Late n’ Rare Flightline Friday: The World’s Worst Carrier, Kuznetsov October 24, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, asshatery, disaster, Flightline Friday, foolishness, fun, non squitur, pr stunts, silliness, Society, technology.
A lot of folks apparently got excited last week when, for the 7th time in its nearly 30 year history the broken down, way too small, horribly designed (and only) Russian carrier the Admiral Kuznetsov put to sea to ostensibly conduct combat operations off of Syria. If the carrier makes it to the Eastern Med – which is by no means certain, given its deplorable history – Kuznetsov will take party in combat operations for the first time with its tiny fixed wing fleet of 16 Su-33 aircraft.
But first she (or, as the Russians say, he) has to get there. And that’s been the problem in the past. Even when Kuznetsov made it to Eastern Med, she was generally in too poor condition to actually do anything remotely military. Her freshwater condensers constantly crap out, meaning they can’t run the turbines, meaning the ship has to be towed back to port. Why else do you think the Russians never let Kuznetsov put to sea without the world’s largest tug as escort? Does the US Navy do this, with their carriers? The Japanese? Italians? Spanish? Even the Brazilians? No, no they do not.
Kuznetsov was a product of two disastrous characteristics: inexperienced, frankly incompetent design, and late-Soviet-era build standards. Coupled together, and you have one of the most poorly designed and built ships ever to slide down the ways. Her horrific design and shoddy workmanship are legendary. The phased array antennas on the island? – they’re concrete ballast, as the real radar was never made functional. The plumbing is worthlessly rusted out in half or more of the ship. Basically half of the ship is unlivable. The ship is only marginally large enough to handle the huge Su-33 tactical aircraft, and can only carry a handful of them, really barely enough to protect the carrier (if that), let alone project power anywhere. And her power plant…….a large steam unit……….has always been her most pronounced weak point.
It appears to have gotten even worse. While passing through the English Channel, Kuznetsov belched forth such hideous, thick plumes of smoke from her oil fired engines that I seriously doubt she could conduct flight operations under such conditions. See, carriers, when they do flight ops, always turn into the wind. Pilots trying to land on Kuznetsov would be rendered almost totally blind by these clouds of incredibly dense smoke emanating from the ship and flowing straight into their approach path to land. And this was while cruising at a leisurely 7-8 knots, not the 25+ generally required for flight operations. I would wager she can’t come close to that speed with engines in such dire shape*. If she can, her pilots will probably be splattered all over the round down trying to land.
Wow. They are either using incredibly dirty, unrefined oil, or those engines have unbelievable problems. Likely a bit of both.
This is not made up stuff. How to deal with carrier smokestack emissions prior to the advent of gas turbines and nukes was a huge issue. That’s one reason US carriers wound up with their islands so far back, which generally prevented the gasses from spreading so much they seriously affected visibility. On earlier Essex class carriers, with islands roughly midship, this was much more of a problem. The Japanese, on their WWII carriers, actually vented the boiler gasses downward, below the level of the flight deck, to try to deal with this.
Of course, US and allied pilots go through the training hell of learning to make night traps using only mirror, ball, and the screams of the LSO. Those landings are dang near blind, so it was generally less of a problem for US naval aviators even when we still had oil-fired carriers (which, we don’t. The last were retired nearly 10 years ago).
So don’t get too worked up over Putin’s latest bluster. This one is much more show than go. That’s all any combat operations conducted from Kuznetsov will be, if there are any – show. And it will be another hellish cruise for her crew, which despises the ship to the extent they mutinied a short while back. This is a ship that has spent over 95% of her 30 year career tied up pierside or in drydock. She’s a floating disaster, and the Chinese were probably suckers to gain most of their carrier knowledge, and their currently only operational carrier, from the incompleted hulk of Kuznetsov’s sister, now finished and called Laioning by the Red Chinese. She has all the same engines and other design flaws of the original, and to date hasn’t put to sea very often at all, by Western standards.
I loved the jokes on Ace: the world’s first wood-, or possibly peat-, burning aircraft carrier. I don’t think Lexington put out that much smoke after taking multiple Jap torpedoes at Coral Sea.
*- In fact, Kuznetsov has apparently never come close to her design speed of 29 kts
Non Sequitur Post of the Week – NIJ Standards for Body Armor October 12, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, blogfoolery, Dallas Diocese, firearms, fun, non squitur, silliness, technology.
