More JSF Thoughts, Theme Hospital, George W. Bush Vs Tony Abbott, and More

- people in charge of running the PR behind the JSF program have handled it really badly at times. If anyone wants to really put the BVR combat perspective back into perspective they should point back to the history of other 'sealth aircraft' such as the B-2 instead of simply repeating the mantra, it will work in the future. People can judge the past, they can only speculate about the future and watch as problem after problem seems to be highlighted with the program
http://www.airforcetimes.com/story/military/2015/09/20/general-usaf-considers-measures-f-35-survive-complete-mission/72403642/http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/buying-single-engine-f-35s-for-canada-a-serious-mistake-report-1.2669476
http://warisboring.com/articles/u-s-air-force-requires-airmen-to-praise-troubled-stealth-fighter/ 
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/business/us-air-force-warns-f-35-o/2129430.html
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/15/general-blasts-a-10-vs-f-35-debate-as-ludicrous/
http://www.dodbuzz.com/2015/09/15/general-warns-budget-woes-may-limit-f-35-purchases-in-2016/
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/17/us-lockheed-martin-fighter-logistics-idUSKCN0RG35320150917
http://www.afr.com/news/special-reports/defence-and-national-security/critics-misunderstand-f35-program-20150914-gjm5l8
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/strike/2015/09/09/-crossroads-f-35-still-faces-challenges/71970864/
http://news.investors.com/business/091015-770366-f35-production-alis-computer-system-worry-officials.htm
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/09/lockheed-martin-f35-usa-idUSL1N11F28X20150909
http://fightersweep.com/2698/f-35-worst-fighter-ever/
http://taskandpurpose.com/skyline/the-f-35-capabilities-were-watered-down-to-meet-deadline/
http://warisboring.com/articles/we-have-proof-the-u-s-air-force-watered-down-the-f-35-to-avoid-embarrassment/
http://warisboring.com/articles/the-marines-f-35s-are-not-ready-for-combat/
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-07-28/lockheed-f-35-s-reliability-found-wanting-in-shipboard-testing
http://www.pogoarchives.org/straus/2015-9-1-DoD-FOIA-ocr.pdf
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-27/f-35-engines-from-united-technologies-called-unreliable-by-ga
http://www.stopthef35.com/

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/holes-in-australias-weapon-capability-need-to-be-filled/story-fni0cx4q-1227493318058
http://news.investors.com/business/091015-770366-f35-production-alis-computer-system-worry-officials.htm
http://www.businessinsider.com/r-pratt-prepping-for-big-production-increase-on-f-35-jet-engines--2015-9?IR=T
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/09/15/pentagon-weapons-tester-calls-f-35-evaluation-into-question/
http://theweek.com/articles/568792/americas-fancy-new-fighter-jet-stinks-fighting-navy-doesnt-care
F-35 not a Dog Fighter???
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=27994&sid=01a79f56fa14710353f156ae201b99a5 

