Posts by George 156 publicly visible posts • joined 19 Dec 2007
I know you love the sceptics angle Lewis but really you could have made more clear that actually the ship is quite a few months away from deployment and therefore we shouldn't expect to be all ready and loaded to go.
Do you love your poo poo of the Telegraph article, sometimes the papers/internet just make stuff up which is just nonsense which irks me.
Until you actually state in real tangible numbers and facts what the benefits are I am not really interested.
Quite frankly improvements in productivity, web functionality and the like are not really good considering the prices they charge, it is really time for facts.
MSN seach hasn't delivered accurate enough results for years so unless Bing does, it will be a Wolfram Aplha lame duck.
No amount of marketing can cover up bad search results.
For example our company comes below about 5 council reports on us (favourable thank god!), how does that happen? On Google, official website is first.
Just to point out to the haters out there that if you provide your handset to a small (or single) provider, you can then get guaranteed service levels agreed. This although losing a small number of customers initially by people who won't change it will mean that your handsets get higher ratings as the customers with those will get higher rated customer service than the great unwashed.
Whether it actaually works in practice or not I don't know but it sounds right in theory.
I think people are getting carried away with the whole multi-role thing.
Just because you fly in bomber config (if there is such a thing, sounds computer gamey to me!) doesn't mean you strap some huge bomb on, take off and just drop it! It was more like adding technology on the flight systems to allow different weapons to be used.
I know because I worked in a place where they tested the concept not the matey up top who wanted to be important. Nobody builds planes based "on old fashioned gumption" anymore, and if anything the Eurofighter comes closest witha great performance envelope only really rivalled by some exotic American kit which I am not mentioning because eveyone will say should have bought that!
The fact is that all these specialised planes we had in the cold war are just relics and nobody wants a hugely expensive plane that does just one job (the yanks thought they did but just cancelled a load of them!). I think we just accept what we got until we get a decent UAV fleet...doesn't make the past right but lets face it we can't change the past!
Not totally though.
Having come from the dark side and worked for a our American but British named friends I believed we were doing the right things for the guys on the front line and we were at office foot soldier level, heck I was proud of what I did. But I have to say my view has been changed since the real problems have come to light and I agree 100% this should have been delayed or cancelled.
As long as we have enough to replace the current aging Tornado and Harrier strike force then Tranche should be developed into a more sophisticated fighter-bomber. With said jamming or bombing or even something more advanced, it will never be a marine carrier fighter though.
Or better still cancel them as said and develop some focused UAVs which the man on the ground can control and cut out the risk of injury. I know that we have several promising ones in the pipeline as long as our wonderful friends at MoD and BAE don't make it cost the earth, and they are as guilty as each other for delays etc.
And it even says that it is more social engineering than anything. For a start the virus should be picked up by a virus scanner not by the user with a different extensions.
MS do a lot wrong but I would say the amount of users now worried about their AV software has shot whereas even around 1 year ago people would use PCs for months without AV.
....I really am tired of the over-sexed-up documentaries that have "secret" documents with "stunning" revelations, "highly classified" with outrageous consequences, because basically its all a load of pap.
The number of documents I have seen on documentaries recently listed like the above and the authors that didn't even have headers or written on the correct paper is ridiculous and the channels should really watch what they are broadcasting, one day it will bite them on the bottom!
So thank you author for highlighting this and for that I give a heart!
Nice to see some being objective about it.
For me, if it runs ok and connects to Terminal Services the users can have it, we are only about 150 users and eveything they need apart from Outlook is Terminal Services hosted. I know not everyone runs like that but seriously if you think that one OS mistake will mean mass uptake of Linux you are not really living in the free world.
Most of the users in the business I work for can just about use Windows, and I mean that like they don't know how to create shortcut or sitting and logging on another doesn't mean all your stuff will work. So it looks like we will be Windows for quite a while, anything else would blow their minds!
Pirate Dave, I do agree with what your saying but if every permutation of a mission going wrong was thought of then nothing would ever get built.
And I believe they could do a trickier but still possible rolling landing with the ship and the plane moving forwards. Its bloomin' hard to do but if anyone can our guys can!
This is good news for the project and hopefully it will be delivered on time....actually hopefully its late so it will be able to tie in with the carrier project which will be (if it isn't already) late.
The ability to have carers log calls to service users by swiping said mobile device which then sends SMS back to base confirming calls.
Why? Because for some unknown reason even turning up at site on time and signing in reliably can be difficult for some carers!
We are looking at implementing this at the moment and NFC looks ideal as there is no external power required and the sensors are pretty small.
Just because you don't use it for Iphone games or your freebies, El Reg, doesn't mean it doesn't have any application to anyone at all.
