• US nuclear-armed B-52H bombers to be based in Australia

    From Cesar@21:1/5 to All on Sat May 10 06:12:32 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal

    Once more the Albanese government has made it clear that the interests
    of Australia, its sovereignty and independence, are irrelevant. The
    interests and security of the Australian people and the region come a
    very poor second to the government�s commitment to the USA. There is
    only one interest worth pursuing and that is the US �alliance.�

    It has just been revealed that the Albanese government has given the
    green light for American B-52H Stratofortress bombers to be based at
    Tindal RAAF base in the Northern Territory. What is significant about
    these bombers is that they are capable of carrying and deploying
    strategic nuclear weapons.

    The US-funded expansion of the Tindal base radically alters the status
    quo. By hosting nuclear-weapons capable B-52 aircraft, and providing
    extensive operational mission support, Australia will, for the first
    time in history, be giving support for potential combat-missions using
    nuclear weapons.

    Any government that even pretends to have the interests of the people at
    heart would demand the right to know whether the bombers are nuclear
    armed or not. A statement from the Albanese government waived this
    right, saying that it both �understands and respects� the US doctrine to neither confirm or deny the presence of nuclear weapons on US aircraft.

    This revelation was made in a report for the Nautilus Institute, a
    progressive public policy think tank that seeks to address critical
    security and sustainability issues with a view to promoting a peaceful
    future. The authors, academics Vince Scappatura and Richard Tanter have produced a detailed, reliable and transparent document. Their research
    came from readily accessible open sources. The government, however,
    failed to take advantage of these same sources. They owed it to the
    people of this country to do so and to let us know where we are being
    led.

    Under current Australian law, there is no legal or even policy barrier
    that might limit US aircraft carrying nuclear weapons from entering the country. The �respect� that our government gives the US for not feeling
    any obligation to confirm that Australia is aiding and abetting
    potential nuclear strikes from an Australian air-force base is out of
    step with how things play out in other countries. To cite just one
    important example, the USA, under the conditions of the New Start Treaty
    that came into force in 2011, is obliged to provide Russia with just the
    sort of information that our government feels it cannot ask for.

    The report is particularly relevant because it takes away a degree of
    the unknown that goes with a refusal to be �straight� with an ally.
    Scappatura and Tanter offer an explanation of how nuclear capable
    aircraft can be identified. The term �Visual Guide� is used. As the
    report says, this �Visual Guide applies strict classification and
    confidence criteria to open-source photography to identify each B-52H
    bomber in the US Air Force active fleet as nuclear-capable or conventional-only.� This is important, but our government has wilfully
    chosen to ignore and deny its significance. After all, if your valued
    �friend and ally� is not prepared to be open with you, it would seem
    reasonable to make a few checks of your own. That is not about to
    happen.

    When Minister for Defence, Richard Marles, can fawningly and publicly
    say to his American counterpart, Lloyd Austin, at the recent AUSMIN
    meeting that �we could not be happier with the extent of your presence
    in the Indo-Pacific. It�s been wonderful � genuinely wonderful � and for
    that, we thank you � but of course, your alliance with us is completely
    central to our worldview, to our national security,� then we all know
    just how craven our government has become.

    Things were not always this way. In the 1970s, during the prime
    ministership of the conservative Malcolm Fraser, a strong sense of
    national sovereignty existed. The USA was welcome to use Australian
    bases but a �Fraser Model� or code of conduct was put in place. It was a
    simple case of the US being required to inform us about what sort of
    armaments their aircraft were carrying. The protocol had a clause that
    made it necessary for the government to them keep the people informed.
    How scrupulous the �truth-telling� might have been is another matter but
    the intent was there.

    The report points out that the Fraser government made it a condition of
    the alliance that B-52 operations in Australia, including landings in
    Darwin, were approved on the express condition that they be �unarmed and carried no bombs.�

    The Albanese government in its subservience to the dictates of America
    has made a stark choice. Scappatura and Tanter make it clear things need
    not be that way. Their report provides essential information regarding
    the nuclear capability of the B-52 bombers that will be using Tindal
    base. The government should have made this information available to the
    public. It should be obliged to share this with the other signatory
    states of the Treaty of Rarotonga. These Pacific Island nations, so patronisingly referred to by Australia as the �Pacific family� along
    with Australia, signed a treaty in 1985, committing each state and the
    region to maintaining a nuclear-free status as part of a campaign for a nuclear-weapons free world.

    Our government could have done what the authors of the report did, but
    it pointedly failed to do so. It is one more damning indictment, not
    merely of the subservience of our government to the USA, but shows of
    just how far to the right mainstream Australian political structures
    have moved.

    https://cpa.org.au/guardian/issue-2116/us-nuclear-armed-b-52h-bombers-to- be-based-in-australia/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From c186282@21:1/5 to Cesar on Sat May 10 17:48:44 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal

    On 5/10/25 2:12 AM, Cesar wrote:
    Once more the Albanese government has made it clear that the interests
    of Australia, its sovereignty and independence, are irrelevant. The
    interests and security of the Australian people and the region come a
    very poor second to the government’s commitment to the USA. There is
    only one interest worth pursuing and that is the US ‘alliance.’

    It has just been revealed that the Albanese government has given the
    green light for American B-52H Stratofortress bombers to be based at
    Tindal RAAF base in the Northern Territory. What is significant about
    these bombers is that they are capable of carrying and deploying
    strategic nuclear weapons.

    . . .

