If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Aero-News Newwork)   Hey General, what do you want us to do with these brand new C-27 cargo planes? H-m-m, ya' know, we really don't have a practical use for them - Just send 'em straight to the aircraft bone yard in Arizona   (aero-news.net) divider line 140
    More: Fail, Arizona, cargo aircraft, Spartans, Sonoran Desert, Air Force Chief of Staff, U.S. Air Force, aircraft  
•       •       •

16111 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Feb 2014 at 9:16 AM (46 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



140 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-03 12:31:50 PM  

DON.MAC: JacksonBryan: From the comments (have not verified but might look)

They have all been disposed of or will be on completion. Seven have gone to the US Army for Special Forces trainers. the remaining fourteen are going to the USCG in exchange for seven older C-130H models which are to be completely refurbished by the USAF (including wing boxes) and then transferred to the USFS (as title holder) for use as Air Tankers by private companies under contract to the USFS, probably using the MAAFF2 system.

Are they chemtrail spraying equipped?


Dude! Ixnay on the emtrail-che aying-spray...the greys are beginning to suspect something.

MJ-9 of 12
 
2014-02-03 12:32:10 PM  
But you see, it's the welfare queen that scams the government out of $20 every time she uses food stamps for junk food that is the real problem here.
 
2014-02-03 12:41:01 PM  

ginko: IAAB (I am a buyer) and we have 4 ways to track replenishment starting before a PO is cut. The computer can tell us to buy something based on preset stocking requirements. We can override the system and tell it to buy something beyond but our ID and the date the override happens is recorded. The person who releases the PO to the supplier is recorded and anyone who edits said PO after the fact is also recorded. Then there's receiving.. so really 5 ways.

Who the hell creates an order for such a large amount of hardware and then lets it ride without finding out if they really wanted it in the first place? Anyone from the above list should be fired. Let them be held accountable.

/you want to fix gov't spending, get rid of these people.


Cheetos and Mountain Dew don't count!

/i keed, keed
 
2014-02-03 12:41:27 PM  

muchgoodmojo: MyRandomName: lilbjorn: But by all means, GOP, please save 0.05% of this wasted money by cutting the NPR budget.

Is it your ignorant assertion that liberal politicians never fight over DOD funds for their district?

It was management's assertion at the place I used to work, that a democrat controlled government was generally better for business... After 20 years there I found myself agreing with them.


Both parties are bad for pork barreled spending.  However, it's generally Republicans that are hardcore on never cutting ANY Defense spending.
 
2014-02-03 12:42:20 PM  
The bone yard is pretty cool if you ever get bored on google maps.
 
2014-02-03 12:43:14 PM  

OnlyM3: But obama's 2 Billion for a few GM jobs was a wise investment.


The first $15 billion that went to GM was given by George Bush the Lesser.

/Obama Derangement Syndrome.   "Damn Obama and his magical time machine!"
 
2014-02-03 12:44:44 PM  

m00: dittybopper: Of course, it's not the military's fault: Blame the politicians who use military funding to get jobs for their districts, essentially purchasing votes.

$567 million for 800 jobs! what a deal! Who wants to bet one of those jobs is CEO, and campaign contributor... and he personally cleared a couple hundred million since 2007?


At least we got something tangible out of the deal, which makes it more profitable than Solyndra.
 
2014-02-03 12:46:51 PM  

WhiskeyBoy: OnlyM3: m00


dittybopper: Of course, it's not the military's fault: Blame the politicians who use military funding to get jobs for their districts, essentially purchasing votes.

$567 million for 800 jobs! what a deal!
But obama's 2 Billion for a few GM jobs was a wise investment.

/// hypocrites.


The difference is that money was paid back.  So, not really the same thing.


Except that it all wasn't.
 
2014-02-03 12:54:27 PM  
Isn't Canada always looking for new military kit and whatnot? Why not sell it to Ottawa?
 
2014-02-03 12:58:51 PM  

JacksonBryan: From the comments (have not verified but might look)

They have all been disposed of or will be on completion. Seven have gone to the US Army for Special Forces trainers. the remaining fourteen are going to the USCG in exchange for seven older C-130H models which are to be completely refurbished by the USAF (including wing boxes) and then transferred to the USFS (as title holder) for use as Air Tankers by private companies under contract to the USFS, probably using the MAAFF2 system.