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/strike/2015/09/21/norway-australia-team-to-develop-missile-for-f-35/72590888/
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/justin-trudeau-vows-to-ditch-f-35
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-trudeau-scrap-f35-halifax-1.3235791
- for a lot of countries the single engined nature of the aircraft makes little sense. Will be interesting how the end game plays out. It seems clear that some countries have been co-erced into purchasing the JSF rather than the JSF earning it's stripes entirely on merit
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/f-35-s-french-rival-pitches-canadianized-fighter-jet-1.2577234
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-f35-trudeau-harper-monday-1.3237046
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/canada-could-pull-out-of-f-35-deal-without-financial-penalty-procurement-expert
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-f35-military-jets-1.3238263
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f35-lightning-ii-faces-continued-dogfights-in-norway-03034/
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/blog/f-35-timeline-canadas-biggest-air-defence-purchase-ever
https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f35-lightning-ii-faces-continued-dogfights-in-norway-03034/
Norway to reduce F-35 order?
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=58&t=27952
F-35 - Runaway Fighter - the fifth estate
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwA4RaaJSeI
- one thing I don't like about the program is the fact that if there is crack in the security of the program all countries participating in the program are in trouble. Think about computer security. Once upon a time it was claimed that Apple's Mac OS X and that Google's technology was best and that Android was impervious to security threats. It's become clear that these beliefs are nonsensical. If all allies switch to stealth based technologies all enemies will switch to trying to find a way to defeat it
- one possible attack against stealth aircraft I've ben thinking of revolves around sensory deprivation of the aircrafts sensors. It is said that the AESA RADAR capability of the JSF is capable of frying other aircraft's electronics. I'd be curious to see how attacks against airspeed, attitude, and other sensors would work. Both the B-2 and F-22 have had trouble with this...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_Grumman_B-2_Spirit
- I'd be like the US military to be honest. Purchase in limited numbers early on and test it or let others do the same thing. Watch and see how the program progresses before making joining in
- never, ever make the assumption that the US will give back technology that you have helped to develop alongside them if they have iterated on it. A good example of this is the Japanese F-2 program which used higher levels of composite in airframe structure and the world's first AESA RADAR. Always have backup or keep a local research effort going even if the US promise to transfer knowledge back to a partner country
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=58&t=25357&p=303229#p303229
http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2015/09/22/2015092201153.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_F-2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-22_Raptor
- as I've stated before the nature of detterance as a core defensive theory means that you are effectively still at war because it diverts resources from other industries back into defense. I'm curious to see how economies would change if everyone mutually agreed to drop weapons and platforms with projected power capabilities (a single US aircraft carrier alone costs about $14B USD, a B-2 bomber $2B, a F-22 fighter $250M USD, a F-35 JSF ~$100M USD, etc...) and only worried about local, regional, defense...
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/americas-f-35-fighter-killer-the-sky-the-defense-budget-13811
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/americas-lrs-b-stealth-bomber-headed-crash-landing-13820
- people often accuse the US of poking into areas where they shouldn't. The problem is that they have so many defense agreements that it's difficult for them not to. They don't really have a choice sometimes. The obvious thing is whether or not they respond in a wise fashion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_alliances
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_treaties
http://www.state.gov/s/l/treaty/collectivedefense/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_wars
http://observer.com/2015/09/washington-waffles-on-korean-missile-defense-cheering-china-and-russia/
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/2015/09/16/bandow-south-korea-wean-us-military-aid/72340392/
- in spite of what armchair generals keep on saying the Chinese and Russians would probably make life at least a little difficult for the US and her allies if things came to a head. It's clear that a lot of weapons platform's and systems that are now being pursued are struggles for everyone who is engaged in them (technically as well as cost wise) and they already have some possible counter measures in place. How good they actually are is the obvious question though. I'm also curious how good their OPSEC is. If they're able to seal off their scientists entirely in internal test environments then details regarding their programs and capabilities will be very difficult to obtain owing the the heavy dependence by the West purely on SIGINT/COMINT capabilities. They've always had a hard time gaining HUMINT but not the other way around...
http://thediplomat.com/2015/08/should-the-pentagon-fear-chinas-newest-weapon/
http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=20140216000084&cid=1101
http://www.valuewalk.com/2015/09/u-s-is-helpless-against-some-russias-military-hardware/
http://www.ibtimes.com/russia-military-flame-throwing-system-under-development-amid-rising-regional-tensions-2063287
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/how-china-russia-plan-crush-americas-stealth-aircraft-13708
http://www.ibtimes.com/russias-advanced-stormbringer-drone-ideal-recon-missions-slated-mass-production-2033356
http://www.ibtimes.com/russias-microwave-gun-can-disable-drones-warheads-6-miles-away-official-says-1967170
http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/darpa-and-us-air-force-are-developing-hypersonic-weapons/story-fnpjxnlk-1227382375769
- some analysts/journalists say that the 'Cold War' never really ended, that it's effectively been in hibernation for a while. The interesting thing is that in spite of what China has said regarding a peaceful rise it is pushing farther out with it's weapons systems and platforms. You don't need an aircraft carrier to defend your territory. You just need longer range weapons systems and platforms. It will be interesting to see how far China chooses to push out in spite of what is said by some public servants and politicians it is clear that China wants to take a more global role
http://www.chinafile.com/document-9-chinafile-translation
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/09/xi-jinping-china-book-chinese-dream/406387/
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/09/22/china-xi-jinping-public-support-confidence-opinion-map/ 
http://www.valuewalk.com/2015/09/us-vs-russia-possible-ice-war/
http://www.valuewalk.com/2015/09/only-russia-can-destroy-us-u-s-ambassador/
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/let-iaf-test-fly-fifth-generation-fighter-aircraft-india-asks-russia/articleshow/48932038.cms
https://news.vice.com/article/nato-is-two-properties-away-from-a-baltic-monopoly-and-russia-is-freaking-out
http://dailysignal.com/2015/09/12/china-just-sent-a-message-to-america-dont-mess-with-us/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_aircraft_carrier_programme
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/chinas-aircraft-carrier-stacks-up-to-other-world-powers-2015-9#/#the-liaonings-particulars-and-capabilities-sound-impressive-2
http://www.ibtimes.com.au/china-building-worlds-longest-aircraft-carrier-1459568
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/china-builds-worlds-largest-aircraft-carrier-dock-south-13466
http://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-china-wants-aircraft-carriers-13071
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/02/china-defense-spending-to-double-by-2020-report.html
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/02/the-new-global-cyberwar-without-boundaries-or-winners.html
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/02/why-china-russia-care-if-you-cheated.html
http://www.janes360.com/images/assets/976/30976/China_aircraft_capabilities_1.pdf
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russias-armata-t-14-tank-vs-americas-m-1-abrams-who-wins-13825
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/how-china-russia-plan-crush-americas-stealth-aircraft-13708