    Ummm ... how USEFUL are B52s these days ? They're
    big and slow and not stealthy. Even Iran can shoot
    them down easily. Missiles/drones are the functional
    replacements.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From MightyMouse@21:1/5 to Petzl on Thu May 15 10:44:39 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal

    Petzl wrote:
    On Sat, 10 May 2025 17:48:44 -0400, c186282 <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 5/10/25 2:12 AM, Cesar wrote:
    Once more the Albanese government has made it clear that the interests
    of Australia, its sovereignty and independence, are irrelevant. The
    interests and security of the Australian people and the region come a
    very poor second to the government’s commitment to the USA. There is
    only one interest worth pursuing and that is the US ‘alliance.’

    It has just been revealed that the Albanese government has given the
    green light for American B-52H Stratofortress bombers to be based at
    Tindal RAAF base in the Northern Territory. What is significant about
    these bombers is that they are capable of carrying and deploying
    strategic nuclear weapons.
    . . .

    Ummm ... how USEFUL are B52s these days ? They're
    big and slow and not stealthy. Even Iran can shoot
    them down easily. Missiles/drones are the functional
    replacements.
    On Sat, 10 May 2025 17:48:44 -0400, c186282 <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 5/10/25 2:12 AM, Cesar wrote:
    Once more the Albanese government has made it clear that the interests
    of Australia, its sovereignty and independence, are irrelevant. The
    interests and security of the Australian people and the region come a
    very poor second to the government’s commitment to the USA. There is
    only one interest worth pursuing and that is the US ‘alliance.’

    It has just been revealed that the Albanese government has given the
    green light for American B-52H Stratofortress bombers to be based at
    Tindal RAAF base in the Northern Territory. What is significant about
    these bombers is that they are capable of carrying and deploying
    strategic nuclear weapons.
    . . .

    Ummm ... how USEFUL are B52s these days ? They're
    big and slow and not stealthy. Even Iran can shoot
    them down easily. Missiles/drones are the functional
    replacements.

    The nuclear multi-warhead missles fired from them are not
    They are also escorted by superfast AI operated drones <https://www.perplexity.ai/search/superfast-ai-operated-drone-es-dR287tUiTUC1fNfPHHkfgQ>
    https://tinyurl.Overview of Superfast AI-Operated Drone Escorts Superfast AI-operated drone escorts represent a rapidly advancing
    field in both military and civilian aviation, leveraging artificial intelligence to autonomously support, protect, or augment manned and
    unmanned assets.

    Key Features and Capabilities
    High Speed and Maneuverability: Modern AI-operated combat drones, such
    as those developed under the Pentagon’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft
    (CCA) program, are designed to reach speeds up to 900 km/h and perform complex maneuvers to escort, protect, and attack alongside manned
    aircraft.

    Autonomous Operation: These drones are capable of flying and making
    tactical decisions independently, with minimal human intervention. AI
    agents can control flight, navigation, and mission execution,
    including offensive and defensive actions.

    Mission Flexibility: AI drone escorts can be equipped for various
    roles, including surveillance, electronic warfare, direct attack, and communications relay. They can carry weapons, sensors, or jamming
    equipment, acting as force multipliers for piloted aircraft.

    Swarm Coordination: Advanced AI enables multiple drones to operate cooperatively as swarms, coordinating complex missions with limited
    human oversight, significantly enhancing battlefield effectiveness.

    Cost Efficiency: Compared to manned fighter jets, AI-operated drone
    escorts like the XQ-58A Valkyrie are much less expensive and can be considered “attritable,” meaning they are designed to be expendable if necessary.

    Notable Programs and Examples
    Drone Model/Program Top Speed Range Role/Capability
    XQ-58A Valkyrie 1,050 km/h 3,941 km Autonomous escort, strike, surveillance, team with fighters
    CCA (Collaborative Combat Aircraft) ~900 km/h N/A Escort,
    scout, attack, communication relay, expendable
    V-Bat Teams (Shield AI) N/A N/A Swarm surveillance, autonomous multi-drone operationscom/3bspfzyz

    unmanned aircraft and drones are the way warfare is headed now

    --
    You have the right not to post. If you give up the right not
    to post, anything you post can and will be used against you.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From c186282@21:1/5 to All on Fri May 16 00:36:55 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal, alt.defense
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    On 5/15/25 9:34 AM, % wrote:
    Rod Speed wrote:
    On Thu, 15 May 2025 10:44:39 +1000, MightyMouse
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    Petzl wrote:
    On Sat, 10 May 2025 17:48:44 -0400, c186282 <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>
    On 5/10/25 2:12 AM, Cesar wrote:
    Once more the Albanese government has made it clear that the
    interests
    of Australia, its sovereignty and independence, are irrelevant. The >>>>>> interests and security of the Australian people and the region come a >>>>>> very poor second to the government’s commitment to the USA. There is >>>>>> only one interest worth pursuing and that is the US ‘alliance.’ >>>>>>
    It has just been revealed that the Albanese government has given the >>>>>> green light for American B-52H Stratofortress bombers to be based at >>>>>> Tindal RAAF base in the Northern Territory. What is significant about >>>>>> these bombers is that they are capable of carrying and deploying
    strategic nuclear weapons.
    . . .

       Ummm ... how USEFUL are B52s these days ? They're
       big and slow and not stealthy. Even Iran can shoot
       them down easily. Missiles/drones are the functional
       replacements.
    On Sat, 10 May 2025 17:48:44 -0400, c186282 <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>
    On 5/10/25 2:12 AM, Cesar wrote:
    Once more the Albanese government has made it clear that the
    interests
    of Australia, its sovereignty and independence, are irrelevant. The >>>>>> interests and security of the Australian people and the region come a >>>>>> very poor second to the government’s commitment to the USA. There is >>>>>> only one interest worth pursuing and that is the US ‘alliance.’ >>>>>>
    It has just been revealed that the Albanese government has given the >>>>>> green light for American B-52H Stratofortress bombers to be based at >>>>>> Tindal RAAF base in the Northern Territory. What is significant about >>>>>> these bombers is that they are capable of carrying and deploying
    strategic nuclear weapons.
    . . .

