Going out, trying to box off specific areas, making sure guys are going out and probing. You never know where enemy might be, you never know if they're surveilling you and you never want to get too comfortable in your position. So you making early contact with them again so you can only fight. Honestly being out here in this arctic environment in DTA is an incredibly unique experience and I think that input from the guys at the lowest level is invaluable. So whatever AAR comments come from this exercise, like if we're able to pull from average Joe and what he's going through and everything else, that's where you're going to make most of your money.


Welcome. I'm Catherine Zox. And this educational video was created to give an accurate representation on how the United States Department of Agriculture regulations pertaining to specified risk materials are carried out at small and very small federal and state beef plants, as well as at custom exempt facilities. The material is being presented by the New York State Department of Agriculture and markets through a cooperative agreement with the United States Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service. At the bottom of the screen you will note several links to websites used as references for the information being provided on this video. The video's content is based on regulations in effect as of April 2007. Because changes take place, we strongly recommend you periodically check the USDA website for any possible changes. Before we visit the plant, let's take a moment to review the specified risk materials, or SRMs, in cattle. The diagram on the screen illustrates the parts of cattle identified as SRMs and the age when considered to be SRMs. The tonsils and distal ilium of the small intestine are considered SRMs in all cattle, regardless of age. In cattle 30 months of age or older, the SRMs are as follows, brain, skull, eyes, trigeminal ganglia, spinal cord, dorsal root ganglia, vertebral column, excluding the vertebrae of the tail, the transverse processes of the thoracic and lumbar vertebrae, and the wings of the sacrum. Let us now go to a very small USDA plant, where we join Mr. Jeff Nichols, as he ensures the cow is ambulatory and shows no signs of central nervous system disorders. The USDA considers all cattle to be 30 months of age or over, unless it is demonstrated by documentation or dentition that the cattle are younger than 30 months of age. Documentation, rather than dentition, is the preferred means of determining the age of animals. In the absence of documentation, dentition can be useful in making general determinations about age. For more on dentition, please visit the link below. Today, Mr. Nichols will be following procedures for cattle 30 months of age or over. Now, we're moving the tail. As stated earlier, the vertebrae of the tail is not considered an SRM. Here's your small intestines. This is the distalillium, which is considered a high-risk material. On a small plant, we don't see any of this for animals, so it doesn't really affect us. In effective October 7, 2005, the USDA allows the small intestine, excluding the distalillium, in a meat food product or for edible rendering. As Mr. Nichols has stated, he handles all intestines as inedible. For more information regarding the use of the small intestine, excluding the distalillium, please see FSIS notice 58-05. Now, because this animal is over 30 months, I'll be removing the spinal cord, which is an SRM. Here's the stamp that's saying that the SRMs must be removed. We removed the spinal cord, but the whole backbone from here where the tail was cut off, right down through to the end of the neck. All these feather bones on the back, and this also affects custom plants that are doing animals over 30 months. They must remove all this on animals that are over 30 months and keep it separate as a high-risk material. Right now, I'm taking out the tongue. We no longer wash the heads because the material from the brainstem could contaminate the meat. So the cheek meat is no longer saved unless you have the proper facilities to seal the head so no brain fluid can possibly go on here. The cerebral spinal fluid references brain fluid by Mr. Nichols is not an SRM. However, cerebral spinal fluid may contain readily identifiable pieces of brain that would contaminate the surface of the head. Now, these are the tonsils right here. They are inedible. The head contains five SRMs, skull, brain, eyes, trigeminal ganglia, and tonsils. Very carefully, we rinse just the tongue so we don't get any brain fluid on any of it.  So about an inch of that tongue is considered inedible and has to be discarded. Plant sanitation requirements will vary depending on the plant's processing. In general, any equipment that is used to cut through SRMs must be cleaned and sanitized before being used on carcasses or parts from cattle less than 30 months. As a note, all SRMs may be completely removed from the cattle at the time of slaughter. However, this practice is generally reserved for cattle being used for ground meat only. Our rendering company takes all of our inedible material including SRMs, so we don't have to keep them separate. We just put them in a barrel that's inedible and they haul them away from our Phillips facility daily. Since much of the inedible material that leaves your facility ends up in animal food or feed, we recommend you stay informed on proposed amendments to 21 CFR 589 substances prohibited from use in animal food or feed. A link to the most recent proposal is listed below. After the carcass is aged in the cooler, it is removed for processing according to customer specifications. We now revisit the plant and join Mr. Lowell Carson as he takes us through the process. We're going to remove this whole spinal column all the way down through. The spinal cord has been removed on the kill floor before it went into the cooler. We're going to move all the way down into the atlas joint today. We're going to remove this all the way down on the boning table. What we had here was the hind quarter where the SRMs and everything was all connected in one. The SRMs to the spinal cord has been removed from the round of the animal. Now the only thing we have to do is remove it from the loin. The round is now SRM free. The tail section and spinal column has been removed from that now. Now that I removed the kidney fat, you can see the tenderloin here. It runs along the spinal column. We're removing that now. The tenderloin has been removed. Next I'm going to remove the hip from the loin. There's a loin here. I can take a saw, remove the spinal column just like that, leave these inner bones in. Now I'm going to remove the SRM material from the short loin. Now the SRM material has been removed. The hip bone has been removed. The SRMs here in the hip area is the four quarter of beef. We're going to remove the spinal column out of here on the way down to the neck area here while it's hanging today. Then I'm going to put the neck area on to the table afterwards and remove the spinal column out of the neck area up to the atlas joint. The SRM has been removed from the plate in the rib area. Next I'll break it down between the fifth and sixth to separate my rib from my plate. I'm going to remove the rest of the remaining SRMs from here down on my table. It's a really big one. The SRM has been all removed from the rib area. The rib bones can stay inside as long as the column has been removed. You leave the ribs in there. Next we'll remove the stamps that all the SRMs from this particular piece of meat has been removed. What we're going to do is remove all the stamps that says SRMs must be removed. This piece now is SRM free. Then we've got to remove the remaining feather bones in the spinal column right down to the atlas joint. The vertebral column excluding the vertebrae of the tail, the transverse processes of the thoracic and lumbar vertebrae, and the wings of the sacrum along with the dorsal root ganglia will often be removed in a plant's processing room. What you just witnessed was one firm's method of removing the SRMs. Your method may vary based on equipment, customer specifications, and style. We hope this video will be a useful training tool for all your current and future employees. Thank you.


