<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_16_1523223</id>
	<title>Own Your Own Fighter Jet</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1263668520000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>gimmebeer writes <i>"The Russian Sukhoi SU-27 has a top speed of Mach 1.8 (more than 1,300 mph) and has a thrust to weight ratio greater than 1 to 1. That means it can accelerate while climbing straight up. It was designed to fight against the best the US had to offer, and now <a href="http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/01/own-the-coolest-jet-on-your-block/">it can be yours for the price of a mediocre used business jet</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>gimmebeer writes " The Russian Sukhoi SU-27 has a top speed of Mach 1.8 ( more than 1,300 mph ) and has a thrust to weight ratio greater than 1 to 1 .
That means it can accelerate while climbing straight up .
It was designed to fight against the best the US had to offer , and now it can be yours for the price of a mediocre used business jet .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>gimmebeer writes "The Russian Sukhoi SU-27 has a top speed of Mach 1.8 (more than 1,300 mph) and has a thrust to weight ratio greater than 1 to 1.
That means it can accelerate while climbing straight up.
It was designed to fight against the best the US had to offer, and now it can be yours for the price of a mediocre used business jet.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792352</id>
	<title>Ummm... hangar space?</title>
	<author>macraig</author>
	<datestamp>1263673440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay, now that I got it, where the heck do I store it?  Under the carport?  Unless the sucker has the best folding wings ever, the HOA fines are gonna be a bitch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , now that I got it , where the heck do I store it ?
Under the carport ?
Unless the sucker has the best folding wings ever , the HOA fines are gon na be a bitch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, now that I got it, where the heck do I store it?
Under the carport?
Unless the sucker has the best folding wings ever, the HOA fines are gonna be a bitch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792488</id>
	<title>Re:Ummm... hangar space?</title>
	<author>TubeSteak</author>
	<datestamp>1263674340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Okay, now that I got it, where the heck do I store it? Under the carport? Unless the sucker has the best folding wings ever, the HOA fines are gonna be a bitch.</p></div><p>Wired wrote an article last week about fly-in communities.<br><a href="http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/01/spruce\_creek\_airpark/" title="wired.com">http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/01/spruce\_creek\_airpark/</a> [wired.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , now that I got it , where the heck do I store it ?
Under the carport ?
Unless the sucker has the best folding wings ever , the HOA fines are gon na be a bitch.Wired wrote an article last week about fly-in communities.http : //www.wired.com/autopia/2010/01/spruce \ _creek \ _airpark/ [ wired.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, now that I got it, where the heck do I store it?
Under the carport?
Unless the sucker has the best folding wings ever, the HOA fines are gonna be a bitch.Wired wrote an article last week about fly-in communities.http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/01/spruce\_creek\_airpark/ [wired.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793838</id>
	<title>what is the MPG? and how much the fual cost?</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1263641700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>what is the MPG? and how much the fual cost?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>what is the MPG ?
and how much the fual cost ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what is the MPG?
and how much the fual cost?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793288</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing new</title>
	<author>cenc</author>
	<datestamp>1263638160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are a bunch of guys in the U.S. with their own Russian made scud missiles. I recall a guy bought one a few years ago, and it showed up at the port on the west coast with a fully functional warhead and engine that the seller in Russia failed to disable as promised before shipping.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are a bunch of guys in the U.S. with their own Russian made scud missiles .
I recall a guy bought one a few years ago , and it showed up at the port on the west coast with a fully functional warhead and engine that the seller in Russia failed to disable as promised before shipping .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are a bunch of guys in the U.S. with their own Russian made scud missiles.
I recall a guy bought one a few years ago, and it showed up at the port on the west coast with a fully functional warhead and engine that the seller in Russia failed to disable as promised before shipping.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793592</id>
	<title>John Travolta....</title>
	<author>bev\_tech\_rob</author>
	<datestamp>1263640260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I bet John Travolta would LOVE to get one of these!  Might take some getting used to compared to the jetliner he owns!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I bet John Travolta would LOVE to get one of these !
Might take some getting used to compared to the jetliner he owns !
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bet John Travolta would LOVE to get one of these!
Might take some getting used to compared to the jetliner he owns!
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793264</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263638040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Actually, the Russian K36 ejection seats are no more (or less) capable than the standard Aces II seat that all US fighters use. They are both very capable seats. The Aces II has a "success" rate of about 90\% when operating outside the ejection envelope and about 95\% within the envelope. The Russian design has similar statistics. Both are capable of 0-0 ejections, meaning that the pilot can eject from a stopped aircraft as 0 feet altitude and safely land. Most of the times, this feature is used when the aicraft is taking off or landing. There are several instances of both designs where aircraft doing low approaches had to eject with amazing results.</p><p>I think the difference in speed you are referring to is that the Russian seat is measured in kilometers and the US seat is in Knots. The Russian design is rated to about 1400kph, while the US design is 600 knots. If you do the simple math, that doesn't make them equal, until you realize that 600 knots is much much faster at altitude (because of air density,) where kilometers is a fixed distance. 600 knots at sea level is about ~1100kph, but at 35,000 feet, it is ~1400kph.</p></div><p>No, if you "do the simple math" you will find out that "knot" means NM per hour, and it is independent of altitude. (Unlike Mach.) 0-0 ejections are trivial, virtually all ejection seats in the last 50 years can do that, so you can't use this to describe them all as "very capable". K36 is superior to all Western designs.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the Russian K36 ejection seats are no more ( or less ) capable than the standard Aces II seat that all US fighters use .
They are both very capable seats .
The Aces II has a " success " rate of about 90 \ % when operating outside the ejection envelope and about 95 \ % within the envelope .
The Russian design has similar statistics .
Both are capable of 0-0 ejections , meaning that the pilot can eject from a stopped aircraft as 0 feet altitude and safely land .
Most of the times , this feature is used when the aicraft is taking off or landing .
There are several instances of both designs where aircraft doing low approaches had to eject with amazing results.I think the difference in speed you are referring to is that the Russian seat is measured in kilometers and the US seat is in Knots .
The Russian design is rated to about 1400kph , while the US design is 600 knots .
If you do the simple math , that does n't make them equal , until you realize that 600 knots is much much faster at altitude ( because of air density , ) where kilometers is a fixed distance .
600 knots at sea level is about ~ 1100kph , but at 35,000 feet , it is ~ 1400kph.No , if you " do the simple math " you will find out that " knot " means NM per hour , and it is independent of altitude .
( Unlike Mach .
) 0-0 ejections are trivial , virtually all ejection seats in the last 50 years can do that , so you ca n't use this to describe them all as " very capable " .
K36 is superior to all Western designs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the Russian K36 ejection seats are no more (or less) capable than the standard Aces II seat that all US fighters use.
They are both very capable seats.
The Aces II has a "success" rate of about 90\% when operating outside the ejection envelope and about 95\% within the envelope.
The Russian design has similar statistics.
Both are capable of 0-0 ejections, meaning that the pilot can eject from a stopped aircraft as 0 feet altitude and safely land.
Most of the times, this feature is used when the aicraft is taking off or landing.
There are several instances of both designs where aircraft doing low approaches had to eject with amazing results.I think the difference in speed you are referring to is that the Russian seat is measured in kilometers and the US seat is in Knots.
The Russian design is rated to about 1400kph, while the US design is 600 knots.
If you do the simple math, that doesn't make them equal, until you realize that 600 knots is much much faster at altitude (because of air density,) where kilometers is a fixed distance.
600 knots at sea level is about ~1100kph, but at 35,000 feet, it is ~1400kph.No, if you "do the simple math" you will find out that "knot" means NM per hour, and it is independent of altitude.
(Unlike Mach.
) 0-0 ejections are trivial, virtually all ejection seats in the last 50 years can do that, so you can't use this to describe them all as "very capable".
K36 is superior to all Western designs.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792636</id>
	<title>Re:WTB: Aircraft Carrier</title>
	<author>agw</author>
	<datestamp>1263632460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about a British surplus aircraft carrier, never even used and yet to be built?</p><p><a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/17/carriers\_now\_for\_india/" title="theregister.co.uk" rel="nofollow">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/17/carriers\_now\_for\_india/</a> [theregister.co.uk]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about a British surplus aircraft carrier , never even used and yet to be built ? http : //www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/17/carriers \ _now \ _for \ _india/ [ theregister.co.uk ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about a British surplus aircraft carrier, never even used and yet to be built?http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/11/17/carriers\_now\_for\_india/ [theregister.co.uk]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792612</id>
	<title>Re:Range?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263675480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You might be interested in a Tupolev Tu-160 strategic bomber, although I don't think they were designed for supersonic cruise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You might be interested in a Tupolev Tu-160 strategic bomber , although I do n't think they were designed for supersonic cruise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might be interested in a Tupolev Tu-160 strategic bomber, although I don't think they were designed for supersonic cruise.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30796770</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>dotancohen</author>
	<datestamp>1263720780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As much as I hate Flash, that animation was worth the Adobe crap crashing my browser yet again. Nice!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As much as I hate Flash , that animation was worth the Adobe crap crashing my browser yet again .
Nice !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As much as I hate Flash, that animation was worth the Adobe crap crashing my browser yet again.
Nice!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792652</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793058</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1263636000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"who's going to try stopping a jet traveling Mach 2?"</p><p>Hundreds of pilots currently sitting alert would get a huge woody at the chance to put an AMRAAM or two into a MIG.</p><p>If it gets in, it still has to escape over water or lightly inhabited areas. It could punch off a simple pod to deliver drugs (the common USAF travel pod is an old napalm cannister with a door in the side and (obviously, because it would scatter valuable golf clubs) no fuses, but the aircraft could still be presumed hostile and shot down. Any nation defending its borders has every right to kill aircraft that refuse to land when so directed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" who 's going to try stopping a jet traveling Mach 2 ?
" Hundreds of pilots currently sitting alert would get a huge woody at the chance to put an AMRAAM or two into a MIG.If it gets in , it still has to escape over water or lightly inhabited areas .
It could punch off a simple pod to deliver drugs ( the common USAF travel pod is an old napalm cannister with a door in the side and ( obviously , because it would scatter valuable golf clubs ) no fuses , but the aircraft could still be presumed hostile and shot down .
Any nation defending its borders has every right to kill aircraft that refuse to land when so directed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"who's going to try stopping a jet traveling Mach 2?
"Hundreds of pilots currently sitting alert would get a huge woody at the chance to put an AMRAAM or two into a MIG.If it gets in, it still has to escape over water or lightly inhabited areas.
It could punch off a simple pod to deliver drugs (the common USAF travel pod is an old napalm cannister with a door in the side and (obviously, because it would scatter valuable golf clubs) no fuses, but the aircraft could still be presumed hostile and shot down.
Any nation defending its borders has every right to kill aircraft that refuse to land when so directed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30799594</id>
	<title>Re:One can dream...</title>
	<author>aqk</author>
	<datestamp>1263754320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, forget them wimpy simulators! <br>
 <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GdfnTLKcvM" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow"> here's a jet </a> [youtube.com]that might be a bit more maneuverable...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , forget them wimpy simulators !
here 's a jet [ youtube.com ] that might be a bit more maneuverable.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, forget them wimpy simulators!
here's a jet  [youtube.com]that might be a bit more maneuverable...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793034</id>
	<title>jets good, old jets better</title>
	<author>WegianWarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1263635820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bah - a friend of mine already own and flies his own <a href="http://jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6747738&amp;nseq=0" title="jetphotos.net">Vampire jet</a> [jetphotos.net].<br>

Best part? I get to help maintain it for him, being a certified system technician and all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bah - a friend of mine already own and flies his own Vampire jet [ jetphotos.net ] .
Best part ?
I get to help maintain it for him , being a certified system technician and all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bah - a friend of mine already own and flies his own Vampire jet [jetphotos.net].
Best part?
I get to help maintain it for him, being a certified system technician and all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793412</id>
	<title>Re:One can dream...</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1263639060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>recovering from a dive can actually be much more difficult than entering one, because the fuel shifts forward, changing the aircraft's center of gravity.</p></div><p>Yes, Neil Armstrong discovered that, 6000 up over Tranquility Base. I think it was part of the reason he landed so low on fuel. He waited for the slosh to subside.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>recovering from a dive can actually be much more difficult than entering one , because the fuel shifts forward , changing the aircraft 's center of gravity.Yes , Neil Armstrong discovered that , 6000 up over Tranquility Base .
I think it was part of the reason he landed so low on fuel .
He waited for the slosh to subside .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>recovering from a dive can actually be much more difficult than entering one, because the fuel shifts forward, changing the aircraft's center of gravity.Yes, Neil Armstrong discovered that, 6000 up over Tranquility Base.
I think it was part of the reason he landed so low on fuel.
He waited for the slosh to subside.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794346</id>
	<title>Not much new here.</title>
	<author>w0mprat</author>
	<datestamp>1263645060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is not first time you can buy a ex-military jet and re purpose it for mucking around (On a side note there have attempts in the past to produce a kit-built DIY supersonic jet such as the Bede <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bede\_BD-10" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bede\_BD-10</a> [wikipedia.org]). BUT this is quite a formidable plane. This is like buying a F14 or F15 (Which I believe the russians designed it to counter), which as far as I know, you don't have a hope in hell of picking one up for your own use.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not first time you can buy a ex-military jet and re purpose it for mucking around ( On a side note there have attempts in the past to produce a kit-built DIY supersonic jet such as the Bede http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bede \ _BD-10 [ wikipedia.org ] ) .
BUT this is quite a formidable plane .
This is like buying a F14 or F15 ( Which I believe the russians designed it to counter ) , which as far as I know , you do n't have a hope in hell of picking one up for your own use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not first time you can buy a ex-military jet and re purpose it for mucking around (On a side note there have attempts in the past to produce a kit-built DIY supersonic jet such as the Bede http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bede\_BD-10 [wikipedia.org]).
BUT this is quite a formidable plane.
This is like buying a F14 or F15 (Which I believe the russians designed it to counter), which as far as I know, you don't have a hope in hell of picking one up for your own use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793706</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>MartinSchou</author>
	<datestamp>1263640980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Weapons and jamming systems I can understand, but why the hell would they want you to remove the radar from a plan that can travel at twice the speed of sound?</p><p>Anything you can see you will be past before you can react, whether it will be by a wide margin, straight through or anything in-between. Essentially you're giving the buyer a legitimate excuse for it slamming into an airliner. "Well, we aren't allowed to have radar. If we had a radar, we would never have hit it."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Weapons and jamming systems I can understand , but why the hell would they want you to remove the radar from a plan that can travel at twice the speed of sound ? Anything you can see you will be past before you can react , whether it will be by a wide margin , straight through or anything in-between .
Essentially you 're giving the buyer a legitimate excuse for it slamming into an airliner .
" Well , we are n't allowed to have radar .
If we had a radar , we would never have hit it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Weapons and jamming systems I can understand, but why the hell would they want you to remove the radar from a plan that can travel at twice the speed of sound?Anything you can see you will be past before you can react, whether it will be by a wide margin, straight through or anything in-between.
Essentially you're giving the buyer a legitimate excuse for it slamming into an airliner.
"Well, we aren't allowed to have radar.
If we had a radar, we would never have hit it.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296</id>
	<title>It IS safe!</title>
	<author>indre1</author>
	<datestamp>1263673020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd go for this instead of a business jet. Far more fun and you don't have to worry if the engines fail - you can always use the ejection seat.