http://fortruss.blogspot.ca/2015/08/nato-russian-electronic-warfare-is.html
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/warfare/2015/08/02/us-army-ukraine-russia-electronic-warfare/30913397/
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/chinas-master-plan-destroy-the-stealthy-f-22-f-35-battle-13871
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/warfare/2015/09/17/analysis-rand-says-us-facing-tough-fight-china/72304540/
http://www.rand.org/paf/projects/us-china-scorecard.html
http://in.rbth.com/blogs/2015/04/20/why_the_brahmos_armed_sukhoi_is_bad_news_for_indias_enemies_42687
http://www.smh.com.au/business/china/china-has-created-a-monster-it-cant-control-20150903-gjev9m.html
http://www.afr.com/news/world/china-military-show-spooks-the-neighbours-20150903-gjek3b
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/03/the-guardian-view-on-chinas-display-of-military-muscle-to-what-end
http://observer.com/2015/09/will-china-invade-alaska-canada-will-russia/
- technically, the US wins many of the wars that it chooses. Realistically, though it's not so clear. Nearly every single adversary now engages in longer term, guerilla style tactics. In Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Libya, and elsewhere they've basically been waiting for allied forces to clear out before taking their opportunity
- a lot of claims regarding US defense technology superiority makes no sense. If old Soviet era SAM systems are so worthless against US manufactured jets then why bother to going to such extents with regard to cyberwarfare when it comes to shutting them down? I am absolutely certain that there is no way that the claim that some classes of aircraft have never been shot down is not true
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantsir-S1
http://news.antiwar.com/2015/09/11/russian-shipments-of-air-defense-systems-to-syria-rile-israel/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-300_(missile)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-400_(missile)
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/strike/2015/09/12/israel-eyes-exclusive-dibs-f-35/72014016/
http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/lockheed-worried-about-idf-unauthorized-modifications-in-f-35/2015/09/06/
http://www.globes.co.il/en/article-israel-to-double-attack-range-of-f-35-stealth-fighter-1001068513
http://warisboring.com/articles/in-f-35-debate-air-force-leaders-love-to-bully-critics/
http://www.globalresearch.ca/syria-shoots-down-israeli-warplane-f-16-bomber-and-helicopters/5471009
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2015/09/15/russia-closing-gap-between-us-with-newer-air-defenses-general.html
- part of me wonders just exactly how much effort and resources are the Chinese and Russians genuinely throwing at their 5th gen fighter programs. Is it possible that they are simply waiting until most of the development is completed by the West and then they'll 'magically' have massive breakthroughs and begin full scale production of their programs? They've had a history of stealing and reverse engineering a lot of technology for a long time now
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-us-could-sanction-chinese-companies-as-early-as-next-week-2015-9?IR=T
http://sputniknews.com/asia/20150903/1026561135.html
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/exclusive-secret-nsa-map-shows-china-cyber-attacks-us-targets-n401211
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/31/china-stole-data-from-600-american-cyber-targets-s/
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-wp-blm-news-bc-declassified31-20150731-story.html
- the US defense budget seems exhorbitant. True, their requirements are substantially different but look at the way they structure a lot of programs and it becomes obvious why as well. They're often very ambitious with multiple core technologies that need to be developed in order for the overall program to work. Part of me thinks that their is almost a zero sum game at times. They think that they can throw money at some problems and it will be solved. It's not as simple as that. They've been working on some core problem problems like directed energy weapons and rail guns for a long time now and have had limited success. If they want a genuine chance at this they're better off understanding the problem and then funding the core science. It's much like their space and intelligence programs where a lot of other spin off technologies were subsequently developed
http://thediplomat.com/2015/05/us-navys-deadly-new-gun-wont-be-ready-for-some-time/
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/394715/railguns-next-big-pentagon-boondoggle-mike-fredenburg
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/417306/age-aircraft-carrier-over-jerry-hendrix
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/09/air-force-fighters-will-carry-laser-cannons-cyber-weapons-by-2020/
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2015/09/11/Northrop-Grumman-speeds-manufacture-of-F-35-center-fuselages/4801441994663/
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/09/08/politics/us-navy-size-military-election-2016/index.html?iid=ob_article_organicsidebar_expansion&iref=obnetwork
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-ambitious-us-air-force-plan-to-make-a-flying-aircraft-carrier-2015-9?IR=T
http://www.defenseone.com/technology/2015/08/military-wants-swarm-bots-retrieve-midair/119795/?oref=d_brief_nl
http://warisboring.com/articles/f-14s-versus-ufos-in-iran/
http://warisboring.com/articles/yes-america-has-another-secret-spy-drone-we-pretty-much-already-knew-that/
http://www.defenseone.com/news/2015/08/the-d-brief-august-31-2015/119843/
http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/08/us-b-3-stealth-bomber-planned-for-2025.html
- reading a lot of stuff online and elsewhere it becomes much clearer that both sides often underestimate one another (less often by people in the defense or intelligence community) . You should track and watch things based on what people do, not what they say
http://www.nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/chinas-carrier-killer-really-threat-the-us-navy-13765
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/russia-and-china-trying-to-make-stealth-obsolete-2015-8
http://atimes.com/2015/08/this-is-how-china-and-russia-plan-to-crush-americas-stealth-aircraft/
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/china-unveiled-a-possible-stealth-drone-2015-1
http://www.nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/how-china-russia-plan-crush-americas-stealth-aircraft-13708
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/01/13/chinas_drone_program_keeps_stealthily_inching_forward/
http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1434040/smog-chinas-top-defence-against-us-laser-weapons-says-pla-navy-general
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/chinese-naval-ships-came-within-12-nautical-miles-of-american-soil/2015/09/04/dee5e1b0-5305-11e5-933e-7d06c647a395_story.html
- a lot of countries just seem to want to stay out of the geo-political game. They don't want to choose sides and couldn't care less. Understandable, seeing the role that both countries play throughout the world now
- the funny thing is that some of the countries that are pushed back (Iran, North Korea, Russia, etc...) don't have much too lose. US defense alone has struggled to identify targets worth bombing in North Korea and how do you force a country to comply if they have nothing left to lose such as Iran or North Korea? It's unlikely China or Russia will engage in all out attack in the near to medium future. It's likely they'll continue to do the exact same thing and skirt around the edges with cyberwarfare and aggressive intelligence collection
https://www.rt.com/uk/314196-henry-jackson-crimea-report/
https://www.rt.com/business/314236-Russia-China-cooperation-agreements/
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/03/u-s-sub-takes-on-russia-in-santa-s-backyard.html
http://www.rt.com/politics/311146-third-world-war-would-be/
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/how-russias-move-to-send-a-military-advance-team-to-syria-poses-concerns-for-us/articleshow/48835565.cms
- It's clear that the superpower struggle has been underway for a while now. The irony is that this is game of economies as well as technology. If the West attempt to compete purely via defense technology/deterrence then part of me fears they will head down the same pathway that the USSR went. It will collapse under the strain of a defense (and other industries) that are largely worthless (under most circumstances) and does nothing for the general poplation. Of course, this is partially offset by a potential new trade pact in the APAC region but I am certain that this will inevitably still be in favour of the US especially with their extensive SIGINT/COMINT capability, economic intelligence, and their use of it in trade negotiations

