Exceptional Engineering – Offroad Caravan Monsters


Published on Mar 18, 2019

SUBSCRIBE 266K
These handmade beasts will undoubtedly make every camper’s heart beat faster: Individually designed and extravagantly furnished long-distance mobile homes are the latest craze on the caravan market – at least for those hobby campers who can afford the unusual models. The off-road companions and rolling luxury suites are priced no upper limits. Who are the owners of the most expensive mobile homes in Germany, and what about the hoods of their rolling homes?

 

Exceptional Engineering – Mega Diesel Engines


Free Documentary

Published on Mar 4, 2019
MTU (Engine and Turbine Union Friedrichshafen) is a brand of Rolls-Royce Power Systems. Their propulsion systems and large diesel engines, for example, neatly heat ships, heavy and military vehicles or railways. Not infrequently bring such drives namely achievements of up to 12,000 hp. The mega-diesels are manufactured in the idyllic Friedrichshafen on Lake Constance, but the engines “Made in Germany” have long been used worldwide.

The World’s Best Automatic Transmission – How Autos Became Cool Again


Engineering Explained

Published on May 1, 2019
How The Best Automatic Transmission Works. ZF’s 8-Speed Auto can give modern dual clutch transmissions a run for their money. It’s light, compact, quick-shifting, and shifts are incredibly smooth. The automatic transmission was a game changer. No longer were three pedals required, drivers could relax as they had one less thing to worry about on the road. But the automatic transmission had many flaws. It was inefficient, shifts were slow and often rough, and automatics were big and heavy. ZF introduced the world’s first production 6-speed auto in the 2002 BMW 7-series, but just a year later VW introduced the first production DCT in the European market Golf R32. The dual clutch was faster to shift, efficient, and gave drivers a direct feel. Was this the end for modern automatics? Not quite. ZF introduced their 8HP, an 8 speed automatic that swept the industry as a result of it’s shift quality, shift speed, efficiency, size, and cost. We’ll learn all about it in the video.

 

Opposed Piston Diesel Engines Are Crazy Efficient


Engineering Explained

Published on Jul 22, 2018
Two-Stroke Opposed-Piston Diesel Engine By Achates Power EE Shirts! – http://bit.ly/2BHsiuo Recommended Books & Car Products – http://amzn.to/2BrekJm Subscribe for new videos every Wednesday! – https://goo.gl/VZstk7 The Achates Power opposed-piston engine is packed full of unique technology. The supercharged, turbocharged, diesel 3 cylinder makes use of six pistons, two of which operate in each cylinder. It’s a two-stroke design, meaning every time the pistons come together a power stroke occurs, forcing both pistons away from one another and rotating their respective crankshafts. The two crankshafts are geared together to a common output shaft, which powers the vehicle. Research has shown two-stroke opposed piston engines to be wildly efficient. 3 cylinder designs are the most efficient, and it’s possible to achieve brake thermal efficiencies as high as 55%, a massive improvement for road car engines. The engine in this video is a 2.7L 3-cylinder producing 270 HP and 480 lb-ft of torque.

 

Happy Father’s Day


 

Fatherhood is the job that pays the least in monetary terms and the most in benefit to the world, along with motherhood. When a man chooses to become a father, biologically or with his heart, he makes a commitment that is lifelong and its impact is to be felt longer than his own life, into the future of his children, grandchildren, and yes, even great grandchildren.

Through his steadfast presence, his wisdom (most of it on the job, but maybe lots of it gained from his own father), his protection, his teaching, his prayers, sacrifice, love, discipline, encouragement and pride he tempers and builds the character and lives of his children.

Today, in gratitude and love, we pause to thank God for His precious gift of fathers, modeled in His own image. For all of you, we give thanks, we pray, we love you. And please, keep up the good work dads, in your job that has no off days, but great benefits.

Deep State Target Interview – Part II


 

Wall Street Wrong Again – Import Prices Decline During Full Year of Import Tariffs…


The latest set of statistics from the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) shows all of the professional pundit claims of higher prices on imported goods due to Trump tariffs are simply disconnected from reality.  In actuality the year-over-year prices of import products are actually dropping:

U.S. Import prices fell 0.3 percent in May, the first monthly decline since a 1.4-percent drop in December. Import prices advanced 1.8 percent from December to April before the downturn in May. The price index for overall imports decreased 1.5 percent over the past 12 months, matching the drop in January. These were the largest over-the-year declines since the index fell 2.2 percent in August 2016. (See table 1.)