Totally non sequitur, just an FYI for those who have no idea what we’re talking about in some other comment threads, the National Institutes of Justice body armor rating levels. I wonder if Bishop Farrell would have ever gotten around to impugning those of his flock who make use of passive defense, as he did so often against active defense (firearms)?
Drat, I guess we’ll never know now. Keep praying for our new bishop, whoever he may be.
BTW, Camper, this list more or less confirms that you are correct, Level IIIA is generally considered proof against most submachine gun rounds, which makes sense, since most subs fire 9 mm, .45, or similar handgun rounds, though at somewhat higher velocity than standard hand guns. Also remember that all soft body armor is pretty much useless against pointy weapons like knives, swords, battleaxes, broad-point arrows, etc.
|NIJ LEVEL I:
This armor protects against .22 caliber Long Rifle Lead Round Nose (LR LRN) bullets with nominal masses of 2.6 g (40 gr) impacting at a minimum velocity of 320 m/s (1050 ft/s) or less and 380 ACP Full Metal Jacketed Round Nose (FMJ RN) bullets with nominal masses of 6.2 g (95 gr) impacting at a minimum velocity of 312 m/s (1025 ft/s) or less.
|NIJ LEVEL IIA:
(Lower Velocity 9mm, .40 S&W). This armor protects against 9mm Full Metal Jacketed Round Nose (FMJ RN) bullets with nominal masses of 8.0 g (124 gr) impacting at a minimum velocity of 332 m/s (1090 ft/s) or less and .40 S&W caliber Full Metal Jacketed (FMJ) bullets with nominal masses of 11.7 g (180 gr) impacting at a minimum velocity of 312 m/s (1025 ft/s) or less. It also provides protection against Level I threats. Level IIA body armor is well suited for full-time use by police departments, particularly those seeking protection for their officers from lower velocity .40 S&W and 9mm ammunition.
|NIJ LEVEL II:
(Higher Velocity 9mm, .357 Magnum). This armor protects against .357 Magnum jacketed soft-point bullets with nominal masses of 10.2 g (158 gr.) impacting at a velocity of 425 m/s (1,395 ft/s) or less and against 9mm full-jacketed bullets with nominal velocities of 358 m/s (1,175 ft/s). It also protects against most other factory loads in caliber .357 Magnum and 9mm as well as the Level I and IIA threats. Level II body armor is heavier and more bulky than either Levels I or IIA. It is worn full time by officers seeking protection against higher velocity .357 Magnum and 9mm ammunition.
|NIJ LEVEL IIIA:
(.44 Magnum; Submachine Gun 9mm). This armor protects against .44 Magnum, Semi Jacketed Hollow Point (SJHP) bullets with nominal masses of 15.55 g (240 gr.) impacting at a velocity of 426 m/s (1,400 ft/s) or less and against 9mm full-metal jacketed bullets with nominal masses of 8.0 g (124 gr.) impacting at a velocity of 426 m/s (1,400 ft/s) or less. It also provides protection against most handgun threats as well as the Level I, IIA, and II threats. Level IIIA body armor provides the highest level of protection currently available from concealable body armor and is generally suitable for routine wear in many situations. However, departments located in hot, humid climates may need to evaluate the use of Level IIIA armor carefully.
|NIJ LEVEL III:
(High-powered rifle). This armor, normally of hard or semirigid construction, protects against 7.62mm full-metal jacketed bullets (US military designation M80) with nominal masses of 9.7 g (150 gr.) impacting at a velocity of 838 m/s (2,750 ft/s) or less. It also provides protection against threats such as 223 Remington (5.56mm FMJ), 30 Carbine FMJ, and 12-gauge rifled slug, as well as Level I through IIIA threats. Level III body armor is clearly intended only for tactical situations when the threat warrants such protection, such as barricade confrontations involving sporting rifles.
||NIJ LEVEL IV:
(Armor-piercing rifle). This armor protects against .30–06 caliber armor-piercing bullets (US military designation APM2) with nominal masses of 10.8 g (166 gr.) impacting at a velocity of 868 m/s (2,850 ft/s) or less. It also provides at least single-hit protection against the Level I through III threats.
Level IV body armor provides the highest level of protection currently available. Because this armor is intended to resist “armor piercing” bullets, it often uses ceramic materials. Such materials are brittle in nature and may provide only single-shot protection since the ceramic tends to break up when struck. As with Level III armor, Level IV armor is clearly intended only for tactical situations when the threat warrants such protection.
