ewilen

Never read much FF. The trailer does remind me of the Lost in Space film, which isn't a good sign. The effects look pretty good, though, and for all I know, they might tell a good story. The problem is, the superhero origins story doesn't wear well on the screen anymore. The old "radiation makes a normal person super" trick could be recycled ad infinitum on paper back in the 60's, but now it's just ad nauseam. Tying the creation of the supers to the creation of the supervillain (chronologically and, often, causally) is also getting really boring. The final straw will be if they follow the usual pattern of killing the villain at the end.

I'm sure AF will deploy the intimidation factor when their backs are really up against it... Anyway, even with the current cuts, we'll probably have more Raptors than anyone else has of practically anything else...except maybe Mig-21's.

Nied, I don't know if you're replying to me or not. If you are, you've missed the key thread of my argument, which is that there's no serious threat to American air superiority, in the sense of using airplanes to shoot down airplanes. That's why it would be (there's no polite way to put it) ridiculous to envision building the Raptor without intending to give it the ground attack capabilities which have been promised. The -A in the name was added because without the upgrades, the Air Force couldn't justify it. When I first began to look seriously at the worth of the F/A-22, I wasn't entirely sure which side I would come down on. However, the bogus and desperate arguments emanating from the Air Force in favor of the Raptor--from the misrepresentation of the COPE India exercises to the "Flanker beats an Eagle by executing a perfect Doppler-rader evading maneuver" story--have convinced me, as much as my own research, that it really is a program worthy of the axe.

Not sure what mean by interceptors is it AAA, UAVs or conventional interceptor fighters? Usually something have to go wrong if the U.S. Army and the USMC ground forces have to defend themselves from hostile enemy fighters. Conventional interceptors. The point being that warheads delivered by enemy aircraft will simply not be a factor, whether it be in tactical situations (enemy infantry calling in CAS) or deep strikes against American bases and lines of communication. If a few enemy bombers or fighter-bombers manage to get off the ground, even if escorted by a handful of Flankers or Fulcrums, the USAF will make quick work of them with or without the F/A-22. In the unlikely case that they penetrate friendly airspace, then SAMs such as Patriot and Hawk will provide effective insurance. On the other hand, enemy ballistic and cruise missiles are a more serious threat. Compared to aircraft, they require far less training and maintenance to operate; launched from hardened silos or mobile launchers, they can't be neutralized by wrecking a runway. They're also much, much harder to intercept than aircraft. But the Raptor won't do anything to neutralize or intercept these weapons which can't be done by other tools in the US inventory. The Raptor will have some anti-cruise missile capability, but that same ability could be built into the F-15; one news article states that the airforce wants to keep it off the Eagle because it doesn't want the F/A-22 to have any competition in the role. At great cost and significant risk, the F/A-22 is slated to acquire improved air-to-ground capability (current estimates are up to $11.7 billion depending on the degree of improvement). However, these abilities are already in the F-15 (and/or future variants) and will be in the F-35.

The F-15K purchase by South Korea has been reported as $4.2 billion for 40 planes, which comes out to roughly $105 million/plane. However, using these numbers for the flyaway cost is problematic, since S. Korea is going to get a lot more than just the aircraft--things like support, training, weaponry, and technology transfers. On the other hand, there were apparently some of "deal sweeteners" on the part of Boeing and the US Government. The F-15I (upgraded F-15E sold to Israel) was about $84 million in 1998. (Source.) In 2001, the Air Force bought 10 F-15E's for about $57 million each. (Source.) Overall, I'd say a flyaway cost in the $45-$60 million range is what the USAF would pay for an F-15K equivalent. There seems to be some misunderstanding about air superiority and how it is achieved. Leaving aside the fact that, with or without the Raptor, the USAF's air-air capability will be unchallenged for the foreseeable future due to numbers, infrastructure, training, and--yes--technology, air superiority is not achieved solely or even principally by engaging enemy fighters in the air. The main threat to American use of the skies is enemy SAMs; as for enemy fighters, in any serious conflict the bulk of them will be destroyed on the ground. Their runways will be holed, and the ground-based sensors and air defense networks on which they rely for guidance will be destroyed. As for enemy attempts to conduct attacks through the air, the bulk of the threat is (again) missiles. Most enemy attack aircraft will be neutralized on the ground, and the remainder, if any, will run into an iron wall of interceptors and SAMs if they attempt offensive operations.

I'll second those suggestions. If you can spare the money, it's really nice to own at least one 1/48.

The Rocketeer was one of the better comic adaptations. I also thought X-Men was good, though neither was a great movie. Many others are mediocre at best in my book: The Shadow, the original Crow, Tank Girl...but to me they're just bad popcorn-fodder. Out of the superhero movies I've seen (not that I've seen that many), the ones that I really actively hate are the original Tim Burton Batman and the recent Hulk. (About Tank Girl...I'll bet that not very many people have seen the original comic. It originally appeared in a British magazine called Deadline, and once it hit its stride, it was very, very good. But the movie almost completely missed out on the spirit of the comic, which wasn't even remotely serious. I remember one episode in which Tank Girl faced off against an enemy who had a male member the size of a whale's...she killed him by removing her top, causing him to get an erection thus depriving his brain of blood.)

Air superiority isn't an end in itself. If we can our bombs on target, and prevent the other guy's bombs from hitting us, it doesn't matter a flying fonzie if the enemy is doing reverse Immelmans and triple cobras over the battlefield. We also like winning wars without going bankrupt. Nope, you should never throw good money after bad. The only questions should be: how much MORE will we have to spend, and what will we get for it?

