text:
Under the Alternative Fighter Engine (AFE) program, the USAF decided to adopt an alternative engine for the F-16, splitting engine orders between Pratt & Whitney and General Electric. As originally planned, with each new fiscal year, a new set of engine orders would be issued. Competition between these two companies would, it was hoped, keep prices down, and having a second source would help to ensure a steady supply of engines.[FULL ARTICLE]
F-16 Information
Appeal of Judge Crawford's Ruling on NEPA lawsuit
Date: September 26, 2016
Civil Action No. 5:14-cv-132
Igor Zbitnoff, Eileen Andreoli, Jeffrey Frost, Richard Joseph, Juliet Beth Buck, Ray Gonda, And Stop the F-35 Coalition, Plaintiffs
City of Winooski, Intervenor Plaintiff
Deborah Lee James, Secretary of the Air Force, Defendant
Notice is hereby given that Igor Zbitnoff, Eileen Andreoli, Jeffrey Frost, Richard Joseph, Juliet Beth Buck, Ray Gonda and Stop the F-35 Coalition, Plaintiffs in the above-named case, hereby appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit from the final judgment entered in this action on August 10, 2016.
James A. Dumont, Esq.
Law Office of James A. Dumont, Esq., PC
Bristol VT
Laura Hill-Eubanks, Esq.
Greenfield Legal Services LLC
Northfield VT
This Map Shows Why The F-35 Has Turned Into A Trillion-Dollar Fiasco
By Jeremy Bender, Armin Rosen and Skye Gould
August 20, 2014
Federal Judge Ruling on NEPA Lawsuit
DECISION on Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment denying 42 Motion for Summary Judgment or MOTION for Judgment on the Administrative Record on Counts 1-6, 9 and 10; denying 45 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment; granting 54 Motion for Summary Judgment
The court has determined that the EIS meets the requirements of NEPA. When it is read in conjunction with the supporting documentation, it is clear that Defendant took a "hard look" at the environmental consequences of the basing decision, including the specific areas about which Plaintiffs complain. It is also clear that the EIS process served its second purpose of generating public interest and examination of the agency's decision-making process. The record demonstrates that a large number of Vermont residents turned out for meetings or sent in comments about the process. Finally, the court is satisfied that the decision to locate the F-35 at YANG meets the requirements that the agency action not be arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law. The EIS documents the adverse environmental changes that basing the F-35 aircraft at YANG will bring to the surrounding community. These changes received thoughtful and detailed consideration.[FULL ARTICLE]
Aviation safety information
September 2011
United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) Report to Congressional Requesters
Aviation Safety Status of FAA's Actions to Oversee the Safety of Composite Airplanes
On the basis of expert interviews and a review of literature, GAO identified four key safety-related concerns with the repair and maintenance of composites in commercial airplanes—(1) limited information on the behavior of airplane composite structures, (2) technical issues related to the unique properties of composite materials, (3) standardization of repair materials and techniques, and (4) training and awareness.[FULL ARTICLE]
F-35 Specifications
Conventional Takeoff and Landing
small wing
full canopy
aerial refueling receptacle dorsal
gun blister on upper port side
no STOVL panel lines or markings
High Court Won't Hear Vt. Airport Noise Challenge
By Bryan Koenig
November 9, 2015
The U.S. Supreme Courtturned down the chance Monday to weigh in on challenge by landowners to a Vermont high court finding that any local effort to curb U.S. Air Force jet noise at a local airport is barred regardless of whether those mitigation efforts actually impact flight operations.
As is customary, no explanation was given for denying appeal to a group of landowners challenging the Vermont Supreme Court's refusal to force the city of Burlington, Vermont, to enact noise-mitigation protections against Air Force F-35A jets the Pentagon plans on housing near Burlington International Airport.[FULL ARTICLE]
Air Force Shirked Duty on F-35 Basing Environmental Process
By Jacob Fischler
December 15, 2015
A Vermont city and a group of citizens asked a federal judge Monday to undo a U.S. Air Force determination to base a fleet of fighter jets at Burlington's airport, saying the military failed to properly consider the effects of jet noise.
The Air Force shirked its duty under the National Environmental Policy Act to provide a detailed evaluation of direct and indirect effects of basing a fleet of F-35A aircraft at the Burlington International Airport, the city of Winooski and a coalition of local residents said in two separate motions for summary judgment Monday.[FULL ARTICLE]
F-16's rough landing damages antenna
Associated Press
April 27, 2005
South Burlington – Last week's rough landing of a Vermont Air National Guard fighter jet damaged an antenna at Burlington International Airport, making landing more difficult for any pilot arriving at the airfield.
The severed antenna emitted a signal that told pilots where they were in relation to the runway. Without the signal, pilots and air-traffic controllers are using other methods that are older, slower and less precise, airport officials said Monday.[FULL ARTICLE]
F-16 landing gear collapsed at Burlington International Airport, Vermont
By Lieven Dewitte
April 21, 2005
The F-16 (#83-1159) was resting on its wing after the accident, Vt. Air National Guard Lt. Col. Lloyd Goodrow said. They planned to remove the plane and any debris from the runway Wednesday night.
The pilot, Col. Douglas Fick was not injured. The cause of the accident is yet unknown but most likely, Col. Fick became disoriented due to the heavy rainfall right as he tried to land his F-16. A board of officers will be appointed to investigate the cause.[FULL ARTICLE]
Bases becoming vulnerable, expert says
By Phillip Swarts
October 19, 2015
American air bases could easily come under attack in future conflicts, and the Air Force must look at ways to better defend them, a military expert told Air Force Times.
Long-range ballistic and cruise missiles developed by other nations are challenging former U.S. notions of security, according to a report written by Alan Vick, a senior political scientist at Rand.
"Air power has been central to joint warfighting concepts, certainly for the U.S., since World War II," Vick told Air Force Times. "[Airbases have] always been worth attacking and, as the report tried to show, have been attacked."
Old City Council Content
Stop the F-35 Basing
The Law is on Our Side
Let's Make History on the 28th!
WHAT: Burlington City Council Public Hearing and Vote on Prohibiting the F-35 Basing
WHEN: Monday, October 28. Come early for the "People and the Planet Before Planes" rally at 5:15 pm
Public hearing begins at 6:00 pm
WHERE: Burlington City Hall, corner of Church and Main
WHY: This is one of the most significant local decisions of a generation
On Monday, October 28, the Burlington City Council will vote on a binding resolution (amended and strengthened based on the recent City Attorney's legal opinion) to bar the basing of the F-35.
See Resolution to Bar Basing Approved by City Attorney
This is our best chance to stop the basing.
A large attendance of people opposed to the F-35 basing from Burlington, Chittenden County, and beyond is essential and will make a difference. We expect a close vote. Bring friends, neighbors, and anyone else you can to stand up for priorities that put people before boondoggle warplanes.
Contact Burlington City Councilors now – Ask the City Council to vote for the resolution to bar the basing and oppose sacrificing over 8,000 residents in airport neighborhoods.
Please go to www.stopthef35.com for more information.
Call Burlington City Councilors to ask them to stop the basing.
Contact Information for Burlington City Councilors
Many members of the City Council have been seriously considering the many harms the basing presents and have favorably responded to our call to bar the basing. The public's response has been similar.
The resolution to bar the basing is the best chance for us to stop this disastrous plan.
Call Burlington City Councilors now to ask them to do the right thing and take a stand against sacrificing over 8,000 residents in airport neighborhoods to this plane and to stand against the backwards priorities the F-35 basing supports.
Government watchdog group wants delay in Vermont F-35 basing decision
An independent government watchdog group in Washington D.C. has asked the Air Force to put off a decision to base a squadron of F-35s in Vermont because of ongoing safety concerns regard about the fledgling fighter jet.
"It is irresponsible for you to rush to beddown this immature aircraft in a residential zone," Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project on Government Oversight, wrote in a Nov. 6 letter to the acting Air Force secretary and chief of staff. "If you believe there is indeed some urgency, then you should not endanger the local population and should follow past precedent and place the F-35A in a less dangerous location," Brian said in the letter. One of the group's founding advisers is Pierre Sprey, a former designer of military aircraft who has made two appearances in Burlington on behalf of foes of the F-35. The Air Force has designated the Vermont Air National Guard facility at Burlington International Airport in South Burlington as the preferred Air Guard site over Guard bases in South Carolina and Florida. A final basing decision by the Air Force is expected shortly.
Brian's letter said her organization obtained information from an Air Force official indicating the F-35 will have logged only 300,000 hours of training and operational flight time by 2020, when the basing in Vermont would begin. Vermont Air National Guard officials have said they believe the plane will have flown 750,000 hours by 2020. "We strongly urge you to delay selecting a location for the F-35A's operational beddown until the aircraft has logged a significant number of flying hours and until its safety record has been demonstrated," Brian wrote.
Full article: http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20131125/NEWS02/311250033/Government-watchdog-group-wants-delay-in-Vt-F-35-basing
"Mayor" Weinberger–F-35 Booster and CEO for the military-industrial-real estate complex
"He's a politician, but he's grounded in business — and in the end you need an economic base to have a successful community," says Pomerleau, who contributed at the host level. Pomerleau, whose family has long dominated the Chittenden County real estate scene, backed Weinberger's Republican opponent, Kurt Wright, in the 2012 election. But he says he's been impressed by the Democratic mayor's efforts to boost Burlington International Airport, reimagine the Moran Plant, build the Champlain Parkway and help the Vermont Air National Guard acquire a squadron of F-35 fighter jets. Last year, Pomerleau flew Weinberger and other Vermont politicians to Florida to hear the jets firsthand. And he helped bankroll a campaign to support Weinberger's so-called "fiscal stability bond," which voters approved last November. "He is the mayor," Pomerleau says. "I didn't support him in the beginning, but I've come to appreciate his efforts and his challenges. Therefore, when he asked me to contribute for a get-together, it was as much a thank-you for what he's doing."
