<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_29_1316210</id>
	<title>Russian Stealth Fighter Makes Its First Flight</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1264773600000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"The long-awaited Russian stealth fighter, codenamed <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi\_PAK\_FA">PAK FA</a> or T-50, has <a href="http://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFTRE60S0V220100129">had its first test flight</a> today. This <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&amp;prev=\_t&amp;hl=en&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;layout=1&amp;eotf=1&amp;u=http\%3A\%2F\%2Flenta.ru\%2Fnews\%2F2010\%2F01\%2F29\%2Ffirstflight\%2F&amp;sl=ru&amp;tl=en">Google translation of a Russian article</a> has a photo of the jet. Production is supposed to begin in 2015; the AP reports that <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/29/AR2010012900461\_pf.html">India is helping</a> with development. It's reportedly <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/7095384/Russia-to-test-stealth-fighter-as-rearmament-cranks-into-gear.html">designed to compete with America's F-22</a> (first flight: 1997). Relatedly, according to Wikipedia, Japan is planning to fly its own stealth fighter, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi\_ATD-X">ATD-X</a>, which we have <a href="//tech.slashdot.org/story/07/10/06/179246/Japanese-Stealth-Fighter-Announced-as-Return-of-the-Zero">previously discussed</a>, in 2011."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " The long-awaited Russian stealth fighter , codenamed PAK FA or T-50 , has had its first test flight today .
This Google translation of a Russian article has a photo of the jet .
Production is supposed to begin in 2015 ; the AP reports that India is helping with development .
It 's reportedly designed to compete with America 's F-22 ( first flight : 1997 ) .
Relatedly , according to Wikipedia , Japan is planning to fly its own stealth fighter , the ATD-X , which we have previously discussed , in 2011 .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "The long-awaited Russian stealth fighter, codenamed PAK FA or T-50, has had its first test flight today.
This Google translation of a Russian article has a photo of the jet.
Production is supposed to begin in 2015; the AP reports that India is helping with development.
It's reportedly designed to compete with America's F-22 (first flight: 1997).
Relatedly, according to Wikipedia, Japan is planning to fly its own stealth fighter, the ATD-X, which we have previously discussed, in 2011.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950132</id>
	<title>Re:Catching up?</title>
	<author>dunkelfalke</author>
	<datestamp>1264783800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Probably <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U49n1JuWAmc" title="youtube.com">this</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Probably this [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Probably this [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908</id>
	<title>Stealthy ?</title>
	<author>daveime</author>
	<datestamp>1264778220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>has a photo of the jet.</i></p><p>So not *that* stealthy then ? Of course, I guess if it was that good, the pilot would never be able to find where he parked the thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>has a photo of the jet.So not * that * stealthy then ?
Of course , I guess if it was that good , the pilot would never be able to find where he parked the thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>has a photo of the jet.So not *that* stealthy then ?
Of course, I guess if it was that good, the pilot would never be able to find where he parked the thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30964554</id>
	<title>Re:Chronic Problem</title>
	<author>laddiebuck</author>
	<datestamp>1264882680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You forget that it was the arms race with the US (which the US could afford with the greatest ease) which originally led to the total unworkability and collapse of the Soviet Union (in the long run, of course). Nowadays Russia has more money (due to oil), so it wouldn't go unworkable, but good weapons still need money, and the US has still got much more.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You forget that it was the arms race with the US ( which the US could afford with the greatest ease ) which originally led to the total unworkability and collapse of the Soviet Union ( in the long run , of course ) .
Nowadays Russia has more money ( due to oil ) , so it would n't go unworkable , but good weapons still need money , and the US has still got much more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forget that it was the arms race with the US (which the US could afford with the greatest ease) which originally led to the total unworkability and collapse of the Soviet Union (in the long run, of course).
Nowadays Russia has more money (due to oil), so it wouldn't go unworkable, but good weapons still need money, and the US has still got much more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951412</id>
	<title>Re:Nah, time for a new fighter program</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264788360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is a good story in that wikipedia link:
<p>
"On December 23, 2002, an Iraqi MiG-25 shot down a U.S. Air Force unmanned MQ-1 Predator drone, which was performing armed reconnaissance over Iraq. This was the first time in history that an aircraft and an unmanned drone had engaged in combat. Predators had been armed with AIM-92 Stinger air-to-air missiles, and were being used to "bait" Iraqi fighter planes, then run. In this incident, the Predator did not run, but instead fired one of the Stingers, which missed, while the MiG's missile did not."
</p><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...an interesting case of somebody putting their life on the line vs somebody fighting from a distance; of an American missile that missed vs a Russian missile that scored a hit; and particularly interesting given the F22 and T50 <i>might</i> be the last of their breed with the onslaught of UAVs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a good story in that wikipedia link : " On December 23 , 2002 , an Iraqi MiG-25 shot down a U.S. Air Force unmanned MQ-1 Predator drone , which was performing armed reconnaissance over Iraq .
This was the first time in history that an aircraft and an unmanned drone had engaged in combat .
Predators had been armed with AIM-92 Stinger air-to-air missiles , and were being used to " bait " Iraqi fighter planes , then run .
In this incident , the Predator did not run , but instead fired one of the Stingers , which missed , while the MiG 's missile did not .
" ...an interesting case of somebody putting their life on the line vs somebody fighting from a distance ; of an American missile that missed vs a Russian missile that scored a hit ; and particularly interesting given the F22 and T50 might be the last of their breed with the onslaught of UAVs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a good story in that wikipedia link:

"On December 23, 2002, an Iraqi MiG-25 shot down a U.S. Air Force unmanned MQ-1 Predator drone, which was performing armed reconnaissance over Iraq.
This was the first time in history that an aircraft and an unmanned drone had engaged in combat.
Predators had been armed with AIM-92 Stinger air-to-air missiles, and were being used to "bait" Iraqi fighter planes, then run.
In this incident, the Predator did not run, but instead fired one of the Stingers, which missed, while the MiG's missile did not.
"
 ...an interesting case of somebody putting their life on the line vs somebody fighting from a distance; of an American missile that missed vs a Russian missile that scored a hit; and particularly interesting given the F22 and T50 might be the last of their breed with the onslaught of UAVs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949012</id>
	<title>Re:Stealthy ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264778940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hear the US is working on a fighter so stealthy that once it's in motion, even the pilot doesn't know exactly where it is. The F-6626 Heisenberg.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hear the US is working on a fighter so stealthy that once it 's in motion , even the pilot does n't know exactly where it is .
The F-6626 Heisenberg .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hear the US is working on a fighter so stealthy that once it's in motion, even the pilot doesn't know exactly where it is.
The F-6626 Heisenberg.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30953188</id>
	<title>Time to Bring in the Copyright Lawyers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264794960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um....designed to compete with the F-22? It's a total freaking ripoff. Just like their space shuttle. We just need to dropship some RIAA lawyers overthere and we won't have to worry about the plane since it clearly is breaking all kinds of copy infringment</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um....designed to compete with the F-22 ?
It 's a total freaking ripoff .
Just like their space shuttle .
We just need to dropship some RIAA lawyers overthere and we wo n't have to worry about the plane since it clearly is breaking all kinds of copy infringment</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um....designed to compete with the F-22?
It's a total freaking ripoff.
Just like their space shuttle.
We just need to dropship some RIAA lawyers overthere and we won't have to worry about the plane since it clearly is breaking all kinds of copy infringment</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950716</id>
	<title>Re:Does someone at NATO have a sense of humour?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264785960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>The Sukhoi PAK FA... NATO reporting name: Firefox</i> </p></div><p>To fly it, YOU MUST THINK IN RUSSIAN!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Sukhoi PAK FA... NATO reporting name : Firefox To fly it , YOU MUST THINK IN RUSSIAN !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> The Sukhoi PAK FA... NATO reporting name: Firefox To fly it, YOU MUST THINK IN RUSSIAN!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951470</id>
	<title>Re:Can aircraft keep ahead of missile tech?</title>
	<author>GooberToo</author>
	<datestamp>1264788540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ridiculous! How many SAM generations came during that time?</p></div><p>You call into question the number of generations out one side of your mouth and point out the duration of a single generation out the other. Somehow the irony seems to have been missed.</p><p>There hasn't been very many generations. Period. Second of all, in order to create a generation which can counter, you generally have to know what it is you're countering. At best they have a lot of speculation. Third of all, the math doesn't even make sense. Why spend billions creating new target/trigger mechanisms to counter a threat which your not likely to see for at least a decade and immediately know little to nothing about. Fourth, had they started a generation to counter a threat, at that time, they would have no clue what is it they are suppose to counter, and even if they did, the technology gap (counter the counter) between then and how is likely to be huge.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>And what are they good for, truly? To carry cruise missiles?</p> </div><p>No, dropping bombs. Imagine that, a bomber dropping bombs. Who would of thought. The fact that you're one, confused about its primary role, and two, still have no clue what a bomber is used for, pretty well puts and end to the discussion. Why your comment has been modded up is beyond me.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I think it's going to take a similar catastrophe to move us past the idea of manned combat aircraft.</p></div><p>Not likely. Right now there are some serious limitations to unmanned fighters. The likes of the F22 and F35 are likely to be the last of their kind but they are expected to be in service for the next thirty to fifty years. The fact their anticipated service life is so long pretty well implies that not only do our unmanned fighters have a very long way to do, but that everyone else has a vastly farther distance to travel. Take a serious look around at technological capabilities of other countries. The only countries likely to be able to field an unmanned fighter capable of providing a serious threat to an F22 or F35 is likely to be our ally and even still, likely to be at least a decade away. And that decade could easily be two or more. Aside from Russia, its likely to be a decade or two before another fighter poses a significant air risk to eh F22 and F35, let alone an unmanned vehicle. Furthermore, its extremely unlikely that the first generation of unmanned fighters will be a significant threat to planes like the F22 and F35 because of high latencies between CnC and the aircraft which means some type of advanced AI is going to be required to compensate - and even still, they must first be able to find the aircraft to even engage.</p><p>Long story short, you post may be "interesting", but its interesting in the same way any other fiction is.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ridiculous !
How many SAM generations came during that time ? You call into question the number of generations out one side of your mouth and point out the duration of a single generation out the other .
Somehow the irony seems to have been missed.There has n't been very many generations .
Period. Second of all , in order to create a generation which can counter , you generally have to know what it is you 're countering .
At best they have a lot of speculation .
Third of all , the math does n't even make sense .
Why spend billions creating new target/trigger mechanisms to counter a threat which your not likely to see for at least a decade and immediately know little to nothing about .
Fourth , had they started a generation to counter a threat , at that time , they would have no clue what is it they are suppose to counter , and even if they did , the technology gap ( counter the counter ) between then and how is likely to be huge.And what are they good for , truly ?
To carry cruise missiles ?
No , dropping bombs .
Imagine that , a bomber dropping bombs .
Who would of thought .
The fact that you 're one , confused about its primary role , and two , still have no clue what a bomber is used for , pretty well puts and end to the discussion .
Why your comment has been modded up is beyond me.I think it 's going to take a similar catastrophe to move us past the idea of manned combat aircraft.Not likely .
Right now there are some serious limitations to unmanned fighters .
The likes of the F22 and F35 are likely to be the last of their kind but they are expected to be in service for the next thirty to fifty years .
The fact their anticipated service life is so long pretty well implies that not only do our unmanned fighters have a very long way to do , but that everyone else has a vastly farther distance to travel .
Take a serious look around at technological capabilities of other countries .
The only countries likely to be able to field an unmanned fighter capable of providing a serious threat to an F22 or F35 is likely to be our ally and even still , likely to be at least a decade away .
And that decade could easily be two or more .
Aside from Russia , its likely to be a decade or two before another fighter poses a significant air risk to eh F22 and F35 , let alone an unmanned vehicle .
Furthermore , its extremely unlikely that the first generation of unmanned fighters will be a significant threat to planes like the F22 and F35 because of high latencies between CnC and the aircraft which means some type of advanced AI is going to be required to compensate - and even still , they must first be able to find the aircraft to even engage.Long story short , you post may be " interesting " , but its interesting in the same way any other fiction is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ridiculous!