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/16/us-philippines-china-idUSKCN0RG17P20150916
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/09/16/potential-obama-putin-summit-chinas-new-airstrip-and-intelligence-briefings-unveiled/ 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/16/russian-attack-helicopters-spotted-in-syria/
http://jubileedebt.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/The-new-debt-trap_07.15.pdf
- you don't really realise how many jobs and money is on the line with regards to the JSF program until you do the numbers
http://www.zacks.com/stock/news/189942/7-incredible-facts-about-the-lockheed-martin-f35
http://aviationweek.com/blog/f-35-stealthier-f-22
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/09/f-35-joint-strike-fighter-extends-reach-with-help-from-allies.html

An old but still enjoyable/playable game with updates to run under Windows 7
http://gamefixes.wordpress.com/2012/11/17/how-to-install-and-play-theme-hospital-under-windows-7-64-bit/
http://themehospital.co.uk/
http://themehospital.co.uk/download-windows-7/

Watching footage about George W. Bush it becomes much clearer that he was somewhat of a clown who realised his limitations. It's not the case with Tony Abbott who can be scary and hilarious at times
http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/john-olivers-hilarious-reaction-to-tony-abbott-eating-a-raw-unpeeled-onion/story-e6frfmyi-1227508279661
Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Tony Abbott, President of the USA of Australia (HBO)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3IaKVmkXuk
Must See Hilarious George Bush Bloopers! - VERY FUNNY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEbZqvMu2cQ

