Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #865604 > unrolled thread

Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained Dallas Basurto <aarr@maramr.sa> - 2022-12-05 18:34 +0000
    Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-06 09:08 +0100
      Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-06 13:01 -0600
        Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-07 09:12 +0100
          Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-07 12:31 -0600
            Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-08 08:06 +0100
              Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-08 10:17 -0600
                Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-09 07:54 +0100
                  Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-09 10:56 -0600
                    Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-10 07:53 +0100
                      Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2022-12-10 06:53 -0800
                      Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-10 10:06 -0600
                        Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-11 07:48 +0100
                          Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-14 08:29 +0100
                            Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-14 06:06 -0600
                              Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained Fabio Brambilla <oaab@llbaboaa.am> - 2022-12-14 17:36 +0000
                                Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-14 13:48 -0600
                              Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-15 10:15 +0100
                                Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-15 01:17 -0800
                                  Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-15 05:57 -0600
                                    Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2022-12-16 12:45 -0800
                                Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-12-15 05:52 -0600
                                  Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2022-12-16 08:43 +0100
          Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained Jim Pennino <jimp@gonzo.specsol.net> - 2022-12-07 11:23 -0800

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#865604 — Re: The error of relativistic physicists explained

Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 02.12.2022 um 12:17 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>> Infinity is not a location, hence nothing can be placed there.
> 
> A place far away is not infinitity!
> A place far away is a real place, but in some distance.
> We only know from the context, that Einstein wanted the source so far
> away, that plane wave approximations are possible in vicinitity of the
> center of the coordinate system.

let him pack his shit and move to america. These uneducated, unskilled 
dicks, wants make us believe they landed man on moon 1969.

Endless Fail： World's Biggest Joke F-35 Has Another Disaster
https://%62%69%74%63%68%75%74%65.com/%76%69%64%65%6f/bNJIRyMgKtpp

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#865622

Am 05.12.2022 um 19:34 schrieb Dallas Basurto:
> Thomas Heger wrote:
>> Am 02.12.2022 um 12:17 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>> Infinity is not a location, hence nothing can be placed there.
>>
>> A place far away is not infinitity!
>> A place far away is a real place, but in some distance.
>> We only know from the context, that Einstein wanted the source so far
>> away, that plane wave approximations are possible in vicinitity of the
>> center of the coordinate system.
>
> let him pack his shit and move to america. These uneducated, unskilled
> dicks, wants make us believe they landed man on moon 1969.
>
> Endless Fail： World's Biggest Joke F-35 Has Another Disaster
> https://%62%69%74%63%68%75%74%65.com/%76%69%64%65%6f/bNJIRyMgKtpp
>

German military is apparently forced to buy these planes to replace 
'Tornados'.

I woukd say, that

https://www.thomasnet.com/insights/what-went-wrong-with-the-f-35-fighter-jet/

"The most expensive fighter jet in history is also one of the least 
reliable.

Earlier this year, the U.S. Air Force tacitly admitted that the F-35 
fighter jet was a failure. A very expensive, time-consuming failure.

The F-35 was supposed to be a low-cost, lightweight fighter jet. But 
with a cost of around $100 million per jet and project delays now 
stretching into double digits, the F-35 is one of the most high-profile 
failures in the history of military procurement. What happened, and what 
does the future hold for the F-35 fighter jet?"

isn't really a recommendendation.



TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#865630

On 12/6/2022 2:08 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 05.12.2022 um 19:34 schrieb Dallas Basurto:
>> Thomas Heger wrote:
>>> Am 02.12.2022 um 12:17 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>> Infinity is not a location, hence nothing can be placed there.
>>>
>>> A place far away is not infinitity!
>>> A place far away is a real place, but in some distance.
>>> We only know from the context, that Einstein wanted the source so far
>>> away, that plane wave approximations are possible in vicinitity of the
>>> center of the coordinate system.
>>
>> let him pack his shit and move to america. These uneducated, unskilled
>> dicks, wants make us believe they landed man on moon 1969.
>>
>> Endless Fail： World's Biggest Joke F-35 Has Another Disaster
>> https://%62%69%74%63%68%75%74%65.com/%76%69%64%65%6f/bNJIRyMgKtpp
>>
> 
> German military is apparently forced to buy these planes to replace 
> 'Tornados'.
> 
> I woukd say, that
> 
> https://www.thomasnet.com/insights/what-went-wrong-with-the-f-35-fighter-jet/
> 
> "The most expensive fighter jet in history is also one of the least 
> reliable.
> 
> Earlier this year, the U.S. Air Force tacitly admitted that the F-35 
> fighter jet was a failure. A very expensive, time-consuming failure.
> 
> The F-35 was supposed to be a low-cost, lightweight fighter jet. But 
> with a cost of around $100 million per jet and project delays now 
> stretching into double digits, the F-35 is one of the most high-profile 
> failures in the history of military procurement. What happened, and what 
> does the future hold for the F-35 fighter jet?"
> 
> isn't really a recommendendation.

