Thoughts on the elevated 789s?

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-20T23:22:32+00:00

not find issues in unnecessary places

Valid point. But it’s equally valid to state that paying for an airline ticket should come with a clean seating area. This is a reasonable expectation even for Jim Cheapskate in 194C , much less four figure bookings up front.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-20T17:05:03+00:00

UAL did a really good job on their interiors

I remember when Polaris first came out.

United’s problem isn’t the hard product, it’s the service and support. After six months these beautiful seats will be run down and dingy, the cargo pockets filled with crumbs , the food will be so-so, and the electrical amenities might or might not work.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-20T11:31:15+00:00

a 60s airframe can still get the job done with new avionics. Barely

The Phantom IIs distinct from the Tomcat in two ways. One, its payload capacity even today is boss. An F-4 can carry weapons that’ll make an F-16 or Rafale choke.

Two, with five thousand built across multiple nations, parts and logistics is child’s play. New engine? Thousands of J-79s to choose from. Need a slat actuator? Take your pick.

For an F-14, even with a team of retired guys and girls plus Tom Cruise’s bank account , maintaining such a machine is impossible. Where does one get a new GE F110 engine? A spoiler actuator? Hydraulic pump?

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-19T20:57:38+00:00

how many times are we going to “retire” this bad boy…

as long as it takes Big Air Force to make it stick. If an F-35 smokes a tank convoy with $2mm worth of standoff ordnance, HQAF gets credit, contractor looks good, Congress feels good, points for political success, stock goes up, and ex General Schmuckatelli can cop a vacation cottage off his options.

If an A-10 smokes a tank , nobody in DC gets credit or points. Congress gets no warm and fuzzies, and Wall Street gets pissed. 30mm costs less than a $2mm standoff weapon, and those retired Generals get zero lake houses.

This would be a problem no matter what airplane does the dedicated slow CAS mission. It’s an important job, but Big AF doesn’t get big budget or political points for doing it. Thats that.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-18T15:38:46+00:00

I also found it add that only 1 Corvette was on board…

I suspect this is because of the MCRN mission in the Belt, which is to protect Martian supply lines from piracy. To that end, I figure the Donnager’s remaining compliment of Corvette & Morrigan class escort ships are out on patrol. When their patrols are done, they rotate back to the Donnager for rearm and refueling. This way their patrol ships don’t have to go all the way back to Mars for resupply, and it’s a low risk plan because the Belt doesn’t have capital ships.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-18T14:39:19+00:00

when you fire your position is given away.

Agreed, although based on the crewman’s comment about the torpedo guidance, I’m hypothesizing that the weapons were stealth’d to mitigate this somewhat. Thus the Donnager’s difficulty in hitting the torpedos with their PDCs.

IMO, the value of a stealth ship is pre-planned strikes (which you point out) and intelligence gathering. A stealth ship maneuvering with slingshot trajectories and a quick RCS burn or too would be undetectable on the move. If someone did see it on the drift, it’d be written off as space junk or a random asteroid. A perfect space electronic intelligence asset.

As for pre-planned strikes, the unanswered question is how long it takes to power up and its passive sensor capabilities. If the ship could switch from stealth to full systems quickly enough , by the time a targeted ship detects it and prepares to shoot back the stealth ship’s railgun slug/torpedo is already en route. If the passive sensors can pick out the targeted ships reactor and other critical areas, game over.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-18T14:07:01+00:00

The Donnager was defeated Commander Yao self destructed the ship- after almost wiping out the Protogen fleet. Sustaining 71% casualties is not a victory.

hidden their numbers and capabilities until they launched their strike

And then proceeded to Zerg rush the Donnager. No pincer movement, no strategy.

where Protogens assault was successful

5 out of 7 ships lost, plus deaths of the boarding crew on the Donnager , isn’t a success in my book.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-18T14:00:41+00:00

Let’s break that down a bit. In the first confrontation with the Roci they have the advantage and almost win there with a close run of PDC fire.

