So 'no track record' is an effing stupid thing to say in this context. Now, you might be correct if you say that Britain is uniquely incapable of replicating that success; that we are exceptionally poor. But the 'no track record in UAS' is a very poor argument.
Spirit used to be the panel beating department of Bombardier before Airbus fucked them. They have no background, expertise or capability in whole airframe design, avionics integration or RPAS. It was never a sound choice on any grounds other than trying to hold the fraying union together.
I have partial sympathy for the government not wanting to award to BAE who previously ran a UAS program from 2005 to 2015 that cost £200m and produced one aircraft that flew four times.
Muscling in on the MQ-28 program was the obvious move, even two years ago, but I don't think the MoD could psychologically handle being the junior partner to Australia.
"They have no background, expertise or capability in whole airframe design, avionics integration or RPAS."
Neither did Baykar.
Next point please.
It took Bayraktar 15 fucking years to produce something that is inferior in every way, apart from cost, to a platform the UK already has today. (Protector RG1). So if we want something that is not as good as something we already have in 2035 then the Bayraktar comparison is worthy and Spirit was a great idea.
LANCA/Mosquito was trying to do something far more complex and advanced with a company that was more than a decade away, on Bayraktar pace, of being able to produce a relative simple UAS.
Is LANCA/Mosquito as consciously WWII fanboi as it sounds?
That looks really rather nice. What do the unripe plums taste like, anything like gooseberries for example (the only sour fruit close I could think of)?
That’s pretty close, yes. Gooseberries could work, The sour plums and tarragon give it an agreeable tartness and a whack of umami
Just want you want in summer if you desire something quite filling, yet not heavy; something to go with cold white wine, yet you don’t want a salad, and you are bored of fish…
Serve with warm crusty bread. Mmm
I might try to recreate something along those lines. Enjoying your travel notes by the way.
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
I wonder where they got the idea of dishonesty in matters political?
Apparently, the leadership contest will be one of Fizzy Lizzy, Ben "Anger Management" Wallace and the one with the enormous head vs Rat Eyes. We are truly blessed.
They got some rum old anonymous Tories quoted in that article, blaming the by-election debacles on the voters 'lying on the doorstep' and 'the girls' on the Tory benches for grassing up Porn Man.
Naturally. As the surely do NOT wish to blame the REAL culprits - themselves.
No wonder they are pumping their bilge undercover. Even worse scum than Boris.
"The question for some Tories is whether the public’s disregard for Mr Johnson will spill over into animosity towards the Conservative party more generally.
“It’s like a disease,” one MP told i. “The Prime Minister is infecting the Cabinet, and if the Tory party doesn’t act in the next six months we will all be infected by him."
All stuff which has already happened. How dim are Tory mps?
That looks really rather nice. What do the unripe plums taste like, anything like gooseberries for example (the only sour fruit close I could think of)?
That’s pretty close, yes. Gooseberries could work, The sour plums and tarragon give it an agreeable tartness and a whack of umami
Just want you want in summer if you desire something quite filling, yet not heavy; something to go with cold white wine, yet you don’t want a salad, and you are bored of fish…
Serve with warm crusty bread. Mmm
I might try to recreate something along those lines. Enjoying your travel notes by the way.
So 'no track record' is an effing stupid thing to say in this context. Now, you might be correct if you say that Britain is uniquely incapable of replicating that success; that we are exceptionally poor. But the 'no track record in UAS' is a very poor argument.
Spirit used to be the panel beating department of Bombardier before Airbus fucked them. They have no background, expertise or capability in whole airframe design, avionics integration or RPAS. It was never a sound choice on any grounds other than trying to hold the fraying union together.
I have partial sympathy for the government not wanting to award to BAE who previously ran a UAS program from 2005 to 2015 that cost £200m and produced one aircraft that flew four times.
Muscling in on the MQ-28 program was the obvious move, even two years ago, but I don't think the MoD could psychologically handle being the junior partner to Australia.
Wouldn’t it be easier to licence the technology from Bayraktar, and use that as a starting point?
Are Bayraktar drones technologically advanced, or are they simply effective and reliable?
Having a lot of cheaper drones might well be better than having fewer more sophisticated ones. I do think it's worth the government encouraging a broad range of developments in this area though.
They’re not state-of-the-art technologically, but are small enough to be a pain in the arse to find with radar, whilst being big enough to carry a payload sufficient to take out an enemy tank.
There’s definitely a case for making a variety of sizes of drone, but all based on a similar control platform.
As always with defence procurement, there’s way too much re-inventing of the wheel.
I'm a bit of a fan of wheel-reinvention! Different teams will learn different things in the process. You can of course go too far, but having essentially just one defence contractor is not a good thing.
Yes and no. It’s good to have multiple contractors and capabilities, but governments also need to get away from seeing defence procurement as primarily a job creation programme.
I suspect that giving a drone project to the technology division of an F1 team, as suggested upthread, would lead to the sort of embarrassment to the establishment that we have seen with SpaceX in the US.
Many years ago I visted the RAF museum at Cosford. There were (and I imagine are) an incredible variety of odd projects. A good number of companies were involved.
Anyway all of those companies were busy trying to outdo one another in terms of inventiveness, and that yielded results - Harrier, Concorde, and what should and would have been the great TSR2.
I think we would be better off if our defence procurement cast a much wider net.
The issue with that, is the technical complexity and costs of development are orders of magnitude higher for modern systems, compared to a few decades ago.
It would indeed be good to cast the net wider, but there’s no longer the budget to ask three companies to design a prototype aircraft, and then selecting one for production - which is where the collection at Cosford originated.
That looks really rather nice. What do the unripe plums taste like, anything like gooseberries for example (the only sour fruit close I could think of)?
That’s pretty close, yes. Gooseberries could work, The sour plums and tarragon give it an agreeable tartness and a whack of umami
Just want you want in summer if you desire something quite filling, yet not heavy; something to go with cold white wine, yet you don’t want a salad, and you are bored of fish…
Serve with warm crusty bread. Mmm
I might try to recreate something along those lines. Enjoying your travel notes by the way.
Oh and my mother's health suddenly deteriorated after the first jab so she's now a shadow of her former self, still keep silent and keep the money flowing in foxy
Was this the straw that broke the troll's back?
To be fair to @micktrain I wouldn’t want to be injected with Sputnik V either
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
I'd reckon that was Chopey except for the WhatsApp reference.
That looks really rather nice. What do the unripe plums taste like, anything like gooseberries for example (the only sour fruit close I could think of)?
That’s pretty close, yes. Gooseberries could work, The sour plums and tarragon give it an agreeable tartness and a whack of umami
Just want you want in summer if you desire something quite filling, yet not heavy; something to go with cold white wine, yet you don’t want a salad, and you are bored of fish…
Serve with warm crusty bread. Mmm
I might try to recreate something along those lines. Enjoying your travel notes by the way.
So 'no track record' is an effing stupid thing to say in this context. Now, you might be correct if you say that Britain is uniquely incapable of replicating that success; that we are exceptionally poor. But the 'no track record in UAS' is a very poor argument.
Spirit used to be the panel beating department of Bombardier before Airbus fucked them. They have no background, expertise or capability in whole airframe design, avionics integration or RPAS. It was never a sound choice on any grounds other than trying to hold the fraying union together.
I have partial sympathy for the government not wanting to award to BAE who previously ran a UAS program from 2005 to 2015 that cost £200m and produced one aircraft that flew four times.
Muscling in on the MQ-28 program was the obvious move, even two years ago, but I don't think the MoD could psychologically handle being the junior partner to Australia.
Wouldn’t it be easier to licence the technology from Bayraktar, and use that as a starting point?
Are Bayraktar drones technologically advanced, or are they simply effective and reliable?
Having a lot of cheaper drones might well be better than having fewer more sophisticated ones. I do think it's worth the government encouraging a broad range of developments in this area though.
They’re not state-of-the-art technologically, but are small enough to be a pain in the arse to find with radar, whilst being big enough to carry a payload sufficient to take out an enemy tank.
There’s definitely a case for making a variety of sizes of drone, but all based on a similar control platform.
As always with defence procurement, there’s way too much re-inventing of the wheel.
I'm a bit of a fan of wheel-reinvention! Different teams will learn different things in the process. You can of course go too far, but having essentially just one defence contractor is not a good thing.
Yes and no. It’s good to have multiple contractors and capabilities, but governments also need to get away from seeing defence procurement as primarily a job creation programme.
I suspect that giving a drone project to the technology division of an F1 team, as suggested upthread, would lead to the sort of embarrassment to the establishment that we have seen with SpaceX in the US.
Many years ago I visted the RAF museum at Cosford. There were (and I imagine are) an incredible variety of odd projects. A good number of companies were involved.
Anyway all of those companies were busy trying to outdo one another in terms of inventiveness, and that yielded results - Harrier, Concorde, and what should and would have been the great TSR2.
I think we would be better off if our defence procurement cast a much wider net.
The issue with that, is the technical complexity and costs of development are orders of magnitude higher for modern systems, compared to a few decades ago.
It would indeed be good to cast the net wider, but there’s no longer the budget to ask three companies to design a prototype aircraft, and then selecting one for production - which is where the collection at Cosford originated.
Why are the costs so much higher? Personally I think it's because there's no competition. Some of the materials needed are hard and expensive to work with, but that just tells me we need more consumers.