How many SAM generations came during that time?You call into question the number of generations out one side of your mouth and point out the duration of a single generation out the other.
Somehow the irony seems to have been missed.There hasn't been very many generations.
Period. Second of all, in order to create a generation which can counter, you generally have to know what it is you're countering.
At best they have a lot of speculation.
Third of all, the math doesn't even make sense.
Why spend billions creating new target/trigger mechanisms to counter a threat which your not likely to see for at least a decade and immediately know little to nothing about.
Fourth, had they started a generation to counter a threat, at that time, they would have no clue what is it they are suppose to counter, and even if they did, the technology gap (counter the counter) between then and how is likely to be huge.And what are they good for, truly?
To carry cruise missiles?
No, dropping bombs.
Imagine that, a bomber dropping bombs.
Who would of thought.
The fact that you're one, confused about its primary role, and two, still have no clue what a bomber is used for, pretty well puts and end to the discussion.
Why your comment has been modded up is beyond me.I think it's going to take a similar catastrophe to move us past the idea of manned combat aircraft.Not likely.
Right now there are some serious limitations to unmanned fighters.
The likes of the F22 and F35 are likely to be the last of their kind but they are expected to be in service for the next thirty to fifty years.
The fact their anticipated service life is so long pretty well implies that not only do our unmanned fighters have a very long way to do, but that everyone else has a vastly farther distance to travel.
Take a serious look around at technological capabilities of other countries.
The only countries likely to be able to field an unmanned fighter capable of providing a serious threat to an F22 or F35 is likely to be our ally and even still, likely to be at least a decade away.
And that decade could easily be two or more.
Aside from Russia, its likely to be a decade or two before another fighter poses a significant air risk to eh F22 and F35, let alone an unmanned vehicle.
Furthermore, its extremely unlikely that the first generation of unmanned fighters will be a significant threat to planes like the F22 and F35 because of high latencies between CnC and the aircraft which means some type of advanced AI is going to be required to compensate - and even still, they must first be able to find the aircraft to even engage.Long story short, you post may be "interesting", but its interesting in the same way any other fiction is.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951640</id>
	<title>Re:Can aircraft keep ahead of missile tech?</title>
	<author>Whorhay</author>
	<datestamp>1264789080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From the Wiki page on the six day war the Israeli's only lost 46 aircraft during the entire conflict. I couldn't determine if those were all fighters or not but even so that would be less than one quarter of their operational fighters. Considering they managed to win in such a crushing manner it's hard to understand how that's considered a high rate of attrition, especially for the time period. Additionally Eqypt alone had twice the fighter aircraft they did.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the Wiki page on the six day war the Israeli 's only lost 46 aircraft during the entire conflict .
I could n't determine if those were all fighters or not but even so that would be less than one quarter of their operational fighters .
Considering they managed to win in such a crushing manner it 's hard to understand how that 's considered a high rate of attrition , especially for the time period .
Additionally Eqypt alone had twice the fighter aircraft they did .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the Wiki page on the six day war the Israeli's only lost 46 aircraft during the entire conflict.
I couldn't determine if those were all fighters or not but even so that would be less than one quarter of their operational fighters.
Considering they managed to win in such a crushing manner it's hard to understand how that's considered a high rate of attrition, especially for the time period.
Additionally Eqypt alone had twice the fighter aircraft they did.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30953440</id>
	<title>Not as stealthy as it needs to be ...</title>
	<author>Old97</author>
	<datestamp>1264796160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The flaw in all this is that we can see these aircraft from the U.S. , Russia, et al, so how stealthy are they really?  A really stealthy aircraft is the one developed and used by the air force of Bhutan.  I know, you'll say that nobody has seen this plane.  That proves my point doesn't it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The flaw in all this is that we can see these aircraft from the U.S. , Russia , et al , so how stealthy are they really ?
A really stealthy aircraft is the one developed and used by the air force of Bhutan .
I know , you 'll say that nobody has seen this plane .
That proves my point does n't it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The flaw in all this is that we can see these aircraft from the U.S. , Russia, et al, so how stealthy are they really?
A really stealthy aircraft is the one developed and used by the air force of Bhutan.
I know, you'll say that nobody has seen this plane.
That proves my point doesn't it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949204</id>
	<title>Re:Stealthy ?</title>
	<author>delinear</author>
	<datestamp>1264779900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or just put one of those balls on it that people put on their car aerials so they can see where they parked in a busy car park.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or just put one of those balls on it that people put on their car aerials so they can see where they parked in a busy car park .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or just put one of those balls on it that people put on their car aerials so they can see where they parked in a busy car park.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950164</id>
	<title>Can aircraft keep ahead of missile tech?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264783860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The viability of manned aircraft is a question of technology. By the end of WWII, proximity-fused shells on US Navy ships made convention air attack against them a suicide mission. If the US Navy was forced to fight an identical opponent in '46, air attack would likely have been abandoned. The Japanese resorted to suicide attacks in part because conventional attacks were already suicide, at least a crash dive might let you get a hit. The cruise missile a refinement of the suicide plane concept. The idea of dive-bombing or torpedoing a warship from the air quickly fell out of favor. But that was ok for airplanes since they could carry missiles and engage from beyond the range of return fire. While aircraft did indeed use gravity bombs and later guided bombs against naval targets in the following decades, that was usually in third-world wars or against small patrol ships. Nobody would think of risking that against a proper warship.</p><p>The rise of the SAM's made things trickier for land-attack craft. A multi-million dollar jet is risked attacking tanks that are worth maybe $200k. The attrition rate under the 6 Day War was so high it was thought the end of manned combat aircraft had been reached. But subsequent development of Wild Weasel tactics and improved ECM put the SAM's on the defensive. But technology continues to improve. The early missiles were laughable. The F-4 went to Vietnam armed only with missiles and did not achieve an air-to-air kill until the gatling-equipped version arrived. But missile tech is very, very good now. The last gun kill achieved by the Air Force was an A-10 versus a Hind in Gulf War 1.</p><p>The question now is one of development cycles. The F-22 program started in '81 and didn't go operational until 2005. Ridiculous! How many SAM generations came during that time? And how much cheaper will those weapons be? The damn B-2's cost a billion bucks a pop and are irreplaceable. We're not cranking up the production lines for any more. And what are they good for, truly? To carry cruise missiles? Why do we need a fancy bomber for that? Why not just load cruise missiles on C-17's and kick them out the back a thousand miles from target? There, now you have cargo-bombers and can buy more aiframes for the same money.</p><p>The Poles kept cavalry units up until WWII. They finally were disabused of the idea by Germans with panzers. I think it's going to take a similar catastrophe to move us past the idea of manned combat aircraft.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The viability of manned aircraft is a question of technology .
By the end of WWII , proximity-fused shells on US Navy ships made convention air attack against them a suicide mission .
If the US Navy was forced to fight an identical opponent in '46 , air attack would likely have been abandoned .
The Japanese resorted to suicide attacks in part because conventional attacks were already suicide , at least a crash dive might let you get a hit .
The cruise missile a refinement of the suicide plane concept .
The idea of dive-bombing or torpedoing a warship from the air quickly fell out of favor .
But that was ok for airplanes since they could carry missiles and engage from beyond the range of return fire .
While aircraft did indeed use gravity bombs and later guided bombs against naval targets in the following decades , that was usually in third-world wars or against small patrol ships .
Nobody would think of risking that against a proper warship.The rise of the SAM 's made things trickier for land-attack craft .
A multi-million dollar jet is risked attacking tanks that are worth maybe $ 200k .
The attrition rate under the 6 Day War was so high it was thought the end of manned combat aircraft had been reached .
But subsequent development of Wild Weasel tactics and improved ECM put the SAM 's on the defensive .
But technology continues to improve .
The early missiles were laughable .
The F-4 went to Vietnam armed only with missiles and did not achieve an air-to-air kill until the gatling-equipped version arrived .
But missile tech is very , very good now .
The last gun kill achieved by the Air Force was an A-10 versus a Hind in Gulf War 1.The question now is one of development cycles .
The F-22 program started in '81 and did n't go operational until 2005 .
Ridiculous ! How many SAM generations came during that time ?
And how much cheaper will those weapons be ?
The damn B-2 's cost a billion bucks a pop and are irreplaceable .
We 're not cranking up the production lines for any more .
And what are they good for , truly ?
To carry cruise missiles ?
Why do we need a fancy bomber for that ?
Why not just load cruise missiles on C-17 's and kick them out the back a thousand miles from target ?
There , now you have cargo-bombers and can buy more aiframes for the same money.The Poles kept cavalry units up until WWII .
They finally were disabused of the idea by Germans with panzers .
I think it 's going to take a similar catastrophe to move us past the idea of manned combat aircraft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The viability of manned aircraft is a question of technology.
By the end of WWII, proximity-fused shells on US Navy ships made convention air attack against them a suicide mission.
If the US Navy was forced to fight an identical opponent in '46, air attack would likely have been abandoned.
The Japanese resorted to suicide attacks in part because conventional attacks were already suicide, at least a crash dive might let you get a hit.
The cruise missile a refinement of the suicide plane concept.
The idea of dive-bombing or torpedoing a warship from the air quickly fell out of favor.
But that was ok for airplanes since they could carry missiles and engage from beyond the range of return fire.
While aircraft did indeed use gravity bombs and later guided bombs against naval targets in the following decades, that was usually in third-world wars or against small patrol ships.
Nobody would think of risking that against a proper warship.The rise of the SAM's made things trickier for land-attack craft.
A multi-million dollar jet is risked attacking tanks that are worth maybe $200k.
The attrition rate under the 6 Day War was so high it was thought the end of manned combat aircraft had been reached.
But subsequent development of Wild Weasel tactics and improved ECM put the SAM's on the defensive.
But technology continues to improve.
The early missiles were laughable.
The F-4 went to Vietnam armed only with missiles and did not achieve an air-to-air kill until the gatling-equipped version arrived.
But missile tech is very, very good now.
The last gun kill achieved by the Air Force was an A-10 versus a Hind in Gulf War 1.The question now is one of development cycles.
The F-22 program started in '81 and didn't go operational until 2005.
Ridiculous! How many SAM generations came during that time?
And how much cheaper will those weapons be?
The damn B-2's cost a billion bucks a pop and are irreplaceable.
We're not cranking up the production lines for any more.
And what are they good for, truly?
To carry cruise missiles?
Why do we need a fancy bomber for that?
Why not just load cruise missiles on C-17's and kick them out the back a thousand miles from target?
There, now you have cargo-bombers and can buy more aiframes for the same money.The Poles kept cavalry units up until WWII.
They finally were disabused of the idea by Germans with panzers.
I think it's going to take a similar catastrophe to move us past the idea of manned combat aircraft.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948926</id>
	<title>Oh noes!</title>
	<author>Pojut</author>
	<datestamp>1264778460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hide the women and children and the number 0, they're coming!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hide the women and children and the number 0 , they 're coming !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hide the women and children and the number 0, they're coming!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951046</id>
	<title>Re:Stealthy ?</title>
	<author>TubeSteak</author>
	<datestamp>1264787100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I hear the US is working on a fighter so stealthy that once it's in motion, even the pilot doesn't know exactly where it is. The F-6626 Heisenberg.</p></div><p>Put a cat in the plane and you'll have scientists from around the world intently following its every move.<br>Heck, you might even be able to get away with painting a cat on the nosecone.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hear the US is working on a fighter so stealthy that once it 's in motion , even the pilot does n't know exactly where it is .
The F-6626 Heisenberg.Put a cat in the plane and you 'll have scientists from around the world intently following its every move.Heck , you might even be able to get away with painting a cat on the nosecone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hear the US is working on a fighter so stealthy that once it's in motion, even the pilot doesn't know exactly where it is.
