satellitedriver
Senior Member
Blimp factoids,HISTORY OF THE BLIMPSince 1925, Goodyear blimps have adorned the skies as very visible corporate icons of the world's largest tire and rubber company that began operations in 1898.
In the 1930s, Goodyear built two giant rigid airships for the Navy. Within their envelopes, they had internal metal frames used to maintain their shape. The aircraft measured more than two football fields in length and needed 6.5 million cubic feet of helium to become airborne at its gross weight of more than 400,000 pounds.
The USS Akron and USS Macon were designed as aerial aircraft carriers and could launch and retrieve specially equipped planes while in flight. Although a good concept, sadly, both airships were lost in storms within two years of going into service, effectively ending the era of the rigid airships.
In the 1940s and 1950s, Goodyear built a series of large surveillance airships used to protect merchant fleets along the coast. They also served as early warning radar stations. Some of these airships could stay aloft for more than a week at a time. In fact, an airship of this type still holds the flying endurance record of 11 days in flight. The airship was a Goodyear-built ZPG-2 called the Snow Bird. In March 1957, it flew from Weymouth, Massachusetts, to Europe and Africa and back to Key West, Florida, without refueling or landing. Today, Goodyear operates three airships in the United States -- the Spirit of America, based in the City of Carson, California; the Spirit of Goodyear, based in Akron, Ohio; and the Spirit of Innovation, based in Pompano Beach, Florida.
Blimp!
Over the years, there has been a lot of speculation about the derivation of the term blimp.
The most plausible explanation, experts claim, is that the name originated with Lt. A.D. Cunningham of Great Britain's Royal Navy Air Service. He commanded the air station at Capel, England, during World War I.
As the story goes, while conducting a weekly inspection of the station, Cunningham playfully flipped his thumb at the envelope of His Majesty's Airship SS-12 and an odd noise echoed off the taut fabric.
"Blimp!" he cried out humorously, imitating the sound. As they say the rest is history.
How easily a thread can morph and I am going to help it along.
The Goodyear Blimp had a base in Houston, TX.. I was in sales of electrical supplies.
As any good "cold call" salesman would do, I drove up to the hanger, walked in and introduced intoduced myself to the crew. They were a great bunch of people. They were in the middle of rewiring the light signs that surround the Blimp. I got a tour of the whole operation.
Then, I got down to business. I asked the lead mechanic what electrical supplies they carried when they flew. We climbed into the cab(for lack of a better term) of the Blimp and I was shocked. The pilot seat is little better than a lawn chair, a wheel( like on a ship) sits on the right side of the chair. There are throttles and two rudder pedals and a radio.
I was expecting a really cool, high tech cabin, but instead ,found bare bone functional equiptment.(alot like a UPS pkg car).
The mechanic pulled out the repair kit he kept in the cab for in flight maintenance and I really was shocked. The cheapest fittings one could buy at a discount auto parts store.
I had a long talk (sales talk) with the mechanic and the crew engineer.
I sold them an entire mil spec set of fittings and threw in a new case, with the caveat that I took their old case.
I still have that case and use it often. It is our household catch all for screws, nails and whatever else might be needed for basic repairs.
I often open it and smile knowing I have a piece of history in my hands and that I have my name in a box on a blimp floating around somewhere in this world.
OK, back to thread.
Ron doesn't stand a snowballs chance, no matter how much money he can generate, nor how well intentioned he might happen to be.
PAX
moreluck
golden ticket member
Satellite....I was raised in Akron, so blimps were a common item. That first picture shows the blimp on the building and I think I can make out Oneil on the sign. If that's in Akron it's the Oneil's Department Store. Oneil's and Polsky's were big department stores right across the street from each other like Macy's & Gimble's
wkmac
Well-Known Member
wkmac
Well-Known Member
Although I like a lot of what Ron sez I'm still very open as to who I'll vote for. Outside of Ron and Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich on the democrat side, all the other candidates in both parties IMO would be about the same at the end of the day if elected so what's the point? As a point of order, Dennis wouldn't take the same approach as Paul or Gravel but at least he's got the 8alls to take the gov't where it's already headed but just floor the accelator to get us there quicker and the vast majority in Washington don't want that as much as they don't want a Paul or Gravel approach either. To fast way upsets the apple cart.