The Lockheed Electra is a very good counterexample.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#865665

Am 06.12.2022 um 20:01 schrieb whodat:
> On 12/6/2022 2:08 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>> Am 05.12.2022 um 19:34 schrieb Dallas Basurto:
>>> Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>> Am 02.12.2022 um 12:17 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>>> Infinity is not a location, hence nothing can be placed there.
>>>>
>>>> A place far away is not infinitity!
>>>> A place far away is a real place, but in some distance.
>>>> We only know from the context, that Einstein wanted the source so far
>>>> away, that plane wave approximations are possible in vicinitity of the
>>>> center of the coordinate system.
>>>
>>> let him pack his shit and move to america. These uneducated, unskilled
>>> dicks, wants make us believe they landed man on moon 1969.
>>>
>>> Endless Fail： World's Biggest Joke F-35 Has Another Disaster
>>> https://%62%69%74%63%68%75%74%65.com/%76%69%64%65%6f/bNJIRyMgKtpp
>>>
>>
>> German military is apparently forced to buy these planes to replace
>> 'Tornados'.
>>
>> I woukd say, that
>>
>> https://www.thomasnet.com/insights/what-went-wrong-with-the-f-35-fighter-jet/
>>
>>
>> "The most expensive fighter jet in history is also one of the least
>> reliable.
>>
>> Earlier this year, the U.S. Air Force tacitly admitted that the F-35
>> fighter jet was a failure. A very expensive, time-consuming failure.
>>
>> The F-35 was supposed to be a low-cost, lightweight fighter jet. But
>> with a cost of around $100 million per jet and project delays now
>> stretching into double digits, the F-35 is one of the most
>> high-profile failures in the history of military procurement. What
>> happened, and what does the future hold for the F-35 fighter jet?"
>>
>> isn't really a recommendendation.
>
> The Lockheed Electra is a very good counterexample.
>
A better example was the 'Starfighter'.

I knew actually two ladies personally, who had a father, who died in a 
'Starfighter'.

So, from time to time, the US military is able to dump their 
'Starfighters' in Germany.

I don't know the exact mechanism, of course, but would say, that it is 
not entirely beneficial (for Germany).



TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#865682

On 12/7/2022 2:12 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 06.12.2022 um 20:01 schrieb whodat:
>> On 12/6/2022 2:08 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>> Am 05.12.2022 um 19:34 schrieb Dallas Basurto:
>>>> Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>> Am 02.12.2022 um 12:17 schrieb JanPB:
>>>>>>>>> Infinity is not a location, hence nothing can be placed there.
>>>>>
>>>>> A place far away is not infinitity!
>>>>> A place far away is a real place, but in some distance.
>>>>> We only know from the context, that Einstein wanted the source so far
>>>>> away, that plane wave approximations are possible in vicinitity of the
>>>>> center of the coordinate system.
>>>>
>>>> let him pack his shit and move to america. These uneducated, unskilled
>>>> dicks, wants make us believe they landed man on moon 1969.
>>>>
>>>> Endless Fail： World's Biggest Joke F-35 Has Another Disaster
>>>> https://%62%69%74%63%68%75%74%65.com/%76%69%64%65%6f/bNJIRyMgKtpp
>>>>
>>>
>>> German military is apparently forced to buy these planes to replace
>>> 'Tornados'.
>>>
>>> I woukd say, that
>>>
>>> https://www.thomasnet.com/insights/what-went-wrong-with-the-f-35-fighter-jet/
>>>
>>>
>>> "The most expensive fighter jet in history is also one of the least
>>> reliable.
>>>
>>> Earlier this year, the U.S. Air Force tacitly admitted that the F-35
>>> fighter jet was a failure. A very expensive, time-consuming failure.
>>>
>>> The F-35 was supposed to be a low-cost, lightweight fighter jet. But
>>> with a cost of around $100 million per jet and project delays now
>>> stretching into double digits, the F-35 is one of the most
>>> high-profile failures in the history of military procurement. What
>>> happened, and what does the future hold for the F-35 fighter jet?"
>>>
>>> isn't really a recommendendation.
>>
>> The Lockheed Electra is a very good counterexample.
>>
> A better example was the 'Starfighter'.
> 
> I knew actually two ladies personally, who had a father, who died in a 
> 'Starfighter'.
> 
> So, from time to time, the US military is able to dump their 
> 'Starfighters' in Germany.
> 
> I don't know the exact mechanism, of course, but would say, that it is 
> not entirely beneficial (for Germany).

Lockheed was corrupt where the F-104 sales were concerned. Still, you
purposely missed the point I made, that even severe flaws can (and
sometimes are) corrected yielding a well functioning piece of
technology. You prefer to substitute politics for the realities. I can't
say I'm surprised. Do you feel any better for it? If you do, why?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#865744

Am 07.12.2022 um 19:31 schrieb whodat:

>>>>> let him pack his shit and move to america. These uneducated, unskilled
>>>>> dicks, wants make us believe they landed man on moon 1969.
>>>>>
>>>>> Endless Fail： World's Biggest Joke F-35 Has Another Disaster
>>>>> https://%62%69%74%63%68%75%74%65.com/%76%69%64%65%6f/bNJIRyMgKtpp
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> German military is apparently forced to buy these planes to replace
>>>> 'Tornados'.
>>>>
>>>> I woukd say, that
>>>>
>>>> https://www.thomasnet.com/insights/what-went-wrong-with-the-f-35-fighter-jet/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "The most expensive fighter jet in history is also one of the least
>>>> reliable.
>>>>
>>>> Earlier this year, the U.S. Air Force tacitly admitted that the F-35
>>>> fighter jet was a failure. A very expensive, time-consuming failure.
>>>>
>>>> The F-35 was supposed to be a low-cost, lightweight fighter jet. But
>>>> with a cost of around $100 million per jet and project delays now
>>>> stretching into double digits, the F-35 is one of the most
>>>> high-profile failures in the history of military procurement. What
>>>> happened, and what does the future hold for the F-35 fighter jet?"
>>>>
>>>> isn't really a recommendendation.
>>>
>>> The Lockheed Electra is a very good counterexample.
>>>
>> A better example was the 'Starfighter'.
>>
>> I knew actually two ladies personally, who had a father, who died in a
>> 'Starfighter'.
>>
>> So, from time to time, the US military is able to dump their
>> 'Starfighters' in Germany.
>>
>> I don't know the exact mechanism, of course, but would say, that it is
>> not entirely beneficial (for Germany).
>
> Lockheed was corrupt where the F-104 sales were concerned. Still, you
> purposely missed the point I made, that even severe flaws can (and
> sometimes are) corrected yielding a well functioning piece of
> technology. You prefer to substitute politics for the realities. I can't
> say I'm surprised. Do you feel any better for it? If you do, why?
>