The F-6626 Heisenberg.Put a cat in the plane and you'll have scientists from around the world intently following its every move.Heck, you might even be able to get away with painting a cat on the nosecone.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950892</id>
	<title>Mig 31?</title>
	<author>PowerVegetable</author>
	<datestamp>1264786500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I thought the mig 31 was the so called "raptor killer".  What ever happened to that?  <br> <br>Who even needs to counter the f22 these days? I guess this thing is pretty much meant for export.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought the mig 31 was the so called " raptor killer " .
What ever happened to that ?
Who even needs to counter the f22 these days ?
I guess this thing is pretty much meant for export .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought the mig 31 was the so called "raptor killer".
What ever happened to that?
Who even needs to counter the f22 these days?
I guess this thing is pretty much meant for export.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951410</id>
	<title>F-22, RIP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264788360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So smart of our politicians to discontinue. Maybe we can counter the new Russian planes with sunshine and lollipops. They'll certainly make a million of these things, license the tech to China to make a million more, then we'll see how well the 25 operational F-22's we have work out for us.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So smart of our politicians to discontinue .
Maybe we can counter the new Russian planes with sunshine and lollipops .
They 'll certainly make a million of these things , license the tech to China to make a million more , then we 'll see how well the 25 operational F-22 's we have work out for us .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So smart of our politicians to discontinue.
Maybe we can counter the new Russian planes with sunshine and lollipops.
They'll certainly make a million of these things, license the tech to China to make a million more, then we'll see how well the 25 operational F-22's we have work out for us.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30952236</id>
	<title>Re:Nah, time for a new fighter program</title>
	<author>fahrbot-bot</author>
	<datestamp>1264791060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Double checked wiki, this story is confirmed there.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
If it's on Wikipedia, it must be true<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Double checked wiki , this story is confirmed there .
If it 's on Wikipedia , it must be true : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Double checked wiki, this story is confirmed there.
If it's on Wikipedia, it must be true :-)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30953486</id>
	<title>Stealth Fighters</title>
	<author>physburn</author>
	<datestamp>1264796400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>  All these Stealth Fighters, are going to give
Air Traffic Control a lot of fun. Look forward to
see a lot a crashes, they is a downside of
planes being invisible, they can't see each
other until they hit each other.
<p>
---
</p><p>
<a href="http://www.feeddistiller.com/blogs/Aviation/feed.html" title="feeddistiller.com">Aviation</a> [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ <a href="http://www.feeddistiller.com/" title="feeddistiller.com">Feed Distiller</a> [feeddistiller.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All these Stealth Fighters , are going to give Air Traffic Control a lot of fun .
Look forward to see a lot a crashes , they is a downside of planes being invisible , they ca n't see each other until they hit each other .
--- Aviation [ feeddistiller.com ] Feed @ Feed Distiller [ feeddistiller.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  All these Stealth Fighters, are going to give
Air Traffic Control a lot of fun.
Look forward to
see a lot a crashes, they is a downside of
planes being invisible, they can't see each
other until they hit each other.
---

Aviation [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ Feed Distiller [feeddistiller.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30953012</id>
	<title>Re:Nah, time for a new fighter program</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264794180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Air Force misunderstood the MiG25, which was an interceptor, not an air superiority fighter. So you get the F-15, designed to counter a nonexistent aircraft (the MiG25 air superiority fighter), which itself was designed to counter a nonexistent aircraft, the B70 strategic bomber. Such is the Fog of (Cold) War. Had the Soviets been working on a Mach 3 bomber we too would have made a high speed sled with no thought beyond interception a priority as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Air Force misunderstood the MiG25 , which was an interceptor , not an air superiority fighter .
So you get the F-15 , designed to counter a nonexistent aircraft ( the MiG25 air superiority fighter ) , which itself was designed to counter a nonexistent aircraft , the B70 strategic bomber .
Such is the Fog of ( Cold ) War .
Had the Soviets been working on a Mach 3 bomber we too would have made a high speed sled with no thought beyond interception a priority as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Air Force misunderstood the MiG25, which was an interceptor, not an air superiority fighter.
So you get the F-15, designed to counter a nonexistent aircraft (the MiG25 air superiority fighter), which itself was designed to counter a nonexistent aircraft, the B70 strategic bomber.
Such is the Fog of (Cold) War.
Had the Soviets been working on a Mach 3 bomber we too would have made a high speed sled with no thought beyond interception a priority as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950454</id>
	<title>Re:Chronic Problem</title>
	<author>Kijori</author>
	<datestamp>1264785000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just to add to that - Russian people in general are extremely proud of their country's military power; most large Russian towns will have regular military parades, parks with military hardware for people to take their photo with, retired missiles and jet fighters on display beside main roads and so on. Spending a large portion of their GDP on their armed forces isn't seen as a frivolity or opposed by anything but a tiny minority of Russian citizens.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just to add to that - Russian people in general are extremely proud of their country 's military power ; most large Russian towns will have regular military parades , parks with military hardware for people to take their photo with , retired missiles and jet fighters on display beside main roads and so on .
Spending a large portion of their GDP on their armed forces is n't seen as a frivolity or opposed by anything but a tiny minority of Russian citizens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just to add to that - Russian people in general are extremely proud of their country's military power; most large Russian towns will have regular military parades, parks with military hardware for people to take their photo with, retired missiles and jet fighters on display beside main roads and so on.
Spending a large portion of their GDP on their armed forces isn't seen as a frivolity or opposed by anything but a tiny minority of Russian citizens.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949010</id>
	<title>That's nothing!</title>
	<author>codeButcher</author>
	<datestamp>1264778940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My country has also developed a stealth airplane. It's so stealthy nobody has seen it yet.
</p><p>Or the tax money used to develop it....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My country has also developed a stealth airplane .
It 's so stealthy nobody has seen it yet .
Or the tax money used to develop it... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My country has also developed a stealth airplane.
It's so stealthy nobody has seen it yet.
Or the tax money used to develop it....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30953512</id>
	<title>Re:Russia finally catching up to US</title>
	<author>Renraku</author>
	<datestamp>1264796460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems like every time we come out with a revolutionary new design for military equipment, either Russia or China copies it.  For examples, see the American X-29 and the Russian Su-47.  Also, <a href="http://www.seattlepi.com/national/spy301.shtml" title="seattlepi.com">http://www.seattlepi.com/national/spy301.shtml</a> [seattlepi.com] is relevant to this concept.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems like every time we come out with a revolutionary new design for military equipment , either Russia or China copies it .
For examples , see the American X-29 and the Russian Su-47 .
Also , http : //www.seattlepi.com/national/spy301.shtml [ seattlepi.com ] is relevant to this concept .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems like every time we come out with a revolutionary new design for military equipment, either Russia or China copies it.
For examples, see the American X-29 and the Russian Su-47.
Also, http://www.seattlepi.com/national/spy301.shtml [seattlepi.com] is relevant to this concept.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949008</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30953380</id>
	<title>... "which we have previously discussed, in 2011"</title>
	<author>WormholeFiend</author>
	<datestamp>1264795860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um, check your calendar?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , check your calendar ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, check your calendar?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014</id>
	<title>Does someone at NATO have a sense of humour?</title>
	<author>blincoln</author>
	<datestamp>1264778940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...or did someone fabricate this part of the Wikipedia article?</p><p><i>The Sukhoi PAK FA... NATO reporting name: Firefox</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...or did someone fabricate this part of the Wikipedia article ? The Sukhoi PAK FA... NATO reporting name : Firefox</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...or did someone fabricate this part of the Wikipedia article?The Sukhoi PAK FA... NATO reporting name: Firefox</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924</id>
	<title>Love the smell of military secrets in the morning</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264778400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have yet to understand why new military technology is so widely publicized.  It's like a magician showing all the secrets of his magic show at the first showing.  Pen and Teller being the exception here. Operating a military force like Pen and Teller just sounds like shear idiocy.  Is this all because the military weapons market has turned into a mainstream business unit?  Or is this a ploy by news outlets to prevent their websites being filtered by the great firewall?  Check it out, we relay military secrets, therefore you should let slide our anti-communist propaganda.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have yet to understand why new military technology is so widely publicized .
It 's like a magician showing all the secrets of his magic show at the first showing .
Pen and Teller being the exception here .
Operating a military force like Pen and Teller just sounds like shear idiocy .
Is this all because the military weapons market has turned into a mainstream business unit ?
Or is this a ploy by news outlets to prevent their websites being filtered by the great firewall ?
Check it out , we relay military secrets , therefore you should let slide our anti-communist propaganda .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have yet to understand why new military technology is so widely publicized.
It's like a magician showing all the secrets of his magic show at the first showing.
Pen and Teller being the exception here.
Operating a military force like Pen and Teller just sounds like shear idiocy.
Is this all because the military weapons market has turned into a mainstream business unit?
Or is this a ploy by news outlets to prevent their websites being filtered by the great firewall?
Check it out, we relay military secrets, therefore you should let slide our anti-communist propaganda.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949154</id>
	<title>Here...</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1264779720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxWZiSdWvns" title="youtube.com">... have a video.</a> [youtube.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>... have a video .
[ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... have a video.
[youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951274</id>
	<title>Re:Can aircraft keep ahead of missile tech?</title>
	<author>brennz</author>
	<datestamp>1264787880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The rise of the SAM's made things trickier for land-attack craft. A multi-million dollar jet is risked attacking tanks that are worth maybe $200k".</p><p>Tanks cost more than 200k.</p><p>True ground attack aircraft such as an A-10 are dramatically different from the a standard high flying fighter.  An A-10 may have some vulnerability to SAMs, but they are much harder to shoot down than say an attack helicopter.  Generally when A-10s are operating, it is as a close air support, so they have some measure of security on the ground already.  The A-10 will supposedly be retired for a lack of speed vs the newest SAMs though.</p><p>Air forces have a significant number of measures they take against ground radar and SAM sites.  Cruise missiles, ecm birds, and anti-radiation missiles, paired with spy satellite data feeds and drones make operating a SAM a short lifespan occupation against an advanced military.  Manpad SAMs have limited ranges and low effectiveness so it isn't like they will fill in the gap either.</p><p>Your conclusion that we are near the death of the manned fighter due to advanced SAMs is highly suspect.</p><p>The reduction of the manned fighter to a minimal role is more likely because:<br>Every private can potentially fly a drone<br>Drones are not casualties<br>It is pretty easy to have drones sitting around waiting for target sightings, loitering over an area of operations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The rise of the SAM 's made things trickier for land-attack craft .
A multi-million dollar jet is risked attacking tanks that are worth maybe $ 200k " .Tanks cost more than 200k.True ground attack aircraft such as an A-10 are dramatically different from the a standard high flying fighter .
An A-10 may have some vulnerability to SAMs , but they are much harder to shoot down than say an attack helicopter .
Generally when A-10s are operating , it is as a close air support , so they have some measure of security on the ground already .
The A-10 will supposedly be retired for a lack of speed vs the newest SAMs though.Air forces have a significant number of measures they take against ground radar and SAM sites .
Cruise missiles , ecm birds , and anti-radiation missiles , paired with spy satellite data feeds and drones make operating a SAM a short lifespan occupation against an advanced military .
Manpad SAMs have limited ranges and low effectiveness so it is n't like they will fill in the gap either.Your conclusion that we are near the death of the manned fighter due to advanced SAMs is highly suspect.The reduction of the manned fighter to a minimal role is more likely because : Every private can potentially fly a droneDrones are not casualtiesIt is pretty easy to have drones sitting around waiting for target sightings , loitering over an area of operations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The rise of the SAM's made things trickier for land-attack craft.
A multi-million dollar jet is risked attacking tanks that are worth maybe $200k".Tanks cost more than 200k.True ground attack aircraft such as an A-10 are dramatically different from the a standard high flying fighter.
An A-10 may have some vulnerability to SAMs, but they are much harder to shoot down than say an attack helicopter.
Generally when A-10s are operating, it is as a close air support, so they have some measure of security on the ground already.
The A-10 will supposedly be retired for a lack of speed vs the newest SAMs though.Air forces have a significant number of measures they take against ground radar and SAM sites.
