Jump to content

Loge

Members
  • Posts

    1,104
  • Joined

Posts posted by Loge

  1. On 2/6/2024 at 10:23 PM, Werthead said:

    This off-season has been the craziest in some time.

    Christian Horner is now being investigated for highly inappropriate behaviour at Red Bull towards a female colleague, which he is vigorously denying. However, Red Bull's parent company have stepped in to handle the investigation (overruling the racing team's internal HR process) and have brought in external investigators. Reportedly they are keen to avoid damage to the brand and they do not want it hanging over them for the car launch on 15 February, let alone the season start on 29 February, so unless they can wrap this up very quickly in Horner's favour, it looks like he might be booted. Also, the relationship between the parent company in Salzburg and the race team in Milton Keynes has become more fractious since Dietrich Mateschitz passed away in 2022, with apparent rumours of a rift between Horner and the new owners.

    It's a bit more complicated. Dietrich Mateschitz owned 49% of the company but could run it as if he owned 100%. When he died his son Mark inherited the 49% but not the right to run the company. The other 51% are owned by Chalerm Yoovidhya, the heir of the Thai co-founder, who wants a say in the running of the company. Looks like the folks at Fuschl headquarters don't like that. As for the F1 team, Horner has Yoovidhya's backing, but not that of the Austrian faction. 

    Meanwhile, Jos Verstappen has openly called for Horner's removal.

  2. 9 hours ago, ThinkerX said:

    Russia is unlikely to be in shape to invade any other country for several decades regardless of whether they win the war in Ukraine. The war has accelerated their ongoing demographic catastrophe, which combined with sanctions, an aging and incompetent leadership, and severe economic issues puts them in bad shape.

     

    Actually, Russia could be ready for the next war in six years.

    https://dgap.org/en/research/publications/preventing-next-war-edina-iii

  3. 2 hours ago, The Anti-Targ said:

    The point is the current non-membership of NATO and the EU were there as propaganda tools for making a move in Ukraine, plus all the crap about Ukraine being a mere province of Russia. These things don't apply to Poland.

    Russia may not claim Poland as a province (though large chunks of it belonged to the Russian empire), but definitely a client state with limited sovereignty. Thus the 2021 ultimatum for NATO to pull back to its 1997 borders.

  4. On 1/11/2024 at 11:26 AM, RhaenysBee said:

    Do you have attached bottle caps in your countries as well? let me put it mildly and say it isn’t quite the packaging revolution I was expecting in the 2020s. Or if I want to put it harshly, what an annoying, idiotic piece of crap invention, I hate it, do aluminum bottles, do glass bottles, do anything but, do better. Ffs. 

    That's EU regulations at work. 

  5. 9 hours ago, Werthead said:

    I think that takes us up to 20 Su-34s lost to date; with more than half of them lost in the first six months of the war. Russia has around 138 left (how many operational and how many have been damaged, cannibalised for parts etc is unknown), but they've been keeping them well back out of range, and only recently started losing more due to Patriot losses and being forced to fly closer to the front.

    What Ukraine probably really wants to take out are the Tupolev bombers which are air-launching long-range munitions from well inside Belarusian or Russian airspace. Russia has relatively few (28, but only ~14 are believed to be airworthy) so taking out even a couple of them would have a huge impact on Russia's ability to launch long-range munitions at Ukrainian targets.

    Well, those are strategic bombers from the 1950s. Russia uses them to launch mid-range missiles because the land-based variants, of which a lot existed during the Cold War, were banned by the INF treaty and subsequently destroyed. That treaty is no longer in force but Russia's inventory is still mostly post-Cold War, so most missiles are launched from planes or submarines.  From what I have read, those planes are quite expensive to maintain, too, each flight requiring three days of preparation. 

    What's remarkable about the recent strike is that Russia used ten Kinshal missiles, one of Putin's much bragged-about wonderweapons. Not only are these missiles quite expensive and meant to carry nuclear warheads, they were all shot down too.

  6. 12 hours ago, Werthead said:

    What is bizarre is an apparently pre-prepared press release in which they confusingly called "Belgorod" "Belgrade."

    No mystery there. From Wikipedia: 

    Quote

    The name Belgorod (Белгород) in Russian literally means "white city", a compound of "белый" (bely, "white, light") and "город" (gorod, "town, city"). The name is a reference to the region's historical abundance of limestone.[14] Etymologically, the name corresponds to other Slavic city-names of identical meaning: Belgrade, Belogradchik, Białogard, Biograd, Bilhorod Kyivskyi, and Bilhorod-Dnistrovskyi.

     

  7. 13 hours ago, williamjm said:

    It's probably difficult to know what the expectations are for historical epics now given how rare they seem to be. It has already made more than twice what The Last Duel did.

    Normally you expect a movie to at least break even on the production budget plus other cost. By a common rule of thumb that required a revenue of three times the production budget. Napoleon had a budget of 200 million, which would require about 600 million at the box office. So, if normal economics applied, it would be an epic flop. But as it was produced by Apple for streaming, the box office isn't that important.

  8. 40 minutes ago, Zorral said:

    O, so Deadline Hollywood lied to us?  Who'd a thot . . . .

    Deadline Hollywood claims that the movie "exceeded expectations." Apparently, those expectations were pretty low as far as box office revenue is concerned.