The F-104 'sales' were not caused by the qualities of the planes, but by 
political presssure upon the government of Germany in the 1960th.

Germany would have been better off, if they had chosen a different 
fighter jet, but was not free to decide.

That was apparently caused by the fact, that Germany was an occupied 
country and the former allies of WWII were still in control of German 
politics. Especially the former president of Bavaria Franz-Joseph 
Strauss was involved in what turned out to be a huge scandal.

So far, so bad. But F 35 fighter jets are way more expensive and still 
are apperently forced upon the German government by means, that are not 
entirely based on quality of the planes and competition of the 
manufacturers.

Iow: if the US is unhappy with this jet, then why should Germans be happy?

Sure, possibly German engineers are able to solve the problems and make 
that plane better than it was in the US.

I think, stealth technology is certainly interesting and German 
manufacturers could eventually learn a thing or two about that.

But possibly that jet is not really what Germany needs.

TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#865761

On 12/8/2022 1:06 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 07.12.2022 um 19:31 schrieb whodat:
> 
>>>>>> let him pack his shit and move to america. These uneducated, 
>>>>>> unskilled
>>>>>> dicks, wants make us believe they landed man on moon 1969.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Endless Fail： World's Biggest Joke F-35 Has Another Disaster
>>>>>> https://%62%69%74%63%68%75%74%65.com/%76%69%64%65%6f/bNJIRyMgKtpp
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> German military is apparently forced to buy these planes to replace
>>>>> 'Tornados'.
>>>>>
>>>>> I woukd say, that
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.thomasnet.com/insights/what-went-wrong-with-the-f-35-fighter-jet/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "The most expensive fighter jet in history is also one of the least
>>>>> reliable.
>>>>>
>>>>> Earlier this year, the U.S. Air Force tacitly admitted that the F-35
>>>>> fighter jet was a failure. A very expensive, time-consuming failure.
>>>>>
>>>>> The F-35 was supposed to be a low-cost, lightweight fighter jet. But
>>>>> with a cost of around $100 million per jet and project delays now
>>>>> stretching into double digits, the F-35 is one of the most
>>>>> high-profile failures in the history of military procurement. What
>>>>> happened, and what does the future hold for the F-35 fighter jet?"
>>>>>
>>>>> isn't really a recommendendation.
>>>>
>>>> The Lockheed Electra is a very good counterexample.
>>>>
>>> A better example was the 'Starfighter'.
>>>
>>> I knew actually two ladies personally, who had a father, who died in a
>>> 'Starfighter'.
>>>
>>> So, from time to time, the US military is able to dump their
>>> 'Starfighters' in Germany.
>>>
>>> I don't know the exact mechanism, of course, but would say, that it is
>>> not entirely beneficial (for Germany).
>>
>> Lockheed was corrupt where the F-104 sales were concerned. Still, you
>> purposely missed the point I made, that even severe flaws can (and
>> sometimes are) corrected yielding a well functioning piece of
>> technology. You prefer to substitute politics for the realities. I can't
>> say I'm surprised. Do you feel any better for it? If you do, why?
>>
> 
> The F-104 'sales' were not caused by the qualities of the planes, but by 
> political presssure upon the government of Germany in the 1960th.
> 
> Germany would have been better off, if they had chosen a different 
> fighter jet, but was not free to decide.
> 
> That was apparently caused by the fact, that Germany was an occupied 
> country and the former allies of WWII were still in control of German 
> politics. Especially the former president of Bavaria Franz-Joseph 
> Strauss was involved in what turned out to be a huge scandal.
> 
> So far, so bad. But F 35 fighter jets are way more expensive and still 
> are apperently forced upon the German government by means, that are not 
> entirely based on quality of the planes and competition of the 
> manufacturers.
> 
> Iow: if the US is unhappy with this jet, then why should Germans be happy?
> 
> Sure, possibly German engineers are able to solve the problems and make 
> that plane better than it was in the US.
> 
> I think, stealth technology is certainly interesting and German 
> manufacturers could eventually learn a thing or two about that.
> 
> But possibly that jet is not really what Germany needs.


Still you play your political games here. You treat Germany as though it
were a dependent of the USA when clearly it is not. Clean up your own
house. Germany does not have to purchase any particular airplane. When
Europe (Germany is still part of Europe, no?) wanted to manufacture its
own trucks they arranged to do so. If a small country (relatively
speaking) like England/UK can design and manufacture aircraft there's
nothing keeping Germany, a country that has historically been a
manufacturing powerhouse, from doing so.

Points to ponder (while ignoring Heger's propaganda:)

Boeing's jets have typically been excellent. Lockheed's manufacture of
cargo aircraft has been unparalleled, especially the C-141 that as far
as I know is still in production although that airframe was originally
designed in the 1950's.

