In surprise, Cody airport awarded $18 million by federal government

In surprise, Cody airport awarded $18 million by federal government: Yellowstone Regional Airport officials knew they’d be getting a financial boost from the federal government’s new Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. But they were …

The FAA rescinds the Collings Foundations Exemption allowing for carrying passengers.

The Nine O Nine, the Collings Foundation B-17 that crashed with fatal results in October, 2019.

The FAA has barred the Collings Foundation from carrying passengers, finding that its approach to maintenance was poor, which it also found contributed to the October 2019 crash of its B-17, Nine O Nine.

The entire decision is as follows:

RESCISSION OF EXISTING EXEMPTION AND DENIAL OF PETITION TO EXTEND EXEMPTION

This decision rescinds the relief that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) previously granted to The Collings Foundation (Collings) from §§ 91.9(a), 91.315, 91.319(a), 119.5(g), and 119.21(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), which allows Collings to operate certain aircraft for the purpose of carrying passengers for compensation or hire for living history flight experiences (LHFE). The FAA had granted such relief in Exemption No. 6540 and extended this relief for successive two year periods. The most recent exemption the FAA issued was Exemption No. 6540P, on March 22, 2018. This decision also denies the petitioner’s request for extension and amendment, submitted on August 29, 2019, and supplemented on November 8, 2019. 

Rescission of Exemption

Exemption No. 6540P authorizes Collings to use ten aircraft to conduct LHFE operations in various locations across the country. Specifically, the relief contained in Exemption No. 6540P allows Collings to conduct operations with civil aircraft that either have experimental or limited category airworthiness certificates for the purpose of carrying passengers for flight in historical aircraft. This relief was granted in conjunction with specific conditions and limitations with which Collings was required to comply. Further information about the FAA’s policy for Living History Flight Exemptions can be found in the FAA’s 2015 policy statement (the “FAA Policy”).

On October 2, 2019, Collings operated a Boeing B-17G (registration number N93012, serial number 32264) under Exemption 6540P in Windsor Locks, Connecticut, during which it undertook an emergency landing and crashed, causing a fire and resulting in fatal injuries to five passengers and two crewmembers onboard the aircraft.2 Findings from the accident investigation establish that 13 persons were onboard the aircraft at the time of the accident. No seat with a seatbelt on the aircraft existed for the Collings Foundation Crew Chief.

 Based on a review of the relevant records and other evidence, the FAA has determined Collings was not fulfilling several requirements of the exemption. Condition and Limitation No. 4 of the exemption states, “[i]n order to participate in Collings’s program and operations, persons must initially, and on an ongoing annual basis, receive training appropriate to their position on the contents and application of Collings’s manual system, safety and risk management program, and the conditions and limitations set forth in this exemption.” Similarly, Condition and Limitation No. 7 provides as follows:

Collings must document and record all ground and flight training and testing. The documentation and records must contain, at minimum, the following information:
a. Date of each training or testing session;
b. The amount of time spent for each session of training given;
c. Location where each session of training was given;
d. The airplane identification number(s) in which training was received;
e. The name and certificate number (when applicable) of the instructor who provided each session of training;
f. The name and certificate number of the pilot who provided each session of testing; and g. For verification purposes, the signature and printed name of the person who received the training or testing.

While Collings produced some training records for maintenance personnel and pilots, the evidence indicates that Collings did not train the crew chief who was onboard the B-17G that was involved in the accident on October 2, 2019. The applicable General Operations Manual states that crew chiefs are assigned to every passenger flight aboard the B-17, B-25, and B-24. Crew chiefs must assist the flightcrew with duties as assigned during each flight. Such duties include, but are not limited to, assisting flightcrew with checklists and handling emergencies,as well as assisting flightcrew and maintenance personnel in preparation for each flight and helping with ground operations and ramp safety. See Collings Foundation LHFE General Operations Manual at 15 (rev. 1.2, Sept. 10, 2017). Crew chiefs are required to be familiar with all documents that must be on board the aircraft and must be “trained by the [pilot in command], [second in command], another Crew Chief or the [Director of Maintenance].” Id. In an interview with the FAA on March 2, 2020, the crew chief verified that he received no initial training and was unaware of basic information concerning operations under the exemption. Instead, he only received on-the-job training. This lack of training indicates Collings failed to fulfill the terms of Condition and Limitation Nos. 4 and 7.