A "Fresh Start": Sixteen Months Before Election Day, Weinberger Courts Big Burlington Donors
Fair Game
By Paul Heintz [11.20.13] He won't face the voters again until March 2015, but Burlington Mayor Miro Weinberger is already collecting cash for a potential reelection bid. Last Wednesday, roughly 100 supporters packed the Bluebird Tavern for Weinberger's first campaign fundraiser since he was elected in March 2012. Tickets to the schmooze fest started at $250 per person. Sponsors paid $500. And members of the event's host committee, which included several top real estate developers with business before the city, ponied up $1000.
Read full article: http://www.7dvt.com/2013fresh-start-sixteen-months-election-day-weinberger-courts-big-burlington-donors
Progressive's Solution to F-35 Dilemma is Perfect
Absolutely unbelievable! The business community's latest scare tactic is to claim that setting "noise and safety standards" for the operation of the Burlington International Airport is "reckless, risky and unnecessary." One of government's primary responsibilities is to protect its citizens. How can it be reckless, risky and unnecessary to establish basic standards related to noise and safety?
A resolution before the Burlington City Council on Monday evening calls for the creation of standards as follows: "1) except for grandfathered uses, no commercial or government airplane using the airport shall have noise impacts from its routine use as measured by the federally recognized DNL noise impact measurement method that significantly exceed present noise levels at the airport, including any significant expansion of the land area or number of residences within the 65 db or 75 db DNL day-night averages, and 2) no commercial or government airplane that regularly uses the airport shall have a cumulative fleet accident rate significantly greater than that of the cumulative fleet accident rate of the government's F-16 fighter jet as measured by the Class A mishap rate or comparable method." The resolution goes on to also call for Burlington to "oppose the basing of F-35 jets at its airport during the first basing round."
For several months the proponents of bringing the F-35 to BTV have repeatedly stated: 1) Any added noise of the F-35 can be mitigated so that it will be no louder than the F-16. 2) The safety record of the F-35, by the time it arrives at BTV, will as good as the F-16s. Did they misspeak, all these months?
The idea of skipping the first round of basing-decisions so that considerable more data is available to make a decision is exactly the position taken by the Winooski City Council. Winooski did not say, no way, never. It said, we don't know enough data at this point to make a good decision. This allows the proponents to spend the time between the first and second basing-decisions to gather the information needed to make a truly informed decision. Why are they afraid of this deliberate process? Why are they so ready to be reckless and risky?
This whole process could have been very simple, open and transparent. For some reason the proponents, including the congressional delegation, have refused to take that route. Instead they have stonewalled, refused to participate in civil discussion and debate, and generally attempted to basically drive their agenda through regardless of the consequences. What might an open, transparent and repeatable process have looked like?
The proponents could have agreed that the opponents raised legitimate questions that were worthy of discussion and debate. They could have agreed to find a compromise that would work for everyone. Such a plan might have been as simple as the Winooski Plan – bypass the first round of basing-decisions and establish a plan for the second round. If the plane is as good as the proponents say, if the noise can be mitigated and the safety record documented, it might be suitable for a residentially-sited airport. But no, the proponents wanted it all now, no wait, our way or the highway.
So here we are. The schism will last for years. The battle will continue for decades. The business community's (proponents) adoption of the Washingtonian decision-making process is unfortunate and unbecoming of the wonderful men and women who make that community so successful in Vermont. It could have been different.
Ray Gonda, S. Burlington
Let's Make History on the 28th! All Out For the City Council Meeting to Stop the F-35
Stop the F-35 Basing
The Law is on Our Side
Let's Make History on the 28th!
WHAT: Burlington City Council Public Hearing and Vote on Prohibiting the F-35 Basing
WHEN: Monday, October 28. Come early for the "People Before Planes" rally at 5:15.
Public hearing begins at 6:00.
WHERE: Burlington City Hall, corner of Church and Main
WHY: This is one of the most significant local decisions of a generation
On Monday, October 28, the Burlington City Council will vote on a binding resolution (amended and strengthened based on the recent City Attorney's legal opinion) to bar the basing of the F-35.
See Resolution to Bar Basing Approved by City Attorney
This is our best chance to stop the basing.
The Stop the F-35 Coalition will hold a rally for People and the Planet Before Planes at 5:15 pm
The public hearing on the resolution begins at 6:00 pm at Burlington City Hall.
A large attendance of people opposed to the F-35 basing from Burlington, Chittenden County, and beyond is essential and will make a difference. We expect a close vote. Bring friends, neighbors, and anyone else you can to stand up for priorities that put people before boondoggle warplanes.
Contact Burlington City Councilors now – Ask the City Council to vote for the resolution to bar the basing and oppose sacrificing over 8,000 residents in airport neighborhoods.
Please go to www.stopthef35.com for more information.
New Tactic To Restrict F-35 Gets City Attorney Approval
After reviewing the language, Blackwood said "I don't see any legal impediment for them to pass that."
VPR News
New Tactic To Restrict F-35 Gets City Attorney Approval
A new proposal by Progressives on Burlington's city council could effectively block the F-35, opponents say.
The resolution, crafted by Councilor Vince Brennan with input from F-35 opposition attorney Jim Dumont and City Attorney Eileen Blackwood, calls on Burlington International Airport director Gene Richards to develop noise and safety standards for the airport.
The resolution (seen here with Blackwood's markups, which Brennan said he had no problems with) says the new standards must establish that "except for grandfathered uses, no commercial or government airplane using the airport shall have noise impacts from its routine use as measured by the federally recognized DNL noise impact measurement method that significantly exceed present noise levels at the airport. Including any significant expansion of the land area or number of residences within the 65 db or 75 db DNL day-night averages."
Full article: http://digital.vpr.net/post/new-tactic-restrict-f-35-gets-city-attorney-approval
Former Pentagon Jet Designer Warns of Risks of Basing F-35s at Burlington Airport
Pierre Sprey, a defense analyst and co-designer of some of the military's toughest and most reliable warplanes, was in Burlington Tuesday warning of the potential dangers of basing the F-35 attack jets at Burlington International Airport.
Sprey charged that it would be both "dangerous" and "irresponsible" for the Air Force to base these new and sophisticated jets in a highly populated area such as South Burlington before they've logged enough flight time to work out all the bugs.
Sprey further warned that an F-35 crash in or around Chittenden County would produce dangerous levels of highly toxic gases and fibers, due to the burning of all its plastic components and stealth coating materials. He suggested that such a crash would be "a catastrophe of major proportions" that could "potentially blanket blocks and blocks" of residential neighborhoods in deadly gases for days, likening the effects to a "chemical warfare attack" in Syria.
Sprey also challenged claims by the Vermont Air National Guard that they'd be adequately prepared to deal with such an accident, noting that the video of a catastrophic crash and explosion of a B-2 bomber in 2008 "scared the pee out of every fire chief who looked at it."
The 76-year-old Sprey speaks from experience. In 1967 he was brought to work at the Pentagon by then-defense secretary Robert McNamara. While there, he helped design the F-16 fighter jet, the A-10 "Warthog" ground attack jet, as well as tanks and anti-tank weapons. He left the Pentagon in 1971 but remained an active consultant on military systems through the late 1970s and has served as a defense analyst ever since.
On Tuesday, Sprey offered a room full of mostly F-35 opponents a blunt assessment of the new jet — and the politics of the generals pushing its development.
When compared to the F-16, Sprey described the F-35 as slower, less maneuverable and more difficult to fly due to its "frightening" cockpit visibility for pilots. Sprey also challenged the plane's ultimate usefulness to national defense, charging that its long-delayed development — now the most expensive weapons system in U.S. history — is driven more by political reasons than by military ones.
"The truth of the matter is, the engineering in the F-35 is appalling," Sprey said, adding that the attack jet's "main mission is to send money to Lockheed [Martin]."
Sprey's final conclusion of the F-35s' usefulness: "This is no way to defend a country."
Of concern to many of the people in attendance — Sprey's visit was sponsored by opponents of basing the F-35s at BTV — were the conclusions he outlined in a six-page report. Among his chief arguments:
1. All new fighters have high accident rates, he explained, which are higher than mature fighter planes and much higher than scheduled commerical airliners. And, because the F-35s are being produced so slowly — the Air Force is taking delivery on only 19 F-35As per year through 2017 — Sprey predicts the planes will not have more than 100,000 "fleet hours" before they're pressed into service at BTV.
2. Basing a new fighter with significantly less than 1 million fleet hours of safety experience in an urban area exposes Chittenden County residents to accident probabilities that he calls "irresponsibly high."
3. Sprey attacked the Vermont Air National Guard's estimate that the F-35A will have 750,000 cumulative fleet flight hours upon its arrival at BTV. According to his own calculations, he estimates that the F-35A is unlikely to have much more than 100,000 flight hours by 2020, which he called "grossly inadequate for judging its safety."
