text:
Maintaining the Gap
Militarily, America has traditionally been able to count on a technology and general capability advantage over its opponents. This gap between our capabilities and our enemy's has allowed us to persevere while steadily shrinking in numbers (Reagan era excepted!). Of late, however, our enemies have been able to match, and in some cases exceed, our technology. China, in particular seems bent on matching or exceeding both our technology and our numbers. If successful, they will reverse the military gap and own the advantage. Russia is matching some of our technology and in a few cases exceeding it – electronic warfare being the prime example. Russia, however, lacks numbers and the economic foundation to alter the numbers imbalance.
The military gap, or offset, as it has also been called, has, historically, been a transient and ever-changing situation. Whenever one country develops a new technology it is only a matter of time until all countries have it. Thus, the original developer gains a fairly short-lived, transient advantage that vanishes over time.
For example, the US was the first to develop stealth in a workable, mass produced form (F-117 aircraft) and that gave us a significant advantage for a number of years. Now, however, all countries have stealth capabilities. Not only that, many countries are developing counter-stealth technologies. Our stealth-based gap (offset) has ended.
With the end of the US stealth gap, our overall gap has begun to shrink. Decades ago, we committed to a philosophy of fewer numbers in the misguided belief that we could compensate with superior technology. Now, though, we're finding ourselves being matched in technology and we're losing the numbers advantage we once held – the worst of both worlds.
The narrowing gap is beginning to make an impact.
… during a congressional hearing earlier this month, Rand Corp. researcher and Pentagon war gamer David Ochmanek told senators that "when we run war games against China and Russia, U.S. forces lack the capabilities they need to win … and the gap is widening." (1)
"I think there's widespread agreement in the building that our conventional overmatch is eroding," [Robert] Work [former DepSecDef] said. "The only debate is how long we have." (1)
Having learned no lessons from history, the US' solution to maintaining our gap over potential enemies is to develop new technology. For the US, technology has always been the answer to everything. Quantity, tactics, training, maintenance, etc. have been relegated to afterthoughts. We're focused on technology for its own sake, assuming that superior technology automatically grants battlefield success. Unfortunately, history is packed with examples of low tech forces matching or beating high tech ones. Some examples include,
NVietnam
Afghanistan/Taliban
Hamas/PalestineHouthi rebels
Despite history's lesson about technology, we remain determined to ride the promise of technology. A few years ago, it was the Third Offset Strategy which would use networks and unmanned vehicles to make up for lack of firepower, survivability, and numbers despite the fact that our networks and unmanned communications are highly susceptible to electronic countermeasures, as Russia has demonstrated in Ukraine.
Now, the Third Offset talk has died down but the pursuit of technology continues unabated. The name may have changed but the Third Offset goals still resonate with the US military.
If, as history teaches us, technology is not the way to maintain our gap, what is?
The answer is firepower. More specifically, effective firepower.
It does us no good to know what color underwear each individual enemy soldier is wearing if we lack the firepower to kill them. Conversely, the enemy doesn't really care about intel if they can bring massive and incredibly lethal area bombardments to bear. The Russian TOS-1 Buratino self-propelled rocket launcher (an MLRS with 30x 220mm rockets) is a good example of a thermobaric, area barrage weapon.
Firepower makes up for a lot of missing intel.
Now, don't get me wrong, intel/recon/surveillance is important. However, when it supersedes firepower it becomes counterproductive and intel for its own sake is just wasteful and misleading. Ideally, intel and firepower should operate hand in hand. However, if you can't have both, consider the two cases where one of the factors is missing.
- Intel without firepower is useless.
- Firepower without intel is still useful. Area bombardment is effective, if inefficient.
Given the general principal, what specific types of firepower do we lack? Here's a few,
Conventional ballistic missiles – China, in particular, is building an inventory of such missiles including the much-hyped DF-21 carrier killer. We sorely lack a 1000-5000 mile ballistic missile. Ballistic missiles are causing immense concern in the Navy. Isn't it about time that we return the favor to China?
Supersonic cruise missiles – We lack supersonic cruise missiles. Even our newest anti-ship missile, the LRASM, is subsonic. Again, we worry greatly about our enemy's supersonic missiles (every conversation seems to include mention of the 'unstoppable' BrahMos) and for good reason. They are very difficult to engage. We need our own.
Stealthy cruise missiles – The Tomahawk is our main cruise missile and, among its other shortcomings, is not stealthy. The success rate of Tomahawk against a peer defense is highly suspect.
Artillery cluster munitions – The US has opted to cease development of cluster munitions despite our enemies enthusiasm for them. Why wouldn't they be enthusiastic? Cluster munitions are highly effective and hugely destructive. We need cluster munitions.
Heavy naval guns – We have an entire amphibious assault doctrine that completely lacks heavy naval gunfire support. The vast majority of military targets throughout the world lie within 20 miles of the shore. Heavy naval guns would prove immensely destructive and useful. Vietnam and a host of other historical examples prove that conclusively.
Very Long Range Air-to-Air Missile – The US developed the Phoenix missile and owned a significant air-to-air range advantage but has since failed to follow up with even longer ranged missiles. China and Russia are now developing and fielding air-to-air missiles with ranges of 200-300+ miles.
The examples can go on but these should suffice to illustrate our firepower shortcomings.
If we don't change our approach and begin focusing more on firepower, we'll someday have the most exquisite knowledge in the history of warfare of the enemy that is destroying us with good old-fashioned area bombardment.
We need to regain our firepower gap or, at the very least, not allow our enemies to own the firepower advantage.
(1)Foreign Policy website, "The Pentagon's Third Offset May Be Dead, But No One Knows What Comes Next", Paul McLeary, 18-Dec-2017,
https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/12/18/the-pentagons-third-offset-may-be-dead-but-no-one-knows-what-comes-next/
Labels: Firepower, Offset Strategy, Third Offset Strategy
Mobile Device Display Change
Readers, I've modified the settings on the blog to display the desktop view on mobile devices. Ominously, the preview does not look good. Let me know if I've inadvertently made the problem worse. Thanks.
CNO Richardson Incriminates Himself
CNO Richardson just issued the most self-incriminating statement imaginable. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) just issued a report on the submarine maintenance problems. (1)
… a recent Government Accountability Office report that found the Navy has lost more than $1.5 billion and thousands of operational days over the past decade due to attack submarines caught in maintenance delays or sitting idle while awaiting an availability. (1)
Soak up those numbers … $1.5 BILLION and THOUSANDS of operational days lost !!!!!!!!!!!
Did you catch how long it's been going on? - From the quote, 'over the past decade'.
CNO Richardson's reaction?
Richardson, in a media call on Thursday during his Thanksgiving visit to USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75), told USNI News that he found "no surprises in that report. Every bit of information in that is information we're very, very aware of. (1)
So, CNO Richardson, you have a massive, massive problem facing the fleet, you weren't surprised by any of it, and you've been "very, very aware" of it? So what in the hell have you been doing about it besides sitting on your ass? Talk about dereliction of duty! This is incompetence on a massive scale.
CNO Richardson's statement is about as self-incriminating an indictment of his incompetence as is possible to imagine.
What does the GAO have to say about the Navy's pathetic efforts?
The Navy has started to address challenges related to workforce shortages and facilities needs at the public shipyards. However, it has not effectively allocated maintenance periods among public shipyards and private shipyards that may also be available to help minimize attack submarine idle time.
So, even after a decade or more, the Navy's effort at a solution is feeble and ineffective.
Why does CNO Richardson still have a job?
(1)USNI News website, "CNO: 'No Surprises' in GAO Report on Submarine Readiness Challenges", Megan Eckstein, 26-Nov-2018,
https://news.usni.org/2018/11/26/cno-richardson-no-surprises-gao-report-highlighting-attack-sub-readiness-challenges
Labels: CNO, CNO Richardson, Maintenance, Navy Leadership, Shipyards, Submarines
Why Battleships?
In a past post (see, "Why Not Battleships?") we reviewed the arguments against a modern battleship and were unable to find a compelling reason not to build them. However, that does not necessarily mean that there are any compelling reasons to build them. Let's see if there are. Here are some of the arguments for a battleship.
Presence – One of the Navy's major justifications for its very existence is presence/deterrence. Personally, I find that rationale to be completely unfounded and historically dubious but that's a separate topic. The Navy feels presence is a major justification and nothing says presence like a battleship. Even critics would have to agree with this – they may not agree that it's worth it but they can't deny the sheer imposing presence of a battleship. There is no better naval presence or deterrence than a battleship.