Condition and Limitation No. 5 states, “Collings must maintain and apply on a continuous basis its safety and risk management program that meets or exceeds the criteria specified in the FAA Policy for all operations subject to this exemption. This includes, at a minimum, the Collings SMS Manual, used as a basis for an equivalent level of safety.”

 The evidence establishes Collings did not comply with its Safety Management System (SMS) program. First, the crew chief Collings employed stated he was unaware that a safety and risk management program existed. This absence of awareness and lack of training establishes that Collings failed to maintain and apply on a continuous basis a safety and risk management program that met or exceeded the criteria specified in the FAA Policy. Moreover, the Collings Safety Management System Manual states that hazards should be identified and corrected as a matter of daily routine because identifying and eliminating or mitigating hazards is essential to preventing accidents, incidents, and injuries. See SMS Manual at 10, ¶ 6.1 (rev. 1.2, Sept. 10, 2017). The SMS Manual also emphasizes the performance of audits that cover, in part, “general operations, aircraft maintenance, record keeping, operational procedures, [and] observation of flight operations.” Id. at 15, ¶ 6.5. The SMS Manual further requires a culture of safety exist at Collings Foundation. See id. at 6, ¶ 4. As described below, notable maintenance discrepancies existed with the B-17G, yet the Collings Director of Maintenance signed inspection records—dated as recently as September 23, 2019—indicating no findings of discrepancies. No records or evidence of the completion of periodic audits exist with regard to this aircraft. In addition, the pilot in command of the B-17G was also the Director of Maintenance; as a result, Collings did not have a structure to ensure adequate oversight of his decisions to conduct passenger-carrying operations such as the October 2 flight. This indicates Collings lacked a safety culture when operating the B-17G. As a result, Collings did not fulfill the requirements of Condition and Limitation No. 5.

Condition and Limitation No. 6 states as follows: Collings must maintain all aircraft subject to this exemption in accordance with the— a. Collings General Maintenance Manual; b. Maintenance requirements as specified in the appropriate type specification sheet, as amended; c. FAA-approved maintenance inspection program that meets the requirements of § 91.409(e), (f)(4), and (g); and d. Appropriate military technical manuals.

Inspection of the engines on the B-17G N93012 established magneto and ignition failures existed. Regarding engine 4, to prevent the magneto “P” leads from separating from the magnetos, someone had attempted to rig the magneto leads in place with safety wire. Inspection and testing of engine 4 left magneto revealed the movement of the safety-wired lead caused grounding to the case, which rendered the magneto lead inoperative. In addition, the right magneto of engine 4 was found unserviceable. The cam follower was worn beyond limits and the point gap was less than half the measurement required by service documents. When tested, the magneto produced weak or no spark to four of the nine cylinders. All spark plugs were inspected and required cleaning and all electrode gaps were out of tolerance; therefore, further engine inspection indicated signs of detonation and associated damage. An inspection of engine 3 showed all spark plugs electrode gaps were out of tolerance, fouled, and revealed various signs of detonation. Further inspection of this engine revealed problems with the cylinders. As a result of these findings and other information, the FAA questions whether the engines were inspected adequately and in accordance with the applicable maintenance requirements.

The discrepancies noted above indicate maintenance, or lack thereof, occurred in a manner contrary to maintaining aircraft in accordance with the General Maintenance Manual (GMM). The GMM incorporates by reference inspection procedures for individual aircraft, as described the Aircraft Maintenance Manuals. See General Maintenance Manual Rev. 1.1 at 19 (Sept. 10, 2017). Moreover, the records memorializing the inspections and maintenance performed on the B-17G lack key information and, in some cases, indicate maintenance was either not performed at all or was performed in a manner contrary to the applicable requirements. See Ground Check Inspection Form #15: Accessory Inspection, Engine Number Four Fourth (25 Hour) (Sept. 23, 2019); Ground Check Inspection Form #17: Ignition System Inspection, Engine Number Four Fourth (25 Hour) at ¶¶ 11-13 (Sept. 29, 2019). In addition, maintenance records indicate the removal of wires and no further repairs or adjustments, even though a wire was burned and arcing. See NL93012 B-17G Flying Fortress Flight Report (May 11, 2019). The same record, as well as a record from the following day, indicates flights with passengers occurred in the aircraft. See id.; NL93012 B17G Flying Fortress Flight Report (May 12, 2019). As a result, Collings did not fulfill the requirements of Condition and Limitation No. 6.