The U.S steel and aluminum tariffs have been in effect globally since 2017. Tariffs on softwood lumber (Canada) & durable appliances (S. Korea), same duration.  Additionally the first set of tariffs on China is now well over a year old; and the second set of expanded tariffs on China began a month ago; again, no material impact to the delivered price.

Despite two years of claims by the professional media that tariffs would lead to higher prices for U.S. consumers, as you can see above the reality is quite different.

In part this is driven by lower fuel and energy costs.  Additionally, China is attempting to subsidize its affected industry; and several nations, including China, are attempting to retain export status by adopting monetary policies that devalue their currency.  All of these efforts at countering the U.S. tariffs are having a deflationary impact.

[…] Imports by Locality of Origin: The price index for imports from China edged down 0.1 percent in May following a 0.2-percent drop the previous month. Import prices from China have not recorded a monthly advance since the index rose 0.1 percent in May 2018. Prices for imports from China declined 1.4 percent over the past year, the largest 12-month drop since a 1.6-percent decrease in February 2017.

Import prices from Japan recorded no change in May, after a 0.1-percent decline in April. Prices for imports from Japan also recorded no change from May 2018 to May 2019.

The price index for imports from Canada declined 1.0 percent in May, driven by lower fuel prices. (Link)

President Trump Outwits Chairman Xi Jinping Ahead of G20 Summit…


President Trump has taken the leverage of economics to levels of geopolitical strategy never seen before.  Nowhere is the genius strategy more clear than in the way Trump has positioned the trade reset and confrontation with China.

In hindsight every move since early 2017 including:  (1) the warm welcome of Chairman Xi Jinping to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate; (2) the vociferous praise poured upon Xi; (3) the November 2017 tour of Asia; (4) the direct engagement with North Korean Chairman Kim Jong Un; the strategic relationship with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe; and a host of smaller nuanced moves have been quietly building toward a conclusion.

The upcoming G-20 summit is the last chance for Trump and Xi to reconcile considerable differences and President Trump has the strongest strategic position any Chinese official has ever faced.

After Beijing walked away from previous agreements between USTR Robert Lighthizer and Vice-Premier Liu He, Trump initiated a series of punishing economic consequences that had to have been well planned in advance.

The economy in China is reeling from the pressure applied; and stunningly it has only been a month since the consequence phase began.

In addition to tariff increases, the U.S. blacklisted Huawei Technologies Co., threatened other major Chinese tech companies and essentially cut-off China from the international supply chain it needs to sustain itself.  Beijing responded by drawing up a list of “unreliable entities” and making threats against any enterprise that would walk away from business engagement with China.  The totalitarian response has worsened the situation, and more companies have announced their intent to decouple from Beijing.

An important aspect, missed by most observers, is the ideology and outlook within any Chinese engagement. Quite simply, if it does not benefit China it is not done.  Therefore any negotiation with China is challenging because Beijing will cede no ground they view as already won.

China does not believe in ‘concession from current position‘ within any terms.  Ultimately this is the reason why the negotiated agreement by Lighthizer and Vice-Premier He was dismissed by Beijing and talks collapsed. China will not cede an already attained position.

China never negotiates terms where they give ground.  Almost all negotiation with China has historically surrounded time.  To appease the West the longer-thinking approach of China has been to negotiate winning more slowly, but they will never retreat on previously won gains.

However, in advance of the G20 Summit in Japan President Trump has positioned Chairman Xi in a lose/lose dynamic.  This forces the outlook of Beijing into a state of internal anxiety.  Only President Donald Trump could have achieved this position, is really is remarkable and is noted within this Bloomberg article:

(Bloomberg) By now, Xi Jinping is used to Donald Trump’s tariff threats. But the U.S. president’s latest ultimatum is personal, and the Chinese leader’s response could have far-reaching consequences for his political future.

Trump on Monday said he could impose tariffs “much higher than 25%” on $300 billion in Chinese goods if Xi doesn’t meet him at the upcoming Group of 20 summit in Japan. China’s foreign ministry — which usually refuses to provide details of meetings until the very last minute — declined Tuesday to say whether the meeting would take place.