Cruise missiles, ecm birds, and anti-radiation missiles, paired with spy satellite data feeds and drones make operating a SAM a short lifespan occupation against an advanced military.
Manpad SAMs have limited ranges and low effectiveness so it isn't like they will fill in the gap either.Your conclusion that we are near the death of the manned fighter due to advanced SAMs is highly suspect.The reduction of the manned fighter to a minimal role is more likely because:Every private can potentially fly a droneDrones are not casualtiesIt is pretty easy to have drones sitting around waiting for target sightings, loitering over an area of operations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30958820</id>
	<title>Re:Love the smell of military secrets in the morni</title>
	<author>tftp</author>
	<datestamp>1264780980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>I have yet to understand why new military technology is so widely publicized.</i>
</p><p>
Other comments already mentioned some aspects of why. I can only add that it's pointless to try to hide the existence of such a program - it's large, and it will produce airplanes that will be manufactured, deployed and eventually flown, so that anyone with a camera can take a picture.
</p><p>
What is secret is exact capabilities - how fast and how far it can fly with what load, how much it can carry, how fast it can climb, how many targets it can simultaneously track and fire upon, etc. Numbers are important when you have two comparable airplanes chasing each other.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have yet to understand why new military technology is so widely publicized .
Other comments already mentioned some aspects of why .
I can only add that it 's pointless to try to hide the existence of such a program - it 's large , and it will produce airplanes that will be manufactured , deployed and eventually flown , so that anyone with a camera can take a picture .
What is secret is exact capabilities - how fast and how far it can fly with what load , how much it can carry , how fast it can climb , how many targets it can simultaneously track and fire upon , etc .
Numbers are important when you have two comparable airplanes chasing each other .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I have yet to understand why new military technology is so widely publicized.
Other comments already mentioned some aspects of why.
I can only add that it's pointless to try to hide the existence of such a program - it's large, and it will produce airplanes that will be manufactured, deployed and eventually flown, so that anyone with a camera can take a picture.
What is secret is exact capabilities - how fast and how far it can fly with what load, how much it can carry, how fast it can climb, how many targets it can simultaneously track and fire upon, etc.
Numbers are important when you have two comparable airplanes chasing each other.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949230</id>
	<title>Re:Love the smell of military secrets in the morni</title>
	<author>delinear</author>
	<datestamp>1264780020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If it's a stealth plane that nobody knows about, I'd think that would be a major marketing boon.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If it 's a stealth plane that nobody knows about , I 'd think that would be a major marketing boon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it's a stealth plane that nobody knows about, I'd think that would be a major marketing boon.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30964850</id>
	<title>Re:Can aircraft keep ahead of missile tech?</title>
	<author>laddiebuck</author>
	<datestamp>1264884720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And in a nice bit of irony, the best defence against missiles is guns again -- albeit very small, very rapidly-firing ones, not the big naval guns of the past.<br> <br>
But seriously, I wouldn't be surprised if gunnery made a comeback in the next 50 years. Shells are cheap, missiles are expensive. Just send half a dozen or a dozen low-cost unmanned attacking drones against, say, a destroyer and it suddenly it runs out of missiles and it's toast. But the same destroyer can carry thousands and thousands of shells, which only need to have a hit rate of a hundredth of the missile to be just as effective. A shell also doesn't worry about radar locks. You just fire it at one part of the sky and it'll go off at a certain distance -- in some new shells, the gun can even set a timer electronically just before firing. Guns have quietly come so far in the pat half-century, that when they become a useful alternative to SAMs, people will be taken by surprise.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And in a nice bit of irony , the best defence against missiles is guns again -- albeit very small , very rapidly-firing ones , not the big naval guns of the past .
But seriously , I would n't be surprised if gunnery made a comeback in the next 50 years .
Shells are cheap , missiles are expensive .
Just send half a dozen or a dozen low-cost unmanned attacking drones against , say , a destroyer and it suddenly it runs out of missiles and it 's toast .
But the same destroyer can carry thousands and thousands of shells , which only need to have a hit rate of a hundredth of the missile to be just as effective .
A shell also does n't worry about radar locks .
You just fire it at one part of the sky and it 'll go off at a certain distance -- in some new shells , the gun can even set a timer electronically just before firing .
Guns have quietly come so far in the pat half-century , that when they become a useful alternative to SAMs , people will be taken by surprise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And in a nice bit of irony, the best defence against missiles is guns again -- albeit very small, very rapidly-firing ones, not the big naval guns of the past.
But seriously, I wouldn't be surprised if gunnery made a comeback in the next 50 years.
Shells are cheap, missiles are expensive.
Just send half a dozen or a dozen low-cost unmanned attacking drones against, say, a destroyer and it suddenly it runs out of missiles and it's toast.
But the same destroyer can carry thousands and thousands of shells, which only need to have a hit rate of a hundredth of the missile to be just as effective.
A shell also doesn't worry about radar locks.
You just fire it at one part of the sky and it'll go off at a certain distance -- in some new shells, the gun can even set a timer electronically just before firing.
Guns have quietly come so far in the pat half-century, that when they become a useful alternative to SAMs, people will be taken by surprise.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30953194</id>
	<title>Re:Nah, time for a new fighter program</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1264794960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Total overkill."</p><p>Which is what it should have been, since it could have faced superior numbers of Warsaw Pact aircraft.</p><p>That design philosophy has produced a superb fighter which lasted for decades, killed plenty of MIGs with no end in sight, and brought death and destruction to numerous ground targets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Total overkill .
" Which is what it should have been , since it could have faced superior numbers of Warsaw Pact aircraft.That design philosophy has produced a superb fighter which lasted for decades , killed plenty of MIGs with no end in sight , and brought death and destruction to numerous ground targets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Total overkill.
"Which is what it should have been, since it could have faced superior numbers of Warsaw Pact aircraft.That design philosophy has produced a superb fighter which lasted for decades, killed plenty of MIGs with no end in sight, and brought death and destruction to numerous ground targets.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951576</id>
	<title>Stolen</title>
	<author>DrugCheese</author>
	<datestamp>1264788840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure it relates to this: <a href="http://archive.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/10/30/223902" title="newsmax.com">http://archive.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/10/30/223902</a> [newsmax.com] Can't find a better source</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure it relates to this : http : //archive.newsmax.com/articles/ ? a = 2000/10/30/223902 [ newsmax.com ] Ca n't find a better source</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure it relates to this: http://archive.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/10/30/223902 [newsmax.com] Can't find a better source</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949360</id>
	<title>Re:Does someone at NATO have a sense of humour?</title>
	<author>UnknowingFool</author>
	<datestamp>1264780560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most likely it's the real NATO code name.  NATO has a history of giving code names to technology of Soviet Union/Chinese origin.  By convention <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_NATO\_reporting\_names\_for\_fighters" title="wikipedia.org">fighters</a> [wikipedia.org] have been named starting with "F".</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most likely it 's the real NATO code name .
NATO has a history of giving code names to technology of Soviet Union/Chinese origin .
By convention fighters [ wikipedia.org ] have been named starting with " F " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most likely it's the real NATO code name.
NATO has a history of giving code names to technology of Soviet Union/Chinese origin.
By convention fighters [wikipedia.org] have been named starting with "F".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949560</id>
	<title>Optical Stealth?</title>
	<author>PHPNerd</author>
	<datestamp>1264781460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Did anyone RTFA and read that it will have "invisibility in the optical, radar, and infrared wavelengths"? Does that mean this jet has some sort of real invisibility cloak?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did anyone RTFA and read that it will have " invisibility in the optical , radar , and infrared wavelengths " ?
Does that mean this jet has some sort of real invisibility cloak ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Did anyone RTFA and read that it will have "invisibility in the optical, radar, and infrared wavelengths"?
Does that mean this jet has some sort of real invisibility cloak?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949186</id>
	<title>Re:Does someone at NATO have a sense of humour?</title>
	<author>Thuktun</author>
	<datestamp>1264779840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For those who may have never seen it, c.f. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083943/" title="imdb.com">http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083943/</a> [imdb.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For those who may have never seen it , c.f .
http : //www.imdb.com/title/tt0083943/ [ imdb.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For those who may have never seen it, c.f.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083943/ [imdb.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950026</id>
	<title>Re:Stealthy ?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1264783380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Than&rsquo;s easy. Just walk around, push the button, and listen where the &ldquo;be-beep&rdquo; comes from.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Than    s easy .
Just walk around , push the button , and listen where the    be-beep    comes from .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Than’s easy.
Just walk around, push the button, and listen where the “be-beep” comes from.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949472</id>
	<title>AP missed something TASS didn't</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264780980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>According to <a href="http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=14767585" title="itar-tass.com" rel="nofollow">TASS</a> [itar-tass.com],</p><p><div class="quote"><p>According to official sources, the Russian Defence Ministry plans to buy the aircraft beginning 2015. Until the time, Su-35s of the "four++" generation will be in service. Contracts are signed to supply 48 Su-35 planes to the Air Force.</p></div><p>That is, Russia has at least made an effort to keep up with the USA with "four++" generation aircraft, which according to the above are still ordered even with only four years to go until new stuff comes out.  This "fifth" generation aircraft is probably just a formalization of what they already have.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to TASS [ itar-tass.com ] ,According to official sources , the Russian Defence Ministry plans to buy the aircraft beginning 2015 .
Until the time , Su-35s of the " four + + " generation will be in service .
Contracts are signed to supply 48 Su-35 planes to the Air Force.That is , Russia has at least made an effort to keep up with the USA with " four + + " generation aircraft , which according to the above are still ordered even with only four years to go until new stuff comes out .
This " fifth " generation aircraft is probably just a formalization of what they already have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to TASS [itar-tass.com],According to official sources, the Russian Defence Ministry plans to buy the aircraft beginning 2015.
Until the time, Su-35s of the "four++" generation will be in service.
Contracts are signed to supply 48 Su-35 planes to the Air Force.That is, Russia has at least made an effort to keep up with the USA with "four++" generation aircraft, which according to the above are still ordered even with only four years to go until new stuff comes out.
This "fifth" generation aircraft is probably just a formalization of what they already have.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951868</id>
	<title>Re:Chronic Problem</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1264789860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But that rarely stopped it from making new weapons... that were largely more robust, if less sophisticated, than their western counterparts.</p></div><p>Russia proper was never particularly technologically advanced in military sense. Soviet Union was, and there were many objective reasons for that, but in historical perspective, it was a fairly short period of Russian history, and modern Russian state is no USSR (even if it tries hard to project the same "tough guy" image, playing on the old fears the West still has back from Soviet times).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But that rarely stopped it from making new weapons... that were largely more robust , if less sophisticated , than their western counterparts.Russia proper was never particularly technologically advanced in military sense .
Soviet Union was , and there were many objective reasons for that , but in historical perspective , it was a fairly short period of Russian history , and modern Russian state is no USSR ( even if it tries hard to project the same " tough guy " image , playing on the old fears the West still has back from Soviet times ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But that rarely stopped it from making new weapons... that were largely more robust, if less sophisticated, than their western counterparts.Russia proper was never particularly technologically advanced in military sense.
Soviet Union was, and there were many objective reasons for that, but in historical perspective, it was a fairly short period of Russian history, and modern Russian state is no USSR (even if it tries hard to project the same "tough guy" image, playing on the old fears the West still has back from Soviet times).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949108</id>
	<title>US Sub-Contractors</title>
	<author>the\_hellspawn</author>
	<datestamp>1264779540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would appear that a US Sub-Contractor sold some information on stealth technology. This is why outsourcing is bad. "the AP reports that India is helping with development", so I say no more outsourcing to foreigners for any portion of Defense contracts period!!!! Just my take on this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would appear that a US Sub-Contractor sold some information on stealth technology .
This is why outsourcing is bad .
" the AP reports that India is helping with development " , so I say no more outsourcing to foreigners for any portion of Defense contracts period ! ! ! !
Just my take on this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would appear that a US Sub-Contractor sold some information on stealth technology.
This is why outsourcing is bad.