Russian fighter's ejection seats are far more safe than the US ones - you can eject at over Mach 2 and survive!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd go for this instead of a business jet .
Far more fun and you do n't have to worry if the engines fail - you can always use the ejection seat .
Russian fighter 's ejection seats are far more safe than the US ones - you can eject at over Mach 2 and survive !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd go for this instead of a business jet.
Far more fun and you don't have to worry if the engines fail - you can always use the ejection seat.
Russian fighter's ejection seats are far more safe than the US ones - you can eject at over Mach 2 and survive!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236</id>
	<title>Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>Dragoniz3r</author>
	<datestamp>1263672540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Paying to keep this bad boy in the air won't come cheap.
I wonder how trigger-happy the US Airforce might get if they stumbled across an SU-27 over US soil though... does it still have weapon hardpoints on the wings? TFA doesn't really address that, it just says "They don't have any weapons."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Paying to keep this bad boy in the air wo n't come cheap .
I wonder how trigger-happy the US Airforce might get if they stumbled across an SU-27 over US soil though... does it still have weapon hardpoints on the wings ?
TFA does n't really address that , it just says " They do n't have any weapons .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Paying to keep this bad boy in the air won't come cheap.
I wonder how trigger-happy the US Airforce might get if they stumbled across an SU-27 over US soil though... does it still have weapon hardpoints on the wings?
TFA doesn't really address that, it just says "They don't have any weapons.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792682</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263632820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, the Russian K36 ejection seats are no more (or less) capable than the standard Aces II seat that all US fighters use.  They are both very capable seats.  The Aces II has a "success" rate of about 90\% when operating outside the ejection envelope and about 95\% within the envelope.  The Russian design has similar statistics.  Both are capable of 0-0 ejections, meaning that the pilot can eject from a stopped aircraft as 0 feet altitude and safely land.  Most of the times, this feature is used when the aicraft is taking off or landing.  There are several instances of both designs where aircraft doing low approaches had to eject with amazing results.<br> <br>

I think the difference in speed you are referring to is that the Russian seat is measured in kilometers and the US seat is in Knots.  The Russian design is rated to about 1400kph, while the US design is 600 knots.  If you do the simple math, that doesn't make them equal, until you realize that 600 knots is much much faster at altitude (because of air density,) where kilometers is a fixed distance.  600 knots at sea level is about ~1100kph, but at 35,000 feet, it is ~1400kph.

<br> <br>Remember, the limiting factor isn't the seat itself, it's that soft squishy part that the seat is design to hold.  Russian or US designs don't differ in that respect.<br> <br>

Bill</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the Russian K36 ejection seats are no more ( or less ) capable than the standard Aces II seat that all US fighters use .
They are both very capable seats .
The Aces II has a " success " rate of about 90 \ % when operating outside the ejection envelope and about 95 \ % within the envelope .
The Russian design has similar statistics .
Both are capable of 0-0 ejections , meaning that the pilot can eject from a stopped aircraft as 0 feet altitude and safely land .
Most of the times , this feature is used when the aicraft is taking off or landing .
There are several instances of both designs where aircraft doing low approaches had to eject with amazing results .
I think the difference in speed you are referring to is that the Russian seat is measured in kilometers and the US seat is in Knots .
The Russian design is rated to about 1400kph , while the US design is 600 knots .
If you do the simple math , that does n't make them equal , until you realize that 600 knots is much much faster at altitude ( because of air density , ) where kilometers is a fixed distance .
600 knots at sea level is about ~ 1100kph , but at 35,000 feet , it is ~ 1400kph .
Remember , the limiting factor is n't the seat itself , it 's that soft squishy part that the seat is design to hold .
Russian or US designs do n't differ in that respect .
Bill</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the Russian K36 ejection seats are no more (or less) capable than the standard Aces II seat that all US fighters use.
They are both very capable seats.
The Aces II has a "success" rate of about 90\% when operating outside the ejection envelope and about 95\% within the envelope.
The Russian design has similar statistics.
Both are capable of 0-0 ejections, meaning that the pilot can eject from a stopped aircraft as 0 feet altitude and safely land.
Most of the times, this feature is used when the aicraft is taking off or landing.
There are several instances of both designs where aircraft doing low approaches had to eject with amazing results.
I think the difference in speed you are referring to is that the Russian seat is measured in kilometers and the US seat is in Knots.
The Russian design is rated to about 1400kph, while the US design is 600 knots.
If you do the simple math, that doesn't make them equal, until you realize that 600 knots is much much faster at altitude (because of air density,) where kilometers is a fixed distance.
600 knots at sea level is about ~1100kph, but at 35,000 feet, it is ~1400kph.
Remember, the limiting factor isn't the seat itself, it's that soft squishy part that the seat is design to hold.
Russian or US designs don't differ in that respect.
Bill</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792428</id>
	<title>Flight HRS v. Maint HRS</title>
	<author>WED Fan</author>
	<datestamp>1263673920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a former USAF avionics specialist, these things are a maintenance bear (npi). the maintenance ratio is measured in 10s of hours per flight hours. However, removing combat related systems will lighten the load and reduce certain maintenance cost.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a former USAF avionics specialist , these things are a maintenance bear ( npi ) .
the maintenance ratio is measured in 10s of hours per flight hours .
However , removing combat related systems will lighten the load and reduce certain maintenance cost .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a former USAF avionics specialist, these things are a maintenance bear (npi).
the maintenance ratio is measured in 10s of hours per flight hours.
However, removing combat related systems will lighten the load and reduce certain maintenance cost.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793204</id>
	<title>Re:Range?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263637260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For all intents and purposes, bad English is seen as the hallmark of ignorance and lack of education.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For all intents and purposes , bad English is seen as the hallmark of ignorance and lack of education .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For all intents and purposes, bad English is seen as the hallmark of ignorance and lack of education.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793958</id>
	<title>If this airplane is as good as the AK-47...</title>
	<author>Dr\_Ken</author>
	<datestamp>1263642360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>...the US should buy their aircraft from MiG. The AK rifle is cheap, simple to produce and maintain and it just works and works and works under any and all conditions. If MiG's planes are even half as good, this would be a hell of a bargain.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...the US should buy their aircraft from MiG .
The AK rifle is cheap , simple to produce and maintain and it just works and works and works under any and all conditions .
If MiG 's planes are even half as good , this would be a hell of a bargain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...the US should buy their aircraft from MiG.
The AK rifle is cheap, simple to produce and maintain and it just works and works and works under any and all conditions.
If MiG's planes are even half as good, this would be a hell of a bargain.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792196</id>
	<title>Ah HAH!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263672240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In Soviet Russia, fighter jet owns YOU!</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Soviet Russia , fighter jet owns YOU !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Soviet Russia, fighter jet owns YOU!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794516</id>
	<title>Private air force...</title>
	<author>Wardish</author>
	<datestamp>1263646320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The company formerly known as Blackwater...</p><p>Already has some interesting flying hardware, wonder how many of these they might pick up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The company formerly known as Blackwater...Already has some interesting flying hardware , wonder how many of these they might pick up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The company formerly known as Blackwater...Already has some interesting flying hardware, wonder how many of these they might pick up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30818654</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>zztong</author>
	<datestamp>1263913560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about putting it on static display in front of your house? Maybe you could park it in the back yard and let the kids play on it.</p><p>I always thought it would be cool to bury a WW2 submarine in the back yard as if it were running on the surface.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about putting it on static display in front of your house ?
Maybe you could park it in the back yard and let the kids play on it.I always thought it would be cool to bury a WW2 submarine in the back yard as if it were running on the surface .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about putting it on static display in front of your house?
Maybe you could park it in the back yard and let the kids play on it.I always thought it would be cool to bury a WW2 submarine in the back yard as if it were running on the surface.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792962</id>
	<title>How about a whole squadron?</title>
	<author>YrWrstNtmr</author>
	<datestamp>1263635100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A private <a href="http://www.atacusa.com/" title="atacusa.com">company</a> [atacusa.com] at the local airport has several ex-military jets. A-4, Kfir, Hawker Hunters. They contract out to the Navy and USAF to fly adversary DACT and tow targets.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A private company [ atacusa.com ] at the local airport has several ex-military jets .
A-4 , Kfir , Hawker Hunters .
They contract out to the Navy and USAF to fly adversary DACT and tow targets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A private company [atacusa.com] at the local airport has several ex-military jets.
A-4, Kfir, Hawker Hunters.
They contract out to the Navy and USAF to fly adversary DACT and tow targets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30800244</id>
	<title>Re:One can dream...</title>
	<author>Reziac</author>
	<datestamp>1263759300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So how DO they try to compensate for the fuel slosh?</p><p>IANAE, but my first thought was using a pressurized bladder to maintain a static "shape" inside the fuel tank.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So how DO they try to compensate for the fuel slosh ? IANAE , but my first thought was using a pressurized bladder to maintain a static " shape " inside the fuel tank .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So how DO they try to compensate for the fuel slosh?IANAE, but my first thought was using a pressurized bladder to maintain a static "shape" inside the fuel tank.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793308</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1263638340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The Aces II has a "success" rate of about 90\% when operating outside the ejection envelope and about 95\% within the envelope.</p></div><p>Thats not much of an envelope!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Aces II has a " success " rate of about 90 \ % when operating outside the ejection envelope and about 95 \ % within the envelope.Thats not much of an envelope !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Aces II has a "success" rate of about 90\% when operating outside the ejection envelope and about 95\% within the envelope.Thats not much of an envelope!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793070</id>
	<title>Re:One can dream...</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1263636060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> And for those about to comment on that, computers are the only reason you can fly an unstable aircrafts in the first place</p></div><p>
Absolutely.  I was at a talk a few years back describing the F117's user interface systems.  In the kind of things I've flown, there's a mechanical connection between each control and some flight surface.  Move the stick forward and it pulls a cable and the elevators on the tail move.  Push the pedal and a cable pulls the rudder.  The F117 is an extreme case in the opposite direction.  There is a huge amount of software effort giving you something that feels like that's still what you're doing, but in practice the direction and amount of movement (and even which surfaces move) in response to a particular action (or inaction; both will generate movement) depends on the speed, the crosswind, the angle of attack, and so on, and can vary far faster than a human can react.  The only slightly surprising thing is that they bother putting a human in at all.  </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And for those about to comment on that , computers are the only reason you can fly an unstable aircrafts in the first place Absolutely .
I was at a talk a few years back describing the F117 's user interface systems .
In the kind of things I 've flown , there 's a mechanical connection between each control and some flight surface .
Move the stick forward and it pulls a cable and the elevators on the tail move .
Push the pedal and a cable pulls the rudder .
The F117 is an extreme case in the opposite direction .
There is a huge amount of software effort giving you something that feels like that 's still what you 're doing , but in practice the direction and amount of movement ( and even which surfaces move ) in response to a particular action ( or inaction ; both will generate movement ) depends on the speed , the crosswind , the angle of attack , and so on , and can vary far faster than a human can react .
The only slightly surprising thing is that they bother putting a human in at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> And for those about to comment on that, computers are the only reason you can fly an unstable aircrafts in the first place
Absolutely.
I was at a talk a few years back describing the F117's user interface systems.
In the kind of things I've flown, there's a mechanical connection between each control and some flight surface.
Move the stick forward and it pulls a cable and the elevators on the tail move.
Push the pedal and a cable pulls the rudder.
The F117 is an extreme case in the opposite direction.
There is a huge amount of software effort giving you something that feels like that's still what you're doing, but in practice the direction and amount of movement (and even which surfaces move) in response to a particular action (or inaction; both will generate movement) depends on the speed, the crosswind, the angle of attack, and so on, and can vary far faster than a human can react.
The only slightly surprising thing is that they bother putting a human in at all.  
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795758</id>
	<title>You'll have to steal one</title>
	<author>DesScorp</author>
	<datestamp>1263659280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Still waiting to get my own F-14.</p></div><p>Unless you steal one from Iran, that will never happen. After the last F-14 squadron retired their birds in 2006, Dick Cheney ordered all Tomcats (with the exception of a very few set aside for museums) to be destroyed. Usually, we send freshly retired birds to the "Boneyard" at Davis-Monthan AFB in the desert... the dry conditions preserve the aircraft well in case we need them in an emergency. But Iran needs parts for their Tomcasts so badly that Cheney was afraid a black market would spring up and that parts would start making their way to the Islamic regime. <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/07/02/national/main3006107.shtml" title="cbsnews.com">So the birds were literally shredded</a> [cbsnews.com]. A sad end to arguably the greatest Navy fighter of the jet age.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Still waiting to get my own F-14.Unless you steal one from Iran , that will never happen .
After the last F-14 squadron retired their birds in 2006 , Dick Cheney ordered all Tomcats ( with the exception of a very few set aside for museums ) to be destroyed .
Usually , we send freshly retired birds to the " Boneyard " at Davis-Monthan AFB in the desert... the dry conditions preserve the aircraft well in case we need them in an emergency .
But Iran needs parts for their Tomcasts so badly that Cheney was afraid a black market would spring up and that parts would start making their way to the Islamic regime .
So the birds were literally shredded [ cbsnews.com ] .
A sad end to arguably the greatest Navy fighter of the jet age .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Still waiting to get my own F-14.Unless you steal one from Iran, that will never happen.
After the last F-14 squadron retired their birds in 2006, Dick Cheney ordered all Tomcats (with the exception of a very few set aside for museums) to be destroyed.
Usually, we send freshly retired birds to the "Boneyard" at Davis-Monthan AFB in the desert... the dry conditions preserve the aircraft well in case we need them in an emergency.
But Iran needs parts for their Tomcasts so badly that Cheney was afraid a black market would spring up and that parts would start making their way to the Islamic regime.
So the birds were literally shredded [cbsnews.com].
A sad end to arguably the greatest Navy fighter of the jet age.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792392</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>Nidi62</author>
	<datestamp>1263673620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>does it still have weapon hardpoints on the wings? TFA doesn't really address that, it just says "They don't have any weapons."</p></div><p>These are Su-27UBs, also known as the Flanker-C.  They were not fitted with weapons and were used as trainers, and were also used in the Soviet version of the Blue Angels or Thunderbirds.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>does it still have weapon hardpoints on the wings ?
TFA does n't really address that , it just says " They do n't have any weapons .
" These are Su-27UBs , also known as the Flanker-C. They were not fitted with weapons and were used as trainers , and were also used in the Soviet version of the Blue Angels or Thunderbirds .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>does it still have weapon hardpoints on the wings?
TFA doesn't really address that, it just says "They don't have any weapons.
"These are Su-27UBs, also known as the Flanker-C.  They were not fitted with weapons and were used as trainers, and were also used in the Soviet version of the Blue Angels or Thunderbirds.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792346</id>
	<title>Unfortunately...</title>
	<author>YankDownUnder</author>
	<datestamp>1263673380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>...it won't fit through most drive-in's like McDonald's, KFC or Burger King.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...it wo n't fit through most drive-in 's like McDonald 's , KFC or Burger King .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...it won't fit through most drive-in's like McDonald's, KFC or Burger King.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794368</id>
	<title>Re:"Modernized" Western instrumentation - no thank</title>
	<author>dafing</author>
	<datestamp>1263645180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Tubes had their advantages, ie <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan-Gurevich\_MiG-25" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Mig 25 </a> [wikipedia.org]
<br> <br>
Tubes were easier to replace in remote airfields, which would be VERY useful during a war...they also were more protected from EMP's, kind of useful when you are dropping Nuclear bombs I would assume<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)
<br> <br>
I think tubes have had their day, I am not one of these "pure analogue" audiophiles, but to dismiss all tube technology is very rash.  I believe the Soviet jets were lacking when it came to instrumentation though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Tubes had their advantages , ie Mig 25 [ wikipedia.org ] Tubes were easier to replace in remote airfields , which would be VERY useful during a war...they also were more protected from EMP 's , kind of useful when you are dropping Nuclear bombs I would assume : ) I think tubes have had their day , I am not one of these " pure analogue " audiophiles , but to dismiss all tube technology is very rash .
I believe the Soviet jets were lacking when it came to instrumentation though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tubes had their advantages, ie Mig 25  [wikipedia.org]
 
