41chevy

I read a while ago in a book on the Superliner II Bicentenials that there were 2 SBA Superliners built for Mactrans Heavy Hauling. Swishy might know more about it.

I gather the person 2nd from left with the big load in his pants baggy pants is the driver?

Again, How?

Funny I heard all the new trucks are the most dependable, trouble free ever built.

My B61 the switch for the heater fan is the same switch for the defroster fan. Yours different?

And do not forget the records of crimes, arrests and school issues prior to the persons 18th birthday are sealed or expunged after they turn of age. If those records were allowed in the back ground checks and if the state and local agencies send their arrest and complaint records to the national data base and IF 38 states complied with the Federal back ground check data base rather than shrugging it off, the check would flag and stop 99% of the people with "issues" who slide by. Listen to David Hogg the new anti gun, anti NRA poster child who is going to speak at the UN Security Counsel on the issue of private gun ownership verse crime in the U.S. on Wednesday . Today on the news he was describing how putting a in his words " a giant clip in a rifle turns it into a fully automatic. He praised the 4 officers who stayed outside as being brave and smart for not going after a boy with a "machine gun" because they only had tiny pistols. For a person whose father whom he says fought in both Gulf Wars and retired from the FBI he appears to have a jaded view.

How?

BMT Yardo Spy cam after the video.

AT AGE 4 SUCCESS IS NOT PEEING IN YOUR PANTS. AT AGE 10 SUCCESS IS HAVING FRIENDS. AT AGE 16 SUCCESS IS HAVING SEX. AT AGE 18 SUCCESS IS HAVING A DRIVERS LICENSE. AT AGE 20 SUCCESS IS HAVING SEX. AT AGE 30 SUCCESS IS HAVING MONEY. AT AGE 40 SUCCESS IS HAVING SEX. AT AGE 50 SUCCESS IS HAVING MONEY. AT AGE 60 SUCCESS IS HAVING SEX. AT AGE 70 SUCCESS IS HAVING A DRIVERS LICENSE. AT AGE 75 SUCCESS IS STILL HAVING LIVING FRIENDS. AT AGE 80 SUCCESS IS NOT PEEING IN YOUR PANTS. AT AGE 90 SUCCESS IS WAKING UP.

The NRA in the U.S. is the National Rifle Association founded in 1871. BBC noted this morning the the American NRA is despised by all people in every continent in the world. That bit of news was than aired on most major news outlets in the States. You may have an opinion being from Nigeria.

What do you and your country men think of the NRA organization?

Came originally with an EN707C gas Ad says diesel air start.