"the AP reports that India is helping with development", so I say no more outsourcing to foreigners for any portion of Defense contracts period!!!!
Just my take on this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949522</id>
	<title>I didn't see it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264781280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess it works.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess it works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess it works.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949304</id>
	<title>Re:Love the smell of military secrets in the morni</title>
	<author>kevinNCSU</author>
	<datestamp>1264780320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In time of war you keep military advancements secrets so they can be used to catch your enemy off guard and destroy them. When strong, appear weak.  Draw your enemy in to attack you, and then destroy them.  In times of peace, you tout your military strengths to dissuade the enemy from coming at all because you don't want to fight wars.  When weak, appear strong.  Or when you don't want to fight, appear prepared to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In time of war you keep military advancements secrets so they can be used to catch your enemy off guard and destroy them .
When strong , appear weak .
Draw your enemy in to attack you , and then destroy them .
In times of peace , you tout your military strengths to dissuade the enemy from coming at all because you do n't want to fight wars .
When weak , appear strong .
Or when you do n't want to fight , appear prepared to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In time of war you keep military advancements secrets so they can be used to catch your enemy off guard and destroy them.
When strong, appear weak.
Draw your enemy in to attack you, and then destroy them.
In times of peace, you tout your military strengths to dissuade the enemy from coming at all because you don't want to fight wars.
When weak, appear strong.
Or when you don't want to fight, appear prepared to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949662</id>
	<title>Countries need defense against the US</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1264781880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder if Iraq + Afghanistan + threats against Iran have increased demand for military aircraft throughout the world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if Iraq + Afghanistan + threats against Iran have increased demand for military aircraft throughout the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if Iraq + Afghanistan + threats against Iran have increased demand for military aircraft throughout the world.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951786</id>
	<title>Re:Love the smell of military secrets in the morni</title>
	<author>Idbar</author>
	<datestamp>1264789560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>It's like a magician showing all the secrets of his magic show at the first showing.</i> <br>
Well, to me, is exactly like a regular magician. They show they have a new trick, and some will be interested on paying for it. It's still a trick. The interesting thing here, is who will pay (and will be allowed to pay for) and who will try to reverse engineer the trick.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's like a magician showing all the secrets of his magic show at the first showing .
Well , to me , is exactly like a regular magician .
They show they have a new trick , and some will be interested on paying for it .
It 's still a trick .
The interesting thing here , is who will pay ( and will be allowed to pay for ) and who will try to reverse engineer the trick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's like a magician showing all the secrets of his magic show at the first showing.
Well, to me, is exactly like a regular magician.
They show they have a new trick, and some will be interested on paying for it.
It's still a trick.
The interesting thing here, is who will pay (and will be allowed to pay for) and who will try to reverse engineer the trick.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949856</id>
	<title>Re:Nah, time for a new fighter program</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264782660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>to keep Russia bankrupt trying to catch up to it.</p><p>1. Come up with super tech military program<br>2. Fund it until it becomes too costly<br>3. Wait for the other guy to spin up to compete against it<br>4. Move the bar further out</p></div><p>The story of the F-15, as related to me by an Air Force guy. The Russians come out with a new interceptor, the MiG-25. In reality it's a lead sled, can go really freakin' fast in one direction and fire off some missiles but it has very little flexibility and is not that good of an aircraft. But since we don't have good intel on it, we start guessing as to what it's capabilities would be, making up all sorts of shit. The Air Force freaks out and demands we build a counter and that eventually became the F-15, fully capable of doing everything the Foxbat was supposed to do. Total overkill.</p><p>Doublechecked wiki, this story is confirmed there.</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mig-25" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mig-25</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>to keep Russia bankrupt trying to catch up to it.1 .
Come up with super tech military program2 .
Fund it until it becomes too costly3 .
Wait for the other guy to spin up to compete against it4 .
Move the bar further outThe story of the F-15 , as related to me by an Air Force guy .
The Russians come out with a new interceptor , the MiG-25 .
In reality it 's a lead sled , can go really freakin ' fast in one direction and fire off some missiles but it has very little flexibility and is not that good of an aircraft .
But since we do n't have good intel on it , we start guessing as to what it 's capabilities would be , making up all sorts of shit .
The Air Force freaks out and demands we build a counter and that eventually became the F-15 , fully capable of doing everything the Foxbat was supposed to do .
Total overkill.Doublechecked wiki , this story is confirmed there.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mig-25 [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to keep Russia bankrupt trying to catch up to it.1.
Come up with super tech military program2.
Fund it until it becomes too costly3.
Wait for the other guy to spin up to compete against it4.
Move the bar further outThe story of the F-15, as related to me by an Air Force guy.
The Russians come out with a new interceptor, the MiG-25.
In reality it's a lead sled, can go really freakin' fast in one direction and fire off some missiles but it has very little flexibility and is not that good of an aircraft.
But since we don't have good intel on it, we start guessing as to what it's capabilities would be, making up all sorts of shit.
The Air Force freaks out and demands we build a counter and that eventually became the F-15, fully capable of doing everything the Foxbat was supposed to do.
Total overkill.Doublechecked wiki, this story is confirmed there.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mig-25 [wikipedia.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949152</id>
	<title>Re:Does someone at NATO have a sense of humour?</title>
	<author>autoevolution</author>
	<datestamp>1264779720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Theres other fox named russian fighters: foxbat, foxhount etc...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Theres other fox named russian fighters : foxbat , foxhount etc.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Theres other fox named russian fighters: foxbat, foxhount etc...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30956042</id>
	<title>Why?</title>
	<author>ozbird</author>
	<datestamp>1264763880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why bother building an expensive stealth fighter when they have Vladimir Putin, Russia's answer to Chuck Norris?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why bother building an expensive stealth fighter when they have Vladimir Putin , Russia 's answer to Chuck Norris ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why bother building an expensive stealth fighter when they have Vladimir Putin, Russia's answer to Chuck Norris?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951126</id>
	<title>Re:Stealthy ?</title>
	<author>The Grim Reefer2</author>
	<datestamp>1264787400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>has a photo of the jet.</i> </p><p>So not *that* stealthy then ? Of course, I guess if it was that good, the pilot would never be able to find where he parked the thing.</p></div><p>That was in the original plans. However there were design problems in the magic lasso department and a serious shortage of qualified Amazon pilots.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>has a photo of the jet .
So not * that * stealthy then ?
Of course , I guess if it was that good , the pilot would never be able to find where he parked the thing.That was in the original plans .
However there were design problems in the magic lasso department and a serious shortage of qualified Amazon pilots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> has a photo of the jet.
So not *that* stealthy then ?
Of course, I guess if it was that good, the pilot would never be able to find where he parked the thing.That was in the original plans.
However there were design problems in the magic lasso department and a serious shortage of qualified Amazon pilots.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949078</id>
	<title>Re:Love the smell of military secrets in the morni</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264779360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I have yet to understand why new military technology is so widely publicized.  It's like a magician showing all the secrets of his magic show at the first showing.  Pen and Teller being the exception here. Operating a military force like Pen and Teller just sounds like shear idiocy.  Is this all because the military weapons market has turned into a mainstream business unit?  Or is this a ploy by news outlets to prevent their websites being filtered by the great firewall?  Check it out, we relay military secrets, therefore you should let slide our anti-communist propaganda.</p></div><p>Because, presumably, they will want to sell the aircraft or a derivative of that aircraft.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have yet to understand why new military technology is so widely publicized .
It 's like a magician showing all the secrets of his magic show at the first showing .
Pen and Teller being the exception here .
Operating a military force like Pen and Teller just sounds like shear idiocy .
Is this all because the military weapons market has turned into a mainstream business unit ?
Or is this a ploy by news outlets to prevent their websites being filtered by the great firewall ?
Check it out , we relay military secrets , therefore you should let slide our anti-communist propaganda.Because , presumably , they will want to sell the aircraft or a derivative of that aircraft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have yet to understand why new military technology is so widely publicized.
It's like a magician showing all the secrets of his magic show at the first showing.
Pen and Teller being the exception here.
Operating a military force like Pen and Teller just sounds like shear idiocy.
Is this all because the military weapons market has turned into a mainstream business unit?
Or is this a ploy by news outlets to prevent their websites being filtered by the great firewall?
Check it out, we relay military secrets, therefore you should let slide our anti-communist propaganda.Because, presumably, they will want to sell the aircraft or a derivative of that aircraft.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949466</id>
	<title>When did we discuss it?</title>
	<author>Ksevio</author>
	<datestamp>1264780980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Relatedly, according to Wikipedia, Japan is planning to fly its own stealth fighter, the ATD-X, which we have previously discussed, in 2011.</p></div><p>Funny I don't remember talking about that.  Must still need to do some catching up on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Relatedly , according to Wikipedia , Japan is planning to fly its own stealth fighter , the ATD-X , which we have previously discussed , in 2011.Funny I do n't remember talking about that .
Must still need to do some catching up on / .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Relatedly, according to Wikipedia, Japan is planning to fly its own stealth fighter, the ATD-X, which we have previously discussed, in 2011.Funny I don't remember talking about that.
Must still need to do some catching up on /.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949288</id>
	<title>Re:Does someone at NATO have a sense of humour?</title>
	<author>delinear</author>
	<datestamp>1264780260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Although if they crash a lot it'll get renamed the IE, after the noise the pilots make on the way down, "AAAAAIIIIEEEEEE........."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although if they crash a lot it 'll get renamed the IE , after the noise the pilots make on the way down , " AAAAAIIIIEEEEEE......... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although if they crash a lot it'll get renamed the IE, after the noise the pilots make on the way down, "AAAAAIIIIEEEEEE........."</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950034</id>
	<title>Re:Nah, time for a new fighter program</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1264783380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why do you care about bankrupting Russia?  It's China that's the economic threat.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do you care about bankrupting Russia ?
It 's China that 's the economic threat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do you care about bankrupting Russia?
It's China that's the economic threat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30954064</id>
	<title>Competing with F-22?</title>
	<author>Max\_W</author>
	<datestamp>1264756020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Competing with F-22? Gosh, do they really say it? Do they want us to fight with Americans? Budget of New York city alone is larger than a budget of the whole Ukraine.</p><p>A war with Germany would seem as a kindergaten. This is insane.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Competing with F-22 ?
Gosh , do they really say it ?
Do they want us to fight with Americans ?
Budget of New York city alone is larger than a budget of the whole Ukraine.A war with Germany would seem as a kindergaten .
This is insane .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Competing with F-22?
Gosh, do they really say it?
Do they want us to fight with Americans?
Budget of New York city alone is larger than a budget of the whole Ukraine.A war with Germany would seem as a kindergaten.
This is insane.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949962</id>
	<title>Re:Optical Stealth?</title>
	<author>BZ</author>
	<datestamp>1264783140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The google translation is a bit off.  The Russian text says "" (low visibility), not "" (invisibility).  The full sentence in the Google translation:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Fighter will differ maneuverability and invisibility in the optical, infrared and<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; radar wavelengths.</p><p>is better translated as:</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; The fighter will excel at supermaneuverability and low visibility in the optical,<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; infrared, and radar wavelenghts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The google translation is a bit off .
The Russian text says " " ( low visibility ) , not " " ( invisibility ) .
The full sentence in the Google translation :     Fighter will differ maneuverability and invisibility in the optical , infrared and     radar wavelengths.is better translated as :     The fighter will excel at supermaneuverability and low visibility in the optical ,     infrared , and radar wavelenghts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The google translation is a bit off.
The Russian text says "" (low visibility), not "" (invisibility).