Tubes were easier to replace in remote airfields, which would be VERY useful during a war...they also were more protected from EMP's, kind of useful when you are dropping Nuclear bombs I would assume :)
 
I think tubes have had their day, I am not one of these "pure analogue" audiophiles, but to dismiss all tube technology is very rash.
I believe the Soviet jets were lacking when it came to instrumentation though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792490</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>iamhassi</author>
	<datestamp>1263674340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"I'd go for this instead of a business jet. Far more fun and you don't have to worry if the engines fail - you can always use the ejection seat."</i>
<br> <br>
Sure, but of course it's <i>your</i> 5 million dollar jet you're ejecting from and not tax-payers, not to mention the bill the US gov't might hit you with for having to clean up the <a href="http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:iVBQ0lMyop4J:findarticles.com/p/articles/mi\_qn4207/is\_19950301/ai\_n10187150/+jet+crash+scattered+over+acres&amp;cd=3&amp;hl=en&amp;ct=clnk&amp;gl=us" title="74.125.95.132">jet scattered over 10 acres. </a> [74.125.95.132]
<br> <br>
Of course this is <a href="http://www.narconews.com/Issue49/article2965.html" title="narconews.com">a good deal for drug traffickers</a> [narconews.com].  With a <a href="http://aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/su27/" title="aerospaceweb.org">4,000 kg normal payload capacity</a> [aerospaceweb.org] and <a href="http://www.narcoticnews.com/Cocaine/Prices/USA/Cocaine\_Prices\_USA.html" title="narcoticnews.com">cocaine selling for $23,000 per kg</a> [narcoticnews.com] you'd make almost 100 million in one trip, and who's going to try stopping <a href="http://aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/su27/" title="aerospaceweb.org">a jet traveling Mach 2?</a> [aerospaceweb.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>" I 'd go for this instead of a business jet .
Far more fun and you do n't have to worry if the engines fail - you can always use the ejection seat .
" Sure , but of course it 's your 5 million dollar jet you 're ejecting from and not tax-payers , not to mention the bill the US gov't might hit you with for having to clean up the jet scattered over 10 acres .
[ 74.125.95.132 ] Of course this is a good deal for drug traffickers [ narconews.com ] .
With a 4,000 kg normal payload capacity [ aerospaceweb.org ] and cocaine selling for $ 23,000 per kg [ narcoticnews.com ] you 'd make almost 100 million in one trip , and who 's going to try stopping a jet traveling Mach 2 ?
[ aerospaceweb.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I'd go for this instead of a business jet.
Far more fun and you don't have to worry if the engines fail - you can always use the ejection seat.
"
 
Sure, but of course it's your 5 million dollar jet you're ejecting from and not tax-payers, not to mention the bill the US gov't might hit you with for having to clean up the jet scattered over 10 acres.
[74.125.95.132]
 
Of course this is a good deal for drug traffickers [narconews.com].
With a 4,000 kg normal payload capacity [aerospaceweb.org] and cocaine selling for $23,000 per kg [narcoticnews.com] you'd make almost 100 million in one trip, and who's going to try stopping a jet traveling Mach 2?
[aerospaceweb.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792258</id>
	<title>Range?</title>
	<author>istartedi</author>
	<datestamp>1263672720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was curious about Concorde replacements a while
back and researched some of the Soviet fighters.  Unfortunately
they tend to have short ranges at top speed.  If they could just
increase the fuel capacity of a two-seater, they'd have a Concorde
substitute.  The ticket would probably be a lot more though, since
you've got one plane and one passenger.</p><p>If you don't have the range for a trans-Atlantic hop, having
supersonic capability isn't too useful in the US.  You're not allowed
to fly supersonic over land here because of the boom.</p><p>Maybe it'll sell in some other country where the uber-wealthy
have a shorter distance to travel, and no noise restrictions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was curious about Concorde replacements a while back and researched some of the Soviet fighters .
Unfortunately they tend to have short ranges at top speed .
If they could just increase the fuel capacity of a two-seater , they 'd have a Concorde substitute .
The ticket would probably be a lot more though , since you 've got one plane and one passenger.If you do n't have the range for a trans-Atlantic hop , having supersonic capability is n't too useful in the US .
You 're not allowed to fly supersonic over land here because of the boom.Maybe it 'll sell in some other country where the uber-wealthy have a shorter distance to travel , and no noise restrictions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was curious about Concorde replacements a while
back and researched some of the Soviet fighters.
Unfortunately
they tend to have short ranges at top speed.
If they could just
increase the fuel capacity of a two-seater, they'd have a Concorde
substitute.
The ticket would probably be a lot more though, since
you've got one plane and one passenger.If you don't have the range for a trans-Atlantic hop, having
supersonic capability isn't too useful in the US.
You're not allowed
to fly supersonic over land here because of the boom.Maybe it'll sell in some other country where the uber-wealthy
have a shorter distance to travel, and no noise restrictions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795472</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263656220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No way, they are/will be using the unmanned submersible robots (<a href="http://www.liquidr.com/" title="liquidr.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.liquidr.com/</a> [liquidr.com] and <a href="http://www.stanford.edu/class/ee380/Abstracts/091028.html" title="stanford.edu" rel="nofollow">http://www.stanford.edu/class/ee380/Abstracts/091028.html</a> [stanford.edu]) for their high risk payloads. The logistical chain must be unbroken for the profits to come. This thing is used after a hard day at the cocaine plants and shady offices to get really high.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No way , they are/will be using the unmanned submersible robots ( http : //www.liquidr.com/ [ liquidr.com ] and http : //www.stanford.edu/class/ee380/Abstracts/091028.html [ stanford.edu ] ) for their high risk payloads .
The logistical chain must be unbroken for the profits to come .
This thing is used after a hard day at the cocaine plants and shady offices to get really high .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No way, they are/will be using the unmanned submersible robots (http://www.liquidr.com/ [liquidr.com] and http://www.stanford.edu/class/ee380/Abstracts/091028.html [stanford.edu]) for their high risk payloads.
The logistical chain must be unbroken for the profits to come.
This thing is used after a hard day at the cocaine plants and shady offices to get really high.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792722</id>
	<title>Re: stopping drug traffickers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263633240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Of course this is <a href="http://www.narconews.com/Issue49/article2965.html" title="narconews.com" rel="nofollow">a good deal for drug traffickers</a> [narconews.com].  With a <a href="http://aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/su27/" title="aerospaceweb.org" rel="nofollow">4,000 kg normal payload capacity</a> [aerospaceweb.org] and <a href="http://www.narcoticnews.com/Cocaine/Prices/USA/Cocaine\_Prices\_USA.html" title="narcoticnews.com" rel="nofollow">cocaine selling for $23,000 per kg</a> [narcoticnews.com] you'd make almost 100 million in one trip, and who's going to try stopping <a href="http://aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/su27/" title="aerospaceweb.org" rel="nofollow">a jet traveling Mach 2?</a> [aerospaceweb.org]</p> </div><p>Any US or european 4th gen fighter guided to interception by AWACS plane can shoot down that nacro-Suhoi with BWR missiles. It's not exactly a stealth aircraft, you know...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course this is a good deal for drug traffickers [ narconews.com ] .
With a 4,000 kg normal payload capacity [ aerospaceweb.org ] and cocaine selling for $ 23,000 per kg [ narcoticnews.com ] you 'd make almost 100 million in one trip , and who 's going to try stopping a jet traveling Mach 2 ?
[ aerospaceweb.org ] Any US or european 4th gen fighter guided to interception by AWACS plane can shoot down that nacro-Suhoi with BWR missiles .
It 's not exactly a stealth aircraft , you know.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course this is a good deal for drug traffickers [narconews.com].
With a 4,000 kg normal payload capacity [aerospaceweb.org] and cocaine selling for $23,000 per kg [narcoticnews.com] you'd make almost 100 million in one trip, and who's going to try stopping a jet traveling Mach 2?
[aerospaceweb.org] Any US or european 4th gen fighter guided to interception by AWACS plane can shoot down that nacro-Suhoi with BWR missiles.
It's not exactly a stealth aircraft, you know...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793226</id>
	<title>Short</title>
	<author>athlon02</author>
	<datestamp>1263637380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Man, I'm so close to owning one... only $4.9999 million short.  Can anyone spot me some money?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Man , I 'm so close to owning one... only $ 4.9999 million short .
Can anyone spot me some money ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man, I'm so close to owning one... only $4.9999 million short.
Can anyone spot me some money?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793404</id>
	<title>Re:One can dream...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263639000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Horseshit.  A competent pilot can control an aircraft with unstable flight characteristics; no computer is necessary.  Dick Rutan flew Voyager around the world doing just that (though his copilot apparently wasn't up to the task).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Horseshit .
A competent pilot can control an aircraft with unstable flight characteristics ; no computer is necessary .
Dick Rutan flew Voyager around the world doing just that ( though his copilot apparently was n't up to the task ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Horseshit.
A competent pilot can control an aircraft with unstable flight characteristics; no computer is necessary.
Dick Rutan flew Voyager around the world doing just that (though his copilot apparently wasn't up to the task).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795714</id>
	<title>Re:One can dream...</title>
	<author>ShakaUVM</author>
	<datestamp>1263658800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The bigger problem with owning a fighter is the amount of maintenance that go into them. You have to put a lot more hours of maintenance into a fighter than a normal private aviation craft. As in, hours of maintenance every damn time you fly it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The bigger problem with owning a fighter is the amount of maintenance that go into them .
You have to put a lot more hours of maintenance into a fighter than a normal private aviation craft .
As in , hours of maintenance every damn time you fly it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The bigger problem with owning a fighter is the amount of maintenance that go into them.
You have to put a lot more hours of maintenance into a fighter than a normal private aviation craft.
As in, hours of maintenance every damn time you fly it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792954</id>
	<title>Re:WTB: Aircraft Carrier</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1263635100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I saw these fly at Farnborough a few years ago.  Absolutely beautiful to watch - they showed a manoeuvre where the plan banks to a straight stall, then just stops and hovers.  Any pursuing craft flies straight past.  It was a bit old then (just there for the display, they weren't selling them), and wasn't much use as a combat manoeuvre anyway because it was introduced in an age when close dogfighting was already largely obsolete, but it looked impressive.</p><p>
And, since you mention it, while I was there a girl on one of the stands did ask if I wanted an aircraft carrier.  It was a bit out of my price range though.  She offered me a discount if I bought two, but even then there were a few too many zeros on the end of the number...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw these fly at Farnborough a few years ago .
Absolutely beautiful to watch - they showed a manoeuvre where the plan banks to a straight stall , then just stops and hovers .
Any pursuing craft flies straight past .
It was a bit old then ( just there for the display , they were n't selling them ) , and was n't much use as a combat manoeuvre anyway because it was introduced in an age when close dogfighting was already largely obsolete , but it looked impressive .
And , since you mention it , while I was there a girl on one of the stands did ask if I wanted an aircraft carrier .
It was a bit out of my price range though .
She offered me a discount if I bought two , but even then there were a few too many zeros on the end of the number.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw these fly at Farnborough a few years ago.
Absolutely beautiful to watch - they showed a manoeuvre where the plan banks to a straight stall, then just stops and hovers.
Any pursuing craft flies straight past.
It was a bit old then (just there for the display, they weren't selling them), and wasn't much use as a combat manoeuvre anyway because it was introduced in an age when close dogfighting was already largely obsolete, but it looked impressive.
And, since you mention it, while I was there a girl on one of the stands did ask if I wanted an aircraft carrier.
It was a bit out of my price range though.
She offered me a discount if I bought two, but even then there were a few too many zeros on the end of the number...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548</id>
	<title>One can dream...</title>
	<author>gillbates</author>
	<datestamp>1263674820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
When I was younger, I remember touring the Air National guard and asking the tour leader if I could by a fighter jet.  He responded that to own a fighter jet, I'd have to find one in the Arizona boneyard and it would cost about 5 million dollars.  In the 80's, the F16 cost 5 million each (or so I was told...)
</p><p>
However, even had I the money today, I'm not so sure I would buy one.
</p><p>
My uncle was in the Air Force, and actually flew in an F4 phantom.  He had three remarks:
</p><ol>
<li>He could not believe anything could travel so fast.  Even though he rode a motorcycle, he was awestruck by the speed of the F4 phantom.</li>
<li>Fighter jets built after WWII are as maneuverable as they are because they are inherently unstable in flight.  The reason why a fighter jet can pull such tight turns is because it's "steady state" flight characteristic is not flat, level flight, but turning flight.  While this is valuable in combat, it means that flying combat aircraft requires a high degree of concentration and training.  Unlike a Cessna, a moment of inattention in a combat jet can mean finding oneself in an unrecoverable maneuver.</li>
<li>Unlike what some simulators might predict, recovering from a dive can actually be much more difficult than entering one, because the fuel shifts forward, changing the aircraft's center of gravity.  Of course engineers design the aircraft to minimize this, but it can never be completely eliminated and does have serious implications for flight.  The asymetric flight characteristics of combat jets could come as a very unwelcome (and possibly fatal) surprise to a civilian pilot.</li>
</ol><p>
Today, I'm content to fly simulators because I can get a feel for the experience without the attendant risk and cost.  Were I flying a 5 million dollar aircraft, I would be very reticent to try the kind of manuevers I do in the simulator, simply because of the risk involved.  In the simulator, I can try spins and stalls and rolls that prudence would forbid in the real world.
</p><p>
But it would still be cool to own a fighter jet.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I was younger , I remember touring the Air National guard and asking the tour leader if I could by a fighter jet .
He responded that to own a fighter jet , I 'd have to find one in the Arizona boneyard and it would cost about 5 million dollars .
In the 80 's , the F16 cost 5 million each ( or so I was told... ) However , even had I the money today , I 'm not so sure I would buy one .
My uncle was in the Air Force , and actually flew in an F4 phantom .
He had three remarks : He could not believe anything could travel so fast .
Even though he rode a motorcycle , he was awestruck by the speed of the F4 phantom .
Fighter jets built after WWII are as maneuverable as they are because they are inherently unstable in flight .
The reason why a fighter jet can pull such tight turns is because it 's " steady state " flight characteristic is not flat , level flight , but turning flight .
While this is valuable in combat , it means that flying combat aircraft requires a high degree of concentration and training .
Unlike a Cessna , a moment of inattention in a combat jet can mean finding oneself in an unrecoverable maneuver .
Unlike what some simulators might predict , recovering from a dive can actually be much more difficult than entering one , because the fuel shifts forward , changing the aircraft 's center of gravity .
Of course engineers design the aircraft to minimize this , but it can never be completely eliminated and does have serious implications for flight .
The asymetric flight characteristics of combat jets could come as a very unwelcome ( and possibly fatal ) surprise to a civilian pilot .
Today , I 'm content to fly simulators because I can get a feel for the experience without the attendant risk and cost .
Were I flying a 5 million dollar aircraft , I would be very reticent to try the kind of manuevers I do in the simulator , simply because of the risk involved .
In the simulator , I can try spins and stalls and rolls that prudence would forbid in the real world .
But it would still be cool to own a fighter jet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
When I was younger, I remember touring the Air National guard and asking the tour leader if I could by a fighter jet.
He responded that to own a fighter jet, I'd have to find one in the Arizona boneyard and it would cost about 5 million dollars.
In the 80's, the F16 cost 5 million each (or so I was told...)