4. As a result, Sprey called the elevated accident risk that occurs between 100,000 flight hours and a million flight hours "substantial."
5. Since the F-35 is a new and far more sophisticated aircraft than either of its predecessors, the F-16 or the F-22, Sprey claims the Air Force cannot accurately gauge its potential accident rate. He notes that the F-22 has two engines, whereas the F-35 has just one. And, because the F-35 flight computer runs five times as many lines of computer code, Sprey says, "One may reasonably anticipate that the accident rate of the F-35 will be significantly higher than the F-22."
Much of the audience in Contois Auditorium seemed supportive of Sprey's conclusions. Although two F-16 pilots who serve with the Vermont Air National Guard were in the room to observe, they declined to comment on Sprey's assessments of the F-35 and said a statement would be issued later Tuesday from VTANG's public information officer. None had been released as of this posting.
The Rev. Peter Cook, senior pastor at the First Congregational Church in Burlington, who was among the two dozen spectators in the audience, said that one of his chief concerns is that there be a "balanced conversation" on this issue. He complained that each side in the F-35 debate keeps coming in with "wheelbarrows of facts" that "get dumped at the feet of the opposition and then they walk away." Cook said the lack of engagement between the two sides makes it very adifficult for the average citizen to weigh and interpret those facts and then decide which ones they find valid.
For his part, Sprey said he's happy to "sit down with a calculator and numbers" with anyone from VTANG or the Air Force who challenges his assessments. Sprey went on to critcize the statistical analyses provided by VTANG in its assessment of the F-35s' safety risk to the Burlington area, including one claim that the F-16 is safer than commercial airliners.
"That's so ludicrous I can hardly deal with it," Sprey said, calling the calculations in VTANG's spreadsheets "the most childish, kindergarten mistakes in statistics you can imagine. It's really a sad piece of work."
Sprey also leveled criticism at those who contend the F-16 is no longer a viable fighter jet. Noting that there are still DC-3s from the 1930s in the air today, he argued that the decision to permanently ground the F-16 "is a political decision, not a technical decision."
"There's zero truth to the statement that if you get rid of the F-16s, then the Vermont Air National Guard would be out of business," he charged, adding that if Sen. Patrick Leahy "put as much effort into keeping the F-16s as he has in getting rid of them, they could fly until 2050."
Resolution to Bar F-35 Approved by City Attorney–Vote on Oct. 28
After reviewing the language, Blackwood said "I don't see any legal impediment for them to pass that."
VPR News
New Tactic To Restrict F-35 Gets City Attorney Approval
A new proposal by Progressives on Burlington's city council could effectively block the F-35, opponents say.
The resolution, crafted by Councilor Vince Brennan with input from F-35 opposition attorney Jim Dumont and City Attorney Eileen Blackwood, calls on Burlington International Airport director Gene Richards to develop noise and safety standards for the airport.
The resolution (seen here with Blackwood's markups, which Brennan said he had no problems with) says the new standards must establish that "except for grandfathered uses, no commercial or government airplane using the airport shall have noise impacts from its routine use as measured by the federally recognized DNL noise impact measurement method that significantly exceed present noise levels at the airport. Including any significant expansion of the land area or number of residences within the 65 db or 75 db DNL day-night averages."
In a report last week, City Attorney Eileen Blackwood said the city is bound by agreements that say it cannot form policies that discriminate against any single type of aircraft.
The opposition's answer was to take aim not at the F-35, but at its attributes. The Air Force has acknowledged that the stealth fighter jet is significantly louder than the F-16s currently operating at the airport. So the resolution doesn't ban the F-35, but it does ban the sound levels the jet produces.
'We're not discriminating," Brennan said. "That's the big difference: We're not discriminating against one particular plane in our resolution. We're actually looking at the health and safety aspects of all planes now, and I think that's the big difference from last week to this week."
Brennan said the new resolution addresses the real problems opponents have had with the F-35 all along – crash rate and noise – even without naming the jet.
"What we're asking for now is to have any plane that's coming to the Burlington airport have a [crash] rate that's comparable to the F-16s when they actually came here," Brennan said.
Blackwood, Burlington's city attorney, is staying out of the politics of the F-35 debate. She said her job is to make sure the city is acting within legal boundaries.
"I'm really looking at whether or not their resolution is appropriate from a legal standpoint," Blackwood said. "In other words, is the city taking some kind of position that it can or can't take or that has some kind of legal significance that harms the airport? So I don't know the details about the F-35 and whether it would or it would not be blocked."
After reviewing the language, Blackwood said "I don't see any legal impediment for them to pass that."
Brennan and other opposition figures are sure the standards that would emerge from the resolution would block the jet.
Gene Richards, director of aviation for Burlington International Airport, was hesitant to comment on actions airport administrators would take because the final version of the resolution hasn't been approved by city council yet. He did say the airport will do "exactly what we're told" to do by the city council.
Pierre Sprey report–Facts about the safety of F-35 Basing in Burlington
Pierre Sprey is an internationally recognized expert on military aircraft and critic of the F-35. He was in Burlington on October 22, 2013.
Pierre Sprey
Download full report here: Pierre Sprey report–Facts about the safety of F-35 Basing in Burlington-1
- 1. All new fighters have high accident rates, much higher than mature fighters and much, much higher than scheduled airliners.
- 2. Basing a new fighter with significantly less than 1 million fleet hours of safety experience in an urban area is likely to expose the residents to accident probabilities that are irresponsibly high.
The F-16 at 100,000 fleet hours had a cumulative major accident rate (i.e., officially termed Class A Mishap Rate) of 17 per 100,000 hours. By 1 million hours (almost exactly the point when F-16s started operating from Burlington) its cumulative rate was down to 7 and the current cumulative rate at 12,000,000 fleet hours is 3.55. (Note that the current F-16 fleet major accident rate, that is, the non-cumulative rate, is actually running about 1.59, as averaged over the last 5 years).
Statistically speaking, there is not much point in looking at the accident rates of fighters with less than 100,000 fleet hours, simply because with such small accident sample sizes, the estimated rates bounce around too much, rendering the estimates too uncertain to be useful.
Thus, with only 4500 cumulative fleet hours for the F-35A (10,000 hours for all three variants), no useful direct estimate of the F-35A accident rate can be projected. Note that only F-35A fleet hours are germane to estimating the accident probabilities for Burlington; the accident experience of the F-35B and C is irrelevant because they only have 20{33979494efa9b9c28f844b5c37a1ddedf4bb90a2eb3dac7a83ede58b7eac2e67} commonality with the F-35A. The fact that, so far, the F-35A has had zero Class A Mishaps is certainly commendable but uninformative. And the zero major accident score is certainly offset by having more early fleet-wide groundings to cure safety problems than any other fighter of the last 50 years.
The Air Force's EIS agrees that the F-35 accident rate can't be directly estimated because of the fighter's newness. Reasoning by analogy, the USAF does go on to say that the F-35 major accident rate may be similar to that of the F-22 because the size and technology are roughly comparable. This reasoning overlooks two relevant facts, both of which would increase the likely accident rate relative to the F-22. First, the F-35 has only one engine while the F-22 has two. Second, the F-35 flight computer, weapons system, cockpit/helmet display, control system, and cooling system are significantly more complex than the F-22 (for instance, 9 million lines of computer code versus 1.7 million for the F-22).
The F-22 cumulative accident rate, whether germane or not, is now running at about 7.34 major accidents per 100,000 hours with a fleet total of about 130,000 hours. At 16 years since first flight, these fleet total hours are remarkably low (at 16 years after first flight, the F-16 had 4 million hours). The F-35A will have similarly low total hours by 2020 for similar reasons: first, because both airplanes are so complex, they spend so much time in maintenance that they fly less than 12 hours per month; secondly, both are so expensive that the DoD budget can only afford to produce them at a slow rate (20 per year maximum for the F-22 at 11 years after first flight and only19 F-35As per year for the USAF out through at least 2014, with probably no production increase for 3 years longer under sequestration).
From the point of view of Burlington area residents, the real issue is the probability of a major accident in any given year. That, of course, depends on the fighter's actual accident rate and how often it flies per year.
The current VtANG F-16s fly 2550 sorties per year (same as 5100 flight operations/yr) from Burlington at 1.3 hours per sortie and have a current (not cumulative) major fleetwide accident rate of 1.59 per 100,00 hours over the last 5 years. That yields a .051 probability of at least one major accident per year (Poisson probability calculation)—or roughly 1 accident every 20 years.
Just as an illustrative comparison, a guesstimate for the F-35A accident rate could assign it the same major accident rate as the F-16, since the F-16 is the single engine fighter that is closest in size and performance to the F-35. When it came to Burlington in early1986 with 1 million hours of worldwide fleet flight time, the F-16 non-cumulative rate was about 7 per 100,000 hours, based on accidents experienced during the next million worldwide flight hours. Assuming this rate for the F-35A and with the F-35A flying 2250 sorties per year (according to the USAF's EIS Scenario 1) and about 1.54 hours per sortie (current average), the probability of at least one major accident per year would be .215—or nearly one accident every 4 years.
For scheduled airliners (no smaller than 10 passengers), the official NTSB Major + Serious accident rate (the rough equivalent of the military Class A Mishap) is .1217 accidents per 1 million hours over the last 5 years reported (2007 to 2011), about 132 times less than the F-16 hourly rate. These scheduled airliners flew 5681 flights (landing + departure) out of Burlington in 2012, averaging 1.53 hours per flight. That yields a .0011 probability of a major accident in a year—or roughly 1 accident every 945 years.