       Ummm ... how USEFUL are B52s these days ? They're
       big and slow and not stealthy. Even Iran can shoot
       them down easily. Missiles/drones are the functional
       replacements.

    The nuclear multi-warhead missles fired from them are not
    They are also escorted by superfast AI operated drones
    <https://www.perplexity.ai/search/superfast-ai-operated-drone-es-dR287tUiTUC1fNfPHHkfgQ>

           https://tinyurl.Overview of Superfast AI-Operated Drone Escorts
    Superfast AI-operated drone escorts represent a rapidly advancing
    field in both military and civilian aviation, leveraging artificial
    intelligence to autonomously support, protect, or augment manned and
    unmanned assets.

    Key Features and Capabilities
    High Speed and Maneuverability: Modern AI-operated combat drones, such >>>> as those developed under the Pentagon’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft >>>> (CCA) program, are designed to reach speeds up to 900 km/h and perform >>>> complex maneuvers to escort, protect, and attack alongside manned
    aircraft.

    Autonomous Operation: These drones are capable of flying and making
    tactical decisions independently, with minimal human intervention. AI
    agents can control flight, navigation, and mission execution,
    including offensive and defensive actions.

    Mission Flexibility: AI drone escorts can be equipped for various
    roles, including surveillance, electronic warfare, direct attack, and
    communications relay. They can carry weapons, sensors, or jamming
    equipment, acting as force multipliers for piloted aircraft.

    Swarm Coordination: Advanced AI enables multiple drones to operate
    cooperatively as swarms, coordinating complex missions with limited
    human oversight, significantly enhancing battlefield effectiveness.

    Cost Efficiency: Compared to manned fighter jets, AI-operated drone
    escorts like the XQ-58A Valkyrie are much less expensive and can be
    considered “attritable,” meaning they are designed to be expendable if >>>> necessary.

    Notable Programs and Examples
    Drone Model/Program    Top Speed    Range    Role/Capability
    XQ-58A Valkyrie    1,050 km/h    3,941 km    Autonomous escort, >>>> strike, surveillance, team with fighters
    CCA (Collaborative Combat Aircraft)    ~900 km/h    N/A Escort,
    scout, attack, communication relay, expendable
    V-Bat Teams (Shield AI)    N/A    N/A    Swarm surveillance, autonomous
    multi-drone operationscom/3bspfzyz

    unmanned aircraft and drones are the way warfare is headed now

    We'll see...

    You can't seize territory using just those

    you can do anything with anything if you know how


    Nobody knows how ... or at least it's be
    to 'Un-PC' ........

    The previous poster keeps listing supposed FIXES
    for the fault of the B-52s ... special add-on
    defenses. Thing is, it just confirms that the
    things are OBSOLETE ... need lots and LOTS of
    "help" that may, or may not, be adequate.

    Large sub-sonic un-stealthy aircraft are PRIME
    TARGETS for even 3rd-world air defenses these
    days. Shit, even the Houthi could take a lot
    of them down.

    50s tech was great in the 50s. These are NOT
    the 50s anymore. Plan to bring back horse
    soldiers with swords ???

    B-52s and a number of other old solutions need
    to be RETIRED immediately, the money sent elsewhere.
    The FUTURE is drones and hyper-sonics and missiles
    and 'AI' brains powering everything.

    Russia knows it. China knows it. The USA/EU seems
    to be lagging well behind the equation. This will
    mean DECISIVE defeats in any new skirmish/wars.

    THEY know it. Very bad.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From c186282@21:1/5 to Governor Swill on Mon May 19 02:11:20 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal, alt.defense
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    On 5/18/25 9:45 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
    On Fri, 16 May 2025 00:36:55 -0400, c186282 wrote:
    On 5/15/25 9:34 AM, % wrote:
    <snip>
    The previous poster keeps listing supposed FIXES
    for the fault of the B-52s ... special add-on
    defenses. Thing is, it just confirms that the
    things are OBSOLETE ... need lots and LOTS of
    "help" that may, or may not, be adequate.

    Exactly. The B-52 is an expression of the first fifty years of
    aviation. We're well over a century into it now and still using it?

    The other poster does NOT want to admit it.
    MAYbe old B-52 crew ?

    However it's TRUE.

    Large sub-sonic un-stealthy aircraft are PRIME
    TARGETS for even 3rd-world air defenses these
    days. Shit, even the Houthi could take a lot
    of them down.

    I doubt the Houthi have the capability to take out a B-52.

    Iran MAY provide them with it however ...

    It's advantage is payload. It's big so it can carry a *lot* of
    ordnance.

    Yea, but mostly STUPID ordinance. MIGHT hit within
    a quarter mile ...

    50s tech was great in the 50s. These are NOT
    the 50s anymore. Plan to bring back horse
    soldiers with swords ???

    Artillery is even older.

    THAT still seems to have a place, regardless of
    age. Modern artillery can be VERY accurate.

    B-52s and a number of other old solutions need
    to be RETIRED immediately, the money sent elsewhere.

    The last one was built in October, 1952 . . . before even *I* was
    born. Google AI says it averages 25M annually to maintain.

    The FUTURE is drones and hyper-sonics and missiles
    and 'AI' brains powering everything.

    Yes. Skynet.

    Kinda ....

    Russia knows it. China knows it. The USA/EU seems
    to be lagging well behind the equation. This will
    mean DECISIVE defeats in any new skirmish/wars.

    I don't think they're lagging that much, but events have overtaken
    them. The Europeans are being kicked out of the nest and the
    Americans are skimming cream all over the place.


