The Solar wind isa very mild 276 km/sec and there are 9 active sunspots on the sun. The thing to keep in mind, is that these sunspots are all nearly equatorial. These are not high latitude, reverse polarity sunspots. That means the Solar cycle 24 is middle-aged already. Very strange. Flares caused by these sunspots will lack much of the proton power it take to grossly affect Earth. That being said, the Icelandic subglacial volcanic eruption is about to blast ashs into the sky, promising an early and very cold winter for Europe. There was a 6.1 quake in Petaluma, California. There seems to be a correlation between solar activity and the earthquakes we see on Earth.
China Urges U.S. to Halt Close Air Surveillance After Encounter
Source: Pentagon via Bloomberg
A Chinese fighter in international waters buzzed a U.S. Navy surveillance aircraft... Read More
China urged the U.S. to stop close reconnaissance after a Chinese fighter jet had an encounter with U.S. surveillance aircraft last week.
A U.S. navy P-3 anti-submarine plane and a P-8 patrol aircraft conducted a reconnaissance flight within 220 kilometers (137 miles) of Hainan Island and on Aug. 19, Yang Yujun, a spokesman for China’s Ministry of National Defense, said in a statement posted on the ministry’s website.
China sent a fighter to carry out routine identification and verification of the two U.S. planes, according to the statement. The fighter maintained a safe distance from the U.S. planes and the actions of its pilot were professional, China said.
U.S. and Chinese aircraft have had several close encounters over the sea since March, amid rising tensions over China’s territorial claims. The U.S. Navy deployed the Boeing Co. P-8, its newest surveillance aircraft, to the Pacific as part of a strategic shift to Asia.
In the Aug. 19 incident, the U.S. said the Chinese fighter flew within 20 feet of the surveillance aircraft and did a barrel roll over it, actions the White House called provocative. The Chinese J-11 fighter passed the P-8 Poseidon at 90 degrees, with its belly toward the U.S. aircraft to show off its weapons, according to a U.S. Defense Department statement.
China dismissed the U.S. accusation as “totally groundless,” in its statement. The large-scale and frequent air surveillance by the U.S. against China is the root cause of accidents that will endanger military security between the two countries, it said
U.S. Spy Plane, Chinese Fighter Collide Over Sea
Asia: American craft with a crew of 24 lands safely on China's Hainan island, while the other reportedly crashes. Incident strains already shaky bilateral relations.
April 02, 2001|HENRY CHU and PAUL RICHTER | TIMES STAFF WRITERS
BEIJING — A U.S. Navy spy plane and a Chinese fighter jet collided Sunday over the South China Sea, causing the American craft to make an emergency landing in China and the Chinese plane to crash, U.S. and Chinese officials said.
The 24 crew members aboard the EP-3 U.S. reconnaissance plane were unhurt, but U.S. defense officials said they have been unable to establish contact with the crew since the craft came to ground on Hainan island, a Chinese province off the country's southern coast. The pilot of the downed Chinese jet was reported missing.
American diplomats from Beijing were to arrive this morning on Hainan to press for the release of the crew and plane, but it remained unclear how the Chinese would respond. The incident puts more strain on increasingly shaky Sino-U.S. relations.
U.S. officials said they would not be able to determine responsibility for the incident until they talked to crew members. They also warned the Chinese not to enter the top-secret aircraft, which the Americans insisted was "sovereign territory."
China blamed the U.S. for the crash, which occurred about 9:15 a.m. Sunday in China (5:15 p.m. Saturday PST).
Two Chinese F-8 fighters were conducting "normal flight operations" about 65 miles southeast of Hainan when the American EP-3 suddenly veered toward one of the Chinese jets, a statement by the Chinese Foreign Ministry said.
"The nose and left wing of the U.S. plane hit the Chinese plane and caused it to crash," the statement said, adding that rescue crews were searching for the downed Chinese pilot.
"The U.S. should bear full responsibility," declared Zhu Bangzao, a Foreign Ministry spokesman.
But Adm. Dennis Blair, chief of the U.S. Pacific Command, said "common sense" suggests that the lighter, faster Chinese jets caused the collision with the heavier, clumsier EP-3, which is about the size of a Boeing 737.
"Big airplanes like this fly straight and level on their path. Little airplanes zip around them," Blair told reporters in Honolulu. "It's pretty obvious who bumped into who. I'm going on common sense now because I haven't talked to our crew."
According to U.S. officials, the American craft was on a routine surveillance mission out of Kadena Air Base in Okinawa, Japan, when the two fighter jets came up alongside the EP-3 and "intercepted" it.