There are, of course, large numbers of flights out of Burlington by much smaller airplanes: air taxis (most of them well under 9 seats) flew 8862 flights (landing + takeoff) and private airplanes (most under 4 seats) flew 18522 flights in 2012, according to Sky Vector. These smaller planes need to be considered separately because their major accidents represent far less of an urban area disaster potential than the much larger scheduled airliners or fighters. Just to give a rough indication of accident likelihood for these smaller aircraft, the air taxi accident rate per flying hour is about 8 times that of scheduled airliners, so air taxis would still have a considerably lower major accident probability than F-16 fighters. Small private airplanes, however, have an accident rate about 40 times greater than scheduled airliners and fly 8 times as many flights out of Burlington, so their accident probability would significantly exceed that of the F-16s.
3. The VtANG claims that by 2020 the F-35 fleet will have accumulated 750,000 hours of safety experience and that will be adequate maturity to a) provide a good estimate of the fighter's accident rate and b) ensure acceptably safe accident probabilities for basing in Burlington. Statistically speaking, 750,000 fleet hours is marginally adequate for purpose a). Purpose b) would be served if and only if the F-35A fleet demonstrated less than 10 Class A Mishaps in the interval between 250,000 and 750,000 hours.
4. The arithmetic that led to the claim of 750,000 F-35 fleet hours by 2020 is wildly in error. In truth, a decision to base F-35As in Burlington in 2020 would be exposing the Burlington area to a fighter with only about 90,000 to 110,000 fleet hours of safety experience.
Given that current F-16 operations in Burlington are exposing the area to a Class A Mishap risk of about 1 every 20 years, it would be hard to argue that it is acceptable for a new F-35 fighter to significantly increase that risk, say by a factor of 2 or 3 or more—most particularly if that new fighter also adds the risk of a major toxicity disaster to any crash in a residential area (as will be discussed below). The success of the F-16 basing in Burlington—arriving with 1 million hours of fleet experience and demonstrating steady and satisfying accident rate reductions thereafter—sets a convincing precedent for a conservative approach to the fleet hours needed to estimate and mitigate the risk to area residents. Thus, 750,000 hours of fleet experience is marginally acceptable.
To keep the risk of the new F-35A fighter close to the 1.59 accident rate of the currently flying F-16s means that the new fighter needs to demonstrate less than 2 Class A Mishaps per 100,000 hours during an adequately long period before the date the F-35 is to be based in Burlington. From a statistical viewpoint, a sample of 10 accidents is barely acceptable for forming an adequately accurate estimate of the true accident rate. Thus, to ensure with adequate confidence an accident rate of no more than 2 per 100,000, it is essential to set a threshold of no more than 10 F-35A accidents in the 500,000 hours before the decision date for basing in Burlington.
With regards to correctly estimating the number of F-35 fleet hours accumulated by 2020, the arithmetic is quite simple. Our starting point is the 10,000 hours reported this October 13 by Lockheed for all three variants; the F-35A comprises 42{33979494efa9b9c28f844b5c37a1ddedf4bb90a2eb3dac7a83ede58b7eac2e67} of the 63 F-35A/B/Cs flying in October and about 45{33979494efa9b9c28f844b5c37a1ddedf4bb90a2eb3dac7a83ede58b7eac2e67} of the hours or 4500 hours. For those in-service 27 F-35As–plus for every newly produced F-35A delivered thereafter–we calculate that 10 hours per month (present fleet average) gets added to the 4500 hour starting point. The delivery schedule is fixed out to 2017 by the existing LRIP (Low Rate Initial Production) contracts. LRIP-5 delivers 22 F-35As (includes export planes) by second quarter 2014, LRIP-6 delivers 23 by second quarter 2015, LRIP-7 delivers 24 by 2Q 2016 and LRIP-8 delivers 21 by 2Q 2017 (these deliveries may well get cut back by the exigencies of sequestration). For our arithmetic, we assume a slight increase to 25 F-35As per year for the following years, 2018, 2019 and 2020 (even this slight increase may not materialize due to continuing budget pressures and large competing programs in USAF procurement plans). The total F-35A fleet hours by second quarter 2020 therefore total 89,460 hours. Should the monthly F-35 hours improve to 12, the 2020 total would be 107,352 hours. Note that only a quarter of the factor of 8 error in the 750,000 hour calculation is due to the VtANG's mistake of counting all three F-35 variants as providing relevant accident experience.
5. All largely composite-based (that is, laminated plastic and carbon fiber cloth) aircraft—whether new generation airliners or fighters—release large volumes of extremely toxic gases and fibers when the flammable plastic burns unextinguishably in a crash. These gases and fibers can blanket an entire neighborhood or can touch down in "hot spots" as far away as 10 to 50 miles, depending on atmospheric conditions.
There is a large and growing body of research and technical papers on the fire dangers of composite airplanes, authored by engineers, toxicologists, chemists and combustion scientists. Based on both laboratory experiments plus the real world experience of the 2013 Dreamliner fire in London and the disastrous 2008 B-2 crash on Guam (which burned for two days despite massive fire fighting efforts), there is direct evidence of the flammability of composite fuselages and wings, and of the dangerous toxicity of the clouds of resulting combustion products.
The aircraft that pose this new crash danger are the latest generation airliners (Boeing 787 and Airbus A350) and military aircraft (F-22, F-35, B-2 and almost all current drones), all with 30{33979494efa9b9c28f844b5c37a1ddedf4bb90a2eb3dac7a83ede58b7eac2e67} to 60{33979494efa9b9c28f844b5c37a1ddedf4bb90a2eb3dac7a83ede58b7eac2e67} or more of composite structure. Many older planes (F-16, F-18) have small composite parts—wing and tail tips, fairings and housings–comprising 2{33979494efa9b9c28f844b5c37a1ddedf4bb90a2eb3dac7a83ede58b7eac2e67} to 5{33979494efa9b9c28f844b5c37a1ddedf4bb90a2eb3dac7a83ede58b7eac2e67} of the structure; these planes are not at issue here.
The composite fire problem is simple: the plastic adhesives that glue the carbon fiber cloth layers together (mostly related to epoxies or polyurethanes), unlike aluminum structure, can be ignited at well below the temperature of burning fuel. And once ignited, the inner layers continue to smolder (sometimes for 24 to 48 hours) even after firefighters have extinguished the external fires. Epoxies and polyurethanes and their solvents are high on OSHA's list of dangerously toxic industrial chemicals, even at room temperature; after burning, the combustion products of these same chemicals can become significantly more toxic and corrosive to the lungs and other organs, as well as more carcinogenic. A further risk comes from the clouds of tiny carbon fibers, breathable like asbestosis fibers and laden with adsorbed toxic combustion products.
Viewing a video of any crashed airliner or military aircraft burning immediately establishes that there are towering clouds of smoke from the burning fuel that can easily blanket dozens or even hundreds of blocks of residential neighborhoods—particularly in still weather or, even worse, during an inversion. Then consider the effect of mixing in the toxic fumes of 12,300 pounds of burnt F-35 plastic composites (42{33979494efa9b9c28f844b5c37a1ddedf4bb90a2eb3dac7a83ede58b7eac2e67} of the 29,300 pound empty weight of the F-35 is composites). Just the prompt evacuation problem for residents downwind of such a crash is a nightmare, not to mention the subsequent disastrous load on local medical facilities.
Less obvious is the problem of "hot spots"; these are touchdowns of the crash site's smoke plume that create locally toxic concentrations many, many miles downwind. Such hot spots have been widely observed in situations as diverse as toxic releases from incinerators or smelters, radioactive plumes from Fukushima and toxic smoke from the Twin Towers of 9/11.
At this early point in the history of composite aircraft crashes, the health consequences for people exposed to these toxic gases and fibers are, needless to say, poorly understood or quantified. But the OSHA and toxicological literature do establish some rough safety thresholds for some of the toxins involved, with respect to effects such as pulmonary tissue damage, neurotoxicity and cognitive dysfunction, liver damage, asthmatic crises, kidney damage and/or carcinogenicity.
6. All stealth coatings are highly toxic during manufacture and even more so when they burn, much more so than the already dangerous toxicity of standard composite fires.
There is a long history, dating back to before 1988, of stealth production line workers sickened and sometimes permanently disabled after breathing the toxic fumes of assembly line stealth materials. Some of this history is documented in dozens of lawsuits brought by afflicted workers, most of them unsuccessful because the defendant companies and government agencies invoked national security classification to withhold evidence. The 1980s open pit burning of failed F-117 stealth coating panels at the then-secret Area 51 airbase in Nevada killed two of the pit workers and permanently disabled at least five more who were working at the pits or downwind. This turned into a high profile lawsuit that won a favorable federal court ruling, ultimately blocked by a secrecy directive issued by President Clinton.
After the disastrous F-117 experience, the USAF started taking somewhat more responsible health precautions for mechanics repairing B-2 and, subsequently, F-22 coatings. Stealth aircraft manufacturers, however, varied greatly in taking responsible precautions. According to whistleblowers working there, Lockheed was notably irresponsible in exposing F-22 workers, engineers and even office workers to alarmingly toxic fumes from stealth constituents. As is to be expected, the exact toxic constituents are kept secret by high classification levels. However, it is known that di-isocyanates and mercury at particularly dangerous levels were involved in the F-22 stealth coatings. Di-isocyanates are one of the most important OSHA listed toxins in the plastics and fiberglass industries, with known long term pulmonary, asthmatic and neurotoxic/cognitive function effects at concentrations so minute that their usually acrid odor can't even be detected. The F-35 uses yet another generation of stealth coatings, different than the F-22 but known to be very toxic—even though, once again, the constituents are classified.