So 'no track record' is an effing stupid thing to say in this context. Now, you might be correct if you say that Britain is uniquely incapable of replicating that success; that we are exceptionally poor. But the 'no track record in UAS' is a very poor argument.
Spirit used to be the panel beating department of Bombardier before Airbus fucked them. They have no background, expertise or capability in whole airframe design, avionics integration or RPAS. It was never a sound choice on any grounds other than trying to hold the fraying union together.
I have partial sympathy for the government not wanting to award to BAE who previously ran a UAS program from 2005 to 2015 that cost £200m and produced one aircraft that flew four times.
Muscling in on the MQ-28 program was the obvious move, even two years ago, but I don't think the MoD could psychologically handle being the junior partner to Australia.
Wouldn’t it be easier to licence the technology from Bayraktar, and use that as a starting point?
Insufficently big, complex or expensive for Crab Air tastes.
That is a completely different role for that envisioned for LANCA/Mosquito and a mission that is already well served by 16 x Protector RG1.
Mosquito was going to be an attritable companion to crewed aircraft. So it would complement and accompany E-7, P-8 and F-35 on sorties just as MQ-28 does.
We have a rather hot war going on at the moment. Does experience in that war show that the highly-capable (and expensive) Mosquito concept is a wise investment, compared to lower-cost (but less capable) drones?
Oh and my mother's health suddenly deteriorated after the first jab so she's now a shadow of her former self, still keep silent and keep the money flowing in foxy
What is quote comic about the trolling, is that to think that anyone is in the NHS for 'all the free flowing money' is just absurd. Which can only lead me to believe whilst your English is good, you seem to be missing some cultural information from your employers.
As just a casual lurker here who seldom posts, your consist pokes towards Foxy just see so far off base. Foxy posts are always worth reading and they come across as a dedicated medical professional.
Bit surprised there isn't a rate limiting option for new posters, certainly in your case quantity is definitely impacting quality
Cheers, MrB
Always good to see Bristols. 👍🏻
I never realised you were a lady of such refined tastes
That looks really rather nice. What do the unripe plums taste like, anything like gooseberries for example (the only sour fruit close I could think of)?
That’s pretty close, yes. Gooseberries could work, The sour plums and tarragon give it an agreeable tartness and a whack of umami
Just want you want in summer if you desire something quite filling, yet not heavy; something to go with cold white wine, yet you don’t want a salad, and you are bored of fish…
Serve with warm crusty bread. Mmm
I might try to recreate something along those lines. Enjoying your travel notes by the way.
So 'no track record' is an effing stupid thing to say in this context. Now, you might be correct if you say that Britain is uniquely incapable of replicating that success; that we are exceptionally poor. But the 'no track record in UAS' is a very poor argument.
Spirit used to be the panel beating department of Bombardier before Airbus fucked them. They have no background, expertise or capability in whole airframe design, avionics integration or RPAS. It was never a sound choice on any grounds other than trying to hold the fraying union together.
I have partial sympathy for the government not wanting to award to BAE who previously ran a UAS program from 2005 to 2015 that cost £200m and produced one aircraft that flew four times.
Muscling in on the MQ-28 program was the obvious move, even two years ago, but I don't think the MoD could psychologically handle being the junior partner to Australia.
Wouldn’t it be easier to licence the technology from Bayraktar, and use that as a starting point?
Are Bayraktar drones technologically advanced, or are they simply effective and reliable?
Having a lot of cheaper drones might well be better than having fewer more sophisticated ones. I do think it's worth the government encouraging a broad range of developments in this area though.
They’re not state-of-the-art technologically, but are small enough to be a pain in the arse to find with radar, whilst being big enough to carry a payload sufficient to take out an enemy tank.
There’s definitely a case for making a variety of sizes of drone, but all based on a similar control platform.
As always with defence procurement, there’s way too much re-inventing of the wheel.
I'm a bit of a fan of wheel-reinvention! Different teams will learn different things in the process. You can of course go too far, but having essentially just one defence contractor is not a good thing.
Yes and no. It’s good to have multiple contractors and capabilities, but governments also need to get away from seeing defence procurement as primarily a job creation programme.
I suspect that giving a drone project to the technology division of an F1 team, as suggested upthread, would lead to the sort of embarrassment to the establishment that we have seen with SpaceX in the US.
Many years ago I visted the RAF museum at Cosford. There were (and I imagine are) an incredible variety of odd projects. A good number of companies were involved.
Anyway all of those companies were busy trying to outdo one another in terms of inventiveness, and that yielded results - Harrier, Concorde, and what should and would have been the great TSR2.
I think we would be better off if our defence procurement cast a much wider net.
The issue with that, is the technical complexity and costs of development are orders of magnitude higher for modern systems, compared to a few decades ago.
It would indeed be good to cast the net wider, but there’s no longer the budget to ask three companies to design a prototype aircraft, and then selecting one for production - which is where the collection at Cosford originated.
Why are the costs so much higher? Personally I think it's because there's no competition. Some of the materials needed are hard and expensive to work with, but that just tells me we need more consumers.
There are various 'kinds' of costs that make projects like this hard to value. Take the Space Shuttle: how much did it cost per flight? There are loads of different costings out there, depending on things like whether development costs are included. Then there are program costs: how much it costs to sustain the systems. Actual 'Flight' costs; the cost of each flight in terms of manpower and fuel, might be relatively low. But there were many non-flight costs, such as maintaining facilities and support equipment.
There were originally going to be 132 B2 Spirit planes built (the US stealth bomber). That was reduced to 75, and then in 1992 down to 20. All the development costs of the plane are split between fewer airframes, meaning that costings that include dev costs inflate massively. In the end the B2 project may end up costing $2 billion per airframe.
Basically: the fewer of something you end up making, the greater the cost of the project per unit if you include dev costs.
That looks really rather nice. What do the unripe plums taste like, anything like gooseberries for example (the only sour fruit close I could think of)?
That’s pretty close, yes. Gooseberries could work, The sour plums and tarragon give it an agreeable tartness and a whack of umami
Just what you might want in summer if you desire something quite filling, yet not heavy; something to go with cold white wine, yet you don’t yearn for a salad, and you are bored of fish…
Serve with warm crusty bread. Mmm
Would blackcurrants do? Unsweetened, they are very sour, and cut duck breast's fattiness well.
NYT ($) - Kavanaugh Gave Private Assurances. Collins Says He ‘Misled’ Her. “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge,” the justice told the senator in a discussion on Roe, according to notes from a meeting before his confirmation.
During a two-hour meeting in her Senate office with the Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Aug. 21, 2018, Senator Susan Collins of Maine pressed him hard on why she should trust him not to overturn Roe v. Wade if she backed his confirmation.
Judge Kavanaugh worked vigorously to reassure her that he was no threat to the landmark abortion rights ruling.
“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”
SSI - Personally no great fan of Sen. Collins. Do believe she is NOT a habitual liar, however.
In that respect, quite unlike Justice Brent "Sex on the Beach" Kavanaugh.
That looks really rather nice. What do the unripe plums taste like, anything like gooseberries for example (the only sour fruit close I could think of)?
That’s pretty close, yes. Gooseberries could work, The sour plums and tarragon give it an agreeable tartness and a whack of umami
Just want you want in summer if you desire something quite filling, yet not heavy; something to go with cold white wine, yet you don’t want a salad, and you are bored of fish…
Serve with warm crusty bread. Mmm
I might try to recreate something along those lines. Enjoying your travel notes by the way.
NYT ($) - Kavanaugh Gave Private Assurances. Collins Says He ‘Misled’ Her. “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge,” the justice told the senator in a discussion on Roe, according to notes from a meeting before his confirmation.
During a two-hour meeting in her Senate office with the Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Aug. 21, 2018, Senator Susan Collins of Maine pressed him hard on why she should trust him not to overturn Roe v. Wade if she backed his confirmation.
Judge Kavanaugh worked vigorously to reassure her that he was no threat to the landmark abortion rights ruling.
“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”
SSI - Personally no great fan of Sen. Collins. Do believe she is NOT a habitual liar, however.
In that respect, quite unlike Justice Brent "Sex on the Beach" Kavanaugh.
What a parcel of rogues on the SCOTUS!
“I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it” sounds like a statement of intent!
So 'no track record' is an effing stupid thing to say in this context. Now, you might be correct if you say that Britain is uniquely incapable of replicating that success; that we are exceptionally poor. But the 'no track record in UAS' is a very poor argument.
Spirit used to be the panel beating department of Bombardier before Airbus fucked them. They have no background, expertise or capability in whole airframe design, avionics integration or RPAS. It was never a sound choice on any grounds other than trying to hold the fraying union together.
I have partial sympathy for the government not wanting to award to BAE who previously ran a UAS program from 2005 to 2015 that cost £200m and produced one aircraft that flew four times.
Muscling in on the MQ-28 program was the obvious move, even two years ago, but I don't think the MoD could psychologically handle being the junior partner to Australia.
Wouldn’t it be easier to licence the technology from Bayraktar, and use that as a starting point?
Are Bayraktar drones technologically advanced, or are they simply effective and reliable?
Having a lot of cheaper drones might well be better than having fewer more sophisticated ones. I do think it's worth the government encouraging a broad range of developments in this area though.