This is stock number 9419. We are here at Summit Automotive in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin, your new and used half-ton truck headquarters. Today we are checking out this super clean 2016 Chevy Silverado 1500 crew cab short box. This truck has the 5.3 liter V8 motor. From this HD video you will be able to tell that this truck is extremely clean all the way around. It does have the projector lamp headlamps, the LED fog lights, and the LED running lights. Front bumper is in really nice shape. Silver ice is the color. Factory alloy rims, these are 18 inch rims, and they have Goodyear Wrangler Kevlar 265-65 R18 tires. These tires have about 50 to 60% of the tread left. I know there's a little snow on them, but they do have some pretty good tread left on them. We shoot all of our videos in 1080p, so if you have HD capabilities on your computer, tablet, or smartphone, turn them on now because it's like you're right here looking at the truck with me. Passenger side fender is in excellent condition. Passenger side rim no scuffs or scrapes, and as we go down this side of the truck you can see just how clean that body is, how reflective and glass-like that paint is. Now we take these HD videos so if you are far away, or even if you're close by and you can just can't make the trip down, you can still see the truck, hear the truck, and of confidence in the vehicle that you're looking at before you even get here. We want to make sure that our customers get the most accurate representation possible, and this is the best way to do that without actually being here. Back rim is in excellent shape and these back tires have just as much tread as the front tires. Framing underbodies in really nice condition, as you can see, and it's like that all the way underneath because all the remaining factory exhaust. Lower rockers all look really good and it does have some nice chrome step bars on it. This one has the Z71 off-road suspension package which gives you the special shocks and these skid plates. Rear bumpers in pretty nice condition. There is one tiny little ding to the right of the receiver hitch there. It does have a full towing package, receiver hitch for and seven pin wiring, and the tailgate is absolutely perfect. No dents or dings on that. It has an access soft rolling tonneau cover. It's in really nice condition. I didn't see any rips or tears on that. It has the shock assist rear tailgate so that goes down nice and slow. Never gonna be a slam your tailgate down and the bed's got a couple light duty scuffs and scrapes but nothing major. No major dents or dings doesn't look like it's had much abuse at all. Very nice condition inside that bed and that tailgate is a locking tailgate. Also has a backup camera on it. It has the in bumper steps and as we go down this side of the vehicle just as clean as a passenger side. No dents or dings on this side. Very very nice. Has the bed rail covers.  Or does this the LT2? This is an LT2. My bad.  Factory all-weather floor mats throughout. There are no rips or tears in the seats. This truck has never been smoked in. Has power windows power locks and power mirrors. You have the factory brake controller turned off four-wheel drive and the auto headlamps. As we go inside the truck here you can see it has 27,451 miles. It comes with the Chevy my link system. This is where your backup camera shows up. You can see it has dual climb control, stability track, downhill sys control, and the rear cargo lamps. Leather wrap steering wheel. You got cruise control on that side. Bluetooth audio controls on that side. Pass and receipt is very clean as well. No rips or tears on that. And it does have the on-star system and your map lights up there. 40, 20, 40 split bench seating. Factory all-weather floor mat on that side and the carpeting is like new in this truck. We'll take a quick look at the back seats and then we will check out under the hood. Back seats are in excellent condition as well. No rips or tears back here. It does have the latch child safety system for your car seats. These seats do fold up for extra storage. You can see just how clean that carpeting is back here. And we have all-weather floor mats back here as well.  Your driver's side mirror has a little blind spot mirror in it. That hood is absolutely perfect. Didn't see any dents or dings on that. And under the hood is very clean as well. This truck has been fully safe and inspected by our service shop. Has a fresh oil and filter change. All the fluids have been checked and topped off. The truck has been gone through mechanically 100% and is 100% ready to go. And to see more pictures of this truck or one of our other 400 new and used cars, trucks, SUVs, minivans, wranglers, half tons, three quarter tons, one tons, you name it. We got it.  Videos of every single used vehicle that we have all at summitauto.com. Thank you so much for checking out the video. If you like this truck and want to make it yours, give us a call right now<PHONE_NUMBER>. Ask for one of our sales associates to make this truck yours today. Once again, that number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. And we also have dump trucks here as well. And if you want to check out more videos, go to youtube.com. Remember to like, subscribe, and share on this video and all those videos there. In fact, any second you'll see a link to subscribe to our YouTube channel on your left. A link to more half ton truck videos like this one on your right. If you haven't been to our website on the bottom, a link to this truck on our website, click those. Check us out. And we really look forward to helping you with this super clean 2016 Chevy Silverado 1500 Crew Cab Short Box LT2 Z71. Thanks again.