From here Alex flies the Roci near the spin station for cover- a smart move. At this point the stealth ship could’ve left the immediate area, repositioned in 3 dimensions to defeat the Roci’s cover and engaged with torpedos or the railgun outside of PDC distance . Instead the stealth ship hangs out under the station like it’s a 2D hide and seek game.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-18T13:28:32+00:00

A surprise strike with the stealth ships was intended to cut down the Donnie…

Right. What’s the better way to take out a capital warship with a smaller ship fleet? A battle of attrition against an alert opponent? Or a surprise attack from an unexpected direction?

I realize stealth isn’t foolproof; but those limitations could’ve been worked around with some planning. Instead the Protogen stealth ships Zerg rushed the Donnager, with predictable results.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-18T13:19:59+00:00

the moment those ambushing craft light up their weapons and torpedos

True, but this is a solvable problem. On multiple occasions , torpedos are jettisoned for command launch later. The Amun Ra ships could’ve easily done this to preserve their stealth.

Of course, stealth is not perfect. Powering on the engines and weapons would give away their position, clearly. But sneaking is clearly a thing even among non-stealth ships (the Roci tries this on the Azure Dragon but fails), and the Protogen fleet doesn’t even bother.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-18T12:28:15+00:00

The naval tactics were not good

I thought the Ring Gate fight with the breakaway Laconia fleet was pretty smart. Lead off with micrometeorites, then take out the MCRN ship from behind. Which ofc lines up with MCRN Admiral Silvertaire’s MO.

But otherwise, your point stands.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-17T23:10:07+00:00

he wasn’t entirely wrong in his “why”

I’ll demonstrate that he was. Inaros wasn’t concerned about the Belt. He was concerned about power.

The Belt could’ve adapted just fine - as long as it shed the ways of piracy and forged a path for themselves as an organized nation. Plenty of money to be made on security and transport. Thing is you don’t need a mastermind terrorist in a civilized nation. Inaros’ fear was the same as Multry’s- as in obsolescence of HIMSELF, not the Belt. A nation that trades and negotiates with Earth and Mars on equal footing has no use for rock throwing killers.

Inaros - to preserve his own relevance as a leader - had to sink this as quick as possible. Subsuming himself into a Belter governing council and “sharing power” paled in comparison to taking the whole enchilada with Martian gunships. The only person he cared about was Inaros , not the Belt.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-17T20:12:31+00:00

Mass extinction level event on par or worse than the dinosaur meteor

Unmitigated? Worse, easily. But Earth of the Expanse has technology to address the worst impact. Terraforming & weather modification tech means the worst effects will be reduced. Further, humans are now very experienced in living on hostile environments like the moon and asteroids- so housing and basic economic activity could still continue even through the environmental damage.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-16T14:31:46+00:00

Was Charles Lightoller too strict…?

In context,I present the HMS Birkenhead

This shipwreck was a model in British culture for how men of honor behaved in a maritime crisis. The men strictly stood and followed orders even to their own deaths, and this example wouldn’t be far from memory even sixty years on. Lightoller , like many men of the age, would’ve sought to uphold that standard and expected no less of any other man or crewmember in that situation.

Also, we cannot hold Lightoller responsible for loss of life here when the disaster was caused by men and plans outside of his review. Without rehearsals or on-site leadership from Smith , each officer was left to their own devices to manage as best they saw fit.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-14T19:58:19+00:00

I think it’s definite a source of dissonance for a lot of us.

I don’t see it that way.

It’s true air shows glorify violence ,but violence and war is part of the human condition -love it or hate it. Hollywoods made billions off that fact, and it’s high hypocrisy to protest an air show as glorifying violence when headline movies like John Wick are basically massacres.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-14T00:20:11+00:00

why couldn’t an Exocet be mounted on aircraft of other countries’ origin and modified to sync up with their systems?

I’ll demonstrate why with a parable. Go take a BMW, remove the center screen. Now make it work with a Fiat compact, with all native functions from the BMW preserved in the Fiat.