In addition, Condition and Limitation No. 22 requires compliance with all conditions and limitations set forth in FAA Exemption No. 6540P. The lack of compliance discussed above serves as a basis for the FAA to rescind the exemption.

Under Exemption No. 6540P, Collings received relief from the following regulations:

Section 91.9, which prohibits operations of a civil aircraft without complying with the operating limitations specified in the approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual, markings, and placards, or as otherwise prescribed by the certificating authority of the country of registry.

Section 91.315, which prescribes, in pertinent part, “No person may operate a limited category civil aircraft carrying persons or property for compensation or hire.”

 Section 91.319(a)(1) and (2), which state, “(a) No person may operate an aircraft that has an experimental certificate— (1) for other than the purpose for which the certificate was issued; or (2) Carrying persons or property for compensation or hire.”

Section 119.5(g), which prescribes, in pertinent part, “(g) No person may operate as a direct air carrier or as a commercial operator without, or in violation of, an appropriate certificate and appropriate operations specifications. No person may operate as a direct air carrier or as a commercial operator in violation of any deviation or exemption authority, if issued to that person or that person’s representative.”

 Section 119.21(a), which prescribes, in pertinent part, “(a) Each person who conducts airplane operations as a commercial operator engaged in intrastate common carriage of persons or property for compensation or hire in air commerce, or as a direct air carrier, shall comply with the certification and operations specifications requirements in subpart C of this part....”

The FAA’s Decision:

The undersigned finds that allowing Exemption No. 6540P to continue in effect until its previously established March 31, 2020, expiration date would not be in the public interest and would adversely affect safety. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 106(f) and (g), 40113, and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, Exemption No. 6540P is rescinded in full, effective immediately

Decision on Petition to Extend Existing Exemption

This decision also responds to the petitioner’s request, dated August 22, 2019, to amend and extend Exemption No. 6540P. The relief provided by Exemption No. 6540P is described above. The petitioner requests to extend this relief and to add an additional B-25 aircraft to the exemption for operations beginning in January 2020. Moreover, on November 8, 2019, Collings submitted an additional request to the FAA, in which Collings sought to add another B-17 to exemption 6540P.

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

In its petition to extend Exemption No. 6540P, the petitioner states that all of the aircraft requested are either limited or experimental category and that none of them has a standard category equivalent. Petitioner also states that all of the aircraft have been U.S. operated, none of the aircraft are currently in U.S. military service, and all of the aircraft meet the criteria of being “fragile” as there are less than 1% of each type still in service.

The FAA’s analysis is as follows:

The FAA has determined good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition in the Federal Register because the requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent.

Although the FAA did not seek comment on this extension, the FAA received over 1,500 comments supporting the renewal of Exemption No. 6540P. Most of these comments were from individuals who cited the historical and sentimental value of allowing living history flights to continue. Some individual commenters strongly urged the FAA to not renew Exemption No. 6540P because of safety concerns regarding the operations Collings has conducted.

 In considering the request for further extension of Exemption No. 6540P, the FAA assessed the current risk to the safety of U.S. registered aircraft, FAA-certificated airmen, persons paying for carriage, and the public at large in determining whether granting relief to Collings would be in the public interest. See 49 U.S.C. 44701(f). As noted in the previous section regarding rescission of Exemption No. 6540P, the FAA has determined through ongoing investigation that Collings has not been operating in compliance with the conditions and limitations of the 6540P exemption issued to Collings. In addition, the FAA continues to gather facts that indicate Collings lacked a commitment to safety, insofar as Collings did not take seriously its safety management system program. Based on the totality of facts the FAA has gathered, granting an extension to Collings’s current authority to operate and permitting Collings to add an aircraft to its exemption would adversely affect safety.

The FAA is mindful that flight in these historic aircraft is meaningful to some members of the public; however, the FAA is required by statute to ensure that any exemption the FAA grants would be in the public interest. See 49 U.S.C. 44701(f). Given the facts of the accident on Oct. 2, 2019, and the subsequent evidence of Collings’s lack of compliance summarized in the Rescission section of this document, the FAA has determined that granting the exemption from §§ 91.9(a), 91.315, 91.319(a), 119.5(g), and 119.21(a) would not be in the public interest because of the adverse effect on safety.