They’re not state-of-the-art technologically, but are small enough to be a pain in the arse to find with radar, whilst being big enough to carry a payload sufficient to take out an enemy tank.
There’s definitely a case for making a variety of sizes of drone, but all based on a similar control platform.
As always with defence procurement, there’s way too much re-inventing of the wheel.
I'm a bit of a fan of wheel-reinvention! Different teams will learn different things in the process. You can of course go too far, but having essentially just one defence contractor is not a good thing.
Yes and no. It’s good to have multiple contractors and capabilities, but governments also need to get away from seeing defence procurement as primarily a job creation programme.
I suspect that giving a drone project to the technology division of an F1 team, as suggested upthread, would lead to the sort of embarrassment to the establishment that we have seen with SpaceX in the US.
Many years ago I visted the RAF museum at Cosford. There were (and I imagine are) an incredible variety of odd projects. A good number of companies were involved.
Anyway all of those companies were busy trying to outdo one another in terms of inventiveness, and that yielded results - Harrier, Concorde, and what should and would have been the great TSR2.
I think we would be better off if our defence procurement cast a much wider net.
The issue with that, is the technical complexity and costs of development are orders of magnitude higher for modern systems, compared to a few decades ago.
It would indeed be good to cast the net wider, but there’s no longer the budget to ask three companies to design a prototype aircraft, and then selecting one for production - which is where the collection at Cosford originated.
Why are the costs so much higher? Personally I think it's because there's no competition. Some of the materials needed are hard and expensive to work with, but that just tells me we need more consumers.
There are various 'kinds' of costs that make projects like this hard to value. Take the Space Shuttle: how much did it cost per flight? There are loads of different costings out there, depending on things like whether development costs are included. Then there are program costs: how much it costs to sustain the systems. Actual 'Flight' costs; the cost of each flight in terms of manpower and fuel, might be relatively low. But there were many non-flight costs, such as maintaining facilities and support equipment.
There were originally going to be 132 B2 Spirit planes built (the US stealth bomber). That was reduced to 75, and then in 1992 down to 20. All the development costs of the plane are split between fewer airframes, meaning that costings that include dev costs inflate massively. In the end the B2 project may end up costing $2 billion per airframe.
Basically: the fewer of something you end up making, the greater the cost of the project per unit if you include dev costs.
Everybody but everybody thinks these projects were wildly baggy though.
If the military had commissioned the iPhone it'd be a million dollars a pop. Actually much more.
Oh and my mother's health suddenly deteriorated after the first jab so she's now a shadow of her former self, still keep silent and keep the money flowing in foxy
Was this the straw that broke the troll's back?
To be fair to @micktrain I wouldn’t want to be injected with Sputnik V either
Thought that his personal slurs versus Foxy were a bit much.
Especially as he had zero clue the good doctor was a doctor until me & doc told him.
Plus deeply offensive (to me) for him (or it or them or what-have-you) to adopt a Hibernian nom de bot.
Oh and my mother's health suddenly deteriorated after the first jab so she's now a shadow of her former self, still keep silent and keep the money flowing in foxy
What is quote comic about the trolling, is that to think that anyone is in the NHS for 'all the free flowing money' is just absurd. Which can only lead me to believe whilst your English is good, you seem to be missing some cultural information from your employers.
As just a casual lurker here who seldom posts, your consist pokes towards Foxy just see so far off base. Foxy posts are always worth reading and they come across as a dedicated medical professional.
Bit surprised there isn't a rate limiting option for new posters, certainly in your case quantity is definitely impacting quality
Cheers, MrB
Always good to see Bristols. 👍🏻
I never realised you were a lady of such refined tastes
NYT ($) - Kavanaugh Gave Private Assurances. Collins Says He ‘Misled’ Her. “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge,” the justice told the senator in a discussion on Roe, according to notes from a meeting before his confirmation.
During a two-hour meeting in her Senate office with the Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Aug. 21, 2018, Senator Susan Collins of Maine pressed him hard on why she should trust him not to overturn Roe v. Wade if she backed his confirmation.
Judge Kavanaugh worked vigorously to reassure her that he was no threat to the landmark abortion rights ruling.
“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”
SSI - Personally no great fan of Sen. Collins. Do believe she is NOT a habitual liar, however.
In that respect, quite unlike Justice Brent "Sex on the Beach" Kavanaugh.
What a parcel of rogues on the SCOTUS!
This is all horrendous. The whole point of being a judge is that though you bring to it your whole life and experience you don't come to public judgement on any litigable issue until you have heard all sides and considered all the arguments. Not rushing to judgement is exactly what judges are uniquely asked to do.
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
They're pretty stupid if they didn't think there was a good chance they would lose the seat. Nearly everyone on here thought it was a strong possibility.
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
They're pretty stupid if they didn't think there was a good chance they would lose the seat. Nearly everyone on here thought it was a strong possibility.
Most people weren’t getting because even at odds of 5-1 for the Tory Party to win It wasn’t value. If backbenchers thought they were going to retain the seat then they are even stupider than I thought they were.
So 'no track record' is an effing stupid thing to say in this context. Now, you might be correct if you say that Britain is uniquely incapable of replicating that success; that we are exceptionally poor. But the 'no track record in UAS' is a very poor argument.
Spirit used to be the panel beating department of Bombardier before Airbus fucked them. They have no background, expertise or capability in whole airframe design, avionics integration or RPAS. It was never a sound choice on any grounds other than trying to hold the fraying union together.
I have partial sympathy for the government not wanting to award to BAE who previously ran a UAS program from 2005 to 2015 that cost £200m and produced one aircraft that flew four times.
Muscling in on the MQ-28 program was the obvious move, even two years ago, but I don't think the MoD could psychologically handle being the junior partner to Australia.
Wouldn’t it be easier to licence the technology from Bayraktar, and use that as a starting point?
Are Bayraktar drones technologically advanced, or are they simply effective and reliable?
Having a lot of cheaper drones might well be better than having fewer more sophisticated ones. I do think it's worth the government encouraging a broad range of developments in this area though.
They’re not state-of-the-art technologically, but are small enough to be a pain in the arse to find with radar, whilst being big enough to carry a payload sufficient to take out an enemy tank.
There’s definitely a case for making a variety of sizes of drone, but all based on a similar control platform.
As always with defence procurement, there’s way too much re-inventing of the wheel.
I'm a bit of a fan of wheel-reinvention! Different teams will learn different things in the process. You can of course go too far, but having essentially just one defence contractor is not a good thing.
Yes and no. It’s good to have multiple contractors and capabilities, but governments also need to get away from seeing defence procurement as primarily a job creation programme.
I suspect that giving a drone project to the technology division of an F1 team, as suggested upthread, would lead to the sort of embarrassment to the establishment that we have seen with SpaceX in the US.
Many years ago I visted the RAF museum at Cosford. There were (and I imagine are) an incredible variety of odd projects. A good number of companies were involved.
Anyway all of those companies were busy trying to outdo one another in terms of inventiveness, and that yielded results - Harrier, Concorde, and what should and would have been the great TSR2.
I think we would be better off if our defence procurement cast a much wider net.
The issue with that, is the technical complexity and costs of development are orders of magnitude higher for modern systems, compared to a few decades ago.
It would indeed be good to cast the net wider, but there’s no longer the budget to ask three companies to design a prototype aircraft, and then selecting one for production - which is where the collection at Cosford originated.
Why are the costs so much higher? Personally I think it's because there's no competition. Some of the materials needed are hard and expensive to work with, but that just tells me we need more consumers.
There are various 'kinds' of costs that make projects like this hard to value. Take the Space Shuttle: how much did it cost per flight? There are loads of different costings out there, depending on things like whether development costs are included. Then there are program costs: how much it costs to sustain the systems. Actual 'Flight' costs; the cost of each flight in terms of manpower and fuel, might be relatively low. But there were many non-flight costs, such as maintaining facilities and support equipment.
There were originally going to be 132 B2 Spirit planes built (the US stealth bomber). That was reduced to 75, and then in 1992 down to 20. All the development costs of the plane are split between fewer airframes, meaning that costings that include dev costs inflate massively. In the end the B2 project may end up costing $2 billion per airframe.
Basically: the fewer of something you end up making, the greater the cost of the project per unit if you include dev costs.
Everybody but everybody thinks these projects were wildly baggy though.
If the military had commissioned the iPhone it'd be a million dollars a pop. Actually much more.
Because they'd only make five of them, and use bespoke parts.
They'd also bin their processors much more stringently than any consumer project. (Kerching to the fabs!)
There's also the problem that if you're only making a handful of things, you really don't want them to fail. In consumer electronics, a return rate of 1% (defects) was not uncommon twenty years ago for cheap stuff -though I believe it has improved since.
In other words, 1% of units would fail within warranty. But as they're cheap as chips, it didn't matter much.
If you are only making 10 of something, as opposed to two million, then you cannot afford outright failures. This means you spend much, much more on trying to make certain that the thing you produce works. Costs escalate as you try to get components to 99.999999999% reliability. And you need systems to detect potential failures, and redundancy to protect against them. And rigorous test and maintenance of components whilst in use.
This is understandable for crewed systems: you do not want to lose people. But does it matter as much for unmanned systems? If the system is much cheaper, and you have more of them, the loss of one does not hurt as much. This then becomes a virtuous cycle: the more you make of them, the cheaper you can make the design.