Sure each candidate (repub. & democrat) has specific hot topics and issues where they seem to show disagreement from one another but at the end of the day I truly believe the gov't will have grown larger, debt grown with it, I don't think much will change as it relates to our military involvments overseas (contary to the political posturing) because this is how the embedded policy works at the present time and I see none of them willing to stepout and speak of dramatic changes that would return us to a non-interventionist policy.
Much could also be said in the area of economics, education, energy, immigration, etc. but in the end I see where neither side will have any dramatic shift away from the present course. Ron Paul stated early on that he would only run if nominated by his party but he's made comments of late that lead me to think he may do otherwise. The latest rumormill around certain circles is that Ron and Mike Gravel may join together as a independent effort and run in Nov. 08'. I'm not convinced Ron won't run 3rd party but what does have my interest tweaked is a Paul/Gravel or Gravel/Paul ticket. There was talk of a Buchannan/Nader alliance in 04' when Pat interviewed Ralph for his American Conservative magazine and the obvious issues of agreement were overwhelming. Paul/Gravel could begin to pull together a political force of paleo-conservatives and paleo-liberals into a single force and there are a lot of folks on bothsides who so wish this to happen. That's what I'm waiting to see happen because Pat and Ralph showed bothsides we have a ton in common http://www.amconmag.com/2004_06_21/cover.html and the part where we divide can be overcome and compromised.
JMHO
wkmac
Well-Known Member
https://web.archive.org/web/2007081...ge=/Politics/archive/200712/POL20071218b.html
Very interesting op-ed IMO. I always thought Howard Dean would be seen in the future as the father of the new type of political movement (internet based and driven) in respect to how henceforth they would be done. Grassroots citizenery apart from corp. or special interest control via the internet. I guess Al Gore missed this one!
Because Howard failed to capture the nomination (I personally believe he was cut down internally by his own party leadership ie DLC to save 08' for Hillary) people don't IMO understand in the longhaul how his approach revolutionized the political process.
Ron, love him or hate him, is raising more money than the other candidates and from what can be seen it's not large, big money corp. interests but rather the average American who holds a specific point of view and seez Ron as a personification of that POV. Of the 58k plus who raised the $6m in one day are continuing contributors from previous fund raisings and how many are first time suggesting contributory growth I don't know but what is most interesting is the fact that so many folks across numerous political stratems are coming together to support this man.
Traditional liberal civil libertarians who've stayed democrat over the years in the hopes perserving personal liberties and paleo-conservatives who hold strong positions of the founding fathers of remaining away from "entangling alliances" and free market economic thought have and are founding ever growing common ground. Nader started the political merging and Dean showed how you can organize and finance the cause and Ron IMO has merged the 2 into one where past political opposites have realized they have so much in common afterall and where they do differ they agree to disagree and compromise to a greater cause for now. The real surprise of the day is the growth and popularity among the youth and college voter.
I've seen several wonder aloud about the impact of the college youth and the thought of those days in the 60's impacting our society and public policy today from the cuases of the 60's if in several generations we could see a pendulum swing back towards a type of 18th century thinking of what was once called "classical liberal thought" that was the force behind men like Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, Patrick Henry and the like?
Where this goes only time will tell but from the assaults of both the left and the right on this effort, I do believe this movement has some folks at the top of the ruling political left and right that control so to speak American politics really are worried. Why so much media and so much downplay for a farst and incapible political POV that is looney and no chance of winng the nomination much less leading the country? If an ant craps in the woods in Africa do we worry about it contaminating our drinking glass here in America?