So, presence would seem to be a valid reason to build battleships.
Firepower – As we noted in the previous post, a battleship has more firepower, more sustained firepower, and more responsive firepower than a carrier – and the battleship's firepower can't be jammed, decoyed, shot down, or have a pilot captured.
Within its inherent range limitation, the firepower of the battleship, therefore, offers a viable alternative to a carrier group which frees up the carrier for its primary mission of air superiority and escort of Tomahawk shooters.
A battleship utterly dominates anything it can reach.
So, firepower would seem to be a valid reason to build battleships.
Flexibility – As noted in the preceding discussion of firepower, a battleship offers the ability to conduct significant strikes without requiring a carrier. This flexibility would be operationally advantageous given the limited number of carriers in the fleet.
Further, the ability of a battleship to operate as the centerpiece of a powerful surface group gives the navy the flexibility to operate more surface groups than just the few carrier groups that are currently possible.
So, flexibility would seem to be a valid reason to build battleships.
Amphibious Assault – We've noted that the Navy/Marine amphibious assault doctrine completely negates any possibility of gun support. Given the Marine's already light combat structure, the absence of naval gun support effectively renders the entire concept of amphibious assault null and void. The existence of battleship gun support completely changes that picture and makes amphibious assault conceptually possible again. The ability to stand relatively near shore and provide gun support with near-immunity to land based rockets, artillery, and anti-ship missiles (via the small size of mobile anti-ship missiles and the presence of the Aegis umbrella) is a huge advantage in an assault.
So, amphibious assault would seem to be a valid reason to build battleships.
Pressure – The Navy's distributed lethality concept is predicated on the ability to apply much greater operational and tactical pressure on the enemy by forcing them to account for more threats. Again, ComNavOps believes this is bilgewater but the Navy believes it. That being the case, a battleship, alone (stupid) or in a group, would be the epitome of creating additional pressure on the enemy's operational and tactical situation. Unlike, say, an LCS with a few anti-ship missiles (if that comes to be), a battleship would be a major threat to both the enemy's surface and land assets. The enemy would have to devote significant resources to defending against a battleship group.
So, pressure would seem to be a valid reason to build battleships.
Range – The Iowa class battleships had a range of 15,000 nm at 15 kts, according to Wiki. Short of nuclear propulsion, this is about as good as it gets. This type of range is particularly applicable to the Pacific/China theatre and stands out in stark contrast to the LCS which has proven to be a disaster in its deployments to the Pacific. Given the Navy's limited bases and limited at-sea replenishment and refueling ships, a powerful ship with great range is mandatory.
So, range would seem to be a valid reason to build battleships.
We noted no compelling reasons not to build modern battleships and now we note several reasons to build them. Operational and tactical flexibility combined with immense firepower are the main reasons for building modern battleships. The increase in lethality and options that a battleship provides would be a tremendous advantage for any fleet. The logic seems clear – battleships are a good idea and a modern battleship is long overdue.
Labels: Armor, Battleship, Deterrence, Firepower, Land Attack, Navy Force Structure
New Reader Responsibility
There has been an influx of new readers in recent weeks and I find that we're having to repeat a lot of material that has been previously covered. The archives exist for a reason. It is the responsibility of new readers to become familiar with the archive material so as to avoid 're-litigating' old issues. I don't mind new perspectives on old issues as long as the reader has done his homework and reviewed the existing material. You'll find, however, that many of your ideas and arguments have already been covered.
So, grab your favorite beverage, settle in, and enjoy the wisdom of the archives! Plus, with your new-found knowledge you'll be more interesting and you'll find yourself invited to more parties.
Carrier Group?
Train like you fight. Fight like you train.
The Navy still doesn't get it.
Here's a photo of the recent Reagan and Stennis carrier groups operating together in the Philippine Sea. (1)
Reagan and Stennis Groups
Notice the number of escorts? There might be some other escorts detached for side missions but this is consistent with what we've seen over the last couple of decades. We're simply not training like we'll fight. Does anyone really think we'll send carriers into combat with only two escorts? Of course not! So why, then, are we operating with so few escorts? That's not training us for combat. We're not learning how to position, control, and tactically operate a large escort force.
Is a carrier and two escorts even a group? But, I digress.
ComNavOps has stated that carriers will have to operate in groups of four and even this little 'exercise' (more likely just a photo op) has only two carriers - still not like we'll fight. Setting that aside, if we went to the trouble of assembling two carriers, why wouldn't we provide a combat escort and really get some worthwhile training out of it?
The Navy simply isn't serious about combat and, therefore, isn't training for it. There isn't an Admiral in the Navy that has ever commanded a full combat carrier group. We'll pay for this when war comes - and it will.
(1)USNI News website, "Reagan, Stennis Carrier Strike Groups Conduct Dual Operations In Philippine Sea", Ben Werner, 16-Nov-2018,
https://news.usni.org/2018/11/16/38542
Labels: Aircraft Carrier, Combat Mentality, Tactics
Roles - The Frigate
Why do we have or want frigates today?
Sadly, the most accurate answer is probably just because we've always had them.
We're going to take a look at the role of the frigate, its historical function, and how that role translates into today's naval force, if it even does.
Frigates originated in the days of sail. They were single deck ships designed to be fast. They were not part of the line of battle. Their role was patrol, scouting, commerce raiding, escort, communications, and diplomacy (often of the gunboat variety!).
It was their scouting and patrol functions that were most valuable in that they provided what we now refer to as 'situational awareness' for the fleet commanders. In many respects, fleet commanders valued frigates more than ships of the line.
As the age of steel and steam emerged, the traditional frigate somewhat disappeared. The scouting role for the fleet became the responsibility of the cruiser – more so when aircraft appeared and cruisers could launch their own planes. Cruisers were the eyes of the fleet commander until the rise of aircraft when carrier and land based, long range scout planes largely took over the role.
By the time of WWII, frigates were relatively rare. However, the advent of submarines gave rise to the small anti-submarine ship which, in the US Navy, was referred to as a destroyer escort (DE) although in terms of size the DE slotted into the space between a destroyer and a corvette which would be the frigate space. The DE's role was anti-submarine warfare (ASW) and escort. Other navies referred to the same function/size vessel as corvettes or frigates. Thus, we see the beginning of today's widespread overlapping designations.
So, by the end of WWII the frigate's traditional role of situational awareness had given way to ASW and escort.
During the post-war period the US continued building destroyer escort (DE) classes such as the,
Dealey, DE, 1952
Claud Jones, DE, 1956
Bronstein, DE, 1963
In 1975, the Navy redesignated many ship classes and introduced the formal use of the frigate (FF/FFG) designation. Subsequent classes such as the Garcia, Knox, and Perry were now frigates.
Regardless of designation, they retained the DE's role of ASW and convoy escort.
As the Cold War developed and Western military planners contemplated the need to move convoys across the Atlantic to support a land war in Europe, Soviet submarines were seen as the major threat with some additional, less likely, threat from long range, cruise missile armed bombers. Thus, the convoy escort was mainly an ASW vessel with a nod to self or near area air defense – hence, the Perry FFG's fit of Standard missiles.
With the collapse of the Soviet Union the need for massive cross-Atlantic resupply convoys disappeared and, to a large extent, so did the need for frigates, at least in the convoy escort role. There just wasn't any need for convoys and this remained the case until the rise of China. A China war once again raises the specter of trans-oceanic convoys, this time across the Pacific. As with the Soviet scenario, submarines will, again, present the major threat to convoys.
Concurrent with the rise of the Chinese threat, small, conventionally powered submarines (SSK) proliferated and created a need for up close ASW although, in this case, the need is for pure ASW without the need for convoy escort or even limited area AAW. Thus, what is needed is a small, cheap, expendable, pure ASW vessel along the lines of a WWII Flower class corvette.
Another chapter in frigate development has been the world-wide tendency of budget-limited navies (almost everyone except the US and China!) to try to pack as much firepower and capability as they can into their frigates since those ships are what constitute the major suface combatant of those navies. If a frigate is your biggest ship, it makes a certain kind of misguided sense to load it with as much capability as you can to try to make it your 'capital' ship. So called 'frigates' now perform almost every naval role: ASW, AAW, ASuW, cruise missile land attack, etc. Unfortunately, this trend has led many US Navy observers to call for similar frigates for the US Navy. We've already debunked this desire in previous posts so I won't belabor it further, here. Suffice it to say that the US Navy has no need for a frigate and would benefit much more from a small, cheap, ASW corvette.