Hi guys, this is the ELPM S3, it's a redesign of the ESP32 S3 module to achieve extreme low power consumption in deep sleep up to 1nm. Before introducing the project, I want to show you the power consumption of this new module. This is the power consumption of the ELPM S3 in deep sleep mode when the external RTC is disabled. As you can see, with this jumper I generated an interrupt to the circuit that controls the power supply of the ESP32 and now with the RTC enabled, the external RTC turned on the module every 1 minute and as you can see the ELPM wakes up by itself. I will now explain how I got this result but first, this video is sponsored by PCBWay. You can buy your PCBs for only $5, check the link below to place your first order. The ELPM S3 was designed to solve one of the main constraints of the ESP32 module, the power consumption in deep sleep. I know there are my controllers with a very low deep sleep stand by power consumption, such as ST microelectronics and silicon labs my controllers, but more and more smart devices are being developed with the ESP32. The reason is very simple, it's easy to use and there is a very wide community behind this platform. So the ESP32 S3 module is known for its limited power efficiency and this redesign takes it to a whole new level. By optimizing the power management circuit, we have been able to reduce the power consumption of the module. These energy efficiency improvements give the ESP32 S3 the ability to be used for whole battery power devices and energy harvesting applications. With the LPM S3 users can enjoy the benefits of extreme low power consumption without sacrificing the performance of the ESP32 S3. But does it really make sense to reduce power consumption so much during the deep sleep? ESP32 S3 is not efficient enough. To answer this question just compare the battery life of two equivalent smart devices based with the ESP32 S3 and with LPM S3. To obtain this data I used my power profiler, so as you can see the LPM S3 is much more efficient. I set either annual self-discharge value because it depends a lot on the battery used and I made the same consideration with the safety margin. And now let's take a look at the main features of the module. As you can see from the block diagram the ELPM can be powered in two ways. The first by supplying 3.3V to the module. In this way you directly power the ESP32 S3 and the RGB LED and the RTC. The second way is to supply a voltage between 3 and 5V from the VIN input of the power latch. By providing power the power latch waits for an interrupt to trigger and power the ESP32 and to all components connected to the 3.3V. The interrupt can be provided by these three inputs. The first one is the master, the second one is the gate for son. Then we have wake input and last but not least by the RTC. To understand in depth how the different interrupt modes work I suggest you to download the documentation. You can find the link below in the description. Also in the module is a battery level circuit. You can connect a battery in the VIN input. This circuit has zero leakage current because it takes the reading all if the ESP32 is powered. So it's not connected directly to the battery. It sounds like an obvious feature but trust me the most development boards as much product have the battery level circuit always connected to the battery. Since the circuit consists of a voltage divider you can well understand that these two resistors draw some micron pair. Another feature is the status LED under the objects logo. Also the LED has zero leakage current so it has no effect on the energy efficiency of the module. Manufacturing in the ELPMS free world have been challenging without the support of PCB way which not only provided me the PCBs but also manufactured the aluminum shields. An important components of the module is an EMI shield. Why is MI shielding important? Essentially to protect the module from external electromagnetic signals and to prevent signals generated by the module from interfering with surrounding components. And why I choose aluminum for the shield? So aluminum is non-magnetic. It does not interact with the electronic devices that are sensitive to magnetic fields. Also is relatively inexpensive making it an affordable solution for EMI shielding. There are other metals and alloys that are used for shield development but have either production cost for a small batch. One of the most widely used alloys is mu metal. One advantage of aluminum is much more resistant to external mechanical forces like other alloys. In addition aluminum is very easy to recycle. The only limitation is that very complex to solder with tin and you need to use a specific flux. I solved this problem with the end rocking system. Before we start the test comparing ESP32S3 and ELPMS3 we need to consider a few things. Just to test the ESP32S3 I used the official dev kit but removing all those components that would be influenced the measurement. So I removed the LDO, the Serial Bridge and also the RGB LED because they are connected to the 3.3V but the RGB LED is present in the ELPM because it does not influence the power consumption in deep sleep. From my point of view this optimization is very useful. I have performed several tests on the ELPMS3. The first test is a simple comparison of wake up by interrupt of the ELPMS3 and ESP32S3. The differences are mainly the power consumption in deep sleep which you already know and the startup time which is longer by a few milliseconds in the ELPMS3 module. It's the right compromise to achieve very low power consumption. It's possible to reduce the startup time of the ESP32S3 boot so it's possible to achieve a better result. This test is similar to the first one only the wake up pace is automatic because it's controlled by RTC. In this test I show how it's possible to program the RTC to wake up the module every one minute and at the same time it's possible to wake up the module by generating an interrupt in the master input. In general with the ELPMS3 you can do any project you usually develop with the ESP32S3 but with extreme energy efficiency. Since it's a first prototype I'm very satisfied with the final result. In the description you can find the link to download the documentation of the ELPMS3. My goal is to mass manufacture the ELPM modules but first guys what do you think about the ELPMS3? Should I add some other features? Would you use them in your project? And that's it guys I look forward to your feedback below in the comments so guys thank you for watching the video until the end and see you next time.


And now, for your U.S. Army Europe spotlight. High on helicopters in the air, German leopard tanks, striker vehicles, BMPs, I mean it's kind of like a Star Wars bar scene. It's the environment created for U.S. and partner nation soldiers to train in during Sabre Junction 2012. It's complex, realistic, and very challenging. It's all about making adaptive, flexible units, leaders, and soldiers. The decisive action training environment provided by the Joint Multinational Training Command is a key component of the new Army training strategy. This training ensures that we can maintain peace. And when we can't maintain peace, we have trained units and trained allies to go tackle whatever that threat is that we might foresee in the future.


