If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Can You Handle the Truth RichA???
On Fri, 09 Dec 2011 18:28:46 -0600, Rich wrote:
Eric Stevens wrote in : How much of the $440 billion sent to Africa in the past 30-40 years came from the U.S.? Not that it helped Africa to survive. Most of it ended up in the Swiss bank accounts of warlords and tyrannical leaders. http://www.amazon.com/Nazi-Gold-Fift...3507754&sr=1-3 Regards, Eric Stevens |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Can You Handle the Truth RichA???
On 12/9/2011 7:28 PM, Rich wrote:
Eric wrote in : How much of the $440 billion sent to Africa in the past 30-40 years came from the U.S.? Not that it helped Africa to survive. Most of it ended up in the Swiss bank accounts of warlords and tyrannical leaders. And a lot of it would up in the unclaimed funds department of those banks. Eventually, to be leveraged by the banks. -- Peter |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Can You Handle the Truth RichA???
On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 02:35:39 -0600, John Turco
wrote: Eric Stevens wrote: On Sun, 20 Nov 2011 20:02:32 -0600, John Turco wrote: Eric Stevens wrote: On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:35:11 -0600, John Turco wrote: heavily edited for brevity Germany's radar technology was far more advanced than Britain's, actually. In fact, British commandos were sent to raid German hardware, so their country could catch up to its bitter enemy. As I understand it the Germans lacked the PPI display and had to use a complicated manual system to achieve the same effect. Irrelevant. For instance, they had adjustable, parabolic radar aerials...while Britain's "Home Defence" system was composed completely of fixed antennas. That was the original 'Home Chain' defense system which at least had the advantage that it detected the German raids almost as soon as they took off. I was going by memory, when I wrote "Home Defence" (sorry about that). The latter was quite crude indeed, compared to the Germans' more sophistcated and higher-frequency equipment. Which came later. But then, so too did the British later have more sophisticated higher-frequency equipment. Only after they'd stolen German radar gear and reverse-engineered it. Not so. Where do you get these ideas? Converesly, the Germans sneered at the sad stuff the British left behind in Dunkirk, France...which was also a embarrassing defeat for Britain, despite what its propaganda machine still professes. edited for brevity British propaganda was originally responsible for this myth of the Germans lagging in radar...it's understandable, given the wartime circumstances. What's perplexing, is that subsequent generations of historians and journalists have all seemed to ignore reality! It's much more complicated than that. Regards, Eric Stevens No, it's quite simple: The British lied (out of emergency), and national pride has prevented them from fully admitting German radar superiority, even today. That's your version. Regards, Eric Stevens No, not at all. Recently, I found a PDF file that I'd downloaded in January of 2004. It's presently available online, he The Radar Pages - "DEFLATING BRITISH RADAR MYTHS OF WORLD WAR II" http://www.radarpages.co.uk/download/AUACSC0609F97-3.pdf [Read it and educate yourself, Eric!] On page 2 it states "The focus of this research is on pre-war Germany and Britain; comparing and contrasting tactics and technology that existed prior to hostilities." which isn't of much relevance of the respective development of radar during WW2. Regards, Eric Stevens |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Can You Handle the Truth RichA???