    The USA relies TOO much on last-century mil-tech.


    THEY know it. Very bad.

    We ALL know it. Good.


    But it seems NOTHING will be done ...

    It'd be kind of like relying on horse cavalry to
    win WW2. The old generals LOVE the pomp and WILL
    hang on to it all for as long as possible Just
    Because. That kind of thinking created the WW-1
    "lost generation" ......... dread to think what
    it will cause TOMORROW.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Siri Cruz@21:1/5 to All on Mon May 19 01:06:58 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal, alt.defense
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    On 18/5/25 23:11, c186282 wrote:
    Exactly. The B-52 is an expression of the first fifty years of
    aviation. We're well over a century into it now and still
    using it?

    The other poster does NOT want to admit it.
    MAYbe old B-52 crew ?

    However it's TRUE.

    Large sub-sonic un-stealthy aircraft are PRIME
    TARGETS for even 3rd-world air defenses these
    days. Shit, even the Houthi could take a lot
    of them down.

    I doubt the Houthi have the capability to take out a B-52.

    Iran MAY provide them with it however ...

    It's advantage is payload. It's big so it can carry a *lot* of
    ordnance.

    Yea, but mostly STUPID ordinance. MIGHT hit within
    a quarter mile ...

    50s tech was great in the 50s. These are NOT
    the 50s anymore. Plan to bring back horse
    soldiers with swords ???

    Artillery is even older.

    THAT still seems to have a place, regardless of
    age. Modern artillery can be VERY accurate.

    B-52s and a number of other old solutions need
    to be RETIRED immediately, the money sent elsewhere.

    The last one was built in October, 1952 . . . before even *I* was
    born. Google AI says it averages 25M annually to maintain.

    The FUTURE is drones and hyper-sonics and missiles
    and 'AI' brains powering everything.

    Yes. Skynet.

    Kinda ....

    Russia knows it. China knows it. The USA/EU seems
    to be lagging well behind the equation. This will
    mean DECISIVE defeats in any new skirmish/wars.

    I don't think they're lagging that much, but events have overtaken
    them. The Europeans are being kicked out of the nest and the
    Americans are skimming cream all over the place.


    The USA relies TOO much on last-century mil-tech.


    Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've
    constructed. The ability to destroy a planet, or even a whole
    system, is insignificant next to the power of the Force.

    --
    Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-999. Disavowed. Denied. @
    'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
    The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 4.0 / \
    of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Computer Nerd Kev@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Tue May 20 09:32:50 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal

    In aus.legal c186282 <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 5/18/25 9:45 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
    On Fri, 16 May 2025 00:36:55 -0400, c186282 wrote:
    On 5/15/25 9:34 AM, % wrote:
    <snip>
    The previous poster keeps listing supposed FIXES
    for the fault of the B-52s ... special add-on
    defenses. Thing is, it just confirms that the
    things are OBSOLETE ... need lots and LOTS of
    "help" that may, or may not, be adequate.

    Exactly. The B-52 is an expression of the first fifty years of
    aviation. We're well over a century into it now and still using it?

    The other poster does NOT want to admit it.
    MAYbe old B-52 crew ?

    However it's TRUE.

    In terms of usage you could argue that that B-52s do much more
    active service than the other nuclear deterrents of nuclear subs
    and ICBMs. You just need to read over the Wikipedia page to see
    how the USA is able to use them fairly regularly for sub-doomsday
    tasks where an ICBM might be rather inappropriate:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-52_Stratofortress#21st_century_service

    Large sub-sonic un-stealthy aircraft are PRIME
    TARGETS for even 3rd-world air defenses these
    days. Shit, even the Houthi could take a lot
    of them down.

    I doubt the Houthi have the capability to take out a B-52.

    Iran MAY provide them with it however ...

    Well their capacity for downing a B-52 might be unknown but the
    Houthi's on their own have come close to hitting the latest F-35
    fighters because their low-tech arms aren't detected by its
    high-tech defences, so even fully modern tech isn't 100%:

    https://www.twz.com/air/how-the-houthis-rickety-air-defenses-can-threaten-the-stealthy-f-35

    B-52s and a number of other old solutions need
    to be RETIRED immediately, the money sent elsewhere.

    The last one was built in October, 1952 . . . before even *I* was
    born. Google AI says it averages 25M annually to maintain.

    Oh no, political arguments fuelled by AI BS are here! Wikipedia
    isn't perfectly trustworthy either but they have a cited statement
    that the last of the currently-operational B-52H model "B-52H AF
    Serial No. 61-40, left the factory on 26 October 1962".

    Now they're developing a new B-52J model "To be operational before
    the end of the 2020s". So with the typical delays of modern US
    military programmes I guess that means sometime this century.

    The US airforce themselves say:
    "The B-52A first flew in 1954, and the B model entered service in
    1955. A total of 744 B-52s were built, with the last, a B-52H,
    delivered in October 1962."
    https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104465/b-52h-stratofortress/

    That Air Force webpage also points out that they drop modern
    weapons like cruise missiles from them which can be very precise
    and useful in the wars they actually do fight, against ISIS and the
    like.

    The FUTURE is drones and hyper-sonics and missiles
    and 'AI' brains powering everything.

    Yes. Skynet.

    Kinda ....

    Maybe they'll start dropping AI drones from B-52s, that's similar
    to modern cruise missiles they drop already anyway. Just think of
    it as a massive high-altitude drone mothership with the capacity to
    destroy a whole country. Seem modern again now?