Love ≠ Moral Acceptance of People Doing Whatever They Want October 4, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Admin, Bible, Domestic Church, episcopate, error, family, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, Spiritual Warfare, Tradition, Virtue.
In all things I have tried to accord the conduct of my life and especially my belief to the Doctrine of the Faith as it is has been exculpated and practiced for centuries, especially the centuries prior to the modernist/leftist infiltration of the Church beginning in the early 20th century. I am more successful, probably, at the latter – the believing – than the practicing.
As I have mentioned numerous times in the past, I have radically altered many previously deeply held beliefs to be more in accord with the Doctrine of the Faith. A few examples of these:
- Contraception is always and everywhere wrong and gravely immoral – I used to not believe this
- Porn use/self-abuse are always and everywhere wrong and gravely immoral – ditto
- Usury, commonly found in capitalist systems, is always and everywhere wrong and gravely immoral – again, I changed
- The form of government established in the USA is fraught with moral problems and compromises that made our present inevitable. So I’ve gone from “USA is the greatest country that ever could be” to………..this thing is a very serious problem and is probably not fixable.
- Abortion is wanton murder of innocent life. There is never any justifiable reason for it – I used to be a bit squishy
- Jesus Christ exists whole and entire in the Real Presence of the Blessed Sacrament of the altar – I always thought it a “symbol”
- Homeschooling is by far the best, and quite possibly the only moral, option for educating children in this day and age – I definitely found this weird
- Sacramental Confession is morally vital for salvation and must be frequently availed of
And the list goes on. I cannot stress how much of a rah-rah USA is the best typical Republican I used to be. That was a core part of my personality, my belief set (even while I had strangely contrary things going on in private). But having learned the Doctrine of the Faith and the myriad ways in which the USA, at its founding, was deliberately contrived to be very contrary to that Doctrine, I now see things very differently.
I was as attached to sins against the 6th and 9th Commandments as anyone could be. Those were, so to speak, my “original sins.” That kind of thing was my first addiction. And I went very, very far down a path of personal immorality and horrific abuses to which I was constantly wedded. I mean, this was a daily, almost constant occurrence. And this later manifested in other, worse things I won’t go into. You could even say that these sins were who I was, so profound a part of my identity they had become.
Obviously, they took many years of enormous pain and effort and sacrifice to overcome. I am by no means perfect in this regard, but I have completely altered my beliefs and almost totally successfully modified my behaviors, and have come to see, with grim realism, the evil that was involved in them, and the harm they did to myself and many others. I am leaving out scads and scads of details, which would shock and dismay most if not all readers. I have a very, very dark past.
But I am hardly unique. Most everyone in this fallen age, having to swim in the moral sewer we occupy, have had similar experiences. Some were more fortunate than others. Some were able to (largely) overcome their sins through much prayer and sacrifice by themselves and often others but basically kept their lives intact. Others have not been so fortunate, and have experienced divorce, collapse of business, etc., as a result of their attachment to sin.
We swim in a sea of lies. The primary one is that the culture, under the influence of leftist thought which has penetrated very deeply into the Church, purports that love = endorsing/approving of everything someone really really wants to do especially if it is of a sexual nature or somehow serves the agencies of the political-cultural Left. This is a total corruption of the proper understanding of love. Love, true love, must always, everywhere, be ordered to the eternal good of souls.
What we see described as “love” even by high-placed Church leaders is really a degraded form of sentimentality that is as pernicious as it is destructive. We absolutely must practice love/charity universally, but the modern world has twisted love from its roots in the salvation of souls to being something very perverse, requiring an endorsement or at least tacit acceptance of things that we know with absolute certainty will lead souls to eternal ruin.
This is not some made up belief I am proclaiming. These are not just my opinions. We have the divine words of Jesus Christ Himself to make this clear to us, as recorded inerrantly – without error – in Sacred Scripture.
Romans i:24-28, 32
24 Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, *to uncleanness: to dishonour their own bodies among themselves.
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie: and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26 For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature.
27 And, in like manner the men also, leaving the natural use of the woman, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error.
28 And as they liked not to have God in their knowledge; God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient………
32 Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they, who do such things, are worthy of death: and not only they who do them, but they also who consent to them that do them
But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.
And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand.
