Alternate Runway Exercise at LCK RD
-
RSAF pilots said in ST:
AB runway looks like a big Marker from the air.LCK Rd just like a small pencil.
LCK Rd is barely big enough for E2C.
-
Originally posted by lookahead:
Ok you win, I have too little depth for Shakesphere! :-D
Enough said about forum behaviour and stuff. Let's get back to military stuff. :-)
eh ? we should continue. its nice to have a rationale and reasonable discussion on this forum
yes. back to mil stuff. Oh btw, were the aircraft on full combat load ? were you with the milnut guys from the other forum ?
-
as much as i disagree with lionnoisy.
this is the first time in official press release that mindef has confirmed the existence of the pulau semedong Airstrip.
FYI lionnoisy. Did you know that under the copyright law 1987 that taking content without permission from the content owner is piracy ? you can be charged in a court of Law in the republic of singapore. read the terms and conditions of usage on Today's webpage.
i distinctly recall a clause which denies permission regarding the redistribution and republishing the contents of the article without prior consent.
you had better acknowledge the source of the E2C picture. taking a screenshot and posting it here without acknowledgement is piracy. Mediacorp might send u a lawyer's letter
-
wow another kacking.
All MODS,
pl take away the hackers.
This posting were just kackered.
"@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
is it a safe forum or thread.
-
Flag : blatant disregard for country bashing, in offence of directive by mod.
Lionnoisy, i spent a good 6 months in Australia on exchange. its a good place to live in. no wonder they rejected your PR application.
its called freedom.Freedom has a price and has its drawbacks.
its better than having a nanny state that panders to its population and treats its populace as if they were no more than 5 year old kids.
what about the chinese peidu mama and her kid which were murdered by their landlord ? what about the pure blatant discrimination against indian workers by the serangoon gardens crowd ? what about the robber at UOB capital plaza ? what about the maybank armed robbery which they never caught 2 years ago ? what about DBS high notes 5 and 3 ?what about the DBS taking responsibility for investors who were mislead ? must it take a wanna-be politician with vested interest to armtwist MAS and the government into forcing DBS to reimburse the population ? why temasek-linked banking giants cannot follow the lead of Hong Kong Monetary authority directive to banks and reimbursed affected consumers who buy the lehman-brother linked products ?
why posting about australia here ? cant answer the SOCOM questions i raised right ? dare to reply here dare not reply elesewhere ?
whats a queene ?
dont showcase your bigotry here lionnoisy. i wont let it go away that easily.
screw you and your bigotry lionnoisy. dont talk trash here. if you want to talk trash ild take it up with you point by point.
-
Hello Lion, did u know that there is alot of preparations to make LCK Rd (or other similar roads) a runway? Hence, strictly speaking, nobody (especially CIA or Jane's) would not consider these roads as runways.
-
Originally posted by sgstars:
as much as i disagree with lionnoisy.
this is the first time in official press release that mindef has confirmed the existence of the pulau semedong Airstrip.
FYI lionnoisy. Did you know that under the copyright law 1987 that taking content without permission from the content owner is piracy ? you can be charged in a court of Law in the republic of singapore. read the terms and conditions of usage on Today's webpage.
i distinctly recall a clause which denies permission regarding the redistribution and republishing the contents of the article without prior consent.
you had better acknowledge the source of the E2C picture. taking a screenshot and posting it here without acknowledgement is piracy. Mediacorp might send u a lawyer's letter
can u read the photo carefully again at the top right hand corner?
Are u wearing the correct spec today?
I PUT LINK AND SOURCE IN MY EVERY QUOTE.
Many here scold me just dunt do this themselves.
pl tell me if i forget to put link.
Putting the link is a community services that u guy
can explore more from the sources.
there are too many just surf this forum and dunt contribute...
-
Ok, so I should contribute I guess.
+1
-
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
can u read the photo carefully again at the top right hand corner?
Are u wearing the correct spec today?
I PUT LINK AND SOURCE IN MY EVERY QUOTE.
Many here scold me just dunt do this themselves.
pl tell me if i forget to put link.
Putting the link is a community services that u guy
can explore more from the sources.
there are too many just surf this forum and dunt contribute...
sadly moron. you dont get it do you ?
1) the picture is found in your photobucket album. it implies ownership. which is in fact, THEFT of MEDIACORP intellectual property rights
2) the picture is from mediacorp today and was released in PDF file format. it clearly shows Mediacorp is the content owner here.
3) the link is part of the picture and not acknowledgement of content rights. the picture itself is located on your photobucket album. which implies you own the image. not mediacorp.
in effect, the link on the picture is inconsequential. you dont own the image and here you are distributing the image around. that is copyright infringment you idiot.