We see, then, that there have been three major incarnations of the frigate:
the original sailing frigate with its role of fleet scout
the oceanic convoy escort with its role of ASW and limited AAW
the pseudo-capital ship of budget limited navies
Today's frigates are, by and large, just generic surface ships of as a great a size and capability as the building nation can afford. Generally speaking, frigates with a specific role no longer exist.
Hopefully, this little review has shed some light on the historical development of frigates. In the end, though, this is just a semantics discussion. Lacking a specific role, a frigate can be anything and trying to compare one country's frigate to another's is pointless since it is not comparing apples to apples. So, sit back, relax, and enjoy your favorite version of 'frigate'.
USS Ford – aviation frigate?
Labels: ASW, Escort, Frigates, Naval History, Naval Trends
Secrecy Is The Enemy Of Readiness
Just as perfect is the enemy of good, sometimes secrecy is the enemy of readiness.
Let's look at a few examples.
The F-22 is artificially limited in its performance during training exercises out of fear of revealing too much about its capabilities.
F-22 pilots may be restricted from flying the F-22 the way they would fly it in combat -- due to security concerns about exposing the F-22's unique capabilities," the report said. "These restrictions limit the value of the exercises and can result in pilots developing bad habits, according to Air Force officials. (1)
On a related note, this may be an explanation for those occasional stories about foreign aircraft/pilots who claim to have defeated F-22s – along with the desire by the American military not to embarrass foreign militaries during training exercises.
For many years, the Air Force refused to commit the F-22 to operational missions – missions which would have yielded vast amounts of actual performance data. F-22 IOC was declared in 2005 but the first combat sortie did not occur until 2014 in Syria.
Secrecy has crippled the ability of the Navy to evaluate the Virginia class submarines.
Because Navy security rules prevent the ability to collect useful operational test data from Virginia when conducting exercises with foreign ASW capable platforms, the Navy finished IOT&E without testing the Virginia class submarine against one of its primary threats, the foreign diesel electric submarine (SSK). (2)
Refusing to test against a primary threat because of secrecy concerns is insane.
B-2 Bomber
For many years, the Air Force refused to commit its B-2 bombers to operational missions – missions which would have yielded vast amounts of actual performance data. The first B-2 was delivered in 1993 but the first mission did not occur until 1999 in Kosovo.
The US military has many electronic warfare (EW) platforms and the Russian's Ukrainian and Syrian involvements would seem to offer an excellent opportunity for some real world EW testing but, so far, we seem to be withholding much of our EW capability although it has been noted that EC-130 aircraft have been 'disrupted' over Syria. EW is an area that is very difficult to find definitive information on so, to be fair, it's difficult to determine the exact extent to which our EW is, or is not, being actively employed. However, circumstantial evidence strongly suggests that we are greatly throttling back our EW other than monitoring Russian performance.
While there is a strong argument to be made for secrecy, if it is taken to the extreme where we don't even know how our systems perform then it's been taken too far.
Another key point is that there are very few real secrets anymore. Cyber hacking by Russia, NKorea, Iran, and China has been so successful that attempting to preserve 'secrecy' is probably pointless. The benefits of actual testing now far outweigh the dubious preservation of secrecy.
As an example, when the F-117 was developed the Air Force kept it under tight wraps, refusing to even admit its existence until it was used in Desert Storm. At the time, this was probably appropriate and effective. Today, however, the Chinese are probably seeing our F-35 technical data in near real time! Thanks to the Internet and proliferation of networks, the days of physical isolation of a secret platform being able to ensure secrecy are long gone.
We need to start vigorous, real world testing and find out what works and what doesn't. Secrecy is no longer possible.
(1)Military.com website, "Air Force Missing Out on Opportunities to Employ F-22, Report Finds", Oriana Pawlyk, 20-Jul-2018,
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/07/20/air-force-missing-out-opportunities-employ-f-22-report-finds.html
(2)DOT&E Annual Report 2011, p. 176
Labels: Cyber Warfare, Readiness, Testing
Navy Getting Divorced
Well, it had to happen sooner or later. The Navy was just served with divorce papers from its longtime partner, reality. We can't say it's a surprise, can we? We've seen that reality and the Navy have been drifting apart for some time. Still, it's always sad to see a marriage torn apart. I wonder who will get custody of their child, the fleet? I'm betting the Navy will and the fleet will only see reality a couple of times a year, if that.
Apparently, the event that finally triggered the divorce was the Navy's latest desire to turn the amphibious ships into destroyers. From a USNI News article,
Maj. Gen. David Coffman said his directorate will spend 2019 working out the finer details of an Amphibious Warship Evolution Plan, which will … put the smaller amphibious transport San Antonio-class (LPD-17) docks more on par with cruisers and destroyers as "prominent middle-weight fighters" in a future naval battle. (1)
Here's a little bit more detail.
Coffman said that wargames and tabletop exercises have shown the LPD is just the right size to be highly effective in the Navy's distributed lethality and distributed maritime operations concepts, if they were upgraded to include more lethal systems. …
"Making a bet on increased lethality … is absolutely essential" and worth the cost, he argued. He declined to say what weapon systems he was looking at putting on these amphibs, but he said the upgrades would allow the amphibs to join the rest of the black shoe navy in the fight for sea control once they put their MAGTF ashore.
"Why aren't you contributing to air and missile defense? Why aren't you contributing to anti-surface? Instead of having to be protected, why don't you put something on offer to be part of the killers?" Coffman said of the possibilities of an upgraded LPD. "The bulk of that will be Navy systems integrated into Navy weapons architecture."
The general described a scenario of multiple LPDs fighting alongside cruisers and destroyers, and not only would the amphibs have a complement of sensors and weapons to contribute to the sea and air control fight, but they would also have a surprise mix of aircraft and surface connectors hidden in their well decks and flight decks to surprise an adversary closer in to shore. (1)
Well, that was heavy on fantasy and stupidity and light on reality! Let's look at the concept in a bit more detail – detail that the Marines/Navy apparently did not.
Sensors. The ships will, apparently, have a new "complement of sensors and weapons to contribute to the sea and air control fight". Is every ship going to get Aegis/AMDR/EASR? That should drive the already multi-billion dollar cost up quite a bit!
Weapons. This seems to be more than just welding a few Harpoon launchers onto an open space on the deck. The vague description seems to imply extensive vertical launch systems, SeaRAM, ESSM, Standard (?), and, likely, the coming (?) vertical launch anti-ship missile (VL-LRASM), among others. This is no minor upgrade! No ship has large amounts of unused space. Every compartment on a ship has a function and few (none!) are unnecessary. Every weapon added has to be balanced by the loss of some existing function to free up space. Where are VLS cells going to go? Where is there room for additional magazines?
Risk. We only have around 30 amphibious ships to begin with. Are we really going to risk our only amphibious ships in an air/surface battle that they aren't designed for? The amphibs are not stealthy (LPD-17 class claims to have some degree of stealth), do not have integrated air/surface combat control software suites, do not have optimally located sensors, etc. Yes, they could be rebuilt to incorporate all that but the cost to do so boggles the mind. Does it make sense to risk the amphibious fleet just to gain a few extra missiles in a fight the ships are not suited for? If we lose amphibs trying to fight a battle they're not suited for we lose our amphibious capability (or that portion, at least) for the rest of the war. We're not going to build new multi-billion dollar amphibs in any relevant time frame.
Mission. The amphibious fleet doesn't just "drop off" the Marines. That's kind of what happened at Guadalcanal ! The entire ship(s) has to be unloaded to maintain a continuous flow of supplies for the ground fight. Once the ships are emptied, their job will be to go get more supplies. The amphibs embarked supplies are only sufficient to maintain the ground force for a couple of weeks at combat usage levels (always way beyond peacetime estimates!). When is the amphibious fleet going to have time to hang around for an air/sea battle? That's just not their job.
Manning. You can't just add weapons with no additional crew. Weapon and sensor operators will be needed. Additional high end electronic and weapon system maintenance technicians will be needed. Additonal crew will be needed to feed these added people. Additional berthing, galley space, heads, etc. will be needed to service the added manpower. The Navy is already on an ill-advised quest for reduced manning and this is going to increased manning.
Cost. While there are no details offered on what the upgrade/conversion would consist of, it's clear that this won't be cheap! These ships already cost multi billions of dollars and this is just going to drive the price way, way up. The Navy is already screaming about not enough funding for new ships and that's before the looming SSBN replacement program in addition to the normal ship construction. Where is this money going to come from.