    --
    __ __
    #_ < |\| |< _#

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From -hh@21:1/5 to Governor Swill on Wed May 21 12:25:47 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal, alt.defense
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    On 5/21/25 04:21, Governor Swill wrote:
    On Mon, 19 May 2025 02:11:20 -0400, c186282 <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 5/18/25 9:45 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
    On Fri, 16 May 2025 00:36:55 -0400, c186282 wrote:
    On 5/15/25 9:34 AM, % wrote:
    <snip>
    The previous poster keeps listing supposed FIXES
    for the fault of the B-52s ... special add-on
    defenses. Thing is, it just confirms that the
    things are OBSOLETE ... need lots and LOTS of
    "help" that may, or may not, be adequate.

    Exactly. The B-52 is an expression of the first fifty years of
    aviation. We're well over a century into it now and still using it?

    The other poster does NOT want to admit it.
    MAYbe old B-52 crew ?

    However it's TRUE.

    Large sub-sonic un-stealthy aircraft are PRIME
    TARGETS for even 3rd-world air defenses these
    days. Shit, even the Houthi could take a lot
    of them down.

    I doubt the Houthi have the capability to take out a B-52.

    They have the capability.

    Many have for decades, which is precisely why high standoff weapons (eg
    cruise missiles) were developed for the B52 over thirty (30) Years ago.


    Iran MAY provide them with it however ...

    It's advantage is payload. It's big so it can carry a *lot* of
    ordnance.

    Yea, but mostly STUPID ordinance. MIGHT hit within
    a quarter mile ...

    Um, no. Keep up. The B-52 carries an array of smart weapons. It's
    radar, avionics, computers and sensors have all been updated to modern standards. A B-52 could stick missile up a camel's ass from six miles
    up.

    Sure...if there's not GPS jamming /s



    50s tech was great in the 50s. These are NOT
    the 50s anymore. Plan to bring back horse
    soldiers with swords ???

    Artillery is even older.

    THAT still seems to have a place, regardless of
    age. Modern artillery can be VERY accurate.

    B-52s and a number of other old solutions need
    to be RETIRED immediately, the money sent elsewhere.

    The last one was built in October, 1952 . . . before even *I* was
    born. Google AI says it averages 25M annually to maintain.

    The FUTURE is drones and hyper-sonics and missiles
    and 'AI' brains powering everything.

    Yes. Skynet.

    Kinda ....

    Russia knows it. China knows it. The USA/EU seems
    to be lagging well behind the equation. This will
    mean DECISIVE defeats in any new skirmish/wars.

    I don't think they're lagging that much, but events have overtaken
    them. The Europeans are being kicked out of the nest and the
    Americans are skimming cream all over the place.


    The USA relies TOO much on last-century mil-tech.

    The US is cutting edge. What planet are you on?

    The high costs tend to result in very long lifecycle durations.

    For example, the Army's M109 self-propelled howitzer ended its actual production in 1969: every M109 "produced" since then has been upgrades & refurbs which have reused that original batch of hulls from the 1960s...

    ...and even then, the existence of upgrade programs doesn't mean that
    the entire fleet has been upgraded to that latest specification.



    -hh

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Siri Cruz@21:1/5 to Governor Swill on Wed May 21 10:17:31 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal, alt.defense
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    On 21/5/25 1:21, Governor Swill wrote:
    Um, no. Keep up. The B-52 carries an array of smart weapons. It's
    radar, avionics, computers and sensors have all been updated to modern standards. A B-52 could stick missile up a camel's ass from six miles
    up.



    It becomes a Ship of Theseus. Like an airliner every few years
    the plane is completely disassembled and all parts are examined.
    Those showing wear are replaced. Then the plane is reassembled.
    And as above brand new bits and bobs can be added keeping it up
    to date.

    The B52 will continue to be used as long as it the best way to
    drop stuff that goes bang on an enemy.

    Navies use war ships that are a century old.

    --
    Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-999. Disavowed. Denied. @
    'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
    The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 4.0 / \
    of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gary Roselles@21:1/5 to Siri Cruz on Wed May 21 14:20:51 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal, alt.defense
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    On 5/21/2025 10:17 AM, Siri Cruz wrote:
    On 21/5/25 1:21, Governor Swill wrote:
    Um, no.  Keep up.  The B-52 carries an array of smart weapons.  It's
    radar, avionics, computers and sensors have all been updated to modern
    standards.  A B-52 could stick missile up a camel's ass from six miles
    up.



    It becomes a Ship of Theseus. Like an airliner every few years the plane is completely disassembled and all parts are examined. Those showing wear are replaced. Then the plane is reassembled. And as above brand new bits and bobs can be added keeping it up to date.

    The B52 will continue to be used as long as it the best way to drop stuff that
    goes bang on an enemy.

    Navies use war ships that are a century old.
    Cut the bullshit. There is not a deployed ship in any navy in the world that is a century old.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Computer Nerd Kev@21:1/5 to Gary Roselles on Thu May 22 08:20:57 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal

    In aus.legal Gary Roselles <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 5/21/2025 10:17 AM, Siri Cruz wrote:
    On 21/5/25 1:21, Governor Swill wrote:
    Um, no. Keep up. The B-52 carries an array of smart weapons. It's
    radar, avionics, computers and sensors have all been updated to modern
    standards. A B-52 could stick missile up a camel's ass from six miles
    up.
    It becomes a Ship of Theseus. Like an airliner every few years the plane is >> completely disassembled and all parts are examined. Those showing wear are >> replaced. Then the plane is reassembled. And as above brand new bits and bobs
    can be added keeping it up to date.

    The B52 will continue to be used as long as it the best way to drop stuff that
    goes bang on an enemy.

    Navies use war ships that are a century old.

