"Obsolete SDs" Waste not...

I don't see the logic of using them as training platforms.

That makes as much sense to me as training new auto mechanics on a fleet of 1973 Ford Pintos because you found a bone yard full of them or setting up a Computer Lit class using a warehouse full of Apple II's.

If you are going to train from scratch, then the best way to do it is to train on the system that's going to be used. Otherwise, you are just going to have to retrain once they get out of the classroom and into the real world.

jtg452 wrote:I don't see the logic of using them as training platforms.

That makes as much sense to me as training new auto mechanics on a fleet of 1973 Ford Pintos because you found a bone yard full of them or setting up a Computer Lit class using a warehouse full of Apple II's.

If you are going to train from scratch, then the best way to do it is to train on the system that's going to be used. Otherwise, you are just going to have to retrain once they get out of the classroom and into the real world.

I asked him before why the GA wouldn't use the Sphinx SDs in storage for that purpose, but he ignored me.

I tink the only use for the sollie Superdreadnought would be to put them at the Torch wormhole as a barricade. If someone use it, he Crash directly into milions of tons of metal.

Relax wrote:Are you born knowing how to run, jump, dribble, and shoot a basketball? No. You start by crawling, pullups, stumbling, walking, running. Then you see your slightly older sisters/brothers skipping, jumping, dribbling, and shooting a basketball and you decide to learn how to do that as well. Is there some magic beans that makes this all possible. Actually yes, there is. Your own willpower.

You don't start at the finish line. You do not start by creating a modern advanced navy from scratch. You have to crawl first. Which means starting at the bottom. The bottom is scrounging, maybe stealing and copying SLN tech. No one from the MALIGN, or Haven sector is going to change your diapers for you. They might sell you diapers, but they sure as heck won't be changing them. Since they are not changing your diapers, you might forget to change your diaper and get a rash. But, you will learn far faster by doing it yourself than having someone doing it for you.

OtJT is the fastest way to learn ANY subject. Anyone saying otherwise, is nothing but an pampered fool.

I'd tend to agree if you're talking about OTJT through something like an apprenticeship - where a knowledgeable person is working with you or at least checking your work frequently to correct mistakes or missed steps.

But on a complicated system dumping it in the trainee's lap along with a vague "I'm sure the manuals are on its computer system somewhere" seems like a horribly inefficient way to learn and quite possibly one likely to damage the ships or crew.
I got the impression that Sigs was advocating something much closer to this later scenario...

Sigs wrote:Put yourself in the shoes of the GA leadership, your nation is a target of centuries old conspiracy and suddenly you discover that there is a second part to the plan. You don't know what the RF is supposed to do but you know they are meant to replace the League at least in part. If the GA want's to survive I would in their shoes hammer the RF as hard as I can, as fast as I can and in the order that I can with as little collateral damage as possible. The GA hammering a dozen or even two dozen systems will not cause a thousand other systems to want revenge because those systems will be far from the conflict and having problems of their own.

I can assure you that there will be a lot of evidence pointing to other systems if people start to look for it. Lots of vague evidence about this secret conspiracy pointing to many completely innocent but very well connected and influential system.

jtg452 wrote:I don't see the logic of using them as training platforms.

That makes as much sense to me as training new auto mechanics on a fleet of 1973 Ford Pintos because you found a bone yard full of them or setting up a Computer Lit class using a warehouse full of Apple II's.

If you are going to train from scratch, then the best way to do it is to train on the system that's going to be used. Otherwise, you are just going to have to retrain once they get out of the classroom and into the real world.

you can learn automechanics on a ford pinto, just not the modern electronic parts, you repair a 2016 mercedes fender bender like on the 1975pinto, your gears are gears, and changing the carpet sure is the same.
if you had horsedrawn wagons before you can learn a lot

if you want to learn the basics of programing an apple 2 is fine i learned programing on it, its a lot better then having a typewriter to learn computing, in fact modern programers don t know shit about assembler which you needed on an apple 2 to get any performance

you can upgrade later

a missile warhead tech needs missile warheads to train on, that takes 3 years, it might teake 1-2 month to train for a new warhead
a missile drive tech needs 3 years to train on missile drives, he needs 1-3 month to train on multidrive drives

a molycircuit tech .. grasertech.. hyperdrive tech whatever tech.

