It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Sunday, November 21, 2021
Bill Gates: humanity to prepare for attacks with biological weapons
WASHINGTON – In a new interview with Policy Exchange, the founder of Microsoft announced a future catastrophe, for which it is time to prepare now.
Photo credit: Reuters
The businessman warned governments in various countries of the need to prepare for terrorist attacks with biological weapons, learned BulgarianMilitary.com, citing Tabu.bg. In particular, we are talking about intentional infection with smallpox – a highly contagious viral infection. The disease is characterized by fever, rash on the skin and mucous membranes, often leaving scars. That’s what The Independent writes.
According to the founder of Microsoft, countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom have to spend tens of billions of dollars to fund epidemiological safety research. It is especially worth paying attention to the places where people from different countries gather. Bioterrorists are likely to carry out attacks at airports.
“It will probably take about a billion a year for the WHO working group to monitor and do what I call a ‘microbial game,'” Bill Gates said.
According to the developer, epidemics caused by bioterrorism can be worse than natural, including more dangerous than the pandemic of the coronavirus infection COVID-19. We remind you that the first outbreak of coronavirus was registered in December 2019 in the Chinese city of Wuhan. Now, according to BBC News, the number of coronavirus deaths worldwide has already exceeded 5 million.
BulgarianMilitary.com recalls that on October 29 this year, the US intelligence community concluded that the Covid-19 coronavirus was not developed as a biological weapon, according to a report published by the US National Intelligence Council. “We believe that the virus was not created as a biological weapon,” the report said. “Most agencies also estimate with a low level of confidence that the virus may not have been genetically modified. However, two agencies believe that there is not enough data to make such an assessment,” the report said.
According to the report, US intelligence agencies have not reached a consensus on the origin of the virus and believe that two hypotheses about the origin of COVID-19 are likely: an animal infection and “related to a laboratory incident [in Wuhan].”
The secret collision of the US Seawolf nuclear submarine
The analyzes were made by Maksymilian Dura for Defence24. Their assessments, opinions and comments on the topic do not reflect the position of BulgarianMilitary.com
WARSAW – The US Navy briefly reported that the USS Connecticut submarine collided with an unknown underwater object in an attempt to dispel the suspicions that there was a collision with an unknown Chinese submarine. However, it is still unknown what waters the USS Connecticut was in, that the Americans did not have proper maps and could not use anti-collision sonar.
The US Navy released a one-sentence statement on the Seawolf-type nuclear submarine USS Connecticut (SSN 22) in the South China Sea on October 2, 2021. An investigation conducted for US 7th Fleet command found that the US unit was to “land on an unexplored submarine while operating in international waters in the Indo-Pacific region.” The Commander of the 7th Fleet is now to determine whether the further action of the commander of the USS Connecticut was appropriate.
This will be difficult since the investigation did not explain why an underwater collision had occurred at all. The blame was placed on American maps, which did not inform about the existence of such high underwater obstacles at the scene. This took the responsibility off the crew, but at the same time means that: The US Navy did not draw the correct conclusions from a similar accident on the USS San Francisco (SSN-711) Los Angeles-class submarine in 2005; the operation of American submarines in the South China Sea can be very dangerous.
Information about inaccurate maps (if true) would undoubtedly please the Chinese who want to make the South China Sea an inner sea, with the exclusive right to exploit its underwater resources. Therefore, there is no chance that China will provide the Americans with its own, perhaps more accurate, underwater maps. The US Navy could, of course, survey the South China Sea itself, but that would require months of oceanographic vessel work. There is no money for such activity: neither the money nor the consent of the authorities in Beijing, which will certainly not allow Western countries to conduct any comprehensive research under their side.
The Chinese, however, probably did not “buy” the American explanations and are conducting their investigation of what the American nuclear submarine did that it collided “somewhere” with “some” underwater obstacle.
What is the extent of the damage to Seawolf?
So far, the size of the damage is being investigated and the cost of repairing it is estimated. Fortunately, the USS Connecticut hit the underwater mountain with its bow, thanks to which the rigid hull was not damaged (which would have been possible if the ship had rubbed its side against an obstacle over a long surface). In turn, the bow part can be likened to a car bumper, with the difference that on a submarine in the “crumple zone” (between the bow deflector and the front part of the rigid hull) there is a lot of various types of marine equipment.
So far, the Americans have only stated that the ballast tanks have been damaged, which meant that the USS Connecticut had to sail from the South China Sea to the naval base on the island of Guam for a week on the surface. Additionally, the US Navy continues to reassure us that “the nuclear reactor and the submarine’s propulsion system are undamaged.” The fore antenna system of the sonar complex – including its lower elements – must have been destroyed, so the ones most likely used to avoid collisions and mines and to periodically measure the distance to the bottom.
The condition of the main spherical sonar, which is the farthest forward element of the hydroacoustic system, is also unknown. Despite the reinforcements used, it was also probably badly damaged.
Was it possible to avoid the collision?
A submarine below the periscope depth only seems to be unable to observe the surrounding environment. Underwater, optoelectronic, and radar systems are replaced by sonar complexes using acoustic waves, which equally carefully monitor the surroundings and locate objects within the range of even several dozen nautical miles.