The full sentence in the Google translation:
    Fighter will differ maneuverability and invisibility in the optical, infrared and
    radar wavelengths.is better translated as:
    The fighter will excel at supermaneuverability and low visibility in the optical,
    infrared, and radar wavelenghts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950656</id>
	<title>Compulsory picture</title>
	<author>janwedekind</author>
	<datestamp>1264785780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stealth fighters can be detected by the characteristic pattern of reduced precipitation below the body of the aircraft:<br><a href="http://www.roe.ac.uk/~jkd/stealth.jpg" title="roe.ac.uk">http://www.roe.ac.uk/~jkd/stealth.jpg</a> [roe.ac.uk]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stealth fighters can be detected by the characteristic pattern of reduced precipitation below the body of the aircraft : http : //www.roe.ac.uk/ ~ jkd/stealth.jpg [ roe.ac.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stealth fighters can be detected by the characteristic pattern of reduced precipitation below the body of the aircraft:http://www.roe.ac.uk/~jkd/stealth.jpg [roe.ac.uk]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949044</id>
	<title>First flight</title>
	<author>muckracer</author>
	<datestamp>1264779180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually it's been flying for over three years but nobody ever saw it. The plane from the photo is, well, just a carefully chosen look-as-if prop to mislead the world.<br>There IS, however, a way to see the real plane too, but it involves filtering out the light-/infrared- and radar-blocking emanations this plane sends out. Would love to give you more details on constructing an easy home-made device utilizing commonly available kitchen supplies but I am already late for my Doctor's appointment. And last time the session was too short to present the compelling evidence I have gathered, that this plane does keep hovering right over my trailer... o\_O</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually it 's been flying for over three years but nobody ever saw it .
The plane from the photo is , well , just a carefully chosen look-as-if prop to mislead the world.There IS , however , a way to see the real plane too , but it involves filtering out the light-/infrared- and radar-blocking emanations this plane sends out .
Would love to give you more details on constructing an easy home-made device utilizing commonly available kitchen supplies but I am already late for my Doctor 's appointment .
And last time the session was too short to present the compelling evidence I have gathered , that this plane does keep hovering right over my trailer... o \ _O</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually it's been flying for over three years but nobody ever saw it.
The plane from the photo is, well, just a carefully chosen look-as-if prop to mislead the world.There IS, however, a way to see the real plane too, but it involves filtering out the light-/infrared- and radar-blocking emanations this plane sends out.
Would love to give you more details on constructing an easy home-made device utilizing commonly available kitchen supplies but I am already late for my Doctor's appointment.
And last time the session was too short to present the compelling evidence I have gathered, that this plane does keep hovering right over my trailer... o\_O</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30957138</id>
	<title>Re:Horse Catastrophe?</title>
	<author>dunkelfalke</author>
	<datestamp>1264769040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly. Poland and USSR used cavalry pretty successfully. GP probably imagines it like some kind of a fantasy movie, in fact cavalry was used for fast strikes against resting Germans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
Poland and USSR used cavalry pretty successfully .
GP probably imagines it like some kind of a fantasy movie , in fact cavalry was used for fast strikes against resting Germans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
Poland and USSR used cavalry pretty successfully.
GP probably imagines it like some kind of a fantasy movie, in fact cavalry was used for fast strikes against resting Germans.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951232</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949508</id>
	<title>Catching up?</title>
	<author>Cyner</author>
	<datestamp>1264781220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's great that they can contend with our F-22. But what happens when we have a few dozen pilots each remotely commanding a <a href="http://news.slashdot.org/story/09/11/03/1751232/Rise-of-the-Robot-Squadrons" title="slashdot.org">Squadron of UAV</a> [slashdot.org]?
<br> <br>
Honestly, I don't know why people waste their time trying to catch up with something that's already totally outdated.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's great that they can contend with our F-22 .
But what happens when we have a few dozen pilots each remotely commanding a Squadron of UAV [ slashdot.org ] ?
Honestly , I do n't know why people waste their time trying to catch up with something that 's already totally outdated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's great that they can contend with our F-22.
But what happens when we have a few dozen pilots each remotely commanding a Squadron of UAV [slashdot.org]?
Honestly, I don't know why people waste their time trying to catch up with something that's already totally outdated.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949020</id>
	<title>Re:Love the smell of military secrets in the morni</title>
	<author>Vohar</author>
	<datestamp>1264779000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's because it's less about force than show of force. It's "Hey look, we have these now too. Brand new stealth fighters RIGHT HERE BABY."</p><p>With global economies so intertwined, there's really not a huge chance these days of needing some kind of secret weapon force to go against other large countries in large-scale war. So they make the new developments public for the sake of national pride and respect among other countries.</p><p>Plus, it's always fun to show off new toys.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's because it 's less about force than show of force .
It 's " Hey look , we have these now too .
Brand new stealth fighters RIGHT HERE BABY .
" With global economies so intertwined , there 's really not a huge chance these days of needing some kind of secret weapon force to go against other large countries in large-scale war .
So they make the new developments public for the sake of national pride and respect among other countries.Plus , it 's always fun to show off new toys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's because it's less about force than show of force.
It's "Hey look, we have these now too.
Brand new stealth fighters RIGHT HERE BABY.
"With global economies so intertwined, there's really not a huge chance these days of needing some kind of secret weapon force to go against other large countries in large-scale war.
So they make the new developments public for the sake of national pride and respect among other countries.Plus, it's always fun to show off new toys.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30952544</id>
	<title>Re:Nah, time for a new fighter program</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264792260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Overkill? Gee, no sense in making a weapon system that's better than the other guy, i guess...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Overkill ?
Gee , no sense in making a weapon system that 's better than the other guy , i guess.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Overkill?
Gee, no sense in making a weapon system that's better than the other guy, i guess...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949856</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950024</id>
	<title>The Cold War</title>
	<author>re\_organeyes</author>
	<datestamp>1264783380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just got a kick in the butt!</p><p>Not that it ever really rested, but this is just another clue that we can't be going around apologizing to every other nation in the world for being the "bad boys" like our clueless president says we are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just got a kick in the butt ! Not that it ever really rested , but this is just another clue that we ca n't be going around apologizing to every other nation in the world for being the " bad boys " like our clueless president says we are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just got a kick in the butt!Not that it ever really rested, but this is just another clue that we can't be going around apologizing to every other nation in the world for being the "bad boys" like our clueless president says we are.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951830</id>
	<title>Re:Nah, time for a new fighter program</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1264789740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>to keep Russia bankrupt</p></div><p>Good job. It's precisely such sentiments on the American side (which are blown beyond any proportion by the local propaganda machine) that fuel the <a href="http://keep4u.ru/imgs/b/071227/69/6995918f91ce8bf6b1.jpg" title="keep4u.ru">hatred towards US in Russia</a> [keep4u.ru].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>to keep Russia bankruptGood job .
It 's precisely such sentiments on the American side ( which are blown beyond any proportion by the local propaganda machine ) that fuel the hatred towards US in Russia [ keep4u.ru ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to keep Russia bankruptGood job.
It's precisely such sentiments on the American side (which are blown beyond any proportion by the local propaganda machine) that fuel the hatred towards US in Russia [keep4u.ru].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951232</id>
	<title>Horse Catastrophe?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264787760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The Poles kept cavalry units up until WWII. They finally were disabused of the idea by Germans with panzers. I think it's going to take a similar catastrophe to move us past the idea of manned combat aircraft.</p></div><p>The Poles weren't disabused of using horses in WW2. The Germans, had mounted units during WWII, and the Italians conducted a cavalry charge as late as August 1942 (and won!)</p><p>The Polish unit you mention was successful also, and a Free Polish Unit apparently conducted the last Cavalry action of the war in March 1945.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Poles kept cavalry units up until WWII .
They finally were disabused of the idea by Germans with panzers .
I think it 's going to take a similar catastrophe to move us past the idea of manned combat aircraft.The Poles were n't disabused of using horses in WW2 .
The Germans , had mounted units during WWII , and the Italians conducted a cavalry charge as late as August 1942 ( and won !
) The Polish unit you mention was successful also , and a Free Polish Unit apparently conducted the last Cavalry action of the war in March 1945 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Poles kept cavalry units up until WWII.
They finally were disabused of the idea by Germans with panzers.
I think it's going to take a similar catastrophe to move us past the idea of manned combat aircraft.The Poles weren't disabused of using horses in WW2.
The Germans, had mounted units during WWII, and the Italians conducted a cavalry charge as late as August 1942 (and won!
)The Polish unit you mention was successful also, and a Free Polish Unit apparently conducted the last Cavalry action of the war in March 1945.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949198</id>
	<title>Re:Love the smell of military secrets in the morni</title>
	<author>Andy Dodd</author>
	<datestamp>1264779840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Since the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia has been pretty big on foreign military sales.  So yeah, a big motivator here is business.</p><p>Also, it's not like the specific capabilities of the plane are publicized.  It's basically saying, "look at this plane that kicks ass" without specifying exactly how much ass it will kick.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Since the fall of the Soviet Union , Russia has been pretty big on foreign military sales .
So yeah , a big motivator here is business.Also , it 's not like the specific capabilities of the plane are publicized .
It 's basically saying , " look at this plane that kicks ass " without specifying exactly how much ass it will kick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia has been pretty big on foreign military sales.
So yeah, a big motivator here is business.Also, it's not like the specific capabilities of the plane are publicized.
It's basically saying, "look at this plane that kicks ass" without specifying exactly how much ass it will kick.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30952558</id>
	<title>Re:Nah, time for a new fighter program</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264792260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem you'll be facing is that<br>1. Many Russian engineers would work on such a program for free out of ideological or other, higher-than-commercial motives<br>2. It costs less to produce stuff<br>3. The above make money a non-issue<br>4. Just in case it becomes an issue, Russian government can claim some oligarch assets or sell some diamonds/platinum/uranium/gold/oil/etc. to make up for that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem you 'll be facing is that1 .
Many Russian engineers would work on such a program for free out of ideological or other , higher-than-commercial motives2 .
It costs less to produce stuff3 .
The above make money a non-issue4 .
Just in case it becomes an issue , Russian government can claim some oligarch assets or sell some diamonds/platinum/uranium/gold/oil/etc .
to make up for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem you'll be facing is that1.
Many Russian engineers would work on such a program for free out of ideological or other, higher-than-commercial motives2.
It costs less to produce stuff3.
The above make money a non-issue4.
Just in case it becomes an issue, Russian government can claim some oligarch assets or sell some diamonds/platinum/uranium/gold/oil/etc.
to make up for that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949498</id>
	<title>Chronic Problem</title>
	<author>TheMeuge</author>
	<datestamp>1264781160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The chronic problem of the West is using the logic they learned in their own countries when analyzing Russia. Russia was never good to its citizens, and it was hardly ever not on the brink of national bankruptcy. But that rarely stopped it from making new weapons... that were largely more robust, if less sophisticated, than their western counterparts.</p><p>Getting into another arms race with Russia is a recipe for the US bankruptcy as much as it is for Russian... and while overspending on defense in the US would causes political instability, Russia is quite happy to make new weapons while its population starves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The chronic problem of the West is using the logic they learned in their own countries when analyzing Russia .
Russia was never good to its citizens , and it was hardly ever not on the brink of national bankruptcy .
But that rarely stopped it from making new weapons... that were largely more robust , if less sophisticated , than their western counterparts.Getting into another arms race with Russia is a recipe for the US bankruptcy as much as it is for Russian... and while overspending on defense in the US would causes political instability , Russia is quite happy to make new weapons while its population starves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The chronic problem of the West is using the logic they learned in their own countries when analyzing Russia.
Russia was never good to its citizens, and it was hardly ever not on the brink of national bankruptcy.