Historically, depending on others for national defense (or even part of
it) has always been a disaster. The USA can apparently survive such
disasters as we make. I remember the F-111 vividly. I was working at
Lockheed at the time, on cargo aircraft. When I left Lockheed I got
into the exciting, state-of-the-art, R&D.

I make no apologies for Germany's political blunders, they've been doing
that since before I was born. Only the names have been changed.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#865806

Am 08.12.2022 um 17:17 schrieb whodat:
> On 12/8/2022 1:06 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>> Am 07.12.2022 um 19:31 schrieb whodat:
>>
>>>>>>> let him pack his shit and move to america. These uneducated,
>>>>>>> unskilled
>>>>>>> dicks, wants make us believe they landed man on moon 1969.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Endless Fail： World's Biggest Joke F-35 Has Another Disaster
>>>>>>> https://%62%69%74%63%68%75%74%65.com/%76%69%64%65%6f/bNJIRyMgKtpp
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> German military is apparently forced to buy these planes to replace
>>>>>> 'Tornados'.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I woukd say, that
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.thomasnet.com/insights/what-went-wrong-with-the-f-35-fighter-jet/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "The most expensive fighter jet in history is also one of the least
>>>>>> reliable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Earlier this year, the U.S. Air Force tacitly admitted that the F-35
>>>>>> fighter jet was a failure. A very expensive, time-consuming failure.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The F-35 was supposed to be a low-cost, lightweight fighter jet. But
>>>>>> with a cost of around $100 million per jet and project delays now
>>>>>> stretching into double digits, the F-35 is one of the most
>>>>>> high-profile failures in the history of military procurement. What
>>>>>> happened, and what does the future hold for the F-35 fighter jet?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> isn't really a recommendendation.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Lockheed Electra is a very good counterexample.
>>>>>
>>>> A better example was the 'Starfighter'.
>>>>
>>>> I knew actually two ladies personally, who had a father, who died in a
>>>> 'Starfighter'.
>>>>
>>>> So, from time to time, the US military is able to dump their
>>>> 'Starfighters' in Germany.
>>>>
>>>> I don't know the exact mechanism, of course, but would say, that it is
>>>> not entirely beneficial (for Germany).
>>>
>>> Lockheed was corrupt where the F-104 sales were concerned. Still, you
>>> purposely missed the point I made, that even severe flaws can (and
>>> sometimes are) corrected yielding a well functioning piece of
>>> technology. You prefer to substitute politics for the realities. I can't
>>> say I'm surprised. Do you feel any better for it? If you do, why?
>>>
>>
>> The F-104 'sales' were not caused by the qualities of the planes, but
>> by political presssure upon the government of Germany in the 1960th.
>>
>> Germany would have been better off, if they had chosen a different
>> fighter jet, but was not free to decide.
>>
>> That was apparently caused by the fact, that Germany was an occupied
>> country and the former allies of WWII were still in control of German
>> politics. Especially the former president of Bavaria Franz-Joseph
>> Strauss was involved in what turned out to be a huge scandal.
>>
>> So far, so bad. But F 35 fighter jets are way more expensive and still
>> are apperently forced upon the German government by means, that are
>> not entirely based on quality of the planes and competition of the
>> manufacturers.
>>
>> Iow: if the US is unhappy with this jet, then why should Germans be
>> happy?
>>
>> Sure, possibly German engineers are able to solve the problems and
>> make that plane better than it was in the US.
>>
>> I think, stealth technology is certainly interesting and German
>> manufacturers could eventually learn a thing or two about that.
>>
>> But possibly that jet is not really what Germany needs.
>
>
> Still you play your political games here. You treat Germany as though it
> were a dependent of the USA when clearly it is not. Clean up your own
> house. Germany does not have to purchase any particular airplane. When
> Europe (Germany is still part of Europe, no?) wanted to manufacture its
> own trucks they arranged to do so. If a small country (relatively
> speaking) like England/UK can design and manufacture aircraft there's
> nothing keeping Germany, a country that has historically been a
> manufacturing powerhouse, from doing so.

Political pressure is applied to people, not to the country.

Usually people in politicis were chosen from the members of certain 
groups, which had to fullfil the wishes of their particular leaders.

Then the elected few would further the agendas of their groups rather 
than the demands of their country.

This is also the case for the USA itself, which is also influenced by 
such groups.

The groups themselves are hidden and therefore also the lines of 
influence around the globe.

We only know, such groups are international and do not care for nations 
like e.g. Germany.

The countries now find repeatedly incentive to further their own goals 
and get in conflict with such groups. But usually such hidden groups are 
stronger and pull the strings from behind the scenes.

This case is only visible, when taken actions and obvious demands of the 
nation do not match, like in the purchase of F 104 or F 35 by Germany.


> Points to ponder (while ignoring Heger's propaganda:)
>
> Boeing's jets have typically been excellent. Lockheed's manufacture of
> cargo aircraft has been unparalleled, especially the C-141 that as far
> as I know is still in production although that airframe was originally
> designed in the 1950's.

Nobody questioned the quality of US cargo planes.

Certainly Germany had also the capacity to build good planes for any 
possible purpose. But Germany is a relatively small country and 'economy 
of scale' is an issue here and Germans can only afford the development 
of a few planes.

> Historically, depending on others for national defense (or even part of
> it) has always been a disaster. The USA can apparently survive such
> disasters as we make. I remember the F-111 vividly. I was working at
> Lockheed at the time, on cargo aircraft. When I left Lockheed I got
> into the exciting, state-of-the-art, R&D.
>
> I make no apologies for Germany's political blunders, they've been doing
> that since before I was born. Only the names have been changed.