The FAA’s Decision:

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption is not in the public interest because it would adversely affect the safety of Collings Foundation’s U.S.-registered aircraft, the FAA-certificated airmen that would be participating in the operations, the passengers on board the aircraft, and others involved in or affected by the operations. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 40113, and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, the petition for renewal of Exemption No. 6540P issued to The Collings Foundation is denied.

 Issued in Washington, D.C., on March 25, 2020

Lex Anteinternet: February 1, 1920 The Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the South African Air Force formed

Lex Anteinternet: February 1, 1920 The Royal Canadian Mounted Polic...:

February 1, 1920 The Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the South African Air Force formed.

On this day in 1920 the recently merged Royal North West Mounted Police and the Dominion Police Force officially became the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

Mountie of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, circa 1930s.

This is undoubtedly confusing for people who associate the Mounties, as they are called, with the 19th Century, but the RCMP celebrates its 100th anniversary today.

The confusion is no doubt created by the fact that the well known prior police force, whose troopers were also called Mounties, the North West Mounted Police, dated back to 1873. The NWMP was formed to patrol the Canadian West and adopted the famous scarlet color as the Indian population associated it with authority due to the British Army.  The NWMP came to ultimately wear a uniform that for all practical purposes is the one we associate with the RCMP today.

Troopers of the NWMP  at Fort Walsh, 1878 in early uniforms with British style "pill box" caps.

It was the NWMP that established the reputation of the Mounties for "always getting their man" and brave, risky, solitary action.  They also established the Mounties appearance, adopting, unofficially at first, the Stetson hat that still prominently features in the RCMP uniform.

Mountie of the North West Mounted Police in the Yukon, 1917. This Mountie is carrying a Ross rifle, formerly the rifle of the Canadian Army, and is riding a stock saddle. Stock saddles were the norm for Mounties for much of their mounted history.  His Stratchcona boots, adopted by Canadain volunteers during the Boer War and still used by the RCMP today, are also easily identifiable in the photo.

In later years the North West Mounted Police was renamed the Royal North West Mounted Police in 1904, bringing the name close to that of the RCMP. During the Boer War it contributed men to volunteer forces that served in South Africa and in 1918 it contributed two units directly to the Empire forces in Europe, and then in Russia, over the objection of the Canadian military which felt that there was no need for cavalry to be sent at that time.  The sending of Mounties in fact blurred their purpose somewhat as it caused a force which was military in organization but a police force to actually take on a military role for a time while also putting a strain on police functions in Canada itself, as the war had so depleted the number of men serving in the RNWMP.

Dawson, Yukon Territory.

While the North West Mounted Police covered the vast Canadian west, in the east the Canadian federal police force was the Dominion Police Force, which had been formed in 1868.  We hear a great deal less about it, no doubt because its role was less dramatic.  During World War One it was folded into the Canadian Army for a time. Following the war the decreased need for a force of the type of the North West Mounted Police and the increased need for a central Canadian police force caused the merger of the two, which officially became the Royal Canadian Mounted Police on this day in 1920.

Royal Canadian Musical Ride at the Wyoming State Fair, 2012.

The RCMP has existed ever since, although its no longer a mounted service and its famous scarlet uniform is now only a dress uniform.  It's final existence in its original frontier form was waning even at the time of its creation. Even so, all Mounties were required to learn to ride until 1966, a fact which reflects Canada's vast wild nature.  At the same time, following its creation, it took on many of the same duties that the Federal Bureau of Investigation occupies in the United States while also retaining provincial policing duties, often by contract with local entities.

Purely coincidentally, today is also the date that marks the formation of the South African Air Force which holds the status as the world's second independent air force.  I.e., it was a service separate from the Army.  The Royal Air Force holds the status of being the world's first independent air force, acquiring that status on April 1, 1918.

Airco D.H.9, several of which were given by the United Kingdom to the Dominion of South Africa.

The date cold legitimately be debated as in reality it marks the date on which Col Pierre van Ryneveld was appointed the South African Director Air Service with the task of creating the South African Air Force.  South African had been given several military aircraft for the purpose of creating an air arm, and his task was to do that.  Interestingly, Van Ryneveld was not in South Africa at the time and had just been recalled from the UK to assume his new duties.  He returned at the controls of a Vickers Vimy, which he flew all the way from the UK with co-pilot Quintin Brand. Both Van Ryneveld and Brand were knighted for the feat.