The classification/secrecy problem, in itself, considerably increases the already seriously elevated risks and health consequences of a crash involving the F-35's stealth coatings. Doctors treating people exposed to known toxins from an unclassified aircraft crash can focus on therapies for specific chemical pathways, particularly as toxicological and medical research in this area continues to make progress. But when a classified aircraft crashes, the doctor is denied knowledge of the toxins released and thus can only treat victims with generic, all-purpose therapies.
October 28th Call to Action–Burlington Should Vote to Bar the F-35 Basing
Dear Fellow F-35 Opponents,
The urgent and growing struggle against the F-35 warplane basing in Vermont comes to a head on Monday, October 28th. On this date the Burlington City Council will vote on a resolution to use its authority as owner of the Burlington Airport to bar the basing of the F-35. The decision is of local and national importance.
The F-35 will have a devastating impact on the lives of over 8,000 working class and modest income residents surrounding the airport whose homes will be designated "not suitable for residential use" due to the extreme noise. Other harms include health, cognitive development of children, crash risk, declining home values, and the dignity of thousands sacrificed for the benefit of commercial interests cheerleading the basing.
The priorities the F-35 warplane represents for our state, nationally, and for the planet are completely backwards. The projected cost is $1.5 trillion, the largest military boondoggle in history. With more austerity on the agenda from Washington, the F-35 is an obscene priority given the $1 trillion in student debt, the critical need for resources put to the task of addressing climate change, and the many more jobs that could be created with that same wasted money if spent on clean energy, health care, and education. The militarization of Vermont does not contribute to any of our progressive goals.
The movement to stop the F-35 basing needs your help. The involvement of thousands of ordinary people committed to equality, social justice, peace, workers rights, environmental and climate justice, and democracy have been the life-blood of our struggle.
We ask for your help now to protect our community from the harms of the basing—and to stand for people and the planet over unneeded warplanes.
We NEED a big turn out for the City Council meeting on Monday, October 28th. We know the F-35 boosters will do their best to turn out in force. Whether you live in Burlington, in other airport communities, or elsewhere, come tell the Council to bar the basing.
Here is the schedule for the 28th
5:15 pm: Rally for People before Planes
6:00 pm: Public Hearing and Council Meeting
Where: Burlington City Hall corner of Main and Church
We expect a close vote. You can make a difference
Before the 28th, you can call Burlington City Councilors to ask them to support barring the basing—click here for calling guide.
Please go to StoptheF35.com for more information on the F-35 basing and the resolutions.
We hope to see you on the 28th!
In Solidarity,
Stop the F-35 Coalition
See video: http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/VideoNetwork/2728206744001/F-35-opponents-rally-at-Burlington-City-Hall&odyssey=mod{33979494efa9b9c28f844b5c37a1ddedf4bb90a2eb3dac7a83ede58b7eac2e67}7Cvideo
F-35 is destroying jobs
Ask a Keynesian: With U.S. Borrowing Capped, Won't More Pentagon Spending Destroy Jobs?
Robert Naiman, Huffington Post
I claim that the following is a basic economic fact, which all Keynesian economists should readily acknowledge: in the current federal budget political context, in which federal borrowing is capped under the Budget Control Act, and repealing the BCA's borrowing cap is not under serious consideration; and in which increased taxes on the super-rich, like a Wall Street speculation tax, are not considered politically viable in Washington, unnecessary Pentagon spending destroys American jobs.
Before explaining why we know this fact to be the case, let's consider two related reasons why this fact matters a great deal right now: the Burlington F-35 basing fight and the apparent return of the proposed federal budget "Grand Bargain."
In Burlington, Vermont, the city council, which owns Burlington International Airport, is considering a resolution to ban the basing of the noisy, dangerous, problem-plagued F-35 warplane at the city-owned airport.
Read rest of article at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/ask-a-keynesian-with-us-b_b_4059484.html?utm_hp_ref=tw
I have to say, I have grown weary of being on the other end of the "that jet noise is the sound of freedom" argument every time I express my concern over the basing of the F-35 here in Burlington.
It is not the sound of freedom. Freedom is a concept, an intellectual construct, and it has no sound. Saying that it is the sound of freedom is a way to make dissenters like myself look unpatriotic and as if we do not care about those who choose to serve in our armed forces. I love the United States and I have the highest respect for those who choose to put themselves on the firing line. I also don't want the F-35 roaring over my community with any regularity.
The F-35 is louder than the F-16. The Air Force does not dispute this fact. This is from an article on VT Digger:
"The Green Ribbons postcards [in favor of basing the F-35 here] state that the F-35 will create noise levels similar to the current F-16, that there will be 2,613 fewer operations per year, and there will be no health effects on citizens.
The Air Force responded that while this comment will be noted in the decision-making process, the content is proven false by the EIS. The Air Force's response states that the F-35s are projected to create more noise than the F-16s, and that there would be fewer operations only if 18 F-35 jets were based in Burlington."
Anyone who says that the F-16's don't fly everyday, or thinks that it's only noisy for 6 minutes a day clearly doesn't spend enough time in the flight paths of these jets. I work in Williston, directly in flight path of the F-16 squadrons when they take-off and land. It is consistent; at least two jets, usually four, spaced about 30 seconds apart, and it happens about three or four times a day, during the work week. The sound is totally overwhelming. If you are having a conversation, even inside, you have to stop and wait until the jets are far enough way. It is frustrating and intrusive. Each squadron, coming and going, eats up about 5 minutes per take-off or landing. That is my experience.
The idea that this noise would get louder is hard to imagine. My co-worker jokes when the F-16's go overhead, that "these are the quiet ones." Sure, we also hear the commercial air traffic going overhead; however, the noise and disruption of the non-military aircraft produces is nowhere near that of the fighter jets. It's comparable to the noise of being near a busy roadway.
So, let me say this: Stop with the sound of freedom nonsense. I support our troops. My father is an Air Force veteran. This is not about the quality of the job they do or making sure they have the best equipment. To imply that I don't support our service men and women is inaccurate and mean spirited. This is about quality of life and whether or not this particular jet belongs in the heart of Vermont's most populated and prosperous county. This is a highly populated area. It's too loud for this area and has too unproven a safety record for this area. This jet does not have to be based here. It can be deployed in an area that is not as densely populated as Chittenden County.
There are other ways to support our troops and the VTANG without bringing in the F-35.
If we must assign a sound to freedom, I would like to see more sounds on the list than only those generated by combat vehicles.
F35: "Loads up like a bomb truck"
"It loads up like a bomb truck with the world's deadliest air to ground weapons."
As F-16 designer Pierre Sprey said in 2013, the F-35 will be used as a high altitude bomber.
Watch this 3 minute F-35 promotion video to learn more.
Huffington Post: This Week, Let's Help Burlington Kill the $1.5 Trillion F-35 Taxpayer Ripoff
We have just a week left to help Burlington, Vermont kill the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the biggest taxpayer ripoff in human history. On Monday, October 7, the Burlington City Council will vote on a binding resolution that would block F-35 warplanes from being based at Burlington International Airport, which is owned by the city.
If the Council votes to block the planes from being based in Burlington, that won't kill the $1.5 trillion F-35 taxpayer ripoff by itself. But it will set a crucial precedent. It will prove that the F-35 is politically vulnerable. It will mark a historic defeat of pork-barrel military Keynesianism by citizen engagement. It would help change the national posture of Democrats on unnecessary military spending. It would help abolish the dogma that Democrats have to support unnecessary military spending when it takes place in their districts.
Read Full Article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/this-week-lets-help-burli_b_4018161.htm
I was floored by Vermont Air National Guard spokesman Capt. Chris Gookin 's remark on Vermont Public Radio on Sept. 26: "The takeaway," Gookin said, "is that we remain confident in the decision-making process because the decision-making process – it's repeatable, it's defendable and it's transparent." If only it was so. Capt. Gookin's statement defending the decision-making process actually highlights its illegitimacy.
Weapons of Mass Destruction Wanted? Democratic "Leaders" Push For "National Scandal" to Come to Vermont
With Vermont's highest elected officials still deep in Defense Dept. denial over the disaster that is the Air Force's F-35 strike fighter, a local city council threatens to bring some military sanity to Vermont (but nowhere else) by exercising its landlord right to reject as a tenant a weapon of mass destruction that will wreak havoc on the local neighborhood.
This initiative comes from four members of Vermont's Progressive Party on the Burlington City Council, who plan to introduce a resolution on October 7 effectively barring the F-35 from being based in the middle of Vermont's most populated area. In contrast, Vermont's official "leadership," almost all Democrats, still thinks basing nuclear-capable warplanes in a Vermont community is a dandy idea.
Greco: A Letter to Vermont's Congressional Delegation on the F-35
Editor's note: This commentary is by Rosanne Greco, a retired U.S. Air Force colonel who is now a member of the South Burlington City Council.
