Form 6b: Fill & Download for Free

(1) spears are awesome(2) swords are sidearms(3) when you have a shield, you don’t open yourself up to strike first(4) bludgeon weapons are great against armor(5) swords don’t slash through chainmail(6) archery. it’s a thing. and it’s very effective.(6b) archery requires strength. Sorry, female protagonist with skinny arms.(bonus) though not a weapon - WEAR HELMETS, YOU STUPID PROTAGONISTS !

A HUGE Improvement in multiple ways, particularly in Manpower, Tactics, and Technology.Manpower:Due to the technology available (1960s) in the EA-6B Prowler’s time, 4 men were needed in the cockpit to perform effective Electronic Attack (EA) operations :According to a former Prowler Pilot on the Fighter Pilot Podcast, the seating arrangement was unique to the growler and that each group of seats had unique responsibilities:Left Front Seat: The pilot position - the pilot in the EA-6B Growler could only pilot the plane. He had no access to any electronic warfare technology that the Electronic Countermeasure Officers (ECMOs) had.Right Front Seat: ECMO 1 position: - ECMO 1 had responsibility for comms, navigation, and High-speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM) deployment. He had no access to information on the pilot seat and would need to lean over to see altitude and airspeed from the pilot side.Left and Right Rear Seat: ECMO 3 and ECMO 4 position: These seats were for electronic support and electronic attack, but while both were capable of performing the same tasks, it was an informal “agreement” between ECMO 3 ECMO 4 to split the tasks between them. In the back seat position, they only knew altitude and airspeed, and nothing else from the Pilot’s dashboard.The reason that ECMOs 3 and 4 existed according toCaptain Dave “Mini Me” Kurtz, a former Prowler Pilot, was that:[Back Then] the [ECMOS would leave the briefing with their information]…on reams of printer paper [and] in the backseats … [they] manually input [the Electronic Support and Electronic Attack information] in the keyboards [prior to takeoff].All this changed with the Growler, as the time difference and advancement in technology between the Prowler and the Growler allowed for greater automation in the Growler:[W]e [went] from an extremely operator driven process in the EA-6B [Prowler]to an automated and computer automated one in the new EA-18G Growler.Confessions Of A US Navy EA-18G Growler Electronic Warfare OfficerThis automation improved to the point that only two people were needed to effectively perform the same jobs:2. TacticallyWith a top speed of 651 mph for the Prowler versus 1190 mph for the Growler, unlike the A-6 platform the Prowler was based on, the Growler is basically a modified F/A-18 SuperHornet with the same maneuverability and characteristics as its dedicated fighter brethren. Meaning that the Growler is now able to keep up, maneuver and attack along with the package in ways the Prowler could never have done.3. Technology.a. Avionics:Image of EA-6B Prowler Cockpit shows a significant amount of analog technology and instrumentation:Updated image of the EA-18G Growler shows how the previously analog instrumentation of the EA-6B Prowler has been digitized and consolidated into readings on computer monitors in the EA-18G Growler:b. Commonality with F/A-18 F SuperHornetsThe use of what is essentially the F/A-18 F dual seat SuperHornet allows for a consolidation of spares and repairability between the EA-18G Growler and the Hornets it joins. The similarity in avionics and other parts of the Growler to the SuperHornets also allows for an easier learning curve for technicians working with the planes that was not available when the EA-6B Prowler was also on the deck.c. SensorsThe EA-6B’s sensors to detect signals were located in a single, tail-based fin-pod In the back of the plane:The EA-6B's tail fin pod housed sensitive surveillance receivers, capable of detecting hostile radar emissions at long range. Emitter information is processed by the central mission computer. Detection, identification, direction-finding, and jammer-set-on-sequence may be performed automatically or by the crew.EA-6B ProwlerThe EA-18G Growler improved upon this by taking the technology from this tail fin pod and doubling it with the AN/ALQ-218(V)2 system that is placed in wingtip pods on the left AND right sides of the EA-18G Growler, and adding extra antennas to the fuselage:The AN/ALQ-218(V)2, [for the Growler] developed by Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems, is a variant of the Improved Capabilities (ICAP) III system deployed on the US Navy’s EA-6B Prowler aircraft. The [Growler’s] system’s antennas are located on the port and starboard sides of the nose, the engine bays, in the wingtip pods and to the aft of the cockpit, providing 360° azimuthal cover.EA-18G Growler Electronic Attack Aircraft - Naval TechnologyBy spreading the antennas across the entire aircraft in all directions, the Growler is more capable than the Prowler ever was in determining the azimuth from which any emissions are coming from.The Growler is A HUGE Improvement over the Prowler.From Manpower, to Tactics, and Technology. The Grower allowed for greater distribution of warfighters across the fleet, greater effectiveness in automation for ES AND EA, and tactical improvements in planning and strikes.Hope this helped!

Here’s some disappointing news for you: the amount your employer earns for your engineering work isn’t necessarily related to your engineering prowess. Especially for software engineering.The money the company makes is based mostly on sales and marketing, as long as they’re not foolish in other areas. A company with mediocre engineers and good sales & marketing will be more successful than a company with great engineers and mediocre sales and marketing.I’ll use Microsoft as an example (note: I am not representing Microsoft, this is based on public information).If you look at the 2016 shareholder letter, The company had $85B in gross revenue, with a gross margin of $52.5B. R&D for 2016 is listed as [math]$2,962M [/math][math][/math][math]+ $2,900M [/math][math][/math][math]+ $2,980M [/math][math][/math][math]+ $3,146M = $12B[/math]. This includes all kinds of expenses related to development, not just salaries. For the sake of argument, let’s say 50% of R&D costs are salary, bonus, and stock awards. That would be $6B/yr. So, the company would gross [math]$85B - $6B = $79B, $79B/$6B = $13.17 [/math][math][/math][math][/math]for every dollar it pays an engineer. Sales and marketing get paid slightly more, and IMO they deserve it.If you ask me, the engineers have it very good, and are lucky to work places that have good, effective sales forces to market and monetize what they build.