4) mediacorp T&C of use specify that you may not alter or change the PDF format in which online today is distributed. i.e Create deriavative works.
i give you 30mins to take it down before i email Mediacorp today. you've had your warning, you blatantly abuse things and ignore copyright laws.
-
let me put for the moronic lionnoisy to understand
http://www.todayonline.com/tc.htm
All content (including without limitation all text, photographs, graphics, video and audio content) located on the Site is copyrighted and protected by international copyright and trademark laws. You may download materials displayed on the Site for your own personal and non-commercial use only but you must retain all copyright and proprietary notices on downloaded and/or copied material. Save as specifically permitted hereunder, and except for any materials that you have posted on the Site, you may not copy, reproduce, distribute, publish, enter into a database, display, perform, modify, create derivative works, transmit, or in any way exploit any part of this Site, except that you may download material from the Site for your own personal use as follows: you may make one machine readable copy and/or one print copy that is limited to occasional articles of personal interest only and provided that all copyright and proprietary notices on such material shall be retained in whole. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, you may not distribute any part of this Site over any network, including a local area network, nor sell or offer it for sale. In addition, these files may not be used to construct any kind of database. The Site has been specially designed for presentation of content in a unique format and appearance to MPR’s users. MPR is concerned about the integrity of the Site when it is viewed in a setting created by a third party that includes advertising or other materials that MPR has not authorized to be displayed with the Site. Without limiting the foregoing provisions, neither you nor any third party shall make use of the contents of the Site in any manner that constitutes an infringement of MPR’s rights, including copyright.
basically lionnoisy has just broken just about everything mentioned in bold. and by posting on his photobucket. it can be legally construed that he is illegally entering it into a databse.
if by 12 noon, lionnoisy still dosent seem to want to obey the laws as stipulated in the copyright act 1987 in the Republic of singapore. i will contact the relevant authorities and content owners (i.e Mediacorp)
it is hereby my civic duty to uphold the law and i intend to do that.
-
Originally posted by gd4u:
Hello Lion, did u know that there is alot of preparations to make LCK Rd (or other similar roads) a runway? Hence, strictly speaking, nobody (especially CIA or Jane's) would not consider these roads as runways.
Jane's and CIA said it is runways!!My Dear!!
1.What are the preparations get to do with the status of being a runway,though
it is emergency one?I dunt get your point.Few hundred people to convert LCK Rd from road to a runway ,in 48 hours,worth every single cent!!
Even they take one week to convert is still a runway!!
2.Do u mean RSAF is bull sxxx again by declaring this is a Runway Exercise?
3.How do u define runway,on- base or off--the--base?
u said "nobody (especially CIA or Jane's) would not consider these roads as runways."
Both said it is runways!!My Dear!!
A.What did Jane's say
I have posted Jane's map in this thread and i repeat here.
This time i added Jane's description these are Emergency Runways
in photo.
B.CIA said---i already quoted in page 1 of this thread.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/sn.html
says:
Airports:
8 (2007)Airports - with paved runways:
total: 8
over 3,047 m: 2
2,438 to 3,047 m: 1
1,524 to 2,437 m: 4
914 to 1,523 m: 1 (2007)Any thing can catch mouse is cat
Are u here to down play the usefulness or importance of the
off--base--runways?Or u want tell us SG is defenseless?
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
There are too many people think that they know SG and Australia very well!!
If u dunt open your mind and listen,u will not know SG pretty well,
even u have been staying here for long long time.
Opening your eyes are not enough.
@@@@@@@@
The message here is very simple:People on the top treat defense damn
serious.No delay in defence projects!!
The frequent delays in Oz mega defense projects are just
incredible,if not unforgivable in SG!!
Jane's
-
Lionnoisy ! copy right infringement ? hello ???
-
Originally posted by sgstars:
as much as i disagree with lionnoisy.
this is the first time in official press release that mindef has confirmed the existence of the pulau semedong Airstrip.
FYI lionnoisy. Did you know that under the copyright law 1987 that taking content without permission from the content owner is piracy ? you can be charged in a court of Law in the republic of singapore. read the terms and conditions of usage on Today's webpage.
i distinctly recall a clause which denies permission regarding the redistribution and republishing the contents of the article without prior consent.
you had better acknowledge the source of the E2C picture. taking a screenshot and posting it here without acknowledgement is piracy. Mediacorp might send u a lawyer's letter
u overlook my acknowledge and now u get angry?
Thats why people saying quality........
