
“Good evening Mr. Walrus, congratulations on the new house.”
“Thanks Miss Cardinale, come up and see me sometime.”
“Maybe I will.”
“…..”
“Mr. Walrus? You okay?”
“Sorry, It never usually gets that far.”
“Hmmm, maybe I won’t.”
Winner

This week











“Yoo-hoo, Mr. Walrus. Where are you? Now where could he have gotten to? Wait. Here’s a note, this may explain things.”
“Sorry to leave you on your own this morning but I’m out of town for the day and won’t be back until this evening. As you read this I’ll be closing on my new house and will be caught up on all that entails. I’ll see you when I get back. Have the Champagne chilling.”
“Well! Looks like we have a new homeowner. Congrats Mr. Walrus. On to the memes!”
Winner

This week.










A whole lot of anxiety. Next Thursday is closing. Fingers crossed all the T’s are dotted and the I’s are all crossed.
Previous Build

German Staff Car Type 230
The Mercedes-Benz W 153 was a luxury six cylinder passenger car built in parallel with the W 143 from 1938, and first presented in public at the Berlin Motor Show early in 1939. It was one of several Mercedes-Benz models known, in its own time, as the Mercedes-Benz 230 (or sometimes, in this case, as the Mercedes-Benz Typ(e) 230).
The car had the same 3,050 mm (120 in) wheelbase as the longer wheelbase versions of the W143 from 1937, but with a completely new and much more modern body as well as a completely new chassis. In place of the earlier car’s pressed steel subframe the W 153 had an x-shaped oval tube subframe. The car had been developed by Hans Gustav Röhr who headed up the company’s Passenger Car Development Department for two years prior to his death in August 1937.
Plans. Plans, plans, plans. We finally got a chance to get into the house with our contractors for a short period of time. A lot of discussions and the result is we have a tentative plan of what we want done. Now comes the fun part, how much? We await the projected cost summary. That aside I have been planning out where all my furniture and belonging will go. So far it looks like everything will fit easily. That was helped by a fortuitous discovery. Doing the first walk throughs there was this door in the bedroom which we thought was a closet. Upon opening it looked like a blank wall about 3 inches in. Odd, but it was dark and I didn’t think about asking about it. When we did the walk through this week we took a closer look and discovered it wasn’t a wall but another door. When we unlocked the door and looked in we found 3 storage room/areas. While not tall, only about 5 and a half feet, they were still substaintial with one having clothes racks and shelving. All my storage needs met! It certainly helps clarify what I will now keep or get rid of. So that’s what I was building this week. Regular builds will probably resume in May after I move in. Until then, here is a previous build.