    Cut the bullshit. There is not a deployed ship in any navy in the world that is
    a century old.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_rescue_ship_Kommuna

    --
    __ __
    #_ < |\| |< _#

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From -hh@21:1/5 to Gary Roselles on Wed May 21 19:03:13 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal, alt.defense
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    On 5/21/25 17:20, Gary Roselles wrote:
    On 5/21/2025 10:17 AM, Siri Cruz wrote:
    On 21/5/25 1:21, Governor Swill wrote:
    Um, no.  Keep up.  The B-52 carries an array of smart weapons.  It's
    radar, avionics, computers and sensors have all been updated to modern
    standards.  A B-52 could stick missile up a camel's ass from six miles
    up.



    It becomes a Ship of Theseus. Like an airliner every few years the
    plane is completely disassembled and all parts are examined. Those
    showing wear are replaced. Then the plane is reassembled. And as above
    brand new bits and bobs can be added keeping it up to date.

    The B52 will continue to be used as long as it the best way to drop
    stuff that goes bang on an enemy.

    Navies use war ships that are a century old.
    Cut the bullshit. There is not a deployed ship in any navy in the world
    that is a century old.

    The USS Constitution (1797) is still commissioned, so it is technically
    still an active and deployable ship. They just had it out sailing in
    Boston Harbor earlier this month.

    -hh

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Siri Cruz@21:1/5 to Gary Roselles on Wed May 21 18:49:34 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal, alt.defense
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    On 21/5/25 14:20, Gary Roselles wrote:
    On 5/21/2025 10:17 AM, Siri Cruz wrote:
    On 21/5/25 1:21, Governor Swill wrote:
    Um, no. Keep up. The B-52 carries an array of smart
    weapons. It's
    radar, avionics, computers and sensors have all been updated
    to modern
    standards. A B-52 could stick missile up a camel's ass from
    six miles
    up.



    It becomes a Ship of Theseus. Like an airliner every few years
    the plane is completely disassembled and all parts are
    examined. Those showing wear are replaced. Then the plane is
    reassembled. And as above brand new bits and bobs can be added
    keeping it up to date.

    The B52 will continue to be used as long as it the best way to
    drop stuff that goes bang on an enemy.

    Navies use war ships that are a century old.
    Cut the bullshit. There is not a deployed ship in any navy in the
    world that is a century old.

    Like the Constitution or Kommuna?

    --
    Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-999. Disavowed. Denied. @
    'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
    The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 4.0 / \
    of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From c186282@21:1/5 to Governor Swill on Fri May 23 00:44:53 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, alt.survival, alt.defense
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    On 5/22/25 10:36 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
    On Wed, 21 May 2025 19:03:13 -0400, -hh
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 5/21/25 17:20, Gary Roselles wrote:
    On 5/21/2025 10:17 AM, Siri Cruz wrote:
    On 21/5/25 1:21, Governor Swill wrote:
    Um, no.  Keep up.  The B-52 carries an array of smart weapons.  It's >>>>> radar, avionics, computers and sensors have all been updated to modern >>>>> standards.  A B-52 could stick missile up a camel's ass from six miles >>>>> up.



    It becomes a Ship of Theseus. Like an airliner every few years the
    plane is completely disassembled and all parts are examined. Those
    showing wear are replaced. Then the plane is reassembled. And as above >>>> brand new bits and bobs can be added keeping it up to date.

    The B52 will continue to be used as long as it the best way to drop
    stuff that goes bang on an enemy.

    Navies use war ships that are a century old.
    Cut the bullshit. There is not a deployed ship in any navy in the world
    that is a century old.

    The USS Constitution (1797) is still commissioned, so it is technically
    still an active and deployable ship. They just had it out sailing in
    Boston Harbor earlier this month.

    -hh

    Doesn't count. It's a museum piece.

    Anybody know of a ship over a century old still being used and
    deployed by any navy?

    A couple of the old WW-2 battleships were used
    during the Reagan era to fair effect. Impressive
    fire-power, even with old 'analog' targeting.

    They MAY still be at least "semi-active". I know
    they're kept ready, even semi-armed.

    Now a wooden SAILING ship ... kinda limited uses there.

    EXCEPT maybe after a big EMP attack or solar giga-flare.

    Low-tech IS still a good backup. Don't be TOO quick
    to throw stuff in the garbage bin. I still have some
    short-wave radios ... CAN get info from anywhere,
    any time.

    Oh, still have some PAPER bank instruments ? Actual
    CASH money ? If Vlad/Xi have their way they CAN turn
    off ALL the e-commerce shit in an instant and KEEP
    it off for a long time. Do you even have any paper
    statements to prove what you have where ??? Alas the
    more common answer these days is "No".

    Me, OLD school - have lots of paper. Hard to argue
    with ink on paper. Things go to shit I *will* still
    have claim and some access to my assets. 1959 level
    is better than NO level.

    Get it ?

    As for 'analog' targeting ... SURPRISINGLY good.
    They really knew their shit, even in the 1940s.
    Digital is great - but ALSO far easier to hack
    and corrupt.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From c186282@21:1/5 to Rod Speed on Fri May 23 02:12:29 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, alt.survival, alt.defense
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    On 5/23/25 1:04 AM, Rod Speed wrote:
    On Fri, 23 May 2025 14:44:53 +1000, c186282 <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 5/22/25 10:36 PM, Governor Swill wrote:
    On Wed, 21 May 2025 19:03:13 -0400, -hh
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    On 5/21/25 17:20, Gary Roselles wrote:
    On 5/21/2025 10:17 AM, Siri Cruz wrote:
    On 21/5/25 1:21, Governor Swill wrote:
    Um, no.� Keep up.� The B-52 carries an array of smart weapons.� It's >>>>>>> radar, avionics, computers and sensors have all been updated to
    modern
    standards.� A B-52 could stick missile up a camel's ass from six >>>>>>> miles
    up.