I also have to ask, where and when did this Marine become an expert on naval battles? This seems like yet another example of the Marines pushing into areas they aren't qualified for (aviation, UAVs, fleet defense, long range strike, cyber warfare, etc.).
Amphibious ships are highly specialized, incredibly rare and valuable, and not easily replaced. Why would we want to risk them in a battle they're not suited for? Wouldn't it make far more sense to build dedicated, optimized destroyers to fill the destroyer role?
This has to be the dumbest idea I've heard in a long while. I know, I know, the Navy has come up with a LOT of dumb ideas recently (Zumwalts with no ammo for the guns, for example) so maybe this isn't the absolute dumbest but it's certainly up near the top.
I see why reality has decided to divorce itself from the Navy! They were in a loving relationship once but have nothing in common anymore.
(1)USNI News website, "Navy Pitching Amphibious Warship Overhaul to Boost Lethality, Survivability" Megan Eckstein, 13-Nov-2018,
https://news.usni.org/2018/11/13/amphibious-warship-upgrade-plan-to-outline-offensive-capabilities-for-lpds-lhd-midlife-overhauls
Labels: Amphibious Ships, Distributed Lethality
Survival On The Modern Battlefield
The lethality of the modern land battlefield argues against the survival and effectiveness of unprotected infantry. Indeed, it strongly suggests that only armored vehicles have any reasonable expectation of survival long enough to be effective. For the infantry, this means that heavy armored personnel carriers (HAPC) are mandatory. The U.S. military's fascination with unarmored or lightly armored "jeeps" in various forms (such as the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle) is misguided in the extreme. The Russian lesson in artillery in Ukraine should have been eye-opening for the US and allies.
Similarly, the naval battlefield will be one of immense lethality where only the big and strong (armored) will survive. Of course, this has always been a characteristic of naval warfare. Naval battles have always been short, vicious, and deadly, especially for the smaller vessels like WWII destroyers and even cruisers.
Consider our modern U.S. Navy. Our 90 or so surface warships, the Burkes and Ticonderogas, are likely one-hit kills or, at best, mission kills due to the combination of near complete absence of armor and reduced crew size for effective damage control.
Our most powerful ships are one-hit kills?
Does this seem wise?
During WWII, ships had to be sunk or very badly damaged to knock them out of a fight and it required immense amounts of ordnance to accomplish. Today, a single anti-radar, air burst missile can achieve a mission kill.
Consider the Burke class destroyer. For all its many VLS cells and impressive Aegis radar arrays, its combat effectiveness ultimately comes down to three SPG-62 missile guidance radars (illuminators). All three are exposed high on the superstructure, unprotected by any surrounding structures to any great extent. In other words, they're out in the open just waiting for some simple shrapnel to wander by. Worse, two of the three illuminators are located within 10 ft of each other which begs for 2/3 of the ship's fire control to be eliminated with a single hit. This violates the survival design maxim of separation of critical items and there is nothing more critical to an Aegis AAW ship than its illuminators.
Consider the recent history of "hits" on US Navy ships. The Stark, Cole, Port Royal, Antietam, McCain, and Fitzgerald were all rendered mission kills and most were nearly sunk by a single "hit". Ponder what that means for the modern naval battlefield. An entire battlegroup could be wiped out or mission killed by a dozen individual hits. That's a pretty low bar for the enemy to achieve! In WWII, it required dozens (usually many dozens) of hits on a ship to sink it or render it a mission kill. In fact, mission kills were fairly rare. A ship either sank or continued fighting. Losing a few illuminators should not be the end of a ship's usefulness and yet that is exactly the situation, today.
If we're going to intentionally and knowingly build one-hit ships then we ought to, at least, be building them much, much cheaper. Losing a $2B Burke to a single hit is criminal.
If we want expensive ships then we need to build them to absorb damage and keep fighting. That means firepower and armor and lots of it. We need to remember what a warship is for, what dangers it faces, and design accordingly.
Labels: Armor, Naval Trends, Survivability, Warship Design
Sensors - What Good Are They?
We've previously noted that the US military has gone all in on sensor networks and unmanned vehicles as the basis for its Third Offset Strategy which is intended to provide the US with a military advantage over its enemies. We've also noted the Navy's commitment to distributed lethality which also depends on regional sensor networks to provide targeting to roving ships with a few anti-ship missiles. Further, the entire basis of the F-35's hoped for 'superiority' is sensor fusion and situational awareness (it's sure not air combat maneuvering!).
Unfortunately, we've also noted that the entire concept of sensor and data networks is inherently flawed. Non-enemy induced network crashes, sensor failures, UAV communications link failures, and GPS failures are commonplace. Add to that wartime cyber attacks, jamming, GPS disruption, electronic countermeasures, electronic spoofing, false signal injection, etc. and the prospects for successful sensor and data networks is dismal – and yet we're betting everything on exactly this.
Are we being overly pessimistic? Well, consider,
• The Russians have been giving an object lesson in electronic warfare in the Ukraine and Syria. US commanders have acknowledged that the Russians have disrupted and 'disabled' our dedicated electronic warfare EC-130 aircraft over Syria.
• Iran is believed to have disabled and captured US UAVs.
• US Navy unmanned underwater vehicles routinely wander off due to communication's loss, never to be seen again.
• Despite having inertial navigation systems and GPS, the Aegis cruiser Port Royal managed to run aground in well known, well charted, home waters.
• Despite GPS and extensive regional sensors, two US Navy riverine boats became lost and wandered into Iranian waters and were captured.
• The Vincennes shot down an airliner despite having continuous, unhindered radar contact.
• Despite the most advanced naval sensors in the world, the Navy has been unable to determine whether any of three separate attacks on a Burke class destroyer off Yemen actually occurred.
• Despite the world's most advanced radar, sonar, and electro-optical sensors two Burke class destroyers managed to collide with large, slow, non-stealthy commercial ships.
The examples are nearly endless.
Now, as has been recently and widely reported, the Norwegian Nansen class frigate Helge Ingstad (F313) has collided with an oil tanker and been beached to avoid sinking. The ship has essentially capsized and is laying on its side on the beach.
The Nansen class frigate possesses a multitude of advanced sensors of various types including,
• SPY-1F 3D multi-mode radar
• Reutech RSR 210N air/sea surveillance radar
• Sagem Vigy 20 Electro-optical
• MRS 2000 hull mounted sonar
• Condor CS-3701 ESM/ECM
Despite this impressive array of sensors which should have provided unparalleled situational awareness, the ship managed to collide with a tanker.
On a related note, yet another modern 'warship' has been nearly sunk by a single 'hit' – not exactly a tribute to modern warship design, is it? But, I digress …
The empirical evidence is overwhelming. Our vaunted sensors and networks do not work at anywhere near the claimed levels.
Our sensor and network systems are simply not reliable.
They don't work.
And yet, we're betting our military future on them working flawlessly and doing so in the face of a vast array of countermeasures.
The reasons for failure are many and varied and not all of the failures are due purely to the sensors and networks.
• Comm. links fail (UAVs being lost)
• Networks spontaneously fail (we've all experienced this at work or in the military)
• Maintenance shortages cause degraded sensors (the Aegis system being a prime example)
• Human action based on sensor data is inherently flawed (Vincennes)
The overall conclusion is that we can't count on sensor and data networks and we can't count on having situation awareness – and yet that's exactly what we're betting our military future on. It's also worth noting that all of the examples of sensor and data network failings are peacetime examples when everything should work perfectly. How much worse will our situational awareness be during war?
Now, having said all that, I'm certainly not suggesting that we should abandon sensors and networks. What I'm saying is that we should acknowledge the inherent limitations and tendencies to fail and not bet our military future on them. Instead, we should use them as adjuncts to basic technologies (binoculars or sextant, for example) and common sense (post lookouts!). We should train to function without sensors, to any great extent, and then we'll be pleasantly surprised when they do, occasionally, work. We have to break our mindset of dependence on sensors and networks and learn to stick out heads out the porthole and look and reason for ourselves.
We also need to recognize that data, alone, is useless in war. We need firepower to destroy whatever we see. Failing that, we'll have the most perfect awareness in history of the enemy that kills us using low tech, indiscriminate, area bombardments. For all its impressive development of electronic warfare capabilities, the Russians have not neglected to also develop impressive families of armored vehicles, advanced cluster munitions, treaty busting cruise missiles, very long range air-to-air missiles, advanced torpedoes, etc. They understand that, ultimately, firepower wins wars.
Labels: Networks, Sensors, Third Offset Strategy
SSC Update
Carrier Strike
Weapons Armor