Dear Sen. Leahy, Sen. Sanders, and Rep. Welch,
For years, people have been asking you to meet with those who will live in the noise zone of the F-35A, and who have grave concerns about its impact on their lives. Most of us are trying to understand why such caring, social justice-minded men, such as yourselves, are acting so out of character by supporting the basing of the F-35A in our neighborhoods; and why you refuse to meet with us. It is baffling to many to think that you would choose the military-industrial complex that President Eisenhower warned us about, over the health and financial well-being of thousands of average Vermonters.
People are guessing at reasons for your position. Here are some of them:
Assumption 1: You don't know the facts, since your statements contradict what the Air Force has stated unequivocally.
July 13th Rally and March
No F-35 !
People before Planes
- NO to Basing the F-35 Warplane in Burlington!
- Protect our children's health!
- YES to affordable housing and livable neighborhoods, no to a boondoggle warplane
- Vermont's Congressional Delegation should represent their constituents-not the military-industrial-commercial real estate complex
Rally and March
Burlington City Hall
2 pm, Saturday July 13th
Corner of Church and Main Streets
****Permitted and family friendly****
BFP: Political Leaders Respond To Question on the F-35 Warplanes
Wednesday, June 12th, 2013
Burlington VT
The Burlington Free Press "asked the Vermont political leaders who have supported the plane to explain the economic benefits, the source of their information about the importance of the new plane to the Vermont Air National Guard and to speak about their understanding of the capabilities of the plane. They were asked to respond individually."
Click here for the complete article.
Please call me (Chris Hurd) at 802.238.5256 so I can get your name, email address and phone number so we can be in two way communication immediately. We need you to become involved right now!
Way To Go BFP: Asks Tough Questions of Vermont Delegation, Governor and Burlington's Mayor on F-35
Tuesday June 4th, 2013
Burlington, VT
Journalist, John Briggs reports that the Burlington Free Press has sent numerous detailed and specific questions to Senators Patrick Leahy, Bernard Sanders, Congressman Peter Welch, Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin, and Burlington Vermont Mayor Miro Weinberger emanating from a meeting with aviation designer Pierre Sprey, USAF Col. Rosanne Greco (ret.) and Chris Hurd and from Friday's revised Air Force Environmental Impact Statement. The Free Press has specifically asked for individual responses from Vermont's top political leadership rather than their unified joint comments with a June 12th deadline for responses.
We wholeheartedly applaud the journalists and leadership at the Burlington Free Press. This is a shining star example of the important role a FREE press plays in our democracy!
Click here to read the entire list of questions the Burlington Free Press sent to Vermont's Political Elite Leadership all steadfast supporters for bringing the F-35's to Vermont.
Please call me (Chris Hurd) at 802.238.5256 so I can get your name, email address and phone number so we can be in two way communication immediately. We need you to become involved right now!
Major Turnout For "The F-35: A Citizens' Hearing" Last Thursday Night
Saturday, June 1st, 2013
With our political, business and military leaders having COMPLETELY IGNORED opposition force's repeated requests for open, transparent public engagement and dialogue around the basing of F-35 warplanes capable of carrying nuclear weapons, we were forced to take matters into our own hands.
Before a packed house at the Unitarian Universalist Church atop Church Street in Burlington Vermont, citizens heard first hand accounts from a resident severely impacted by their neighborhoods being devastated and turned into what she calls "Little Detroit". Citizens heard about the morality and serious community consequences of such recklessness from longtime Rabbi Joshua Chasan Rabbi of Ohavi Zedek Synagogue in Burlington.
Please read the article that appeared the next day in the Burlington Free Press.
USAF Colonel Rosanne Greco spoke to veterans about the erosion of benefits and choices of hardware over people. She urged that we PUT PEOPLE FIRST. PEOPLE BEFORE PLANES.
The keynote speaker, Pierre Sprey, is a co-designer of the F-16 warplane that is currently flying at the Burlington Airport. In addition, he co-designed the A-10 Warthog as well. Both of these planes are currently in the USAF arsenals. The F-16 widely regarded as a superior design, a pilot's plane.
If you have questions or concerns or want to get involved go to our HOW CAN I HELP? section at this top of this page!! WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU AND WE WANT YOU TO GET INVOLVED RIGHT NOW! WE NEED YOU!


text:
E.U. Plans To Probe SkyTeam Alliance
In a speech Monday at the International Institute of Air and Space law conference in the Netherlands, Kroes said she would review the competitive impact of the...
To view the full article, register now.
Try Law360 FREE for seven days
Already a subscriber? Click here to login

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Upcycled book jacket cover paper, hand-cut and embossed flowers for elegant, classic, vintage, and beautiful scrapbook, tags, wedding invitations, accents, or card and other craft projects.They can be used in a lot of ways you prefer:wedding invitationsflower girl hair accentwedding tokensgift tagsthank you cardsscrapbookenvelope sealer...and they remain pretty and elegant as ever.Choose the stamen color you prefer!Flower size is 2 inches in diameter, 3 layers in all ... you get 12 pieces in a pack... only from this shop!
Shipping time may vary depending on location. It may take 3 -6 weeks for international buyers to receive their items. Tracking number and contact information to service provider shall be issued to customer for their direct follow-up if applicable.Costs for transporting & packaging is included in shipping.
All items may be shipped worldwide. Costs of shipping includes packaging and transport. For furniture, shipping costs may vary due to packaging and delivery costs, so shipping cost is finalized AFTER delivery address has been provided by buyer and inquiries are made to forwarders. We guarantee that actual shipping fee based on current market exchange shall be used and all extra payments shall be returned to you via Paypal.
Inform us of undelivered items in 6 weeks waiting time and we shall strive to replace items. In most instances, we refund payments made although 3rd party costs cannot be refunded.
We strive to provide you with positive experience with us from the purchase period up to the time you are already enjoying the furniture. If for any reason that you have questions, queries, or other concerns, please do let us know and we will see what we can do.


text:
Engines & Empires: Labyrinth Lord (D&D) in Victorian World
Swords and sorcery meets technology in in a Victorian world in the new Labyrinth Lord variant Engines & Empires. It's over 200 pages of D&D goodness in a free PDF -- or you can buy a printed copy from Lulu for the very reasonable price of $9.99 plus shipping. This review is of the free PDF download so I can't comment in the print quality.
The blurb on Lulu describes Engines & Empires as "...a campaign setting designed for use with the LABYRINTH LORD fantasy RPG. Sitting at the crossroads of heroic high fantasy and Victorian gaslight romance, E&E pits magic and science against an ancient darkness intent on once again enveloping the world of Gaia... along with all the Free Folk that now dwell thereupon." This does not do the game justice.
Engines & Empires is much more than a campaign setting, it is a complete set of variant rules for Labyrinth Lord (a retro-clone of B/X D&D) which expand the game system with new classes, new ways of looking at magic, Victorian era technology, and more. Over 160 pages of new rules -- all open content -- before reaching the setting, the world of Gaia which has an additional 70 pages of content. It's very well thought out and simply but professionally presented.
Character Classes include Boxer, Expert, Halfling, Faun, Fighter, Dwarf, Centaur, Sylph, Mage, Fay, Scholar, Elf, Merrow, Tech, and Gnome. All classes have 36 levels (like B/X D&D's successor, BECMI D&D). The classes look to be well thought out. Expert and Tech are the most unusual.
"Experts are human characters who turn normal, 'civilian' professions into unique adventuring skill-sets." This can be anything from a burglar to a noble to a master of some craft or obscure lore. Naturally, this requires a bit of discussion between GM and the player of an Expert character, but it looks like it should work well.
The Tech "is a living symbol of the modern era. By combining the two complementary arts of science and engineering, techs can build a machine or brew a chemical for any occasion." As a Tech advances in level he learns new technological principles that he can use to create tech items. I've seen a number of attempts to a "Techno" character class to D&D (starting with the first Arduin Grimoire back in the 1970s). In my opinion, none have really worked well. To be honest, most have not worked at all. The E&E Tech class looks like it should at least work okay and prehaps every well -- although I'd have to see a few played by an inventive player to be sure. There are three fields of technology: biology, chemistry, and physics. Each field has 12 degrees. These degrees which have to be earned in order within a field, but the player can choose to specialize or generalize.
Characters can also learn skills. There are 12 skills and they are handled in a old-school manner by rolling 1d6 and trying to roll under your skill rank. Like BECMI, the game is divided into stages which include ruling dominions and going on epic adventures at higher levels.
The last part of the book deals with the world of Gaia. I can't do justice to it here. However, I can say that reading about the world gives me all sorts of idea for adventures and makes me want to run the game -- which is exactly what a good campaign setting should do.
If you have any interest in "Old School" D&D variants or just like the idea of mixing swords, sorcery, and technology in a Victorian setting, you need to download a copy of the Engines & Empires Campaign Compendium from Relative Entropy Games' page on Lulu. The download is free and well worth a look.
[Don't forget that rare Traveller fanzines (Working Passage & Imperium Staple) and the RPGA limited edition AD&D Modules R1 (To the Aid of Falx) and R2 (Investigation of Hydell) are available (for Cancer Fund Donors) -- addition to the usual PDF downloads every donor has access to. There is still plenty of time to make a donation and get in on the giveaway which ends at the end of October 2009. Thanks much to those who have already donated.]
Jeff Rients
October 13, 2009 at 7:27 AM
Thanks for the review! I've been meaning to check out E&E for a while but now you've motivated me to quit being a slouch and actually do it.
October 18, 2009 at 11:33 PM
Okay, you've convinced me to check out E&E. Thanks!


