The official E9x OT thread!

Originally Posted by anE934fun

It would take much more than a year.... Unless you were to just do a complete slash-and-burn. Every program has its advocates. One example of a waste - the duplicate engine program for the F-35. The DoD (even SecDef Gates testified against the program) agreed the program was a waste. But the congressional (and lobbyist) supporters had every reason under the sun why the program was needed. $2.4B in development funds flushed down the toilet.

Another favorite - subsidies for the enthanol production.... Nothing more stupid than taking corn and turning it into ethanol to blend with gasoline. The annual waste on ethanol production subsidies is $4 Billion, or $1.95/gallon of the price of gasoline (from a 2008 Rice University Baker Institute for Public Policy study). But if you were to listen to the ethanol advocates, it is the salvation of the nation.

Originally Posted by furby076

The lobbyists are my problem. When the DOD, including the SecDef, says it's a waste I would listen to them more then the folks who are gonna make money out of it.

I think Ethanol is a waste only because it is not a perfected system.

Get ready to start hearing more about the Ohio Class replacement problem, known as SSBN-X. The design is already in place for the replacement of our nation's most survivable nuclear deterrent. The 14 ship class will be in the 5-12 billion dollar range, per ship.

Originally Posted by E92Submarine

Get ready to start hearing more about the Ohio Class replacement problem, known as SSBN-X. The design is already in place for the replacement of our nation's most survivable nuclear deterrent. The 14 ship class will be in the 5-12 billion dollar range, per ship.

This is what gets me.... The nation is asked to fund a weapons system for a threat that basically doesn't exist or can be met with a present weapons system. How is the $100+ billion cost going to be funded? Run up the credit card balance some more? If the objective is to employ shipyard workers, spend less $ on re-building/upgrading the existing fleet. There would be a full employment program and the cost would be far less than $100+ billion.

Originally Posted by anE934fun

This is what gets me.... The nation is asked to fund a weapons system for a threat that basically doesn't exist or can be met with a present weapons system. How is the $100+ billion cost going to be funded? Run up the credit card balance some more? If the objective is to employ shipyard workers, spend less $ on re-building/upgrading the existing fleet. There would be a full employment program and the cost would be far less than $100+ billion.

Ahem... they have bigger ones too...

Originally Posted by anE934fun

This is what gets me.... The nation is asked to fund a weapons system for a threat that basically doesn't exist or can be met with a present weapons system. How is the $100+ billion cost going to be funded? Run up the credit card balance some more? If the objective is to employ shipyard workers, spend less $ on re-building/upgrading the existing fleet. There would be a full employment program and the cost would be far less than $100+ billion.

And there are three more carriers planned...that would give us a fleet of thirteen unless they retire one or more. The next most powerful nation on earth has...one. With a lifetime cost of $20 billion or more each, what is the role of the carrier in fighting insurgent type wars that we are committed to abandon? If we need thirteen, somebody in the military must know something that we don't know.

Originally Posted by ///M-ratedE90

Ahem... they have bigger ones too...
snip...

So this is the justification for a $100+ billion replacement to the Ohio class submarines? If memory serves, the Ohio class submarines can only be tracked by looking for sound voids in the surrounding water. Combine that with the range of the D-5 missile, and you are having to cover a sh*tload of open ocean.

Back to the present discussion, are we going to pay for the continued expenditures by running up the balance on the credit card?

Originally Posted by anE934fun

So this is the justification for a $100+ billion replacement to the Ohio class submarines? If memory serves, the Ohio class submarines can only be tracked by looking for sound voids in the surrounding water. Combine that with the range of the D-5 missile, and you are having to cover a sh*tload of open ocean.

Back to the present discussion, are we going to pay for the continued expenditures by running up the balance on the credit card?

If we are happy to cough a trillion dollars to line the pockets of Wall Street, I am comfortable spending 100 billion on submarines...naval engineers need jobs too!

Hmmm, whatever happened to all that cash? It never got invested in America...which I guess makes sense...who would want to invest now????

Originally Posted by pointandgo

And there are three more carriers planned...that would give us a fleet of thirteen unless they retire one or more. The next most powerful nation on earth has...one. With a lifetime cost of $20 billion or more each, what is the role of the carrier in fighting insurgent type wars that we are committed to abandon? If we need thirteen, somebody in the military must know something that we don't know.