Marlan Cotner is an award-winning artist from West Michigan represented in numerous solo shows in Michigan and Ohio. She has exhibited in local and regional competitions and her works are included in the collections of Governor Blanchard, Governor Engler, and James Brooks. Her art has won awards in the Michigan Fine Arts Competition in Birmingham/Bloomfield, the Mid-Michigan Competition in St. Joseph, the Western Michigan Competition in Holland, the Small Wonders Competition in Lansing, and numerous others. She is a published artist with over two hundred illustrations in books and magazines.
There is also a lighter side to this artist with her food and drink series. A woman propped up against a wedge of chocolate cake or a man draped around a glass of red wine, these are sure to please all. Perhaps the golf series appeals to your sporty side with a man carrying a "golf bag" of olives back to the clubhouse or giant martini glasses on the nineteenth hole.


text:
Downer Friday
"Because it's a payment, you see. That's where the 'money' part comes in. Do you want to stay married now? You do, right?"
Friday, May 29, 2020 Comments are closed
Metapost: Still hypin', still COTW-ing
UPDATE TO THIS: We are postponing this show because none of us feel very funny, what with what's going in the US right now. But email me if you want your name added to the list and we'll contact you with a new date and time when we know it!
A reminder to everyone: my beloved live comedy show, The Internet Read Aloud, is at long last going to be live online — specifically on Zoom, at 6 pm Pacific/9 pm Eastern, on June 5 — a mere week from today!
How do you "attend" this show? Well, you'll need a URL from me, which isn't ready yet, and the easiest way to get it is to email me at jfruh@jfruh.com and I'll put you on my list. (I won't use use your email for any purpose other than letting you know about this specific show.) You can also say you're going on Facebook, if that appeals to you!
I've never done anything like this before, so it'll be a bit of an experiment, but there are four great comics on the bill and I'm very excited to try it out. So get hyped and I will hopefully "see" you "there"!
What isn't experimental — what is in fact very tried and true — is sharing with you this week's top comment:
"He called Buck 'pal.' Buck is nobody's pal. Truck didn't have Covid, he clearly has something more insidious that attacks the brain." –Carl Karnuth
And the runners up! Very funny!
"Is Mark relaxing in the middle of his pot patch? That might explain his sudden fascination with politics and pigs. 'It's like, reverse 1984, man. You know, like under communism, hairy pigs weren't equal? But under capitalism, all pigs are equal? Equal for the slaughterhouse, man.'" –Voshkod
"Martin and Mason make plans to sabotage their successful Hollywood careers together. Because in Funky Winkerbean you can either wait for the universe to ruin your life for you or you can beat it to the punch, experiencing the thrill that comes from outspeeding the Gloom Bringer. It all ends the same way, might as well go out on your own terms." –Lionheart
"There's only one director I trust with directing Lisa's Story: Rian Johnson. Knives Out proves he can make medium-sized movies with unlikable characters. Last Jedi proves he will not refrain from killing some sacred cows. His Twitter account proves that he will deliciously irritate Lisa's Story fanatic fan base, i.e., only Les." –Ettorre
"In an acknowledgement of the arrival of summer, Fenris Ulfr vomits forth the sun." –richardf8
"Don't give her grief for getting the expression wrong; she probably hasn't been talking that long. I mean, how old is she? (That's not rhetorical; I literally have no idea how old these kids are supposed to be.)" –Pozzo
"So much has changed in this new age, as Dagwood bids a final farewell to his only real friend, locks himself in his concrete bunker marked only by an ominous warning on the steel door (tricked up to look like a normal door in an effort to thwart looters), and leaves Blondie, Alexander, Cookie and that asshole Dithers, nay, everyone, to their fate." –Lawyerbob
"Dagwood should know superheroes never make the 'ultimate sacrifice' since most of them come back from the dead all the time. Dagwood sobbed during the Dark Phoneix saga and wept tears of joy when Jean Grey came back only to break down when she died again — and came back yet again. Elmo is right. Dagwood really knows how to cover the important stuff." –KMD
"Great flag, Mr B! It must be, what, 20 inches long and over a foot wide? The pride of the neighborhood!" –Just John
"I feel like the Venn diagram of people who watch internet concerts and people who buy CDs in 2020 doesn't overlap at all." –Rosstifer
"You guys, I think Mary Worth just cured everyone's anxiety with a simple solution — just don't be anxious. Brilliant! Why didn't the rest of us think of this before? Sorry, Big Pharma and Big Therapy, you've been benched." –Joe Blevins
"Buck's head is so full of big ideas, his neck long ago gave up on trying to support it." –Red Greenback
"I agree with Josh that the 'eye dialog' in this strip is annoying, as in Panel 1 where Miz Prunelli's word balloon contains the word 'enny' in place of 'any', when of course they sound exactly the same. I believe the boldface 'furst' is in fact appropriate, however, since Jughaid is emphasizing that he knows what the correct word is, in contrast to his Unk Snuffy who would surely have said 'fustest.'" –seismic-2
"We're missing the real story here, which is that a Civil War reenactor is wandering around Camp Swampy, possibly violating the terms of his hobby by collecting information on modern warfare so he can change the outcome of the battle he's taking part in. Why he'd do this is a mystery since he's clearly on the Union side, and the 1861 capture of Parris Island was successful. Then again maybe the real story is he's the one who really put Beetle to sleep with boring facts about daily life in 19th century warfare." –Spunky The Wonder Squid
"The Lockhorns, ladies and gentlemen! Today, Leroy goes to extreme measures to get out of his gym contract! Remember gym contracts? Contracts? With gyms? You know, the hot, sweaty arenas where bodily fluids are continuously exchanged? Those brick-and-mortar businesses who, due to the pandemic and social distancing, have shuttered their doors and pivoted to pay-as-you-go online classes for a fraction of their usual membership fees in order to slightly postpone spiraling into bankruptcy? Stay tuned for tomorrow's installment, where Leroy tries to get out of his marriage by shouting 'Fire!' in a crowded movie theater." –Carsick Yankee
"Reprobate School has been good for Mike. The English department has already taught him a new word to add to his lexicon: 'reprobate.' Tomorrow: 'lexicon.'" –Only Here For The Ads
"Part of me is sad that Hugo and I couldn't make our romance work, especially after he moved to another country and we both started dating other people. I mean, we did everything we could, other than staying in the same country and not dating other people, right? Love is strange that way. Well, at least Jared will never leave me — it isn't as if he could ever do better." –BigTed
"Dawn had literally the easiest break-up in history, but if she didn't stare wistfully into the middle distance and complain about it, she wouldn't be the Dawn Weston we've come to know and… I mean 'love' is a little strong. Just 'know' is fine." –Dan
"Yeah, I can see why they had to use Sam for this one and not Barfy." –Zla'od
"'Technically, we're all part of the Universe, and the Universe is part of us. Connected together beyond time and the space between the stars, we are woven into a fabric that cannot be destroyed by any trivial differences of appearance or circumstance. Maybe the new hero could embody this idea?' 'Geez, who wants to think about any of that? I just want a guy who sparkles and hits people.'" –GeoGreg
Remember: If you never want to see banner ads on this site, and want to get cool comment-editing features to boot, for a mere three dollars a month you can become a Comics Curmudgeon Supporter! If you just want to give me money directly, you can put some scratch in my tip jar, or back me on Patreon! Thanks to all for your support and readership!