On 22/12/2011 08:35, John Turco wrote:
Eric Stevens wrote: On Sun, 20 Nov 2011 20:02:32 -0600, John wrote: Eric Stevens wrote: On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:35:11 -0600, John wrote: heavily edited for brevity Germany's radar technology was far more advanced than Britain's, actually. In fact, British commandos were sent to raid German hardware, so their country could catch up to its bitter enemy. As I understand it the Germans lacked the PPI display and had to use a complicated manual system to achieve the same effect. Irrelevant. For instance, they had adjustable, parabolic radar aerials...while Britain's "Home Defence" system was composed completely of fixed antennas. That was the original 'Home Chain' defense system which at least had the advantage that it detected the German raids almost as soon as they took off. I was going by memory, when I wrote "Home Defence" (sorry about that). The latter was quite crude indeed, compared to the Germans' more sophistcated and higher-frequency equipment. Which came later. But then, so too did the British later have more sophisticated higher-frequency equipment. Onlyafter they'd stolen German radar gear and reverse-engineered it. Converesly, the Germans sneered at the sad stuff the British left behind in Dunkirk, France...which was also a embarrassing defeat for Britain, despite what its propaganda machinestill professes. The thing that made the most difference was when Britain made a working and stable high power magnetron at cm wavelengths. An invention that was almost immediately shared with America. The German radar had better aerials and transmitters up to that point but once the magnetron was in production and use for British night fighters the tables were turned. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6331897.stm We might well have lost had the invention not been shared with the USA. The cover story for it was "pilots eating carrots to see in the dark" although for some strange reason in the USA it is reported as "blueberry jam". edited for brevity British propaganda was originally responsible for this myth of the Germans lagging in radar...it's understandable, given the wartime circumstances. What's perplexing, is that subsequent generations of historians and journalists have all seemed to ignore reality! It's much more complicated than that. Regards, Eric Stevens No, it's quite simple: The British lied (out of emergency), and national pride has prevented them from fully admitting German radar superiority, even today. At the outset of the war Germany was better equipped than Britain on almost all fronts - they were after all on a planned war footing. That's your version. Regards, Eric Stevens No, not at all. Recently, I found a PDF file that I'd downloaded in January of 2004. It's presently available online, he The Radar Pages - "DEFLATING BRITISH RADAR MYTHS OF WORLD WAR II" http://www.radarpages.co.uk/download/AUACSC0609F97-3.pdf [Read it and educate yourself, Eric!] What it says was going into the war the Germans had better aerials and transmitters. It says nothing at all about how rapidly the technologies evolved in the two countries *during* the war period. The Wurtzberg antennae were certainly snapped up afterwards by the victors. They were nice pieces of kit. One was still in service many decades later as an interference monitor at MRAO, Cambridge. Regards, Martin Brown |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Can You Handle the Truth RichA???
On 2011-12-25 00:24:09 -0800, John Turco said:
John Turco wrote: Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote: heavily edited for brevity Germany didn't believe aerial radar was in use by the British and squandered a whole year of interception radar use for night fighters by trying to follow the (finally impossible to follow) order that the antennae had to be inside the plane. Britain had a central clearing room, Germany much later had only Himmelbett, which was strictly regional (and could direct only one night fighter at a time) --- and that was *after* they'd overhauled their organisation. Exactly. Germany expected miracles from it's researchers (with an unspoken 'or else'), Britain actually put significant resources to work at the problem (like the whole of the USA). Germany had 2 IFF systems (both incompatible, of course, and only working with half the radar parts (that is, Erstling sort of worked, and Zwilling didn't work at all) until the Würzburg radar sets were upgraded to be compatible with Erstling). edited The U.S. ultimately triumphed with "NORAD" -- it was so good, it became part of the "Apollo" moon missions, a quarter of a century after WWII ended. edited Correction: "LORAN" (a forerunner of "GPS"). LORAN (Long Range Radio Navigation) was only related to GPS in that it was a navigation aid, initially intended for coastal maritime navigation and eventually adopted by aviation & the military. It had nothing to do with RADAR or the detection of targets, except that it used radio signal time differences from at least two specific radio transmitters. These time differences were plotted on a chart with LORAN 'lines". modern LORAN units will provide a navigational fix without a chart, but it does not reach the accuracy of GPS. In the 1980's & 70's merchant marine LORAN was used as a supplement to astral navigation, not the replacement it many thought it could be. NORAD is something completely different, the North American Aerospace Defense Command a joint operation of the USAF and the Canadian AF which was responsible for the establishment of the Distant Early Warning Line, or "DEW Line" which provided about 3 hours warning against a polar route attack by Soviet bombers in the 1950's. With the introduction of ICBM's the DEW line became obsolete and was replaced with other technology. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Can You Handle the Truth RichA???
|
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Can You Handle the Truth RichA???