Don't forget the replacement for the Nimitz class carriers (CVN-78)....

The bottom line for me is if we are going to have a blank check for military expenditure, it has to be paid for by some mechanism other than running up the credit card balance. And social security and medicare/medicaid should not be the source for the difference.

Which leaves increasing revenues some how. Cut tax breaks would seem to be a real and present source of revenue, but that seems to be radioactive in D.C. There is no reason on Earth why Exxon should pay a lower percentage of its revenues in taxes than someone making $75K/year, but it happens. Only in America.

Originally Posted by ///M-ratedE90

If we are happy to cough a trillion dollars to line the pockets of Wall Street, I am comfortable spending 100 billion on submarines...naval engineers need jobs too!

Hmmm, whatever happened to all that cash? It never got invested in America...which I guess makes sense...who would want to invest now????

The $1 Trillion was the cost of too big to fail. Are the too big companies being broken up? I certainly haven't seen any sign of that happening.

At the rate things are going, expect another recession before 2012 is out. This time, it will be sourced in the Eurozone. Greece is gone. The risk is from Italy and Spain defaulting. That would be a Lehman-scale failure. Just like in 4Q2008, banks won't know the default risk of other banks and as a result, interbank lending will freeze solid.

Been there, done that.

Originally Posted by pointandgo

I suppose you'd hire FEM BOTS to do your dirty work. Afterall, you would be a DICTATOR. Fess up.

That doesn't sound like patriotic talk to me.

Originally Posted by Inline Sixer

I second that!

...and just to mess with people politically, get a vanity plate for the Ferrari that goes: "JOB CR8TR"

and for the M3, "4RUGAL"

LOL

Originally Posted by E92Submarine

Get ready to start hearing more about the Ohio Class replacement problem, known as SSBN-X. The design is already in place for the replacement of our nation's most survivable nuclear deterrent. The 14 ship class will be in the 5-12 billion dollar range, per ship.

Originally Posted by anE934fun

This is what gets me.... The nation is asked to fund a weapons system for a threat that basically doesn't exist or can be met with a present weapons system. How is the $100+ billion cost going to be funded? Run up the credit card balance some more? If the objective is to employ shipyard workers, spend less $ on re-building/upgrading the existing fleet. There would be a full employment program and the cost would be far less than $100+ billion.

You get a job as my military adviser

Originally Posted by ///M-ratedE90

If we are happy to cough a trillion dollars to line the pockets of Wall Street, I am comfortable spending 100 billion on submarines...naval engineers need jobs too!

Hmmm, whatever happened to all that cash? It never got invested in America...which I guess makes sense...who would want to invest now????

You get a job as my communications director. We just can't let them know you are not a US born citizen

Walking to the car, at the office, I see this overly sized guy driving a white mustang, and chirping his wheels at every intersection (his car is also jerking back and forth). The idiot is even tailgaiting people, in this huge (thousands of employees) parking lot....these are his coworkers.

We get in our car and drive out, and there is a jam up. Yup, the moron of a driver t-boned and caused an SUV to flip over. The debri was massive. The mustang was about 30 yards away from the SUV after the accident...talk about an idiot. For the stang driver to have driven so fast, out of the parking lot, he must have gunned it.

Originally Posted by furby076

Walking to the car, at the office, I see this overly sized guy driving a white mustang, and chirping his wheels at every intersection (his car is also jerking back and forth). The idiot is even tailgaiting people, in this huge (thousands of employees) parking lot....these are his coworkers.

We get in our car and drive out, and there is a jam up. Yup, the moron of a driver t-boned and caused an SUV to flip over. The debri was massive. The mustang was about 30 yards away from the SUV after the accident...talk about an idiot. For the stang driver to have driven so fast, out of the parking lot, he must have gunned it.

I like the black BMW sitting at a 45 degree angle - "accident avoidance" in action.

Did you have an overwhelming urge to just go slap the 'Stang driver up the back side of his head?

delete

Originally Posted by anE934fun

This is what gets me.... The nation is asked to fund a weapons system for a threat that basically doesn't exist or can be met with a present weapons system. How is the $100+ billion cost going to be funded? Run up the credit card balance some more? If the objective is to employ shipyard workers, spend less $ on re-building/upgrading the existing fleet. There would be a full employment program and the cost would be far less than $100+ billion.