So the army gives planes to private contractors who they then pay to use the planes to refuel their other planes?
That seems slightly pointless when you could just keep the planes and train your own pilots to do the refueling.
 
2014-02-03 01:09:02 PM  
dittybopper:
That's where this sort of thing can be a help:  It would probably only take at most a day to get one of those mothballed aircraft ready in a national emergency.  Change the fluids, maybe the tires, check out the electronics and controls, and away you go.  Get a few teams of mechanics and flight crews, and you could have them ready pretty quickly.

I'd imagine there's quite a bit more to it that 'just' topping up the oil. Oxidization never, ever, ever stops. You need to recheck all of the rubber and seals. Moreover, many joints and sealings depend upon use for their continued maintenance otherwise these can become brittle and require teardown and replacement. Finally, the aircraft will have 'Nothing' in all of the maintenance entries for a decade. It simply won't get certified for flight until everything is inspected, retorqued and spun up for testing.

There's a big difference between idling the engine on a tarmac and actually having inspectors remove the AOG flag next to its name. Moreover, where are all of the parts going to come from all at once? Where are the technicians and engineers who need to be trained and certified to work on ten-year-old variants going to come from or do you have them in cryogenic suspension somewhere? Sorry, I don't buy the idea that pulling aircraft from the dust is as easy as you make out.
 
2014-02-03 01:11:23 PM  
jaypgreene.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-02-03 01:22:22 PM  

PainInTheASP: MJ-9 of 12



Michael Jackson liked 9-to-12 year olds?

WFT and I reading?
 
2014-02-03 01:32:22 PM  

chachi88: ginko: IAAB (I am a buyer) and we have 4 ways to track replenishment starting before a PO is cut. The computer can tell us to buy something based on preset stocking requirements. We can override the system and tell it to buy something beyond but our ID and the date the override happens is recorded. The person who releases the PO to the supplier is recorded and anyone who edits said PO after the fact is also recorded. Then there's receiving.. so really 5 ways.

Who the hell creates an order for such a large amount of hardware and then lets it ride without finding out if they really wanted it in the first place? Anyone from the above list should be fired. Let them be held accountable.

/you want to fix gov't spending, get rid of these people.

Cheetos and Mountain Dew don't count!

/i keed, keed


Don't knock the fuel that keeps me buying when my system upgrades crap out. Today sucks in the purchasing dept and time for more Dew :)
 
2014-02-03 01:41:43 PM  

croesius: Mikey1969: Well, in the first place, it says that they were originally ordered in 2007, and sequestration forced their mission to be reconsidered. This isn't WalMart, they couldn't just get to the Cargo Plane Checkout and say ' I don't want these, you'll need to put them in the GoBacks cart.'. The planes were ordered, they take awhile to be built, and the contract stipulates they get delivered.

But they are still, at this moment, making more of them. It's not that they began the process, and once it was done had extra. They are still building the planes, knowing exactly where they will go.

"But the C-27J Spartans are parked in the desert, and more are being built and delivered into storage. An Air Force spokesman said the program was "too near completion" to be able to terminate the program in a way that does not cost the taxpayers more than building the airplanes and sending them immediately to the boneyard. "

I'm wondering how it would cost us more to stop building them, than to build them.


"when a big government contract is chugging along, there are costs associated with shutting it down rarely taken into account by those poor souls suffering from late stage Deficit Obsession Syndrome. Bills already owed, fixed costs that cannot always be easily unwound, sometimes layoffs and severance benefits ahead "
Link
 
2014-02-03 01:45:08 PM  
Idea: why don't we put guns on them like the Spectre? I'm sure we could use those.

Oh, it would need armor plating then? No problem! Put it on!

Hmm the engines won't be able to lift that craft with the guns and armor? Replace the engines with jet turbines!

What will we have then?

A no-runway cargo jet that needs a runway to land, can't carry cargo and has less armament than a Spectre but is slower. Brilliant!
 
