It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Ferris.Bueller.II
Makes total sense Obama wants to pare down the official military, to make room for his own private military which will be just as powerful, strong, and well funded as the official military but have total allegiance to Obama:
"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."
Are you serious?
Today, AmeriCorps -- our nation's network of local, state, and national service programs -- has 75,000 slots. And I know firsthand the quality of these programs. My wife, Michelle, once left her job at a law firm and at City Hall to be a founding director of an AmeriCorps program in Chicago that trains young people for careers in public service. And these programs invest Americans in their communities and their country. They tap America's greatest resource -- our citizens.
And that's why as president, I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their efforts connected to a common purpose. People of all ages, stations, and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem -- they are the answer.
So we are going to send -- we're going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We'll call on Americans to join an Energy Corps to conduct renewable energy and environmental cleanup projects in their neighborhoods all across the country. We will enlist our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, to be there for our military families. And we're going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered, and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy.
We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.
We need to use technology to connect people to service. We'll expand USA Freedom Corps to create online networks where Americans can browse opportunities to volunteer. You'll be able to search by category, time commitment, and skill sets; you'll be able to rate service opportunities, build service networks, and create your own service pages to track your hours and activities. This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda, and make their own change from the bottom up.
Originally posted by James R. Hawkwood
May i remind you that most US ships that havent been upgraded to latest standards still cant defend themselves from the infamous SS-22 "Sunburn".
Originally posted by IblisThis is too absurd to ignore. Aside that this "flagship of the Russian navy" continually runs into financial and technical difficulties, let's discuss your "CBG all in one" commentary.
And all that is spread out between multiple targets, and all with multiple defense systems which can work with one-another.
It'd have been better to say the russian ship is a typical carrier plus an AAM system. And an extra few tidbits.
Given, the U.S. system costs an exhorbitant amount more, but to claim one ship somehow fulfills the role of four or five is absurd and ignorant at best.
Originally posted by finemanmI am soooooo not a hippie, that its not even funny.
The US currently spends $651,163,000,000 on defense annually. The real number is actually closer to a trillion when you factor in the two wars and defense research. I read that in an article that I can't find right now.
But if you take just the $651 Billion, that is 56% of global defense spending. Thats nuts. The next highest budget is China with $70,242,645,000 in annual spending. That is slightly more than 10% of the US defense budget.
It is rediculous that we spend that much on "defense" when kids in school don't have books, teachers can barely afford to live, and millions of middle and working class americans have no health coverage.
If we cut our defense budget by one third, we would still outspend the next nine countries COMBINED. [edit on 28-3-2009 by finemanm]
Ok, ok i was wrong about the Kuz being just as strong as a complete CBG but still it packs a mighty punch.
And those extra "few" tidbits and its AAM systems makes it a Cruiser not a Carrier. Reason? Because the Kuz has ASW weapons on its own which realy makes it more then just a carrier.
Originally posted by orangetom1999Is this the ship to which you refer as the Kuz?? If so ..I am wondering if you see what I see in these photos at this site.
Interesting photos but telling in some of them.
Ive spent a number of years in the construction of 688 class submarines and also the Virginia class boats.
Also I have spent years in the construction and overhaul of Nimitz class carriers..including the nuclear refueling of them. I know their engine rooms, pump rooms, catapults, Reactor compartments, as well as arresting gear systems.
The Russians have to use the jump ramp. They have been unable to construct or maintain a catapult system. This is known in the trades. It is just not widely told in this PC type world. The lack of this knowledge makes us more easily afrighted by such photos.
Yes...the Russians will be improving their carrier and other fleet ships in the future. So too will the Chinese.
Just wondering if you see what I see in the photos of the carrier in the page I linked??
Originally posted by orangetom1999
The electric catapults to my limited knowledge are not working out. The new Ford class will be getting steam catapults. To many problems not satisfactorily ironed out. Perhaps in the future with more advances in the state of the art.
While no one has told me specifics...I have wondered what a large electrical spike from a electrical catapult launching will do to all the sensitive electronic equipment on board..from radars to radios to computers and inertial navigation equipment..not only on the ship but in the aircraft as well.
A Nimitz class carrier is truly a bird nest of antennas and electronics on the flight deck as well as the Island house. Very very sensitive equipment.
As a licensed Ham radio operator, I quickly take notice of any kind of antenna farm or set up..which is exactly what a Nimitz class carrier is on the flight deck and Island House. An Antenna Farm!!
Thanks to all for their posts,
[edit on 31-3-2009 by orangetom1999]
GA and its Team have completed the Program Definition and Risk Reduction (PDRR) phase of the Navy's electromagnetic aircraft launch system (EMALS) program and have been selected to perform the System Development and Demonstration phase. The goal of the EMALS SDD phase is to develop the existing design chosen during PDRR into an integrated shipboard system that is both operationally suitable and effective, thus replacing steam catapults with an electric system that will reduce maintenance and provide flexibility and growth potential for carrier aviation throughout the 21st century.The GA Team EMALS design is a robust, highly reliable launch system that will meet or exceed all Navy performance goals. This design will provide significant reductions in installed weight, volume, and workload compared to the existing steam catapult. The design uses state-of-the-art technologies that we believe will demonstrate our system is affordable and producible.
NAVAIR’s EMALS developers have given a green light to engineers at General Atomics in Tupelo, MS to engage in full power train testing of EMALS motor components.
This second phase of High Cycle Testing (HCT-2) will involve full power train testing, and will give a specific prediction of EMALS operations. HCT-2 will also perform environmental qualification testing, which is used to confirm the adequacy of the equipment design and safety under normal, abnormal, design basis event, post design basis event and in-service test conditions