Yeah, we're building our diplomacy with France here in Global Connections. I'm J.F.I. Dell, this is ThinkTech at 5 o'clock and we are joined by Carl Baker, who has spent his life in diplomacy and being diplomatic and with Pacific Forum and a whole bunch of things that qualifies him to comment on what in the world happened with France. Good afternoon, Carl. Thank you for joining the show. Yeah, thanks for having me on. It's out of my area a little bit when we start talking about U.S.-French relations, but I think the impact on how we're thinking about Asia and how Australia fits into this is what makes it fascinating. Yeah, what we really want to talk about today is this new agreement called AUKUS, which is sort of an acronym in itself, Australia, UKUS Defense Agreement, to promote ties between the three countries in several areas. But the big news from this statement, and that's all there is, there's one page of the three country leaders saying what they're going to do in this defense relationship, and the big news, of course, is that we're going to sell or no, it's not even going to sell, we're going to explore the possibility of Australia getting eight nuclear-powered submarines, which of course, France says it's completely surprised by this because it has a deal, a 66 billion dollar deal with Australia to build 12 diesel-powered submarines that were supposed to be delivered sometime in the early 2030s, but the deal was actually originally made in 2016. So Australia has a lot of sunk costs as through the French in this deal that suddenly is gone by the wayside via an announcement by Prime Minister Morrison, Prime Minister Johnson, and President Biden. So what does a nuclear submarine mean in the context of Australia and Asia in general? And why is that preferable to a diesel submarine? Well, that's one of the questions that's now being asked, because there's a lot of technical questions involved when you switch from a nuclear to or from a diesel to a nuclear submarine. I mean, clearly the nuclear submarine is better in the sense that it has more distance. You can travel faster, longer distances, more staying time on target because it doesn't have to come up and breathe like an electric powered diesel submarine does. So I mean, the big advantage of the nuclear submarine is it goes further. And so of course, this is where it starts playing into what is the larger strategy, the military strategy behind this? And beyond the military strategy, how does this fit into a larger strategy in the Indo-Pacific? Clearly, Australia is the one that initiated the whole idea of coming out with this defense agreement. As we've learned over the last couple of weeks that everybody who's ever thought about the Indo-Pacific has chimed in to provide their input on how this came about and all the strategic implications. So anyway, so what we know or what we think we know so far is that Australia actually came forward with this proposal because it wanted to get out from under the agreement it had with France on the diesel powered submarines because there's been a lot of problems. And according to the Australian version of this history is they've been reminding France that there's a lot of problems. Number one, the price is almost doubled from the original agreement of 30 some billion. It's now 60 some billion. And of course, the submarines aren't even being built yet. How could the price have doubled if the submarines aren't being built? That sounds like a strange negotiation. Well, it's just that as they start looking at the cost of how they're going to get it done, the price has gone up. I mean, if you think about the rail in Hawaii, it's probably a good example of how these things happen. So it's not that unusual in terms of the negotiations between the two. It's let's low ball the price and then go from there. And of course, if you go back and look at what happened with the original deal is Japan really thought it should get the deal. And then France kind of came in the side door and got and won the bid. So it's been a shaky project in some sense from the beginning. So anyway, so Australia wants to get out of the deal. And it convinces the UK who's trying to project itself is global Britain in the post Brexit to show that they have an international presence. Of course, this is the best we can tell one and only example of global Britain in the post Brexit. And the United States says, ooh, we could we could sell them our nuclear technology. And here's the real thing is the only other country, of course, that has ever gotten the US nuclear technology is great Britain. So the UK, the United States and Australia now have a deal to investigate the possibility of providing Australia with a nuclear submarine nuclear powered submarines. But of course, Australia has no capacity to to develop nuclear power, because it has been one of the strong advocates in the world for the non proliferation treaty and for for disarmament and doesn't have any nuclear power capability at all. So it's not a big question. It's a big change in policy, isn't it? It's a huge change in policy. Because because first of all, like I said, only the UK has the United States has only ever shared the nuclear technology, the naval nuclear technology with with the United Kingdom. So Australia is now coming on board, but it has no real experience in in nuclear power and navy nuclear power. And I say the other part of this, Carl, isn't it that these submarines that we're going to we're going to provide to Australia are not going to be somewhere that they're going to be non nuclear missile submarines. It's not they're not only the propulsion attack subs, they're not going to be SS. They're not going to be nuclear. They're not going to launch nuclear missiles. I mean, they they they launch torpedoes and they launch cruise missiles. So they're they're basically attack submarines. And a diesel submarine can do that same mission. It's just that again, it's it's extended time on on station and distances can be traversed faster because the boats themselves are much faster than the diesel powered submarines. But the point is, is that clearly the United States sees this as augmenting its nuclear its nuclear powered submarine capability in Asia. And of course, this means that Australia can now reasonably be expected to patrol South China Sea and and areas beyond its its the continent of Australia itself. Well, can I raise the you know that the central, we want to call it the central figure in all of this is China. If you talk about South China Sea, you're talking about China, you're talking about nuclear submarines in that area. You're talking about concerns by Australia, New Zealand, Philippines, what have you in Japan, for that matter. It's all about China. This is this really threatened China that Australia would have nuclear powered submarines, but not nuclear missiles. Or is this just kind of fooling ourselves? Is Australia fooling itself here? Well, it's not clear to me. And honestly, the the the conversation in Australia is quite heated. But there's a lot of different opinions that are being voiced right now about the technical issues associated with having nuclear powered submarines, because it's just not clear what the mission of these things are going to be. Is it really just to augment the American presence in Asia? I mean, clearly the United States, that's the United States's advantage. But I don't think that's really in Australia's best interest. But again, we don't know because it's not part of a larger package of strategic of a strategy for dealing with the rise of Chinese military. And certainly not a strategy for how the United States is going to pivot or transition its capabilities to Asia. You know, that's that's what the big that's what the big story is in the United States is that this is the first step in the Americans effort to pivot to Asia away from the Middle East now that we're out of Afghanistan. But again, the questions remain of how does this fit into a larger US strategy? Unfortunately, of course, it's focused on military technology. And that again, highlights the