Once upon a time I read about a Chinese girl who used a pin in her soldering iron to do extremely fine soldering work. I use solder paste or wire glue. Takes less time and using sticky/masking tape you can achieve a really clean finish
http://www.jaycar.com.au/Tools-%26-Soldering/Soldering/Accessories/Solder-Paste-SMD-Syringe-15G/p/NS3046
http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/2379/smd-solder-now-or-later
http://www.instructables.com/id/hand-soldering-teeny-tiny-chips!/
http://www.instructables.com/id/Soldering-tiny-SMD-components-the-easy-and-fast-wa/
http://www.jaycar.com.au/Service-Aids/Chemical-Aids/Adhesives/Wire-Glue-9ml/p/NM2831

- as usual thanks to all of the individuals and groups who purchase and use my goods and services
http://sites.google.com/site/dtbnguyen/
http://dtbnguyen.blogspot.com.au/

Native Instrument's 'pkg' File Format, Web Documentation Compiler/Scraper, Thoughts on the JSF/Counter-Stealth Technologies, and More

Sometimes you get installation errors in Windows and it is absolutely infuriating because the manufacturer offers you no easy way of correcting (and understanding where the error actually is because of arcane error messages) the file short of re-downloading the entire ISO, etc... This is when some basic reverse engineering skills come in handy.

As you can see below, Native Instrument's 'pkg' file format is actually just a xar archive which includes several other archived files as well.

xar -x -f "Maschine 2 Factory Library Library Part 5.pkg"
user@machine:/media/sda1/NIMCN2FL100$ cd Folder
user@machine:/media/sda1/NIMCN2FL100/Folder$ ls
Bom  PackageInfo  Payload  Scripts
user@machine:/media/sda1/NIMCN2FL100/Folder$ file *
Bom:         Mac OS X bill of materials (BOM) file
PackageInfo: XML document text
Payload:     gzip compressed data, from Unix
Scripts:     gzip compressed data, from Unix
user@machine:/media/sda1/NIMCN2FL100/Folder$ mv Payload Payload.gz
user@machine:/media/sda1/NIMCN2FL100/Folder$ mv Scripts Scripts.gz
user@machine:/media/sda1/NIMCN2FL100/Folder$ gunzip Scripts.gz
user@machine:/media/sda1/NIMCN2FL100/Folder$ ls
Bom  PackageInfo  Payload.gz  Scripts
user@machine:/media/sda1/NIMCN2FL100/Folder$ vim Scripts
user@machine:/media/sda1/NIMCN2FL100/Folder$ gunzip Payload.gz
user@machine:/media/sda1/NIMCN2FL100/Folder$ ls
Bom  PackageInfo  Payload  Scripts
user@machine:/media/sda1/NIMCN2FL100/Folder$ file *
Bom:         Mac OS X bill of materials (BOM) file
PackageInfo: XML document text
Payload:     ASCII cpio archive (pre-SVR4 or odc)
Scripts:     ASCII cpio archive (pre-SVR4 or odc)

http://www.techradar.com/au/news/software/how-to-repair-a-broken-zip-file-986146
http://www.gzip.org/recover.txt
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/59735/recover-corrupt-zip-or-gzip-files
https://packages.debian.org/xar
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/debian-26/extract-a-xar-file-on-squeeze-4175428210/
https://packages.debian.org/libxml2-dev
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cpio
http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/85029/what-is-the-meaning-of-the-errors-from-my-cpio-command

The trend towards placing all documentation online can be infuriating at times. It means you have to have a permanent connection on at all times for referencing. The only option is to run a web crawler/web site downloader over it but as I've discovered in the past the performance of such programs can be frustrating. Recently, I had a similar encounter with some trading software. I wrote a custom script to download all relevant files and then compiling them into a single PDF file.

https://sites.google.com/site/dtbnguyen/zorro-manual-compiler-1.00.sh.zip

This reminds me, you don't always have to resort to multi-threading to achieve parallelism/higher performance (I've come across some people who have almost basically assumed this). In fact, in some languages you can't even do it.
http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/dodge-dangers-of-explicit-multithreading/
https://software.intel.com/en-us/intel-parallel-studio-xe

If you've ever watched some of the online courses from MOOCs and seen some of the better quality YouTube productions (or other free video upload sites out there) you're sometimes left wondering why you or others would want to pay. Anyhow, as stated previously I don't like being online all the time and want to download things for offline perusal. Recently, I had a problem with regards to merging them though. One, it wasn't being done properly and two, MP3 tag information was corrupted. I found out mp3wrap and vbrfix did the job.

