Jeff Crowell <jeff.crowellSPAMSUX@hp.com> wrote in news:iusv12$eaj$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com: Jeff Crowell wrote: Problem is, since a smaller carrier is less capable, the usual counter-argument is that the smaller birdfarm is less able to defend itself, Jim Yanik wrote: Carriers don't really defend themselves,they have AEGIS cruisers and missile destroyers to do that
On 5/23/2011 7:06 PM, Matt Wiser wrote: On May 23, 4:03 pm, Daryl<dh...@nospami70west3.com> wrote: On 5/23/2011 8:03 AM, hcobb wrote: http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=6531851&c=POL&s=TOP Contrary to popular belief, Shackelford said, a rapid acquisition has to comply with the same basic procedures that a normal program does. The difference, he said
On 5/23/2011 8:03 AM, hcobb wrote: http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=6531851&c=POL&s=TOP Contrary to popular belief, Shackelford said, a rapid acquisition has to comply with the same basic procedures that a normal program does. The difference, he said, is that the oversight of a rapid acquisitions program is greatly streamlined. The oversight bypasses the midlevel management
On May 12, 4:43 am, Bill Shatzer <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote: kirk.st...@gmail.com wrote: P-61 is iteresting possibility. On the German side, what about the He 219? Did any get whacked by Mosquitos, or bombers shooting back? Several. http://www.ejection-history.org.uk/Aircraft_by_Type/heinkel_he_219.htm There is a photo of a He 219 ejections sequence here: http://www