    It becomes a Ship of Theseus. Like an airliner every few years the >>>>>> plane is completely disassembled and all parts are examined. Those >>>>>> showing wear are replaced. Then the plane is reassembled. And as
    above
    brand new bits and bobs can be added keeping it up to date.

    The B52 will continue to be used as long as it the best way to drop >>>>>> stuff that goes bang on an enemy.

    Navies use war ships that are a century old.
    Cut the bullshit. There is not a deployed ship in any navy in the
    world
    that is a century old.

    The USS Constitution (1797) is still commissioned, so it is technically >>>> still an active and deployable ship.� They just had it out sailing in
    Boston Harbor earlier this month.

    -hh
    �Doesn't count.� It's a museum piece.
    �Anybody know of a ship over a century old still being used and
    deployed by any navy?

    �� A couple of the old WW-2 battleships

    Nothing even remotely like a century old

    �� were used
    �� during the Reagan era to fair effect. Impressive
    �� fire-power, even with old 'analog' targeting.

    B52s leave that for dead. Cruise missiles in spades and
    vastly cheaper than keeping those old hulks floating

    �� They MAY still be at least "semi-active". I know
    �� they're kept ready, even semi-armed.

    �� Now a wooden SAILING ship ... kinda limited uses there.

    �� EXCEPT maybe after a big EMP attack

    Lebanon never had anything even remotely like that capability

    or solar giga-flare.

    Wont stop a B2

    �� Low-tech IS still a good backup.

    B52 isnt low tech

    �� Don't be TOO quick
    �� to throw stuff in the garbage bin. I still have some
    �� short-wave radios ... CAN get info from anywhere,
    �� any time.

    More bullshit.

    �� Oh, still have some PAPER bank instruments ? Actual
    �� CASH money ? If Vlad/Xi have their way they CAN turn
    �� off ALL the e-commerce shit in an instant and KEEP
    �� it off for a long time.

    More bullshit

    �� Do you even have any paper
    �� statements to prove what you have where ???

    Dont need that


    Yes, you DO.


    �� Alas the� more common answer these days is "No".

    �� Me, OLD school - have lots of paper. Hard to argue
    �� with ink on paper.

    Pity about when the house burns down


    Such Houses rarely burn COMPLETELY down.


    �� Things go to shit I *will* still
    �� have claim and some access to my assets. 1959 level
    �� is better than NO level.

    Not when the bank has gone bust and they still do that

    The govt won't/can't let all the banks go down.

    �� Get it ?

    Nothing to get

    Oh yea, plenty ....

    �� As for 'analog' targeting ... SURPRISINGLY good.
    �� They really knew their shit, even in the 1940s.

    �� Digital is great - but ALSO far easier to hack
    �� and corrupt.

    Bullshit

    Wow ... TOTALLY ignorant.

    Noted.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From c186282@21:1/5 to All on Fri May 23 02:25:10 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, alt.survival, alt.defense
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    Ummm ... Rod ... MOST women don't want TOO much 'speed'
    associated with the rod :-)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From c186282@21:1/5 to Rod Speed on Fri May 23 02:29:45 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal, alt.defense
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    On 5/23/25 1:40 AM, Rod Speed wrote:
    Governor Swill <[email protected]> wrote
    Rod Speed <[email protected]> wrote
    Governor Swill <[email protected]> wrote
    Rod Speed <[email protected]> wrote
    Siri Cruz <[email protected]> wrote
    Governor Swill wrote

    Um, no.� Keep up.� The B-52 carries an array of smart weapons.� It's >>>>>>> radar, avionics, computers and sensors have all been updated to
    modern� standards.� A B-52 could stick missile up a camel's ass
    from six
    miles� up.

    It becomes a Ship of Theseus. Like an airliner every few years the >>>>>> plane� is completely disassembled and all parts are examined.

    Bullshit

    Cite?

    YOU made that stupid claim about completely disassembled

    No, I didn't.

    I'm asking for someone in this thread to cite something they wrote.

    Then you should have said that immediately after where they wrote that


    Who thinks Swill and friends are WORTH that
    much effort ??? :-)

    Hey, we don't get PAID to post here ...

    OK, maybe the Hamas/Rus people .....

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Siri Cruz@21:1/5 to Governor Swill on Fri May 23 03:05:47 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, alt.survival, alt.defense
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    On 22/5/25 22:27, Governor Swill wrote:
    Could the U.S. Navy Bring Back the Battleships? One Word ...

    US is not the only navy.

    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_rescue_ship_Kommuna>

    --
    Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-999. Disavowed. Denied. @
    'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
    The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 4.0 / \
    of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Computer Nerd Kev@21:1/5 to Governor Swill on Sat May 24 06:22:24 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal

    In aus.legal Governor Swill <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Wed, 21 May 2025 19:03:13 -0400, -hh
    <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 5/21/25 17:20, Gary Roselles wrote:
    On 5/21/2025 10:17 AM, Siri Cruz wrote:
    Navies use war ships that are a century old.
    Cut the bullshit. There is not a deployed ship in any navy in the world
    that is a century old.

    The USS Constitution (1797) is still commissioned, so it is technically >>still an active and deployable ship. They just had it out sailing in >>Boston Harbor earlier this month.

    Doesn't count. It's a museum piece.