And the more you make, the more you learn about the design on how to make it more reliable and cheaper.
Leon, if you decided to head off to Crna Gora, definitely check out Kotor Bay. At one time a key base for the Austro-Hungarian Navy. And before & since a spectacular land & seascape.
If I go to Montenegro - my probable choice - Kotor will be my first stop. It looks fecking incredible in photos. And UNESCO listed
I do like to tick off UNESCO listed places. I once met a German dentist (on Easter Island) who was dedicating his life to seeing them all. He knew it was a doomed task, the list gets longer every year, extending ahead of you, but he had done about 700, which was damn impressive
Montenegins of old (and new probably also) though nothing of scampering up and down those incredible slopes, as Kotor Bay was their lifeline to the rest of Christendom, as they hung on independent (mostly) against the Ottomans at the height of their power.
A frayed, undependable lifeline at times. Yet it allowed the clans of the Black mountain to hold out, survive and eventually outlast the Turks as a bulwark of Orthodoxy and Slavdom. (Or Serbism if you prefer BUT that is a topic best not raised with locals on first acquaintance.) Despite fighting like crazy cats in a small bag among themselves.
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
They're pretty stupid if they didn't think there was a good chance they would lose the seat. Nearly everyone on here thought it was a strong possibility.
Its just revisionism and hyperbole to assist the overall aim (fat dog culling)
It's absolutely none of my business what people post on here, and generally I'm at the freedom of speech end of the spectrum. But there is a line to be drawn.
So, how about an automatic ban on anybody who refers to other posters as 'mate' or 'pal'? Beyond the pale, in my view.
I’m more confused by someone using both - in my life there are people who call others “mate” and others who use “pal” but don’t recall anyone using both - I always thought it was a regional thing with “pal” being more Northern and “mate” more south….
I've used both depending on where I am. Mate in London, Pal in Scotland. Marra on Tyneside. I'm sure I have heard blokes calling each other Love elsewhere in the North, maybe Sheffield. Don't think I've used any on here though.
It's a usage that I find odd, as usually "mate" or "pal" is used in a slightly hostile way, to mean its opposite.
All fairly random though, and often get patients calling me "mate", "me duck", or even "my love". The last seems mostly to come from older Gujeratis rather than Bristolians in my part of the world. All part of life's rich tapestry.
I remember an incident someone (Nick Clegg, i think) had in Liverpool, ingratiatingly greeting a random passer-by:
Politician: Hello, friend! Liverpudlian: I'm not yer fooking friend.
So 'no track record' is an effing stupid thing to say in this context. Now, you might be correct if you say that Britain is uniquely incapable of replicating that success; that we are exceptionally poor. But the 'no track record in UAS' is a very poor argument.
Spirit used to be the panel beating department of Bombardier before Airbus fucked them. They have no background, expertise or capability in whole airframe design, avionics integration or RPAS. It was never a sound choice on any grounds other than trying to hold the fraying union together.
I have partial sympathy for the government not wanting to award to BAE who previously ran a UAS program from 2005 to 2015 that cost £200m and produced one aircraft that flew four times.
Muscling in on the MQ-28 program was the obvious move, even two years ago, but I don't think the MoD could psychologically handle being the junior partner to Australia.
Wouldn’t it be easier to licence the technology from Bayraktar, and use that as a starting point?
Are Bayraktar drones technologically advanced, or are they simply effective and reliable?
Having a lot of cheaper drones might well be better than having fewer more sophisticated ones. I do think it's worth the government encouraging a broad range of developments in this area though.
They’re not state-of-the-art technologically, but are small enough to be a pain in the arse to find with radar, whilst being big enough to carry a payload sufficient to take out an enemy tank.
There’s definitely a case for making a variety of sizes of drone, but all based on a similar control platform.
As always with defence procurement, there’s way too much re-inventing of the wheel.
I'm a bit of a fan of wheel-reinvention! Different teams will learn different things in the process. You can of course go too far, but having essentially just one defence contractor is not a good thing.
Yes and no. It’s good to have multiple contractors and capabilities, but governments also need to get away from seeing defence procurement as primarily a job creation programme.
I suspect that giving a drone project to the technology division of an F1 team, as suggested upthread, would lead to the sort of embarrassment to the establishment that we have seen with SpaceX in the US.
Many years ago I visted the RAF museum at Cosford. There were (and I imagine are) an incredible variety of odd projects. A good number of companies were involved.
Anyway all of those companies were busy trying to outdo one another in terms of inventiveness, and that yielded results - Harrier, Concorde, and what should and would have been the great TSR2.
I think we would be better off if our defence procurement cast a much wider net.
The issue with that, is the technical complexity and costs of development are orders of magnitude higher for modern systems, compared to a few decades ago.
It would indeed be good to cast the net wider, but there’s no longer the budget to ask three companies to design a prototype aircraft, and then selecting one for production - which is where the collection at Cosford originated.
Why are the costs so much higher? Personally I think it's because there's no competition. Some of the materials needed are hard and expensive to work with, but that just tells me we need more consumers.
There are various 'kinds' of costs that make projects like this hard to value. Take the Space Shuttle: how much did it cost per flight? There are loads of different costings out there, depending on things like whether development costs are included. Then there are program costs: how much it costs to sustain the systems. Actual 'Flight' costs; the cost of each flight in terms of manpower and fuel, might be relatively low. But there were many non-flight costs, such as maintaining facilities and support equipment.
There were originally going to be 132 B2 Spirit planes built (the US stealth bomber). That was reduced to 75, and then in 1992 down to 20. All the development costs of the plane are split between fewer airframes, meaning that costings that include dev costs inflate massively. In the end the B2 project may end up costing $2 billion per airframe.
Basically: the fewer of something you end up making, the greater the cost of the project per unit if you include dev costs.
Everybody but everybody thinks these projects were wildly baggy though.
If the military had commissioned the iPhone it'd be a million dollars a pop. Actually much more.
Because they'd only make five of them, and use bespoke parts.
They'd also bin their processors much more stringently than any consumer project. (Kerching to the fabs!)
There's also the problem that if you're only making a handful of things, you really don't want them to fail. In consumer electronics, a return rate of 1% (defects) was not uncommon twenty years ago for cheap stuff -though I believe it has improved since.
In other words, 1% of units would fail within warranty. But as they're cheap as chips, it didn't matter much.
If you are only making 10 of something, as opposed to two million, then you cannot afford outright failures. This means you spend much, much more on trying to make certain that the thing you produce works. Costs escalate as you try to get components to 99.999999999% reliability. And you need systems to detect potential failures, and redundancy to protect against them. And rigorous test and maintenance of components whilst in use.
This is understandable for crewed systems: you do not want to lose people. But does it matter as much for unmanned systems? If the system is much cheaper, and you have more of them, the loss of one does not hurt as much. This then becomes a virtuous cycle: the more you make of them, the cheaper you can make the design.
And the more you make, the more you learn about the design on how to make it more reliable and cheaper.
Indeed. It could be said from the Ukranian experience, that the biggest problem with military drones is that they’re over-engineered and the contractors are working down from manned planes, rather than working up from hobby drones.
Fckn hell, just listening to Any Questions from Lerwick, the SNP panel member stuck in Inverness due to to a cancelled flight is utterly, and I mean utterly, inaudilble. You'd think after 2 two and a half years of Covid that a world beating broadcasting company would have sorted out distance contributions.
A truly embarrassing performance. Made worse by the fact that in the week of T and H and being in Shetland the BBC could not find a Lib Dem panel member.
Tommy having a teeny moment of hesitation in his headlong rush to Brexit loving, Tory voting, Telegraph columnising reaction. Won’t last long.
Indeed not. At some point soon - probably on Monday - the sheer horror of structural racism being mentioned in Californian schools will send concern over the reclassification of women as second class citizens back to the corner where it belongs!
It's absolutely none of my business what people post on here, and generally I'm at the freedom of speech end of the spectrum. But there is a line to be drawn.
So, how about an automatic ban on anybody who refers to other posters as 'mate' or 'pal'? Beyond the pale, in my view.
I’m more confused by someone using both - in my life there are people who call others “mate” and others who use “pal” but don’t recall anyone using both - I always thought it was a regional thing with “pal” being more Northern and “mate” more south….
I've used both depending on where I am. Mate in London, Pal in Scotland. Marra on Tyneside. I'm sure I have heard blokes calling each other Love elsewhere in the North, maybe Sheffield. Don't think I've used any on here though.
It's a usage that I find odd, as usually "mate" or "pal" is used in a slightly hostile way, to mean its opposite.
All fairly random though, and often get patients calling me "mate", "me duck", or even "my love". The last seems mostly to come from older Gujeratis rather than Bristolians in my part of the world. All part of life's rich tapestry.
I remember an incident someone (Nick Clegg, i think) had in Liverpool, ingratiatingly greeting a random passer-by:
Politician: Hello, friend! Liverpudlian: I'm not yer fooking friend.
CMI calculates 122,400 excess deaths in the UK since the start of the pandemic. The total has increased by 2,000 in 2022.