And what ever else the financial institutions feel you do not need to own. See we do not need the Congress, Senate or even diplomats, all we need is a few angry, self rightous Bankers. . . Good read from the New York Times How Banks Can Control Gun Sales if Washington Won’t. For the past year, chief executives have often talked about the new sense of moral responsibility that corporations have to help their communities and confront social challenges even when Washington won’t. In the aftermath of the school shooting in Parkland, Fla., that killed 17 students and staff members — and at a time when Washington shows little interest in limiting the sales of assault weapons — there’s a real opportunity for the business community to fill the void and prove that all that talk about moral responsibility isn’t hollow. Here’s an idea. What if the finance industry — credit card companies like Visa, Mastercard and American Express; credit card processors like First Data; and banks like JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo — were to effectively set new rules for the sales of guns in America? Collectively, they have more leverage over the gun industry and the NRA than any lawmaker. It wouldn’t be hard for them to take a stand, with out the issues of legislation and opposition hindering it. PayPal, Square, Stripe and Apple Pay announced years ago that they would not allow their services to be used for the sale of firearms. “We do not believe permitting the sale of firearms on our platform is consistent with our values or in the best interests of our customers,” a spokesman for Square told me. The big financial firms don’t even have to go that far. For example, Visa, which published a 71-page paper in 2016 espousing its “corporate responsibility,” could easily change its terms of service to say that it won’t do business with retailers that sell assault weapons, high-capacity magazines and bump stocks, which make semiautomatic rifles fire faster. (Even the National Rifle Association has said it would support tighter restrictions on bump stocks.) If Mastercard were to do the same, assault weapons would be eliminated from virtually every firearms store in America because otherwise the sellers would be cut off from the credit card system. There is precedent for credit card issuers to ban the purchase of completely legal products. Just this month, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup and Bank of America banned the use of their cards to buy Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. To be clear: Those three banks won’t let you use your credit card to buy Bitcoin, but they will happily let you use it to buy an AR-15-style semiautomatic rifle — the same kind of gun used in mass shootings in Parkland; Newtown, Conn.; San Bernardino, Calif.; Las Vegas; and Sutherland Springs, Tex. Visa, oddly enough, is the card of choice of the N.R.A.: There is actually an N.R.A.-branded Visa card issued by First Bankcard, a division of First National Bank of Omaha. And Mastercard proudly announced last year that it was the branded card for Cabela’s, an outdoor gear megastore with a seemingly limitless assault-weapon catalog. Visa spokesmen did not reply to several emails seeking comment. A spokesman for Mastercard sent a boilerplate statement that expressed “disgust with recent events, including last week in Florida.” “Our payments network is governed by standards that have been established over time,” the statement said. “Chief among these is that we do not and will not permit merchants to engage in unlawful activity on our network.” He said the company would continue to talk to customers and lawmakers about its policies. If Visa and Mastercard are unwilling to act on this issue, the credit card processors and banks that issue credit cards could try. Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase, which issues credit cards and owns a payment processor, has talked about how he and his bank have “a moral obligation but also a deeply vested interest” in helping “solve pressing societal challenges.” This is your chance, Mr. Dimon. And here’s a variation on the same theme: What if the payment processing industry’s biggest customers — companies like McDonald’s, Starbucks, Apple, Amazon, AT&T, CVS and others that regularly talk about “social responsibility” — collectively pressured the industry to do it? There’s a chance that some of the payment processors would stop handling gun sales. Perhaps their voices would help push one of the banks to step out and lead? Is all of this a pipe dream? Maybe, but I spent the last 72 hours calling and emailing a handful of chief executives to discuss these ideas. None wanted to speak on the record, because it’s a hot-button topic. But all applauded the idea and some said they had already been thinking about it. A few, I discovered later, called their peers to begin a conversation. At least two executives said a reason that they haven’t been more outspoken yet is that they fear reprisals from the N.R.A. and other gun supporters — in the form of actions that could imperil the safety of their employees. Obviously there would be opposition. When Peter Thiel, the co-founder of PayPal, was asked at a conference about his former company’s decision to not do business with firearms merchants, he made his displeasure clear. “No, I wouldn’t be doing that if I was still running it,” said Mr. Thiel, who left the company years ago and is a supporter of President Trump. Perhaps the biggest stumbling block to an approach like this are companies like Walmart, which has huge sway over the financial industry. While Walmart stopped selling assault rifles in 2015, it might look askance at any policy by a bank issuer or credit card company to limit the kinds of products it sells. Critics of using the finance industry to influence gun sales might argue that such a move would be discriminatory against gun retailers. But gun sellers are not a protected class, like age, race, gender, religion or even political affiliation. This would be a strictly commercial decision. Another critique is that it is impossible to prevent every shooting, no matter how guns are restricted. The banks’ actions may have a slight negative affect on millions of their own customers, effectively dictating what they can and cannot buy. Overall though it is for our societies benefit. One aspect of having the finance industry try to restrict gun sales is that it may push the most dangerous guns into an untraceable world where sales would depend on cash. That’s true. All things considered, though, it would make it considerably harder to even find such guns. There are other sectors of the finance industry that could step up. For example, Lloyd’s of London is the favored insurance company for gun shows. It could pull out. None of this is a panacea. But it’s a start. It takes leadership and courage — exactly what these executives say they have. If they don’t want to back up their words with actions, the next time there’s a school shooting that prompts a conversation about gun companies, it should also include the financial complex that supports them.

Now that your good at it I've got 3 Acars for you to do..

Two of grandma's harvest trucks had them. Grandma being cheap frugal filled them with cracked corn. Somebody asked what they were for, so I took off the cap and grabbed a hand full of corn . I explained that the heat of the tires popped the corn and made a good snack for the pickers. I got Wow grat idea.

Turret front armor hit with a 16" 2700-lb Mark 8 Mod 6 AP with inert filler at the plate from a distance of 1500 yards, almost point blank. The flaking means it was contaminated, low nickel content and had too slow cooling to be strong armor. The normal angle of the turret face armor was 45 degrees off vertical. That increased the armor thickness by about 8+ inches. The ranges in a sea battle would have started at 30,000 yards and closed to 8 to 10,000. It would have been a matter of repeated hits. But the plus on the U.S. ship armor was it was face hardened and would at combat distances deflect the hit. IJN= bigger guns, inferior armor, USN smaller guns and less projectile weight (by almost 1000 pounds) Higher muzzle velocity and better armor.

18" same range roughly as our, but the IJN ships were 8 knots slower . Targeting was radar and visual like ours. Probably would have come down to rate of fire and the initial salvo's accuracy.

https://www.pressreader.com/australia/big-rigs/20160506/281487865548617

I often wondered how the Jersey, Iowa or Missuri would has faired in a one on one against the Musahsi, or Yamato

This was one of the first ones, no 105 and analog fire computers. we had AC130's, AC47's and AC119 Boxcars. On a pylon turn the 47 could put 3 round in each square foot of ground. The newest AC130's I'm told are 5 times more deadly than ours in 1971.

Many South American Countries went back to steamers. We helped "up date" the rail lines in the Andes to diesels in the late 1980's. They found the diesels had minimal power at the altitudes from thin air up high.. Went back to the steamers for those runs. Higher the altitude, easier to make steam. Paul

My mixer has an after market 4 way flasher switch in that spot.

Seen one of the first AC130 gun ship on a night run in Vietnam do a pylon turn locked on with the Xeon light all 4 miniguns and 4 Vulcans all firing at once. There was nothing left of the ground personnel but rags. It's now on display at Elgin Air Force base in Florida.

The USS Oklahoma BB-37 main gun is on display at the Bethlehem Steel Plant