an officer needs to train his speciality , to adapt to certain tech needs a lot less time

so to say training on tech thats not the top of the line is dumb,is dumb.. 1. you train basic capability, then you train the special capability for the tech used

svenhauke wrote:you can learn automechanics on a ford pinto, just not the modern electronic parts, you repair a 2016 mercedes fender bender like on the 1975pinto, your gears are gears, and changing the carpet sure is the same.
if you had horsedrawn wagons before you can learn a lot

At least the '75 Pinto is new enough to be unibody construction - so that would be somewhat similar to the Mercedes.
Of course there are still significant differences in the repairs - the Mercedes having more plastic/rubber external components, or in the case of the SL an aluminium body which should be worked differently that a mild steel one.

Oh and the Mercedes will be designed with extensive crumple zones that you'd ideally want restored after a crash - something the Pinto wouldn't have.

Not so sure on the idea that gears are gears, since Mercedes, at least in the US, has almost eliminated manual transmissions - so you're dealing with an 8 or 9 speed automatic rather than 3 speed auto or 4 speed in the Pinto.

Some stuff will more or less transfer, but those "modern electronic parts" are a lot of the Mercedes (and even moreso of a starship)

When I was in the Air Force, I was a bomb loader on F-111s (D and F models) for seven years. About 5 years in, I tested for promotion to Staff Sergeant. In the testing process, some of the questions pertained to loading bombs (and or guns, in some cases) on B-52s, B-1s, F-4s, F-16s, F-15s, and A-10s. This also included electronics questions, since we also have to test weapons delivery electronics in the process of loading.

I never did make SSGT, because all I had ever worked on were the 'Varks, and I missed many of the questions regarding other aircraft weapons systems. Never had the training. Had I ever gone on to work on a different aircraft, then I would have gotten the training, and it would have taken another 3-6 months (the same amount of time to be trained on the F-111 - and there were differences between the F model and the D model that I had to learn when I changed bases).

The point is that even though all the aircraft listed above did similar things (drop bombs, shoot rotary cannon, etc.), the maintenance and procedures for actually doing the job on the different "classes" of aircraft were vastly different, even on aircraft from similar time periods (F-111, F-4, B-52). So, just because one has had training on one type of thing, it doesn't always follow that it would be easy to switch to a similar, but different type of the same thing.

MaxxQ wrote:When I was in the Air Force, I was a bomb loader on F-111s (D and F models) for seven years. About 5 years in, I tested for promotion to Staff Sergeant. In the testing process, some of the questions pertained to loading bombs (and or guns, in some cases) on B-52s, B-1s, F-4s, F-16s, F-15s, and A-10s. This also included electronics questions, since we also have to test weapons delivery electronics in the process of loading.

I never did make SSGT, because all I had ever worked on were the 'Varks, and I missed many of the questions regarding other aircraft weapons systems. Never had the training. Had I ever gone on to work on a different aircraft, then I would have gotten the training, and it would have taken another 3-6 months (the same amount of time to be trained on the F-111 - and there were differences between the F model and the D model that I had to learn when I changed bases).

The point is that even though all the aircraft listed above did similar things (drop bombs, shoot rotary cannon, etc.), the maintenance and procedures for actually doing the job on the different "classes" of aircraft were vastly different, even on aircraft from similar time periods (F-111, F-4, B-52). So, just because one has had training on one type of thing, it doesn't always follow that it would be easy to switch to a similar, but different type of the same thing.

I've got an 80's Porsche I bought about 20 years ago as a College graduation present to myself. I do whatever maintenance on it I can, but I know my limits and take it to the experts when necessary. I had to get the timing belt replaced and had the local dealer do the work. I had to wait 5 weeks for the Porsche tech to be available for the work, which required 3 specialized alignment tools.

After I got the car back, the car broke after 5 weeks. The trained tech didn't check and align an idler pully as is required by the repair manual, it improperly tensioned the belt, causing the pully to break, and causing >$4000 in damage to my engine.

A tech might know the basics, but that is just enough to cause issues... big issues.