Although the intentions of the Chinese pilots were unclear, when "two fighter jets come up on [you], they're generally not coming up to say hi," said Lt. Cmdr. Sean Kelly, a spokesman for the U.S. Pacific Command.
Kelly said the EP-3 and one of the Chinese planes bumped into each other, causing enough damage that the pilot of the American craft issued a mayday distress signal and landed the disabled plane at an airfield on Hainan.
Kelly said that under international convention, "any military aircraft is essentially sovereign territory of its owner. So it cannot either be boarded, seized or inspected without the express permission of the U.S. government."
U.S. defense officials said they expected China to "respect the integrity of the aircraft and the well-being and safety of the crew" and to facilitate the repair and return of the EP-3. Beijing said "proper arrangements" had been made for the U.S. crew but did not say where they were.
Sunday's collision is likely to complicate already edgy relations between Washington and Beijing, including on the military front. A few months ago, a high-level People's Liberation Army officer defected to the U.S. in an embarrassing setback for Beijing. In China, authorities have arrested two scholars with U.S. ties and charged one with spying.
This month, the Bush administration is to decide on an arms package for Taiwan, which China claims as part of its territory. Supporters of Taiwan on Capitol Hill have urged the White House to sell the island advanced weapons, including several naval destroyers, to increase its ability to fend off any attack from the mainland.
U.S. officials said the air maneuvers leading up to Sunday's crash are not uncommon, with an intercept by Chinese planes occurring in about one of every three U.S. patrol flights along the Chinese coast. But Blair said that the intercepts "have become more aggressive" over the last couple of months. The U.S. has protested about the "pattern of increasingly unsafe behavior" but "did not get a satisfactory response," he said.
U.S. Aircraft Belongs to Sophisticated Class
The collision appeared to be the first between Chinese and American military planes.
The EP-3 belongs to a sophisticated class of land-based, long-range, anti-submarine patrol aircraft. Military analysts say that it contains top-of-the-line electronic data-gathering equipment that can intercept telephone calls and e-mail as well as radar and fax data.
Military analysts said the crew members would be able to erase all data and disable the surveillance equipment if such moves were deemed necessary.
Chinese Supersonic Sub
China has moved a step closer to creating a supersonic submarine that could travel from Shanghai to San Francisco in less than two hours.
New technology developed by a team of scientists at Harbin Institute of Technology's Complex Flow and Heat Transfer Lab has made it easier for a submarine, or torpedo, to travel at extremely high speeds underwater.
Li Fengchen, professor of fluid machinery and engineering, said the team's innovative approach meant they could now create the complicated air "bubble" required for rapid underwater travel. "We are very excited by its potential," he said.
Water produces more friction, or drag, on an object than air, which means conventional submarines cannot travel as fast as an aircraft.
However, during the cold war, the Soviet military developed a technology called supercavitation, which involves enveloping a submerged vessel inside an air bubble to avoid problems caused by water drag.
A Soviet supercavitation torpedo called Shakval was able to reach a speed of 370km/h or more - much faster than any other conventional torpedoes.
In theory, a supercavitating vessel could reach the speed of sound underwater, or about 5,800km/h, which would reduce the journey time for a transatlantic underwater cruise to less than an hour, and for a transpacific journey to about 100 minutes, according to a report by California Institute of Technology in 2001.
However, supercavitation technology has faced two major problems. First, the submerged vessel has needed to be launched at high speeds, approaching 100km/h, to generate and maintain the air bubble.
Second, it is extremely difficult - if not impossible - to steer the vessel using conventional mechanisms, such as a rudder, which are inside the bubble without any direct contact with water.
As a result, its application has been limited to unmanned vessels, such as torpedoes, but nearly all of these torpedoes were fired in a straight line because they had limited ability to turn.
Li said the team of Chinese scientists had found an innovative means of addressing both problems.
Once in the water, the team's supercavitation vessel would constantly "shower" a special liquid membrane on its own surface. Although this membrane would be worn off by water, in the meantime it could significantly reduce the water drag on the vessel at low speed.
After its speed had reached 75km/h or more the vessel would enter the supercavitation state. The man-made liquid membrane on the vessel surface could help with steering because, with precise control, different levels of friction could be created on different parts of the vessel.
"Our method is different from any other approach, such as vector propulsion," or thrust created by an engine, Li said. "By combining liquid-membrane technology with supercavitation, we can significantly reduce the launch challenges and make cruising control easier."