Photo credit: Defense Express
It is easiest in the case of “noisy” objects because sonar systems are able not only to detect a bearing on them but also to identify them (through sound analysis). It is worse with the determination of the distance, but it is also possible when using passive antenna arrays of side observation sonars or towed linear antennas, which allow for determining the position of the target using the triangulation method.
In the case of underwater obstacles that do not emit sound, the situation is much more complicated, because to detect them you need to either know where they are or locate them using active sonar. In the first case, you need accurate seabed maps as well as a precise inertial navigation system. Contrary to appearances, it is not difficult at all, because such maritime powers as the US Navy have long been creating a database of the operating areas of their ships, not only in terms of depth but also in terms of hydrological conditions (vertical temperature distribution, speed of sound propagation in water). , salinity, etc.). It is necessary, among others to allow the sonar to work accurately.
It is also not a problem to determine your position underwater without contact, for example, with the GPS, because modern submarines use very accurate inertial navigation systems, counting the distance traveled, taking into account external conditions (mainly underwater sea currents). The American Seawolf-class ships most likely have at least two such underwater navigation systems, so this could not have been the reason for a collision with anything.
It is also difficult to assume that the cause of the collision was the poorly trained crew of the USS Connecticut. All three Seawolf ships are designed for the most difficult tasks and the US Navy would certainly not allow crew members to be taken on board without the appropriate knowledge and experience.
“Connecticut hit the facility while it was submerged on the afternoon of October 2, while operating in international waters in the Indo-Pacific region,” PACFLEET Press Office said on October 7, 2021.
The simplest explanation, then, is that of the US Navy from the outset, that the maps that did not take into account the submarine that the USS Connecticut ultimately struck had failed. The problem is that such an explanation is illogical. The cause of the accident will only be found by those who explain: why anti-collision sonar was not used and what waters in the Indo-Pacific area have not yet been described on American maps.
Why was no active sonar used on the USS Connecticut?
As mentioned above, each submarine, while operating in unfamiliar waters, has the means to locate “non-noisy” underwater objects in front of and below it. These measures include, for example, active combat sonar, anti-collision sonar, anti-mine sonar, and seabed sonar.
These devices allow you to very accurately determine the bearing and distance to the detected object, but they operate according to the principle known from radars: sending an impulse (group of impulses) and then receiving the part of the energy reflected from the target. Unfortunately, this is how the submarine “sees” everything, but on the other hand, it reveals its presence. Active sonar sends an acoustic wave that can be picked up even tens of nautical miles away – alerting the enemy anti-submarine forces.
To avoid this, different types of sonar are used for different types of tasks. Again, the same principle as in the case of radars comes into play. The higher the frequency of the signal, the greater the accuracy of the measurement, but the range is shorter (and therefore also the range of its reception by the opponent). Hence, active combat sonars operate at lower, “audible” frequencies – most often in the 5-20kHz band. This allows to increase the range, but at e.g. 1 kHz requires the use of large-size antennas, which is difficult to use in the case of submarines.
In turn, in anti-collision and anti-mine sonars they already use higher frequencies, even exceeding 100 kHz. For example, a station of this type SA 9510S of the Norwegian company Kongsberg secures in one pulse (ping) at frequencies from 70 to 100 kHz, the observation sector over 120º horizontally and over 90º vertically. Apart from the selection of a higher band of the active sonar signal, its detection can be made more difficult by e.g. using a wide transmission spectrum. The pulse is then “stretched” over a wide frequency range but according to an algorithm that is only understood by a given transmitter and receiver. The signal is thus masked in some way in the ambient noise, which, however, may cause disturbances in the reception of the echo signal.
Photo credit: Defense Express
And it should be remembered that in the case of sonars it is a bit more difficult to determine the parameters of objects than in the case of a radar station because acoustic waves move in the water much slower than electromagnetic waves in the air, with different speeds (depending, for example, on the sea and the season) and not rectilinear. Hence, it is so important to know the hydrology of the sea, and therefore to have up-to-date maps of the sea on which you plan to operate.
Despite various technical improvements, active sonar is still very reluctantly used by submarine crews. And this applies not only to hydroacoustic stations that send a signal in front of the ship (eg to avoid a collision) but also to devices that send “pings” down, measuring the distance to the bottom for navigation purposes. This reluctance, however, applies only to those reservoirs where you plan to hide your own presence, e.g. by carrying out some secret mission related to the reconnaissance of the enemy, blowing up commandos, or espionage.
The failure of the active sonars to be turned on by the USS Connecticut crew meant that the ship’s mission was top secret, well worth the dangers posed by a submarine worth several billion dollars (about $ 8.5 billion at the current rate). In addition, the lack of maps with the exact shape of the bottom proves that the operation was carried out in a body of water that had not been studied by the American hydrographic services before. This may be proof that the Americans actually found themselves in the actual Chinese waters, for example following the latest submarines and surface ships mass-built in China. This is evidenced by, for example, the consistent avoidance of the term “South China Sea” and the use of the name “Indo-Pacific region” in the official communications of the US Navy when indicating the place of the accident. Perhaps this is why the authorities in Beijing are accusing the US Navy of covering up the entire incident, asking for more detailed explanations on several occasions.