Originally Posted by anE934fun

So this is the justification for a $100+ billion replacement to the Ohio class submarines? If memory serves, the Ohio class submarines can only be tracked by looking for sound voids in the surrounding water. Combine that with the range of the D-5 missile, and you are having to cover a sh*tload of open ocean.

That's typically the argument people have against the building these machines. The fact of the matter is that the nuclear threat does still exist; it's just different these days. It's not just the Soviets with nukes anymore. In today's world, the upper hand is gained through electronic intelligence and not brute force.

There are a number of reasons it's more cost effective to replace the aging ships. One of the simplest reasons is the fact that these steel hulled boats have been driven beneath hundreds of feet of salt water. All the anti corrosion techniques available in the world cannot prevent some deterioration of the hull over 30 years. There are literally hundreds of valves and miles of piping that allow the ingestion of salt water into the ship. All of these are prone to corrosion. The nuclear reactor needs to be refueled. The piping systems associated with the reactor eventually need replacing.

This type of overhaul would logistically be a nightmare and would likely cost billions. There are some components that would literally require the ship to be cut into sections to be removed. Now that the space shuttle has been retired, these can be considered the most complicated machines in the world. They are not aircraft carriers where components can be repaired or replaced with minimal effort/time/money.

That being said, the range of the D-5 missile is so great, that the ship can remain in port and reach just about any target on the planet. We'll likely see a ship that carries fewer weapons and has a wider range of capabilities than the current Ohio class. This is all about 10-15 years down the road mind you.

Originally Posted by E92Submarine

That's typically the argument people have against the building these machines. The fact of the matter is that the nuclear threat does still exist; it's just different these days. It's not just the Soviets with nukes anymore. In today's world, the upper hand is gained through electronic intelligence and not brute force.

There are a number of reasons it's more cost effective to replace the aging ships. One of the simplest reasons is the fact that these steel hulled boats have been driven beneath hundreds of feet of salt water. All the anti corrosion techniques available in the world cannot prevent some deterioration of the hull over 30 years. There are literally hundreds of valves and miles of piping that allow the ingestion of salt water into the ship. All of these are prone to corrosion. The nuclear reactor needs to be refueled. The piping systems associated with the reactor eventually need replacing.

This type of overhaul would logistically be a nightmare and would likely cost billions. There are some components that would literally require the ship to be cut into sections to be removed. Now that the space shuttle has been retired, these can be considered the most complicated machines in the world. They are not aircraft carriers where components can be repaired or replaced with minimal effort/time/money.

That being said, the range of the D-5 missile is so great, that the ship can remain in port and reach just about any target on the planet. We'll likely see a ship that carries fewer weapons and has a wider range of capabilities than the current Ohio class. This is all about 10-15 years down the road mind you.

For good reason. WWIII is the answer to our economic woes: http://www.colbertnation.com/the-col...playershare_fb

Originally Posted by E92Submarine

That's typically the argument people have against the building these machines. The fact of the matter is that the nuclear threat does still exist; it's just different these days. It's not just the Soviets with nukes anymore. In today's world, the upper hand is gained through electronic intelligence and not brute force.

I definitely agree with you on the value of intel. Odd, but a ballistic missile submarine doesn't exactly strike me as an intel collection platform.

There are a number of reasons it's more cost effective to replace the aging ships. One of the simplest reasons is the fact that these steel hulled boats have been driven beneath hundreds of feet of salt water. All the anti corrosion techniques available in the world cannot prevent some deterioration of the hull over 30 years. There are literally hundreds of valves and miles of piping that allow the ingestion of salt water into the ship. All of these are prone to corrosion. The nuclear reactor needs to be refueled. The piping systems associated with the reactor eventually need replacing.

This type of overhaul would logistically be a nightmare and would likely cost billions. There are some components that would literally require the ship to be cut into sections to be removed. Now that the space shuttle has been retired, these can be considered the most complicated machines in the world. They are not aircraft carriers where components can be repaired or replaced with minimal effort/time/money.