I also enjoyed this op-ed piece by Justin Raimondo of anti-war.com
http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=12053
Very interesting op-ed IMO. I always thought Howard Dean would be seen in the future as the father of the new type of political movement (internet based and driven) in respect to how henceforth they would be done. Grassroots citizenery apart from corp. or special interest control via the internet. I guess Al Gore missed this one!
Because Howard failed to capture the nomination (I personally believe he was cut down internally by his own party leadership ie DLC to save 08' for Hillary) people don't IMO understand in the longhaul how his approach revolutionized the political process.
Ron, love him or hate him, is raising more money than the other candidates and from what can be seen it's not large, big money corp. interests but rather the average American who holds a specific point of view and seez Ron as a personification of that POV. Of the 58k plus who raised the $6m in one day are continuing contributors from previous fund raisings and how many are first time suggesting contributory growth I don't know but what is most interesting is the fact that so many folks across numerous political stratems are coming together to support this man.
Traditional liberal civil libertarians who've stayed democrat over the years in the hopes perserving personal liberties and paleo-conservatives who hold strong positions of the founding fathers of remaining away from "entangling alliances" and free market economic thought have and are founding ever growing common ground. Nader started the political merging and Dean showed how you can organize and finance the cause and Ron IMO has merged the 2 into one where past political opposites have realized they have so much in common afterall and where they do differ they agree to disagree and compromise to a greater cause for now. The real surprise of the day is the growth and popularity among the youth and college voter.
I've seen several wonder aloud about the impact of the college youth and the thought of those days in the 60's impacting our society and public policy today from the cuases of the 60's if in several generations we could see a pendulum swing back towards a type of 18th century thinking of what was once called "classical liberal thought" that was the force behind men like Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, Patrick Henry and the like?
Where this goes only time will tell but from the assaults of both the left and the right on this effort, I do believe this movement has some folks at the top of the ruling political left and right that control so to speak American politics really are worried. Why so much media and so much downplay for a farst and incapible political POV that is looney and no chance of winng the nomination much less leading the country? If an ant craps in the woods in Africa do we worry about it contaminating our drinking glass here in America?
I also enjoyed this op-ed piece by Justin Raimondo of anti-war.com
http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=12053
diesel96
Well-Known Member
Why would you support a Current Rep.Candidate If Ron Paul so staunchley opposes meddling in the middle east and irresponsible spending and borrowing and following the constitution to the tee? It goes against his own philosophy of taking back the rep. party from the Neo's and bringing it back to the Goldwater days of tradition reps.
One other tidbit, I heard on one talk show that the bulk of Ron Pauls supporters and contributors are under the age of 32. Is this a sign of things to come from young reps and independents or just an internet craze.
brett636
Well-Known Member
Because even a bad day with a republican controlled government is better than the best day with a communist...err democrat controlled government.
Interesting tidbit of information. I've heard and read some wild accusations about Ron Paul. None of which really changes my initial decision to not support him in his candidacy. I feel he is strong principled in his beliefs, many of which I support, but his proposed foreign policy is downright dangerous. The enemies of the United States would much welcome a President who promises to never use the military in an offensive manner. We benefit as a country when we are feared by our enemies.
diesel96
Well-Known Member
brett636 said:Because even a bad day with a republican controlled government is better than the best day with a communist...err democrat controlled government.
That's funny, I thought the more liberal leaning views of the democrats was all about liberating. Sounds to me the exact opposite of communism. Lets hope GW and "Mad Dog" Chaney relinquish power when their term is up.
Offering social healthcare and eraticating tax cuts for the wealthy considered all out communism? I suppose the right likes to Ann Coulterize words thru exaggeration and label communism to Democrats. I don't know why they do. Maybe because they hear it over and over again from the TV and radio waves for reassurance that there right and were wrong.
Have we ever had an American era (besides wartime or depression) ruled by social domination, Republican or Democrat. I'm sure "The Historian" WKMAC can answer that.