Photo credit: Defense Express
When it comes to repairing, it’s not all about money
Currently, USS Connecticut is handled by repair teams from the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and service groups from the USS Emory S. Land (AS-39) submarine logistic support ship based in Guam. It is a vessel that is a substitute for a specialized submarine base, which, even in unprepared ports, can provide these units with electricity and water, carry out repairs and maintenance of weapons and equipment, as well as provide consumables, spare parts, medical and dental assistance, food, mail, and even legal services. For this purpose, the USS “Emory S. Land” has been set up as a small town with up to 53 different specialized stores.
Now all these repair crews are working to prepare the USS Connecticut so that it can return to the United States and undergo a full repair there. Contrary to appearances, it is not about money, but most of all about finding a shipyard that will take place to carry out the necessary renovation (e.g. a free dry dock). The schedule of US Navy shipbuilding works is so tight that it is very difficult to suddenly include an additional vessel. The inclusion of USS Connecticut in plans may therefore have an impact on other maintenance programs and tasks.
Photo credit: Defense Express
In the United States, the discussion on the need to secure the Guam base with appropriate shipbuilding infrastructure was immediately resumed – including, for example, a modern, dry dock, so that damaged ships would not later have to be transferred across the Pacific to the United States. The nearest dry dock to Guam for major repairs of submarines is located in Hawaii, and the second in the continental United States at the Puget Sound shipyard, near the USS Connecticut homeport in Bremerton, Washington.
These omissions will now extend the length of time that the US Navy will not be able to use one of its Seawolves operationally. The Americans have only three such ships, which, despite their age (they were in service in 1997, 1998, and 2005), are still considered to be the most silent ships in their class in the world (even at an underwater speed of 20 knots). Initially, they were created specifically to combat Russian submarines in the depths of the oceans. Currently, they have been adapted to perform the most secret tasks assigned to the American Navy.
It does not change the fact that it is a very well-armed submarine. It is equipped with 8 torpedo tubes of 660 mm caliber, which can be used to launch both torpedoes and Tomahawk missiles (which can take up to 50 in total). There is also space for 8 commandos on board.
Do Americans learn from their mistakes?
In all this, the Americans were very lucky. First, their ship managed to break through to Guam for several days, hiding the fact of the accident at all (including from the Chinese). Second, the collision was not serious compared to an earlier incident of this type on the Los Angeles-type USS San Francisco on January 8, 2005, 364 NM southeast of Guam Island (“near the Carolingian Islands”).
Photo credit: Defense Express
So far it is known that on the USS Connecticut “only” 1 person was injured from a crew of over 130. On the other hand, on the USS San Francisco, one officer was killed and 98 people were injured out of about 130 people on board at that time. This difference was mainly because the USS San Francisco hit the obstacle at the full underwater speed of about 35 knots (65 km / h) and was at a depth of 160 m. So the ship almost immediately stopped and the sailors ran into anything, that stood next to them (injuries mainly included bone fractures, spine injuries, head injuries, and cuts).
The automatic damage was also much greater than on the USS Connecticut (which sailed much more carefully) and included the bow ballast tanks (which had been torn apart) and the entire bow section. The part was practically completely crushed and could not be repaired. So it was replaced with a “new” one, taken from the previously withdrawn Los Angeles-class submarine – USS Honolulu (SSN-718). Fortunately, in this case, the reactor was not damaged and the ship could sail to Guam on its own, with the support of auxiliary ships.
Apart from the obvious errors in command by the commander of the ship and six other crew members, it is noteworthy that the collision in 2005 also occurred with the submarine mountain, which was not on the map used by the crew. This obstacle, however, was indicated on other maps, but it was not marked in the navigational documentation of the USS San Francisco – which was a breach of the regulations. The inconsistencies detected during periodic measurements of the distance to the bottom, which were too rare at the high speed used, were also not taken into account. The last measurement 4 minutes before the collision was, for example, at a depth of 2000 m.
This cost the Americans tens of millions of dollars to repair, and the US Navy was stripped of one submarine for four years – until April 2009, when the USS San Francisco returned to service. When the USS Connecticut will return to the line, it is not known yet.
Why would the US and the world leave Taiwan at the mercy of China?
PANAGYURISHTE, ($1=1.69 Bulgarian Levas) – A few days ago, US President Joe Biden answered a question asked by CNN journalist Anderson Cooper whether the United States would defend Taiwan in the event of an attack by China. Biden replied, “Yes, we have a commitment to do that.”
Biden went further in his speech, telling a broad audience of the TV channel that the United States is the most powerful army in the world and “Russia, China, and the whole world know this.”
Biden loves to talk and emphasize the superiority of Americans over the world. Another issue is that very often his words do not overlap with reality. Look at Afghanistan – the US president has stated emphatically that Kabul is in safe hands and there is no way a 330,000 army can fall at the feet of 70,000 Taliban. We already know what happened.
Another example of the US administration’s lack of orientation, in reality, is the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline. Many members of the US Senate and Congress, as well as Biden and Donald Trump, have stated emphatically that Russia’s monopoly on natural gas production and transportation to Europe will be interrupted that Nord Stream 2 will be sanctioned, but again – we saw what happened. Is Joe Biden’s statement serious?
US President Joe Biden’s remarks are ambiguous. It is not clear from his answer – how exactly will the United States defend Taiwan? There are two probabilities.