text:
Reuters Staff
1 Min Read
Oct 11 (Reuters) - Unipro Technologies Ltd
* Approves resignation of Aparna Reddy as chief financial officer Source text for Eikon: Further company coverage:
All quotes delayed a minimum of 15 minutes. See here for a complete list of exchanges and delays.
© 2018 Reuters. All Rights Reserved.


text:
Commerce, Jurisdiction and Firearms Freedom Acts
State efforts to reclaim their jurisdiction are great. But in some respects, the states are still showing signs of apprehension of, and/or undue deference to, the federal government.Details
State efforts to reclaim their jurisdiction are great. But in some respects, the states are still showing signs of apprehension of, and/or undue deference to, the federal government.Details
For decades, using a tortured definition of "interstate commerce," Congress has claimed the authority to regulate, control, ban, or mandate virtually everything – from wheat grown on one's own land for personal consumption, to weed grown in an individual's own home for the same purpose, to guns manufactured, sold and kept in state boundaries.Details
NH Legislators again raise the bar for the 10th Amendment Movement – felony charges proposed for federal agents violating gun rights in New HampshireDetails
Missouri State Representative Cynthia Davis has introduced the "Firearms Freedom Act†The bill "Asserts the right of the State of Missouri to regulate the intrastate use and acquisition of certain firearms pursuant to the reserved powers of the state over intrastate commerce and the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.â€Details
That two states have enacted Firearms Freedom Acts, eight states have introduced them, and 20 other states are poised to introduce their own is an "emerging consensus" that the federal judiciary probably won't actively acknowledge, but that those in the black robes will be aware of and pay attention to.Details
"For far too long elected officials and unelected bureaucrats at the federal level have passively forgotten or actively neglected the Tenth Amendment that guarantees rights not enumerated in the Constitution be left to the individual states…"Details
the federal government has been ignoring the Constitution for decades–so much so that if there is going to be any restoration of genuine liberty in the country, the states are going to have to stand up to this out-of-control national leviathan and say, "No." And they are going to have to say it loudly enough for Washington to get the message.Details
Introduced in the Ohio House on October 16, 2009, the "Firearms Freedom Act†(HB-315) seeks "To enact section 2923.26 of the Revised Code to provide that ammunition, firearms, and firearm accessories that are manufactured and remain in Ohio are not subject to federal laws and regulations derived under Congress' authority to regulate interstate commerce and to require the words "Made in Ohio" be stamped on a central metallic part of any firearm manufactured and sold in Ohio."Details
Pennsylvania State Representative Sam Rohrer has introduced the "Firearms Freedom Act" (HB1988) for consideration in the state legislature. The bill is "An Act prohibiting certain firearms, firearm accessories or ammunition from being subject to Federal law or Federal regulation."Details
Introduced in the Michigan House on August 11, 2009, the "Firearms Freedom Act†(HB-5232) seeks "to make certain findings regarding intrastate commerce; to prohibit federal regulation of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition involved purely in intrastate commerce in [the State of Michigan]; to provide for certain exceptions to federal regulation; and to establish certain manufacturing requirements."Details
A line was drawn in the sand last week- a response by the Federal Government to the State of Tennessee and their assertion of sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution.Details
Phil Russo and Jason Hoyt of TeaPartyPatriotsLive.com (660 WORL-AM: Orlando, FL), interview Michael Boldin on the Florida's Sovereignty Resolution, the Firearms Freedom Act, the Commerce Clause, and more.Details
The Constitution. Every issue, every time. No exceptions, no excuses.


text:
2 Post Lifts
Motorcycle Lift
4 Post Car Lift
Alignment Lift
2 Post Lift Accessories
4 Post Lift Accessories
Car Scissor Lifts
Specialty Lifts
Mobile Column Lifts
Alignment Equipment
Tire Changers
ATV Tire Changers
Motorcycle Tire Changers
Wheel Balancers
Motorcycle Wheel Balancers
Other Products
Information Center
Product Videos
Product Comparisons
About us
Customer Service
Vist Our Showrooms
[1]Also available in 8' and 10' height configurations; ask your sales rep. for details.[2]Also available in 8' and 10' width configurations; ask your sales rep. for details.[3]Weight varies based on height/width options selected; ask your sales rep. for details.
WARNING: Cancer and Reproductive Harm. www.P65Warnings.ca.gov
Be the first to Write a Review


text:
NEW YORK – President Bush (search) and Sen. John Kerry (search) were set to close up their debate training camps Wednesday and head for Florida, the pivotal state in the 2000 election and the site of the first 2004 presidential debate.
Florida also has a new distinction — it's taken a beating this hurricane season.
Bush planned to survey damage in the Lake Wales area of the Sunshine State from the latest of the four storms, Jeanne, and then head to Miami. His aides said his formal preparations for the face-off are over.
The debate, which is intended to focus on foreign policy and homeland security, takes place Thursday at the University of Miami in Coral Gables, Fla. Watch the debate live on the FOX News Channel at 9 p.m. EDT.
Click here for FOXnews.com's daily campaign journal, "Trail Tails."
The Bush-Cheney campaign has disclosed that the president will, in his closing remarks, mention a Wisconsin businessman, Mike Shaver, whose machine parts company has benefited from the tax cuts Bush championed and signed into law.
Kerry, who will arrive in Florida later Wednesday, is getting some debate advice from former Vice President Al Gore, who debated Bush leading up to the 2000 elections. In an op-ed column in The New York Times Wednesday, Gore advises Kerry to be prepared for one of the toughest debates of his career.
"While George Bush's campaign has made 'lowering expectations' into a high art form, the record is clear — he's a skilled debater who uses the format to his advantage," Gore writes.
Vocabulary Gaffes Won't Hurt Bush
Political insiders from both sides of the aisle agree that Bush is a skilled orator in these situations and strikes a chord with those watching, despite his not-so-uncommon pronunciation slip-ups.
"George Bush has won every debate he's been in, he's been president for four years and he's the one who wanted this debate to be on foreign policy, which is his home turf. So John Kerry has his work cut out for him," Tom Downey, a former New York congressman who used to serve as Gore's mock debate partner, told FOX News.
Bush "sticks to his message and even though his syntax may not always be correct; he gets his message across," he added.
Former Texas gubernatorial candidate, Democrat Gary Mauro, also debated Bush while vying for the governor's seat in the Lone Star State.
"Bush is probably the most skilled office holder in America in holding that dialogue with Americans. It will be interesting to see if Kerry can match that skill," Mauro said.
Even if Bush mangles a few words, Mauro said, "ordinary Americans mangle the language too ... in Texas, it's not unusual to hear people talk a little funny and use words you probably won't use at Yale or Harvard."
With at least 44 million people expected to watch Thursday's debate, Kerry senior adviser Mike McCurry told FOX News that the face-off is the Democratic candidate's big chance to show the American people that he's a leader with a vision for winning the peace in Iraq, winning the War on Terror and keeping America safe.
"We won't give up what's going on in the locker room before the big game right now but obviously, he's [Kerry] getting prepared and doing what he needs to do so he feels comfortable making the best case he can make about where he would lead America and how America would be different in the next four years if he serves as president," said McCurry, a former press secretary for President Clinton.
But former New York Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, a Republican, said Kerry has a tough job ahead of him.
"Whether you subscribe to it or not, the flip-flop issues, on John Kerry taking one position then the other, it struck home," D'Amato told FOX News. "He has to make his point strongly but yet there's a fine line ... if he's too aggressive, even if he wins the debate, he loses as a result of how he comes off."
Who's the Real Waffler?
Going into the debate, both Bush and Kerry granted high-profile television interviews — Bush to FOX News' Bill O'Reilly and Kerry to ABC News' Diane Sawyer.
In the third portion of a three-part interview, which will air Wednesday night, Bush was asked what he was thinking as he sat in the school classroom in Florida when his chief of staff, Andrew Card, informed him the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, that a plane had flown into the World Trade Center.
Bush has been criticized by Democrats for not saying or doing something sooner after being told of the attack.
"I was thinking America was under attack, I was collecting my thoughts, and I wasn't about to panic a bunch of kids," Bush tells O'Reilly. "I waited for the end of the program, I excused myself and I went to action. And what the American people will judge me on is whether or not I handled that crisis in a way that lets them know that I'll lead in this War on Terror, that's what they need to look at, and I think they are looking at it that way."
In the second part of the interview, which aired Tuesday night, Bush was asked if he thought the nation was politically divided.
"It's just one, a period of history, you know, and I'm doing my best to bring people together. We've been united at times during my presidency. We were united after Sept. 11, we were united going into Afghanistan ... The Iraq war was a, is a polarizing event, because a lot of people didn't see the wisdom of going into Iraq," Bush said.
In Wisconsin, Kerry blasted Bush on the war in Iraq.
"He's [Bush] gotten us into this mess. It was his decision as to when to go, his decision as to how to go, his decision not to listen to his own advisers," Kerry told Sawyer.
Kerry also said it's Bush who's the waffler, even though polls show that 53 percent of voters think the Massachusetts senator changes his mind too often.
"I think their advertising, and their effort over these last months — to use that word — have been particularly successful," Kerry said. "But it doesn't reflect truth, nor does it reflect the truth of George Bush's record, who said he wouldn't go to the U.N., then he goes to the U.N., who said he didn't support homeland security and then he supports homeland security, who said he wasn't going to support the 9/11 commission and then he supports it, then he says he won't testify, then he goes to testify."