And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.
And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words: going forth out of that house or city shake off the dust from your feet.
Do not think that I came to send peace upon earth: I came not to send peace, but the sword. ForI came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
To sum up all the above, Saint Paul makes clear the continuation of the constant revelation in the Old Law against those sins which have always been judged by the Church to be particularly noxious for souls and offensive to God. Our Lord tells us very plainly that those who refuse the Doctrine of the Faith are to be excluded from the community of believers, and those who do so obstinately must even at some point be, in a manner of speaking, left apart. And of course Our Blessed Lord told us that His beliefs, which are so contrary to our fallen natures and the evil rulers of this world, would cause strife and division even within families.
ALL OF THIS IS BASED COMPLETELY ON LOVE. True love, that is, love ordered for the best eternal end of souls. That love may seem shockingly contrary to this fallen world and its lying “wisdom,” but it remains all the same.
The early Church was rife with confirmations of all these beliefs. The particular sins decried by Saint Paul were regarded with a particular revulsion by the early Church and were viewed as being particularly egregious. As I noted in another recent post, the martyrs wouldn’t even do something so small as burn a pinch of incense to the emperor. Do you think they turned a blind eye to sins that were so obviously and plainly denounced in the Bible?
What is outlined above is a very brief but also very holistic explanation of the nature of true love ordered for the salvation of souls. It is not sentimental. It is, from the eyes of a world that has become a past master at twisting Scripture to its own ends and finding souls eager to listen, “hard,” unfair, even.
There are many more aspects at play. Much of what we hear within and outside the Church is riven with overtones of moral blackmail. If you “judge,” you don’t love. This is so wrong as to be evil. What we see described as “love” even by high-placed Church leaders is really a degraded form of sentimentality that is as pernicious as it is destructive. We absolutely must practice love/charity universally, but the modern world has twisted love from its roots in the salvation of souls to being something very perverse, requiring an endorsement or at least tacit acceptance of things that we know with absolute certainty will lead souls to eternal ruin. “Love the sinner” has become “never question or correct the sin.” Especially with the particular sin we are discussing now, we are presented with a particularly reprehensible form of blackmail: either you endorse my lifestyle choices, or you do not love me. But in fact the highest act of love is to always work towards the eternal good of souls, which may, at times, require very painful choices.
The one great danger I have seen in these types of situations is that simple, tacit acceptance is rarely enough. There is always heavy pressure to transform that acceptance into full-throated endorsement. That is what has happened to the “Always Our Children” groups here in the Diocese. Whatever they might have been in the beginning, today, these are nothing but vehicles for the proclamation of the glories of perverse lifestyles and the squashing of all opposition.
There’s much more, but I’m running quite long as it is. One additional thing I’d like to bring up is that this blog takes a very strong stand on these matters, especially those related to the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah, for several reasons. For one, this blog has always been ordered primarily towards the confirmation of the faithful, and much less for those outside the Faith or wavering.
Secondly, I take a very strong stand and use sometimes harsh terms because manipulation of the language is probably the prime means by which the political-cultural Left and the perverse agenda has gained its many “victories.” Yes I decry these sins in terms many find harsh, shocking, and maddening, but it is done to provide a sort of counterweight to the many, many voices out there in the culture declaring 2+2=5, perversion of grace-filled faculties = love, and all the rest.
Finally, I believe God commands it. Many have deeply imbibed a very feminized, or probably better, demasculinized, understanding of the Faith, where the Christian must always been meek and surrendering. That’s not the way most Saints conducted themselves, especially prior to the protestant revolt. What some may believe is harsh uncharitability, others find to be badly needed clarity.
Anyway, perhaps this helps some folks understand a little better where I come from and why I do what I do. I have the zeal of the converted in more ways than most folk can probably imagine.
Some Good Local Catholic Art…….. September 30, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Art and Architecture, awesomeness, fun, General Catholic, Glory.
……and then have a nice weekend.
Reader SL is also an artist, a couple of whose works I have posted before. He has a new one I like quite a bit:
And a previous work:
I’m off. I pray you have a blessed weekend.
Frightline Friday: Lockheed to Develop Mach 20 Strike System September 23, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Flightline Friday, fun, history, non squitur, silliness, technology.