2014-02-03 01:55:25 PM  

gaslight: dittybopper:
That's where this sort of thing can be a help:  It would probably only take at most a day to get one of those mothballed aircraft ready in a national emergency.  Change the fluids, maybe the tires, check out the electronics and controls, and away you go.  Get a few teams of mechanics and flight crews, and you could have them ready pretty quickly.

I'd imagine there's quite a bit more to it that 'just' topping up the oil. Oxidization never, ever, ever stops. You need to recheck all of the rubber and seals. Moreover, many joints and sealings depend upon use for their continued maintenance otherwise these can become brittle and require teardown and replacement. Finally, the aircraft will have 'Nothing' in all of the maintenance entries for a decade. It simply won't get certified for flight until everything is inspected, retorqued and spun up for testing.

There's a big difference between idling the engine on a tarmac and actually having inspectors remove the AOG flag next to its name. Moreover, where are all of the parts going to come from all at once? Where are the technicians and engineers who need to be trained and certified to work on ten-year-old variants going to come from or do you have them in cryogenic suspension somewhere? Sorry, I don't buy the idea that pulling aircraft from the dust is as easy as you make out.


Well, *YES*, but in a national emergency a lot of niceties go out the window, and even if you were to replace all the seals, etc., it still takes less time than building an entire plane from scratch, even in an assembly line situation.

In other words, it would take much less time and resources to service and put into action pre-existing mothballed aircraft than it would to build an equivalent number of new aircraft.

Oh, and it's not like they are just towed out there and abandoned:

An aircraft going into storage undergoes the following treatments:

All guns, ejection seat charges, and classified hardware are removed.

The fuel system is protected by draining it, refilling it with lightweight oil, and then draining it again. This leaves a protective oil film.

The aircraft is sealed from dust, sunlight, and high temperatures. This is done using a variety of materials, ranging from a high tech vinyl plastic compound, called spraylat after its producer the Spraylat Corporation, of an opaque white color sprayed on the aircraft, to simple garbage bags. The plane is then towed by a tug to its designated "storage" position.


In other words, they are prepped for long term storage with an eye to making them flyable again with the minimal amount of effort necessary (assuming they aren't destined for spare parts, etc.).
 
2014-02-03 01:57:44 PM  

simkatu: OnlyM3: But obama's 2 Billion for a few GM jobs was a wise investment.

The first $15 billion that went to GM was given by George Bush the Lesser.


And that means it was a good idea how exactly? Newsflash idiot, both parties are completely capable of doing idiotic things.
 
2014-02-03 02:12:12 PM  
Lets flip the budget for the military and the budget for education and see what happens.
 
2014-02-03 02:16:47 PM  
OK, so I went on Google Earth and took a look around Davis-Monthan.  I found a few gems, including a couple of RB-57's.  Those were obsolete when the U-2 came out, and we're still saving them?
 
2014-02-03 02:18:08 PM  

umad: simkatu: OnlyM3: But obama's 2 Billion for a few GM jobs was a wise investment.

The first $15 billion that went to GM was given by George Bush the Lesser.

And that means it was a good idea how exactly?

Newsflash idiot, both parties are completely capable of doing idiotic things.

It was a good idea.  Loaning GM money saved hundreds of thousands of jobs from downstream suppliers, customers, and various ancillary operations as well as all the other businesses in the towns the plants are in that depend on having thousands of well paid workers.

I was just pointing out to the person that blamed Obama for the bailout that it was actually George the Lesser that provided the $15 billion initial loan.   I'm sure the guy also forgot that George the Lesser signed TARP into law too, but that's common among his type.

/Both sides are bad so vote Republican!
 
2014-02-03 02:18:37 PM  

TheNewJesus: Lets flip the budget for the military and the budget for education and see what happens.


Your cunning plan...
 
2014-02-03 02:22:46 PM  

simkatu: It was a good idea. Loaning GM money saved hundreds of thousands of jobs from downstream suppliers, customers, and various ancillary operations as well as all the other businesses in the towns the plants are in that depend on having thousands of well paid workers rewarded their terrible business practices by putting the burden of covering their losses on the taxpayer. Just like we did when we rewarded the asshole bankers who crashed the economy.