That being said, the range of the D-5 missile is so great, that the ship can remain in port and reach just about any target on the planet. We'll likely see a ship that carries fewer weapons and has a wider range of capabilities than the current Ohio class. This is all about 10-15 years down the road mind you.

Didn't you post a picture recently regarding a submarine that had been refitted/rebuilt/whatever term would best describe the effort by the shipyard where you work? I didn't say rebuilding would be easy, just that it would likely cost less than building something new from scratch. Add in the development $ (and the inevitable cost overruns that occur with new development projects) and the cost-benefit probably points to rebuild/refit.

Originally Posted by Inline Sixer

For good reason. WWIII is the answer to our economic woes: http://www.colbertnation.com/the-col...playershare_fb

I guess a Cold War with China might be a reasonable proxy for a replacement for the Cold War with the Soviets. At least it would end the labor cost arbitrage that the Chinese have been party to with the corporations.

Originally Posted by Nordic_Kat

I like the black BMW sitting at a 45 degree angle - "accident avoidance" in action.

Did you have an overwhelming urge to just go slap the 'Stang driver up the back side of his head?

Yes, still do. I've been in those situations where I see an accident happen and pull the whole "**** I'm in a BMW, what do I do to protect my baby"...happened a year or so ago when I saw the SUV flip head over tail (I posted on the forums).

On a side, I haven't driven my baby in a month

Originally Posted by Nordic_Kat

Did you have an overwhelming urge to just go slap the 'Stang driver up the back side of his head?

"Life is hard, but it's even harder if you're stupid."

So after removing my appendix and getting C-Diff, I feel much better now.

Originally Posted by anE934fun

I definitely agree with you on the value of intel. Odd, but a ballistic missile submarine doesn't exactly strike me as an intel collection platform.


Didn't you post a picture recently regarding a submarine that had been refitted/rebuilt/whatever term would best describe the effort by the shipyard where you work? I didn't say rebuilding would be easy, just that it would likely cost less than building something new from scratch. Add in the development $ (and the inevitable cost overruns that occur with new development projects) and the cost-benefit probably points to rebuild/refit.

When I say "overhaul" I'm talking about the submarine equivalent to changing the brake rotors on your car. What you're referring to would be like taking a 1984 E30 and turning it into a 2011 M3.

Originally Posted by -=Hot|Ice=-

So after removing my appendix and getting C-Diff, I feel much better now.

Man, that's rough. Glad you're ok now.

Originally Posted by -=Hot|Ice=-

So after removing my appendix and getting C-Diff, I feel much better now.

Hey Hot, glad you made it through! Man, the **** you get in the hospital these days while you're recovering from what you went in there for. How much weight did you lose?
Recently I had a new grandson born in the hospital. My wife and I used disinfectant wipes on our hands whenever we left the place. After all, very sick people have been opening the same doors...

Originally Posted by DSXMachina

Hey Hot, glad you made it through! Man, the **** you get in the hospital these days while you're recovering from what you went in there for. How much weight did you lose?
Recently I had a new grandson born in the hospital. My wife and I used disinfectant wipes on our hands whenever we left the place. After all, very sick people have been opening the same doors...

Thanks! When I went into the hospital, My weight was around 157.3 pounds. I had gotten to as low as 148.8 pounds. I'm now 152.6 pounds. You gatta be careful in there. The problem with c-diff is that it's part of the .1% that the hand sanitizers can't clean. You must wash your hands with soap and water. What really got to me was I had my appendix removed just a week earlier and thought I was lied to because my stomach was in so much pain again. Congrats on your grandson.

Where all my Indian IT peep? I tried to crack my SW airline membership number and.....
Seriously!!!?

Originally Posted by GiaGiaJa

Where all my Indian IT peep? I tried to crack my SW airline membership number and.....
Seriously!!!?

There is a range of possibilities... Some that immediately occur:
1. Your device got hacked. (Not too high chance)
2. You visited southwest.com at some point in the past and based on information you entered during the prior visit, a multi-national cookie was placed on your device. (Fairly high chance)
3. Your device has been set up with multi-national features turned on that were recognized by southwest.com (Mid-level chance)

There are other scenarios that could be causing the multi-national query challenge, but the above are what occur to me without any knowledge of how southwest.com has been configured.