Sure. But you should distinguish between politicians and the people.

A nation is not the talking head at the most prominent political 
position. Politicians come and go and sooner or later better politicians 
will come.


TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#865819

On 12/9/2022 12:54 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 08.12.2022 um 17:17 schrieb whodat:
>> On 12/8/2022 1:06 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>> Am 07.12.2022 um 19:31 schrieb whodat:


[...]

>> I make no apologies for Germany's political blunders, they've been doing
>> that since before I was born. Only the names have been changed.
> 
> Sure. But you should distinguish between politicians and the people.

I've written it here before, the people get the government they deserve
no matter how or what you argue. You're full of excuses and in your
argumentation accept no responsibility. As has been pointed out to you,
another European nation bought the same planes from the USA and had
a very good safety record with them. It has become clear to me that you
argue for its own sake without achieving anything. Too bad.

> A nation is not the talking head at the most prominent political 
> position. 

Then what the hell are you doing here?

> Politicians come and go and sooner or later better politicians 
> will come.

In the end, whether or not you realize it, you have just accepted
Germany's responsibility for the failing aircraft.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#865873

Am 09.12.2022 um 17:56 schrieb whodat:
> On 12/9/2022 12:54 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>> Am 08.12.2022 um 17:17 schrieb whodat:
>>> On 12/8/2022 1:06 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>> Am 07.12.2022 um 19:31 schrieb whodat:
>
>
> [...]
>
>>> I make no apologies for Germany's political blunders, they've been doing
>>> that since before I was born. Only the names have been changed.
>>
>> Sure. But you should distinguish between politicians and the people.
>
> I've written it here before, the people get the government they deserve
> no matter how or what you argue. You're full of excuses and in your
> argumentation accept no responsibility. As has been pointed out to you,
> another European nation bought the same planes from the USA and had
> a very good safety record with them. It has become clear to me that you
> argue for its own sake without achieving anything. Too bad.
>
>> A nation is not the talking head at the most prominent political
>> position.
>
> Then what the hell are you doing here?

sorry, but I was born here.

Usually you do not decide where you like to live.


>> Politicians come and go and sooner or later better politicians will come.
>
> In the end, whether or not you realize it, you have just accepted
> Germany's responsibility for the failing aircraft.
>
You are usually not responsible for what you have not done.

F35 stealth bombers are not a German development, but stem from the USA.

Germany has no real demand for a stealth bomber, anyhow, because Germany 
does not plan to bomb anything in the near future.

If I personally had to buy fighter planes for Germany, I would not buy a 
stealth bomber at all.

We have a demand for state-of-the-art interceptors, air-to-ground 
fighters like the 'Warthog' and for large cargo planes.

The F35 is way too expensive and of no obvious use. But large cargo 
planes and fighter jets against tanks on the ground are certainly welcome.

Another class of jets is called 'air-superiority-fighters', to which the 
F35 also does not belong.

TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#865882

In sci.physics Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote:
> Am 09.12.2022 um 17:56 schrieb whodat:
>> On 12/9/2022 12:54 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>> Am 08.12.2022 um 17:17 schrieb whodat:
>>>> On 12/8/2022 1:06 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>> Am 07.12.2022 um 19:31 schrieb whodat:
>>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>> I make no apologies for Germany's political blunders, they've been doing
>>>> that since before I was born. Only the names have been changed.
>>>
>>> Sure. But you should distinguish between politicians and the people.
>>
>> I've written it here before, the people get the government they deserve
>> no matter how or what you argue. You're full of excuses and in your
>> argumentation accept no responsibility. As has been pointed out to you,
>> another European nation bought the same planes from the USA and had
>> a very good safety record with them. It has become clear to me that you
>> argue for its own sake without achieving anything. Too bad.
>>
>>> A nation is not the talking head at the most prominent political
>>> position.
>>
>> Then what the hell are you doing here?
> 
> sorry, but I was born here.
> 
> Usually you do not decide where you like to live.
> 
> 
>>> Politicians come and go and sooner or later better politicians will come.
>>
>> In the end, whether or not you realize it, you have just accepted
>> Germany's responsibility for the failing aircraft.
>>
> You are usually not responsible for what you have not done.
> 
> F35 stealth bombers are not a German development, but stem from the USA.
> 
> Germany has no real demand for a stealth bomber, anyhow, because Germany 
> does not plan to bomb anything in the near future.
> 
> If I personally had to buy fighter planes for Germany, I would not buy a 
> stealth bomber at all.
> 
> We have a demand for state-of-the-art interceptors, air-to-ground 
> fighters like the 'Warthog' and for large cargo planes.
> 
> The F35 is way too expensive and of no obvious use. But large cargo 
> planes and fighter jets against tanks on the ground are certainly welcome.
> 
> Another class of jets is called 'air-superiority-fighters', to which the 
> F35 also does not belong.