FTFY

simkatu: I was just pointing out to the person that blamed Obama for the bailout that it was actually George the Lesser that provided the $15 billion initial loan.


We know this. We don't care because we aren't partisan farksticks. Bush was scum. Obama is scum for continuing his policies. Is that clear enough for you, tard?
 
2014-02-03 02:25:40 PM  
This program is chump change.   The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is the biggest boondoggle ever.   It has a program cost of $1.45 TRILLIONand there is very little likelihood that any of the 3000 planes will ever see any combat.   We haven't needed a single fighter in the last 30 years of warmongering around the world.   We aren't going to be fighting the next war with manned fighter jets.

/But those are good high paying jerbs building them planes (and the work is divided up among almost all 50 states, so every Senator gets a piece of pie).
 
2014-02-03 02:40:24 PM  

dittybopper: OK, so I went on Google Earth and took a look around Davis-Monthan.  I found a few gems, including a couple of RB-57's.  Those were obsolete when the U-2 came out, and we're still saving them?


Love looking at the boneyards on Google Earth.  Really damn awesome, especially their Cold War era stuff like the Canberras.

IIRC, I think NASA and the Coast Guard still have some Canberras flying for weather observation / hurricane testing.
 
2014-02-03 03:08:37 PM  

give me doughnuts: PainInTheASP: MJ-9 of 12


Michael Jackson liked 9-to-12 year olds?

WFT and I reading?


Sorry, I can't say.  You don't have the clearance.
 
2014-02-03 04:30:49 PM  

OnlyM3: m00


dittybopper: Of course, it's not the military's fault: Blame the politicians who use military funding to get jobs for their districts, essentially purchasing votes.

$567 million for 800 jobs! what a deal!
But obama's 2 Billion for a few GM jobs was a wise investment.

/// hypocrites.


Ohh you mean a program initiated by Bush, implemented by Obama that was paid back and saved the American Auto Industry (not just one company) that employs roughly 1 out of every 5 Americans?
 
2014-02-03 04:33:44 PM  

dittybopper: dittybopper: FatherChaos: No wonder our youth is borderline potato.  If we switched military spending with education, we'd have the smartest combat force in existence.

1. We already do:   Education spending in the US is 5.5% of GDP, whereas defense spending is only 4.4% of GDP.

2. We already do have the smartest combat force in existence.

Fark didn't like the first URL:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_spending_on_educati o n_(%25_of_GDP)



There is no Source that Wikipedia sites for you Education Spending.
 
2014-02-03 06:09:16 PM  

shtychkn: dittybopper: dittybopper: FatherChaos: No wonder our youth is borderline potato.  If we switched military spending with education, we'd have the smartest combat force in existence.

1. We already do:   Education spending in the US is 5.5% of GDP, whereas defense spending is only 4.4% of GDP.

2. We already do have the smartest combat force in existence.

Fark didn't like the first URL:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_spending_on_educati o n_(%25_of_GDP)


There is no Source that Wikipedia sites for you Education Spending.


World Bank says 5.4 and 5.6 for the last two years they have numbers:
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/S E.XPD.TOTL.GD.ZS
 
2014-02-03 07:25:04 PM  

shtychkn: hh you mean a program initiated by Bush, implemented by Obama that was paid back and saved the American Auto Industry (not just one company) that employs roughly 1 out of every 5 Americans?


Don't even bother, Conservatives believe that one can magically convert money from the federal reserves discount window into 'stuff'. Industrial policy involves spending money on factories and workers and that's just disgusting and dirty. Libertarians believe that heavy industry grows magically like mushrooms after a warm rain. If wasn't for government interference someone would invint a magical machine that makes cars out of thin air.
 
2014-02-03 07:45:30 PM  

dittybopper: FatherChaos: No wonder our youth is borderline potato.  If we switched military spending with education, we'd have the smartest combat force in existence.