However, even had I the money today, I'm not so sure I would buy one.
My uncle was in the Air Force, and actually flew in an F4 phantom.
He had three remarks:

He could not believe anything could travel so fast.
Even though he rode a motorcycle, he was awestruck by the speed of the F4 phantom.
Fighter jets built after WWII are as maneuverable as they are because they are inherently unstable in flight.
The reason why a fighter jet can pull such tight turns is because it's "steady state" flight characteristic is not flat, level flight, but turning flight.
While this is valuable in combat, it means that flying combat aircraft requires a high degree of concentration and training.
Unlike a Cessna, a moment of inattention in a combat jet can mean finding oneself in an unrecoverable maneuver.
Unlike what some simulators might predict, recovering from a dive can actually be much more difficult than entering one, because the fuel shifts forward, changing the aircraft's center of gravity.
Of course engineers design the aircraft to minimize this, but it can never be completely eliminated and does have serious implications for flight.
The asymetric flight characteristics of combat jets could come as a very unwelcome (and possibly fatal) surprise to a civilian pilot.
Today, I'm content to fly simulators because I can get a feel for the experience without the attendant risk and cost.
Were I flying a 5 million dollar aircraft, I would be very reticent to try the kind of manuevers I do in the simulator, simply because of the risk involved.
In the simulator, I can try spins and stalls and rolls that prudence would forbid in the real world.
But it would still be cool to own a fighter jet.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794680</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263647520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Knots are nautical miles per hour.  Nautical miles are a fixed length - they do not depend on pressure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Knots are nautical miles per hour .
Nautical miles are a fixed length - they do not depend on pressure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Knots are nautical miles per hour.
Nautical miles are a fixed length - they do not depend on pressure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794958</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>bhtooefr</author>
	<datestamp>1263650340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's why you communicate with the tower, and do what they let you do.</p><p>If you're flying it that fast that there's an issue, you need government approval, and they'd require you to follow a strict flight path to avoid collisions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's why you communicate with the tower , and do what they let you do.If you 're flying it that fast that there 's an issue , you need government approval , and they 'd require you to follow a strict flight path to avoid collisions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's why you communicate with the tower, and do what they let you do.If you're flying it that fast that there's an issue, you need government approval, and they'd require you to follow a strict flight path to avoid collisions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793706</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792712</id>
	<title>Re:One can dream...</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1263633180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From what I understand the latest fighters have computer failsafes to prevent you from losing control, assuming you have enough altitude. And for those about to comment on that, computers are the only reason you can fly an unstable aircrafts in the first place. If the engine dies, you eject because it can't glide at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From what I understand the latest fighters have computer failsafes to prevent you from losing control , assuming you have enough altitude .
And for those about to comment on that , computers are the only reason you can fly an unstable aircrafts in the first place .
If the engine dies , you eject because it ca n't glide at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From what I understand the latest fighters have computer failsafes to prevent you from losing control, assuming you have enough altitude.
And for those about to comment on that, computers are the only reason you can fly an unstable aircrafts in the first place.
If the engine dies, you eject because it can't glide at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30798354</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>joib</author>
	<datestamp>1263744120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i><br>I think the difference in speed you are referring to is that the Russian seat is measured in kilometers and the US seat is in Knots. The Russian design is rated to about 1400kph, while the US design is 600 knots. If you do the simple math, that doesn't make them equal, until you realize that 600 knots is much much faster at altitude (because of air density,) where kilometers is a fixed distance. 600 knots at sea level is about ~1100kph, but at 35,000 feet, it is ~1400kph.<br></i></p><p>Eh, what? A knot, per definition, is nautical miles per hour. The length of a nautical mile, again per definition, is 1852 meters, regardless of altitude.</p><p>Now, while I don't know about ejection seat specifications, it certainly sounds reasonably that the operating envelope would be given in terms of indicated air speed, rather than true air speed. But this is a different issue than whether the speed is given in units of knots or kph.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the difference in speed you are referring to is that the Russian seat is measured in kilometers and the US seat is in Knots .
The Russian design is rated to about 1400kph , while the US design is 600 knots .
If you do the simple math , that does n't make them equal , until you realize that 600 knots is much much faster at altitude ( because of air density , ) where kilometers is a fixed distance .
600 knots at sea level is about ~ 1100kph , but at 35,000 feet , it is ~ 1400kph.Eh , what ?
A knot , per definition , is nautical miles per hour .
The length of a nautical mile , again per definition , is 1852 meters , regardless of altitude.Now , while I do n't know about ejection seat specifications , it certainly sounds reasonably that the operating envelope would be given in terms of indicated air speed , rather than true air speed .
But this is a different issue than whether the speed is given in units of knots or kph .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the difference in speed you are referring to is that the Russian seat is measured in kilometers and the US seat is in Knots.
The Russian design is rated to about 1400kph, while the US design is 600 knots.
If you do the simple math, that doesn't make them equal, until you realize that 600 knots is much much faster at altitude (because of air density,) where kilometers is a fixed distance.
600 knots at sea level is about ~1100kph, but at 35,000 feet, it is ~1400kph.Eh, what?
A knot, per definition, is nautical miles per hour.
The length of a nautical mile, again per definition, is 1852 meters, regardless of altitude.Now, while I don't know about ejection seat specifications, it certainly sounds reasonably that the operating envelope would be given in terms of indicated air speed, rather than true air speed.
But this is a different issue than whether the speed is given in units of knots or kph.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795768</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing new</title>
	<author>DesScorp</author>
	<datestamp>1263659460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>&gt;I'm curious why.  Certainly, older generations of America fighter aircraft are permitted - Michael Dorn flies his F-86 Sabre all the time.</p></div><p>A privately owned F-104 occasionaly comes through the airport where I work. And there's a MiG-17... again, privately owned... in one of the hangers here that comes out to play occasionaly. I'm aware of no restriction on ownership or flights of retired fighters, only that they have to be "declawed"... have their gun and fire control system removed.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I 'm curious why .
Certainly , older generations of America fighter aircraft are permitted - Michael Dorn flies his F-86 Sabre all the time.A privately owned F-104 occasionaly comes through the airport where I work .
And there 's a MiG-17... again , privately owned... in one of the hangers here that comes out to play occasionaly .
I 'm aware of no restriction on ownership or flights of retired fighters , only that they have to be " declawed " ... have their gun and fire control system removed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;I'm curious why.
Certainly, older generations of America fighter aircraft are permitted - Michael Dorn flies his F-86 Sabre all the time.A privately owned F-104 occasionaly comes through the airport where I work.
And there's a MiG-17... again, privately owned... in one of the hangers here that comes out to play occasionaly.
I'm aware of no restriction on ownership or flights of retired fighters, only that they have to be "declawed"... have their gun and fire control system removed.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792756</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30798176</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>Leebert</author>
	<datestamp>1263742500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I thought you guys were had a right to bare arms, what is the difference between a shot gun and a jet?</p></div><p>By my reading of the U.S. Constitution, there <i>shouldn't</i> be a difference, and it <i>should</i> be allowed.</p><p>But hey, I'm the nutjob who also thinks that the Constitution would permit me to own a nuclear weapon, so take that opinion for what it's worth.</p><p>BTW, I'm also in favor of re-writing the second amendment to be a bit more sane for modern weaponry.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought you guys were had a right to bare arms , what is the difference between a shot gun and a jet ? By my reading of the U.S. Constitution , there should n't be a difference , and it should be allowed.But hey , I 'm the nutjob who also thinks that the Constitution would permit me to own a nuclear weapon , so take that opinion for what it 's worth.BTW , I 'm also in favor of re-writing the second amendment to be a bit more sane for modern weaponry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought you guys were had a right to bare arms, what is the difference between a shot gun and a jet?By my reading of the U.S. Constitution, there shouldn't be a difference, and it should be allowed.But hey, I'm the nutjob who also thinks that the Constitution would permit me to own a nuclear weapon, so take that opinion for what it's worth.BTW, I'm also in favor of re-writing the second amendment to be a bit more sane for modern weaponry.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794854</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793028</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>UnknowingFool</author>
	<datestamp>1263635700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's not what the parent asked.  Of course the jet will be stripped of actual weaponry, but will it still have the attachment points (hardpoints).  Removing hardpoints may or may not be possible as they could affect the structural integrity of the plane.  After acquiring the aircraft, the owner could attach nonfunctional mockups for pure show.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not what the parent asked .
Of course the jet will be stripped of actual weaponry , but will it still have the attachment points ( hardpoints ) .
Removing hardpoints may or may not be possible as they could affect the structural integrity of the plane .
After acquiring the aircraft , the owner could attach nonfunctional mockups for pure show .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not what the parent asked.
Of course the jet will be stripped of actual weaponry, but will it still have the attachment points (hardpoints).
Removing hardpoints may or may not be possible as they could affect the structural integrity of the plane.
After acquiring the aircraft, the owner could attach nonfunctional mockups for pure show.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792216</id>
	<title>lol</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263672360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>judging by the pitiful performances of Russian fighter jets at airshows around the world, it's also capable of flying straight down.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>judging by the pitiful performances of Russian fighter jets at airshows around the world , it 's also capable of flying straight down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>judging by the pitiful performances of Russian fighter jets at airshows around the world, it's also capable of flying straight down.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792364</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>wjsteele</author>
	<datestamp>1263673500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Any foreign military aircraft that is brought into the US must be demilitarized before its sale can be approved.  That include removing any equipment that could be offensive in nature, including radars, jamming equipment and weapon systems.<br> <br>