Van Ryneveld left, and Brand right, February 1920.

Van Ryneveld commanded the new South African Air Force officially until 1933 and then unofficially until 1937 after which time he was the head of the South African General Staff, a position he occupied until 1949.  The dual role existed as no replacement was chosen for his air force role until 1937.  He died at age 81 in 1972.  Brand, who as also South African, remained in the RAF and returned to the UK to resume his duties with it.  He played an important and successful role as an RAF commander during the Battle of Britain but was on the wrong side of the internal British tactical debate on the "Big Wing" theory and was sidelined and retired in 1943, during the midst of the Second World War.  Following his retirement he married for the second time at age 50, marrying the sister of his first wife who had died in 1941.  The couple retired to what was then Rhodesia in 1950 and he died at age 74 in 1968.

Lex Anteinternet: Friday Farming. Farming Airman.

Lex Anteinternet: Friday Farming. Farming Airman.:

Friday Farming. Farming Airman.

United States Air Force photograph, Airman 1st Class Jonathan Whitely photographer)

Today In Wyoming's History: January 20, 1920. Bert Cole back in the air.

Today In Wyoming's History: January 20: 1920  Bert Cole, who was the pilot in the incident that resulted in the loss of the life of Maude Toomey on the January 14, was already back in the air, piloting for a stunt.

I'm frankly a little shocked. That seems awfully soon.

Some Gave All: Maud Toomey Memorial, Evansville Wyoming

Some Gave All: Maud Toomey Memorial, Evansville Wyoming:

Maud Toomey Memorial, Evansville Wyoming

Maude Toomey was a 33 year old high school Latin teacher, and an oil company bookkeeper, in Casper when she took a ride as a passenger in a plane owned and piloted by Casperite Bert Cole on January 14, 1920.  Something went tragically wrong during the flight and Cole's plane crashed near what is now the Evansville water treatment plant, which is not far from what was Natrona County's first airport.

A cement cross was placed in the ground at the spot where the plant crashed.  Oddly, no inscription was placed on it, leading to a small element of doubt about its purpose later on when it was rediscovered during the construction of the water treatment plant.  Since that time, an inscription has been placed at its base and the location is now an Evansville park.

Evansville has sort of a unique history in that regard as two of its somber memorials are located in areas where children now play, which is perhaps a more appropriate placement than many might suppose, honoring the dead in a way that they might have appreciated.

These photographs were taken near the centennial of the accident, which contributed to very long shadows, even though they were taken near 1:00 p.m.

Shifting to GPS Guided Landings In Wyoming.

A recent headline in the Tribune read:

Local pilots decry federal changes to flight routes

The article went on to note:

A cost-saving shift by the Federal Aeronautics Commission to GPS-guided landings at airports around the Mountain West has elicited the concern of a number of airplane pilots based in Casper, who fear the proposed elimination of more than a dozen analog routes could cause significant problems for air transportation around the state.

Eh, what's that mean?  Well, I wasn't too sure either.  The paper then went on to state:

Long guided by a network of extremely high-frequency, short-range ground-based systems known as VORs, pilots in the Rocky Mountains will soon go the way of the rest of the country and come to rely heavily on the same GPS-guided navigation systems promoted by the FAA since the technology’s introduction in the early ‘90s. 

It’s a significant step for pilots in the region, who have long relied on the older, more inexpensive systems already in place for navigating the mountainous terrain, and one long pursued by a bureaucracy seeking ways to make air travel as streamlined, efficient and responsive as possible. 

“It’s been a quantum leap forward,” said Joe MacGuire, a local airline pilot and a Republican member of the Wyoming House of Representatives.

Well, I'm still not really following, but I sort of grasp it.  But why wouldn't this be a good change?

Well, I'm not really sure, but apparently it has to do with weather and costs.  Having said that, I think that aircraft have all been shifting over to GPS by Federal mandate for some time.

The paper went on to include this comment:

This change, Casper-based corporate pilot and 45-year flight veteran Dallas Chopping said, could also be a potentially dangerous one: though the number of VOR approaches proposed for elimination by the FAA – at just over two dozen statewide – seems small, they could present a significant liability for pilots in a rare event when the GPS systems fail or are disrupted, potentially creating risks for commercial pilots, emergency responders and even the National Guard, who often provide a critical role in search-and-rescue operations around the state.