You may have to chance some code in mp3wrap if you use more than 256 files though. ./configure, make, make install...
mp3wrap.h:#define MAXNUMFILE 512

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/62618/what-is-the-best-way-to-merge-mp3-files
http://superuser.com/questions/314239/how-to-join-merge-many-mp3-files
http://askubuntu.com/questions/20507/concatenating-several-mp3-files-into-one-mp3
https://packages.debian.org/wheezy/mp3wrap
http://lyncd.com/2009/02/how-to-merge-mp3-files/
http://lyncd.com/2011/03/lossless-combine-mp3s/
http://mp3wrap.sourceforge.net/
https://packages.debian.org/vbrfix
https://packages.debian.org/mp3val

Can't believe that in this day and age we don't have better mp3 file verification checking options. Guessing I haven't found the right tool yet?
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8933053/check-duration-of-audio-files-on-the-command-line
http://askubuntu.com/questions/248811/how-can-i-fix-incorrect-mp3-duration
http://askubuntu.com/questions/135907/ripped-mp3-files-show-wrong-track-lengths
https://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=mp3diags
https://packages.debian.org/wheezy/mp3val

- as stated before the US seems more guarded with regards to the program than most other people
http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/08/air-force-admits-big-f35-problems-and.html

http://breakingdefense.com/2015/08/pentagon-spox-says-f-35-numbers-not-under-review/
http://breakingdefense.com/2015/07/dunford-says-f-35-fleet-requirement-under-review-supports-f-35-buy/
http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/will-the-f-35-dominate-the-skies-9618
http://aviationweek.com/awin/israel-us-agree-450-million-f-35-ew-work
http://aviationweek.com/blog/f-35-stealthier-f-22

- most advances in 'stealth' have so far come from iterative science and technology advances. I think the next major advance will likely come from left field though. Something which affects the science in general rather than something more specific to stealth/defense technology alone. Like 'stealth' my guess is that it may take a bit of time before we feel the impact of such technology in the real world though
http://www.hngn.com/articles/123689/20150827/radiationless-revolution-born-radical-new-theory.htm
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-08/anu-ntl082615.php
http://nextbigfuture.com/2015/08/theory-explaining-electromagnetic.html
- if you look at the program more carefully it's much more obvious how savings can accrue over the life of the JSF program. It's clear that the core designs across each of the variants is no longer as similar as was originally intended but modular design, self diagnostics/testing, etc... will still play a role over the entire lifetime of the program
Marine In The F-35 Test Force Shares His Experiences
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=27540
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nunn%E2%80%93McCurdy_Amendment
- the irony is that some of the primary mechanisms that are currently used to reduce temperature for IR stealth are actually used in satellite technology and more inauspicious areas like motorsport technology
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrared_signature
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/stealth-aircraft-ir.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SBIRS
- one of the odd things which has struck me about the Russia/Chinese with regards to their defense/intelligence setup is that even if they have the ability to re-produce some Western technologies they sometimes choose not to. Think about the Buran. They're generally more practical and economical with regards to use of technology. Look at the way finances were handled during the KGB era. They were miserly when it came to budgeting for possible assets when compared to their Western counterparts. That's why I'm not entirely certain that the reason why they are behind the eight ball on aircraft stealth is simply because they don't have the ability to bridge the gap... At various times throughout history they've held the lead with regards to submarine, missile, and various other core defense technologies. I think that it may simply come down to the fact that they may be trying to do their best allocate their resources in such a way that to acheive their defensive needs for the best price? Either way, I don't think that a war involving the US and near peer threats such as Russia and China is going to be clear cut as some people think (especially when the modernisation of their militaries are complete). It will be somewhat of a slugfest...
http://in.rbth.com/economics/defence/2015/08/28/sukhoi-attack-drone-lit-up-maks-2015_393057
http://nypost.com/2010/07/04/1000s-of-russian-spies-in-u-s-surpassing-cold-war-record/
http://thetruthwins.com/archives/new-russian-submarines-are-so-silent-that-the-u-s-navy-calls-them-black-holes
http://www.rt.com/news/220983-russia-submarine-tests-nato/
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russia-launches-quietest-submarine-the-world-12765
http://breakingdefense.com/2014/10/triton-poseidon-uclass-the-navys-isr-balancing-act/
http://missilethreat.com/new-russian-missile-mach-3-5/
- even if the JSF can perform CAS duties relatively well there's something we're missing here. The JSF is incredibly expensive and the way that stealth is so integral to the aircraft means that every time the aircraft gets hit its RCS increases. Moreover, the cost of the shell of the aircraft is exhorbitant compared to current technology. For anyone to assume that the JSF is not going to get hit in CAS duties is nonsensical especially if it's going to try to takeover the role of the A10 (in a like for like replacement) at some point. I still prefer a group of loitering drones that can be called in for an immediate support at any point if and when required. It should be cheaper, quicker, and more survivable (if designed correctly)... This could be a moot point though if Allied nations only continue to engage in non near-peer threat engagements such as been the case recently though and the trend continues towards higher altitude CAS...
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/strike/2015/08/29/prove-cas-capabilities-face/71336130/
http://www.wearethemighty.com/cool-darpa-projects-2015-02
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zumwalt-class_destroyer
- the most common argument that the Russians/Chinese have when the West accuses them of something is that the West isn't any different. The funny thing about this is that technically they're right. It's just the level that each side is willing to stoop to. The US spies on friend and foe alike using mostly technological means though while the former is more reliant on HUMINT. In the context of economic intelligence I'd be very interested to know just exactly how the numbers add up knowing how much the West spends on technical intelligence and the same goes for the Russians/Chinese as well... Both sides sound rediculous at times accusing one another of any wrong doing...
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/aug/31/us-officials-claim-spies-at-risk-as-china-russia-r/
http://www.afr.com/technology/russia-launches-fresh-crackdown-on-internet-20150831-gjc6jf
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4696268,00.html
- if you think about the nature of defense now it's somewhat bemusing. Our concept of what defense seems to be almost completely focused around the notion of force projection and qualitative/quantitative superiority. To me some of what is done has little to do with defense anymore as it does attempting to shape the world in the way we want simply because we can...
http://www.watoday.com.au/world/chinas-secret-submarine-caves-extend-xi-jinpings-naval-reach-20141101-11fe1i.html
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/31/japan-plans-largest-ever-defence-budget-to-counter-chinas-reach
http://www.gulf-times.com/japan/248/details/452680/japan-lawyers-join-opposition-to-controversial-security-bills
- there's so much information out there regarding a lot of sensitive military technology I just find it hard to believe some of the classification levels for information that are held when it comes to some stuff and why we would hold people accountable for stuff that is already out in the open and confirmed by official sources. Sometimes it seems as though much of what the Russians/Chinese need to reverse engineer some technologies can either be purchased or else obtained from free and open sources
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewforum.php?f=65
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_PAK_FA
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-35_Lightning_II
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-22_Raptor
JSF Making Stealth productionJuly48 TEXT READABLE.pdf
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=16084&start=165
China-SignPost_18_J20-analysis_17-January-2011.pdf
http://www.chinasignpost.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/China-SignPost_18_J20-analysis_17-January-2011.pdf
F-35 High Energy Laser
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=54&t=27171&sid=a3b7376a910f0d25fd1feb3b4bea2b82