lack of strategy by the United States for the economic side of this. How does how does this benefit the United States's in economic engagement or diplomatic engagement in Asia? Because now you created a problem with with Japan, because Japan says, Oh, those guys get nuclear power, but we don't know nuclear powered submarines. And of course, South Korea, which has wanted nuclear powered submarines for some time, is now looking at and saying, wait a minute, we actually have a civilian nuclear power capability, but they're giving it to the Australians. So so they've sort of alienated two allies in Northeast Asia. And in Southeast Asia, of course, the Philippines has actually said this is good, because they see it as as an augmentation to submarine capability in the South China Sea. But the rest of Southeast Asia sees this as a risk, because now you've got you've got the United States and Australia focusing on South the South China Sea as a focal point for competition with China in the submarines. Yeah, one thing strikes me and maybe I haven't been watching, but so you have this big deal, multi billion dollar deal. I didn't know about the French deal, didn't know anything about it. I don't think they did a lot of media on it. And now you have this big media thing, where this is announced globally worldwide.  Was it necessary to publicize it? Was it necessary to tell the world about it? Would a would a perhaps a more careful strategy have been not to tell the world about it? A more careful strategy would have certainly would have separated out the cancellation of the French deal with the deal to to explore these areas of higher technology, because it isn't just submarines. I mean, the only the only thing you hear about is the submarines. But remember, the other capabilities are cyber artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and other undersea domains is what the is what the statement says. So these are all important areas. And these are areas, of course, where United States is competing technologically with Japan or with I'm sorry with China. You know, this is this is the big area of areas of competition. But it certainly isn't the case that only the United States, the UK and Australia can provide some input into that those kinds of technology. But I mean, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, although India, all those countries can provide some capability by by sectoring off the three the three English speaking countries, you rise, you raise all these racial racial issues. The the French, of course, have always been sensitive, you know, to the five eyes in some in some explanations by by analysts in the United States are saying, well, this has to be because of the five, you know, five eyes, just to just for clarification is intelligence sharing system between the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand. I got the three. Yeah.   And that's always been sort of looked at in a very unfavorable way by those that are left out. Japan has been trying to get in, South Korea has been trying to get in. And of course, the French feel that they should be a part of it also. So so you know, so they're saying that they have to separate this out because of because of the sensitivities of the intelligence behind it. But again, you have you have the sufferings as the highlight, not the other area. So so certainly to get back to your point, it would have been much better to to separate this out and to include it in a broader strategy, a broader strategy of how you're going to integrate economic defense diplomacy into a broader US strategy in the region and highlight how some of these other countries can in fact help and and are are helping in in developing different things in different areas, rather than saying this is a this is an exclusive three country club. And we're going to focus on a very technical issue on nuclear powered submarines. You know, whatever whatever other effects it might have, this agreement is a projection of American power into Asia, you know, a significant projection nuclear power. And not only that, but the expression of relationships between UK and in the US and Australia. So we have a great, as you said, we have a greater presence. So the question I have is what does this do to our existing and maybe rocky relationship with China? Does this exacerbate, you know, the friction with with China? Does this make them respond by cowering in the corner and say, Oh, my goodness, the Americans are back. Does it make them respond by increasing the size of their navy, which is already quite substantial? What kind of reaction do we get from that? Well, one, one, I mean, one, I don't think this is this is a correlation. But what the what the Chinese did about two days after, of course, is they put in their application to become part of the comprehensive and progressive trans-Pacific partnership, which of course is the old TPP that the United States walked away from the first day of the Trump administration. You know, so so that's what China is. Of course, it's going to is of course, it's going to exacerbate military competition. But China is also strength has always China's strength has always been the economic component. And that's where the United States continues to fail. It continues to focus on on the military, whether it's intentional or or not. The fact is, is that this is another military aspect of the U.S. engagement in Asia. And it's exactly what what Southeast Asia doesn't want to see. Certainly, China isn't going to say, Oh, we better pull out those those structures we built in the South China Sea and go home, because the United States now has eight more nuclear powered attack subs that are going to patrol the South China Sea. Of course not. You know, so so it's just a remarkable failure to understand the strategic need for a comprehensive strategy for the United States to engage Asia. Well, you know, one I even today, I saw an article somewhere that touched on the issue of how close are we to a war? And how, you know, there are factors and vectors, and maybe it's not right now, but it's over five, 10 years that if these things these frictions can continue, we will wind up in more than just an economic competition or even a military competition will be, you know, throwing weapons at each other. And I know it's hard to get to that it is kind of a, you know, a very troubling notion. But it seems to me that if you focus on the military competition, rather than the economic, and I certainly agree with you, then you're you're taking a step further toward military friction. Yeah, I mean, military actions result in counter military actions. You know, and so it's so sure. It's just it's just a cycle that with a vicious cycle that we need to get out of. And if you if you accept the General Milley's bona fides and calling Beijing or speaking to Beijing about Trump's intentions, you know, it's out of a movie, you think, well, my goodness, did he really feel it was necessary to do that? Did he really feel that they felt that, you know, there was the possibility of fisticuffs here? And you wonder what we don't know about the, you know, the cutting edge of that of that relationship as we may be closer than we think. Yeah. Yeah.  France, to be honest, France actually has a substantial presence in the Indian and the Pacific Ocean. You know, it it has forces all the way from the east coast of Africa to to New Caledonia to to French Polynesia. You know, so so all all the area that we're talking about in the Indo Pacific, France has has territory and they have they have military forces and they and they have a very big interest. And so to slap France in the face in this in the process, it just it just is baffling. Well, you say slap them in the face. I mean, was this done in a tricky manner? I really I'm afraid I don't know whether the United States told France before it told the world or whether the United States snuck around here and told the world before France even knew what hit him. Yeah, that's that's kind of open to debate.  