Brett636 said:
I'm not so sure about that....you ever watch the military channel or Discovery Channel's Future Weapons programs? That would strike fear into me if I was the enemy. Besides I'd much rather have gains in alliances than losses. Which makes us a much more, powerful and serious conventional threat to major powers like China or Russia without the threat of nuclear holocaust. When The US and most free willed countries stand together as one, thats where we will beneifit as a country and gain overwhelming UNITY. Intentionally striking fear in a offensive manner is not a practise use in most forms of disciplined martial arts nor should be used as a freedom fighting military tactic. Knowingly able to defend your borders and your allies first and foremost, secondly, then go in for the offensive kill thru defensive counter attacks that breeds justification, unity and strength. I guess thats why we call it The Department of Defense.
out...Have a good Xmas.
brett636
Well-Known Member
I see nothing "liberating" about giving your government more control over you life whether its health care, retirement, or anything else. Everytime you give up part of your life to your government you are giving away a piece of your liberty. As the quote in my sig says, a government that can do anything for you is capable of doing anything to you. Those are not the principles this country was founded upon. Raising taxes on the wealthy is simply wealth redistribution, but that is a fact you seem to ignore over and over again. "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs." This quote appears to fully encompass your political views.
I'm not so sure about that....you ever watch the military channel or Discovery Channel's Future Weapons programs? That would strike fear into me if I was the enemy. Besides I'd much rather have gains in alliances than losses. Which makes us a much more, powerful and serious conventional threat to major powers like China or Russia without the threat of nuclear holocaust. When The US and most free willed countries stand together as one, thats where we will beneifit as a country and gain overwhelming UNITY. Intentionally striking fear in a offensive manner is not a practise use in most forms of disciplined martial arts nor should be used as a freedom fighting military tactic. Knowingly able to defend your borders and your allies first and foremost, secondly, then go in for the offensive kill thru defensive counter attacks that breeds justification, unity and strength. I guess thats why we call it The Department of Defense.
Unfortunately few, if any, of our enemies can view the discovery channel. While our military technology is becoming ever more deadly, and much more accurate, those that would like to see the destruction of America feel they can do so based on divine intervention. The best defense is a good offense, and this has been proven since the Iraq invasion. Libya gave up its amibitions for nuclear weapons very quickly after Saddam's regime fell. North Korea was a severe threat a couple of years ago, but now seems eager to work with us in breaking up their nuclear arms programs. President Bush has had to focus his own foreign policies to reverse the rising number of dangerous countries and organizations allowed to flourish under the Clinton Presidency. In fact, he has been doing so with the support both politically and militarily of our allies. Ron Paul's movement will reverse what good has come from our military operations overseas.
diesel96
Well-Known Member
brett636
Well-Known Member
You couldn't be further from the truth. The country was founded upon the rights of the individual to pursue whatever makes himself/herself happy. Not cradle to the grave entitlements, and definitely less, not more, government control over their lives.
You seem so quick to put down corporations, when all they do is produce and provide the goods and services you and I enjoy everyday. The regulations you mentioned only make it more expensive for the consumer. Its a private corporation which produces that motorcycle in your avatar, but its the government that requires them to put useless smog control devices on it making it more expensive for you to purchase. When it comes to gasoline the government mandates some 30+ different blends of gasoline depending on what region of the country it is going to leading to higher prices for everyone. More government regulation only hurts those on the lower end of the income scales, and those are the very people you act like you want to help. What I find ironic is someone whose paycheck comes from a corporation is so quick to turn around and blame corporations for the worlds problems.
I am an American first, teamster second.
tieguy
Banned
You'd make one heck of a center manager.
you're one to talk with your unprovoked attacks on other posters here who happen to disagree with you. Ron might do better if you dissasociate yourself from his campaign.
brett636
Well-Known Member
You'd make one heck of a center manager.
I'm not so sure about that, but I will say you make for one heck of an uninformed voter.
Similar threads