"The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II is an American family of
single-seat, single-engine, all-weather stealth multirole combat
aircraft that is intended to perform both air superiority and strike
missions."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#865889

On 12/10/2022 12:53 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 09.12.2022 um 17:56 schrieb whodat:
>> On 12/9/2022 12:54 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>> Am 08.12.2022 um 17:17 schrieb whodat:
>>>> On 12/8/2022 1:06 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>> Am 07.12.2022 um 19:31 schrieb whodat:
>>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>> I make no apologies for Germany's political blunders, they've been 
>>>> doing
>>>> that since before I was born. Only the names have been changed.
>>>
>>> Sure. But you should distinguish between politicians and the people.
>>
>> I've written it here before, the people get the government they deserve
>> no matter how or what you argue. You're full of excuses and in your
>> argumentation accept no responsibility. As has been pointed out to you,
>> another European nation bought the same planes from the USA and had
>> a very good safety record with them. It has become clear to me that you
>> argue for its own sake without achieving anything. Too bad.
>>
>>> A nation is not the talking head at the most prominent political
>>> position.
>>
>> Then what the hell are you doing here?
> 
> sorry, but I was born here.
> 
> Usually you do not decide where you like to live.


Born on Usenet, now there's a trick.


>>> Politicians come and go and sooner or later better politicians will 
>>> come.
>>
>> In the end, whether or not you realize it, you have just accepted
>> Germany's responsibility for the failing aircraft.
>>
> You are usually not responsible for what you have not done.


Nonsense.


> F35 stealth bombers are not a German development, but stem from the USA.


Did someone twist Germany's arm behind it's back and force Germany to
purchase defective airplanes? And who/what the hell are you anyway, you 
don't have authority to speak on behalf of the government or the German 
people.



> Germany has no real demand for a stealth bomber, anyhow, because Germany 
> does not plan to bomb anything in the near future.


Now you're doing strategic planning for the German government?



> If I personally had to buy fighter planes for Germany, I would not buy a 
> stealth bomber at all.


Finally one glimmer of truth, you don't have responsibility. You have a
right to question those who are responsible but no "right" to complain
to or about the USA's provision of equipment. You probably don't think
of it this way but what you are doing here in sci newsgroups is
trolling. You're angry and you're trying to incite anger in others here.



> We have a demand for state-of-the-art interceptors, air-to-ground 
> fighters like the 'Warthog' and for large cargo planes.


Who is the "we" to whom you refer here?



> The F35 is way too expensive and of no obvious use. But large cargo 
> planes and fighter jets against tanks on the ground are certainly welcome.


Nobody here, in a Usenet sci newsgroup, can do anything about your
gripes that don't belong here.


> 
> Another class of jets is called 'air-superiority-fighters', to which the 
> F35 also does not belong.


How very nice, while OT.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#865928

Am 10.12.2022 um 17:06 schrieb whodat:
> On 12/10/2022 12:53 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>> Am 09.12.2022 um 17:56 schrieb whodat:
>>> On 12/9/2022 12:54 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>> Am 08.12.2022 um 17:17 schrieb whodat:
>>>>> On 12/8/2022 1:06 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>>>> Am 07.12.2022 um 19:31 schrieb whodat:
>>>
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>> I make no apologies for Germany's political blunders, they've been
>>>>> doing
>>>>> that since before I was born. Only the names have been changed.
>>>>
>>>> Sure. But you should distinguish between politicians and the people.
>>>
>>> I've written it here before, the people get the government they deserve
>>> no matter how or what you argue. You're full of excuses and in your
>>> argumentation accept no responsibility. As has been pointed out to you,
>>> another European nation bought the same planes from the USA and had
>>> a very good safety record with them. It has become clear to me that you
>>> argue for its own sake without achieving anything. Too bad.
>>>
>>>> A nation is not the talking head at the most prominent political
>>>> position.
>>>
>>> Then what the hell are you doing here?
>>
>> sorry, but I was born here.
>>
>> Usually you do not decide where you like to live.
>
>
> Born on Usenet, now there's a trick.
>
>
>>>> Politicians come and go and sooner or later better politicians will
>>>> come.
>>>
>>> In the end, whether or not you realize it, you have just accepted
>>> Germany's responsibility for the failing aircraft.
>>>
>> You are usually not responsible for what you have not done.
>
>
> Nonsense.

Surely not nonsense!

Guilt requires, that you did something illegal or didn't do something 
required.

In any case you can be either guilty of misbehavior or not. In the 'not 
case' you are innocent and have to be treated that way.

To prosecute the innocent is a very serious crime itself.

>
>> F35 stealth bombers are not a German development, but stem from the USA.
>
>
> Did someone twist Germany's arm behind it's back and force Germany to
> purchase defective airplanes? And who/what the hell are you anyway, you
> don't have authority to speak on behalf of the government or the German
> people.

I don't know, but guess this is what usually happens.

The mighty nations force the not so mighty nations to do, what is 
beneficial to them.

For this purpose the mighty nations have installed their spies in these 
nations.

For instance 'Stalin', Hitler, Mussolini or Idi-Amin were imho spies.

For Hitler I had the theory, that that spy had the real name 'Noel 
Trevenen Huxley'.

>
>
>> Germany has no real demand for a stealth bomber, anyhow, because
>> Germany does not plan to bomb anything in the near future.
>
>
> Now you're doing strategic planning for the German government?
>
No, unfortunately not.

>
>> If I personally had to buy fighter planes for Germany, I would not buy
>> a stealth bomber at all.
>
>
> Finally one glimmer of truth, you don't have responsibility. You have a
> right to question those who are responsible but no "right" to complain
> to or about the USA's provision of equipment. You probably don't think
> of it this way but what you are doing here in sci newsgroups is
> trolling. You're angry and you're trying to incite anger in others here.

I think usually in terms of price-worthyness of baught items and think, 
the F35 is way too expenesive, not very reliable and not what Germany needs.

