Connect with us

Re: Audio Precision System One Dual Domani Measuirement Systems

Discussion in 'Electronic Repair' started by Phil Allison, Dec 30, 2011.

  1. We were, but you had said that a single small airplane would not be a
    practical tool of war, and I was refuting that. IMHO a single stealth
    airplane, seeming appearing out of nowhere 10 minutes from London
    with an atomic bomb would have been a very practical tool of war.

    Especially if the US public was led to believe that there was another
    one headed for the east coast of the US, for example New York City,
    Boston, Washington DC, etc.

    Or if there were two such airplanes, one hitting New York from Europe
    and one hitting L.A. from "Japan" (not directly, obviously), that would
    have been the end of the war.

    IMHO one of the big reasons that Japan surrendered after the second
    atomic bombing was that they were unaware there was no fourth bomb, the
    first having been set of on US soil.

    If (again speculation) the US had not invaded Europe in June of 1944,
    my original comment, and the Luftwaffe had both a stealth bomber and atomic
    bombs to drop from it, the war would of turned out differently.

    As for Germany stopping its atomic bomb development program in 1942, how many
    times did Saddam Huesein start his and Iran stop theirs in the last 20 years?

  2. David Looser

    David Looser Guest

    You were privy to the deliberations of the Japanese government? I'm
    An awful lot of "ifs" there!
    The US threw enormous recourses at building an atomic bomb, recourses that
    Germany simply didn't have in 1944. They didn't have the recourses to build
    a transatlantic stealth bomber either. The fighter (which of course never
    saw action) was no more than a concept demonstrator, it didn't have the
    range to reach the UK let alone the US, nor did it have the load-carrying
    capability to carry an atomic bomb. How long would it have taken Germany,
    already coming under serious pressure from the Red Army and seriously short
    of fuel, materials and manpower to develop both?

  3. Ken

    Ken Guest

    Sweden use DVB-T2 on VHF Band III in some areas for HDTV.
  4. Oh, come on. I said IMHO, and it was exactly that, an opionon of someone
    born after the war, commenting in 2012 what they did in 1945.
    Yes, that's why it's speculaton.

    I have no idea. What we do know is that the US accomplished most of it
    through "brute force" (my words) by throwing enormous recourses (your words)
    at it.

    Germany may not of had the resources, but they may of had better scientists.
    They certainly were years ahead of the Allies in rocket science.

    As long as we are speculating, I started this with the timing of the US
    invasion of occupied France, June 6, 1944, and saying that things would
    of turned out differently if it had occured a year or two later. Care
    to speculate on what the Soviet Army would of done too?

  5. "Would have", or "would've" if we're being informal.

    Isn't there a usenet rule that when you start correcting grammar or
    spelling errors, you always make at least one of you own?
  6. Terry Casey

    Terry Casey Guest

    Is that what it says in American history books?

    I think you will find that it was an Allied invasion ...
  7. I know, I was wondering if anyone was actually paying attention. :)

  8. J G Miller

    J G Miller Guest



    According to the NOVA program "Hitler and the Bomb"


    "This was not because the country lacked the scientists,
    resources, or will, but rather because its leaders
    did not really try."

    According to "Hitler's Bomb" by Rainer Karlsch published in March 2005,
    the NSDAP regime did succeed in creating a dirty bomb but lacked
    the pure grade uranium required for a true atomic bomb.

  9. Don Pearce

    Don Pearce Guest

    Why do people write and say "of"? It makes absolutely no sense at all.

  10. There is a story (of questionable validity) that work on atomic weapons was
    halted, because they were based on "Jewish" science.
  11. J G Miller

    J G Miller Guest

    It is all to do with the inevitable consonant and vowel shifting that
    occurs in dialects and languages, something like

    formally he would have

    can become he would avv

    which becomes he would aff

    which become he would of
  12. A lot (which I was taught not use) of things have changed in the last 50
    years and English has mutated. In my case, I don't really care, I try to
    use what I remember is proper grammar, but sometimes I am behind the times
    or fail.