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Set the margarine out to soften a bit.
Crumble the topping over the apple pie. It doesn't have to be perfect, just get it as evenly as possible.
Place pie in a brown paper grocery sack and close with a paper clip, staple, or tape.
Place sack directly on oven rack.
Bake at 400 degrees for 15 minutes then reduce oven temp to 350 and bake another 1 hour and 10 minutes.
I hope you love this as much as my family! Happy Thanksgiving!
For over 400 Slow Cooker recipes, click here to get my eBook!
Which type of apples do you recommend?
I have used different apples, but always a red apple, and tend to buy what is on sale…. Don't really like Red Delicious, as they don't seem to bake too well for me. Hope this helps!
Granny Smith and Reds combine are real good.
Macintosh (a Michigan apple grown for their sweetness and are AWESOME baked in any way!) Honey Crisp and Gala are the best [in this order] for baking, ENJOY!
Hi, just found the blog…and I look forward to trying some of these.
Hi Catherine, this is my mother-in-laws recipe that was shared with her many many years ago, and my husbands favorite. You will love it. The paper bag gives the pie a woodsy taste, and adds so much flavor, besides the fact it keeps your oven clean, by catching any just that flows over the side. I know it is not a slow cooker meal, but one I wanted to share! ENJOY!
Why doesn't the paper bag catch fire on an oven rack??
Kim it will catch on fire if you open the oven before it is done baking…. trust me I have done that, so don't open the oven until it is done. This recipe was passed to me by my mother-in-law, and my hubby's favorite! Enjoy! I promise you will love this pie.
Yes Becky, you will have to practice self control, and it really smells delicious too!
Wouldn't the paper bag catch on fire?
Do you have to use Margarine? Can we use butter instead?
Ina the key is not to open the oven until it is done! If you do the air and the heat can catch it on fire, trust me, as it did happen to my mother-in-law once a long time ago… Don't worry!
Thnx for sharing all the recipes. I'm actually going to try this. Never made a pie in my life.
Thank you Cindy… Enjoy! Happy Thanksgiving!
And the paper bag does not catch on fire in the oven?
Can I use a homemade pie crust? Do I just put the pie in the baking dish then place it in the bag, do you fold it closed?
Yes you can use homemade pie crust, in fact that is the only way I make it. Then slide your pie dish in the paper bag, and you can scotch tap it shut, staple it shut, or paper clip it shut.
I too am nervous about the whole paper bag and fire thing but I will trust you BUT one quick question???
Does it make a difference if it is an electric or gas stove?
It does not, my mother-in-law has electric and I have gas.. You are good to go! Just do not open the oven during the baking time!
Paper burns at 451 degrees. Since the oven is set for 400 there should be no problem.
this may sound dumb, but how does the oven know if the pie is done?…meaning if you open the oven during the baking process vs. opening the oven when it's done. i want to try, but i'm scared.
golden delicious apples are the best to make pies with!
Can you bake it minus the paper bag? I don't have any but the recipe sounds really good.
Hi Katie, I have never made it without the paper bag, and I'm sure it would be fine. I know the grocery stores still have them on hand, maybe you could ask them for a paper bag. That is what we do in our family.
Do you have to cook it in the paper bag? Will it turn out if you don't?
I've never baked it any other way Billie, but you are welcome to see how it turns out? Enjoy!
Love this! I thinking of making it with maple sugar instead of refined. Do you have any thoughts?
Julie it sounds good, I just don't vary from the family recipe… Please post back and let me know how your pie turned out! Thank YOU!
what is half & half ?
Laure, half & half is cream that is half cream and half milk. You can find it in the dairy isle at your grocery store. Enjoy!
You should mention the part about the bag catching on fire if the oven is opened to soon so that people don't get suprised by that and burn themselves or burn their house down… just a thought.
Clara, You can substitute a tiny bit less that 1/4 cup milk plus 3/4 tsp. of butter melted into milk and this will equal the 1/4 c. Half ad Half needed for the recipe! Hope this helps! Enjoy and Happy Crocking!
I can't wait to try this I cook my turkey in a paper bag and has never caught fire and it moist and delicious.
Tara we cook our turkey in a paper bag also, and you are correct is it always moist! Only two more days!
Does it matter which rack you put it on? Just the middle one? I can't wait to try this for Thanksgiving!
I have Fat Free Half and Half at home already since I use it for my coffee. Do you think I could use that instead of regular half and half?
Hello Angela, I have not used Fat Free, but please make this recipe your own, since you already have it on hand, I would definitely use the fat free. Enjoy and Happy Thanksgiving!
I have read that baking it in the paper bag allows the pie to bake perfectly without burning the crust. I have my second one in the oven right now – these are being served tomorrow at Thanksgiving dinner. The first one looks like it turned out great, and I am thinking it may not last through the night with my family! Thanks for the recipe.
Thanks Kelly, the pie is a little work cutting all the apples, but I promise your pies will be a hit! It really is a pretty pie! I alway threaten my husband, as he has a hard time staying away from it when it is warm. In fact I always warm his piece up in the microwave because he loves it warm. Thank you so much for posting, you made my night! Happy Thanksgiving!
Pie is in the oven and the bag thing is scaring me a bit. I'm watching it like a hawk.
Ok I love to cook being why I sell pampered chef but I HATE to bake. I made the apple pie and all I have to say is I am now required to bring this desert every year.
Hi Tracy! I'm so glad you all loved the apple pie! It's definitely a favorite in our family too. (and with everyone I've shared it with) Happy Thanksgiving and Happy Crocking!
Can you use the bag twice as I only have one and baking two pies?
Hi Gina – You should be able to use the bag twice. I haven't done this but it should be okay as long as you don't overfill your pie. If the pie is too full when you bake it it will spillover and cause the bag to stick to the pie pan. (It will come off easily but will rip preventing you from being able to use it again.) I have baked this without the bag and it's not as good but it will still work in a pinch. Good luck & Happy Crocking!
The pie came out beautiful! I'm glad I read about not opening the oven- I'm one of those peekers. Thanks for the great recipe!
So So glad you enjoyed, ours was very good too!
Took the pie to Thanksgiving dinner today…a real hit. Will definitely do again.
Jenn, Thank you so much for the recipe. It was AMAZING!! My Husband is not an apple pie fan and I am NOT a pumpkin fan. So today I made this and a Pumpkin Pie. He has NOT touched the pumpkin. I had not even had a bite when I saw it was over half gone. Mostly by him. Total hit. Tell your MIL thanks. Have a wonderful Thanksgiving.
The pie was brought by a friend to our home for Thanksgiving! OMG – it was the BEST apple pie I've had in years! Very THANKFUL my friend has shared the recipe!
Have to ask. When you say 'prepared crust', I'm assuming that you mean that it has been placed in the pie pan, but NOT baked yet. Is that right???
Correct Kay-M! You do not pre-bake the crust.
I have tried making the topping twice following the instructions and both times is has turned out like a moist dough.. any idea what I'm doing wrong?!
Yes, this pie is delicious, but when baking the bag creates an unusual odor. And be sure you do not too high of temps as the bag can burn. Speaking from experience. The pie is absolutely delicious!
I believe I stated this before, but actually this happened to my mother-in-law once, and she found her door was not shutting tight and it was letting air in the oven. She had the door repaired, as it was sprung, and her next pie cooked perfectly. Sorry you had a problem. But I am sure it still tasted great!
From someone who is not American, but Australian, and just loves your crockpot site, can you advise what half and half is?
There is a lot of things that come up in recipes, that I have no idea what they are.
Hi Monique, Half and Half is half cream and half milk, and here in the United States we can buy it in our grocery store. So for you, you can use either use cream or possible mix cream and milk together for your half and half. Thank you so much for your question, and Happy Crocking!
Does the pie need to be refrigerated, or is it ok to be stored at room temperature?