And that is coming from somebody whose house was bought on this kind of money (not the amount, unfortunately just the source).
The fact that the government co-funds research into something it is going to pay top whack for anyway then something is amiss. Not many other industries work that way. And there needs to be much tougher penalties for late delivery, we have got to the point where it is actually expected to be late, what is the point of building an item of modern equipment if it will be surpassed by the time it is in the field?
And people continuallygo on about F-22, possibly the worst procurement in modern history (although the Type45 isn't finished yet!), an overpriced piece of kit which has limited abilities and limited scope for use. Yes I understand that when there is a war on it would pay for itself maybe but in reality the rest of the world is building muilt-role aircraft.
I think this is great sport, and I love the way politicians are so emboldened now by all the laws they have created for themselves that there is no question of her resigning or Gordon Brown sacking her. He is standing by her and making himself look like a twonk.
At least in Major's day they resigned eventually.
Imagine going to a meeting yesterday knowing that your bosses husband watches porn and you have proof, now that would be a meeting, you could pretend it never happened or just about about him and smirk. Now imagine it for a really very important job and somebody who represents our country...oh dear. Lets hope nobody important is coming to town this week for important meetings.......oh dear.
Wikipedia has killed this but doesn't make it right.
Surely a revenue model could be found for the right kind of respected encyclopedia, Wikipedia is dangerously untrue sometimes, not dangerous as in reading it may cause harm but more crap knowledge is worse and no knowledge.
After all its just a tool for the Army to use, how they use may be different to the idea we all have. What about where you are pinned down in action and therefore pretty risky sticking your head to have a look/direct munitions/buddies to the source, this would be godsend.
And as for the people saying its too late once your shot, you've been playing too many computer games, not every shot kills hits or even goes near the target.
I also think its pretty risky since it would have to be really, really good to distinguish individual weapon types for friend/foe scenarios, we do not want anymore friendly fire!
I thought that was going to safeguard jobs, the defense (the s because our biggest contractor is really from US of A these days) industry is always the governments cornerstone for high-tech industries but barely a mention here.
Lets face this idea is dead in the water since they are looking far too long term, kids can't behave let alone learn at the moment.
Anyway, Dear Government, to save the economy how about getting some of those banks you own to actually lend some money. Ok it may mean some of your old mates have to do some work to calculate risks rather than the all or nothing approach we are used to but hey, that's what friends are for.
...but I only forsee one issue, if there are several grunt officers calling for one asset (death dealing asset!) then how would it make the decision of which is priority. Being able to talk the pilot into a target is a much used tactic and also allows some human thinking and rationilisation on weapon useage.
So what if one grunt fancies laying down some massive firepower on a non-immediate threat but somebody else is up to their neck in it, how does the computer decide?
I have to say the Farnorough show of the Vulcan bit dull, yeah its big and fairly impressive but compared to what the Raptor did, Eurofighter et al it was nothing. Like a moving museum piece.
I would much rather that £1m went to Shooting Star Hospices, they would love that and the kids would be overwhelmed. They were crying when my brother did the marathon for them so this would be like a miracle.
BAE was a great company to work for but it is barely British, the number of American's in the company is growing all the time, even our departments promo videos were changed to have US voice overs. And all the IT is outsourced to CSC who are an American company and all the equipment is shipped from the US no matter where you are...example:
I needed a new laptop for a project (a good Dell XPS one but fairly common you'll agree) in 3 weeks, plenty of time, phone up local CSC contact, no problem will get that sorted. Get a call a week later, problem number one it has to come from the US so it will take 2 weeks, cutting it fine but ok no problem. Next held up at customs, my name on it, you need to pay import duty, out comes card, done. Waiting, getting awful tight on deadlines...it's missing, somewhere in HQ in Aldershot sorry but no chance of finding it for a week as guy is on holiday...I went to PC World and picked one up that afternoon at £300 less than CSC sold it for. Never received the CSC one, but I bet it was paid for anyway.
It admittedly took a long time for me to see that bad in the company as I was on good pay, great conditions and very well looked after, but BAE Systems really has some hollow arguments for gaining work and justifying its existence.
....is surely due to its age not just the fact it can't vertically land?!
Other than that slight technicality all this seems to make good sense for once, surely a rolling landing is easier. And if its a) easier b) involves less engine wear and c) doesn't mean dumping weapons then surely its win all round.
As people above have said this is probably more for a forward command station than actually in a little Targus rucksack. Oh and don't forget these days there is all kinds of counter-terrorism ops where they mingle with the rest of us.
Plus don't black helicopters have have plug points?