Cumulative mortality rates YTD are 0.1% of a full year’s mortality worse than 2019. 2/3 https://t.co/0oikxlDC9C
I think that there is a limit to how far back one can safely compare when looking at excess deaths, as population ageing effects start to intrude.
The problem of Omicron is more one of morbidity than mortality, lengthening hospital stay, etc.
Deaths running nearly 20% above normal now as shown by latest ons figures not that gps are interested, they are still in hiding
Largely a recording effect from the prolonged Bank Holiday.
This is an interesting piece of work looking at the excess million deaths from covid in the USA, in particular the higher mortality in the young and middle aged.
FFS - have we got another ignoring-reporting-effects clown?
{picks up baseball bat and a handful of rust nails…}
No wrong deaths rose above the seasonal trend in May and have continued above in June, the snowball has started
Oh do fuck off. This forum is packed with intelligent, successful men and women who come here to discuss political betting, politics and test cricket.
Some of us like to make awesome puns too!
And plan for the relocation of the DfE…..
On that subject, how’s that space rocket coming along?
Flight hardware being stacked - Starship 24 and Booster 7…
Hope it's not too long. I'm looking forward to telling Susan Acland Hood and Amanda Spielman 'you're useless c**** and I'm going to fire you into Uranus.'
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
At least in 1997 the PM didn't lie to you.
Apart from about his affair with Edwina Currie, of course.
Open invitation to all PBers to come out for the Greenwood Auto Show, right in front of my humble bode today here in beautiful, sunny (today anyway) and summery (ditto) Seattle!
Appears like were in for the first truly Summer day of the season. Plus the Auto Show, an annual event that is a BIG deal locally, was cancelled previous two years due to COVID.
So looking forward to (as Ed Sullivan used to say) a really big show today.
NOT a great fan of classic cars, or large crowds as a rule.
However, this is a exception for me. Because it's the one thing my hood does for the whole city, indeed region. Plus the people watching is even better than the car viewing, as the crowd is VERY diverse, a true melting pot. With all kinds of street food to match!
Looked it up and it's in an area called Crown Hill.
Fckn hell, just listening to Any Questions from Lerwick, the SNP panel member stuck in Inverness due to to a cancelled flight is utterly, and I mean utterly, inaudilble. You'd think after 2 two and a half years of Covid that a world beating broadcasting company would have sorted out distance contributions.
A truly embarrassing performance. Made worse by the fact that in the week of T and H and being in Shetland the BBC could not find a Lib Dem panel member.
That's not uncommon. The BBC have ceased to include the libdems on anything like a regular basis for a long time. I think Lee Mack has been on more times now....
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
At least in 1997 the PM didn't lie to you.
Apart from about his affair with Edwina Currie, of course.
Was he accused of it? I don't think it readily occurred to anyone, tbh.
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
At least in 1997 the PM didn't lie to you.
Apart from about his affair with Edwina Currie, of course.
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
At least in 1997 the PM didn't lie to you.
Apart from about his affair with Edwina Currie, of course.
Was he accused of it? I don't think it readily occurred to anyone, tbh.
Well, no, which is where my quip falls down. But it’s interesting that Johnson receives huge opprobrium for having affairs, while Major does not. You can argue scale is different, but both cheated on their wives.
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
At least in 1997 the PM didn't lie to you.
Apart from about his affair with Edwina Currie, of course.
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
At least in 1997 the PM didn't lie to you.
Apart from about his affair with Edwina Currie, of course.
Was he accused of it? I don't think it readily occurred to anyone, tbh.
It came out when Currie published her diaries, in 2012. There was no public knowledge of the affair before that.
'Conservative MP Andrew Bridgen is now speaking to Sky News. He has said he will run to become part of the 1922 Committee, which governs the parliamentary party of the Tories, in a bid to get the rules changed to allow another confidence vote on Boris Johnson’s leadership. [...]
“Changing the rules of the 1922 committee or even threatening it, is something Boris Johnson did for Theresa May.”'
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
At least in 1997 the PM didn't lie to you.
Apart from about his affair with Edwina Currie, of course.
Do you mind? Some of us are having lunch.
Eggs, I assume?
Salmon, and it's an Ella fa job to eat when given that mental image.
Fckn hell, just listening to Any Questions from Lerwick, the SNP panel member stuck in Inverness due to to a cancelled flight is utterly, and I mean utterly, inaudilble. You'd think after 2 two and a half years of Covid that a world beating broadcasting company would have sorted out distance contributions.
A truly embarrassing performance. Made worse by the fact that in the week of T and H and being in Shetland the BBC could not find a Lib Dem panel member.
That's not uncommon. The BBC have ceased to include the libdems on anything like a regular basis for a long time. I think Lee Mack has been on more times now....
Also did you notice on QT the another night? Mick lynch was anserwing a question and he was interrupted by Fiona Bruce to say that she had to put the government's view over something he said. Two things wrong there:
1) You should never interrupt anyone in there time slot
2) The BBC should not be putting one party's view, especially when there was a gov minister on the panel!
NYT ($) - Kavanaugh Gave Private Assurances. Collins Says He ‘Misled’ Her. “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge,” the justice told the senator in a discussion on Roe, according to notes from a meeting before his confirmation.
During a two-hour meeting in her Senate office with the Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Aug. 21, 2018, Senator Susan Collins of Maine pressed him hard on why she should trust him not to overturn Roe v. Wade if she backed his confirmation.
Judge Kavanaugh worked vigorously to reassure her that he was no threat to the landmark abortion rights ruling.
“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”
SSI - Personally no great fan of Sen. Collins. Do believe she is NOT a habitual liar, however.
In that respect, quite unlike Justice Brent "Sex on the Beach" Kavanaugh.
What a parcel of rogues on the SCOTUS!
I watched the hearings on that guy and could not believe he was being considered for a big important job requiring intellect and maturity.
Was he chosen solely for his hackneyed right wing politics and pliability?
Fckn hell, just listening to Any Questions from Lerwick, the SNP panel member stuck in Inverness due to to a cancelled flight is utterly, and I mean utterly, inaudilble. You'd think after 2 two and a half years of Covid that a world beating broadcasting company would have sorted out distance contributions.
A truly embarrassing performance. Made worse by the fact that in the week of T and H and being in Shetland the BBC could not find a Lib Dem panel member.
That's not uncommon. The BBC have ceased to include the libdems on anything like a regular basis for a long time. I think Lee Mack has been on more times now....
Also did you notice on QT the another night? Mick lynch was anserwing a question and he was interrupted by Fiona Bruce to say that she had to put the government's view over something he said. Two things wrong there:
1) You should never interrupt anyone in there time slot
2) The BBC should not be putting one party's view, especially when there was a gov minister on the panel!
1) does not seem a rule that is observed that often
'Conservative MP Andrew Bridgen is now speaking to Sky News. He has said he will run to become part of the 1922 Committee, which governs the parliamentary party of the Tories, in a bid to get the rules changed to allow another confidence vote on Boris Johnson’s leadership. [...]
“Changing the rules of the 1922 committee or even threatening it, is something Boris Johnson did for Theresa May.”'
Incidentally, 58% of electricity currently from wind or solar. Just 16% from gas.
If only every day was like this...
It’s quite inspiring. I remember as a kid seeing a wind turbine above Ilfracombe (late 80’s). I didn’t really appreciate how vital and widespread they would become.
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
They're pretty stupid if they didn't think there was a good chance they would lose the seat. Nearly everyone on here thought it was a strong possibility.
As a group they seem unable to think ahead. Even if they had won T and H the problem would remain. And only a couple of weeks ago having the one and only chance to have a fairly bloodless coup they didn't take it.
Politics is like Test cricket. To win you have to take your catches, and you can't predict when they will come. Tory MPs faced with a dead easy catch to get Boris out fumbled it.
Like SNP voters in 2014. And unlike Brexiteers in 2016 - who saw that however unsatisfactory the process, and however tough the next sessions would be, the catch had to be taken because they would never get another chance.
NYT ($) - Kavanaugh Gave Private Assurances. Collins Says He ‘Misled’ Her. “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge,” the justice told the senator in a discussion on Roe, according to notes from a meeting before his confirmation.
During a two-hour meeting in her Senate office with the Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Aug. 21, 2018, Senator Susan Collins of Maine pressed him hard on why she should trust him not to overturn Roe v. Wade if she backed his confirmation.
Judge Kavanaugh worked vigorously to reassure her that he was no threat to the landmark abortion rights ruling.
“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”
SSI - Personally no great fan of Sen. Collins. Do believe she is NOT a habitual liar, however.
In that respect, quite unlike Justice Brent "Sex on the Beach" Kavanaugh.
What a parcel of rogues on the SCOTUS!
I watched the hearings on that guy and could not believe he was being considered for a big important job requiring intellect and maturity.
Was he chosen solely for his hackneyed right wing politics and pliability?
It was rather weird to see those opposed to his nomination obsessed by how he behaved as a student a quarter of a century earlier, rather than on his view of law, precedent, and recent judgements.
'Conservative MP Andrew Bridgen is now speaking to Sky News. He has said he will run to become part of the 1922 Committee, which governs the parliamentary party of the Tories, in a bid to get the rules changed to allow another confidence vote on Boris Johnson’s leadership. [...]
“Changing the rules of the 1922 committee or even threatening it, is something Boris Johnson did for Theresa May.”'