    You can imagine my shock the first time I read that someone was gifted a
    blender and other modernizations that have occured in the last decade.

    But, sometimes I am just being a wise guy because on the internet no one
    notices, and one can break the rules, such as starting a sentence with but.

    On that note on a local mailing list, someone asked:

    "Many people have been recomending me to study to become a technical
    writer. Does anyone know anything about it? Is there a demand in Israel?
    Whats the pay like? How advanced does my English have to be?"

    I wrote back "Your English is not good enough."

    He never even said thank you.

  13. David Looser

    David Looser Guest

    OK :)
    Just because they were years ahead in rocket science doesn't mean they were
    years ahead in everything. For example they had nothing to compare with the
    British "Ultra" code-breaking operation. Also they lagged behind the allies
    with Radar. When it comes to nuclear science, many of their best scientists
    left the country in the late pre-war period either because they were Jewish
    or because they were unwilling to work for the Nazis. These scientists then
    lent their expertise to the Manhattan project. The US atomic bomb
    development effort was greatly aided by the contribution of scientists from
    Germany or from countries occupied by Germany.
    Allied invasion!

    Would have done about what? By 1944 the Red Army was on a roll which Germany
    was unable to stop. Had there been no D-day landing then in my view the
    Soviets would simply have gone on to occupy the whole of Germany, and
    probably Italy and all the countries occupied by Germany as well.
    Whether they would have been able to set up puppet communist regimes in them
    (and keep them all in order) they way they just about managed in Eastern
    Europe is another matter entirely.


  14. Because it sounds like the perfectly acceptable word [would've]
  15. It's also an indication that the person is a visual or aural thinker and
    does not think in words.

    A very common trait of creative people.

  16. Don Pearce

    Don Pearce Guest

    Never mind what it sounds like. Does it make any sense?

  17. Is that the reflexing someone mentioned, or just a general term for
    cheap circuit techniques? I'm not familiar with the name, but (a) I'm in
    UK (b) I'm not in the trade.

    In a similar vein (though OT for UTB), Amstrad put actually useful - as
    opposed to just gaming - computing into many homes and small businesses
    where there would not have been any otherwise, especially with his PCW
    (personal computer Word processor) series that included a printer. The
    machines were often derided by others but provided computing - with
    printing, so therefore actually of some use - at a low price. (In UK, in
    I think about the early '80s.)
    Was it purely that they were deaf? If so, would they have been one of
    the few cases where an external preamp (in the room, not masthead) was
    actually useful (or were the noise figures of external preamps pretty
    bad then)?
    J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G.5AL-IS-P--Ch++(p)[email protected]+Sh0!:`)DNAf

    The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a
    profound truth may well be another profound truth. -Niels Bohr, physicist
  18. David Looser

    David Looser Guest

    Do you mean that the war could have been avoided completely, or that the US
    could have stayed out?
    An interesting claim. Who do you claim was "goading" the Japanese? And what
    evidence do you have to back it up?

  19. FDR was pro-war (or anti-NAZI, depending upon your point of view).

    The US had large anti-war (pro-peace) and fascist (pro-Nazi), and
    isolationist (do what you want, just don't do it here) populations.
    Combined they were enough to prevent him from joining the war.

    The fact that the Japanese attacked the US, and (by accident) the attack
    was a surprise gave FDR the excuse he needed.

    So while it would of been likely that the US did not enter the war in 1941
    if there was no attack on Pearl Harbor, eventually Roosevelt would have found
    a way, or an attack would of happened.

    As for the war not happening at all, if the King of England, who was a
    fascist supporter had not been forced to abdicate, when Germany invaded
    the Studentenland, he would not of declared war on Germany.

    If Germany had kept its nonagression pact with the Soviet Union, and been
    satisifed with Europe, there may not have been a "world" war.

    Not likely, but a long train of "ifs" that were possible.

  20. You have a strange idea of the power of the monarch in the UK. He would
    have done as he was told or face the consequences. If he wasn't allowed to
    marry who he wanted (and stay king), do you really think he could
    influence something far more important like a declaration of war?
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day