I mean, that's his quote. He said it was an stab in the back. And and of course, they withdrew the ambassadors from from both the US and Australia. Now now they've they've they've brought the ambassador to US back after Biden's phone call. Biden, you know, said they would help with the with the they would support French activity in the Sahil in Africa. And they would work to to better the relationship. It's it's it's a little bit hard to tell. You know, I've seen I've seen both sides that that the Australians have said, look, we we've been telling the French all along that we have we had a problem with it with the diesel sub program France. I mean, France clearly is saying, no, you didn't you didn't say you were going to cancel it. And they've shown some evidence that that they were making making positive statements two days before the announcement came out. So but I you know, I think that that that in some ways, France is more heaved with with Australia. And the United States looks like sort of a gullible player in this whole thing that it didn't understand the broader strategic context, you know, and what we've seen since the announcement is everybody who fancies themselves as the strategist has come out with what this is this is what it means. This is the implication for for the broader Indo-Pacific strategy of the United States. And the United States hasn't even put out that strategy. Right. What about what about Brexit, you know, Brexit with not without some, you know, irritation, if you will. Yeah. Is is there an irritation resulting from Brexit or around Brexit between France and the UK that enters into this some. Oh, absolutely. You know, and this and this is the other the other impact that it's had is France has really become more important, obviously, to the European Union. And France has been promoting what's what's called European Union sovereignty. And so it's been promoting a strategy for European Union engagement with Asia. And in fact, you know, this this whole announcement about AUKUS sort of overwhelmed a released document by the European Union for its engagement with the end of its Indo-Pacific strategy.  And Germany is in a bit of a pickle about getting a sack together. And where Angela Merkel was, you know, clearly and Germany, the leader of the EU over a period of years, she was there when 15 years and so now that's not happening. And it's not likely to happen. And it leaves a power vacuum among the countries in the EU. And and where I read that, you know, who is going to succeed Germany as the leader of the EU? Well, it may very well be France.  Angela Merkel as the leader of the EU. Does that enter into this? France, France very much has tried to tried to take that very position, especially on the Indo-Pacific, you know, because begin because it has those interests, because it has those territories, it has a big interest in Asia. So so it clearly is trying to move itself into a position of leading the European Union in into its engagement with China and the broader Indo-Pacific. So so certainly, I think that that this is this is something that's very important. And the relationship between France and the UK was greatly damaged by Brexit. And the response by France has been exactly that, to promote a stronger European Union absent the UK's participation. So here, let's turn to the Biden administration. You know, I hate to say it, but as much as I want to support him and believe in him and see him as the savior of democracy in this country, you know, he's been right or wrong, he's been criticized. And this seems to be a subject of possible criticism where, as you were saying, this isn't really necessarily a military strategy, ideally, it's a it's a comprehensive strategy, but they left out the economic. And this is this is a problem because it it sounds like the military is driving the diplomacy here. And Tony Blinken is taking signals from the military instead of the other way around. What are your thoughts about that? Well, exactly. I was thinking about that, too, that it clearly is is a failure to think strategically by by the State Department. I mean, that's the real that's the real conundrum I see. And unfortunately, it follows on, as you've been watching Millie's testimony, you know, he basically pinned on State Department saying they waited too long to to do the the non non essential evacuation order. And so it's a strategic failure by State Department in Afghanistan. You know, and now this is I think another example of of the State Department just doesn't seem to to have its strategic act together. I mean, this was a very tactical move. And State should have should have seen alarm bells that this was going to that this was going to create problems for for the US relationship with with with its allies in Asia and with with the European Union. You know, so so yeah, and you've got to to put it you've got to put it in the doorsteps of the State Department. Yeah, well, which means Biden. But let me ask you this, though, it was extraordinary and very newsworthy that McCron decided to withdraw recall is the word the ambassador from Washington to Paris. And that is that is extraordinary because our national relationship with them goes back to their investment in Washington's army. It goes back to the very beginning of our Republic, they have always been our our friend, our ally through thick and thin for 240 years. And so you really wonder, and this has never happened before. So it has to mean something, no? Well, careful now. Don't forget that that France withdrew its military from NATO because it felt like it wasn't being treated fairly by the United States with with the nuclear forces. And also don't forget Freedom Prize in 2003. So so we've had we've had a good relationship. But but it's it there have been bumps in that in that US French relationship. And you know, and I think this this exacerbates that this this and it reminds the French, you know, one more time, you know, these Americans sometimes we just can't trust them. You know, and so I think that that that and that's that's what I think we should be worried about that that with with France trying to promote itself as the leader of the European Union. And and it trying to to ensure that the European Union is is strong and has some capability of responding to us that that we need to be careful that that we need to remember that that France, while it's been a faithful ally, we have we have had some run ins with them. And that's what I mean when I think when I say that that somebody at state should have said, wait a minute, this may not be such a good idea and unpack this thing a little bit and say, Australia, if you don't like your your deal with the French, you go undo your deal. Don't don't undo your deal in the context of us promising you nuclear powered submarines. Yeah, so on the other hand, you know, Macron, that was pretty abrupt, wasn't it? Did he go you think he went over the top? Could he have handled that in a better way? Well, yeah, sure.  And so for French politics, I think it was was very, very much in line with him trying to promote himself as a strong defender of France. But it goes beyond that. It wasn't just just playing to the domestic audience.  