I heard that's what triggered her to resign. She was told they were going to change the rules and she'd lose the resulting conf vote.
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
At least in 1997 the PM didn't lie to you.
Apart from about his affair with Edwina Currie, of course.
Was he accused of it? I don't think it readily occurred to anyone, tbh.
Well, no, which is where my quip falls down. But it’s interesting that Johnson receives huge opprobrium for having affairs, while Major does not. You can argue scale is different, but both cheated on their wives.
I don't think anyone gives much of a fig about politicians having affairs these days. Ironically, the last bastions of people who do - the DUP for example - tend to fawn the most over Boris.
'Conservative MP Andrew Bridgen is now speaking to Sky News. He has said he will run to become part of the 1922 Committee, which governs the parliamentary party of the Tories, in a bid to get the rules changed to allow another confidence vote on Boris Johnson’s leadership. [...]
“Changing the rules of the 1922 committee or even threatening it, is something Boris Johnson did for Theresa May.”'
I heard that's what triggered her to resign. She was told they were going to change the rules and she'd lose the resulting conf vote.
Be interesting to see if that works on the substantial canid.
NYT ($) - Kavanaugh Gave Private Assurances. Collins Says He ‘Misled’ Her. “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge,” the justice told the senator in a discussion on Roe, according to notes from a meeting before his confirmation.
During a two-hour meeting in her Senate office with the Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Aug. 21, 2018, Senator Susan Collins of Maine pressed him hard on why she should trust him not to overturn Roe v. Wade if she backed his confirmation.
Judge Kavanaugh worked vigorously to reassure her that he was no threat to the landmark abortion rights ruling.
“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”
SSI - Personally no great fan of Sen. Collins. Do believe she is NOT a habitual liar, however.
In that respect, quite unlike Justice Brent "Sex on the Beach" Kavanaugh.
What a parcel of rogues on the SCOTUS!
I watched the hearings on that guy and could not believe he was being considered for a big important job requiring intellect and maturity.
Was he chosen solely for his hackneyed right wing politics and pliability?
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
At least in 1997 the PM didn't lie to you.
Apart from about his affair with Edwina Currie, of course.
Was he accused of it? I don't think it readily occurred to anyone, tbh.
It came out when Currie published her diaries, in 2012. There was no public knowledge of the affair before that.
Didn’t spitting image run a skit where Major was shagging Virginia Bottomley? I remember watching an interview with the writers where they talked about how they were considering picking Edwina Currie for the skit but eventually picked Bottomley because of the name.
Fckn hell, just listening to Any Questions from Lerwick, the SNP panel member stuck in Inverness due to to a cancelled flight is utterly, and I mean utterly, inaudilble. You'd think after 2 two and a half years of Covid that a world beating broadcasting company would have sorted out distance contributions.
A truly embarrassing performance. Made worse by the fact that in the week of T and H and being in Shetland the BBC could not find a Lib Dem panel member.
A fair point, particularly in a Shetland setting. I thought Jen Stout was a pretty good voice of reason.
Incidentally, 58% of electricity currently from wind or solar. Just 16% from gas.
If only every day was like this...
But as I pointed out either yesterday or the day before it isn't. Solar was generating more than wind, and gas was about half.
And that's the big issue was have at the moment.
Surely the way forward is a mixed future. The more we can exploit the renewables the better. It reduces the costs and letting us stockpile the LNG. I remember in the 80s they were using discarded oilwells and gas wells off Norwich to store Natural Gas. I wonder if they are still doing that.
Also I notice we are at 60% renewable and we are selling 10% abroad. The interconnectors will help smooth out peaks and troughs
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
At least in 1997 the PM didn't lie to you.
Apart from about his affair with Edwina Currie, of course.
Was he accused of it? I don't think it readily occurred to anyone, tbh.
Well, no, which is where my quip falls down. But it’s interesting that Johnson receives huge opprobrium for having affairs, while Major does not. You can argue scale is different, but both cheated on their wives.
I don't think anyone gives much of a fig about politicians having affairs these days. Ironically, the last bastions of people who do - the DUP for example - tend to fawn the most over Boris.
You may not, but millions disagree. Older generations certainly. And Johnson is constantly assailed for it.
Fckn hell, just listening to Any Questions from Lerwick, the SNP panel member stuck in Inverness due to to a cancelled flight is utterly, and I mean utterly, inaudilble. You'd think after 2 two and a half years of Covid that a world beating broadcasting company would have sorted out distance contributions.
A truly embarrassing performance. Made worse by the fact that in the week of T and H and being in Shetland the BBC could not find a Lib Dem panel member.
That's not uncommon. The BBC have ceased to include the libdems on anything like a regular basis for a long time. I think Lee Mack has been on more times now....
Also did you notice on QT the another night? Mick lynch was anserwing a question and he was interrupted by Fiona Bruce to say that she had to put the government's view over something he said. Two things wrong there:
1) You should never interrupt anyone in there time slot
2) The BBC should not be putting one party's view, especially when there was a gov minister on the panel!
1) does not seem a rule that is observed that often
NYT ($) - Kavanaugh Gave Private Assurances. Collins Says He ‘Misled’ Her. “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge,” the justice told the senator in a discussion on Roe, according to notes from a meeting before his confirmation.
During a two-hour meeting in her Senate office with the Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Aug. 21, 2018, Senator Susan Collins of Maine pressed him hard on why she should trust him not to overturn Roe v. Wade if she backed his confirmation.
Judge Kavanaugh worked vigorously to reassure her that he was no threat to the landmark abortion rights ruling.
“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”
SSI - Personally no great fan of Sen. Collins. Do believe she is NOT a habitual liar, however.
In that respect, quite unlike Justice Brent "Sex on the Beach" Kavanaugh.
What a parcel of rogues on the SCOTUS!
I watched the hearings on that guy and could not believe he was being considered for a big important job requiring intellect and maturity.
Was he chosen solely for his hackneyed right wing politics and pliability?
It was rather weird to see those opposed to his nomination obsessed by how he behaved as a student a quarter of a century earlier, rather than on his view of law, precedent, and recent judgements.
Maybe because he was quite content to lie about these matters and the evidence was less clear cut.
NYT ($) - Kavanaugh Gave Private Assurances. Collins Says He ‘Misled’ Her. “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge,” the justice told the senator in a discussion on Roe, according to notes from a meeting before his confirmation.
During a two-hour meeting in her Senate office with the Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Aug. 21, 2018, Senator Susan Collins of Maine pressed him hard on why she should trust him not to overturn Roe v. Wade if she backed his confirmation.
Judge Kavanaugh worked vigorously to reassure her that he was no threat to the landmark abortion rights ruling.
“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”
SSI - Personally no great fan of Sen. Collins. Do believe she is NOT a habitual liar, however.
In that respect, quite unlike Justice Brent "Sex on the Beach" Kavanaugh.
What a parcel of rogues on the SCOTUS!
I watched the hearings on that guy and could not believe he was being considered for a big important job requiring intellect and maturity.
Was he chosen solely for his hackneyed right wing politics and pliability?
From memory it started off as a standard Trumpian own-the-libs ploy and became almost immediately a massive must-win battle in the culture war.
NYT ($) - Kavanaugh Gave Private Assurances. Collins Says He ‘Misled’ Her. “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge,” the justice told the senator in a discussion on Roe, according to notes from a meeting before his confirmation.
During a two-hour meeting in her Senate office with the Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Aug. 21, 2018, Senator Susan Collins of Maine pressed him hard on why she should trust him not to overturn Roe v. Wade if she backed his confirmation.
Judge Kavanaugh worked vigorously to reassure her that he was no threat to the landmark abortion rights ruling.
“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”
SSI - Personally no great fan of Sen. Collins. Do believe she is NOT a habitual liar, however.
In that respect, quite unlike Justice Brent "Sex on the Beach" Kavanaugh.
What a parcel of rogues on the SCOTUS!
I watched the hearings on that guy and could not believe he was being considered for a big important job requiring intellect and maturity.
Was he chosen solely for his hackneyed right wing politics and pliability?
It was rather weird to see those opposed to his nomination obsessed by how he behaved as a student a quarter of a century earlier, rather than on his view of law, precedent, and recent judgements.
For quite good reasons we rarely think about the amazingly high quality of the UK judiciary. This is on public display daily on the excellent
Oh and my mother's health suddenly deteriorated after the first jab so she's now a shadow of her former self, still keep silent and keep the money flowing in foxy
What is quote comic about the trolling, is that to think that anyone is in the NHS for 'all the free flowing money' is just absurd. Which can only lead me to believe whilst your English is good, you seem to be missing some cultural information from your employers.
As just a casual lurker here who seldom posts, your consist pokes towards Foxy just see so far off base. Foxy posts are always worth reading and they come across as a dedicated medical professional.
Bit surprised there isn't a rate limiting option for new posters, certainly in your case quantity is definitely impacting quality
Cheers, MrB
Always good to see Bristols. 👍🏻
I never realised you were a lady of such refined tastes
NYT ($) - Kavanaugh Gave Private Assurances. Collins Says He ‘Misled’ Her. “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge,” the justice told the senator in a discussion on Roe, according to notes from a meeting before his confirmation.
During a two-hour meeting in her Senate office with the Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Aug. 21, 2018, Senator Susan Collins of Maine pressed him hard on why she should trust him not to overturn Roe v. Wade if she backed his confirmation.