PzKpfw. V Panther Ausf. G
The Panther tank, officially Panzerkampfwagen V Panther (abbreviated PzKpfw V) with ordnance inventory designation: Sd.Kfz. 171, is a German medium tank of World War II. It was used on the Eastern and Western Fronts from mid-1943 to the end of the war in May 1945.
On 27 February 1944 it was redesignated to just PzKpfw Panther, as Hitler ordered that the Roman numeral “V” be deleted. In contemporary English-language reports it is sometimes referred to as the “Mark V”.
The Panther was intended to counter the Soviet T-34 medium tank and to replace the Panzer III and Panzer IV. Nevertheless, it served alongside the Panzer IV and the heavier Tiger I until the end of the war. The Panther was a compromise. While having essentially the same Maybach V12 petrol (690 hp) engine as the Tiger I, it had better gun penetration, was lighter and faster, and could traverse rough terrain better than the Tiger I. The trade-off was weaker side armour, which made it vulnerable to flanking fire, and a weaker high explosive shell. The Panther proved to be effective in open country and long-range engagements. Although it had excellent firepower, protection and mobility, its reliability was less impressive. The Panther was far cheaper to produce than the Tiger I. Key elements of the Panther design, such as its armour, transmission, and final drive, were simplifications made to improve production rates and address raw material shortages. Despite this, the overall design has still been described by some as “overengineered”.
The Panther was rushed into combat at the Battle of Kursk in the summer of 1943 despite numerous unresolved technical problems, leading to high losses due to mechanical failure. Most design flaws were rectified by late 1943 and early 1944, though the bombing of production plants, increasing shortages of high-quality alloys for critical components, shortage of fuel and training space, and the declining quality of crews all impacted the tank’s effectiveness. Though officially classified as a medium tank, at 44.8 metric tons the Panther was closer in weight to contemporary foreign heavy tanks. The Panther’s weight caused logistical problems, such as an inability to cross certain bridges, otherwise the tank had a very high power-to-weight ratio which made it highly mobile.
The naming of Panther production variants did not, unlike most German tanks, follow alphabetical order: the initial variant, Panther “D” (Ausf. D), was followed by “A” and “G” variants.
The Panzer V Ausf. G (September 1943 – May 1945)
The Panzer V Panther tank was given the Ausf.G version designation to indicate this production run of tanks used a different redesigned chassis. The turret and 7.5cm Kw.K L/70 gun was the same one used on the earlier Ausf.A.
On 4 May 1944, during a meeting at the M.A.N. company, a decision was made to design a new Panther tank chassis. Work had already started on developing a new version of the Panther tank called Panther II but that was far from completion. Some of the lessons learnt from that design process were used in formulating the plans for the Ausf.G tank chassis.
The side pannier armor that covered the top of the tracks on both sides of the tank was angled at 40 degrees on the Ausf.D and Ausf.A tank chassis. The new chassis pannier side armor was sloped at 29 degrees. The thickness in the armor was increased from 40 mm to 50 mm. This increased the weight of the tank by 305 Kg.
To compensate for this increase in weight the designers looked for areas where the thickness of the armor could be reduced. They chose to use 50 mm armor plate on the lower front hull instead of the normal 60 mm. This saved 150 kg. The forward belly plates were reduced to 25 mm from 30 mm. The front two belly plates were 25 mm thick and the rear plate was 16 mm thick. This saved a further 100 kg in weight. The rear side armor wedges at the end of the superstructure were not part of the new design. The floor of the pannier was now a straight line. These weight reduction changes meant that the increase in side armor thickness did not result in an increase in weight of the Ausf.G tank chassis compared with the older chassis.
As the bottom of the pannier was now 50 mm nearer to the top of the track no weld seams or stowage straps were fixed there. This was to stop them coming into contact with the track as the tank drove fast over undulating ground. Instead the stowage straps were welded to the side of the pannier armor.
There were many other minor changes but the overall thinking behind the design was to simplify the construction process to enable more tanks to be built as fast as possible. For example, the ventilation systems for the transmission, brakes, engine and exhaust were redesigned. This meant that the two additional parallel vertical pipes that came out of the left armoured exhaust cover at the rear of the tank on the late production Ausf.A tank chassis were no longer needed. Starting in May 1944, cast armor exhaust guards gradually replaced welded ones. To help reduce the red glow given off by the exhaust pipes at night, as a temporary solution, sheet metal covers were gradually introduced starting in June 1944. Starting in October 1944 these were replaced gradually with purpose build Flammenvernichter flame suppressor exhaust mufflers. When additional supplies became available they were back-fitted to other Panther tanks.
Another simplification of the production process was to introduce less complicated hinged hatches above the heads of the driver and radio operator. It was found during trials that the performance of the cross-country ride of the tank with or without the rear shock absorber was practically the same. Starting from 7 October 1944 the factories were ordered to stop fitting them to help simplify production.
Maschinenfabrik-Augsburg-Nuernberg (M.A.N.) started producing Panzer V Ausf.G Panther tanks from Fahrgestell-Nummer Serie chassis number 120301: Daimler-Benz from chassis number 124301 and Maschinenfabrik Neidersachsen Hannover (M.N.H.) from chassis number 128301.
Better than nothing. Still waiting on our full subscription gratis.
| FRANK J. FLEMINGAPR 2 |