If I could spent the same money on US war planes, I would buy different 
ones like these huge cargo planes and the 'Warthog'.


TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#866152

Am 11.12.2022 um 07:48 schrieb Thomas Heger:

>>
>>> Germany has no real demand for a stealth bomber, anyhow, because
>>> Germany does not plan to bomb anything in the near future.
>>
>>
>> Now you're doing strategic planning for the German government?
>>
> No, unfortunately not.
>
>>
>>> If I personally had to buy fighter planes for Germany, I would not buy
>>> a stealth bomber at all.
>>
>>
>> Finally one glimmer of truth, you don't have responsibility. You have a
>> right to question those who are responsible but no "right" to complain
>> to or about the USA's provision of equipment. You probably don't think
>> of it this way but what you are doing here in sci newsgroups is
>> trolling. You're angry and you're trying to incite anger in others here.
>
> I think usually in terms of price-worthyness of baught items and think,
> the F35 is way too expenesive, not very reliable and not what Germany
> needs.
>
> If I could spent the same money on US war planes, I would buy different
> ones like these huge cargo planes and the 'Warthog'.
>
Now I see these crappy planes on German tv in the news and that the 
current defense minister wants to spent most of the budget for them.

That makes me sick and I really dislike the idea to buy these planes.

I also dislike the idea of deficit spendings for questionabe arms deals, 
because that would multiply the dangers of the already questionable 
purchase.

Especially in times of 'inflation' the government should try to cut 
unnecessary spendings and useless arms are a good means to start with that.


TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#866160

On 12/14/2022 1:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 11.12.2022 um 07:48 schrieb Thomas Heger:
> 
>>>
>>>> Germany has no real demand for a stealth bomber, anyhow, because
>>>> Germany does not plan to bomb anything in the near future.
>>>
>>>
>>> Now you're doing strategic planning for the German government?
>>>
>> No, unfortunately not.
>>
>>>
>>>> If I personally had to buy fighter planes for Germany, I would not buy
>>>> a stealth bomber at all.
>>>
>>>
>>> Finally one glimmer of truth, you don't have responsibility. You have a
>>> right to question those who are responsible but no "right" to complain
>>> to or about the USA's provision of equipment. You probably don't think
>>> of it this way but what you are doing here in sci newsgroups is
>>> trolling. You're angry and you're trying to incite anger in others here.
>>
>> I think usually in terms of price-worthyness of baught items and think,
>> the F35 is way too expenesive, not very reliable and not what Germany
>> needs.
>>
>> If I could spent the same money on US war planes, I would buy different
>> ones like these huge cargo planes and the 'Warthog'.
>>
> Now I see these crappy planes on German tv in the news and that the 
> current defense minister wants to spent most of the budget for them.
> 
> That makes me sick and I really dislike the idea to buy these planes.
> 
> I also dislike the idea of deficit spendings for questionabe arms deals, 
> because that would multiply the dangers of the already questionable 
> purchase.
> 
> Especially in times of 'inflation' the government should try to cut 
> unnecessary spendings and useless arms are a good means to start with that.

No purchases, no kickbacks. Get a clue already.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#866168

whodat wrote:

> On 12/14/2022 1:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>> Especially in times of 'inflation' the government should try to cut
>> unnecessary spendings and useless arms are a good means to start with
>> that.
> 
> No purchases, no kickbacks. Get a clue already.

you are stupid like a dog, a gay goy with which not to sit at a table. He 
shits on your stinking mouth, you saying "give me more".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#866183

On 12/14/2022 11:36 AM, Fabio Brambilla wrote:
> whodat wrote:
> 
>> On 12/14/2022 1:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>> Especially in times of 'inflation' the government should try to cut
>>> unnecessary spendings and useless arms are a good means to start with
>>> that.
>>
>> No purchases, no kickbacks. Get a clue already.
> 
> you are stupid like a dog, a gay goy with which not to sit at a table. He
> shits on your stinking mouth, you saying "give me more".


Take the psychotropic medications the doctor gave you. Please. The
hallucinations will go away if you do.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#866218

Am 14.12.2022 um 13:06 schrieb whodat:
> On 12/14/2022 1:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>> Am 11.12.2022 um 07:48 schrieb Thomas Heger:
>>
>>>>
>>>>> Germany has no real demand for a stealth bomber, anyhow, because
>>>>> Germany does not plan to bomb anything in the near future.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Now you're doing strategic planning for the German government?
>>>>
>>> No, unfortunately not.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> If I personally had to buy fighter planes for Germany, I would not buy
>>>>> a stealth bomber at all.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Finally one glimmer of truth, you don't have responsibility. You have a
>>>> right to question those who are responsible but no "right" to complain
>>>> to or about the USA's provision of equipment. You probably don't think
>>>> of it this way but what you are doing here in sci newsgroups is
>>>> trolling. You're angry and you're trying to incite anger in others
>>>> here.
>>>
>>> I think usually in terms of price-worthyness of baught items and think,
>>> the F35 is way too expenesive, not very reliable and not what Germany
>>> needs.
>>>
>>> If I could spent the same money on US war planes, I would buy different
>>> ones like these huge cargo planes and the 'Warthog'.
>>>
>> Now I see these crappy planes on German tv in the news and that the
>> current defense minister wants to spent most of the budget for them.
>>
>> That makes me sick and I really dislike the idea to buy these planes.
>>
>> I also dislike the idea of deficit spendings for questionabe arms
>> deals, because that would multiply the dangers of the already
>> questionable purchase.
>>
>> Especially in times of 'inflation' the government should try to cut
>> unnecessary spendings and useless arms are a good means to start with
>> that.
>
> No purchases, no kickbacks. Get a clue already.
>

Well, we had Franz Joseph Strauss already as defense minister. He was 
the guy from Bavaria, who puchased the starfighter F 104 from Lockeed 
and got some 'kick-backs' (as far as that is known).