The first possibility is that the United States will continue to negotiate, sell and deliver its latest weapons technology to Taiwan, as it has done so far.
The second possibility – the United States to participate with its equipment, troops, and intelligence in a direct conflict between Taiwan and China.
There is a third probability, which is half, ie. with the help of satellite support, the United States to provide intelligence on the movement and deployment of Chinese troops, and military equipment.
However, such a categorical statement by Joe Biden is not serious about the audience – the one in the United States and the world. It is not diplomatic, it is not well thought out, which calls into question whether Biden listens to his advisers, or whether his advisers correctly rely on the political and economic situation in the world or the Indian Pacific region.
Such a statement takes us back to the Cold War when the economic situation itself was radically different – a Western market built on competition and capabilities, and an Eastern market, which was dictated by the USSR and was a closed circle of trade relations. Then, such a statement made sense, because the very signal it carries with it speaks of a change in political and economic relations around the world. Today the world is different and China is present. The forgotten facts
Taiwan has its currency, widely accepted passport, postage stamps, Internet TLD, armed forces, and a constitution with an independently elected president. However, Taiwan is not a member of the United Nations and does not have observer status in the organization. The reason for this is China’s policy.
On October 25, 1971, UN Resolution 2758 was adopted by 76 votes to 35, with 17 abstentions, recognizing the People’s Republic of China as China’s sole representative to the United Nations. Countries that support China are France, India, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union, and some of the abstaining countries are Japan and the United States.
Taiwan has formal diplomatic relations with 14 of the 193 UN member states and the Holy See. These are the so-called official diplomatic channels. In addition, many other countries maintain informal diplomatic ties through missions and institutions in Taiwan.
Notice which are the 14 countries that have official diplomatic relations with Taiwan and recognize the de facto independence of the island nation – Guatemala, Honduras, the Holy See, Haiti, Paraguay, Nicaragua, Eswatini, Tuvalu, Nauru, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saint Kitts, and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Belize, Marshall Islands, Balau.
China’s influence on recognizing Taiwan as a separate and independent country is enormous. China keeps all international organizations in check, forcing them not to grant Taiwan membership through politics and economics. Sometimes this barrier is overcome, but only if different names of Taiwan are used, which are again after agreement with China. This is more of an internal conflict than an international one
In reality, if a war breaks out between the People’s Republic of China and Taiwan, it will be more of an internal conflict than a war between two countries. The UN will not support the United States and will try to prevent a war with diplomacy, trying to restore peace and return the two countries to their original position.
Russia is likely to take a neutral position, as will most UN members but will continue co-operation between Moscow and Beijing on the axis of military co-operation in production and know-how.
Much of Europe will remain neutral, and so will Central and South America. Britain and Japan are also unlikely to support the United States.
Taiwan will be abandoned by the United Nations and the world, forcing the United States to do the same. The very fact that the United States has no official diplomatic relations with Taiwan eloquently leads us to the outcome of this conflict.
The United States, Europe, and the world cannot send troops and military equipment to defend Taiwan. It will be a serious propaganda tool in the hands of Beijing, Moscow, and other opponents of Washington. This will lead to serious inflation and an economic crisis all over the world, on an unimaginable scale.
China is strong economically and that matters
After the United States, China is the world’s second-largest economy in terms of gross domestic product. The difference between the first two countries is minimal, while the difference between the second and third (Japan) is huge.
However, the influence of the Chinese economy on the world economic index is greater than that of the United States. China’s trade and foreign exchange trade worldwide is greater than that of the Americans.
Let’s not forget another important factor – the United States and China continue to trade, despite the economic sanctions that countries have exchanged in recent years. A war between the two countries, at the expense of a third (Taiwan), will be devastating for the standard of living in the two countries, for the price of their currency, for their economy and production.
If these two countries suffer, the whole world will suffer economically. The world will go back at least 100 years and start rebuilding its markets. Millions will die more from hunger, and misery than from the war itself, which is likely to take tens of thousands.
Biden’s last lie
No, the United States does not have the most powerful army in the world. This statement was valid 30-40 years ago. The words of US President Joe Biden are most likely dictated by one fact – the US has the largest military budget in the world (750-770 billion USD), which does not mean that it has the most powerful army.
China has the second-largest military budget in the world and has shown a new generation of weapons in recent years. We cannot say what the capabilities of Chinese weapons technology are, but we can say that they exist, that so far China and the United States have not faced each other in a confrontation, and that the outcome of this confrontation is unclear militarily.
Diplomacy
The United States, the world, and China must find a way to diplomacy, and one of the first steps is to stop heating their political and trade relations.
Otherwise, China will invade Taiwan, and neither the United States nor the rest of the world will be able to help the islanders. Taiwan will remain at the mercy of China
Unknown: F-22 Raptor covered with a mosaic of reflective material By Boyko Nikolov
On Nov 21, 2021
WASHINGTON – Military aviation photographer Santos Cáceres managed to capture an interesting innovation on the hull of the American stealth fighter of the fifth-generation F-22 Raptor during its takeoff from the Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada. BulgarianMilitary.com has learned that the photo is new and was taken on November 19, 2021.
Photo credit: Santos Caceres
The photo shows that the “normal skin” of the F-22 Raptor has a carefully placed metal coating similar to tiles, precisely applied so as not to interfere with the key access points of the air jet, fighter sensors, and critical areas, and antenna areas.