And then and then the other thing is is he, I think, as we talked about, he's trying to Europeanize this, he's trying to say this is an affront on on the European Union. It's not just it's this is this is the UK and the United States teaming up against us to take advantage of Australia. You know, and so I think that Macron, yes, he overreacted, but it was I think very calculated on his part. Well, it also follows the Trump administration where where Trump was, you know, lost no opportunity to beat them up and diminish the NATO, diminish the EU, diminish every country there. And God, that was insulting. Their feelings were hurting, you know, for four years. And now untie they and they have great hopes that Biden will correct that. And this then this happens. Yeah. And so and so there's there's French commentary that have said said exactly that that this this is this is a problem in America. It goes well beyond Trump here. This is this is this America first mindset. And and we need to we need to be very wary of it. And so it doesn't it doesn't help us in any immediate way, I don't think. And then and then we haven't we haven't even gotten to the real the real problem is this whole business of trying to transfer this technology. There's going to be a lot of discussion about this in Australia in the very near future, because because Australians are not going to just roll over and say, OK, yeah, we'll just take this American technology and and we're not going to touch it. And it's going to be a mess. Why? Why, Carl? Well, because there's a very strong anti nuclear movement in Australia. And what what what I've seen talking about the technical aspects of this nuclear submarine is what the Americans are trying to say is they're going to provide them a nuclear reactor for these naval ships, which by the way, the United States is the only country that uses highly enriched uranium in naval reactors. And that that uranium that uranium is not accessible to the IEA because there's a cut out in the IEA agreements for the US for high in highly enriched uranium. And so what the United States is saying they're going to do is they're going to package this highly enriched uranium in a reactor and you won't have to touch it for 35 years. This is this is unique to the United States. This technology only the United States is developing this kind of technology. So so Australia is going to end up with a ship that with a reactor that they can't do anything with. They have to send it back to the United States if it needs anything done. That's not going to work.  And in the meantime, they're saying at best, you're going to get a nuclear submarine to Australia in late 2030s. So you don't have nuclear submarines patrolling South China Sea anytime soon. So there's a whole lot of questions left there. Yeah, it strikes me too. Yeah, as you say, this reactor will make the way it's set up will make them dependent on us going forward. It will also limit their ability to that reactor. So in the case of a diesel submarine, you can get diesel fuel everywhere anywhere. It's ubiquitous. But in the case of a nuclear submarine that depends on having this reactor around, you're really limited. And furthermore, it's an object of sabotage, an object of failure, an object of explosion. In the case of some extreme weather, who knows what. So it's got it's kind of technical technical weaknesses. Yeah, there's there's a huge technical side to this thing. I mean, and it's more detail than we need to get into. But but that's that's going to become a big issue here in the next in the next 18 months as they think about how they're going to do this. You know, there's been some discussion that what's going to end up happening is they're going to lease a US submarine. And so then they're talking about a Los Angeles class. Now, I'm certainly it's not going to be a Virginia class, which is what they really want, because they're they're just too precious to the United States. So, you know, so there's there's questions about how you're going to deal with the transitional period, because right now Australia has has what's called the Collins class sub, which is which is really dated. Those things are really old. And so they're not there. They're problematic. They're not and they've been, their shelf life has been extended already. And now they're trying to extend the thing into into the 2030s. So so it's going to become a real technical issue between the United States and Australia before we're done with this.  Thank you. Well, so one thing is really remarkable that we should discuss it is Biden's very adept maneuvers after it hit the fan to regroup with Prince and to say what had to be said and do what had to be done to bring them back into the fold and have them retract their retraction and send the ambassador back to Washington. What happened, Carl? Well, I mean, I don't know. I don't know any inside details of how he did that other than as I said earlier, you know, they agreed to support French, French military in the Sahel in Africa. And they're they're they're promised to to work through issues with France on better relations with the European Union and NATO and all that. And that's that's about all I have a recollection of seeing somewhere that McCron made that made the point that he that France lost a lot of money in this deal. They had arguably profit coming out of this deal. Maybe that's one of the reasons that the price went up. And somehow Biden said to him it was it was it was transactional as far as I remember. Biden said to him something like we're going to make good on that. We're going to help you out because we know you lost money. We're going to we're going to help to help to compensate you in some way. Well, Francis also said that they're going to build the Australians for for work that's been done. So so they've also they've also put out fair warning to the Australians that that they're not going to just let them walk away without without covering some of their costs too. So Carl, you know, I could answer this based on what you've said, but let me let me ask you to say it again. What what are the lessons here? What are the lessons we've learned about projecting power in the Pacific? What are the lessons we've learned about making military deals without comprehensive policies, comprehensive strategies? What are the lessons about dealing with our allies? There are a lot of lessons here. It's it's not as if we you know we can immediately forgive ourselves. Well, and the lesson is is that you know the let's use the butterfly effect. I mean, when you do something tactical, it has strategic implications. And so when you when you do something, think about what you're doing in terms of your broader strategy. And I think it's really really that's a fundamental principle that we seem to have lost. And I was thinking about why is that why why is that we do that? And you know, and I think it goes back to the simple fact that everybody is thinking short term. Everybody's thinking about we got to do something before 2022 elections, we got to do something before the end of this election cycle. You know, and it just becomes so self destructive. And as the United States becomes so, so politicized and everything, this this this activity at the tactical level becomes becomes overwhelming. And we never get to the point where we actually develop a strategy. You know, and the strategy is is too late and too little. And so I think that that the the real lesson is is if you want to lead the world, you have to think like a leader and leaders think strategically. And they think they think 20 years out, they think 30 years out. But they don't make tactical mistakes in the on the way to those 20 years. You know, they recognize the tactical they recognize the tactical issues before they become an issue. And that's why and I think that's why we saw this this deluge of commentary at the strategic level of what this means in terms of the American Indo Pacific strategy, the European Union Indo Pacific strategy, how Australia fits into this this broader context. I mean, look at what's happening with the quad, you know, suddenly the whole the whole idea of the quad the the India, Australia, US, Japan has been thrown into turmoil. What what is their role in this thing? I thought I thought the quad was going to become an important security mechanism.  Japan has been left out India, of course, has always felt left out. These this doesn't help. So anyway, yeah, so I think, you know, the real the real bottom line is tactical actions have strategic implication. Oh, that is so right on that. Thank you so much for those comments that wisdom really appreciated today. Thanks for coming on. I really feel we have all learned a lot from this discussion. And I hope to see you again. I hope I don't have the same kind of issue again. But I hope to see you again soon. Something something kinder and gentler maybe like where's the United States and its economic policy in Asia. Yeah, that's coming soon. Thank you, Carl Baker appreciate your your being here.