Can't speak in detail because thats how it is with my experience in these things but I concur with Adrian. All "stealth" aircraft are low really observability which means that yes they can be tracked but the signature is much smaller or different to what it should be. Any object in the sky can be tracked by radar but the trick is to camoflage the object (much like ground forces) to make it look different and hope that the enemy systems or users mistake it for something else. And as Adrian says there are also avoidance techniques for missing radar stations, it's no coincidence that the B2 has such a high operating ceiling or that the RAF train far more in low level missions. Not to forget some counter-measures like jamming etc. although in practice that is far more likely to alert an enemy to your presence.
Now the longer an aircraft is operated the more the shape becomes recognisable and many modern AA radars can be changed on wavelengths and patterns to recognise the newer aircraft. But they have to see them, observe them and do all that shenanigans.
To be fair stealth is a good word but is over-used probably by people like The Sun, because the planes have never been invisible to radar. Low observability is a much better term.
What they really want is legitimate access to everything rather than going through the longer legal route that has worked for so long.
And thats to say that they couldn't get it covertly anyway, and if they can't that is very worrying since how do we defend ourselves if we can't even intercept basic email and files. I can't imagine MI5 trying to hack in to some where and when it comes up with password required saying "oh no we're screwed Jeeves"
I still don't think we should just open up our data to any government organisation as it always gets abused. Look at the Terrorism Act its been used to spy on people over filling bins.
Just to say I have nothing to hide, worked in defence so clean as anybody can be BUT doesn't mean I want the government to access my data.
I love the idea that so many people say "buy American, buy American" right after slagging them off for not doing the tech transfer deal at the last minute on the F-35. Its simply not feasible to just buy American since the stuff doesn't always suit our needs.
For example the American ships require so much manpower to run and sailwhich we simply do not have available in our forces, thats not just budget cuts but the professional soldier (OK...sailor!) per head count is much higher in US too.
Secondly the most important thing....do they even want to sell one (or the plans to one) don't forget they use them not only in force but in diplomatic terms too (ham fisted I agree but....). So would they want another country parading around in one of theirs?
I don't really think anyone is backing away from the carrier problem and its often presented as an open and shut case in terms of the F-35 which it isn't, both version STOVL and convential carrier is being evaluated but we have a wait and see.
And does anybody really believe they would be allowed to dissolve some active and precious air assets when there is no alternative....would they even want to themselves? They may be a little silly at the MoD but they aren't totally stupid.
This story to me seems like pure speculation and I hope it is.
Nothing like a well-timed bit of scare mongering to make people buy their software.
I don't even need to read it, it goes like this:
"Worlds going to hell in a handcart"
"Unamed and very shadowy groups are waiting to take your business down"
"Are you a technically inept but well meaning CEO...approach your IT department now with the words "I say, those Symantec chaps are jolly clever aren't they, buy their stuff now""
Same every time.
The Eurofighter is not built to combat the threats here and now, as is no sigificant military hardware, that would short sighted and leave you open to a wide range of unanticipated threats.
You wouldn't say "we don't need any tanks because al-qaeda haven't got any" would you? You build the best you can afford and then adapt your tactics.
In fact this short sightedness is what led to huge amounts of Snatch (snigger) Land Rovers without a capable armoured vehicle for other operations. Fair enough the error has been spotted now but lives have been lost.
Please tell as an enlightened reader of El Reg you know how the oversubscribed competition line scams work?
Basically raffle loads of tat (apparently worth £000,000s but really acquired at cost or gratis), then ask a stupidly easy question so millions enter at around £1.50 a pop, you make money, operator makes money everyone happy. Then icing on the cake...send advertising back to users also charging them for the priveledge. If people get uppity offer to give some nominal money from each call (be careful not to say texts) to a charity.
It's rare these days that you find a win-win situation but this is one of those times.
Ofcom and the others should really be looking at this a bit more and shock horror, together.
Aaaah ha, the jolly roger sails the airwaves these days.
...blind people can delete their account on the Reg. Blind people use crossings and are actually far safe than other pedestrians who simply don't realise those big moving metal things kills or realise if we touch them there is a big compo claim coming our way!
Wow, I'm angry today.
Why are politicians always so painfully slow at jumping on the bandwagon? I know they are out of touch but this was all at the beginning of the week, it just reeks of desperate to be known for something other than taking our taxes and wasting them all.
Have you also noticed how none of our politicans are that worried (or even appear to be guinenely concerned) about the market slowdown? No because they have nice fat guaranteed wage!
That sort of armour (note the u 'merikans!) you speak about is the dream of the military but a soft flexible armour capable of deflecting even handguns is some way off.
And special forces tend not wear armour at all when on advanced operations as its often quite restrictive.
I hope it works as it seems a good idea in theory at least.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