http://breakingdefense.com/2015/06/ge-sets-aetd-record/
Stealth question - Reduction in RCS
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=16084&start=165
http://theweek.com/articles/569274/how-chinas-expert-fighter-jet-designer-avoids-americas-mistakes
http://nation.time.com/2012/05/16/f-22-gets-into-a-dogfight/
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/special-features/f-35-in-new-dogfight-over-chinese-russian-stealth-technology/story-fnknbqfy-1227177399053
http://www.businessinsider.com/david-cenciotti-f-22-stealth-jet-dogfighting-an-f-15-2014-6?IR=T
https://medium.com/war-is-boring/one-analyst-predicted-the-f-35s-s-dogfight-failure-50a942d0cf8a
- as stated previously, most people who watch this space know that stealth bombers can be tracked from thousands of kilometers away provided equipment is tuned correctly, environmental conditions are favourable, etc... To me, a lot of the power projection capabilities (or anything which facilitates them) makes me feel as though they have homing beacons. This includes sensor technology which relies on any active measures such as long range RADAR, AWACS, re-fuelling, AEGIS class warships, aircraft carriers, etc... They're just asking to be hit (by near peer threats) which probably explains the reasons behind increasing sensory capabilities of 5th gen aircraft such as the JSF and increasing de-centralisation of capabilities in 6th gen aircraft designs
http://aviationweek.com/blog/behind-f-35-air-combat-report
- if you know a little bit about military technology you'll be aware that one of the things that are of slight concern are electronic hardware which when illuminated by certain, unique frequencies basically become homing beacons. The thing is, if you think about this for a bit isn't it possible to achieve the same thing using microchips (or anything that is symmetrical on an aircraft)? I mean, one of the core tenets of RADAR stealth is incorporating non-planform design. Namely, reducing parallel and symmetrical shapes. The legs on a microchip are spaced evenly and symmetrically apart. Provided sufficient power and at favourable angles isn't it also possible to achieve the same thing using electronics (and other objects) aboard most aircraft (epsecially if their designs are unique)? The main issues would be power and projection of course...
http://archive.sciencewatch.com/dr/fmf/2010/10sepfmf/10sepfmfStuc/
- in the Iraq war much of the RADAR capabilities were knocked out extremely early. The opposite has been true in Syria where much equipment has been turned off and turned on only periodically. Much like my beacon idea I'm wondering why we couldn't use the same concept to detect SAM and RADAR systems. If we know the rough design, then we should know the rough frequency/wavelength that they operate with... Radiate at sufficient power and at the right angle and they should re-radiate? Perhaps a job for drones which would search for equipment based on rough intelligence estimates for mobile equipment in particular?
http://www.defencetalk.com/iran-deploys-cutting-edge-ghadir-radar-system-64792/
- people often harp on about how Western defense technology is superior but we've never really seen a genuine encounter between near peer threats for a long time. It's also clear that neither side. Operationally, both Russia and the United States have never really given in to their partners on national security concerns. Their partners often don't receieve the same information nor do they recieve the same technology (same fear that the US has regarding the F-22 Raptor. They don't want to have to go to war against equipment that is equally adept which they built. They also worry about OPSEC of allied nations believing that we could leak information since we spend less on national security). I wouldn't be surprised if (much like during the Cold War) much of the publicly available information we have regarding upper end equipment is substantially wrong
- much has been made of DAS in the JSF. Some Russian fighter aircraft have had much of this basic, core functionality (all around sensory capability) for decades
- a RAND defense analyst recently floated around the idea of a slow moving aircraft with large payload capabilities as an alternative to conventional fighter jets. It would actually render 5th gen fighters completely irrelevant if implemented correctly...
- I've been looking at the design of the PAK-FA slightly more closely and noticed how it had multi-band RADAR capabilities for various purposes. The thing which struck me was the updated R-77 capability whereby the jet provides information in unison with the missile's own internal targeting system. Even if one fails, the other system has enough redundancy to be able to potentially re-acquire a lock. Interestingly, if we think about this slightly what if we use the same idea in combination with jets and ships or jets and large RADAR. Updated information from longer wavelength RADAR in combination with the missiles' or jets' on targeting systems would allow for an increased chance of lock and reduced chances of being outwitted through decoys as well...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-77
- modern rules of engagement may mean that visual identification may be necessary before a pilot can launch an attack rendering any BVR capabilities a moot point
http://aviationweek.com/blog/behind-f-35-air-combat-report
- for a while now the defense and intelligence have used animals such as dolphins and sea lions for various purposes including recon as well as force proection. Something I've been curious about is whether or not we can use animals as radiators undersea as well as in the air... Think about this, if you are in a room with furniture and you scream it sounds different to if it were empty. It's the same if you scream in front of someone versus if you scream with nothing in front of you. If you can activate all animals in your surronding area (using beacons at abnormal frequencies or otherwise training them and attaching 'radiators' to them) to either create sound you can detect the presence of other objects in your immediate vicinity (without giving away your position as well). Roughly the same principle that allowed the detection and shooting down of the original F-117 stealth bomber
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/11813322/Israeli-spy-dolphin-caught-off-Gaza-coast.html