DARPA has been working on this for over a decade, with not exactly stellar success. Called originally Prompt Global Strike, as people began to wrap their heads around the “Global War on Terror” in the early 00s, they began to comprehend how useful a weapon system that could be launched from CONUS and hit a target anywhere in the world within 30-40 minutes.
Some bright folks at the Air Staff exclaimed: “Why, we have ICBMs that can do that! We just need to put a conventional warhead (or not) on an ICBM and, voila!, capability created!” Someone then said……how would the Russians or Chinese feel about an ICBM launch from the US, even if told about it in advance? How would they feel about ICBM warheads sailing overhead in route to a target in Afghanistan or Yemen? Back to the drawing board……..
So began what has turned into a long-term effort to develop what amounts to a sort of hypersonic cruise missile, launched from a bomber or perhaps a sub and carried aloft to a high, but nowhere near orbital, altitude, and flying to the target at speeds between Mach 5 (3500 mph) and Mach 20 (14,000 mph).
There have been a number of programs – Hypersonic Test Vehicles HTV-1, HTV-2, X-43, X-51, and the Advanced Hypersonic Weapon. Their success rate has been around 50% so far. HTV really never quite worked and seems to have been cancelled. AHW seem to be ongoing. All of these follow a “depressed,” atmospheric trajectory deliberately, to prevent other nuclear armed powers from believing they are being attacked with ballistic missiles. How excited they will become at a Mach 20 scramjet coming in their general direction remains to be seen.
The US is hardly the only country pursuing this technology. China and Russia both are, and the Chinese program may be more advanced than the US at this time.
Perhaps to redress that, DARPA awarded a $150 million contract to Lockheed to develop a new Tactical Boost Glide weapon. $150 is probably chicken feed to develop something so radically advanced, but perhaps that’s just for starters:
Lockheed Martin just won a $147 million contract to build a vehicle capable of flying at speeds of Mach 20. The goal is to create a high-speed delivery system that could bomb targets thousands of miles away in an hour or less. It’s similar to what other countries, including Russia and China, are working on.
Tactical Boost Glide (TBG) will be an air-launched boost glide weapon system. The TBG itself is a aerodynamic, arrowhead-shaped vehicle fitted on the nose of a rocket. The rocket in turn is carried by a large aircraft such as a B-52 bomber, which would carry the rocket to high altitude and then launch it. The rocket boosts TBG to an evenhigher altitude, whereupon a scramjet or ramjet kicks in and quickly accelerates it up to hypersonic speeds. TBG then glides unpowered the rest of the way to the target.
How fast will TBG go? A nearly identical program concluded in 2011 reached speeds of Mach 20. At that speed, a hypersonic vehicle could travel from New York City to Los Angeles in 12 minutes, or London to Sydney in 49 minutes.
Hypersonic is the next frontier in weaponry. The super-fast speeds could make it possible to destroy a faraway but time-critical target—say, a North Korean missile fueling on the launch pad or a terrorist meeting in a remote location. Hypersonic speed also makes interception very difficult—and makes the actual vehicle a weapon when the kinetic energy of an object traveling at Mach 20 is transferred to a target.
Meh. Prompt Global Strike, like unmanned systems, is more of a politician’s dream than what I suspect will become a real military capability. Politicians love unmanned systems for the promise of being able to fight wars without much risk of loss of US life. I pray to God they never become really capable, or we’ll be killing people around the world without end at a far higher rate than we do now. There’d be no end to it.
Don’t get me wrong, hypersonics have great utility and I think they will eventually come along, but I think Mach 20 is quite a reach. The temperatures and pressures at that altitude (~200,000 ft) are fantastic – hundreds if not thousands of PSI, 3500 degrees F. Mach 5-8 seems much more reasonable, and the technology to handle those temps and pressures has been around a long time.
The earlier X-43:
A successful hypersonic weapon, whether an air-breathing scramjet powered vehicle, or one that glides after initial boost to terrific speed, can be much more difficult to intercept than an ICBM RV because they are not on a fixed ballistic profile, and will likely be capable of something like aircraft like maneuvers, albeit, at enormous speeds.
Long ago, the Air Force had a project for a replacement to the venerable B-52. The replacement was called the XB-70. It was killed largely due to McNamara’s inveterate dislike for bombers, which stemmed from several reasons, most of them faulty. The XB-70 was killed because it was designed to fly at Mach 3.2 at 70-80,000 ft. With the shootdown of Francis Gary Powers U-2 in 1960, some felt that high altitude was too dangerous, due to the proliferation of surface-to-air missiles that could reach the same or higher altitudes.