The brinkmanship puts Xi — China’s strongest leader in decades — in perhaps the toughest spot of his six-year presidency. If Xi caves to Trump’s threats, he risks looking weak at home. If he declines the meeting, he must accept the economic costs that come with Trump possibly extending the trade conflict through the 2020 presidential elections.

“Whether they meet or not, none of the possible scenarios are good for President Xi or the economy in the long run,” said Zhang Jian, an associate professor at Peking University. “You don’t have a good choice which can meet the needs of the Chinese economy or Mr. Xi’s political calculations.”  (read more)

Read that again carefully….

“If Xi caves to Trump’s threats, he risks looking weak at home. If he declines the meeting, he must accept the economic costs that come with Trump possibly extending the trade conflict through the 2020 presidential elections.”

That is what you call a Lose/Lose scenario.

China NEVER faces lose/lose situations.  The Chinese culture doesn’t even have a frame of reference for a position that includes ‘less losing’ amid better options.

For President Trump to have navigated Chairman Xi into such a position is the pinnacle of strategic success. In the long history of western engagement with Beijing it has never happened, ever.

President Trump is now playing with Chairman Xi like a mouse in a maze.

Trump wants to go to the full confrontation position. Donald J Trump has been talking about this for thirty years.  Additionally, for the past two years he has strategically laid the groundwork and aligned the allies needed for this final confrontation.  President Trump is looking for an excuse to apply the scale of tariffs on China that will crush their U.S. export business – and – force them into massive state subsidies to retain their manufacturing model. This approach creates pressure to retract from preexisting global financial obligations.

President Trump has threatened more tariffs and more consequential action as it relates to non-tariff barriers, IP protection, forced technology transfers etc. as a result of China  reneging on their prior agreement.  In essence, President Trump has put Chairman Xi under threat.  Beijing’s traditional and cultural position would be no-meeting and no negotiation while under threats.

However, as a baseline disposition President Trump doesn’t want Xi Jinping to meet with him.  The appearance of a ‘slight’ is the opening Trump can exploit to apply the 25% tariffs to the remaining $350 billion of imported Chinese goods. This will crush his adversary.

So what does President Trump do… while the tariff threat and trade punishment looms (and he keeps reminding everyone of it), he levels massive amounts of praise upon Chairman Xi making the pressure almost unbearable.

Laughably, U.S. President Trump is wearing the panda mask, and simultaneously applying the dragon approach.  Yes, Trump is using China’s own duplicitous strategy against them.

Chairman Xi cannot meet with President Trump or his appearance implies a willingness to negotiate terms; and that reverses the dismissive position previously outlined by Beijing when they rebuked the earlier agreement. A meeting now would appear as weak.

However, if Xi refuses the G20 meeting he will be walking into a trap and allowing President Trump to take all adversarial action that could indeed collapse Xi’s economy.

Worse still, Beijing cannot fall-back-on their historic approach and begin shooting missiles from their proxy province of North Korea to attain leverage and negotiating position… because President Trump has already blunted that ability by meeting with Chairman Kim Jong Un.

Oh, the G20 is going to be epic.

…and LOL, the G20 is on Trump’s home ASEAN turf, Japan, with Trump’s good friend and golf partner Prime Minister Abe.

Reminder: John Durham Questioning CIA Officials About Intelligence Community Assessment…


Against the backdrop of the DOJ admitting FBI investigators never had access to the DNC servers to verify a Russian hack; and with new information about the FBI receiving partial and redacted analysis from Crowdstrike; the review by U.S. Attorney John Durham toward the downstream assessment/claims of the CIA takes on new meaning.

CTH has previously outlined how the December 29th, 2016, Joint Analysis Report (JAR) on Russia Cyber Activity was a quickly compiled bunch of nonsense about Russian hacking.

The JAR was followed a week later by the January 7th, 2017, Intelligence Community Assessment.   The ICA took the ridiculous construct of the JAR and then overlaid a political narrative that Russia was trying to help Donald Trump.

The ICA was the brain-trust of John Brennan, James Clapper and James Comey. NSA Director Mike Rogers would not sign up to the “high confidence” claims, likely because he saw through the political motives of the report.

