New Book of Rules
in [Design]
|
From: John Woodgate on 12 Aug 2006 12:26 In message <ebkrc1$odn$3(a)blue.rahul.net>, dated Sat, 12 Aug 2006, Ken Smith <kensmith(a)green.rahul.net> writes >A herd of sheep is often the best way to find landmines. I saw on British TV the other day that they are using trained cane rats in Cambodia (?), who can smell the mines. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk 2006 is YMMVI- Your mileage may vary immensely. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK
From: Phat Bytestard on 12 Aug 2006 12:54 On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 06:50:30 +0100, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> Gave us: > > >Phat Bytestard wrote: > >> On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 13:31:26 -0700, John Larkin >> <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> Gave us: >> >> >Do you have a real name? >> >> Well, I am not a bot, if that is what you are getting at. > >You might as well be. > Funny that I knew you would respond that way. So, by your own definition, I could easily say the same thing about you.
From: Phat Bytestard on 12 Aug 2006 12:58 On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 09:12:15 -0400, Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP(a)interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> Gave us: >> Nixon was a twit. He was solely responsible for 5000 MORE deaths in >>Vietnam than were needed, due to his disdain for "losing face". > >You'll find lots of people today who think that, given the situation, >he should have "stayed the course". No. We should have bombed Hanoi early on, long before Nixon ever entered into it. We were afraid of "escalation".
From: Eeyore on 12 Aug 2006 13:08 Phat Bytestard wrote: > On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 09:12:15 -0400, Spehro Pefhany > <speffSNIP(a)interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> Gave us: > > >> Nixon was a twit. He was solely responsible for 5000 MORE deaths in > >>Vietnam than were needed, due to his disdain for "losing face". > > > >You'll find lots of people today who think that, given the situation, > >he should have "stayed the course". > > No. We should have bombed Hanoi early on, long before Nixon ever > entered into it. We were afraid of "escalation". And what would that have gained you ? Are you afraid of the principle of self-determination ? Graham
From: Mike Monett on 12 Aug 2006 13:31
John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 15:16:17 +0000 (UTC), kensmith(a)green.rahul.net > (Ken Smith) wrote: >>> Like all other ground-penetrating radars used for mine >>> detection, it didn't work very well. >> You could have left out "used for mine detection". GPR works on >> CSI and little else. >> The dirt starts eating up your signal before you get to a GHz. > Plus, there's just too much junk down there. At cm resolution, you > can't tell a mine from a potato from a rock from a beer can. > John GPR seems to work well for the US Army and Marines. They just bought $338 million worth: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ $300M = Over 17,000 Portable Mine-Detectors for US Troops Posted 11-Aug-2006 09:52 In late December 2005, DID noted that the USA has spent $1 billion on humanitarian land-mine removal over the last 10 years. A year ago, on August 16, 2005, we noted a $38 million contract to CyTerra for its AN/PSS-14 (formerly HSTAMIDS) Mine Detection Sets. Someone must have liked them, because L-3 recently announced that its March 2006 acquisition CyTerra has received a 10-year, $300 million contract for over 17,000 more sets as well as Sweep Monitoring Systems for training, Training Target Sets, and worldwide training and support. The value of the first order is approximately $24 million. The US Army and Marines currently have about 2,000 delivered sets in their possession. See corporate release. The AN/PSS-14 employs a state-of-the-art metal detector and ground penetrating radar (GPR), coupled with an advanced microprocessor array and software in order to achieve a high probability of detection (in excess of 95%) for both large and small metallic and even nonmetallic antitank and antipersonnel mines. They've even been used to find underground pipes in civilian applications. It also significantly reduces the number of false targets or alarms. The apparatus weighs approximately eight pounds, uses standard batteries and can be operated by a single Soldier. See this U.S. Army page re all countermine equipment in current use: http://ccsweb.pica.army.mil/2counter/main.htm http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2006/08/300m-over-17000-portable- minedetectors-for-us-troops/index.php ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The AN/PSS-14 Mine Detection Set (formerly known as HSTAMIDS) is a vast improvement over today's metallic handheld mine detectors. It employs a state-of-the-art metal detector and ground penetrating radar (GPR), which are coupled with an advanced microprocessor array and software to achieve a high probability of detection (in excess of 95 percent) for both large and small metallic and nonmetallic antitank and antipersonnel mines. It also significantly reduces the number of false targets or alarms. If a mine is detected, audio cues alert the operator. Built-in warning and test equipment also alerts the operator of potential system malfunctions and assists maintenance personnel in fault identification. The result is a greatly improved system that protects the Soldier and enhances his/her ability to detect landmines. The AN/PSS-14 weighs approximately eight pounds, uses standard batteries and can be operated by a single Soldier. The AN/PSS-14 is also being procured by the U.S. Marine Corps as their Advance Mine Detector. http://ccsweb.pica.army.mil/2counter/anpss14.htm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Regards, Mike Monett Antiviral, Antibacterial Silver Solution: http://silversol.freewebpage.org/index.htm SPICE Analysis of Crystal Oscillators: http://silversol.freewebpage.org/spice/xtal/clapp.htm Noise-Rejecting Wideband Sampler: http://www3.sympatico.ca/add.automation/sampler/intro.htm |