Bill</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any foreign military aircraft that is brought into the US must be demilitarized before its sale can be approved .
That include removing any equipment that could be offensive in nature , including radars , jamming equipment and weapon systems .
Bill</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any foreign military aircraft that is brought into the US must be demilitarized before its sale can be approved.
That include removing any equipment that could be offensive in nature, including radars, jamming equipment and weapon systems.
Bill</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792866</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing new</title>
	<author>tautog</author>
	<datestamp>1263634200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just have to call the Navy and ask really nicely. Oh yeah, you have to prove you have the money to have it delivered and all the fun stuff removed (engine systems, navionics, etc). We're on the list to get one for a static display at our local airport.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just have to call the Navy and ask really nicely .
Oh yeah , you have to prove you have the money to have it delivered and all the fun stuff removed ( engine systems , navionics , etc ) .
We 're on the list to get one for a static display at our local airport .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just have to call the Navy and ask really nicely.
Oh yeah, you have to prove you have the money to have it delivered and all the fun stuff removed (engine systems, navionics, etc).
We're on the list to get one for a static display at our local airport.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793922</id>
	<title>two side-by-side</title>
	<author>dltaylor</author>
	<datestamp>1263642180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You either want an A-37 or an FB-111.</p><p>The A-37 is a "buff" T-37 trainer.  It's not so much that you need the weapons, but the stronger engines, larger fuel tanks, and the hard points for luggage (pilots used a have a pod for assignment changes).  Strip the armor during a refurb and the performance should be better, too.  Lots of them sold into South America and Southeast Asia.</p><p><a href="http://www.a-37.org/a37.htm" title="a-37.org">http://www.a-37.org/a37.htm</a> [a-37.org]</p><p>The FB-111 gets you supersonics.  It was the first US jet to do at (well, near) sea level in sustained flight.  Has a pressurized cockpit, too.  Might be able to get one from the Aussies.</p><p><a href="http://www.fighter-planes.com/info/f111\_aardvark.htm" title="fighter-planes.com">http://www.fighter-planes.com/info/f111\_aardvark.htm</a> [fighter-planes.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You either want an A-37 or an FB-111.The A-37 is a " buff " T-37 trainer .
It 's not so much that you need the weapons , but the stronger engines , larger fuel tanks , and the hard points for luggage ( pilots used a have a pod for assignment changes ) .
Strip the armor during a refurb and the performance should be better , too .
Lots of them sold into South America and Southeast Asia.http : //www.a-37.org/a37.htm [ a-37.org ] The FB-111 gets you supersonics .
It was the first US jet to do at ( well , near ) sea level in sustained flight .
Has a pressurized cockpit , too .
Might be able to get one from the Aussies.http : //www.fighter-planes.com/info/f111 \ _aardvark.htm [ fighter-planes.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You either want an A-37 or an FB-111.The A-37 is a "buff" T-37 trainer.
It's not so much that you need the weapons, but the stronger engines, larger fuel tanks, and the hard points for luggage (pilots used a have a pod for assignment changes).
Strip the armor during a refurb and the performance should be better, too.
Lots of them sold into South America and Southeast Asia.http://www.a-37.org/a37.htm [a-37.org]The FB-111 gets you supersonics.
It was the first US jet to do at (well, near) sea level in sustained flight.
Has a pressurized cockpit, too.
Might be able to get one from the Aussies.http://www.fighter-planes.com/info/f111\_aardvark.htm [fighter-planes.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30805630</id>
	<title>Re:WTB: Aircraft Carrier</title>
	<author>tokul</author>
	<datestamp>1263807240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>anybody got a slightly used aircraft carrier up for sale?</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Contact Chinese. They have <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet\_aircraft\_carrier\_Varyag" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Varyag</a> [wikipedia.org], <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet\_aircraft\_carrier\_Minsk" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Minsk</a> [wikipedia.org] and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet\_aircraft\_carrier\_Kiev" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">Kiev</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>anybody got a slightly used aircraft carrier up for sale ?
Contact Chinese .
They have Varyag [ wikipedia.org ] , Minsk [ wikipedia.org ] and Kiev [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>anybody got a slightly used aircraft carrier up for sale?
Contact Chinese.
They have Varyag [wikipedia.org], Minsk [wikipedia.org] and Kiev [wikipedia.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792390</id>
	<title>I'll take them all</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263673620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Send 1 to:</p><p>Osama bin Laden<br>1 Hidden Cave Trail<br>Afghan Border Region<br>Pakistan</p><p>Send the rest to:</p><p>al Qaeda Secret Training Base<br>Yemen</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Send 1 to : Osama bin Laden1 Hidden Cave TrailAfghan Border RegionPakistanSend the rest to : al Qaeda Secret Training BaseYemen</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Send 1 to:Osama bin Laden1 Hidden Cave TrailAfghan Border RegionPakistanSend the rest to:al Qaeda Secret Training BaseYemen</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792320</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>quantumplacet</author>
	<datestamp>1263673200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>actually, TFA says "The jets are the &ldquo;UB&rdquo; variant of the SU-27, never intended for combat, so they aren&rsquo;t fitted with weapons."  Way to make up a quote so you could pretend like you read it though.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>actually , TFA says " The jets are the    UB    variant of the SU-27 , never intended for combat , so they aren    t fitted with weapons .
" Way to make up a quote so you could pretend like you read it though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>actually, TFA says "The jets are the “UB” variant of the SU-27, never intended for combat, so they aren’t fitted with weapons.
"  Way to make up a quote so you could pretend like you read it though.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794868</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing new</title>
	<author>DougF</author>
	<datestamp>1263649320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm curious why</p></div><p>
It has to do with CC (combat coded) designators for the aircraft in question.  CC coded aircraft operated by other than the USG agency authorized to fly them have to be specifically exempt by Congress to be allowed to fly in U.S. airspace.  As I understand it, older generations of aircraft, properly de-mil'd from being able to deploy weapons, can have the CC designation removed.  "Newer" aircraft such as the F-4 still represent a threat (albeit small) and therefore we probably won't see many F-4s (or F-111s, F-14s, AC-130As, F-16s, F-15s, etc. all of which are in the boneyard at AMARC) flying in private hands in the near future.<br>
AMARC= Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Center, a tenet of Davis-Monthan AFB in Arizona.  They maintain them in a storage condition until the owing major commands authorize their re-generation for the primary or other USG agencies, sale to other nations, or processing through DRMS, the Defense Reutilization Marketing Service, usually for scrap metal.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm curious why It has to do with CC ( combat coded ) designators for the aircraft in question .
CC coded aircraft operated by other than the USG agency authorized to fly them have to be specifically exempt by Congress to be allowed to fly in U.S. airspace. As I understand it , older generations of aircraft , properly de-mil 'd from being able to deploy weapons , can have the CC designation removed .
" Newer " aircraft such as the F-4 still represent a threat ( albeit small ) and therefore we probably wo n't see many F-4s ( or F-111s , F-14s , AC-130As , F-16s , F-15s , etc .
all of which are in the boneyard at AMARC ) flying in private hands in the near future .
AMARC = Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Center , a tenet of Davis-Monthan AFB in Arizona .
They maintain them in a storage condition until the owing major commands authorize their re-generation for the primary or other USG agencies , sale to other nations , or processing through DRMS , the Defense Reutilization Marketing Service , usually for scrap metal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm curious why
It has to do with CC (combat coded) designators for the aircraft in question.
CC coded aircraft operated by other than the USG agency authorized to fly them have to be specifically exempt by Congress to be allowed to fly in U.S. airspace.  As I understand it, older generations of aircraft, properly de-mil'd from being able to deploy weapons, can have the CC designation removed.
"Newer" aircraft such as the F-4 still represent a threat (albeit small) and therefore we probably won't see many F-4s (or F-111s, F-14s, AC-130As, F-16s, F-15s, etc.
all of which are in the boneyard at AMARC) flying in private hands in the near future.
AMARC= Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Center, a tenet of Davis-Monthan AFB in Arizona.
They maintain them in a storage condition until the owing major commands authorize their re-generation for the primary or other USG agencies, sale to other nations, or processing through DRMS, the Defense Reutilization Marketing Service, usually for scrap metal.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792756</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792804</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>afabbro</author>
	<datestamp>1263633780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wonder how trigger-happy the US Airforce might get if they stumbled across an SU-27 over US soil though...</p></div><p>Um, not at all?  This isn't like 1917 and suddenly coming across a Fokker in Cornwall.  It's 2009 and people file flight plans, and there are plenty of other Migs (17s, 21s, etc.) flying privately in the US.  </p><p>Now, if it was shooting <i>across the border</i> and <i>painted in Russian colors</i> and <i>not responding to radio</i> that might a different point.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder how trigger-happy the US Airforce might get if they stumbled across an SU-27 over US soil though...Um , not at all ?
This is n't like 1917 and suddenly coming across a Fokker in Cornwall .
It 's 2009 and people file flight plans , and there are plenty of other Migs ( 17s , 21s , etc .
) flying privately in the US .
Now , if it was shooting across the border and painted in Russian colors and not responding to radio that might a different point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder how trigger-happy the US Airforce might get if they stumbled across an SU-27 over US soil though...Um, not at all?
This isn't like 1917 and suddenly coming across a Fokker in Cornwall.
It's 2009 and people file flight plans, and there are plenty of other Migs (17s, 21s, etc.
) flying privately in the US.
Now, if it was shooting across the border and painted in Russian colors and not responding to radio that might a different point.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793134</id>
	<title>spare parts...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263636660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Helllo Sir, this is NAPA auto parts, how can we help you</p><p>Need a  carb for a '98 Sukhoi 27, and some brake shoes for the forward gear</p><p>No problem. we have those in stock</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Helllo Sir , this is NAPA auto parts , how can we help youNeed a carb for a '98 Sukhoi 27 , and some brake shoes for the forward gearNo problem .
we have those in stock</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Helllo Sir, this is NAPA auto parts, how can we help youNeed a  carb for a '98 Sukhoi 27, and some brake shoes for the forward gearNo problem.
we have those in stock</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792744</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing new</title>
	<author>Martin Blank</author>
	<datestamp>1263633360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It'll never happen.  The Tomcats are all scheduled to be either scrapped, mothballed, or go to museums.  Given the perceived risk of an F-14 in private ownership going to Iran, the US will never sell them to private citizens.  For that matter, the US has almost never sold its military aircraft to private citizens even when the aircraft is no longer combat viable, and aircraft sold to other nations include requirements as to final disposition at end of service, which may include authorized resale, sale back to the US, or verified destruction.  Venezuela ran into this recently when it wanted to sell its F-16s to another country that the US didn't want in possession of them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 'll never happen .
The Tomcats are all scheduled to be either scrapped , mothballed , or go to museums .
Given the perceived risk of an F-14 in private ownership going to Iran , the US will never sell them to private citizens .
For that matter , the US has almost never sold its military aircraft to private citizens even when the aircraft is no longer combat viable , and aircraft sold to other nations include requirements as to final disposition at end of service , which may include authorized resale , sale back to the US , or verified destruction .
Venezuela ran into this recently when it wanted to sell its F-16s to another country that the US did n't want in possession of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It'll never happen.
The Tomcats are all scheduled to be either scrapped, mothballed, or go to museums.
Given the perceived risk of an F-14 in private ownership going to Iran, the US will never sell them to private citizens.
For that matter, the US has almost never sold its military aircraft to private citizens even when the aircraft is no longer combat viable, and aircraft sold to other nations include requirements as to final disposition at end of service, which may include authorized resale, sale back to the US, or verified destruction.
Venezuela ran into this recently when it wanted to sell its F-16s to another country that the US didn't want in possession of them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795612</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>wiredlogic</author>
	<datestamp>1263657660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Civilian operated aircraft in the US aren't allowed to have ejection seats. All of the privately owned warbirds have to have their ejection systems removed or rendered inoperable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Civilian operated aircraft in the US are n't allowed to have ejection seats .
All of the privately owned warbirds have to have their ejection systems removed or rendered inoperable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Civilian operated aircraft in the US aren't allowed to have ejection seats.
All of the privately owned warbirds have to have their ejection systems removed or rendered inoperable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792984</id>
	<title>Airport Security</title>
	<author>Voulnet</author>
	<datestamp>1263635400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, even if I owned this beast of a jet, do I have to adhere to flight regulations like getting screened at the airport and not carrying fluids (unless inside my body)?