text:
Q: GitLab pipeline configure I use GitLab CI for my build action.
I need to build my production env only on master upstream branch and only by a tag.
Now I have something like this:
stages:
  - build
  - test
  - deploy

build_project:
  stage: build
  script:
    - cd ./some-dir
    - build-script.sh
  only:
    - master
    - tags

Does someone know how should I change my rules?

A: There's an example of how to do this in the Gitab docs: https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/ci/yaml/README.html#onlyexcept-basic
job:
  only:
    - branches@gitlab-org/gitlab
  except:
    - master@gitlab-org/gitlab
    - /^release/.*$/@gitlab-org/gitlab

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


The "Electric Venom" tee by Fingers Crossed features a hissing cobra seemingly rising out of bolts of thunder. The 100% cotton tee see the white snake moan enveloped by electric venom in psychedelic lettering. A visually toxic ensemble.
Sometimes I'm lucky, most times I'm venomous.


Let me give you some stats; Let me give you an example and comparison, Ill share many more later, Just this morning, the first article on Womens Canada Goose CHELSEA PARKA Classic Camo For Salethe U, It is something that has some influence in the west, but, not nearly as much as it does in the east, Most of the time for me was spent listening to them talk in Chinese, It is something that has some influence in the west, but, not nearly as much as it does in the east, It is only one great practice that powerful leaders like John Stumpf of Wells Fargo and the very famous Jack Welch of General Electric, used and Womens Canada Goose CHELSEA PARKA Classic Camo For Salebelieved to be their most powerful leadership tool.
Product description: Womens Canada Goose CHELSEA PARKA Classic Camo For Sale, Let me give you some stats; Let me give you an example and comparison, Ill share many more later, Just this morning, the first article on Womens Canada Goose CHELSEA PARKA Classic Camo For Salethe U, It is something that has some influence in the west, but, not nearly as much as it does in the east, Most of the time for me was spent listening to them talk in Chinese, It is something that has some influence in the west, but, not nearly as much as it does in the east, It is only one great practice that powerful leaders like John Stumpf of Wells Fargo and the very famous Jack Welch of General Electric, used and Womens Canada Goose CHELSEA PARKA Classic Camo For Salebelieved to be their most powerful leadership tool.
MichaelMM 18:03:18American women wont tolerate it, In the West, there is an attitude that is taught that shapes our thinking in such a way to take care of and maintain what we have, Language is learned naturally by first listening, then speaking, then writing and lastly, reading, Now, you might think that because Ive revealed these numbers that Im being critical of UK, Of its 34,295 applicants last year, iWomens Canada Goose CHELSEA PARKA Classic Camo For Salet accepted 2,048 -- less than 6 percent, Now, you might think that because Ive revealed these numbers that Im being critica404 Not Foundl of UK. Ive traveled to 26 countries, One older friend of mine learned English entirely from what he learned in his English class in school and from listening to VOA broadcasts.
In fact, I was told that, If we dont waste a lot of food then others will think that the host isnt generous! It costs me $4 a month to keep it there, Let me explain. Please be here on August 17th, Ridiculous, right? Well maybe not in UK, It is why I succeed, Not only was I not good at math; I wasnt good at school, Look for the good and talk about it.
Last week, a boy spit on me as I was riding my e-bike, It is proven again and again to work as well in how we live our lives. It is very important in UK but not so in the USA, On the translation of my drivers license and passport, they required a red stamp to verify that the translation is correct and accurate even though the drivers license official who checked it said it was not professional, If you have a dream in your heart that you cant shake, it is likely your divine destiny, It believes in free market and capitalism, It is very affordable and it achieves the goal of getting a degree from the Western school, Ladies and young girls were walking down the street with no fear or concern.
Like an attorney who is gathering information to support a client that he/she is to represent, they will build a case an argument for why they are unhappy and how nothing can change how they feel, In VIP classes that Ive taught in, I allowed no more than 7 students per class? Never underestimate the power of your attitude, Most of the images we see are from our past. It is weak if it is forced! Ive encountered a few problems that could have been serious but were all quickly resolved, Pay particular attention to what all they are going to pay for or offer you for free, Our attitudes and mindset can open new doors and opportunities that open up to us the roads that are most desirable to continue our life journey upon: 17:56:41weesten person have no family conceptBella E!
It can be a pain sometimes! Ive taught a heart surgeon who is one of the foremost and respected surgeons in UK; Right away, he said that he knew without doubt that a western college education was far better than here in UK, My feet hurt, Is English the culprit for so much stress on students are is it based in inefficient teaching methods, models and styles?There are several more questions that have been posed; Perhaps like New York City!
Let me explain, One recent example justyesterday is, I was in a park at an English corner a place wherepeople gather to practice spoken English where I go every Sundaymorning! Oral English and commonly communicative English learning is far more efficient and useful, Nothing was working. Oh, I hear complaints from Chinese and foreign teachers that the students here can be lazy, In 2016, English will be reduced to 100 points from its present 150 points on the Gaokao, Likewise, if your child is in middle school or high school, this company can plan, manage and help maintain their education in order to insure that they too can go abroad to get their degree.
In fact, childrens books are full of colorful pictures that help them learn, Its easy for me to do now, See yourself in your imagination doing what you dream of, In UK, it has power, Lily said she cant understand him most of the time, Its far more than her condition that brings out the good in others.


What can I say, I don't really need to say anything about the garment, as I have mentioned it previously in an earlier post. The fabric is a polyester jersey, to give added stretch and ensure the perfect fit.
Again, I was delighted when my daughter asked me to make something for her. I was told what colour to choose and it had to be off the shoulder without a strap (teenagers know exactly what they want these days).


text:
Kaus ist der Familienname folgender Personen:

 Gina Kaus (1893–1985), österreichische Schriftstellerin, Übersetzerin und Drehbuchautorin
 Gracia-Maria Kaus (* 1947), deutsche Schauspielerin
 Jan Kaus (* 1971), estnischer Schriftsteller
 Karl Kaus (1940–2015), österreichischer Prähistoriker, Landesarchäologe des Burgenlandes
 Klara Kaus (1903–1985), deutsche Gerechte unter den Völkern
 Marita Kaus (1940–2010), deutsche Bildhauerin
 Max Kaus (1891–1977), deutscher Maler und Graphiker
 Willy Kaus (1900–1978), deutscher Unternehmer und Industrieller
 Wolfgang Kaus (1935–2018), deutscher Regisseur und Schauspieler

KAUS steht für:
 Austin-Bergstrom International Airport (ICAO-Code)

Siehe auch:
 Qaus (englisch: Kaus), Hauptgott der Edomiter
 Kawous

Abkürzung

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


This week on Carolina Live the Winston-Salem Symphony Orchestra and Robert Moody perform A Salute to Mahler in Symphony and Song - playing Mahler's Symphony No. 5, and with the Symphony Chorale, Ralph Vaughan Williams' Dona Nobis Pacem.
The Mahler was part of Moody's celebration of five years as the conductor of the Winston-Salem Symphony, a season that also included a couple of other famous "fifths"


text:
Section 3 lands are public lands in the United States within a grazing district administered by the Bureau of Land Management under Section 3 of the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934. BLM authorizes livestock grazing on these lands by issuing permits. Section 3 lands make up the vast majority of BLM-administered lands.