Judge Kavanaugh worked vigorously to reassure her that he was no threat to the landmark abortion rights ruling.
“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”
SSI - Personally no great fan of Sen. Collins. Do believe she is NOT a habitual liar, however.
In that respect, quite unlike Justice Brent "Sex on the Beach" Kavanaugh.
What a parcel of rogues on the SCOTUS!
I watched the hearings on that guy and could not believe he was being considered for a big important job requiring intellect and maturity.
Was he chosen solely for his hackneyed right wing politics and pliability?
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
At least in 1997 the PM didn't lie to you.
Apart from about his affair with Edwina Currie, of course.
Was he accused of it? I don't think it readily occurred to anyone, tbh.
It came out when Currie published her diaries, in 2012. There was no public knowledge of the affair before that.
Didn’t spitting image run a skit where Major was shagging Virginia Bottomley? I remember watching an interview with the writers where they talked about how they were considering picking Edwina Currie for the skit but eventually picked Bottomley because of the name.
Oh wow, imagine if it had come up because of a comedy sketch - that didn’t know anything, but just did it at random.
Fckn hell, just listening to Any Questions from Lerwick, the SNP panel member stuck in Inverness due to to a cancelled flight is utterly, and I mean utterly, inaudilble. You'd think after 2 two and a half years of Covid that a world beating broadcasting company would have sorted out distance contributions.
A truly embarrassing performance. Made worse by the fact that in the week of T and H and being in Shetland the BBC could not find a Lib Dem panel member.
A fair point, particularly in a Shetland setting. I thought Jen Stout was a pretty good voice of reason.
Do you know why she lives in Moscow? To follow up on my previous point there were Con and Lab panel members even though they go 3.59% and 1.29% in the Shetland by-election in 2019 (The Lib Dems got 47.86%).
Incidentally, 58% of electricity currently from wind or solar. Just 16% from gas.
If only every day was like this...
But as I pointed out either yesterday or the day before it isn't. Solar was generating more than wind, and gas was about half.
And that's the big issue was have at the moment.
Which is why I would like to know which fucking idiot vetoed tidal.
I am not as pro- tidal lagoons as some on here are.
regardless of your personal views, it was still a terrible decision made by idiots. Like scrapping the HS2 eastern leg.
Tides may increase or decrease, and they have environmental impacts of their own, but they're fully domestic and there's a consistent minimum there to work with.
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
At least in 1997 the PM didn't lie to you.
Apart from about his affair with Edwina Currie, of course.
Was he accused of it? I don't think it readily occurred to anyone, tbh.
Well, no, which is where my quip falls down. But it’s interesting that Johnson receives huge opprobrium for having affairs, while Major does not. You can argue scale is different, but both cheated on their wives.
I don't think anyone gives much of a fig about politicians having affairs these days. Ironically, the last bastions of people who do - the DUP for example - tend to fawn the most over Boris.
You may not, but millions disagree. Older generations certainly. And Johnson is constantly assailed for it.
Doesn't Boris get the biggest chunk of his support from the older generation?
NYT ($) - Kavanaugh Gave Private Assurances. Collins Says He ‘Misled’ Her. “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge,” the justice told the senator in a discussion on Roe, according to notes from a meeting before his confirmation.
During a two-hour meeting in her Senate office with the Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Aug. 21, 2018, Senator Susan Collins of Maine pressed him hard on why she should trust him not to overturn Roe v. Wade if she backed his confirmation.
Judge Kavanaugh worked vigorously to reassure her that he was no threat to the landmark abortion rights ruling.
“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”
SSI - Personally no great fan of Sen. Collins. Do believe she is NOT a habitual liar, however.
In that respect, quite unlike Justice Brent "Sex on the Beach" Kavanaugh.
What a parcel of rogues on the SCOTUS!
I watched the hearings on that guy and could not believe he was being considered for a big important job requiring intellect and maturity.
Was he chosen solely for his hackneyed right wing politics and pliability?
It was rather weird to see those opposed to his nomination obsessed by how he behaved as a student a quarter of a century earlier, rather than on his view of law, precedent, and recent judgements.
For quite good reasons we rarely think about the amazingly high quality of the UK judiciary. This is on public display daily on the excellent
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
At least in 1997 the PM didn't lie to you.
Apart from about his affair with Edwina Currie, of course.
NYT ($) - Kavanaugh Gave Private Assurances. Collins Says He ‘Misled’ Her. “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge,” the justice told the senator in a discussion on Roe, according to notes from a meeting before his confirmation.
During a two-hour meeting in her Senate office with the Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Aug. 21, 2018, Senator Susan Collins of Maine pressed him hard on why she should trust him not to overturn Roe v. Wade if she backed his confirmation.
Judge Kavanaugh worked vigorously to reassure her that he was no threat to the landmark abortion rights ruling.
“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”
SSI - Personally no great fan of Sen. Collins. Do believe she is NOT a habitual liar, however.
In that respect, quite unlike Justice Brent "Sex on the Beach" Kavanaugh.
What a parcel of rogues on the SCOTUS!
This is all horrendous. The whole point of being a judge is that though you bring to it your whole life and experience you don't come to public judgement on any litigable issue until you have heard all sides and considered all the arguments. Not rushing to judgement is exactly what judges are uniquely asked to do.
Well let's take a sunnier view. Perhaps Brett came to it with an open mind, left all his biases in a jar by the door, then applied his intellectual rigor, knowledge of the law, and basic old fashioned commonsense and humanity to the facts of the case and came to his decision accordingly.
Fckn hell, just listening to Any Questions from Lerwick, the SNP panel member stuck in Inverness due to to a cancelled flight is utterly, and I mean utterly, inaudilble. You'd think after 2 two and a half years of Covid that a world beating broadcasting company would have sorted out distance contributions.
A truly embarrassing performance. Made worse by the fact that in the week of T and H and being in Shetland the BBC could not find a Lib Dem panel member.
That's not uncommon. The BBC have ceased to include the libdems on anything like a regular basis for a long time. I think Lee Mack has been on more times now....
Also did you notice on QT the another night? Mick lynch was anserwing a question and he was interrupted by Fiona Bruce to say that she had to put the government's view over something he said. Two things wrong there:
1) You should never interrupt anyone in there time slot
2) The BBC should not be putting one party's view, especially when there was a gov minister on the panel!
1) does not seem a rule that is observed that often
true, but not by the presenter surely?
When I watch, and that’s not often lately, the presenter is constantly interrupting.
NYT ($) - Kavanaugh Gave Private Assurances. Collins Says He ‘Misled’ Her. “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge,” the justice told the senator in a discussion on Roe, according to notes from a meeting before his confirmation.
During a two-hour meeting in her Senate office with the Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Aug. 21, 2018, Senator Susan Collins of Maine pressed him hard on why she should trust him not to overturn Roe v. Wade if she backed his confirmation.
Judge Kavanaugh worked vigorously to reassure her that he was no threat to the landmark abortion rights ruling.
“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”
SSI - Personally no great fan of Sen. Collins. Do believe she is NOT a habitual liar, however.
In that respect, quite unlike Justice Brent "Sex on the Beach" Kavanaugh.
What a parcel of rogues on the SCOTUS!
I watched the hearings on that guy and could not believe he was being considered for a big important job requiring intellect and maturity.
Was he chosen solely for his hackneyed right wing politics and pliability?
It was rather weird to see those opposed to his nomination obsessed by how he behaved as a student a quarter of a century earlier, rather than on his view of law, precedent, and recent judgements.
For quite good reasons we rarely think about the amazingly high quality of the UK judiciary. This is on public display daily on the excellent
Conservative backbencher: “They are going bloody mental on the WhatsApp group. We didn’t think for one moment that we were going to lose [Tiverton & Honiton]. Voters are lying on the doorstep, like they did in 1997.” https://apple.news/A0HSg-LVZRjCWvulI-qPfHQ
At least in 1997 the PM didn't lie to you.
Apart from about his affair with Edwina Currie, of course.
Was he accused of it? I don't think it readily occurred to anyone, tbh.
It came out when Currie published her diaries, in 2012. There was no public knowledge of the affair before that.
Didn’t spitting image run a skit where Major was shagging Virginia Bottomley? I remember watching an interview with the writers where they talked about how they were considering picking Edwina Currie for the skit but eventually picked Bottomley because of the name.
Oh wow, imagine if it had come up because of a comedy sketch - that didn’t know anything, but just did it at random.
Incidentally, 58% of electricity currently from wind or solar. Just 16% from gas.
If only every day was like this...
But as I pointed out either yesterday or the day before it isn't. Solar was generating more than wind, and gas was about half.
And that's the big issue was have at the moment.
Surely the way forward is a mixed future. The more we can exploit the renewables the better. It reduces the costs and letting us stockpile the LNG. I remember in the 80s they were using discarded oilwells and gas wells off Norwich to store Natural Gas. I wonder if they are still doing that.
Also I notice we are at 60% renewable and we are selling 10% abroad. The interconnectors will help smooth out peaks and troughs
We are at 60% renewables at the moment. People always seem to discuss this when the renewables number is high; they are much quieter when it is very low.
I agree a mix is required.
As an aside, the following by the late David MacKay is well worth a read for anyone wanting to learn about renewables. It's very readable.