But that rarely stopped it from making new weapons... that were largely more robust, if less sophisticated, than their western counterparts.Getting into another arms race with Russia is a recipe for the US bankruptcy as much as it is for Russian... and while overspending on defense in the US would causes political instability, Russia is quite happy to make new weapons while its population starves.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949128</id>
	<title>Re:Love the smell of military secrets in the morni</title>
	<author>QuoteMstr</author>
	<datestamp>1264779600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmCKJi3CKGE" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmCKJi3CKGE</a> [youtube.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = cmCKJi3CKGE [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmCKJi3CKGE [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949460</id>
	<title>Firefox</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264780920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have to think in Russian.</p><p>--</p><p>This thing looks like the F-22 and the Su-27/35 had a baby.  i'd like to see how it actually measures against the F-22.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have to think in Russian.--This thing looks like the F-22 and the Su-27/35 had a baby .
i 'd like to see how it actually measures against the F-22 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have to think in Russian.--This thing looks like the F-22 and the Su-27/35 had a baby.
i'd like to see how it actually measures against the F-22.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30959338</id>
	<title>Photos Just In</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1264785720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.ahajokes.com/crt803.html" title="ahajokes.com">Stealth Fighter</a> [ahajokes.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Stealth Fighter [ ahajokes.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stealth Fighter [ahajokes.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30961338</id>
	<title>The World's First Outsourced Fighter Plane?</title>
	<author>ColonelClaw</author>
	<datestamp>1264857540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I understand it correctly, the Russians are effectively outsourcing the electronics to India. That's going to make for some interesting phone calls to support mid-way through a bombing mission when the systems crash.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I understand it correctly , the Russians are effectively outsourcing the electronics to India .
That 's going to make for some interesting phone calls to support mid-way through a bombing mission when the systems crash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I understand it correctly, the Russians are effectively outsourcing the electronics to India.
That's going to make for some interesting phone calls to support mid-way through a bombing mission when the systems crash.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949086</id>
	<title>Re:Stealthy ?</title>
	<author>XxtraLarGe</author>
	<datestamp>1264779420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So not *that* stealthy then ? Of course, I guess if it was that good, the pilot would never be able to find where he parked the thing.</p></div><p>In Soviet Russia, stealth fighters find YOU! Sorry, couldn't resist.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So not * that * stealthy then ?
Of course , I guess if it was that good , the pilot would never be able to find where he parked the thing.In Soviet Russia , stealth fighters find YOU !
Sorry , could n't resist .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So not *that* stealthy then ?
Of course, I guess if it was that good, the pilot would never be able to find where he parked the thing.In Soviet Russia, stealth fighters find YOU!
Sorry, couldn't resist.
:)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949076</id>
	<title>Re:Love the smell of military secrets in the morni</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264779360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>To paraphrase Dr. Strangelove: <i>Yes, but the... whole point of the </i>new technology<i>... is lost... if you keep it a secret! Why didn't you tell the world, eh? </i> <br> <br>What good would it be to try to sell an airplane that no one knows about?</htmltext>
<tokenext>To paraphrase Dr. Strangelove : Yes , but the... whole point of the new technology... is lost... if you keep it a secret !
Why did n't you tell the world , eh ?
What good would it be to try to sell an airplane that no one knows about ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To paraphrase Dr. Strangelove: Yes, but the... whole point of the new technology... is lost... if you keep it a secret!
Why didn't you tell the world, eh?
What good would it be to try to sell an airplane that no one knows about?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30952674</id>
	<title>Re:Nah, time for a new fighter program</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1264792800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't you mean, to keep us bankrupt trying to outrun the Ruskies?  We spend as much on our military as the entire rest of the world put together spends on theirs.  If anyone is going bankrupt due to military expenditures, it's US.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't you mean , to keep us bankrupt trying to outrun the Ruskies ?
We spend as much on our military as the entire rest of the world put together spends on theirs .
If anyone is going bankrupt due to military expenditures , it 's US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't you mean, to keep us bankrupt trying to outrun the Ruskies?
We spend as much on our military as the entire rest of the world put together spends on theirs.
If anyone is going bankrupt due to military expenditures, it's US.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949240</id>
	<title>Re:Stealthy ?</title>
	<author>dave420</author>
	<datestamp>1264780080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are actually 28 of them in the photo, so it's actually pretty good.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are actually 28 of them in the photo , so it 's actually pretty good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are actually 28 of them in the photo, so it's actually pretty good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949440</id>
	<title>indian way of making stealth vehicle</title>
	<author>snsh</author>
	<datestamp>1264780860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>THIS is how we make stealth car in India<br> <br>

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7eOVpBCtPo" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7eOVpBCtPo</a> [youtube.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>THIS is how we make stealth car in India http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = E7eOVpBCtPo [ youtube.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>THIS is how we make stealth car in India 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7eOVpBCtPo [youtube.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949066</id>
	<title>Re:Stealthy ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264779300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Of course, I guess if it was that good, the pilot would never be able to find where he parked the thing.</p><p>No. Americans would create sophisticated locating system which will automatically turn on while on the ground. Pilot would have special, single purpose PDA which locate the aircraft on the runway. Meanwhile, Russians just paint outline of aircraft on the ground with a chalk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Of course , I guess if it was that good , the pilot would never be able to find where he parked the thing.No .
Americans would create sophisticated locating system which will automatically turn on while on the ground .
Pilot would have special , single purpose PDA which locate the aircraft on the runway .
Meanwhile , Russians just paint outline of aircraft on the ground with a chalk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Of course, I guess if it was that good, the pilot would never be able to find where he parked the thing.No.
Americans would create sophisticated locating system which will automatically turn on while on the ground.
Pilot would have special, single purpose PDA which locate the aircraft on the runway.
Meanwhile, Russians just paint outline of aircraft on the ground with a chalk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949262</id>
	<title>Question About Radar Development</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264780200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So usually these technology don't progress without the corresponding technology acting in response.  Has radar or any detection technology made any progress in detecting stealth aircraft?  Just curious.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So usually these technology do n't progress without the corresponding technology acting in response .
Has radar or any detection technology made any progress in detecting stealth aircraft ?
Just curious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So usually these technology don't progress without the corresponding technology acting in response.
Has radar or any detection technology made any progress in detecting stealth aircraft?
Just curious.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949208</id>
	<title>Re:Does someone at NATO have a sense of humour?</title>
	<author>KH</author>
	<datestamp>1264779900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Clint Eastwood will steal it in no time...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Clint Eastwood will steal it in no time.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clint Eastwood will steal it in no time...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949146</id>
	<title>RCS reductions???????</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264779660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>no chines<br>no shock ramps/S ramps / hidden inlets<br>nose cone is very small (small dish or no dish in there at all right now).</p><p>missing a lot of '5th gen' LO tech</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>no chinesno shock ramps/S ramps / hidden inletsnose cone is very small ( small dish or no dish in there at all right now ) .missing a lot of '5th gen ' LO tech</tokentext>
<sentencetext>no chinesno shock ramps/S ramps / hidden inletsnose cone is very small (small dish or no dish in there at all right now).missing a lot of '5th gen' LO tech</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30954510</id>
	<title>Re:Nah, time for a new fighter program</title>
	<author>MrKaos</author>
	<datestamp>1264757760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>to keep Russia bankrupt trying to catch up to it.</p></div></blockquote><p>
The US had little to do with the collapse of the Soviet Union much of that was caused by internal failures.</p><blockquote><div><p>considering the US Defense departments budget its an easy game to win. What they spend on one program is more than most can spend on many.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Certainly true. What's at issue is how the US's oil centric economy will be able to continue to produce income when Russia has control over large oil interests. I doubt the US is going to invade Russia to secure it's oil supply so with Russia placed as an oil producer just as oil prices are set to skyrocket I think the Russians will have plenty of money to keep up. I certainly don't see Russia at the forefront of the movement to reduce our carbon footprint.</p><p>
The irony in all this is that US commercial oil interests will do everything they can to maintain the status quo, especially when they know they can dig up Alaska for more oil. Russia will be placed similarly as they can sell oil to themselves without paying for it in US dollars and the East and Western Military Industrial complexes will happily march any country they can into resource conflicts (such as Iraq) while the dolars keep rolling in.</p><p>
Sure it's a pretty plane, and I even like looking at this stuff, but it leaves me asking myself if any of this Military progress is real progress when there are some many other avenues of technology that have to be advanced for the whole Human Race.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>to keep Russia bankrupt trying to catch up to it .
The US had little to do with the collapse of the Soviet Union much of that was caused by internal failures.considering the US Defense departments budget its an easy game to win .
What they spend on one program is more than most can spend on many .
Certainly true .
What 's at issue is how the US 's oil centric economy will be able to continue to produce income when Russia has control over large oil interests .
I doubt the US is going to invade Russia to secure it 's oil supply so with Russia placed as an oil producer just as oil prices are set to skyrocket I think the Russians will have plenty of money to keep up .
I certainly do n't see Russia at the forefront of the movement to reduce our carbon footprint .
The irony in all this is that US commercial oil interests will do everything they can to maintain the status quo , especially when they know they can dig up Alaska for more oil .
Russia will be placed similarly as they can sell oil to themselves without paying for it in US dollars and the East and Western Military Industrial complexes will happily march any country they can into resource conflicts ( such as Iraq ) while the dolars keep rolling in .
Sure it 's a pretty plane , and I even like looking at this stuff , but it leaves me asking myself if any of this Military progress is real progress when there are some many other avenues of technology that have to be advanced for the whole Human Race .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to keep Russia bankrupt trying to catch up to it.
The US had little to do with the collapse of the Soviet Union much of that was caused by internal failures.considering the US Defense departments budget its an easy game to win.
What they spend on one program is more than most can spend on many.
Certainly true.
What's at issue is how the US's oil centric economy will be able to continue to produce income when Russia has control over large oil interests.
I doubt the US is going to invade Russia to secure it's oil supply so with Russia placed as an oil producer just as oil prices are set to skyrocket I think the Russians will have plenty of money to keep up.
I certainly don't see Russia at the forefront of the movement to reduce our carbon footprint.
The irony in all this is that US commercial oil interests will do everything they can to maintain the status quo, especially when they know they can dig up Alaska for more oil.
Russia will be placed similarly as they can sell oil to themselves without paying for it in US dollars and the East and Western Military Industrial complexes will happily march any country they can into resource conflicts (such as Iraq) while the dolars keep rolling in.
Sure it's a pretty plane, and I even like looking at this stuff, but it leaves me asking myself if any of this Military progress is real progress when there are some many other avenues of technology that have to be advanced for the whole Human Race.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30954884</id>
	<title>Re:Question About Radar Development</title>
	<author>Aviation Pete</author>
	<datestamp>1264759080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A single radar installation can still be fooled, but once a chain of them is networked, detection is rather simple. When the F-117 appeared, algorithms were not capable of making sense of it's unusual radar returns, but today they are much harder to fool.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A single radar installation can still be fooled , but once a chain of them is networked , detection is rather simple .
When the F-117 appeared , algorithms were not capable of making sense of it 's unusual radar returns , but today they are much harder to fool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A single radar installation can still be fooled, but once a chain of them is networked, detection is rather simple.
When the F-117 appeared, algorithms were not capable of making sense of it's unusual radar returns, but today they are much harder to fool.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949262</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948752</id>
	<title>Well, now we'll restart the F-22</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264777320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That changes the whole argument on the F-22 being killed now, doesn't it? We'll see calls coming out to restart F-22 production, but probably an F-22 B where some of the stealth stuff that drives up operational costs gets dropped in the interest of being just a good first line fighter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That changes the whole argument on the F-22 being killed now , does n't it ?
We 'll see calls coming out to restart F-22 production , but probably an F-22 B where some of the stealth stuff that drives up operational costs gets dropped in the interest of being just a good first line fighter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That changes the whole argument on the F-22 being killed now, doesn't it?
We'll see calls coming out to restart F-22 production, but probably an F-22 B where some of the stealth stuff that drives up operational costs gets dropped in the interest of being just a good first line fighter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949196</id>
	<title>Re:Love the smell of military secrets in the morni</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264779840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>shear idiocy</p></div><p>I&rsquo;m from the department of over-torqued tense compressed wingnuts and I resent that comment!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>shear idiocyI    m from the department of over-torqued tense compressed wingnuts and I resent that comment !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>shear idiocyI’m from the department of over-torqued tense compressed wingnuts and I resent that comment!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949104</id>
	<title>Re:Stealthy ?</title>
	<author>nightranger</author>
	<datestamp>1264779480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure there's an app for that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure there 's an app for that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure there's an app for that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864</id>
	<title>Nah, time for a new fighter program</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264778040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>to keep Russia bankrupt trying to catch up to it.</p><p>1. Come up with super tech military program<br>2. Fund it until it becomes too costly<br>3. Wait for the other guy to spin up to compete against it<br>4. Move the bar further out</p><p>considering the US Defense departments budget its an easy game to win.  What they spend on one program is more than most can spend on many.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>to keep Russia bankrupt trying to catch up to it.1 .