Experts from The Drive say that such a metal coating has not been seen so far on such a class of aircraft by the US Air Force. It is assumed that this particular fighter tested the new coating in flight. It is not clear what the purpose of the metal coating is.
Military analysts point out that this is not the first time that American engineers have tested such components. Last year, in June, test flights of Scaled Composites Model 401 “Son Of Ares” also attracted attention, as the aircraft was covered with a reflective metal coating. The debate among experts at the time was in-depth and offered a variety of options for indoor use – from advanced infrared sensors to laser guidance systems.
The mention of infrared search and tracking systems [IRST] is not accidental. Currently, the US military is in the process of various tests of such systems. The concept is that in the future, infrared systems and laser systems will become leaders on the battlefield, and therefore, dozens of unmanned aerial vehicles in the United States receive such developments and are tested under different conditions.
There is a good reason for the F-22 Raptor to be part of the test program of such systems. This fighter often encounters thin and cold air, as it flies at altitudes above 60,000 feet (18-19 km), makes it at a certain angle, and often in the upper atmosphere. Experts suggest that tests at such heights are relevant to the innovations being tested. Otherwise, the Pentagon would use a standard fighter, such as the F-15 or F-16.
The very fact that the United States is investing in such a development suggests that this mirror metal coating of the F-22 Raptor is important for the United States and the highly changing geopolitical environment. It is possible that this mirror coating has evolved into a modular and non-invasive application that is now part of this development ecosystem.
F-22 fleet received $ 10 billion budget
As we reported on November 6, the U.S. Air Force signed a contract with Lockheed Martin to upgrade its F-22 Raptor fighter. The agreement concluded under the Advanced Raptor Enhancement and Sustainment program or ARES provides for up to 10 years of maintenance and modernization of the fifth-generation fighter.
According to the US Department of Defense, the contract will cover services including upgrades and technical support for Raptor. Lockheed Martin will also provide logistics services and upgrade equipment kits.
If all the terms of the contract are met, the Pentagon expects the work to be completed by October 31, 2031, that is, by the time the F-22 can theoretically retire.
Earlier, the Chief of Staff of the US Air Force, General Charles Quinton Brown Jr., spoke about the phasing out of the F-22 and the rationalization of the fighter fleet.
High-ranking Air Force officials are confident that this fighter will not have enough of its combat capabilities to provide an advantage in the air in the next decade.
At the same time, in the future, the United States plans to put into operation aircraft such as the F-35, F-15EX, F-16, and the sixth-generation NGAD fighter.
***
Ready for air taxis? Aerospace engineers and entrepreneurs aim to change how we see the sky Sun., Nov. 21, 2021This NASA illustration shows a possible future air taxi hovering over a municipal vertiport. (Tribune News Service)
By Daniel DesrochersThe Kansas City Star
The next time you are outside, look up.
You might see houses, buildings, a few trees. Higher you may see some clouds, a commercial airplane, a military airplane. Maybe there’s a helicopter.
In other words, not much. That’s changing.
Aerospace engineers and entrepreneurs across the world are in a race to fundamentally change how we see the sky.
They are working on new air vehicles – in an industry called advanced air mobility that will be used to drop packages on your doorstep, transport people and cargo over shorter distances and could even give people the ability to call air-taxis.
“It’s not an if, it’s a when,” said Davis Hackenberg, the Advanced Air Mobility project manager for NASA. “Electric aviation is going to happen.”
Earlier this month, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill sponsored by Kansas Rep. Sharice Davids that would create a working group to study what the federal government needs to do in regards to the fledgling industry. It now heads to the U.S. Senate, where it’s being shepherded by Kansas Sen. Jerry Moran.
The bill is an attempt to get the government prepared for what will likely change the future of transportation. It will mean everything from new safety regulations, to infrastructure in the form of “vertiports,” to getting the public onboard with the concept of drone-like planes flying around their neighborhoods.
It’s also an attempt to keep Kansas with its well-established aeronautics industry at the forefront of the next generation in flight.
“I think we’re well positioned to not only be able to be the air capital of the world for all the general aviation and commercial aircraft that we have been historically but we can be the air capital of the world for advanced air mobility too,” said Pierre Harter, the Director of Research and Development for National Institute for Aviation Research at Wichita State University.
For nearly a century, air travel has largely been limited to airplanes and helicopters. For the average passenger during much of that period, it’s meant going to an airport, sitting for an hour and getting herded into a seat that seems to get smaller every year.
But technology may soon change the way we think about flying.
Batteries keep getting smaller. Materials to build the aircraft are lighter than ever. Software is getting more sophisticated. A modern cockpit from 20 years ago can’t do half as much as the phone in your pocket, according to Harter.
It has enabled an even greater focus on electric technology in aviation over the past 15 years. That’s allowed for new aircraft designs. It’s changed the way they fly. It’s changed how aircraft can be used. It has made them quieter, so they can get closer to people’s homes.
“It’s a big, wide-open, wild west,” Harter said. “There’s a lot of people out there, a lot of dreamers trying to crack this nut. You have a lot of folks who are not traditionally aerospace who think they can crack this nut as well.” End to ‘transportation deserts?’