I'm not involved in military purchases at all, hence cannot tell too 
much about the details.

But it was a HUGE !!! scandal and absolutely nobody wants anything 
similar anytime soon.


TH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#866219

On 12/15/2022 1:15 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
> Am 14.12.2022 um 13:06 schrieb whodat:
>> On 12/14/2022 1:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>> Am 11.12.2022 um 07:48 schrieb Thomas Heger:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Germany has no real demand for a stealth bomber, anyhow, because
>>>>>> Germany does not plan to bomb anything in the near future.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Now you're doing strategic planning for the German government?
>>>>>
>>>> No, unfortunately not.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> If I personally had to buy fighter planes for Germany, I would not 
>>>>>> buy
>>>>>> a stealth bomber at all.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Finally one glimmer of truth, you don't have responsibility. You 
>>>>> have a
>>>>> right to question those who are responsible but no "right" to complain
>>>>> to or about the USA's provision of equipment. You probably don't think
>>>>> of it this way but what you are doing here in sci newsgroups is
>>>>> trolling. You're angry and you're trying to incite anger in others
>>>>> here.
>>>>
>>>> I think usually in terms of price-worthyness of baught items and think,
>>>> the F35 is way too expenesive, not very reliable and not what Germany
>>>> needs.
>>>>
>>>> If I could spent the same money on US war planes, I would buy different
>>>> ones like these huge cargo planes and the 'Warthog'.
>>>>
>>> Now I see these crappy planes on German tv in the news and that the
>>> current defense minister wants to spent most of the budget for them.
>>>
>>> That makes me sick and I really dislike the idea to buy these planes.
>>>
>>> I also dislike the idea of deficit spendings for questionabe arms
>>> deals, because that would multiply the dangers of the already
>>> questionable purchase.
>>>
>>> Especially in times of 'inflation' the government should try to cut
>>> unnecessary spendings and useless arms are a good means to start with
>>> that.
>>
>> No purchases, no kickbacks. Get a clue already.
>>
> 
> Well, we had Franz Joseph Strauss already as defense minister. He was 
> the guy from Bavaria, who puchased the starfighter F 104 from Lockeed 
> and got some 'kick-backs' (as far as that is known).

EuroFighter 2000 will down that sucker! ;^)


> 
> I'm not involved in military purchases at all, hence cannot tell too 
> much about the details.
> 
> But it was a HUGE !!! scandal and absolutely nobody wants anything 
> similar anytime soon.
> 
> 
> TH
> 
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#866225

On 12/15/2022 3:17 AM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
> On 12/15/2022 1:15 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>> Am 14.12.2022 um 13:06 schrieb whodat:
>>> On 12/14/2022 1:29 AM, Thomas Heger wrote:
>>>> Am 11.12.2022 um 07:48 schrieb Thomas Heger:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Germany has no real demand for a stealth bomber, anyhow, because
>>>>>>> Germany does not plan to bomb anything in the near future.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now you're doing strategic planning for the German government?
>>>>>>
>>>>> No, unfortunately not.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If I personally had to buy fighter planes for Germany, I would 
>>>>>>> not buy
>>>>>>> a stealth bomber at all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Finally one glimmer of truth, you don't have responsibility. You 
>>>>>> have a
>>>>>> right to question those who are responsible but no "right" to 
>>>>>> complain
>>>>>> to or about the USA's provision of equipment. You probably don't 
>>>>>> think
>>>>>> of it this way but what you are doing here in sci newsgroups is
>>>>>> trolling. You're angry and you're trying to incite anger in others
>>>>>> here.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think usually in terms of price-worthyness of baught items and 
>>>>> think,
>>>>> the F35 is way too expenesive, not very reliable and not what Germany
>>>>> needs.
>>>>>
>>>>> If I could spent the same money on US war planes, I would buy 
>>>>> different
>>>>> ones like these huge cargo planes and the 'Warthog'.
>>>>>
>>>> Now I see these crappy planes on German tv in the news and that the
>>>> current defense minister wants to spent most of the budget for them.
>>>>
>>>> That makes me sick and I really dislike the idea to buy these planes.
>>>>
>>>> I also dislike the idea of deficit spendings for questionabe arms
>>>> deals, because that would multiply the dangers of the already
>>>> questionable purchase.
>>>>
>>>> Especially in times of 'inflation' the government should try to cut
>>>> unnecessary spendings and useless arms are a good means to start with
>>>> that.
>>>
>>> No purchases, no kickbacks. Get a clue already.
>>>
>>
>> Well, we had Franz Joseph Strauss already as defense minister. He was 
>> the guy from Bavaria, who puchased the starfighter F 104 from Lockeed 
>> and got some 'kick-backs' (as far as that is known).
> 
> EuroFighter 2000 will down that sucker! ;^)



f-104, 1958. Eurofighter, 2003. A never ending sequence of greater
advantage. Nothing to get excited about.




>> I'm not involved in military purchases at all, hence cannot tell too 
>> much about the details.
>>
>> But it was a HUGE !!! scandal and absolutely nobody wants anything 
>> similar anytime soon.
>>
>>
>> TH
>>
>>
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web