Whereas Kerry recently appeared on "Live with Regis and Kelly," the president and first lady Laura Bush were to bare their inner souls on Dr. Phil McGraw on Wednesday.
"I am really committed to putting family back in America. I think it's what you have put in the White House, and I think it's what we need to put back in America," Bush says on "Dr. Phil."
Minds Made Up
In a new FOX News/Opinion Dynamics poll, 77 percent of 1,000 likely voters surveyed said their minds were made up between Bush and Kerry. Recent polls show that Bush has an edge on Kerry in overall support.
But 18 percent of respondents said they may very well change their votes based on how each candidate performs in the debates.
Asked whom they expected to do better in the face-offs, 39 percent said Kerry and 37 percent said Bush. Ten percent said both candidates would do the same, while 14 percent were not sure.
A clearer split emerged when asked who would do better in the Oct. 5 vice-presidential debate between Vice President Dick Cheney (search) and Sen. John Edwards (search). Edwards, a Democrat from North Carolina, gets the advantage from 45 percent of respondents, while 35 percent think Cheney would do better.
FOX News' Liza Porteus, James Rosen and Kelly Wright contributed to this report.


text:
SPN420 Literature and Culture I
Lead Faculty: Dr. Luis Acebal
Course DescriptionIntroduction to cultural productions from the Pre-Columbian period to the mid-19th century in Spanish. Readings will come from a variety of regions and historical and cultural movements. Discussions, collaborations, and writing assignments will be in Spanish.
Learning Outcomes
- General knowledge of the aesthetic, historical, and sociopolitical development of the region's literary and cultural discourse.
- Increase familiarity with the specific terminology needed for a critical reading of literary texts.
- Awareness of the most significant themes from the region.
- Deliver classroom presentation in Spanish.
- Given that class discussions will be conducted in Spanish as well as written assignments, students will strengthen their language skills as they examine and interact with the linguistic richness of the diverse texts read in class.


text:
Heart disease, cancer and chronic lower respiratory disease collectively account for over 50 percent all deaths in the United States. Accidents are no. 4 and strokes are no. 5 of the top 10 causes of death. The remaining five include Alzheimer's disease, diabetes, influenza and pneumonia, kidney disease and suicide.Continue Reading
The top 10 causes of death collectively account for 75 percent of all deaths in the United States. For example, of 2,596,993 average total deaths in a single year, heart disease claims 611,105, cancer claims 584,881 and chronic lower respiratory diseases claim 149,205 lives, as of 2016. Heart disease includes heart attacks and heart failure.
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths, followed by prostate cancer for men and breast cancer for women. Chronic lower respiratory diseases include chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, bronchitis, emphysema and asthma.Learn more about Population & Demography


text:
Know more about this business than we do? Cool! Please submit any corrections or missing details you may have.Help us make it right
Monmouth County Area
Be the first YellowBot user to add photos or videos of A Chef For All Seasonings
Since 2007 the company has been providing Wholesale - Commercial Cooking And Food Service Equipment.
If you don't see your business listed on YellowBot, please add your business listing.
YellowBot wants to get your input! If you have a comment, find a bug or think of something neat we should do, let us know by emailing us.
© 2007-2018 Solfo, Inc. – All rights reserved


text:
Congratulations to our Illinois State Scholars!
Forreston High School Principal, Travis Heinz is pleased to announce that six students have been recognized as "2017 Illinois State Scholars".
Forreston High School is honored to recognize the following students as Illinois State Scholars from the 2017 graduating class: Ross Behrends, son of Paul and Julie Behrends, Brian Dillard, son of Dana Dillard, Bryan Edler, son of Bryan and Michele Edler, Katie Fisher, daughter of Richard and Dr. Sally Fisher, Emily Homman, daughter of Michael and Tammy Homman, and Emma Nelson, daughter of Shawn and Jennifer Nelson.
This prestigious award is given annually by the Illinois Student Assistance Commission (ISAC) which is recognizing 19,300 high school students from across the state as this year's State Scholars. Illinois State Scholars possess strong academic potential and are chosen based on a combination of exemplary ACT or SAT test scores and six semester class rank. State Scholars rand in the top ten percent of high school seniors from 765 high schools across the state.
"To be recognized in the top 10% of graduating seniors in the State of Illinois is a tribute to the students' work ethic, desire to succeed, their teachers, and the support they receive at home. The nice thing about each of these students is that they are not only successful in the classroom. Many of these students are leaders outside the classroom in the many extra-curricular activities they are involved as well." said Travis Heinz, Forreston High School Principal.
Please CLICK HERE to visit the ISAC website.
Left to Right: Emily Homman, Katie Fisher, Bryan Edler, Ross Behrends, Emma Nelson Not Pictured: Brian Dillard


text:
- Author: Jeannette E. Warnert
Typically, participants are offered an eight-session course called "Eating Smart Being Active." The UC advisors realized the audience couldn't always devote that much time to nutrition education, said Marisa Neelon, nutrition, family and consumer sciences advisor in Contra Costa County. The salient parts were extracted and compiled into four content-packed interactive lessons: Plan, Shop, Save and Cook.
Plan, Shop, Save and Cook is presented by UC CalFresh nutrition educators at schools, churches, shelters and other venues where at least 50 percent of the participants are eligible based on federal income guidelines. But anyone can benefit from the straight-forward, simple guidelines set forth in the curriculum. Below is a sampling:
Planning meals ahead saves time and money. Families save time by avoiding last-minute trips to the grocery store. They save money by taking advantage of the weekly specials and coupons that are published in the store circulars.
Before sitting down to plan a week of meals, check the refrigerator, freezer, cupboards and pantry for foods to use. Review the store's weekly ad for foods you need and to see what vegetables and fruits are in season. In-season produce usually costs less and tastes better.
Build your meals around low-cost, healthful food items, such as:
- Protein - beans (garbanzo, black, cannellini), tofu, nuts, chicken and eggs
- Vegetables - carrots, potatoes, lettuce and leafy greens
- Fruit - apples, bananas , oranges and grapes
- Grains - brown rice, whole wheat bread, oatmeal and pasta
- Dairy - calcium fortified soy milk, milk, reduced or low fat cheese
Using the meal plan and grocery store ad, make a detailed shopping list.
At the grocery store spend time carefully reading food labels, especially the "nutrition facts" and "ingredients."
Consider the serving size on the label, how many calories and fat are in one "serving" of food and whether that serving would be a typical portion for you and your family.
The ingredient list is also important. The ingredients are listed in descending order of predominance by weight. In other words, the ingredient that weighs the most is first, and the ingredient that weighs the least is last.
When comparing prices, look for the unit price on the shelf sticker. The unit price, typically found next to the price of the product, gives the item's cost per pound, gallon, ounce, etc. You will be able to see whether purchasing a large quantity really does cost less.
Stick to your shopping list, but be flexible. Stores will often have unadvertised specials that you can work into your healthy menu. However, avoid buying "extras" like chips and soft drinks. The cost adds up fast.
If possible, shop without children. Children may ask their parents to buy things that are not on the grocery list, not particularly healthy and often expensive. Children can also be distracting when trying to make calculations and keeping track of purchases.
If you must bring the kids, allow for extra time and involve them in the shopping process. Young children can count produce and put it into a bag. Older children can help search for specific foods, read labels and calculate unit pricing.
Use the food you purchased and the menu you planned to put together low-cost, healthy meals, such as:
- Rice and beans
- Baked chicken, potatoes and a vegetable
- Pasta and a salad
- Scrambled eggs with vegetables and toast
If your evenings are busy, keep a collection of quick recipes with minimal ingredients, find a time when you can cook several meals in advance or cook extra and plan to use leftovers for another meal.
To request a presentation of Plan, Shop, Save and Cook by UC CalFresh to an eligible group, contact your county UC Cooperative Extension office.


text:
From Interstate 20 Frontage Road and S Cooper St, Arlington, Texas, drive south on Farm to Market 157 S. Take the I-20 E ramp to Dallas. Keep right at the fork, follow signs for Farm to Market Road 157 N/Cooper St/Ut Arlington and merge onto S Cooper St/Farm to Market 157 N. Turn slightly to the right onto Farm to Market 157 N. Make a right turn onto W Pioneer Parkway. Waterdance I & II Apartments will be on the right.
Waterdance I & II Apartments are nestled directly between Fort Worth and Dallas, putting you within a short distance of many of the area's best lakes and parks. This prime location puts you in the center of a great variety of shopping and entertainment choices.Waterdance I & II Apartments feature Jacuzzi Bathtubs, crown molding, washer and dryer connections, and beautiful color schemes. You will also find roomy walk-in closets, frost free refrigerators, ceiling fans, ice makers, disposals, automatic dishwashers, and more. This apartment community offers two swimming pools, a fitness center, clothes care centers and access control gates. Feel free to bring your pets.


text:
In 2008 Rainforest Concern formed a new partnership with the Carpathia Foundation to protect Romania's ancient Carpathian forests. Although we may be called Rainforest Concern, we have sometimes partnered projects to protect native forests and biodiversity in temperate zones. This is the case with a new project to protect up to 50,000 hectares of the Carpathian forests, home to such charismatic animals as the European bear, lynx, chamois and wolf, and numerous rare or endemic plant species.
Click here for our newsletter (2009) update on this project (pdf format).