Hmmm. . . . I'm not a pilot, but I'm skeptical. That's the argument anyway.

And its mobilized, apparently at least one community group.

Already, the Casper Chamber of Commerce is mobilizing its membership to respond out of concerns the changes could impact commercial air traffic. In a message to its membership on Wednesday, the Chamber urged its members to weigh in on the potential decommissioning prior to the Jan. 15 deadline set by the FAA, highlighting a number of examples where the decommissioning of the route could impact the local economy.
* * *
“The FAA will argue that it is a cost savings,” she added. “However, for Casper, there is no advantage to losing the approach!”

Well, the 15th is today.  We'll see if the FAA was convinced.

Lex Anteinternet: January 14, 1920. Untimely passings.

Lex Anteinternet: January 14, 1920. Untimely passings.:

January 14, 1920. Untimely passings.

January 14

1920  The first fatal air accident to occur near Casper occurred, taking the life of pilot Bert Cole and passenger Maud Toomey.   Ms. Toomey is also the first female air fatality in Wyoming.  The very early airport in use at this time was located where the town of Evansville now sits, and a memorial to Ms. Toomey, who was a schoolteacher, is located in Evansville.  Attribution. Wyoming State Historical Society.

On this day, Natrona County suffered its first air fatality.

The location of this tragic accident is in Evansville, Wyoming, where the county's first air field was located.  There's a cross marking the location somewhere in Evansville, but I've never been able to find it.

Lex Anteinternet: And now Iranian protests against its government

Lex Anteinternet: And now Iranian protests against its government:

And now Iranian protests against its government

The Iranian people's level of trust for their own government is low and has been waning for a long time.

Which leads us to the blistering oddities of the current situation between the US and Iran.  And indeed, the odd ways in which that situation involves air disasters.

The relationship between the two nations went bad during the Islamic Revolution there when Iranian students, who morphed into the Revolutionary Guard, took the American Embassy in Tehran and held those there hostage.  President Carter attempted to secure the release of the hostages through diplomacy before ultimately deploying U.S. special forces in the form of the "Delta Force" in Operation Eagle Claw.

It failed.

Fuel calculations were botched and desert conditions intervened to lead to a USAF EC-130 running into a RH-53 helicopter sending both to the ground with loss of American life.  It was a complete debacle and showed the depths to which the American military had declined following the Vietnam War.  The US was shown to be impotent.

Following this, in 1988, the USS Vincennes shot down Iran Air Flight 655, killing all 290 occupants on board the plane.  The Vincennes had been harried by Iranian naval forces in a prolonged engagement that day and had actually crossed into Iranian waters in pursuit of them when the Iranian Airbus A300 was mistaken for an Iranian military aircraft and shot down.  Unusual for the US, the US never acknowledged that the error was a culpable one and the crew was not disciplined in any fashion.  In the Navy's view, the incident was a regrettable but not culpable event.  

Iran has always viewed it differently and has marked the anniversary of the event repeatedly.  It's one of the unifying events the Iranian people have with their government.

And now they've shot down their own airliner.

A lot has changed since 1979, let alone 1988.  Iranians are no longer that keen on the theocracy and the majority of them would abandon it.  Anecdotal evidence holds that a lot of Iranians have abandoned Islam itself with quite a few converting to Christianity very quietly.  The well educated Iranian population chaffs at the strict tenants of Shia Islam and its well educated female population can look back to the 1970s when they weren't veiled and Iran was even unique in conscripting women, which says something about the government's view of its female population at the time.  The Iranian government is going to change.

The recent American strike on an Iranian Revolutionary Guard general should have served to really being a uniting force between the Iranian people and their theocracy, and it did briefly.  Now that seems to have already eroded.  Even before this incident occurred Iranian twitter accounts were starting to argue against their really being support for the government and some even declared the targeted general to be a terrorist.  Now the weakness of the country has really been exposed.  The American military has really moved on, the Iranian one has not, and now its culpable for killing its own citizens by accident.  And Iranians are back to protesting their government.  The government's capitol on the 1988 event may now have been spent.

Where this leads nobody knows, but nobody could have predicted this course of events in any fashion.

Lex Anteinternet: Causalities of Tension and Incompetence.

Lex Anteinternet: Causalities of Tension and Incompetence.:

Causalities of Tension and Incompetence.

