:37 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Modern drones are plastic, why would fabric and wood be better?
>>>>
>>> I'm thinking "invisible to radar", and large enough to carry a
>>> destructive payload (what are the US Predator drones who have radar)
>>> but anything that doesn't image well with radar works (if you can't
>>> see it, it's hard to defend against). The motor would probably be
>>> metal, and a little in the electronics, but the payload and flight
>>> surfaces nonmetallic. Sure, these days plastic probably better than
>>> fabric/wood.
>>>
>>> I just liked the image of a Fokker D.VII killer drone.
>>
>> AFAIRead, Hanna Reitsch (sp?) had a doodlebug (V) altered so it could be
>> flown by a person. I wonder whay that was never developed :)
>>
>>
>
> Toward the end of the war the Germans were coming up with all kinds of
> stuff. I think they had a piloted rocket plane intended to go after
> bombers, but Hitler vetoed it because it would have been suicide flight
> for the pilot.
They did develop not one, but two, the Me-163 Komet and the Natter.
The Komet went into service and scored 16 kills--a version of this one
was also constructed by the Japanese but was too late to see service
in the war. The other wasn't ready for service when the war ended.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Collins radio and Braniff Airways 1945 [message #388094 is a reply to message #388078] |
Fri, 25 October 2019 21:21 |
Anne & Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
> Toward the end of the war the Germans were coming up with all kinds of
> stuff. I think they had a piloted rocket plane intended to go after
> bombers, but Hitler vetoed it because it would have been suicide flight
> for the pilot.
Iron Giant One of America's great machines comes back to life:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/03/iron-gia nt/8886/
50,000 ton presses ... most are becoming "ancient"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_Press_Program
The machines that made the Jet Age
http://boingboing.net/2012/02/13/machines.html
Germany, June 1945. The Nazi regime has been toppled; the war in Europe
is over. But the Allied victory is largely the result of sheer
overwhelming force, not technological superiority -- and the
victors know it.
....
The reasons for German air superiority were several, of course, but a
key one was their mastery of light-metal forging. While the Allies were
still bolting together their planes out of steel plate, a slow,
labor-intensive process ripe for error and unsuited to design
optimization, the Germans were stamping and squeezing out complex
structural elements from magnesium and aluminum alloys.
....
So, what do they do? Well, in strict terms, they make heavy components
for aircraft, spacecraft, and power-generation facilities. That chunk of
titanium, for example, became one of the bulkheads that anchor the
engines, fuselage, and wings of an F-15. More familiarly, every time you
fly on a Boeing or Airbus, you're relying on parts made by the Heavy
Press Program machines to keep you aloft -- things like the wing spars,
which connect the wings to the plane's chassis.
.... snip ...
after the war, US made off with lots of stuff from Germany, but
complained that the Soviets made off with more (discounting that
the Soviets did majority of the fighting).
articles mentions China are doing new massive presses with the new china
press at 80,000 tons.
http://en.people.cn/90001/90776/6317236.html
https://www.iforgeiron.com/topic/40292-china-makes-34the-big -5034-look-like-a-toy/
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
|
|
|
|
| Re: Collins radio and Braniff Airways 1945 [message #388128 is a reply to message #388076] |
Sun, 27 October 2019 03:07 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 07:01:17 -0700
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Oct 2019 14:23:41 -0400
>> Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Suppose you could tag every drone with an unique ID,
>>
>> Stop right there and reflect on the fact that making a drone
>> from handily obtained components is comfortably easy enough for a
>> fairly bright ten year old.
>>
>
> I don’t claim to be an expert, but I would assume that in making your
> drone the receiver would be an off-the-shelf component, and not something
Probably - radio receivers and servo drivers have been standard
toys for a very long time - these days you can add a small SBC and some
open source autopilot software for autonomous operation.
> you’d whip up from a few transistors and a soldering iron.
But you *could* do just that, designs are simple and easily
available.
> Just like every
> ethernet chip has a unique id, assign one to every controller and
> receiver.
There are plenty around without to be had - in every radio
controlled toy.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Collins radio and Braniff Airways 1945 [message #388183 is a reply to message #388040] |
Wed, 30 October 2019 14:02 |
|
|
Originally posted by: googlegroups jmfbahciv
On Thursday, October 24, 2019 at 3:31:41 PM UTC-4, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> googlegroups jmfbahciv <jmfbah102162@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Wednesday, October 23, 2019 at 8:00:26 AM UTC-4, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>> On 23 Oct 2019 10:22:57 GMT
>>> mausg@mail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> I am strating to get very cautious about drones, the sort of ones that we
>>>> here woul have. Its very hard to judge how far away you aare from
>>>> something, and people have been hurt
>>>
>>> Just wait until autonomous drones become popular toys for illicit
>>> delivery services, there's open source autopilot software around now.
>>>
>>
>> PETA uses them to spy on farms. they make it so painful for
>> farmers, that some are simply giving up.
>
> Another unsupported assertion from Barb.
>
> Cite please?
It happened to my sister. They put down a dozen+ horses because
of the hassle.
>
>
>> Note that the side effect
>> of going out of business is the death of all the animals (which seems
>> to be contrary to what PITAists say they believe in).
>
> Why would that be a side effect?
Stalking and harrassment takes its toll.
/BAH
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