http://marshallradio.com/north-american-falconry-products/north-american-falconry-transmitters
http://marshallradio.com/eu/european-falconry-products/european-falconry-transmitters
http://marshallradio.com/north-american-falconry-products/north-american-falconry-transmitters/item/126-micro-transmitter
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonar
http://science.howstuffworks.com/transport/engines-equipment/submarine4.htm

http://theconversation.com/the-joint-strike-fighter-is-it-the-right-aircraft-for-australia-25911
http://aviationweek.com/defense/f-35-unscathed-hostile-fire-green-flag
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewforum.php?f=22
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_F-15_losses
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/russias-once-mighty-fighter-jet-firm-mig-struggling-as-rivals-make-gains/524940.html

If you've ever worked with laptops (or any device) with dead batteries you've probably wondered about how to restore them to working condition...
http://www.atbatt.com/car-battery/how-to-boost-charge-a-dead-car-battery
http://www.chargingchargers.com/tutorials/battery-desulfation.html
http://www.thedoityourselfworld.com/desulfate-lawn-mower-battery.php
http://www.flyingbeet.com/electricg/batteries.html

- as usual thanks to all of the individuals and groups who purchase and use my goods and services
http://sites.google.com/site/dtbnguyen/
http://dtbnguyen.blogspot.com.au/