Bombay is an alternate for "B." After doing a little more research, I think you're right, but it seems the systems that use "Bombay" for "B" don't use "Alpha" for "A". They use "Africa" or "Australia"... I'll send a note to Egan Loo and see if he can come up with an answer.

The marginal cost of building an F/A-22 is $115 million. What's the cost of a new F-15K? Is it truly necessary to replace the F-15's on a 1-1 basis? And if so, when? How much air superiority do we need in the next 20-30 years? Or is the reality that all those Eagles would just end up being used as bombers--meaning that F-35's could take over the job when the F-15's are retired? Also, the F/A-22 still has some development costs in store, if it's going to do everything that was promised. Without that development, will an F/A-22 even be as capable as an F-15E in the air to ground role?

Sorry, it's a long article, so C&P isn't practical. Registration with the NYT is free; although it was a long time ago, I seem to remember it being pretty painless, too. If I see it reprinted in another news source, I'll post a link.

That may be, but would the doctors and researchers, who are nonmilitary, use mil-speak to talk about AB blood? And why would they always use the same nonstandard code for "AB"? For that matter, why would their computer say "Alpha Bombay" on its screen instead of "AB". Anyway, my impression is that "Alpha Bombay" isn't AB blood. A person with AB blood can accept transfusions from anyone, but can only donate blood to someone who also has AB blood. AB is somewhat rare, but not extraordinarily so (about 4% of the population). As soon as the scientists realize that the AFOS has blood of type "Alpha Bombay", they immediately note that it has the same type as the shrine maidens. And if Mao's blood type was AB, she could have gotten a transfusion from anyone (or in any case, there should have been a few dozen AB donors on the Asuka, not to mention in the fleet). Overall, I think the story's intent is that "Alpha Bombay" is a special blood type.

A little more on the politics over the F/A-22 cuts http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/13/business/13fighter.html

No, that would be Alpha Bravo. Pretty sure that Alpha Bombay is a special, rare blood type in M0.

I'd rather get a bill from the government than a check--it means I got to use that money (at least earning interest) all year before handing over my share. About tax software, if you use the standard deduction, your taxes are probably simple enough that you can use one of the free online tax programs. Some of them charge to do your state taxes, but the trick is that some will tell you beforehand what your bill/refund will be at various stages, even though they won't show you the completed forms until you pay. (This was the case with TaxAct.) So, if you're a cheapskate, you can use the state figures as a "checksum" and just do the forms by hand.

Yes, I think I'd be interested as well.

Depending on your tastes, I think there are better episodes. If you like classic Valk action, I seem to remember thinking that eps. 13-15 had some good bits.

I think I found it via mlnet. It might be on imacross, too.

I have the mecha one. It's about 11x17.

I always felt like it was a LoTR for small children. Later I found out that there was some kind of religious allegory in it, which turned me off even more. It turns out, though, that Tolkien and Lewis were good friends. I think I can avoid seeing it, unless the trailers and reviews are so great that I actually want to.

DVD version of the OAV http://www.manga.com/index.php?id=21 DVD version of the movie http://www.manga.com/index.php?id=8 Also VHS versions of both, from the same company, although I don't know if they actually sell the VHS version any more. The OAV DVD contains both a dub track and soft-encoded subtitles. The movie is hard-encoded subtitles only, because it's a direct transfer of the VHS version (and thus has rather washed-out visuals). I think the OAV tapes were available as either sub or dub. That's it for Region 1.

The civilians decide not only on the budget, but they can also meddle pretty much as much as they see fit. We don't give block grants to the military and say, "Here's a quarter-trillion dollars, defend the country and its interests, and you can keep the change." There are pros and cons to the system but it could indeed be far worse.

It's an enjoyable episode but the ending is more of a "gag" ending than a real ending. And the story thread, such as it is, isn't continued anywhere else in M7. Either it would be jarring in terms of continuity or they'd need at least an extra episode or two to tie things up.

Press coverage indicates the F-35 decision was pushed by the civilian leadership, not by the generals. Not that I disagree with the decision in this particular case, but if you want to blame someone, please note that the generals and admirals didn't produce the budget squeeze, nor did they call for cutting the F-22 order short.

I wouldn't be surprised if Clarke/2001 was an influence, but the idea of ancient aliens influencing human evolution and/or being the basis of human religion/myth is widespread in SF, and may predate 2001. There is also the Erich von Daniken "Chariots of the Gods" theory, which is generally laughed at in archeology but makes good science fiction. Let's see: Chariots of the Gods? 1968 Clarke's (Third) Law 1973 The Sentinel 1948/1951 (Read it here!) 2001 (movie/book) 1968 Does a Bee Care? (short story by Asimov) 1957 Demon with a Glass Hand (teleplay by Harlan Ellison) 1963 Quatermass and the Pit (teleplay later remade as a movie) 1958 Hmmm. Well, so far, Clarke's short story is the earliest, and M0 does show more similarities to 2001 than most of the others, but I think there's some von Daniken (or even Stargate) in there, too. I also see similarities (in the way humanity is "tested") with The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) and to an extent "Silly Asses" (short story by Asimov, 1958). The overall plot, with two power-hungry factions fighting over an ancient weapon, only to miss the Big Picture of the fate of humanity, is also similar to Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind and shows up in some of the Miyazaki's other films, too.