Already, companies like Joby Aviation, which has investments from Uber, are testing passenger vehicles in the hopes of getting them certified with the FAA. Amazon and Wing, which is owned by Google’s parent company Alphabet, already have permission to use drones to deliver packages in some places. Hyundai has an advanced air mobility group and traditional aviation companies like Boeing have invested in start-ups.
So what, exactly, would this future look like?
Maybe you’re walking down the street to the vertiport, where you’ll catch an air taxi because you’re a little late to work. Something flies overhead, just above the houses. It may hover over its destination and send a string down to drop a package. Maybe, higher in the sky, there’s a vehicle carrying cargo from a business to the airport, but you don’t really notice because it’s so quiet, unlike a helicopter.
“I think over the next 10ish years … it’s realistic to say that you’re going to see some on the way to work in the morning,” Hackenberg said.
It won’t all happen at once. First, Harter said, we’re likely to see some of these planes, with a pilot, carrying boxes from one place to another. Those trips would enable companies to get comfortable with the technology and meet safety requirements so they can start flying with passengers. Then it will start to become autonomous.
“It won’t be autonomous to begin with,” Harter said. “There’s just a lot of development that has to be done, a lot of infrastructure that has to be built, a lot of public confidence that has to be built, not to mention the regulators have to approve it all first.”
As the new aircraft become more common, the result could be something as simple as cutting down travel time within urban and suburban areas, making it slightly easier to get to the airport or from the suburbs to downtown. But they could also be used to help get rid of “transportation deserts,” making it easier for a doctor to reach a patient in a rural area who has limited access to a hospital.
“I think part of the challenge is it’s going to depend a lot on the community’s priorities,” said Nancy Mendonca, the community integration lead for NASA’s AAM Mission. “And then understanding what the local community wants.”
There are a lot of outstanding questions before advanced air mobility becomes commonplace. There are safety precautions and regulations that need to be developed. There is pilot training and workforce development. There’s the cost. There’s figuring out who would use this type of transportation. There’s figuring out whether people want to have these aircraft near there homes, no matter how quiet companies say they are.
There are still more advances in technology that need to happen if you want them to go farther than 150 miles and to be unmanned. There’s infrastructure that cities and towns will need to create. There will be arguments over where to put vertiports. There will be questions of access, whether they will just be toys for the bourgeoisie or available to the hoi polloi.
The working group that would be formed if the bill passes Congress would be tasked to answer some of those questions.
“When drones were first being discussed, we kind of got behind the curve on that,” Davids said. “And I want to make sure that doesn’t happen with this emerging technology.”
Davids said she was “excited” about the industry, which is projected to grow significantly over the next 15 years. A report produced by Deloitte this January projected that the market around advanced air mobility could pull in an estimated $115 billion by 2035 and employ more than 280,000 people.
Hackenberg, from NASA, said there is going to be intense competition around the world and said, in his opinion, America “must win.”
“Aviation is the future,” Hackenberg said. “There’s a ton of competition. It’s like automotive, it’s gonna be distributed … there’s going to be vehicles and such built everywhere. But we need to own. We need to have the General Motors and the Fords. And hopefully, the Toyotas and the Tesla’s and everything else.”
Denver Airport Janitors Win Raise After Pre-Thanksgiving Strike
Sun, November 21, 2021
Hundreds of janitors at Denver International Airport walked out on the job on Saturday, November 20, before reaching a deal that included what their union called a “historic” $4-an-hour raise.
The Service Employees International Union Local 105 said janitors were striking to demand “fair wages and workloads” from their employer.
The agreement with Flagship Facility Services still needs to be ratified by union members, the Denver Post said.
The proposed $4 hourly raise would come in three increments over a three-year contract and would raise top-level pay for janitors to $21, local media reported.
Video posted by the Service Employees International Union Local 105 on Twitter shows workers celebrating the agreement. Credit: SEIU Local 105 via Storyful
Kyle Rittenhouse Just Killed our Right to Peacefully Protest
Cliff Schecter Sat, November 20, 2021 Illustration by Elizabeth Brockway/The Daily Beast/Getty
Only in America.
There are certainly other countries where a young man known to hang out with a fascist gang but not a member of any “well-regulated militia” could drive 20 miles across state lines in the direction of unrest while toting a gun illegally to end up shooting and killing other humans and walk away a-ok.
Yet, much like those with whom we compare these days in world health-care system rankings or our use of the death penalty, they’re not countries the world’s oldest sorta-still-going democracy should be proud to join on those lists. (“Hey, what’s the problem? We’re handling these things just like Lithuania and Colombia!”).
By the end of the trial, Strom Thurmondesque Judge Bruce Schroeder only surprised me by not offering Kyle a horsey ride on his knee and free NRA lifetime membership. If Schroeder seemed like a cartoon character out of Bugs Bunny or an extra from The Dukes of Hazzard, that’s because it’s pretty much what he is.
It hasn’t stopped him from getting elected again and again and again to be a judge in Kenosha, Wisconsin. There’s a reason Innocence Projects across the land have freed thousands of wrongly convicted men and women. You saw just a little bit of it on live TV this past week.