Iran shot down a Ukrainian airliner over Tehran this week, after its retaliatory missile strikes on US facilities in Iraq.  The plane was carrying Iranians mostly bound for Canada, which has a large Iranian immigrant population.

To make this plane, Iran's military shot down a civilian aircraft over their own capitol city.

This is because the Iranian military isn't great.

Iran has universal male conscription at 18 years of age.  Interestingly, prior to the 1979 Islamic Revolution, it also conscripted women, but stopped at that time.  This means it has a large conscript military.

And while it has obtained arms, as the greed and stupidity of nations exceeds their best interests all too often, their military is basically a 1970s vintage force.

We don't know what happened to lead to this tragedy, but my guess is that a tired and scared group of Iranian conscripts had been harangued by officers and seniors about expecting an American attack to the point they were worn out and scared.  So they fired on what they thought was an American military aircraft and 176 completely innocent people, most of whom were their fellow countrymen. We don't know what happened to the men who fired the missile, but we can be assured that it is or was bad.

Nothing will happen to the men ultimately responsible for the tragedy, which is the Iranian Islamist leadership that has governed the country for forty one years and kept in on a violent path of regional Shiite dominance. That government will ultimately go down in an Iranian revolution of some sort, and much of their theocratic views forever with it.

Where this leaves the Iranian American Conflict is not known, but what has turned out to be the case is that an extremely risky course of action the US embarked on due to an order of President Trump and under the apparent urging of Mike Pompeo has been surprisingly effective so far.  Nearly everyone agrees that Gen. Soleimani was a terrorist whose demise should not be lamented.  That he was a uniformed officer of the Iranian paramilitary Revolutionary Guard, and the method by which it occurred really ramped up the risks, but Iran's response was ineffective, perhaps intentionally so, or perhaps simply because it was.  And Iran managed to put the period on the entire event by following up an ineffective missile strike by shooting down a Ukrainian airliner.  The U.S., in the meantime, has essentially declared the matter over.

Either as an example of truly masterful strategy, or by accident, the U.S. has effectively moved the bar on state sponsored terrorism and, due to the past week, managed to make state employed uniformed terrorist a routine target in wars on terrorism and to have exposed Iran's conventional forces as less than impressive.  Iran may have in fact suffered a set back as a sponsor of terrorism and given its history, that's a large part of its diplomatic approach to the world. Without it, it's not much.

At least not much until it acquires a nuclear weapon, which it is now working on.  Indeed, exposed as conventionally incompetent and now with a reduced military portfolio because of the changed nature of the game, it may be stepping back because it knows this has become a must for it.

Or so it probably believes. The irony of it is that nuclear weapons for small nations are, frankly, completely worthless.

Lex Anteinternet: January 6, 1920. Peace Secured. Protestants Unite? Suffrage Advances (Posted due to the Curtiss Aircraft Company reference).

Lex Anteinternet: January 6, 1920. Peace Secured. Protestants Unit...:

This item is posted from one of our companion blogs due to the newspaper reference regarding the Curtiss Aircraft Company.  If anyone has more details, I'd be curious on them.

January 6, 1920. Peace Secured. Protestants Unite? Suffrage Advances.

The headline news for this day, January 6, 1920, was that a treaty was to be signed between the victorious Allies and the Germans.  Or, more properly, a protocol to the Versailles Treaty

More properly, this was an amendment to the Versailles Treaty altering and amending some of its terms.  Germany's reluctance to enter into a protocol had lead the Allies and Germany back to the brink of war several months earlier, an event now wholly forgotten, but in the end the amendment had been worked out.

The U.S. Senate had not ratified the original text and would still not be ratifying the treaty in its entirety.

The Casper paper was also reporting that a new Wyoming corporation had been formed to build or take over the manufacturing of the Curtis Aircraft line.  I've never heard of this before and Wikipedia sheds no light on what was going on with this story.  Does anyone know the details?

Also making headlines was an effort to unite the nation's Protestant churches into a single organization. The headlines are apparently a bit misleading as they would suggest that the individual denominations were set to be united, which was not the proposal.

Also misleading, today, is the use of the term "United Church of Christ". That denomination would not come about until 1957.

On the same day, Kentucky and Rhode Island passed the 19th Amendment.

Suffrage supporters watching the Governor of Kentucky sign his state's passage of the 19th Amendment.

And Walt experienced something that I routinely do a century later.