FAA closes El Paso and New Mexico airspace for 10 days

[deirdre]

KFOX is affiliated with the FOX network.

this convo is a bit off topic but it's kinda important info i often share for our foreign readers:

being a fox network affiliate doesnt necessarily (or maybe ever) mean what you think it means. You cant assume a fox station is right leaning. fox tv runs fluff shows like those chef reality shows and The Simpsons. They basically let these stations air their content, [NOT Fox News stuff ever] but they arent owned or operated by Fox Corp.

ex fox61 in connecticut is owned and operated by Tegna. its basically those fluff shows, your local news, maybe some sports. it's like easy listening tv. at least in Connecticut it is, we get zero political input from our local news (or the corresponding websites) here. It's quite soothing.

some affiliated stations do tap into Fox Corp for national and world news items, but kfox uses Sinclair for news, it is owned and operated by Sinclair. (which you will also hate because they basically do the same things main stream media does but in reverse-according to mainstream media anyway. )

you probably get fox tv (and the corresponding website) on your rabbit ears tv. i cant remember where you are specifically. so you'd have to look up who owns your station.
The POINT being though, dont assume if you see fox it automatically means they are right leaning. fox, unlike Fox News, is air wave tv so regulated by the FCC.

 

[Mendel]

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/sinclair-broadcast-group/

Founded in 1971, the Sinclair Broadcast Group is a publicly-traded American telecommunications company controlled by the family of company founder Julian Sinclair Smith. The company is the largest television station operator in the United States by the number of stations, and largest by total coverage; owning or operating a total of 193 stations across the country in over 100 markets (covering 40% of American households), many of which are located in the South and Midwest.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics (Open Secrets), the Sinclair Broadcast Group has donated $1,143,508 or 80% to Republican candidates since 1994.

Overall, we rate Sinclair Broadcast Group Right Biased based on political affiliation with the Republican Party and the direction of network news programming. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to airing news shows with poor fact-check records.

On the inverted V bias/credibility graph, Sinclair would be halfway down the right arm. 4.6 for factual reporting is a poor score for mainstream media. Compare https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/general-news-sources/ , where most sources are rated "high" or "mostly factual".

It is true that many FOX branded TV stations rate "least biased", see https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/?s=fox

 

[deirdre]

On the inverted V bias/credibility graph, Sinclair would be halfway down the right arm. 4.6 for factual reporting

But even then, your source says kfox is pretty good as far as factual, and not all that bad on bias.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/kfox-el-paso-news-bias/

 

[Eburacum]

Is that true? I would like to see evidence of this, as I am not agreeing with that statement.

What do you doubt? That bullets follow ballistic courses, and lasers follow geodesic courses? For a laser beam, there would be a certain amount of atmospheric lensing, but that would be the same in both directions so should cancel out.

The other possibility is the use of guided missiles, which correct their course en route, and can be very good at bringing down aircraft. I don't think a guided missile would be very good at targeting a nearby drone, but there may already be missile technology capable of seeking and destroying drones in the Ukrainian theatre of war and elsewhere. Anyone know?

 

[Gary C]

What do you doubt? That bullets follow ballistic courses, and lasers follow geodesic courses? For a laser beam, there would be a certain amount of atmospheric lensing, but that would be the same in both directions so should cancel out.

The issue may be the term 'geodesic' which is not widely used in general discourse.

The other possibility is the use of guided missiles, which correct their course en route, and can be very good at bringing down aircraft. I don't think a guided missile would be very good at targeting a nearby drone, but there may already be missile technology capable of seeking and destroying drones in the Ukrainian theatre of war and elsewhere. Anyone know?

The issue here is that 'drone' covers devices weighing 10 kg and travelling at 40kph and those weighing a few hundred kg and travelling over 200kph. Only the later are typically engaged by expensive missiles in Ukraine as they can carry a considerable warhead or thermal imaging systems able to provide precise targeting information back to the drone's operators for use in directing artillery or missile fire. The smallest ones are being dealt with using everything from shotguns to jammers to reusable hunter-killer drones. No one solution has so far proved optimal across the entire span of the drone menagerie.

 

[jarlrmai]

Also as has been discussed drones are asymmetric, for example a Shahed drone which is basically a cheap unmanned light aircraft with a bomb strapped to it is many time less expensive and quicker to produce than the missile system that might engage it.

And while the target you are protecting might be worth it, eventually it ends up costing many times more to defend it than it does to attack it and you eventually run out of missiles.

Shooting them down with planes costs you maintenance and pilot time and engaging slow moving targets with guns puts jet fighters and pilots at risk and using air to air missiles is expensive.