I will mention one ruling that was germane not only to this trial, but to this whole dreadful episode, and by that I don’t mean just Kyle Rittenhouse. I mean the past 20 years of right-wing zealots and death profiteers’ attacking gun laws in this country to where they’re now beyond recognition if one applies any reason to their intent. In this case, Judge Schroeder used what can only be called a purposeful misinterpretation to let Kyle Rittenhouse skate on a gun charge.
Before the creation of the military style assault weapon in the mid 20th century, rifles and shotguns were the “long guns” (since our founding) our gun laws were meant to regulate. They were for hunting, and far less lethal than handguns. Kyle Rittenhouse’s possession of an assault rifle, far more lethal than a handgun, should have meant stricter laws meant to curb gun violence would be applied. A 17-year-old Rittenhouse was clearly not meant to possess a weapon of war.
Yet, Schroeder chose to apply a law created with a wholly different intent—to allow kids to hunt certain animals during the proper season with their families—to absolve Rittenhouse of illegally carrying a firearm explicitly created to hunt a very different species: Humans.
Whatever happened on the street that led Rittenhouse to shoot and kill other human beings just doesn’t matter. Because, in every functioning democracy, a 17 year old choosing to place himself there with a weapon meant to kill would be considered outrageous, as it is, and he would’ve gone to prison for it. He created the confrontation by being there with that weapon, and then claimed self defense when it didn’t—or perhaps did—go the way he planned.
The very idea of self defense here is full of more bullshit than the Dutton Yellowstone Ranch.
But over the past 20 years, even before the GOP became a wholly owned subsidiary of a racist real-estate debtor, the NRA was paving the way for white nationalism—encouraging vigilante violence, launching scurrilous attacks on law enforcement and propagandizing with blatantly racist material. They’ve put their every waking hour into creating an America where Kyle Rittenhouse could claim self defense even when being somewhere he shouldn’t be, with a weapon he should never possess.
Through Stand Your Ground Laws, Castle Laws and the like, they’ve worked to transform us from a responsible citizenry where people retreated or avoided these situations when at all possible to a country where as long as you’re white, there’s no culpability as long as you can claim to have had an iota of an inkling that perhaps someone might have harmed you had you not shot them first. Right-wing media, Donald Trump, and a thousand baby Trumps have finished the job the NRA started. And so we’re here.
And the signal this trial sends—much like the trial of George Zimmerman and those of numerous cops who shot first and asked questions later in recent years including the shooting of Jacob Blake seven times in the back, which led to the protest where Rittenhouse decided his presence was necessary—is that lives matter. White lives, that is.
We’ve now lost our guaranteed First Amendment right to peacefully assemble to a half-cocked, cocaine-cowboy version of the Second Amendment. Mix that together with a witch’s brew of right-wing propaganda and white power, and the result is that any time you march for your rights you have to accept that any dimestore Kyle Rittenhouse can point a weapon of war at you and pull the trigger.
Rep. Cori Bush calls for expulsion of House Republicans who offered Kyle Rittenhouse an internship, says her job feels 'more and more dangerous' every day
Morgan Keith Sat, November 20, 2021 U.S. Rep. Cori Bush, D-Mo., speaks during an interview Friday, Nov. 12, 2021, in Northwoods, Mo. Rep. Bush claims on social media that white supremacists shot at protesters in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014, but the city’s police chief says he was unaware of any such incident.AP Photo/Jeff Roberson
Rep. Cori Bush said in a tweet that every day working in Congress feels increasingly dangerous.
Rep. Paul Gosar and two other House Republicans have offered Kyle Rittenhouse an internship.
Bush called for Gosar's expulsion last week over a violent tweet that he was later censured over.
"Just being real: every day it feels more and more dangerous coming to work. Not only do these members fuel violence. Now they're actively recruiting someone whose sole qualification is killing people standing up for Black lives and getting away with it," Bush tweeted. "They must be expelled."
Bush included screenshots of three public offers to hire Rittenhouse as an intern from Republican Reps. Paul Gosar, Matt Gaetz, and Madison Cawthorn. Rittenhouse's criminal defense attorney said he thinks his client pursuing a career in politics would not be a "wise thing" to do in response to the offers.
However, this is not Bush's first time calling for the expulsion of Gosar.
The House of Representatives voted Wednesday to censure Gosar over the tweet, stripping him of his committee assignments.
Colin Kaepernick On Rittenhouse Verdict: 'White Supremacy Cannot Be Reformed'
Mary Papenfuss Sat, November 20, 2021
Activist-athlete Colin Kaepernick on Friday called out the system that allowed for the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse on all charges in the shooting deaths of two unarmed men and the wounding of a third.
The verdict “further validates the need to abolish our current system. White supremacy cannot be reformed,” Kaepernick tweeted Friday.
“We just witnessed a system built on white supremacy validate the terroristic acts of a white supremacist,” wrote the former San Francisco 49s quarterback, who was forced out of the NFL after taking a knee before games to protest racism and police brutality.
The day he shot three people, Rittenhouse, then 17, had traveled from Illinois with an AR-15-style rifle to a protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, against the police shooting of Black resident Jacob Blake.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) expressed a similar perspective to Kapernick’s about who is protected in America. “What we are witnessing is a system functioning as designed and protecting those it was designed for,” she tweeted.
Outspoken former ESPN personality Jemele Hill also called out white supremacy’s role in the Rittenhouse verdict.