1. We already do:   Education spending in the US is 5.5% of GDP, whereas defense spending is only 4.4% of GDP.

2. We already do have the smartest combat force in existence.


Actually chief, I see US government figures saying that the DoD gets app. $150 billion more per year than all levels of govt. spend on primary and secondary education:

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_education_spending_20.html
 
2014-02-03 07:58:41 PM  

dittybopper: way south: Do you suppose they'll want old planes for their next war, or brand new planes?
I bet money it'll be the latter.

They'll still be brand new planes.  They won't have any time on the airframes or engines, which is how you measure the age of an airplane, not the chronological age.

It's like buying a new car and putting it in a garage for a decade.  It's still a new car.  Sure, you'll want to change the fluids and maybe the tires, but that's all it would take to make it show-room new.  Same thing here:  The dry desert helps preserve the aircraft in new condition.

Plus, as I pointed out, it takes *TIME* to ramp up production for aircraft (or anything else, for that matter).  If you are set up to crank out an airplane a week, you can't just start cranking out an airplane a day immediately.  You need to hire more workers, get more tooling, more factory space, etc.

That's where this sort of thing can be a help:  It would probably only take at most a day to get one of those mothballed aircraft ready in a national emergency.  Change the fluids, maybe the tires, check out the electronics and controls, and away you go.  Get a few teams of mechanics and flight crews, and you could have them ready pretty quickly.


The question is if the aircraft will still find a role to fill after you've done all that.  Sitting in the boneyard it may not gather mechanical wear and tear, but its growing increasingly obsolete by the hour as new technology is adding survivability and range to existing platforms.
Soldiers aren't milling hours of experience on these things and no ones learning the details of how to maintain them. You might as well sell the batch before dry rot eats out the plastics, because if you put them back in service in ten years you'll be worse off than if you pulled a couple of hercs from the same field.
Then you've still got the congressional game to deal with, which prefers signing new contracts before pulling old vehicles from the mothballs.
In the end this doesn't seem to be the kind of plane the military was looking for, or they wouldn't have gone unclaimed so easily.
 
2014-02-03 08:06:56 PM  
Any thread in these situations needs this link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXQ2lO3ieBA
 
2014-02-04 08:20:26 AM  

BolshyGreatYarblocks: dittybopper: FatherChaos: No wonder our youth is borderline potato.  If we switched military spending with education, we'd have the smartest combat force in existence.

1. We already do:   Education spending in the US is 5.5% of GDP, whereas defense spending is only 4.4% of GDP.

2. We already do have the smartest combat force in existence.

Actually chief, I see US government figures saying that the DoD gets app. $150 billion more per year than all levels of govt. spend on primary and secondary education:

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_education_spending_20.html


You don't read very well, do you?  From your link:

                                             Fed     Gov.Xfer   State     Local       Total
[+]     Education     141.8     -96.5     285.7     673.0     1,004.0      
[+]     Defense       830.9       0.0       0.8       0.0       831.7



I think you have that backwards.  Collectively, we spend about (1,004-831.7) = 172.3 billion more on education than on defense.

Just in case you need a picture (again, from your own link):

chart.googleapis.com

Education is 16% of the total federal, state, and local spending, and Defense is only 13%.
 
2014-02-04 08:43:44 AM  

way south: The question is if the aircraft will still find a role to fill after you've done all that.  Sitting in the boneyard it may not gather mechanical wear and tear, but its growing increasingly obsolete by the hour as new technology is adding survivability and range to existing platforms.


An available aircraft that is 80 or 90% as capable as a new one that isn't available because it hasn't been built yet is clearly the better choice.

Plus, I think you over-estimate the issues there:  The ability to survive in many cases is through things that are, in essence, "bolt ons" that can be installed in a large aircraft like that with minimal issues.

You aren't thinking "national emergency", which is a large part of the boneyard's raison d'etre.  When the shiat hits the fan, you use everything you possibly can.  We've actually used C-27Js in Afghanistan, so we know they work.  They aren't as big or as long range as, say, a C-130, but sometimes that can be an advantage too:  You aren't putting all your eggs in a single basket, and something like the C-27J can manage to land on fields that the C-130 can't.

The whole idea behind the US purchasing them was to replace the smaller and less capable C-23 Sherpa as a US Army logistical aircraft, because the C-23 was found to be wanting and that placed more of the onus on the Army's helicopter fleet.  As such, it fills a niche that the C-130 is too big for, and the CH-47 shiathook is too expensive to operate*.