References

United States Department of Agriculture


text:
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Web;

namespace Property4U.Models
{
    public class PeriodPropertiesRequests
    {
        public int Properties { get; set; }
        public string Period { get; set; }
        public int Requests { get; set; }
    }
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


Records where field Comments matches value [JFK3], sorted by title.
1. "EXCELSIOR" ARTICLE IMPLYING INVESTIGATIONS RE OSWALD TRIP TO MEXICO.
2. ACTIONS OF SILVIA DURAN AFTER HER FIRST INTERROGATION PASSED TO WC.
6. AGENCY SUPPORT TO THE FBI AND THE WC.
7. ALLEGATIONS OF LEE HARVEY OSWALD'S CONNECTION WITH THE AGENCY.
8. ALLEGATIONS REGARDING INTELLIGENCE TRAINING SCHOOL IN MINSK, USSR AS TRANSMITTED TO WC.
9. ALLEGATIONS REGARDING INTELLIGENCE TRAINING SCHOOL IN MINSK, USSR AS TRANSMITTED TO WC.
10. ALLEGATIONS THAT CIA WAS INVOLVED IN PLAN TO ASSASSINATE FIDEL CASTRO.
11. ALLEGATIONS THAT CIA WAS INVOLVED IN PLAN TO ASSASSINATE FIDEL CASTRO.
12. AMBASSADOR NOTIFIED BY COS MEXICO CITY OF LEE OSWALD CONTACT WITH THE SOVIET EMBASSY.
13. AMERICAN MALE IDENTIFIED AS LEE HARVEY OSWALD CONTACTED THE SOVIET EMBASSY.
14. AMERICAN MALE IDENTIFIED HIMSELF AS OSWALD CONTACTED THE SOVIET EMBASSY.
15. AMERICAN MALE SPEAKING BROKEN RUSSIAN CALLED SOVEMB.
16. AMMUG/1 INFO ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD.
17. AMMUG/1 INFORMATION ON LEE HARVEY OSWALD.
19. AUTHORIZATION OF ZRRIFLE AGENT ACTIVITIES.
From: HELMS, RICHARD/DDP To: HARVEY, WILLIAM K.
20. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON CURRENT PERSONNEL OF THE CUBAN EMBASSY IN MEXICO.


text:
Spontaneous switching of frequency-locking by periodic stimulus in oscillators of plasmodium of the true slime mold
A. Takamatsu*, T. Yamamoto, T. Fujii
*この研究の対応する著者
Microfabrication technique was used to construct a model system with a living cell of plasmodium of the true slime mold, Physarum polycephalum, a living coupled oscillator system. Its parameters can be systematically controlled as in computer simulations, so that results are directly comparable to those of general mathematical models. As the first step, we investigated responses in oscillatory cells, the oscillators of the plasmodium, to periodic stimuli by temperature changes to elucidate characteristics of the cells as nonlinear systems whose internal dynamics are unknown because of their complexity. We observed that the forced oscillator of the plasmodium show 1:1, 2:1, 3:1 frequency locking inside so-called Arnold tongues regions as well as in other nonlinear systems such as chemical systems and other biological systems. In addition, we found spontaneous switching behavior from certain frequency locking states to other states, even under certain fixed parameters. This technique can be applied to more complex systems with multiple elements, such as coupled oscillator systems, and would be useful to investigate complicated phenomena in biological systems such as information processing.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2004.05.008
統計学および確率
生化学、遺伝学、分子生物学(全般)
応用数学
10.1016/j.biosystems.2004.05.008
「Spontaneous switching of frequency-locking by periodic stimulus in oscillators of plasmodium of the true slime mold」の研究トピックを掘り下げます。これらがまとまってユニークなフィンガープリントを構成します。
Myxomycetes Medicine & Life Sciences 100%
Frequency Locking Mathematics 94%
Fungi Engineering & Materials Science 75%
Biological systems Engineering & Materials Science 63%
Nonlinear systems Engineering & Materials Science 46%
Coupled Oscillators Mathematics 34%
Microfabrication Engineering & Materials Science 34%
Simulation Chemical Compounds 34%
Takamatsu, A., Yamamoto, T., & Fujii, T. (2004). Spontaneous switching of frequency-locking by periodic stimulus in oscillators of plasmodium of the true slime mold. BioSystems, 76(1-3), 133-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2004.05.008
Spontaneous switching of frequency-locking by periodic stimulus in oscillators of plasmodium of the true slime mold. / Takamatsu, A.; Yamamoto, T.; Fujii, T.
In: BioSystems, Vol. 76, No. 1-3, 08.2004, p. 133-140.
Takamatsu, A, Yamamoto, T & Fujii, T 2004, 'Spontaneous switching of frequency-locking by periodic stimulus in oscillators of plasmodium of the true slime mold', BioSystems, vol. 76, no. 1-3, pp. 133-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2004.05.008
Takamatsu A, Yamamoto T, Fujii T. Spontaneous switching of frequency-locking by periodic stimulus in oscillators of plasmodium of the true slime mold. BioSystems. 2004 8;76(1-3):133-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2004.05.008
Takamatsu, A. ; Yamamoto, T. ; Fujii, T. / Spontaneous switching of frequency-locking by periodic stimulus in oscillators of plasmodium of the true slime mold. In: BioSystems. 2004 ; Vol. 76, No. 1-3. pp. 133-140.
@article{2b91bcd88b644ac89ecbfbd46240db2b,
title = "Spontaneous switching of frequency-locking by periodic stimulus in oscillators of plasmodium of the true slime mold",
abstract = "Microfabrication technique was used to construct a model system with a living cell of plasmodium of the true slime mold, Physarum polycephalum, a living coupled oscillator system. Its parameters can be systematically controlled as in computer simulations, so that results are directly comparable to those of general mathematical models. As the first step, we investigated responses in oscillatory cells, the oscillators of the plasmodium, to periodic stimuli by temperature changes to elucidate characteristics of the cells as nonlinear systems whose internal dynamics are unknown because of their complexity. We observed that the forced oscillator of the plasmodium show 1:1, 2:1, 3:1 frequency locking inside so-called Arnold tongues regions as well as in other nonlinear systems such as chemical systems and other biological systems. In addition, we found spontaneous switching behavior from certain frequency locking states to other states, even under certain fixed parameters. This technique can be applied to more complex systems with multiple elements, such as coupled oscillator systems, and would be useful to investigate complicated phenomena in biological systems such as information processing.",
keywords = "Arnold tongue, Frequency locking, Microfabrication, Nonlinear oscillator, Physarum polycephalum",
author = "A. Takamatsu and T. Yamamoto and T. Fujii",
doi = "10.1016/j.biosystems.2004.05.008",
journal = "Currents in modern biology",
T1 - Spontaneous switching of frequency-locking by periodic stimulus in oscillators of plasmodium of the true slime mold
AU - Takamatsu, A.
AU - Yamamoto, T.
AU - Fujii, T.
N2 - Microfabrication technique was used to construct a model system with a living cell of plasmodium of the true slime mold, Physarum polycephalum, a living coupled oscillator system. Its parameters can be systematically controlled as in computer simulations, so that results are directly comparable to those of general mathematical models. As the first step, we investigated responses in oscillatory cells, the oscillators of the plasmodium, to periodic stimuli by temperature changes to elucidate characteristics of the cells as nonlinear systems whose internal dynamics are unknown because of their complexity. We observed that the forced oscillator of the plasmodium show 1:1, 2:1, 3:1 frequency locking inside so-called Arnold tongues regions as well as in other nonlinear systems such as chemical systems and other biological systems. In addition, we found spontaneous switching behavior from certain frequency locking states to other states, even under certain fixed parameters. This technique can be applied to more complex systems with multiple elements, such as coupled oscillator systems, and would be useful to investigate complicated phenomena in biological systems such as information processing.
AB - Microfabrication technique was used to construct a model system with a living cell of plasmodium of the true slime mold, Physarum polycephalum, a living coupled oscillator system. Its parameters can be systematically controlled as in computer simulations, so that results are directly comparable to those of general mathematical models. As the first step, we investigated responses in oscillatory cells, the oscillators of the plasmodium, to periodic stimuli by temperature changes to elucidate characteristics of the cells as nonlinear systems whose internal dynamics are unknown because of their complexity. We observed that the forced oscillator of the plasmodium show 1:1, 2:1, 3:1 frequency locking inside so-called Arnold tongues regions as well as in other nonlinear systems such as chemical systems and other biological systems. In addition, we found spontaneous switching behavior from certain frequency locking states to other states, even under certain fixed parameters. This technique can be applied to more complex systems with multiple elements, such as coupled oscillator systems, and would be useful to investigate complicated phenomena in biological systems such as information processing.
KW - Arnold tongue
KW - Frequency locking
KW - Microfabrication
KW - Nonlinear oscillator
KW - Physarum polycephalum
U2 - 10.1016/j.biosystems.2004.05.008
DO - 10.1016/j.biosystems.2004.05.008
JO - Currents in modern biology
JF - Currents in modern biology