Do airport hangar services include reloading the Vulcan gun or sidewinders?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , even if I owned this beast of a jet , do I have to adhere to flight regulations like getting screened at the airport and not carrying fluids ( unless inside my body ) ?
Do airport hangar services include reloading the Vulcan gun or sidewinders ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, even if I owned this beast of a jet, do I have to adhere to flight regulations like getting screened at the airport and not carrying fluids (unless inside my body)?
Do airport hangar services include reloading the Vulcan gun or sidewinders?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792448</id>
	<title>Two tandem seats max</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263674100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>What single seater and at most two tandem seats? What the hell were they thinking?
Looks like the Soviets never learnt the meaning of the word mile high club before trying to compete in the business jet market.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What single seater and at most two tandem seats ?
What the hell were they thinking ?
Looks like the Soviets never learnt the meaning of the word mile high club before trying to compete in the business jet market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What single seater and at most two tandem seats?
What the hell were they thinking?
Looks like the Soviets never learnt the meaning of the word mile high club before trying to compete in the business jet market.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793670</id>
	<title>Re:Range?</title>
	<author>DMUTPeregrine</author>
	<datestamp>1263640740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The first SU-27s seen by the western public flew from Moscow to Paris without refueling, and without drop tanks (internal only). One of them was the two-seater UB version, the same type being sold. (Le Bourget, Paris international air show, 1989.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>The first SU-27s seen by the western public flew from Moscow to Paris without refueling , and without drop tanks ( internal only ) .
One of them was the two-seater UB version , the same type being sold .
( Le Bourget , Paris international air show , 1989 .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first SU-27s seen by the western public flew from Moscow to Paris without refueling, and without drop tanks (internal only).
One of them was the two-seater UB version, the same type being sold.
(Le Bourget, Paris international air show, 1989.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792310</id>
	<title>Re:WTB: Aircraft Carrier</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263673140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh... you just missed it.  The Russians sold the one they had under construction to the Chinese.<br> <br>

Bill</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh... you just missed it .
The Russians sold the one they had under construction to the Chinese .
Bill</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh... you just missed it.
The Russians sold the one they had under construction to the Chinese.
Bill</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792734</id>
	<title>Old News</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263633300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wired did an article on this years ago, explaining how anyone getting into the market for a small business plane could easily pick up any number of military craft. SU-26s were approx. $80,000 at that time, and other european manufactured jets were selling even cheaper. This article also glosses over availability, but the price has gone notably higher for the su-27s. That article stated some private airports allowed them, but I dont know that that's a particularly large number. Nor am I thrilled at the idea of amateur hour in high speed jets. Also, how many tower technicians are trained and familiar with scheduling landings with aircraft of that class? Looking into that is probably one of a hundred steps you should take before getting into the market. Also the cost (which the article does mention) can be insane for fuel and maintenance. "The two happiest days of a yacht owners' life, the day the buy it and the day they sell it."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wired did an article on this years ago , explaining how anyone getting into the market for a small business plane could easily pick up any number of military craft .
SU-26s were approx .
$ 80,000 at that time , and other european manufactured jets were selling even cheaper .
This article also glosses over availability , but the price has gone notably higher for the su-27s .
That article stated some private airports allowed them , but I dont know that that 's a particularly large number .
Nor am I thrilled at the idea of amateur hour in high speed jets .
Also , how many tower technicians are trained and familiar with scheduling landings with aircraft of that class ?
Looking into that is probably one of a hundred steps you should take before getting into the market .
Also the cost ( which the article does mention ) can be insane for fuel and maintenance .
" The two happiest days of a yacht owners ' life , the day the buy it and the day they sell it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wired did an article on this years ago, explaining how anyone getting into the market for a small business plane could easily pick up any number of military craft.
SU-26s were approx.
$80,000 at that time, and other european manufactured jets were selling even cheaper.
This article also glosses over availability, but the price has gone notably higher for the su-27s.
That article stated some private airports allowed them, but I dont know that that's a particularly large number.
Nor am I thrilled at the idea of amateur hour in high speed jets.
Also, how many tower technicians are trained and familiar with scheduling landings with aircraft of that class?
Looking into that is probably one of a hundred steps you should take before getting into the market.
Also the cost (which the article does mention) can be insane for fuel and maintenance.
"The two happiest days of a yacht owners' life, the day the buy it and the day they sell it.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792386</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>Nimey</author>
	<datestamp>1263673620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah, that'll be the trainer variant, then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , that 'll be the trainer variant , then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, that'll be the trainer variant, then.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792974</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>couchslug</author>
	<datestamp>1263635280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The USAF routinely hosts warbird collectors at base airshows, and there are plenty of MIGs. Go to the next open house in your area, it's very cool.</p><p>Anyone wanting to blow up shit and kill people could just as well rent a cargo plane, pack it to the gills with expedient explosive, and bring MUCH more to the game than a few thousand lbs of ordinary bombs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The USAF routinely hosts warbird collectors at base airshows , and there are plenty of MIGs .
Go to the next open house in your area , it 's very cool.Anyone wanting to blow up shit and kill people could just as well rent a cargo plane , pack it to the gills with expedient explosive , and bring MUCH more to the game than a few thousand lbs of ordinary bombs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The USAF routinely hosts warbird collectors at base airshows, and there are plenty of MIGs.
Go to the next open house in your area, it's very cool.Anyone wanting to blow up shit and kill people could just as well rent a cargo plane, pack it to the gills with expedient explosive, and bring MUCH more to the game than a few thousand lbs of ordinary bombs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30807734</id>
	<title>Re:WTB: Aircraft Carrier</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263829080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't that the jet that fell out of the sky at that air show in Europe?  I know I'm not rushing to the dealer to buy a Russian car..........</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't that the jet that fell out of the sky at that air show in Europe ?
I know I 'm not rushing to the dealer to buy a Russian car......... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't that the jet that fell out of the sky at that air show in Europe?
I know I'm not rushing to the dealer to buy a Russian car..........</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792986</id>
	<title>Accessories not included</title>
	<author>CosaNostra Pizza Inc</author>
	<datestamp>1263635400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>$5 million dollar jet but what's available for armaments, in what quantities and how much do they cost?  I'd like to send a message to my neighbor, one house over, the next time he cranks his music too loud.</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 5 million dollar jet but what 's available for armaments , in what quantities and how much do they cost ?
I 'd like to send a message to my neighbor , one house over , the next time he cranks his music too loud .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$5 million dollar jet but what's available for armaments, in what quantities and how much do they cost?
I'd like to send a message to my neighbor, one house over, the next time he cranks his music too loud.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792836</id>
	<title>Re:"Modernized" Western instrumentation - no thank</title>
	<author>cheesybagel</author>
	<datestamp>1263634020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would rather have the Western internals. Soviet fighters from this time period were analog instrumentation packed up the wazoo. You need to be very experienced to fly one of the things. Today you have like a couple of multifunction liquid-crystal displays which do everything. A lot of the countries which have old Soviet planes have bought Russian or Israeli electronic upgrade packages. Kind of surprising they do not have some sort of INS/GPS navigation system however. The Russians have had their Glonass satnav system almost as long as GPS has been available.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would rather have the Western internals .
Soviet fighters from this time period were analog instrumentation packed up the wazoo .
You need to be very experienced to fly one of the things .
Today you have like a couple of multifunction liquid-crystal displays which do everything .
A lot of the countries which have old Soviet planes have bought Russian or Israeli electronic upgrade packages .
Kind of surprising they do not have some sort of INS/GPS navigation system however .
The Russians have had their Glonass satnav system almost as long as GPS has been available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would rather have the Western internals.
Soviet fighters from this time period were analog instrumentation packed up the wazoo.
You need to be very experienced to fly one of the things.
Today you have like a couple of multifunction liquid-crystal displays which do everything.
A lot of the countries which have old Soviet planes have bought Russian or Israeli electronic upgrade packages.
Kind of surprising they do not have some sort of INS/GPS navigation system however.
The Russians have had their Glonass satnav system almost as long as GPS has been available.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793504</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263639720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> and who's going to try stopping <a href="http://aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/su27/" title="aerospaceweb.org" rel="nofollow">a jet traveling Mach 2?</a> [aerospaceweb.org]</p> </div><p>The Air Force? Once they detect an unknown aircraft flying at that speed I'm pretty sure they're going to check it out.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and who 's going to try stopping a jet traveling Mach 2 ?
[ aerospaceweb.org ] The Air Force ?
Once they detect an unknown aircraft flying at that speed I 'm pretty sure they 're going to check it out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> and who's going to try stopping a jet traveling Mach 2?
[aerospaceweb.org] The Air Force?
Once they detect an unknown aircraft flying at that speed I'm pretty sure they're going to check it out.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792520</id>
	<title>Blatant Slashvertizing</title>
	<author>prionic6</author>
	<datestamp>1263674640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's probably a refId for Slashdot somewhere...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's probably a refId for Slashdot somewhere.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's probably a refId for Slashdot somewhere...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792812</id>
	<title>Re:One can dream...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263633840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In the simulator, I can try spins and stalls and rolls that prudence would forbid in the real world.</p></div><p>You should have married Felicity, the fun sister, instead.  (At least you didn't get stuck with Chastity...)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In the simulator , I can try spins and stalls and rolls that prudence would forbid in the real world.You should have married Felicity , the fun sister , instead .
( At least you did n't get stuck with Chastity... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the simulator, I can try spins and stalls and rolls that prudence would forbid in the real world.You should have married Felicity, the fun sister, instead.
(At least you didn't get stuck with Chastity...)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792552</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>0123456</author>
	<datestamp>1263674880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Russian fighter's ejection seats are far more safe than the US ones - you can eject at over Mach 2 and survive!</p></div><p>And Blackbird crews using Western seats have ejected at over Mach 3 and survived...</p><p>What really matters for ejection is dynamic pressure, not airspeed: a Blackbird ejection at Mach 3 at 80,000+ feet is equivalent to around 400mph at sea level. I doubt, for example, that a Russian fighter pilot could survive a Mach 2 ejection at sea level if they could actually reach that speed.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Russian fighter 's ejection seats are far more safe than the US ones - you can eject at over Mach 2 and survive ! And Blackbird crews using Western seats have ejected at over Mach 3 and survived...What really matters for ejection is dynamic pressure , not airspeed : a Blackbird ejection at Mach 3 at 80,000 + feet is equivalent to around 400mph at sea level .
I doubt , for example , that a Russian fighter pilot could survive a Mach 2 ejection at sea level if they could actually reach that speed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Russian fighter's ejection seats are far more safe than the US ones - you can eject at over Mach 2 and survive!And Blackbird crews using Western seats have ejected at over Mach 3 and survived...What really matters for ejection is dynamic pressure, not airspeed: a Blackbird ejection at Mach 3 at 80,000+ feet is equivalent to around 400mph at sea level.
I doubt, for example, that a Russian fighter pilot could survive a Mach 2 ejection at sea level if they could actually reach that speed.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792556</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>sa1lnr</author>
	<datestamp>1263674940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The aircraft arrived here in a  completely de-militarized condition -- all weapons systems and military-related hardware had been previously removed, in full compliance with U.S. and Ukranian laws."</p><p><a href="http://www.prideaircraft.com/flanker.htm" title="prideaircraft.com">http://www.prideaircraft.com/flanker.htm</a> [prideaircraft.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The aircraft arrived here in a completely de-militarized condition -- all weapons systems and military-related hardware had been previously removed , in full compliance with U.S. and Ukranian laws .
" http : //www.prideaircraft.com/flanker.htm [ prideaircraft.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The aircraft arrived here in a  completely de-militarized condition -- all weapons systems and military-related hardware had been previously removed, in full compliance with U.S. and Ukranian laws.
"http://www.prideaircraft.com/flanker.htm [prideaircraft.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795026</id>
	<title>Nothing new</title>
	<author>Registered Coward v2</author>
	<datestamp>1263651120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>People have owned their own fighter jets for years; including an F104 owned by Red Baron:

<a href="http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1093756/2/index.htm" title="cnn.com">http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1093756/2/index.htm</a> [cnn.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>People have owned their own fighter jets for years ; including an F104 owned by Red Baron : http : //sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1093756/2/index.htm [ cnn.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People have owned their own fighter jets for years; including an F104 owned by Red Baron:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1093756/2/index.htm [cnn.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792454</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing new</title>
	<author>westlake</author>
	<datestamp>1263674160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I remember a story from almost 10 years back that you could buy a Mig-21 for $14k</i> </p><p>Here are some fighter jet stories from 2006: <a href="http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/military/read.main/54073/" title="airliners.net">Buying A Fighter Jet?</a> [airliners.net] and another from Wired: <a href="http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.10/kirlin.html" title="wired.com">Building Your Own Air Force, One Mig at a Time</a> [wired.com] [2005]</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember a story from almost 10 years back that you could buy a Mig-21 for $ 14k Here are some fighter jet stories from 2006 : Buying A Fighter Jet ?
[ airliners.net ] and another from Wired : Building Your Own Air Force , One Mig at a Time [ wired.com ] [ 2005 ]  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember a story from almost 10 years back that you could buy a Mig-21 for $14k Here are some fighter jet stories from 2006: Buying A Fighter Jet?
[airliners.net] and another from Wired: Building Your Own Air Force, One Mig at a Time [wired.com] [2005]
 </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792756</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing new</title>
	<author>afabbro</author>
	<datestamp>1263633480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Problem is they cannot be operated in US airspace by a private pilot; excepting only when testing repairs or routine maintenance.</p></div><p>I'm curious why.  Certainly, older generations of America fighter aircraft are permitted - Michael Dorn flies his F-86 Sabre all the time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Problem is they can not be operated in US airspace by a private pilot ; excepting only when testing repairs or routine maintenance.I 'm curious why .
Certainly , older generations of America fighter aircraft are permitted - Michael Dorn flies his F-86 Sabre all the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Problem is they cannot be operated in US airspace by a private pilot; excepting only when testing repairs or routine maintenance.I'm curious why.
Certainly, older generations of America fighter aircraft are permitted - Michael Dorn flies his F-86 Sabre all the time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792582</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793524</id>
	<title>Re:One can dream...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263639840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tell your uncle I call BULLSHIT about the fuel sloshing forward. First off in a dive your are no longer in a 1g situation but you are falling with the craft<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. including the fuel.</p><p>so it does NOT slosh forward moving the cg.</p><p>Actually , the "recomended" way to put most any fighter in a dive , is to roll inverted and then pull 'up'<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. therefore keeping the airframe loaded.  putting negative g on the airframe/pilot is never a good idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tell your uncle I call BULLSHIT about the fuel sloshing forward .
First off in a dive your are no longer in a 1g situation but you are falling with the craft .. including the fuel.so it does NOT slosh forward moving the cg.Actually , the " recomended " way to put most any fighter in a dive , is to roll inverted and then pull 'up ' .. therefore keeping the airframe loaded .
putting negative g on the airframe/pilot is never a good idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tell your uncle I call BULLSHIT about the fuel sloshing forward.
First off in a dive your are no longer in a 1g situation but you are falling with the craft .. including the fuel.so it does NOT slosh forward moving the cg.Actually , the "recomended" way to put most any fighter in a dive , is to roll inverted and then pull 'up' .. therefore keeping the airframe loaded.
putting negative g on the airframe/pilot is never a good idea.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30796784</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263721020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In Sweden there are several privatly owned jets (mostly two-seat trainers though). They have ejection seats since that is required for them to be allowed to carry paying customers (part of the certification).</p><p>I know, I got to fly one for my bachelor party.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-D</p><p>Going over how to arm/safe the ejection seat and how to use the various ejection seat triggers, strapping in and out etc took 15 minutes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In Sweden there are several privatly owned jets ( mostly two-seat trainers though ) .
They have ejection seats since that is required for them to be allowed to carry paying customers ( part of the certification ) .I know , I got to fly one for my bachelor party .
: -DGoing over how to arm/safe the ejection seat and how to use the various ejection seat triggers , strapping in and out etc took 15 minutes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Sweden there are several privatly owned jets (mostly two-seat trainers though).
They have ejection seats since that is required for them to be allowed to carry paying customers (part of the certification).I know, I got to fly one for my bachelor party.
:-DGoing over how to arm/safe the ejection seat and how to use the various ejection seat triggers, strapping in and out etc took 15 minutes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795612</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792430</id>
	<title>"Modernized" Western instrumentation - no thanks</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263673920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Theses birds have been modernized with Western instrumentation, radios and GPS. Both are fully IFR equipped with U.S. avionics.</p></div><p>That's like putting the internals of a Ford into a BMW. Thanks, but no thanks, I want the original.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Theses birds have been modernized with Western instrumentation , radios and GPS .
Both are fully IFR equipped with U.S. avionics.That 's like putting the internals of a Ford into a BMW .
Thanks , but no thanks , I want the original .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Theses birds have been modernized with Western instrumentation, radios and GPS.
Both are fully IFR equipped with U.S. avionics.That's like putting the internals of a Ford into a BMW.
Thanks, but no thanks, I want the original.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794854</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>mrphoton</author>
	<datestamp>1263649200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>sorry can somebody pleas explain why you are not allowed a fully functioning fighter jet.  I thought you guys were had a right to bare arms, what is the difference between a shot gun and a jet?</htmltext>
<tokenext>sorry can somebody pleas explain why you are not allowed a fully functioning fighter jet .
I thought you guys were had a right to bare arms , what is the difference between a shot gun and a jet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sorry can somebody pleas explain why you are not allowed a fully functioning fighter jet.
I thought you guys were had a right to bare arms, what is the difference between a shot gun and a jet?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792364</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793818</id>
	<title>Re:Range?</title>
	<author>MartinSchou</author>
	<datestamp>1263641640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was going to suggest something like New York -&gt; Reykjavik  Reykjavik is ~1,900 km<br>New York -&gt; Reykjavik is ~4.200 km</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi\_Su-27#Specifications\_.28Su-27.29" title="wikipedia.org">Range: 3,530 km at altitude</a> [wikipedia.org], and definitely not at Mach 2. Someone mentioned drop tanks, but I've no clue what that would add to the range.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going to suggest something like New York - &gt; Reykjavik Reykjavik is ~ 1,900 kmNew York - &gt; Reykjavik is ~ 4.200 kmRange : 3,530 km at altitude [ wikipedia.org ] , and definitely not at Mach 2 .
Someone mentioned drop tanks , but I 've no clue what that would add to the range .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going to suggest something like New York -&gt; Reykjavik  Reykjavik is ~1,900 kmNew York -&gt; Reykjavik is ~4.200 kmRange: 3,530 km at altitude [wikipedia.org], and definitely not at Mach 2.
Someone mentioned drop tanks, but I've no clue what that would add to the range.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30797764</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263738780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"600 knots at sea level is about ~1100kph, but at 35,000 feet, it is ~1400kph."</p><p>A knot is 1 nautical mile an hour; Nautical miles don't get shorter the higher you go, do they?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" 600 knots at sea level is about ~ 1100kph , but at 35,000 feet , it is ~ 1400kph .
" A knot is 1 nautical mile an hour ; Nautical miles do n't get shorter the higher you go , do they ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"600 knots at sea level is about ~1100kph, but at 35,000 feet, it is ~1400kph.
"A knot is 1 nautical mile an hour; Nautical miles don't get shorter the higher you go, do they?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792336</id>
	<title>Ben Quote</title>
	<author>Bunji X</author>
	<datestamp>1263673320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>An elegant weapon... For a more civilized age...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>An elegant weapon... For a more civilized age.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An elegant weapon... For a more civilized age...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794284</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263644640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now, if it was shooting towards the RIAA HQ and painted in Pirate-Party colors and seeding torrents over the radio, <b>that</b> would be a different point altogether...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now , if it was shooting towards the RIAA HQ and painted in Pirate-Party colors and seeding torrents over the radio , that would be a different point altogether.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now, if it was shooting towards the RIAA HQ and painted in Pirate-Party colors and seeding torrents over the radio, that would be a different point altogether...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792804</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794158</id>
	<title>Re:WTB: Aircraft Carrier</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263643800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, the US is currently in the process of decommissioning/selling a couple of them.  Good luck!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the US is currently in the process of decommissioning/selling a couple of them .
Good luck !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the US is currently in the process of decommissioning/selling a couple of them.
Good luck!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793258</id>
	<title>Re:Range?</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1263637920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I was curious about Concorde replacements a while<br>back and researched some of the Soviet fighters.</p>  </div><p>For the same money you could pay Scaled Composites to build you a brand new semi ballistic glider. I bet Branson would be interested as well. How does 30 minutes to cross the Atlantic sound?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was curious about Concorde replacements a whileback and researched some of the Soviet fighters .
For the same money you could pay Scaled Composites to build you a brand new semi ballistic glider .
I bet Branson would be interested as well .
How does 30 minutes to cross the Atlantic sound ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was curious about Concorde replacements a whileback and researched some of the Soviet fighters.
For the same money you could pay Scaled Composites to build you a brand new semi ballistic glider.
I bet Branson would be interested as well.
How does 30 minutes to cross the Atlantic sound?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30796886</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>uvajed\_ekil</author>
	<datestamp>1263723180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I'd go for this instead of a business jet. Far more fun and you don't have to worry if the engines fail - you can always use the ejection seat. Russian fighter's ejection seats are far more safe than the US ones - you can eject at over Mach 2 and survive!</i> <br>
It would certainly be impressive, but it would be hard to stare at your Blackberry, have a cocktail, and count the rest of your money if you actually had to pilot the plane. And if you seriously think you might have to use the ejector seat one day, this is not a good risk/reward scenario, financially speaking, since most business jets are never written off as total losses due to crashing. And what <i>real</i> business man with a jet mixes his own cocktail anyway?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd go for this instead of a business jet .
Far more fun and you do n't have to worry if the engines fail - you can always use the ejection seat .
Russian fighter 's ejection seats are far more safe than the US ones - you can eject at over Mach 2 and survive !
It would certainly be impressive , but it would be hard to stare at your Blackberry , have a cocktail , and count the rest of your money if you actually had to pilot the plane .
And if you seriously think you might have to use the ejector seat one day , this is not a good risk/reward scenario , financially speaking , since most business jets are never written off as total losses due to crashing .
And what real business man with a jet mixes his own cocktail anyway ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd go for this instead of a business jet.
Far more fun and you don't have to worry if the engines fail - you can always use the ejection seat.
Russian fighter's ejection seats are far more safe than the US ones - you can eject at over Mach 2 and survive!
It would certainly be impressive, but it would be hard to stare at your Blackberry, have a cocktail, and count the rest of your money if you actually had to pilot the plane.
And if you seriously think you might have to use the ejector seat one day, this is not a good risk/reward scenario, financially speaking, since most business jets are never written off as total losses due to crashing.
And what real business man with a jet mixes his own cocktail anyway?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792496</id>
	<title>Re:Ummm... hangar space?</title>
	<author>that this is not und</author>
	<datestamp>1263674400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Haven't the 'important' members of the Association committed Hari-Kari yet over 'Property Values'?  That's their primary obsession in life...</p><p>If not, here's a Ham Radio Antenna to push them over the edge....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have n't the 'important ' members of the Association committed Hari-Kari yet over 'Property Values ' ?
That 's their primary obsession in life...If not , here 's a Ham Radio Antenna to push them over the edge... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Haven't the 'important' members of the Association committed Hari-Kari yet over 'Property Values'?
That's their primary obsession in life...If not, here's a Ham Radio Antenna to push them over the edge....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224</id>
	<title>Nothing new</title>
	<author>GiveBenADollar</author>
	<datestamp>1263672420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I remember a story from almost 10 years back that you could buy a Mig-21 for $14k as is or around $100k restored and made legal. The cost wasn't in the aircraft itself, but the maintenance to keep it flying. Still waiting to get my own F-14.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I remember a story from almost 10 years back that you could buy a Mig-21 for $ 14k as is or around $ 100k restored and made legal .
The cost was n't in the aircraft itself , but the maintenance to keep it flying .
Still waiting to get my own F-14 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I remember a story from almost 10 years back that you could buy a Mig-21 for $14k as is or around $100k restored and made legal.
The cost wasn't in the aircraft itself, but the maintenance to keep it flying.
Still waiting to get my own F-14.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792752</id>
	<title>Certification</title>
	<author>rossdee</author>
	<datestamp>1263633480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good luck on getting FAA certification, and permission to fly one of those in US airspace. And I'm pretty sure its not legal for a private jet to go over mach 1</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good luck on getting FAA certification , and permission to fly one of those in US airspace .
And I 'm pretty sure its not legal for a private jet to go over mach 1</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good luck on getting FAA certification, and permission to fly one of those in US airspace.
And I'm pretty sure its not legal for a private jet to go over mach 1</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795168</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>Upphew</author>
	<datestamp>1263652740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Actually, the Russian K36 ejection seats are no more (or less) capable than the standard Aces II seat that all US fighters use.</p></div><p>If one is to trust wikipedia, then they must be more capable (or US navy and air force buy their wares abroad just for shit and giggles):</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Zvezda is also Russia's primary manufacturer of ejector seats for Russian fighter aircraft. The K-36 ejector seat was studied at length by the US Navy and Air Force; IBP Aircraft opened up a factory in the US to manufacture it for the F-22 Raptor and the Joint Strike Fighter.[citation needed] The US Government, however, selected the Martin-Baker seat from the United Kingdom for their new fighter jet.</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , the Russian K36 ejection seats are no more ( or less ) capable than the standard Aces II seat that all US fighters use.If one is to trust wikipedia , then they must be more capable ( or US navy and air force buy their wares abroad just for shit and giggles ) : Zvezda is also Russia 's primary manufacturer of ejector seats for Russian fighter aircraft .
The K-36 ejector seat was studied at length by the US Navy and Air Force ; IBP Aircraft opened up a factory in the US to manufacture it for the F-22 Raptor and the Joint Strike Fighter .
[ citation needed ] The US Government , however , selected the Martin-Baker seat from the United Kingdom for their new fighter jet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, the Russian K36 ejection seats are no more (or less) capable than the standard Aces II seat that all US fighters use.If one is to trust wikipedia, then they must be more capable (or US navy and air force buy their wares abroad just for shit and giggles):Zvezda is also Russia's primary manufacturer of ejector seats for Russian fighter aircraft.
The K-36 ejector seat was studied at length by the US Navy and Air Force; IBP Aircraft opened up a factory in the US to manufacture it for the F-22 Raptor and the Joint Strike Fighter.
[citation needed] The US Government, however, selected the Martin-Baker seat from the United Kingdom for their new fighter jet.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795244</id>
	<title>Ken Thompson's MIG experience</title>
	<author>Maximum Prophet</author>
	<datestamp>1263653460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ken Thompson of Unix fame, went to the former Soviet Union to fly a MIG-29.  It cost him $12,000 and included 3 flights in a L39.
<a href="http://funpeople.org/1995/1995ACZ.html" title="funpeople.org">http://funpeople.org/1995/1995ACZ.html</a> [funpeople.org]
He said it was worth it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ken Thompson of Unix fame , went to the former Soviet Union to fly a MIG-29 .
It cost him $ 12,000 and included 3 flights in a L39 .
http : //funpeople.org/1995/1995ACZ.html [ funpeople.org ] He said it was worth it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ken Thompson of Unix fame, went to the former Soviet Union to fly a MIG-29.
It cost him $12,000 and included 3 flights in a L39.
http://funpeople.org/1995/1995ACZ.html [funpeople.org]
He said it was worth it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794086</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>dwye</author>
	<datestamp>1263643260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; I wonder how trigger-happy the US Airforce might get if they stumbled across an SU-27 over US soil though</p><p>Not very.  They might rent it for next year's Top Gun classes, or the Air Force equivalent, though.  Assuming that they do not have their own, of course.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; I wonder how trigger-happy the US Airforce might get if they stumbled across an SU-27 over US soil thoughNot very .
They might rent it for next year 's Top Gun classes , or the Air Force equivalent , though .
Assuming that they do not have their own , of course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; I wonder how trigger-happy the US Airforce might get if they stumbled across an SU-27 over US soil thoughNot very.
They might rent it for next year's Top Gun classes, or the Air Force equivalent, though.
Assuming that they do not have their own, of course.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792186</id>
	<title>WTB: Aircraft Carrier</title>
	<author>Rockoon</author>
	<datestamp>1263672180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>So now that I won my own combat jets, anybody got a slightly used aircraft carrier up for sale?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So now that I won my own combat jets , anybody got a slightly used aircraft carrier up for sale ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So now that I won my own combat jets, anybody got a slightly used aircraft carrier up for sale?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30798536</id>
	<title>Re:How many pepsi points is this gonna cost me?</title>
	<author>meyekul</author>
	<datestamp>1263745500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I saw that commercial too...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...oh it's Russian?