I wish someone could update it with the latest data.
"Would you like to see Supreme Court overturn its RoeVsWade decision or not?"
All Americans Yes 32% No 50%"
This from the Economist and YouGov.
The SC has handed the matter to the voters, just as in the UK. On those figures it shouldn't be too hard for Americans to sort the matter in a sensible liberal direction if they bother to vote. if they don't bother to vote for what they want they can't object.
NYT ($) - Kavanaugh Gave Private Assurances. Collins Says He ‘Misled’ Her. “I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge,” the justice told the senator in a discussion on Roe, according to notes from a meeting before his confirmation.
During a two-hour meeting in her Senate office with the Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Aug. 21, 2018, Senator Susan Collins of Maine pressed him hard on why she should trust him not to overturn Roe v. Wade if she backed his confirmation.
Judge Kavanaugh worked vigorously to reassure her that he was no threat to the landmark abortion rights ruling.
“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”
SSI - Personally no great fan of Sen. Collins. Do believe she is NOT a habitual liar, however.
In that respect, quite unlike Justice Brent "Sex on the Beach" Kavanaugh.
What a parcel of rogues on the SCOTUS!
I watched the hearings on that guy and could not believe he was being considered for a big important job requiring intellect and maturity.
Was he chosen solely for his hackneyed right wing politics and pliability?
It was rather weird to see those opposed to his nomination obsessed by how he behaved as a student a quarter of a century earlier, rather than on his view of law, precedent, and recent judgements.
That student stuff didn't sound great but I was more struck by the palpable mediocrity of the man, plus the brittle tetchy temperament. I remember thinking, jeez, I wouldn't want this bloke on a magistrates bench but he's up for America's supreme court!
"Would you like to see Supreme Court overturn its RoeVsWade decision or not?"
All Americans Yes 32% No 50%"
This from the Economist and YouGov.
The SC has handed the matter to the voters, just as in the UK. On those figures it shouldn't be too hard for Americans to sort the matter in a sensible liberal direction if they bother to vote. if they don't bother to vote for what they want they can't object.
I refer you to this comment from @Alistair this morning, and this isn't the only state like this.
In the Wisconsin state Assembly election in 2018 the Dems got 53% of the vote to 45% for the GOP.
A margin of 8 points.
There are 99 seats in the Assembly - the GOP won 63 of them for a 27 seat majority. Despite being 8 points behind. As of 2018 It was estimated that the Dems would need to win statewide by 14 points to get a bare majority of 1 seat (my own calculation has it needing to be higher but I defer to the experts on this). The districts have been further gerrymandered since then making the 2022 figure they need to hit some absurd target.
Comments
https://peckhampeculiar.tumblr.com/post/165858980814/grandmas-georgian-stew
“It’s like a disease,” one MP told i. “The Prime Minister is infecting the Cabinet, and if the Tory party doesn’t act in the next six months we will all be infected by him."
All stuff which has already happened. How dim are Tory mps?
It would indeed be good to cast the net wider, but there’s no longer the budget to ask three companies to design a prototype aircraft, and then selecting one for production - which is where the collection at Cosford originated.
Personally I think it's because there's no competition. Some of the materials needed are hard and expensive to work with, but that just tells me we need more consumers.
The following Oryx article puts the case for TB2-style drones:
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2021/12/turning-tables-uks-case-for-buying.html
https://classiccarweekly.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/1988-bristol-beaufighter.jpg
There were originally going to be 132 B2 Spirit planes built (the US stealth bomber). That was reduced to 75, and then in 1992 down to 20. All the development costs of the plane are split between fewer airframes, meaning that costings that include dev costs inflate massively. In the end the B2 project may end up costing $2 billion per airframe.
Basically: the fewer of something you end up making, the greater the cost of the project per unit if you include dev costs.
“I am a don’t-rock-the-boat kind of judge,” the justice told the senator in a discussion on Roe, according to notes from a meeting before his confirmation.
During a two-hour meeting in her Senate office with the Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Aug. 21, 2018, Senator Susan Collins of Maine pressed him hard on why she should trust him not to overturn Roe v. Wade if she backed his confirmation.
Judge Kavanaugh worked vigorously to reassure her that he was no threat to the landmark abortion rights ruling.
“Start with my record, my respect for precedent, my belief that it is rooted in the Constitution, and my commitment and its importance to the rule of law,” he said, according to contemporaneous notes kept by multiple staff members in the meeting. “I understand precedent and I understand the importance of overturning it.”
SSI - Personally no great fan of Sen. Collins. Do believe she is NOT a habitual liar, however.
In that respect, quite unlike Justice Brent "Sex on the Beach" Kavanaugh.
What a parcel of rogues on the SCOTUS!
*places self by gallows and awaits justice*
Im bored waiting for Boris to bog off
If the military had commissioned the iPhone it'd be a million dollars a pop. Actually much more.
Especially as he had zero clue the good doctor was a doctor until me & doc told him.
Plus deeply offensive (to me) for him (or it or them or what-have-you) to adopt a Hibernian nom de bot.
https://www.mcgettigans.com/jlt-dubai/whats-on/halfway-to-christmas.html
Christmas food and drink, fancy dress and music. In Dubai in June!
And I see you have your name on the personalised number plate. Nice work.
They'd also bin their processors much more stringently than any consumer project. (Kerching to the fabs!)
There's also the problem that if you're only making a handful of things, you really don't want them to fail. In consumer electronics, a return rate of 1% (defects) was not uncommon twenty years ago for cheap stuff -though I believe it has improved since.
In other words, 1% of units would fail within warranty. But as they're cheap as chips, it didn't matter much.
If you are only making 10 of something, as opposed to two million, then you cannot afford outright failures. This means you spend much, much more on trying to make certain that the thing you produce works. Costs escalate as you try to get components to 99.999999999% reliability. And you need systems to detect potential failures, and redundancy to protect against them. And rigorous test and maintenance of components whilst in use.
This is understandable for crewed systems: you do not want to lose people. But does it matter as much for unmanned systems? If the system is much cheaper, and you have more of them, the loss of one does not hurt as much. This then becomes a virtuous cycle: the more you make of them, the cheaper you can make the design.
And the more you make, the more you learn about the design on how to make it more reliable and cheaper.
A frayed, undependable lifeline at times. Yet it allowed the clans of the Black mountain to hold out, survive and eventually outlast the Turks as a bulwark of Orthodoxy and Slavdom. (Or Serbism if you prefer BUT that is a topic best not raised with locals on first acquaintance.) Despite fighting like crazy cats in a small bag among themselves.
Which is why we have Ukranians 3D-printing fins that turn hand grenades into air-dropped weapons, from consumer drones.
https://dronedj.com/2022/05/04/video-tweet-credits-phantom-3-in-ukraine-grenade-drop-through-russian-sunroof/
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2022-06-24-new-study-finds-politicians-typically-enjoy-longer-lives-general-populations
'Conservative MP Andrew Bridgen is now speaking to Sky News. He has said he will run to become part of the 1922 Committee, which governs the parliamentary party of the Tories, in a bid to get the rules changed to allow another confidence vote on Boris Johnson’s leadership. [...]
“Changing the rules of the 1922 committee or even threatening it, is something Boris Johnson did for Theresa May.”'
If only every day was like this...
1) You should never interrupt anyone in there time slot
2) The BBC should not be putting one party's view, especially when there was a gov minister on the panel!
Was he chosen solely for his hackneyed right wing politics and pliability?
And that's the big issue was have at the moment.
Politics is like Test cricket. To win you have to take your catches, and you can't predict when they will come. Tory MPs faced with a dead easy catch to get Boris out fumbled it.
Like SNP voters in 2014. And unlike Brexiteers in 2016 - who saw that however unsatisfactory the process, and however tough the next sessions would be, the catch had to be taken because they would never get another chance.
I thought Jen Stout was a pretty good voice of reason.
Also I notice we are at 60% renewable and we are selling 10% abroad. The interconnectors will help smooth out peaks and troughs
https://www.bailii.org/
website.
Try a few Court of Appeal and Court of Appeal (Crim Div) judgments.The standard is awesome.
Tides may increase or decrease, and they have environmental impacts of their own, but they're fully domestic and there's a consistent minimum there to work with.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61934851
I agree a mix is required.
As an aside, the following by the late David MacKay is well worth a read for anyone wanting to learn about renewables. It's very readable.
I wish someone could update it with the latest data.
http://www.withouthotair.com/
All Americans
Yes 32%
No 50%"
This from the Economist and YouGov.
The SC has handed the matter to the voters, just as in the UK. On those figures it shouldn't be too hard for Americans to sort the matter in a sensible liberal direction if they bother to vote. if they don't bother to vote for what they want they can't object.
After only a day
And 150 posts
You have run out of puff
And hit the buff-
Ers.
In the Wisconsin state Assembly election in 2018 the Dems got 53% of the vote to 45% for the GOP.
A margin of 8 points.
There are 99 seats in the Assembly - the GOP won 63 of them for a 27 seat majority. Despite being 8 points behind. As of 2018 It was estimated that the Dems would need to win statewide by 14 points to get a bare majority of 1 seat (my own calculation has it needing to be higher but I defer to the experts on this). The districts have been further gerrymandered since then making the 2022 figure they need to hit some absurd target.