However, Li said many problems still needed to be solved before supersonic submarine travel became feasible. Besides the control issue, a powerful underwater rocket engine still had to be developed to give the vessel a longer range. The effective range of the Russian supercavitation torpedoes, for example, was only between 11 km and 15 km.
Li said the supercavitation technology was not limited only to military use. In future, it could benefit civilian underwater transport, or water sports such as swimming.
"If a swimsuit can create and hold many tiny bubbles in water, it can significantly reduce the water drag; swimming in water could be as effortless as flying in the sky," he said.
Besides Russia, countries such as Germany, Iran and the United States have been developing vessels or weapons using supercavitation technology.
Professor Wang Guoyu, the head of the Fluid Mechanics Laboratory at Beijing Institute of Technology who is leading another state-funded research project on supercavitation, said the global research community had been troubled for decades by the lack of innovative ideas to address the huge scientific and engineering challenges.
"The size of the bubble is difficult to control, and the vessel is almost impossible to steer," he said. While cruising at high speed during supercavitation, a fin could be snapped off if it touched the water because of the liquid's far greater density.
Despite many scientists worldwide working on similar projects, the latest progress remains unclear because they are regarded as military secrets.
Wang, a member of the water armament committee of the China Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers, said even he had been kept in the dark about recent supercavitation developments in China.
"The primary drive still comes from the military, so most research projects are shrouded in secrecy," he said.
The execution of American journalist James Foley by ISIS represents a terrorist attack against the United States, a White House official told reporters Friday, adding that the organization could “pivot” to attacks on the scale of the September 11, 2001 attacks.
“When you see somebody killed in such a horrific way, that represents a terrorist attack,” White House Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes told reporters.”That represents a terrorist attack against our country, against an American citizen, and Ithinkall of us have the Foley family in our thoughts and prayers.”
Rhodes also defended President Obama’s oft-repeated description of ISIS as a junior varsity team. “I think what the president was speaking to a few months ago was the fact of the after is, you have many different groups operating across the middle east and North Africa,” Rhodes said.”As we shift from a situation in which the counter-terrorism threat principally emanated from al Qaeda core, we are going to need to evaluate which of these groups pose a threat to the United States, which of these groups pose a threat to our personnel in the region, and which of these groups are more localized militia type forces that are potentially dangerous but can be handled by local security forces.”
Asked if ISIS could carry out a 9/11-style attack, Rhodes said that the group doesn’t appear to be planning one. “To date, we have not seen them focus on that type of planning, but that doesn’t mean we’re not going to be very mindful that they could quickly aim to pivot to attacks against Western targets outside of the region,” he said. “If they show the intent or they show plotting against the United States, we’ll be prepared to deal with that as necessary.”
Steven Foley Article from May 1
The truth about Benghazi is finally trickling out. The curtains are lifting. The “smoking gun” has been found.
And how do the news media respond to a lying White House caught red-handed — in a scandal far worse than Watergate, the political scandal by which all others are judged?
They don’t.
Virtually all major news outlets Tuesday ignored the newly declassified emails that confirm — for the first time — that top White House officials put forth lies about the 2012 attack at the U.S. consulate in Libya that killed four Americans.
The emails, the first hard evidence leading straight to the White House, actually spell out that the purpose of the false narrative was to insulate President Obama from foreign policy criticism during his re-election bid
Get Out While you Can
Terry Burnham, former Harvard economics professor, author of “Mean Genes” and “Mean Markets and Lizard Brains,” provocative poster on this page and long-time critic of the Federal Reserve, argues that the Fed’s efforts to strengthen America’s banks have perversely weakened them. (See our 2005 segment with Burnham below about how “lizard brains” influence our economic decisions.)
Last week I had over $1,000,000 in a checking account at Bank of America. Next week, I will have $10,000.
Why am I getting in line to take my money out of Bank of America? Because of Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen, who officially begins her term as chairwoman on Feb. 1.
Before I explain, let me disclose that I have been a stopped clock of criticism of the Federal Reserve for half a decade. That’s because I believe that when the Fed intervenes in markets, it has two effects — both negative. First, it decreases overall wealth by distorting markets and causing bad investment decisions. Second, the members of the Fed become reverse Robin Hoods as they take from the poor (and unsophisticated) investors and give to the rich (and politically connected). These effects have been noticed; a Gallup poll taken in the last few days reports that only the richest Americans support the Fed. (See the table.)
Why do I risk starting a run on Bank of America by withdrawing my money and presuming that many fellow depositors will read this and rush to withdraw too? Because they pay me zero interest. Thus, even an infinitesimal chance Bank of America will not repay me in full, whenever I ask, switches the cost-benefit conclusion from stay to flee.