(New York Times) […] Mr. Barr wants to know more about the C.I.A. sources who helped inform its understanding of the details of the Russian interference campaign, an official has said. He also wants to better understand the intelligence that flowed from the C.I.A. to the F.B.I. in the summer of 2016.

During the final weeks of the Obama administration, the intelligence community released a declassified assessment that concluded that Mr. Putin ordered an influence campaign that “aspired to help” Mr. Trump’s electoral chances by damaging Mrs. Clinton’s. The C.I.A. and the F.B.I. reported they had high confidence in the conclusion. The National Security Agency, which conducts electronic surveillance, had a moderate degree of confidence. (read more)

Questioning the construct of the ICA is a smart direction to take for a review or investigation. By looking at the intelligence community work-product, it’s likely Durham will cut through a lot of the chatter and get to the heart of the intelligence motives.

Apparently John Durham is looking into just this aspect:  Was the ICA document a politically engineered report stemming from within a corrupt intelligence network?

The importance of that question is rather large.  All of the downstream claims about Russian activity, including the Russian indictments promoted by Rosenstein and the Mueller team, are centered around origination claims of illicit Russian activity outlined in the ICA.

If the ICA is a false political document…. then guess what?

Yep, the entire narrative from the JAR and ICA is part of a big fraud. [Which it is]

Information available as of 29 December 2016 was used in the preparation of this product.

Scope: This report includes an analytic assessment drafted and coordinated among The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and The National Security Agency (NSA), which draws on intelligence information collected and disseminated by those three agencies. It covers the motivation and scope of Moscow’s intentions regarding US elections and Moscow’s use of cyber tools and media campaigns to influence US public opinion. The assessment focuses on activities aimed at the 2016 US presidential election and draws on our understanding of previous Russian influence operations. When we use the term “we” it refers to an assessment by all three agencies.

Advertisements

DOJ Admits FBI Never Saw Crowdstrike Report on DNC Russian Hacking Claim…


The foundation for the Russian election interference narrative is built on the claim of Russians hacking the servers of the Democrat National Committee (DNC), and subsequently releasing damaging emails that showed the DNC worked to help Hillary Clinton and eliminate Bernie Sanders.

Despite the Russian ‘hacking’ claim the DOJ previously admitted the DNC would not let FBI investigators review the DNC server.  Instead the DNC provided the FBI with analysis of a technical review done through a cyber-security contract with Crowdstrike.

The narrative around the DNC hack claim was always sketchy; many people believe the DNC email data was downloaded onto a flash drive and leaked.  In a court filing (full pdf below) the scale of sketchy has increased exponentially.

Suspecting they could prove the Russian hacking claim was false, lawyers representing Roger Stone requested the full Crowdstrike report on the DNC hack.  When the DOJ responded to the Stone motion they made a rather significant admission.  Not only did the FBI not review the DNC server, the FBI/DOJ never even saw the Crowdstrike report.

Yes, that is correct.  The FBI and DOJ were only allowed to see a “draft” report prepared by Crowdstrike, and that report was redacted… and that redacted draft is the “last version of the report produced”; meaning, there are no unredacted & final versions.

Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot!

This means the FBI and DOJ, and all of the downstream claims by the intelligence apparatus; including the December 2016 Joint Analysis Report and January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, all the way to the Weissmann/Mueller report and the continued claims therein; were based on the official intelligence agencies of the U.S. government and the U.S. Department of Justice taking the word of a hired contractor for the Democrat party….. despite their inability to examine the server and/or actually see an unredacted technical forensic report from the investigating contractor.

The entire apparatus of the U.S. government just took their word for it…

…and used the claim therein as an official position….

…which led to a subsequent government claim, in court, of absolute certainty that Russia hacked the DNC.

Think about that for a few minutes.

The full intelligence apparatus of the United States government is relying on a report they have never even been allowed to see or confirm; that was created by a paid contractor for a political victim that would not allow the FBI to investigate their claim.

The DNC server issue is foundation, and cornerstone, of the U.S. government’s position on “Russia hacking” and the election interference narrative; and that narrative is based on zero factual evidence to affirm the U.S. government’s position.

…”the government does not need to prove at the defendant’s trial that the Russians hacked the DNC”… (pg 3)

Ridiculous.

You couldn’t make this nonsense up if you tried…

Here’s the full filing (h/t Techno Fog) :

.