This article originally appeared on HuffPost and has been updated.
Hundreds protest Rittenhouse acquittal across US
Sat, November 20, 2021,
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Law enforcement in Portland declared a riot Friday night as about 200 demonstrators protested the acquittal of a teen who killed two people and injured another in Wisconsin.
The protesters were breaking windows, throwing objects at police and talking about burning down a local government building in downtown Portland, the Multnomah County Sheriff’s Office said. The crowd had dispersed by about 11 p.m., KOIN TV reported.
The Portland Police Bureau said several people were given citations, but only one person who had an outstanding warrant from another matter was arrested.
The protesters gathered following the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse, 18, in Kenosha, Wisconsin. Rittenhouse killed two people and injured another during a protest against police brutality in Wisconsin last year.
Protests have been held in several other U.S. cities into Saturday over the verdict, including New York, Los Angeles and Chicago.
About 1,000 people marched through downtown Chicago Saturday afternoon, organized by Black Lives Matter Chicago and other local activist groups. According to the Chicago Tribune, protesters held signs that stated, “STOP WHITE SUPREMACY” and “WE’RE HITTING THE STREETS TO PROTEST THIS RACIST INJUSTICE SYSTEM” with a picture of Rittenhouse carrying a weapon.
Tanya Watkins, executive director of Southsiders Organized for Unity and Liberation, spoke at a rally in Federal Plaza before the march, according to the Tribune.
“While I am not surprised by yesterday’s verdict, I am tired. I am disappointed. I am enraged. … I have lost every ounce of faith in this justice system,” said Watkins, who is Black.
In North Carolina, dozens of people gathered Saturday near the state Capitol building to protest the verdict, the Raleigh News & Observer reported. Speakers led the crowd of roughly 75 people in chants of “No justice, no peace!” and “Abolish the police!” Police officers on motorcycle accompanied the protesters and blocked traffic for them as they marched down a street past bars and restaurants.
After the murder of George Floyd last year by police in Minneapolis, there were ongoing, often violent protest in Portland. Some activists complained that the police were heavy-handed in their response. Shortly after the Rittenhouse verdict, Portland Police Bureau Chief Chuck Lovell said that officers were working on plans for Friday night and the weekend.
By about 8:50 p.m., about 200 protesters had gathered in downtown Portland and blocked streets. By 9 p.m., windows were broken and doors of city facilities were damaged.
The Multnomah County Sheriff's Office designated the event a riot, and said in a news release Saturday that some demonstrators had thrown urine, water bottles and batteries at deputies.
Kenosha Protest Shootings Reaction
A worker pressure washes around a boarded-up bank behind a vandalized bus stop in Los Angeles, Saturday, Nov. 20, 2021. Protests broke out in Los Angeles and other cities across the U.S. following the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse on all charges Friday after he testified that he acted in self-defense when he fatally shot two men in Kenosha, Wis., during a protest in 2020. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)More
Kyle Rittenhouse 'didn’t deserve to walk free': Top Wisconsin paper trashes 'chilling' not guilty verdict
Saturday afternoon, the editorial board of the Wisconsin State Journal released a scathing editorial calling the not guilty verdicts in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial "chilling" and asserting that he should have been punished after killing two Black Lives Matter protesters
Leaving little doubt about the board viewed the outcome, they titled their piece: "Kyle Rittenhouse verdict sends a chilling message to Wisconsin and the rest of the country."
Getting right to the point, the editors wrote, "This wasn't the message Wisconsin or our nation needed to hear, even if the jury correctly followed the law."
"The disappointing verdict is sure to embolden militant people who seek to take the law into their own hands. It also could increase and complicate self-defense claims if more people carry — and use — firearms in the streets. That's a scary prospect," they then added.
The board decried those who are trying to turn the teen into a hero and suggested that jail time was warranted.
"Rittenhouse is no hero, as some of his defenders pretend. He behaved like a vigilante and didn't deserve to walk free, given his recklessness. Yet the law, unfortunately, skews in favor of shooters who claim self-defense. That needs to change," they wrote before claiming, "Rittenhouse, then 17, wasn't making anyone safer by parading through crowds of angry people with a semiautomatic rifle strapped to his chest and, according to prosecutors, pointing it at people before the conflict escalated."
According to the editorial, there is plenty of blame to spread around.
After writing, "If carrying an AR-15 down a crowded street isn't provocative, what is?" they added, "Rittenhouse even got off on a gun charge despite getting his weapon from a friend because he couldn't legally purchase it. Blame the state Legislature, not the judge who dismissed the charge, for that."
After providing the legislature with a roadmap to laws that need to be changed to limit a similar incident, they returned to the root of the problem.
"If Rittenhouse was justified in his actions, how does that apply if two people openly carry guns and point them at each other? Whose self-defense claim takes priority? Our state should be discouraging standoffs with guns, rather than encouraging more people to arm themselves out of fear or revenge," they wrote before concluding, "Did Rittenhouse face an unlawful threat that night in Kenosha, and was his use of force reasonable and necessary? The jury ultimately answered 'yes,' and we respect their decision — even though we don't like it. Responsible citizens who want to discourage similar tragedies should pressure their elected leaders for smarter gun laws. We the people, through our democracy, must demand that this troubling saga never happens again."