In many highway maintenance operations, it's the loader operator who keeps things going. And although it takes a while to get a feel for the machine and how it works, you'll see that there's a certain rhythm to operation, a balance. The loader is a powerful machine, and in the hands of a skilled operator, it can get a lot of work done in a day. In part one of this program on loader operation, we went through the procedures for starting up the loader, operating the loader controls, and shutting down at the end of the day. Here in part two, we'll cover maneuvering the loader and some of the basic operations you'll perform as a loader operator. The first thing to consider when driving the loader is bucket position. You should keep the bucket around two feet off the ground and roll back. Never travel with a bucket high in the air. Besides cutting down your visibility, it makes the machine top heavy. A good bump could tip you over. You could also get snagged on overhead power lines or tree limbs. Keep the bucket low for better control. And remember, the bucket can be used to carry many things, but not people. Never allow riders in the bucket or anywhere else on the loader. To drive the loader forward, first fasten your seat belt. Make sure you're in neutral. Then start the loader and raise the bucket to travel position. Release the parking brake and shift into gear. You'll remember there are two forward gears, low gear for working, and high gear for traveling. Pretty simple, right? Well backing up is easy too. Just stop the loader, put it in reverse, and back up. Your rear view field division in a loader is excellent. Use it. Now as you learned earlier, steering a loader is quite a bit different than steering a car or truck. The whole front end swings around when you turn the wheel. The frame is articulated. It gives you a much tighter turning radius to maneuver in close quarters. But when you're driving in the yard or to the job site, give yourself plenty of room to go around obstacles.  And remember, never let anyone in the pivot area when the engine's running. I'm sure you remember that barrel we crushed in part one. Now a couple of points to remember. Loaders don't have springs or shock absorbers. A bad bump, even a small one, can rock the loader enough to cause control problems. Slow down on rough terrain and keep the bucket about two feet off the ground. If the loader gets to rocking and the bucket's too low, there's a chance it will dig into the ground and you'll lose control. Another thing to keep in mind are your doors. Never operate with a loader door swinging open.  Now let's take a look at a couple of basic operations. Working with stockpiles and dump trucks. First, stockpiling. Moving a stockpile from one place to another. I know, sounds like the military, right? Well, in fact, it's an excellent operation to learn how to maneuver the loader and use the boom and bucket controls. Keep your work area as smooth as possible. A level area lets you move more quickly and improves your productivity. Clean up the area around the stockpile before, during, and after the operation. When you're working with stockpiles, it's important that you keep the bucket down low and level to the ground as you go into the pile. If you go at the stockpile with the bucket rolled forward, you'll dig into the ground before you reach the pile. Besides making your area look like a battlefield, you'll contaminate the stockpile material. Since this is a stockpile of a special aggregate, the contaminated portion is no good. On the other hand, if you go at the pile with the bucket rolled back, the loader will push right up the side of the pile, compacting the material underneath. Your front wheels will lose traction and you won't get much material in the bucket either. So keep the bucket level with the blade just off the ground. Most loaders have an indicator somewhere on the boom that shows you when the bucket's level. And you also have an automatic leveler in the cab. Just pull it to the left and let it go. And the bucket returns to the level position as you lower the boom. Go straight in at the bottom of the stockpile. Then lift the boom and roll the bucket back as you continue pushing into the pile. Keep the bucket curled back as you back out of the pile. Go to the side of the new stockpile and curl the bucket forward to dump the material. Dump from as low a height as possible. That prevents scattering the material all over the area. Then go back for more. During this or any operation, pay attention to how the machine is running. Keep an eye on the gauges. If anything goes out of the normal operating range, stop working and investigate. And when you take a break, give the loader a quick walk around inspection. Look for loose parts, leaks or any sign of damage and take care of it. Clean out the pre-cleaner now and then. As I said in part one, dirty air is one of the leading causes of diesel engine failure. It doesn't take much time to take care of your equipment. Digging material out of a bank is just about the same as working a stockpile. The only difference is the material in a bank is harder and more compact. You need to work a little slower and use more power to dig it out.  Curl the bucket back as you raise the boom. Then back out when the buckets full. You'll also have to work stockpiles of the salt we use for snow and ice control. Again, the procedure is the same. But the stockpile is usually stored indoors in a salt shed. That's different. The problem is clearance. The bucket can easily reach the rafters in the shed. You've got to keep the entrance to the shed clear. If the material builds up in the doorway, it cuts down your overhead clearance. And even though the shed is not exactly the Cornhusker Hotel in Lincoln, it needs its roof. Okay, now loading trucks. As I said earlier, working with a stockpile is good practice for other loader operations. It's hard to damage a pile of dirt. But loading trucks requires a little more practice and a lot more care. So if loader operation is new to you, take it easy. Think about every move you make. Try to follow a three-point path. Go into the stockpile, raise the boom, and curl the bucket back. Then back out and turn.  If you go in at an angle, half of the bucket load will end up on the ground. Roll the bucket forward to dump it. After you dump the bucket, roll it back or lift the boom before you back out. If you don't clear the side of the box, you're going to do a lot of damage. Always keep an eye on the driver or other people around you. The driver should be in the cab or well away from the truck.  One more point about loading trucks. Don't dump the material with the bucket up too high. If that was a bucket full of rock instead of dirt, the driver might need a new suspension system for his truck. Okay, let's take a look at one more operation. Loading pipe on a trailer. It's really a two or three-man operation. While you're operating the loader, the others help with the chains and stacking. The trick is to adjust the chains so the pipe is balanced. Then moving slowly, you operate the boom and bucket control to lift and lower the pipe. The first layer of pipe should be blocked. Then chain down loosely to keep them from rolling when you put on the second layer. As in all loader operations, careful work and avoiding dangerous situations is the best way to get the job done. Only can't stress safety enough. The loader is a powerful machine and it demands respect and careful operation. Read the manual. Read the manufacturer's warning. Know the capabilities and limitations of the machine. The loader can be used on any number of maintenance jobs, but it can be dangerous if not operated correctly. And that's it for loader operation. You've covered a lot of ground in two programs, but watching a TV show won't make you a good operator. That takes practice, experience, and a willingness to learn. If you're a new operator, these programs are meant to give you a start to show you the capabilities of the machine and your responsibilities for its daily maintenance. And if you're an experienced highway worker, maybe you've picked up some details you'll find useful. In this way, the rest is up to you.