However, one massive bit of the equation McNamara missed was the difference in performance. At 70,000 ft, the U-2 cruised at about 400 mph. That’s all it could do. The B-70 would have been 5 times as fast. While the B-70 had a much larger radar cross section and could thus be detected sooner, 30 years of operation with the SR-71 proved that the high-altitude domain had not been rendered implausible due to surface to air missiles. Flying at the same speeds and altitudes, the SR-71 was targeted and fired upon by SAMs literally hundreds of times, but not one was ever shot down or even damaged.
The reason is that even very large SAMs have very little energy left when they get to that kind of extreme altitude, and the aircraft are often about as maneuverable (if not more) than the SAM way up there in the up there. Also, the enormous speed of the SR-71 (or B-70) means that even a slight change in course results in a displacement of the flight path on the order of miles within a minute or less. So, the SAM, targeted to a particular spot in the sky where the fast, high-altitude aircraft is expected to be, winds up missing by a huge distance when the aircraft turns to avoid. Really no air defense systems of the 60s-90s timeframe could react quickly enough, or had missiles with high enough flight performance, to hit a maneuvering target at those speeds and altitudes.
And that doesn’t even begin to factor in the very advanced electronic countermeasures an aircraft like the B-70 or SR-71 would have or did carry. An ICBM RV is simple to shoot down by comparison, being on a fixed ballistic trajectory – albeit very, very fast – it WILL be at a certain point in the sky at a certain point in time and there is nothing that can be done to change that. Get an interceptor to that same point at the right time, and you have a kill.
The Russians now purport to have “maneuverable” RVs (with attached rockets or lift devices to deviate from the fixed ballistic trajectory) able to defeat missile defense systems, but they a) drastically exaggerate their capabilities, and b) fail to note that they are so heavy and cumbersome that they have a huge negative impact on the ICBM’s limited payload/range capabilities.
The prototype XB-70 #2 reached a peak speed of Mach 3.07 and an altitude of 72,800 ft during it’s test program. The production B-70s would have been equipped with more powerful engines and able to fly faster and quite a bit higher.
But I guess that’s a story for another day.
Most Convincing Ad For Trump I’ve Seen Yet September 22, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, asshatery, disaster, foolishness, Revolution, scandals, self-serving, Society.
I guess we can write off all those “Robert Downey Jr. is a secret Catholic/conservative” memes now:
Of course, Hollywood has never, ever before pretended that failure to vote for their preferred left-wing candidate would result in national disaster:
So couple the first few seconds of this one (don’t recommend going beyond about 20 seconds, because gratuitous, lazy use of vulgar language ensues):
And basically the same message was conveyed in 2008. Vote for Obama or America dies.
I think more and more people, however, have had more than enough of being told what to do by high school drop outs with beautiful faces who can read a teleprompter (marginally well). A lot of Trump’s rise, for good or ill, has to do with telling off this segment of the population, which is why their endorsement this time is all the more desperate and apocalyptic-sounding. If Trump wins, it’s a massive shot at their credibility. They are not the only ones, however.
For someone like me, who choked on Hollywood’s smug superiority and sneering condescension about age 19, the more they freak out, the more the BLM types and all the other leftist’s, genuine and otherwise, lose their minds over Trump’s rise, the more I think…….maybe there is something to this guy. I am far from alone.
Or, if brevity is the soul of wit, I could simply say to Downey Jr and the others……….your ad is your failure. There’s no better ad for Trump than these sorts of messages.
Reminder: Fall Ember Days Start Tomorrow 09/21/16 September 20, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin.
EOM. Maybe a bit more tomorrow. Fast and partial abstinence tomorrow and Saturday, full abstinence on Friday (per, I’m certain, your usual practice).
Mac n’ Cheese for me!
My new all-time favorite UT player September 16, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, non squitur, silliness.
Forget Vince Young, Colt McCoy, Jerry Gray, Earl Campbell, Britt Hager, Lam Jones, or David Thomas, Malcom Roach is my man:
True freshman monster at outside linebacker, obviously the greatest player ever with the greatest name ever.
Surprisingly, no relation.
Flightline Friday: Naval Aviation in the Mekong Delta, 1967-1972 September 15, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, awesomeness, Flightline Friday, fun, history, non squitur, silliness, Society, technology.