What's the Russian equivalent of Pepsi?</p></div><p>Still Pepsi, only in Soviet Russia, it drinks you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw that commercial too... ...oh it 's Russian ?
What 's the Russian equivalent of Pepsi ? Still Pepsi , only in Soviet Russia , it drinks you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw that commercial too... ...oh it's Russian?
What's the Russian equivalent of Pepsi?Still Pepsi, only in Soviet Russia, it drinks you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795592</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>bigngamer92</author>
	<datestamp>1263657420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Which is more likely to attract attention?  An unidentified prop plane, or a Russian Jet?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Which is more likely to attract attention ?
An unidentified prop plane , or a Russian Jet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which is more likely to attract attention?
An unidentified prop plane, or a Russian Jet?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794706</id>
	<title>How about a used Space Shuttle instead?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263647760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NASA has discounted the price of its soon-to-be-retired space shuttles to $28,800,000 each. With transportation to a major airport included in the price (does that count as free shipping?), that's the best deal we've ever seen on a space vehicle. According to the Press Association article, Atlantis and Endeavour are "up for grabs", and the new, Smithsonian-sealed Enterprise may be available for purchase. (Enterprise never made it to space.) If you're lucky enough to get a shuttle, you must display it indoors in a climate-controlled building. Deal ends February 19, and a delivery date of "late 2011" is scheduled.</p><p>Source:<br><a href="http://dealnews.com/32-off-Space-Shuttles-at-NASA-Deals-from-28-800-000-free-shipping-more/342463.html" title="dealnews.com" rel="nofollow">http://dealnews.com/32-off-Space-Shuttles-at-NASA-Deals-from-28-800-000-free-shipping-more/342463.html</a> [dealnews.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NASA has discounted the price of its soon-to-be-retired space shuttles to $ 28,800,000 each .
With transportation to a major airport included in the price ( does that count as free shipping ?
) , that 's the best deal we 've ever seen on a space vehicle .
According to the Press Association article , Atlantis and Endeavour are " up for grabs " , and the new , Smithsonian-sealed Enterprise may be available for purchase .
( Enterprise never made it to space .
) If you 're lucky enough to get a shuttle , you must display it indoors in a climate-controlled building .
Deal ends February 19 , and a delivery date of " late 2011 " is scheduled.Source : http : //dealnews.com/32-off-Space-Shuttles-at-NASA-Deals-from-28-800-000-free-shipping-more/342463.html [ dealnews.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NASA has discounted the price of its soon-to-be-retired space shuttles to $28,800,000 each.
With transportation to a major airport included in the price (does that count as free shipping?
), that's the best deal we've ever seen on a space vehicle.
According to the Press Association article, Atlantis and Endeavour are "up for grabs", and the new, Smithsonian-sealed Enterprise may be available for purchase.
(Enterprise never made it to space.
) If you're lucky enough to get a shuttle, you must display it indoors in a climate-controlled building.
Deal ends February 19, and a delivery date of "late 2011" is scheduled.Source:http://dealnews.com/32-off-Space-Shuttles-at-NASA-Deals-from-28-800-000-free-shipping-more/342463.html [dealnews.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792186</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795096</id>
	<title>Not gonna happen</title>
	<author>Upphew</author>
	<datestamp>1263651840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How does 30 minutes to cross the Atlantic sound?</p></div><p>Impossible. Shortest distance across Atlantic is ~2500km. If you want to cover it in &#189; hour then your speed must be ~5000km/h. SR-71 has (had?) top speed of over 3500km/h... and you are suggesting of making plane that goes almost 50\% faster?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How does 30 minutes to cross the Atlantic sound ? Impossible .
Shortest distance across Atlantic is ~ 2500km .
If you want to cover it in   hour then your speed must be ~ 5000km/h .
SR-71 has ( had ?
) top speed of over 3500km/h... and you are suggesting of making plane that goes almost 50 \ % faster ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does 30 minutes to cross the Atlantic sound?Impossible.
Shortest distance across Atlantic is ~2500km.
If you want to cover it in ½ hour then your speed must be ~5000km/h.
SR-71 has (had?
) top speed of over 3500km/h... and you are suggesting of making plane that goes almost 50\% faster?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792382</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing new</title>
	<author>Bragador</author>
	<datestamp>1263673620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's usually like that around the world. Here you can buy <a href="http://lighthouse.boatnerd.com/gallery/StLawrence/PrinceShoal.htm" title="boatnerd.com">http://lighthouse.boatnerd.com/gallery/StLawrence/PrinceShoal.htm</a> [boatnerd.com] for 1$. The government doesn't want it anymore.</p><p>Have fun with the maintenance though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's usually like that around the world .
Here you can buy http : //lighthouse.boatnerd.com/gallery/StLawrence/PrinceShoal.htm [ boatnerd.com ] for 1 $ .
The government does n't want it anymore.Have fun with the maintenance though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's usually like that around the world.
Here you can buy http://lighthouse.boatnerd.com/gallery/StLawrence/PrinceShoal.htm [boatnerd.com] for 1$.
The government doesn't want it anymore.Have fun with the maintenance though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792582</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing new</title>
	<author>tunapez</author>
	<datestamp>1263675240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Problem is they cannot be operated in US airspace by a private pilot; excepting only when testing repairs or routine maintenance. Saw one a couple weeks back @ DVT. It took off, did 2 touch and go's then landed. That is probably all the flying he'll be doing this year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Problem is they can not be operated in US airspace by a private pilot ; excepting only when testing repairs or routine maintenance .
Saw one a couple weeks back @ DVT .
It took off , did 2 touch and go 's then landed .
That is probably all the flying he 'll be doing this year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Problem is they cannot be operated in US airspace by a private pilot; excepting only when testing repairs or routine maintenance.
Saw one a couple weeks back @ DVT.
It took off, did 2 touch and go's then landed.
That is probably all the flying he'll be doing this year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792494</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>v1</author>
	<datestamp>1263674340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Last I checked, military hardware (such as humvee) cannot legally be sold in the USA if it still has the hardpoints. (which is another debate over stupidity for another thread)  I'd assume the same is true for aircraft.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Last I checked , military hardware ( such as humvee ) can not legally be sold in the USA if it still has the hardpoints .
( which is another debate over stupidity for another thread ) I 'd assume the same is true for aircraft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last I checked, military hardware (such as humvee) cannot legally be sold in the USA if it still has the hardpoints.
(which is another debate over stupidity for another thread)  I'd assume the same is true for aircraft.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795144</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>prefec2</author>
	<datestamp>1263652500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <i>and who's going to try stopping <a href="http://aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/su27/" title="aerospaceweb.org">a jet traveling Mach 2?</a> [aerospaceweb.org]</i></p> </div><p>An anti aircraft missile. Like Stinger or other mach 2+ missiles.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>and who 's going to try stopping a jet traveling Mach 2 ?
[ aerospaceweb.org ] An anti aircraft missile .
Like Stinger or other mach 2 + missiles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> and who's going to try stopping a jet traveling Mach 2?
[aerospaceweb.org] An anti aircraft missile.
Like Stinger or other mach 2+ missiles.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792968</id>
	<title>Re:Nothing new</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263635160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>there is even some issues with the F-35 thats not even in production yet.</p><p>a number of nato nations pitched in on the development costs, with the understanding of buying one or more of the variants when ready. But now it seems that USA considers withholding some important systems, meaning the version sold will be inferior to the equivalent operated by US forces. And this is to nato allies.</p><p>hell, its not the first time. during WW2, britain passed people and research data on a potential atomic bomb to USA. But when the bomb was developed and the war over, USA filed it all away as top secret, not even sharing with its closest wartime allies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>there is even some issues with the F-35 thats not even in production yet.a number of nato nations pitched in on the development costs , with the understanding of buying one or more of the variants when ready .
But now it seems that USA considers withholding some important systems , meaning the version sold will be inferior to the equivalent operated by US forces .
And this is to nato allies.hell , its not the first time .
during WW2 , britain passed people and research data on a potential atomic bomb to USA .
But when the bomb was developed and the war over , USA filed it all away as top secret , not even sharing with its closest wartime allies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there is even some issues with the F-35 thats not even in production yet.a number of nato nations pitched in on the development costs, with the understanding of buying one or more of the variants when ready.
But now it seems that USA considers withholding some important systems, meaning the version sold will be inferior to the equivalent operated by US forces.
And this is to nato allies.hell, its not the first time.
during WW2, britain passed people and research data on a potential atomic bomb to USA.
But when the bomb was developed and the war over, USA filed it all away as top secret, not even sharing with its closest wartime allies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30797014</id>
	<title>This is what I do</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263725580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I work for a company which sells and buys (Exports and imports) and maintains aircraft such as these, and the problem with Russian jet aircraft is indeed maintenance. It's more expensive due to the lack of availability of parts and there are many many directives that are issued, by both manufacturers such as Sukhoi and air safety authorities, to keep the aircraft legal. Not only that, the potential security threats related to it make any government or air safety authority nervous. Although the Su-27 is a beautiful aircraft for the same cost you can get a European jet which uses less fuel and are cheaper to maintain. Is this old news though? From what I heard these were already being sold to governments.<br>
If you just want to go flying in a jet like this there are private operators on every continent in the world using various aircraft and can vary between a few thousand to twenty thousands US dollars for a flight.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I work for a company which sells and buys ( Exports and imports ) and maintains aircraft such as these , and the problem with Russian jet aircraft is indeed maintenance .
It 's more expensive due to the lack of availability of parts and there are many many directives that are issued , by both manufacturers such as Sukhoi and air safety authorities , to keep the aircraft legal .
Not only that , the potential security threats related to it make any government or air safety authority nervous .
Although the Su-27 is a beautiful aircraft for the same cost you can get a European jet which uses less fuel and are cheaper to maintain .
Is this old news though ?
From what I heard these were already being sold to governments .
If you just want to go flying in a jet like this there are private operators on every continent in the world using various aircraft and can vary between a few thousand to twenty thousands US dollars for a flight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work for a company which sells and buys (Exports and imports) and maintains aircraft such as these, and the problem with Russian jet aircraft is indeed maintenance.
It's more expensive due to the lack of availability of parts and there are many many directives that are issued, by both manufacturers such as Sukhoi and air safety authorities, to keep the aircraft legal.
Not only that, the potential security threats related to it make any government or air safety authority nervous.
Although the Su-27 is a beautiful aircraft for the same cost you can get a European jet which uses less fuel and are cheaper to maintain.
Is this old news though?
From what I heard these were already being sold to governments.
If you just want to go flying in a jet like this there are private operators on every continent in the world using various aircraft and can vary between a few thousand to twenty thousands US dollars for a flight.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30799018</id>
	<title>Re:Pain at the pump</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1263749400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your use of 'and' here amuses me - it makes me think that a Russian painted Mig shooting across the border would be just fine so long as they had a nice chat with someone on the radio whilst they did it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your use of 'and ' here amuses me - it makes me think that a Russian painted Mig shooting across the border would be just fine so long as they had a nice chat with someone on the radio whilst they did it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your use of 'and' here amuses me - it makes me think that a Russian painted Mig shooting across the border would be just fine so long as they had a nice chat with someone on the radio whilst they did it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792804</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792670</id>
	<title>How many pepsi points is this gonna cost me?</title>
	<author>greensasquatch</author>
	<datestamp>1263632760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I saw that commercial too...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...oh it's Russian?

What's the Russian equivalent of Pepsi?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw that commercial too... ...oh it 's Russian ?
What 's the Russian equivalent of Pepsi ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw that commercial too... ...oh it's Russian?
What's the Russian equivalent of Pepsi?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792652</id>
	<title>Re:It IS safe!</title>
	<author>grahamd0</author>
	<datestamp>1263632640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>... who's going to try stopping <a href="http://aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/su27/" title="aerospaceweb.org">a jet traveling Mach 2?</a> [aerospaceweb.org]</p> </div><p>I'm just <a href="http://www.airforce.com/" title="airforce.com">guessing</a> [airforce.com].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... who 's going to try stopping a jet traveling Mach 2 ?
[ aerospaceweb.org ] I 'm just guessing [ airforce.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... who's going to try stopping a jet traveling Mach 2?
[aerospaceweb.org] I'm just guessing [airforce.com].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792490</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30799018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792804
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792496
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30818654
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792582
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794868
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30798176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793504
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30798354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793308
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795612
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30796784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30798536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792744
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792968
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792582
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30799594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795096
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793028
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793670
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792352
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30796770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795758
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792364
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793706
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794958
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793404
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792974
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792392
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792556
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793264
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793524
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795592
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30796886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30805630
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792428
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30797764
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795168
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793818
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30800244
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_16_1523223_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792186
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30807734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_16_1523223.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792752
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_16_1523223.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792670
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30798536
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_16_1523223.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792224
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792582
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792756
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795768
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794868
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795758
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792744
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792968
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792454
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792866
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_16_1523223.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792430
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792836
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794368
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_16_1523223.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792986
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_16_1523223.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795612
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30796784
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30796886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792490
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795144
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792652
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30796770
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795592
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795472
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793504
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792722
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792682
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30797764
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30798354
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795168
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793308
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793264
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794680
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_16_1523223.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792984
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_16_1523223.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792488
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_16_1523223.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792392
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792320
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792556
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30818654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792364
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793706
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794958
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793028
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794854
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30798176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792804
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794284
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30799018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792428
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794086
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_16_1523223.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792548
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793412
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30799594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793524
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30800244
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792812
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792712
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793404
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795714
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_16_1523223.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792216
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_16_1523223.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792612
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793670
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793818
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793258
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30795096
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_16_1523223.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30793958
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_16_1523223.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792186
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794706
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30792310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30794158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30807734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_16_1523223.30805630
</commentlist>
</conversation>