Immigration sure is a contentious issue. For one, we have tons of illegal immigration and a lot of arguments over how aggressive to be on deportation or whether to have a path to citizenship. There are also accusations that Democrats don’t want to stop illegal immigration at all because that’s just them trying to import more voters for themselves, while Democrats accuse Republicans of racism for not liking all the people coming here illegally.
And then there is legal immigration, which is really complicated to get — many say too complicated and too limited (which is why many go the illegal route). But how many people should we be allowing in the country per year?
Frank Talk is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Well, what if I said I have a proposal for unlimited immigration — allow people in this country with no limits — that absolutely everyone (including those currently saying we should have zero immigration) will love?
Impossible, you say? You have not factored in how smart I am.
So, here is my proposal: For every immigrant who comes into this country, we deport one white liberal who hates America.
This is a win-win for everyone. For those who want more immigration, we’ll now allow as much immigration as people who want to come here. But as for those worried all the new immigration will just get the Democrats more votes, answer me this: Who is more likely to vote for a Republican: a new immigrant or a white liberal who hates America? Obviously, the former. Everyone would have to agree it would only help the character of this country to replace white liberals who hate America with basically anyone who actually likes this country and wants to be here. And for those always worried about racial issues, they’re going to love this trade of white people for who will be majority non-white. And for those worried about changing the country’s composition, with the type of people we’ll be deporting, we’ll only be losing professors who taught useless majors and a few rude baristas; it seems extremely unlikely whoever replaces them could be worse.
And as for the white liberals who hate America: Great news! You’re no longer going to be in America. You’re going to be… somewhere else (wherever we can get cheap shipment to; we still need to be wary of costs). And if you try to come back, we’ll shoot you.
So, there is my proposal for unlimited immigration that everyone can get behind. All the immigration people want, but in a way guaranteed to make sure America is filled with people who like this country. Because if you don’t like freedom and apple pie and capitalism, we’ll exchange you for people who do.
Frank Talk is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
You’re currently a free subscriber to Frank Talk. For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.
Thanks for reading!
Good evening
Barbara Eden vs Sally Fields
Barbara Eden (5-0-0 Pts. 673 Avg. 134.60)

VS
Sally Fields (0-5-0 Pts. 285 Avg. 57.00)

Good evening.
Linda Evans vs Suzanne Pleshette
Linda Evans (1-3-0 Pts. 365 Avg. 91.25)

VS
Suzanne Pleshette (4-0-0 Pts. 509 Avg. 127.25)

Good morning.
Sally Fields vs Linda Evans
Sally Fields (0-3-0 Pts. 186 Avg. 62.00)

VS
Linda Evans (0-3-0 Pts. 222 Avg. 74.00)

‘Morning Joe’ Guests Demonize White Rural Voters as a ‘Threat to Democracy’
Yahoo Entertainment | February 26, 2024 | Natalie KorachCohost Mika Brzezinski asked the pair, “Why are white rural voters a threat to democracy at this point?”

Well it doesn’t look good for those plucky Ukrainians. Are they worth a further 100 Billion plus? How do you all feel about it?
| The Russian Winter-Spring 2024 Offensive Operation on the Kharkiv-Luhansk Axis |
| Riley Bailey and Fredrick W. Kaganwith Nicole Wolkov and Christina Harward February 21, 2024 |
| Russian forces are conducting a cohesive multi-axis offensive operation in pursuit of an operationally significant objective for nearly the first time in over a year and a half of campaigning in Ukraine. The prospects of this offensive in the Kharkiv-Luhansk sector are far from clear, but its design and initial execution mark notable inflections in the Russian operational level approach. Russian efforts to seize relatively small cities and villages in eastern Ukraine since Spring 2022 have generally not secured operationally significant objectives, although these Russian operations led to large-scale fighting and significant Ukrainian and Russian losses. Russian forces likely pursued more operationally significant objectives during their Winter-Spring 2023 offensive, but that effort was poorly designed and executed and its failure to make any substantial progress precludes drawing firm conclusions about its intended goals. Russian offensives to this point have generally either concentrated large masses of troops against singular objectives (such as Bakhmut and Avdiivka) or else have consisted of multiple attacks along axes of advance that were too far away to be mutually supporting and/or divergent. The current Russian offensive in the Kharkiv-Luhansk sector, by contrast, involves attacks along four parallel axes that are mutually supporting in pursuit of multiple objectives that, taken together, would likely generate operationally significant gains. The design of this offensive operation is worth careful consideration regardless of its outcome as a possible example of the Russian command’s ability to learn from and improve on its previous failures at the operational level. Russian tactical performance in this sector, however, does not appear to have improved materially on previous Russian tactical shortcomings, a factor that may well lead to the overall failure even of this better-designed undertaking. |

Good morning all and I hope you are hungry for some Swimsuit matches, I know I am. Here are the results from last week and this week’s match ups. We continue in the losers bracket.
Round 3 Match 71
Genevieve Morton 106 Defeats Anastasia Ashley 61
Round 3 Match 72
Hannah Ferguson 118 Defeats Bruna Schmitz 51
Round 3 Match 73
Maila Manuel vs Irina Shayk
Maila Manuel

VS
Irina Shayk

Round 3 Match 74
Mia Kang vs Josephine Skriver
Mia Kang

VS
Josephine Skriver