I am famous for two things--
bad English
and all quotes ,info come with links and sources,from main stream
medias or official sources.
Dunt make a joke here.Thousand of SG site repeat the info of SPH and
Media Corp in their web sites.
I store the image in photobucket just to make sure it remain in this
forum .
Oh baby.Dunt cry.This is my fault that the link is so small.
Next time ,i will put bigger!Ha ha.
-
i didnt overlook your acknowledgement.
i noticed it there, thats why i know its from today online. in any case, today has a unique style of having grey dropboxes for their caption texts.
it is still theft of intellectual property right. and in direct contravention of Mediacorp T&C. i will send that email by12 noon.
you break the laws, dont expect me to encourage you. People kind enough to warn you and you take it for granted.
have a nice chat with mediacorp's lawyers. i m sure they will have something to say to you.
-
-
ok i its past noontime. i emailed it out.
-
enjoy lionnoisy. dont blame me when we all see your true face out on Mediacorp today's front page.
putting the source dosent count for acknowledgement when you host the image on your site. it counts for illegal usage/contravention of IPR. nor does it pass off as seeking prior permission or consent. neither does it allow you to download , crop and save pictures, nor does it allow you to post on forums redistributing the content.
this will be your ultimate self-pwn lionnoisy.
-
The fighters carried external fuel tanks, Sidewinders and ACMI pods. The F-16D+ carried its usual targeting pods. So to your question, it's not full combat load. I always wonder why they carry external tanks for very short flights in public displays like this exercise and the Air Force Open House. Probably to give the public the impression of carrying bombs.
-
of more interest to me is the viper having it's conformal fuel tanks attached ...
-
Originally posted by Fatum:
of more interest to me is the viper having it's conformal fuel tanks attached ...
?
the F16 block 52 D++ have had conformal fuel tanks attached for quite a while i think.
@lookahead :
ah, i see, hmm. maybe they wanted to simultate the combat weight / affecting thrust/ landing/take off distances without revealing combat loadout ?
-
Originally posted by sgstars:
?
the F16 block 52 D++ have had conformal fuel tanks attached for quite a while i think.
@lookahead :
ah, i see, hmm. maybe they wanted to simultate the combat weight / affecting thrust/ landing/take off distances without revealing combat loadout ?
as a matter of routine ? ...
I'm not sure about that ... I don't see the viper Ds with the conformal tanks on all the time ....
-
Originally posted by Fatum:
as a matter of routine ? ...
I'm not sure about that ... I don't see the viper Ds with the conformal tanks on all the time ....
IIRC, the conformal tanks are fixed on block 52 D++ and the extended spine as well.
i m not too sure, you mean that the confromal tanks on the F16 52 D++ is a modular thing ? can fit in and out depending on mission profile ?
i thought it was one of the defining characterisitics of our 52 ++
The F16Cs are the single seater ones that are clean and without CFTs. 52 D++ are all 2 seaters with a pilot and wso C3 at the back.
-
Originally posted by sgstars:
IIRC, the conformal tanks are fixed on block 52 D++ and the extended spine as well.
i m not too sure, you mean that the confromal tanks on the F16 52 D++ is a modular thing ? can fit in and out depending on mission profile ?
i thought it was one of the defining characterisitics of our 52 ++
The F16Cs are the single seater ones that are clean and without CFTs. 52 D++ are all 2 seaters with a pilot and wso C3 at the back.
it's a modular thing, that can be fixed on or taken off according to mission profile ...
it's not quite like the FAST pack on strike eagles ...
and we had two crop of Ds one from the nineties, viper 52Ds, all with the spine, but only one regularly flies with the conformal tanks I hear... , which is the latest viper Ds 52++ .... and our vipers at the lukes detachments for example, are never seen with the CFTs ...
anyone caught the tail markings?
don't have to look far to find examples of our Ds without the conformal tanks
this one's at pitch black 2006, no CFTs
and this one's at pitch black this year
it's interesting to note that you don't see DASH attachments on all of our vipers ... and even aircraft with the tell tale gadget and trailing wire on the canopy overhead doesn't get flown with the helmet all the time.
okie, I guess I should practise what I preach, no unit numbers and info, even though it's open domain ...
-
Alright thats enough. The topic is about the exercise. Enough of the lionnoisy copyright stuff. I rather you ignore him rather than to confront him. If any shit happens, its his dai ji.
-
Well done Lionnoisy on publicising the access details to the exercise.
Just because the press release says it is a restricted area, doesn't mean there isn't any look out point.
There are few public access areas where you can view the airbase runways.