The problem in this case, was that the Air Force saw this as the actual military trying to gain a toe-hold in their bailiwick, because this aircraft was larger, faster, and could carry about twice the troops and cargo of the aircraft it replaced.  So they took over the aircraft in the military equivalent of a "hostile takeover", and since they didn't want them in the first place, they retired them.

It's the Gordon Gekko style of military management.

Just trashing the planes would be a waste.  They could be useful later, if we really need them.  So, we take the new aircraft that we've already paid for, seal them up and protect them as much as possible, and then park them in the desert in case we need them later, unless we can find another good use for them (like the Coast Guard, etc.).

*It takes more fuel to use a rotor-winged aircraft to carry a given weight a given distance than a fixed wing aircraft.
 
2014-02-04 10:11:51 AM  
Consider this: education spending safeguards against fascism far better than military spending.
 
2014-02-04 04:43:08 PM  

lilbjorn: But by all means, GOP, please save 0.05% of this wasted money by cutting the NPR budget.


Bomb Garrison Keillor now!
 
2014-02-04 09:10:34 PM  

dittybopper: BolshyGreatYarblocks: dittybopper: FatherChaos: No wonder our youth is borderline potato.  If we switched military spending with education, we'd have the smartest combat force in existence.

1. We already do:   Education spending in the US is 5.5% of GDP, whereas defense spending is only 4.4% of GDP.

2. We already do have the smartest combat force in existence.

Actually chief, I see US government figures saying that the DoD gets app. $150 billion more per year than all levels of govt. spend on primary and secondary education:

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_education_spending_20.html

You don't read very well, do you?  From your link:

                                             Fed     Gov.Xfer   State     Local       Total
[+]     Education     141.8     -96.5     285.7     673.0     1,004.0      
[+]     Defense       830.9       0.0       0.8       0.0       831.7


I think you have that backwards.  Collectively, we spend about (1,004-831.7) = 172.3 billion more on education than on defense.

Just in case you need a picture (again, from your own link):

[chart.googleapis.com image 600x200]

Education is 16% of the total federal, state, and local spending, and Defense is only 13%.


I think you put university/tertiary-level education in with primary and secondary ed.; that would put you over the DoD budget, thanks in no small part to the ballooning student loan/debt system.

You work for the DoD, don't you?  You seem very defensive, so to speak.  I don't work in education, so I suspect I'm being more objective here.
 
2014-02-04 10:42:43 PM  

BolshyGreatYarblocks: I think you put university/tertiary-level education in with primary and secondary ed.; that would put you over the DoD budget, thanks in no small part to the ballooning student loan/debt system.

You work for the DoD, don't you?  You seem very defensive, so to speak.  I don't work in education, so I suspect I'm being more objective here.


Heh.  I work for a small-ish private college, and something like 70% of our degrees awarded are Education degrees.

I did work for the DoD, back when I was in the Army.  In the late 1980's.

Kinda funny how your assumptions were like 180 degrees wrong:  I'm actually in the education business, and it's the education business of educating educators, for that 'juiced in' double education goodness.
 
2014-02-04 11:15:52 PM  

dittybopper: BolshyGreatYarblocks: I think you put university/tertiary-level education in with primary and secondary ed.; that would put you over the DoD budget, thanks in no small part to the ballooning student loan/debt system.

You work for the DoD, don't you?  You seem very defensive, so to speak.  I don't work in education, so I suspect I'm being more objective here.

Heh.  I work for a small-ish private college, and something like 70% of our degrees awarded are Education degrees.

I did work for the DoD, back when I was in the Army.  In the late 1980's.

Kinda funny how your assumptions were like 180 degrees wrong:  I'm actually in the education business, and it's the education business of educating educators, for that 'juiced in' double education goodness.



Curiosity. Does that include the 'off the books' defense spending. The 'special' appropriations crap that nobody wants to pay for 'in budget'? I'm not talking black ops stuff, just stuff nobody wants to put on the books so they can pretend they're not ballooning the deficit.
 
Displayed 40 of 140 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report