One of the relatively little-known aspects of the massive, never-ending air war over Southeast Asia (1964-1973) was the US Navy’s role in it. I do not refer, in this instance, to the numerous carriers and carrier air wings that served throughout the war, involving essentially every attack carrier the Navy had in service in that timeframe, and pretty much every air wing, as well. That’s a separate subject from this post, and, really, one that was so vast it would be impossible to encapsulate in a single blog post.
What I am referring to is something a bit different. These were two land-based squadrons operated in support of the “Brown Water Navy” that patrolled the Mekong Delta and other rivers of Vietnam, seeking to interdict communist supplies flowing down these vast, largely unpoliced waters. The two squadrons in question were Helicopter Attack Squadron (Light) Three -HA(L)-3 – and Light Attack Squadron Four – VAL-4. The former was equipped with Huey gunships (generally UH-1E) and known as the Sea Wolves, and the latter with OV-10A and -10D Broncos and known as the Black Ponies.
HA(L)-3 served from 1967 through 1972, and VAL-4 from 1969 – 1972. Both were focused on defending US and South Vietnamese Navy riverine craft from communist attack, providing close air support to allied troops conducting operations in the region, and also flying armed reconnaissance missions attacking targets of opportunity. VAL-4 flew from Vung Tau (hometown of a friend of mine, once a sleeping fishing village, now a major resort city) and Binh Tuy. HA(L)-3 was nominally based at Vung Tau and Binh Tuy, as well, but operated numerous detachments from floating logistics bases within the Delta itself, using converted WWII LSTs and other ships for this purpose.
Both squadrons were fairly large in terms of equipment and personnel and hit well above their weight in terms of the impact they had on the war. Both flew outrageous numbers of sorties, as did so many units in Vietnam (but these even more), and dropped an incredible amount of munitions. Both have proud and storied legacies well deserving of more remembrance than they have received. This post may hopefully serve to slightly rectify their relative historical anonymity.
A few videos below on both squadrons. First up, a truly excellent history of VAL-4, which not only details personnel and day-to-day operations, but also the squadron’s place in the larger war effort and the many transitions it underwent as its mission set changed due to the American withdrawal and Vietnamization. There is some really amazing air-to-air footage below of numerous OV-10 strike missions, as well as its just plain silly maneuverability (pulling 7-8G at 180kts makes for an amazingly tight turn):
Short, silent, but excellent footage of two Black Pony OV-10s carrying a load of twelve 5″ Zuni rockets (a few with fuze extenders) each on a mission over South Vietnam. The Zuni really packed a punch and has always been a favorite of the Marine Corps, which continues to use it to this day:
One major use of both VAL-4 and HA(L)-3 was as a quick-reaction force to provide air support for allied units that ran into trouble. Thus the intro to the second video below, “Scramble the Seawolves,” the first of which gives you an idea of the quick reaction missions flown, as well as a little overview of the unit, which is the most decorated Naval flying unit of all time. This first video is pretty danged good, showing a lot of combat footage and with some sound added in so it’s not just silent or with an overbearing 60s soundtrack, though you do start to get that some way in:
You’ll have to forgive the psychedelic soundtrack. Eh, it was a product of the times:
Gun run. I can’t believe those door gunners hit very much but who am I to judge?
Some pretty cool stuff. The aircraft used by both squadrons carried similar armament – the OV-10 had four built-in 7.62 mm M60D machine guns and generally carried 2.75″ and 5″ rockets, while the UH-1 could carry 7.62 mm machine guns and 2.75″ rockets, but occasionally had 12.7 mm (.50 cal) M2 machine guns in the doors.
If you’re a glutton for punishment here’s one more:
Please Pray for the Repose of the Soul of Hugh Sheridan September 15, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Dallas Diocese, Four Last Things, General Catholic, Latin Mass, sadness, shocking.
I have sat next to Hugh at most every Sunday Mass for the past 4 or 5 years. He was single and had no family I’, aware of. We always tried to save him a seat. I spoke with him just this past Sunday.
He passed away unexpectedly last night. He had been in fine health as far as I knew. He was probably well into his 70s but I’m not certain of his exact age. He was a faithful TLMer of many, many years.
If you would, in your charity, pray for the repose of his soul. He was a good guy, I liked him quite a bit.
The Requiem Mass will be at 10 am Monday at Mater Dei.
Requiescat in Pace.