  9. 4 hours ago, Toth said:

    The Gepard is just a clever slug thrower mounted on a Leopard 1 chassis. It's decidedly not amphibious, but it doesn't need to be, because Ukraine got plenty of pontoon bridges and bridge-layer vehicles. The issue is, of course, suppressing Russian artillery near the Dnepr enough to make a concerted crossing less suicidal. The only truly amphibious vehicles Ukraine has are the poor old BMPs. Here Ukraine's counter artillery capabilities are king.

    But yeah, like Makk says, Gepards have proven to be awesome at drone defense and while their original mission profile back when they were designed was to protect armored units on the move, it has its reason why Germany has been phasing it out. I don't think it can be expected to defend itself against any fighter and would struggle even against helicopters hurling missiles at it from outside its range. You really want to bring missiles for that job. Ukraine may receive 15 more Gepards from Germany and 30 the US bought from Jordan pretty much as we speak, but I still doubt Ukraine wants to risk them at the front line for the expectation of dubious results.

    It's quite frustrating. I've just scrolled through the Wikipedia articles to see what else we in Germany could deliver for a push. The Gepard has a range of 5,5 km. It was so far "replaced" with Ozelot, a light weapons carrier with some missiles attached to it. Those are mostly just Stingers with an 8 km range or LFK NG, which have a 10 km range. The problem is, Germany only has 19 of those, most currently stationed in Lithuania...

    Strange, the website for the Skyranger, the Boxer variant that is supposed to be a beefed up Gepard, says its effective firing range is only 4 km, but it's also advertised specifically to cost-effectively bring down drone swarms, not to defend against jets and missiles.

    I think the Gepard could shoot down any missile fired at it, though the aircraft if was launched from would usually be out of range. And while not amphibious, it should have some fording capability. The Leopard 1 it's based on certainly has. Not sure if that's enough to cross the Dnipro, though. 

  10. Haven't listened to AM radio for decades. The pulled the plug here in 2015. (Well, that's what Wikipedia says. I didn't notice at the time.) FM was supposed to have been phased out in 2012 in the EU, but they cancelled those plans as the successor, DAB, wasn't very successful. So they created a new digital standard, DAB+, which is no supposed to succeed FM. It's mandatory in cars. 

     

    AM radio was a thing in the cold war, because radio waves don't stop at the border. Western radio and TV were important to people stuck behind the iron curtain. We don't really have their equivalent anymore.

  11. 13 hours ago, LongRider said:

    27 August 1883

    The biggest explosion the world has ever known – an estimated 13,000 times greater than the bomb that destroyed Hiroshima – happened on this day as eruptions of the Krakatoa volcano reached their climax.

    Krakatoa: The World’s Mightiest Explosion - On This Day

    The biggest volcanic eruption on record is the 1815 eruption of Mount Tambora:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1815_eruption_of_Mount_Tambora

  12. Found a source after all, albeit in German:

    https://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/unglueck-von-smolensk-russischer-absturzbericht-empoert-kaczynski-bruder-a-739154.html

     

    Quote

    Schuld treffe den polnischen Kommandeur Andrzej Blasik, der mit 0,6 Promille Alkohol im Blut trotz Warnungen der russischen Flugüberwachung die Piloten zur Landung gezwungen habe, sagte die Luftfahrtexpertin Tatjana Anodina bei der Veröffentlichung des russischen Abschlussberichts. 

    Blasik habe laut Stimmenrekorder direkt im Cockpit Druck auf die Piloten ausgeübt, sagte Anodina. Auch Kaczynskis Protokollchef habe sich vorschriftswidrig in der Pilotenkanzel aufgehalten.

     

  13. 11 minutes ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

    You fly the plane, you are in charge. (Not) Flying to the alternate airport was the decission for the pilot. Arguably not a good career move, but crashing the plane wasn't a good career move either.  Ultimately it was his decission to try that difficult landing at an airfield he was not familiar with.

    True, but tell that to an old general who grew up in the Soviet / Warsaw Pact system. Taking no for an answer from a mere captain probably isn't something they're accustomed to. Of course the pilot should have stood up to them, but that may have ended his career, too. This seems to be a wider issue in post-Warsaw Pact forces, BTW. The older, and more senior folks still follow the old rules.

    Anyway, the story may have been retracted, as I can't find a good source anymore. It definitely was run by a reputable source a couple of years ago. 

  14. 10 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

    Yeah, nevermind the official report (co-authored by Polish and Russian investigators), because the folks from piss party with the remaining half of the clown twins is promoting some conspiracy theory, they regularly use for political gain.

    Wikipedia link. Just scroll down, they have links to the official reports in Polish and English.

    Long story short. Unsafe low visibility approach by the pilots caused this crash.

    Can't find a link right now, but from what I remember, the pilot (an Air Force captain) was bullied into the reckless landing attempt by his big shot passengers, particularly the Air Force Chief of Staff. It was the Poles, not the Russians, who wanted the truth suppressed and blame it on the pilot alone to avoid embarrassment. 

  15. 1 hour ago, Erik of Hazelfield said:

    What are the problems involved in that? The record for staying in space is 437 days, by cosmonaut Valeri Polyakov on the Russian space station Mir. A quick search says a Mars journey takes seven months so a round trip would be on the same order of magnitude as has already been achieved.

    I’m likely missing something here so please enlighten me! 

    Mir was in a low earth orbit. So is the ISS. Those low orbits are protected by the earth's magnetic field. Once a spacecraft is more than 1000km away from the earth's surface it get exposed to a lot of radiation. Depending on the solar activity, a flight to the moon can already be deadly.

×
×
  • Create New...