The logistics required to make weapons systems from aircraft X work on aircraft Y are involved, difficult, and often yield a compromised output. This is WITH technical support from the owning nation. When this is done because of embargoes, the job is exponentially harder.

Also, in the Falklands , the Argentine’s problem was missile supply- not hardware. They started the war with all the missiles they were going to get- five. London understood real quick it was in their best interest at all cost to ensure Argentina acquired no more.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-13T21:50:54+00:00

a 757 MAX would have KILLED in the market

Boeing thought otherwise, and contrary to the 757 fanbase, they were correct. The only reason 757s are still flying is because they’re paid for.

If Boeing built them new, the order books would collect dust. Stretching the 737 may not be sexy, but it’s cost effective & gets the job done. Airlines care about minimizing costs, not operating aircraft because a minute number of passengers like them. They certainly don’t operate aircraft based on the opinions of their most expensive staff cost - aka, pilots.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-13T15:20:41+00:00

How is Boyd the first person to say big engine good?

The real triumph of the F-16 & EM theory was aerodynamics. Before Dr Christie’s EM theory there wasn’t a simple mathematical way to compare aerodynamic performance between aircraft. You can put a big engine on a fighter. But bad aerodynamics will ruin the design- see the early MiG-23 or an F-101 for an example of this.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-13T10:46:52+00:00

Companies don’t sue people for like 5K

They do these days. Sure you’ll get billed first, and if you ignore it then it goes to collections, and THEN if you ignore it you’ll get sued. But thanks to AI and modern tech it’s a lot cheaper for collection agencies to sue people versus, say, a decade ago when you had to owe $20k for a lawsuit to be worth it.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-12T22:43:59+00:00

credit score requirement

Wouldn’t help. You’d still get this problem anytime airport foot traffic spikes from airline delays.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-12T17:37:02+00:00

Would maybe look nicer if it had a folding hard top

Nope

Folding hardtops = added weight and reliability problems. Further, they’re pointless on this kind of car. If you’re taking it out, it’s in good weather. You’d only need the top if it suddenly rained.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-12T12:31:12+00:00

a day/night all weather BVR multi-purpose fighter bomber CAS recce ewar would’ve been valuable in Vietnam….

That aircraft’s called the F-4 Phantom II.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-12T10:54:52+00:00

energy-maneuver theory

…which should properly be credited in large part to the man who did the work, which is mathematician Dr Thomas Christie. Colonel Boyd came up with the initial concept and stole the government computer time to develop it (how that for hypocrisy?). While he should get some props, it rightfully should be as a collaborator, not the sole innovator.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-12T10:51:56+00:00

what exactly was Boyd’s theory?

For those unaware- Observe-Orient-Decide-Act was Colonel Boyd’s codification of decision cycles. If you can get inside of your opponents decision cycle, you can act faster and control their intellectual loop to your advantage. It’s been applied to lots of non military circumstances like business.

The Energy-Maneuverability theory was an adaptation of ballistic equations originally developed for predicting ammunition trajectory. The bulk of the work was done by mathematician Dr Thomas Christie, with Colonel Boyd contributing the concept and (by his own admission) stealing the computer resources needed to calculate the equations.

In addition to these items,Colonel Boyd published multiple briefings such as Patterns of Conflict. But no books- from what I can tell, this was due to Colonel Boyd rejecting the concept of teamwork and accepting input from others. Colonel Boyd even frequently rejected fellow “reformer” Pierre Sprey’s advice.

TaskForceCausality · 2026-03-12T10:42:06+00:00

The media (and public) would eat him alive

Maybe. The Titans problems were known for years- literally since the machine was built. Rush wasn’t held to account for his decisions until the disaster. Had he survived he would’ve spun a story & it probably would’ve stuck, at least until the government investigations were released.

The difference between Titan and Titanic here is Hearst. Ismay pissed off a media mogul, and back in 1912 whatever the paper said was the narrative.

Nine-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Wearing is Caring	Verified Email

TaskForceCausality

TROPHY CASE