Jan 082023
 

Finally saw unedited video of the recent shooting of the armed (with a toy gun as it turns out) robber in Texas. With the edited videos, you can’t tell anything about the customer’s shooting of the robber other than at least one shot in the bad guys back. But with the edited video there appear to be *nine* shots, including multiple shots into the guy while he’s down… and a few seconds later, one more shot which kinda seems like it might have been a back-of-the-head shot. Which, you know… maybe a bit much. Do I feel bad that a robber got rubbed out? Not in the slightest. The fact that he had a fake gun doesn’t matter, the *fear* he was determined to generate was real enough. But riddling a dead guy with holes… people are gonna question that. But I dunno: you threaten to kill someone, chances are real good that that *someone* is going to get amped up on adrenaline, and might not be thinking to straight for a minute or three. I know the wokescolds and the prosecutors are going to yammer on about how he shot too many times… but when your life has just been threatened, how rational are you really expected to be?

The greater lesson here: if you don’t want to be turned into Swiss cheese, don’t go robbing people. Seems a simple enough rule of thumb.

 

 Posted by at 11:14 am
Jan 052023
 

A lot of people think that the US is simply throwing money away. These people are wrong.

 

The majority of the weapons that the US is giving to the Ukrainians are old stock, stuff that would have gone to the incinerator or the scrap heap pretty soon anyway. If you expend a million-dollar weapon that you were otherwise going to simply throw away, you haven’t lost money. But if you expend that weapon for a practical purpose, you not only affect the course of the conflict, you also *learn* things.

 Posted by at 11:06 am
Dec 092022
 

Not so much for the US.

WNBA star Brittney Griner released from Russian detention in prisoner swap for convicted arms dealer

She is an *acknowledged* drug-transporting criminal. Whether you agree with Russia’s laws on such things or not, those were the laws. And while the US went to the bizarre extreme of returning to Russia an arms dealer for Griner, the US has done doodly squat for other prisoners currently languishing in Russian penal colonies. Why? because Griner has various and sundry privileges that others don’t. see, for example, Marc Fogel. Very similar circumstances of bringing in a small amount of pot; almost no public outcry, no celebrities or TV NPCs shrieking about how the US needs to bring him back. Why? Feel free to guess.

But hey, at least the Russian get “The Merchant of Death” back.

 Posted by at 6:40 am
Dec 062022
 

BREAKING: Army Chooses Bell Textron’s V-280 Valor Tiltrotor to Replace Black Hawk

… the V-280 Valor tiltrotor beat out Sikorsky-Boeing’s bid — the Defiant X coaxial rotor blade platform — in the years-long competition to design the future long range assault aircraft, or FLRAA, a key part of the Army’s plan to modernize its aviation platforms. 

 

While I’m pleased to see the Valor going ahead, I *also* hope that the Defiant goes ahead in some fashion. There’s no reason why we should only have one VTOL transport. The Defiant would be spectacular in different ways than the Valor.

 

 Posted by at 11:36 am
Dec 062022
 

This “experiment” seems like all kinds of fun. It also seems like the sort of thing that would attract the attention of the ATF. Or the DoD.

I gotta admit I like the method of production of the nozzle. Adopting that process for a more advanced rocket might be a chore… a refractory metal nozzle made this way would be great, but I have doubts that it’d be possible.

 Posted by at 8:46 am
Dec 052022
 

The Hudson Institute is a “conservative think tank.” So it’s not a Biden administration mouthpiece. Some interesting points here:

Ten Myths about US Aid to Ukraine

Myth 1: There is not enough oversight of US aid to Ukraine.

Myth 2: We have written more than $66 billion worth of “blank checks” for Ukraine.

Myth 3: Congress hasn’t had “enough time to debate” US aid to Ukraine or “read the bill.”

Myth 4: This money to Ukraine would be better spent on “the wall” or “baby formula.”

Myth 5: Europe needs to “spend more” before America does.

Myth 6: The US should only give “military aid.”

Myth 7: US weapons are ending up on the black market or are not getting to the front lines.

Myth 8: Ukraine is too corrupt to receive aid responsibly.

Myth 9: Russia is a distraction. US focus must be on China.

Myth 10: Aid to Ukraine puts “America last.”

 Posted by at 11:44 pm
Dec 052022
 

Looks like the Ukrainians are taking the war home to Russian military forces, this time hitting Engels Air Force Base and potentially destroying two TU 95 “Bear” bombers. Unknown as yet *how* the Ukrainians pulled this off.

 

I remain unconvinced that hitting Mother Russia is necessarily the wisest course for Ukraine; it could will be used to feed the Russian propaganda machine, to say that Ukraine actually is a threat. On the other hand, taking out Russian military assets like strategic bombers costs Russia *real* money. So long as the Ukrainians strictly stick to military targets, this is potentially a good thing for them. Now the Russians will have to redeploy their air defense systems.

 Posted by at 8:42 am
Dec 022022
 

I remember reading many years ago someone describing what would happen if a modern anti-ship missile was launched against a World War 2 battleship: after the explosion, a sailor would have to go out on deck and sweep up all the bits of the missile and dump them overboard and probably slap on another coat of paint. The point was that ships used to be massive floating armored installations, and thus required massively powerful incoming weapons to take them out, but more recent ships are lightly built and rely on active defenses (missiles and CIWS along with ECM) to avoid getting hit in the first place.

 

The war in Ukraine from time to time demonstrates this. For example, the Russians recently launched a “Lancet” loitering munition against a piece of Ukrainian artillery, an old Soviet-era D-20 howitzer. The advanced modern weapon made a direct impact… and blew out a tire. There is value in being built like an old cannon, it seems. The Lancet seems to use a warhead wrapped with bits of cut-up rebar; this doubtless does wonders against soft targets such as trucks and troops concentrations and playgrounds and hospitals and the like, but seems to do diddly-squat against actual armor. Other variants apparently include shaped charge warheads for use against armor; perhaps this was a failure of proper weapons selection.

 

 Posted by at 9:40 pm
Dec 012022
 

Twenty copies of the new book have finally arrived, fortunately entirely intact. They took two days to cross an ocean, one day to cross half a continent… and two weeks to cross the customs office. Shrug.

Anyway, here’s what I’m gonna do: signed, numbered and dated copies will be $20 plus postage (media mail). These will come with two 18X24 prints, also signed and dated. If you would like to be on the list for one of these send me an email:

But the first five copies will be auctioned off, with the highest bids getting the lowest numbers. Additionally: numbers 3,4 and 5 will receive three 18X24 prints, while numbers 1 and 2 will receive four 18X24 prints, all signed, dated and numbered. If this sounds interesting to you, email me what your bid is. Bidding ends Sunday night, after which I’ll let bidders know. If there are more than five bidders, six and beyond won’t be held to their bids… but they won’t *necessarily* get the next numbers in line. Once the auction winners are processed, I’ll send out PayPal invoices for the regular copies, and they will be sent out based on the order of payment.

I also have ten “SR-71” copies and five “B-47/B-52” copies. The SR-71’s, singed and dated with two 18X24 prints, will go for $20; the B-47/52 signed and dated with three 18X24 prints, will go for $55 plus postage. If you would like one of these, let me know.

 Posted by at 11:12 pm