On Sun, 25 Dec 2011 02:24:09 -0600, John Turco
wrote: John Turco wrote: Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote: heavily edited for brevity Germany didn't believe aerial radar was in use by the British and squandered a whole year of interception radar use for night fighters by trying to follow the (finally impossible to follow) order that the antennae had to be inside the plane. Britain had a central clearing room, Germany much later had only Himmelbett, which was strictly regional (and could direct only one night fighter at a time) --- and that was *after* they'd overhauled their organisation. Exactly. Germany expected miracles from it's researchers (with an unspoken 'or else'), Britain actually put significant resources to work at the problem (like the whole of the USA). Germany had 2 IFF systems (both incompatible, of course, and only working with half the radar parts (that is, Erstling sort of worked, and Zwilling didn't work at all) until the Würzburg radar sets were upgraded to be compatible with Erstling). edited The U.S. ultimately triumphed with "NORAD" -- it was so good, it became part of the "Apollo" moon missions, a quarter of a century after WWII ended. edited Correction: "LORAN" (a forerunner of "GPS"). Loran was an advance on the British GEE system. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LORAN Regards, Eric Stevens |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Can You Handle the Truth RichA???
"X" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 08:50:25 -0500, George Kerby wrote: China make their slaves available to anyone. China could give a **** about polluting their air and water. They are whores. Planned obsolescence is part of Capitalism, but a Socialist such as yourself would know nothing of that. Lawsuits protect a company's product, nothing more, nothing less. Face it, Commie, you are just ****ed because you sold your AAPL at $8.00 and bought MSFT which has been stagnant for the past decade, LOL! Get over it! And you wonder why Americans are so despised? look in the mirror **** face. Yes, some despise us (the USA), yet many continue to come here for advanced degrees, or for freedom of religious expression, or for an environment relatively free of cultural bias, or for an opportunity to gain wealth by honest effort, or for the best chance to participate in the only mass-scale social experiment (with a reasonable promise of hope) currently available. USA USA USA |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Can You Handle the Truth RichA???
On 12/26/11 6:21 PM, in article , "Charles" wrote: "X" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 08:50:25 -0500, George Kerby wrote: China make their slaves available to anyone. China could give a **** about polluting their air and water. They are whores. Planned obsolescence is part of Capitalism, but a Socialist such as yourself would know nothing of that. Lawsuits protect a company's product, nothing more, nothing less. Face it, Commie, you are just ****ed because you sold your AAPL at $8.00 and bought MSFT which has been stagnant for the past decade, LOL! Get over it! And you wonder why Americans are so despised? So late for the party. SO late... |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Can You Handle the Truth RichA???
"George Kerby" wrote in message ... On 12/26/11 6:21 PM, in article , "Charles" wrote: "X" wrote in message .. . On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 08:50:25 -0500, George Kerby wrote: China make their slaves available to anyone. China could give a **** about polluting their air and water. They are whores. Planned obsolescence is part of Capitalism, but a Socialist such as yourself would know nothing of that. Lawsuits protect a company's product, nothing more, nothing less. Face it, Commie, you are just ****ed because you sold your AAPL at $8.00 and bought MSFT which has been stagnant for the past decade, LOL! Get over it! And you wonder why Americans are so despised? So late for the party. SO late... So sad. SO sad. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
I wonder how Dpreview will handle.... | Jürgen Exner | Digital SLR Cameras | 0 | October 13th 08 09:33 AM |
BEST WAY TO HANDLE D-MAC AND RITA ! | Annika1980 | 35mm Photo Equipment | 25 | November 23rd 07 02:31 AM |
How do you handle duplicates. | Steve Franklin | Digital SLR Cameras | 3 | July 4th 05 06:00 PM |
How to handle smudges on LCD? | Gene Palmiter | Digital Photography | 21 | January 15th 05 07:37 PM |
How to handle smudges on LCD? | Satoshi | Digital Photography | 0 | January 3rd 05 04:24 AM |