Come up with super tech military program2 .
Fund it until it becomes too costly3 .
Wait for the other guy to spin up to compete against it4 .
Move the bar further outconsidering the US Defense departments budget its an easy game to win .
What they spend on one program is more than most can spend on many .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to keep Russia bankrupt trying to catch up to it.1.
Come up with super tech military program2.
Fund it until it becomes too costly3.
Wait for the other guy to spin up to compete against it4.
Move the bar further outconsidering the US Defense departments budget its an easy game to win.
What they spend on one program is more than most can spend on many.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948752</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949126</id>
	<title>Re:Stealthy ?</title>
	<author>ciaohound</author>
	<datestamp>1264779540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, I can just see Larry Ellison wandering around a huge mall parking lot, trying desperately to remember where he parked his Russian stealth fighter.  Damn it, he says to himself, why didn't I just drive the Lamborghini?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I can just see Larry Ellison wandering around a huge mall parking lot , trying desperately to remember where he parked his Russian stealth fighter .
Damn it , he says to himself , why did n't I just drive the Lamborghini ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I can just see Larry Ellison wandering around a huge mall parking lot, trying desperately to remember where he parked his Russian stealth fighter.
Damn it, he says to himself, why didn't I just drive the Lamborghini?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950250</id>
	<title>Re:Russia finally catching up to US</title>
	<author>thedonger</author>
	<datestamp>1264784220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, but in related news, Iran claims to have had a stealth fighter in continuous since 1984, but we can't see it. Poland also built one, in 1993, but they can't find it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but in related news , Iran claims to have had a stealth fighter in continuous since 1984 , but we ca n't see it .
Poland also built one , in 1993 , but they ca n't find it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but in related news, Iran claims to have had a stealth fighter in continuous since 1984, but we can't see it.
Poland also built one, in 1993, but they can't find it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949008</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951026</id>
	<title>move your ass radar engineers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264787040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm hoping some breakthrough in radar technology instantly make these stealth fighters redundant, if for no other reason than to STFU all the armchair top gun wannabes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm hoping some breakthrough in radar technology instantly make these stealth fighters redundant , if for no other reason than to STFU all the armchair top gun wannabes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm hoping some breakthrough in radar technology instantly make these stealth fighters redundant, if for no other reason than to STFU all the armchair top gun wannabes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950458</id>
	<title>Re:Does someone at NATO have a sense of humour?</title>
	<author>ianare</author>
	<datestamp>1264785000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>See? Open source is communist and un-American !!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>See ?
Open source is communist and un-American !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See?
Open source is communist and un-American !
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950872</id>
	<title>Re:Stealthy ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264786440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought they already have a <a href="http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/02/25/2038217" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">fighter</a> [slashdot.org] that once in motion even the pilot doesn't know exactly where it is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought they already have a fighter [ slashdot.org ] that once in motion even the pilot does n't know exactly where it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought they already have a fighter [slashdot.org] that once in motion even the pilot doesn't know exactly where it is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949012</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30952262</id>
	<title>JoeBlow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264791180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Grate H1B-ers sold us out. I thought India was an ally, how do these guys get security clearance, we got them working  on nuclear mark 2 torpedoes, air born chemical lasers, hunter killer space drones. Yet I can't get a job?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Grate H1B-ers sold us out .
I thought India was an ally , how do these guys get security clearance , we got them working on nuclear mark 2 torpedoes , air born chemical lasers , hunter killer space drones .
Yet I ca n't get a job ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Grate H1B-ers sold us out.
I thought India was an ally, how do these guys get security clearance, we got them working  on nuclear mark 2 torpedoes, air born chemical lasers, hunter killer space drones.
Yet I can't get a job?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951916</id>
	<title>Re:Stealthy ?</title>
	<author>Eil</author>
	<datestamp>1264789980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Of course, I guess if it was that good, the pilot would never be able to find where he parked the thing.</p></div></blockquote><p>Not a problem if it <a href="http://www.emmitsburg.net/humor/pictures/2006/stealthplane.jpg" title="emmitsburg.net">rained</a> [emmitsburg.net] the night before.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course , I guess if it was that good , the pilot would never be able to find where he parked the thing.Not a problem if it rained [ emmitsburg.net ] the night before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course, I guess if it was that good, the pilot would never be able to find where he parked the thing.Not a problem if it rained [emmitsburg.net] the night before.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949284</id>
	<title>PAK FA detailed specifications &amp; model</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264780260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Check out <a href="http://warfare.ru/?linkid=2280&amp;catid=255" title="warfare.ru" rel="nofollow">PAK FA detailed specifications</a> [warfare.ru], you can also compare it head-to-head with F-22 there. As you can see from the info there, the 1st test flight was completed on schedule.</p><p>You can also make <a href="http://www.paper-avia.com/en/modelz/wars/ww4\_f/2117#top" title="paper-avia.com" rel="nofollow">a 1:72 PAK FA paper model</a> [paper-avia.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Check out PAK FA detailed specifications [ warfare.ru ] , you can also compare it head-to-head with F-22 there .
As you can see from the info there , the 1st test flight was completed on schedule.You can also make a 1 : 72 PAK FA paper model [ paper-avia.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Check out PAK FA detailed specifications [warfare.ru], you can also compare it head-to-head with F-22 there.
As you can see from the info there, the 1st test flight was completed on schedule.You can also make a 1:72 PAK FA paper model [paper-avia.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951370</id>
	<title>No problably not</title>
	<author>Sycraft-fu</author>
	<datestamp>1264788240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NATO makes up reporting names for eastern bloc weapons. Fighter aircraft all start with F, so Firefox would be the kind of reporting name you'd use for this. As to why they chose that, well maybe it is due to the novel/movie which used it for a fictional Russian fighter, maybe it is because of the browser. It's not like people in the military don't use computers.</p><p>The only requirements is that it start with F (since it is for a fighter aircraft) and be unambiguous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NATO makes up reporting names for eastern bloc weapons .
Fighter aircraft all start with F , so Firefox would be the kind of reporting name you 'd use for this .
As to why they chose that , well maybe it is due to the novel/movie which used it for a fictional Russian fighter , maybe it is because of the browser .
It 's not like people in the military do n't use computers.The only requirements is that it start with F ( since it is for a fighter aircraft ) and be unambiguous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NATO makes up reporting names for eastern bloc weapons.
Fighter aircraft all start with F, so Firefox would be the kind of reporting name you'd use for this.
As to why they chose that, well maybe it is due to the novel/movie which used it for a fictional Russian fighter, maybe it is because of the browser.
It's not like people in the military don't use computers.The only requirements is that it start with F (since it is for a fighter aircraft) and be unambiguous.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949260</id>
	<title>Re:Love the smell of military secrets in the morni</title>
	<author>GreenTom</author>
	<datestamp>1264780200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't forget that other nations have internal politics too.  The current Russian leadership banks heavly on a "we're making Russia strong again" sort of nationalisim for their support. Showing off something like this is probably as much aimed at their own people as anyone else.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't forget that other nations have internal politics too .
The current Russian leadership banks heavly on a " we 're making Russia strong again " sort of nationalisim for their support .
Showing off something like this is probably as much aimed at their own people as anyone else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't forget that other nations have internal politics too.
The current Russian leadership banks heavly on a "we're making Russia strong again" sort of nationalisim for their support.
Showing off something like this is probably as much aimed at their own people as anyone else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949008</id>
	<title>Russia finally catching up to US</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264778940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not a big deal. This aircraft is 20 years behind ours. In January of 1990, I was stationed at Edwards AFB, at the hangar right behind the YF-22/YF-23 Combined Test Flight. I missed the first flights of the YF-22 and YF-23 because of training at Fairchild, AFB's Survival School.</p><p>The F-22 was developed from the YF-22 selection. 20 years later, production is nearing completion, and the F-22 has been deployed and is now operational.</p><p>I'd say that Russia has a lot of catching up to do at this point.</p><p>BTW, initial photos make their new plane look a lot like the YF-23. Coincidence?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not a big deal .
This aircraft is 20 years behind ours .
In January of 1990 , I was stationed at Edwards AFB , at the hangar right behind the YF-22/YF-23 Combined Test Flight .
I missed the first flights of the YF-22 and YF-23 because of training at Fairchild , AFB 's Survival School.The F-22 was developed from the YF-22 selection .
20 years later , production is nearing completion , and the F-22 has been deployed and is now operational.I 'd say that Russia has a lot of catching up to do at this point.BTW , initial photos make their new plane look a lot like the YF-23 .
Coincidence ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not a big deal.
This aircraft is 20 years behind ours.
In January of 1990, I was stationed at Edwards AFB, at the hangar right behind the YF-22/YF-23 Combined Test Flight.
I missed the first flights of the YF-22 and YF-23 because of training at Fairchild, AFB's Survival School.The F-22 was developed from the YF-22 selection.
20 years later, production is nearing completion, and the F-22 has been deployed and is now operational.I'd say that Russia has a lot of catching up to do at this point.BTW, initial photos make their new plane look a lot like the YF-23.
Coincidence?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950282</id>
	<title>Re:Stealthy ?</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1264784340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> Meanwhile, Russians just paint outline of aircraft on the ground with a chalk.</p></div></blockquote><p>Stupidest idea ever.  What if it snows?  A ball of string, one end tied to the undercart - that's what you need.</p><p>Of course if it was a US plane it woulds be special string that would cost a thousand bucks.  Per foot.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Meanwhile , Russians just paint outline of aircraft on the ground with a chalk.Stupidest idea ever .
What if it snows ?
A ball of string , one end tied to the undercart - that 's what you need.Of course if it was a US plane it woulds be special string that would cost a thousand bucks .
Per foot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Meanwhile, Russians just paint outline of aircraft on the ground with a chalk.Stupidest idea ever.
What if it snows?
A ball of string, one end tied to the undercart - that's what you need.Of course if it was a US plane it woulds be special string that would cost a thousand bucks.
Per foot.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949066</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30954902</id>
	<title>I have a serious question ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264759140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't mean to be inflammatory by asking what I consider to be a very important question, but when was the last time that a major weapons system designed by the USSR or Russia was proven in actual combat to be superior to a comparable system designed by the US or another Western bloc power?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't mean to be inflammatory by asking what I consider to be a very important question , but when was the last time that a major weapons system designed by the USSR or Russia was proven in actual combat to be superior to a comparable system designed by the US or another Western bloc power ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't mean to be inflammatory by asking what I consider to be a very important question, but when was the last time that a major weapons system designed by the USSR or Russia was proven in actual combat to be superior to a comparable system designed by the US or another Western bloc power?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951786
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30952236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949230
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949076
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30952558
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949962
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951370
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30957138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951232
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950716
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30952674
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30952544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951868
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949240
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30953012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950034
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30964850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949360
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30953194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949856
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950250
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949008
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30954884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30954510
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30964554
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30953512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949008
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30958820
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949508
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949208
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951274
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949078
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951640
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950164
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1316210_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1316210.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949962
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1316210.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950892
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1316210.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948924
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949128
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949076
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949230
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949198
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949020
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30958820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949078
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949196
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1316210.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950026
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951916
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949012
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951046
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949066
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950282
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949204
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1316210.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949010
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1316210.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30953486
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1316210.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949460
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1316210.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30954884
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1316210.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30954902
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1316210.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949152
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949186
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950716
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949208
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951370
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1316210.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30948864
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950034
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30952674
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949856
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30952236
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30953194
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30952544
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951412
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30953012
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949498
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950454
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30964554
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951868
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30954510
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30952558
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951830
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1316210.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949008
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30953512
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1316210.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30949508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950132
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1316210.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30950164
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951274
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30964850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951640
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30951232
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1316210.30957138
</commentlist>
</conversation>