    Anybody know of a ship over a century old still being used and
    deployed by any navy?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_rescue_ship_Kommuna http://www.hisutton.com/Russian-Navy-Moskva-Cruiser-Wreck.html

    --
    __ __
    #_ < |\| |< _#

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From c186282@21:1/5 to Computer Nerd Kev on Sat May 24 01:06:21 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    On 5/23/25 4:22 PM, Computer Nerd Kev wrote:
    In aus.legal Governor Swill <[email protected]> wrote:
    On Wed, 21 May 2025 19:03:13 -0400, -hh
    <[email protected]> wrote:
    On 5/21/25 17:20, Gary Roselles wrote:
    On 5/21/2025 10:17 AM, Siri Cruz wrote:
    Navies use war ships that are a century old.
    Cut the bullshit. There is not a deployed ship in any navy in the world >>>> that is a century old.

    The USS Constitution (1797) is still commissioned, so it is technically
    still an active and deployable ship. They just had it out sailing in
    Boston Harbor earlier this month.

    Doesn't count. It's a museum piece.

    Anybody know of a ship over a century old still being used and
    deployed by any navy?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_rescue_ship_Kommuna http://www.hisutton.com/Russian-Navy-Moskva-Cruiser-Wreck.html


    It's MOSTLY a 'pride/historical' thing.

    However after the giant solar flare or huge
    EMP attack, these MAY be the only things still
    floating - so .........

    Don't be TOO critical of "low-tech backup
    systems". I really HOPE the US Mil still has
    old tube-based shortwave systems and a few
    prop planes and such that still use magneto
    ignition.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From c186282@21:1/5 to Rod Speed on Sat May 24 02:03:37 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    On 5/24/25 1:38 AM, Rod Speed wrote:
    c186282 <[email protected]> wrote
    Computer Nerd Kev wrote
    Governor Swill <[email protected]> wrote
    -hh <[email protected]> wrote
    Gary Roselles wrote
    Siri Cruz wrote

    Navies use war ships that are a century old.

    Cut the bullshit. There is not a deployed shipin any navy in the
    world� that is a century old.

    The USS Constitution (1797) is still commissioned,so it is
    technically still an active and deployable ship. They just had it
    out sailing in� Boston Harbor earlier this month.

    Doesn't count.� It's a museum piece.

    Anybody know of a ship over a century oldstill being used and
    deployed by any navy?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_rescue_ship_Kommuna
    http://www.hisutton.com/Russian-Navy-Moskva-Cruiser-Wreck.html

    �� It's MOSTLY a 'pride/historical' thing.

    �� However after the giant solar flare or huge
    �� EMP attack, these MAY be the only things still
    �� floating - so .........

    Bullshit on the still floating and it won't be going
    anywhere anyway and even if they can do that,
    just one or two won't be any use anyway

    �� Don't be TOO critical of "low-tech backup� systems".

    They aren't "low-tech backup� systems".


    Umm ... depends on the exact SITUATION, doesn't it ? :-)


    �� I really HOPE the US Mil still has
    �� old tube-based shortwave systems

    They aren't that stupid

    �� and a few� prop planes

    They aren't that stupid


    Maybe they ARE ... your response WORRIES me.

    ALWAYS keep some prev-gen stuff, Just In Case.

    It should be hack-impervious, EMP impervious.

    If the fecal matter impacts the rotating airfoil ...


    and such that still use magneto� ignition.

    There are plenty of very small planes like that like the Cessna 172 but
    there is a fat lot of use those would be to the military after a nuke holocaust

    Yea, but they're pretty SMALL and SLOW - I know,
    I've flown them.

    Celestial navigation when the ship aint going anywhere in spades

    Apollo crews used 'celestial navigation' - came in
    esp useful for '13'.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gronk@21:1/5 to All on Mon May 26 00:04:04 2025
    XPost: aus.politics, aus.legal, alt.defense
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh

    c186282 wrote:


    Because magats are so frickin' stupid...

    https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104465/b-52h-stratofortress/

    Mission
    The B-52H Stratofortress is a long-range,
    heavy bomber that can perform a variety of
    missions. The bomber is capable of flying at
    high subsonic speeds at altitudes of up to
    50,000 feet (15,166.6 meters). It can carry
    nuclear or precision guided conventional
    ordnance with worldwide precision navigation
    capability.

    Features
    In a conventional conflict, the B-52 can
    perform strategic attack, close-air support,
    air interdiction, offensive counter-air and
    maritime operations.
    ...


    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-52_Stratofortress

    Weapons upgrades include the 1760 Internal
    Weapons Bay Upgrade (IWBU), which gives a
    66 percent increase in weapons payload using
    a digital interface (MIL-STD-1760) and rotary
    launcher. IWBU is expected to cost roughly
    US$313 million. The 1760 IWBU will allow the
    B-52 to carry eight[80] JDAM 2,000-pound
    (910 kg) bombs, AGM-158B JASSM-ER cruise
    missiles and ADM-160C MALD-J decoy missiles
    internally. All 1760 IWBUs should be operational
    by October 2017. Two bombers will have the
    ability to carry 40 weapons in place of the 36
    that three B-52s can carry.[81] The 1760 IWBU
    allows precision-guided missiles or bombs to be
    deployed from inside the weapons bay; the
    previous aircraft carried these munitions
    externally on the wing hardpoints. This
    increases the number of guided weapons (Joint
    Direct Attack Munition or JDAM) a B-52 can carry
    and reduces the need for guided bombs to be
    carried on the wings. The first phase will allow
    a B-52 to carry twenty-four GBU-38 500-pound
    guided bombs or twenty GBU-31 2,000-pound bombs,
    with later phases accommodating the JASSM and
    MALD family of missiles.[82] In addition to
    carrying more smart bombs, moving them internally
    from the wings reduces drag and achieves a
    15 percent reduction in fuel consumption.

    The B-52 is due to receive a range of upgrades
    alongside a planned engine retrofit. These
    upgrades aim to modernize the sensors and
    displays of the B-52.


    ETC

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)