Chelt

Wicked. Thank you!

I'm trying to get CMAK/CMBB back up and running on my old PowerBook G4. Trouble is, that machine has the ATI Mobility Radeon 9000 graphics card, the one with the driver problem. ATI issued a patch that fixed the drivers, but I can't find the patch anymore. The troubleshooting page (http://www.battlefront.com/products/cmbb/troubleshooting.html#Mac) points to a page of the ATI site that no longer exists. It looks as if AMD deleted a lot of the old ATI support files after the companies merged. Does anyone have a copy of the patch for MacOS 9? I think that it was just an extension, maybe an associated control panel. (Post probably belongs in the technical support forum, but there are Russian thistles blowing around in there.) Thanks!

There is something very strange about the narration on that piece. The speaker sounds like an American affecting a British accent, sometimes going Scottish, sometimes sounding more like a Mainer. He halts in awkward places, giving the impression that he has rarely read from a script. He lacks have the controlled tone that characterizes narration of the period. Last, the recording of his voice retains detail that I'd expect of a condenser microphone, not the then-common dynamic mics. What was Boat Two?

The presenter in your seminar was, at best, passing on a counterfactual folk-history version of the Challenger disaster. The booster engineers DID speak up; managers discarded the warnings because they deemed the risks acceptable. This from an paper (by one of the lead engineers, published in Engineering Ethics journal) about the incident: "NASA and all the other interested parties, including the managers at Morton Thiokol, knew there were problems. So when the engineers gathered together their charts to make their recommendation the night before the Challenger launch, they went into the room to remind everyone in the chain of command what everyone already knew." And the engineers recommendation? They believed that NASA should hold the launch. That isn't exactly "keeping your mouth shut in order to conform to groupthink." http://www.onlineethics.org/CMS/profpractice/exempindex/RB-intro/RepMisrep.aspx

US vs. US. I'm already planning a series of "Bear Flag Republic" scenarios.

fruchtreis = rice with fruits?

The piece of writing behind that sequence was written by Spec. Colby Buzzell. The National Endowment for the Arts sponsored the "Operation Homecoming" project, creating a collection of soldiers' writing, then bringing the writing together in a book. Buzzell's story was part of that collection. The Documentary Group, funded by PBS and others, later made some of these writings into a "documentary" film of the same name. It's a strange film. The producers set about dramatizing the stories that are read on-screen, not by re-enacting them, but by animating them, or editing together still image sequences. The Men in Black sequence is one of the better ones, I think. In many of the others, the strength of the imagery overpowers the words, which are the "actuality" here. The film aired a few weeks ago as part of a PBS series about life after 9/11, America at a Crossroads. There are a few more videos on the PBS site, and the quality is (I think) better than the flash-video-player site's. The other films that are part of America at a Crossroads are worth viewing.

Quoth Battlefront.com: Does this mean that a scenario designer can instruct a group of units to hold a position, but to withdraw if they take a certain level of casualties? So that engagements need not become mondo-battles-to-the-death? Is there any way to make the AI break off an attack if losses become too high?

John Kettler: Does a battleship move sideways when she fires? Battleship: 35,000 tons Broadside: 18 tons, ballpark figure I don't think so. More detailed analysis: http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-022.htm

The lack of POWs in American munitions plants is not, you know, a matter of domestic politics. The Hague 1899 and 1907 both forbid the employment of prisoners of war on activities related to military operations.

This spake AdamL: You can't talk about divisions as fixed formations comprising one kind of unit. Not anymore. Most of the regular army has gone over to the new brigade-based structure. There are divisions that mix heavy and Stryker brigades in garrison. When deployed in the field, a division might end up controlling just about any mix of subordinate units. There is no infantry-denser formation. The light infantry brigades have 8 companies of infantry; the SBCT has 9. A heavy brigade has 4. Why does so much of this discussion revolve around the truck itself? All this talk about the merits or faults of the Stryker vehicle ignores the infantry that these vehicles are ferrying around. Forget the hardware and think about the formation itself, for a moment. The brigade is a full-size infantry formation, with enough vehicles to lift its entire strength under armor, considerable direct fire support, and excellent communications. The wheeled APC/IFV is well tested. In the modern US Army, mounted infantry is not.

double post

It's interesting to compare the SBCT organization with the newer modular brigade structures. The Strykers have three maneuver battalions + a strong reconnaissance battalion. Artillery support is at the scale of 3x 155mm batteries; engineer support is just one company; service support includes only one distribution company and four forward spt co. They reflect a "pre-transformation" structure. The new HBCT and IBCT organizations have just two maneuver brigades, with correspondingly reduced artillery support. Battalions are square, with four companies each. What T/O changes would you make to the Stryker brigade so that they could better support CMSF's hypothetical invasion? Would you change anything? The trick in this question is that you may not change the equipment types; if it isn't currently issued to a Stryker brigade, you can't add it. (Maybe, if you must, you can add equipment that is already in service on LAV type vehicles - maybe.) Assume that you can get the money, the time, and the soldiers from the same magical place that the rest of the invasion is coming from. You can cleave to the brigade's role as defined in FM-3-21.31, or you can declare your own. [ March 13, 2007, 06:45 PM: Message edited by: Chelt ]

I've just discovered the US Army Heritage Collection Online: http://www.ahco.army.mil/site/index.jsp The site contains a vast number of historical documents, including manuals from the whole of the 20th century, in PDF form. There are also images and personal documents. It's a bonanza for any curious reader or serious researcher, though the interface is appalling. It's not immediately obvious how one narrows down a search to particular types of documents, periods, or collections. By way of example, here's how I searched for Coast Artillery manuals: - Go to http://www.ahco.army.mil/site/search.jsp - Click on the "search" button - Click on "advanced options" - Under "document fields," uncheck all boxes except for "Published Material" - Click on the "save changes" button - Under "title," enter your search terms, like "Coast". - Press the "Submit Search" button. - You get a listing of results. The site presents manuals as PDFs contained within a frame. If you know how, you can save these PDFs to your hard drive. Try control-clicking on a Mac, or right-clicking under Windows. The files contain watermarks that make them pretty much illegible. If you have a full version of Adobe Acrobat, you can select and then delete the stupid and unnecessary watermarks. (They're US Government documents, so they're in the public-freakin-domain.) [This is a slightly expanded cross-post from the Naval Fiction Board.]

Sarah Michelle Gellar certainly isn't the tallest action heroine.