air-tight-8-scene3 
2009-07-13 - extension: rar - parts: 2 - size: 31 MB
air-tight-8-scene3
Hosted on: rapidshare.com
Air Tight 1 m 2009-01-13 - extension: rar - parts: 2 - size: 102 MB
Air Tight 1 m
Hosted on: rapidshare.com
Anna Malle Air Tight 3 2009-12-26 - extension: rar - parts: 2 - size: 96 MB
Anna Malle Air Tight 3
Hosted on: rapidshare.com
Video results for: air tight 1More results from video 
Compressed Air Rocket Launching Bunch of my friends and I had to build a rocket powered by air. The design called for the use of a (More) Bunch of my friends and I had to build a rocket powered by air. The design called for the use of a two-liter bottle on the end of a pipe that, when stomped on, would shoot a paper rocket off of the other end. Very basic. We were not satisfied with this simple design and set off to make our own.
What we did instead was take a length of pipe and slide a bottle onto the end of it. This serves as the rocket. When we had it positioned how we wanted, we marked the spot where the bottom of the bottle was and melted that section of pipe, making it bulge out so that the bottle would create an air-tight seal around it when pressed on. Using zip ties and another small section of pipe, we created a make-shift trigger, so that we could build up the pressure inside and then launch whenever we wanted. We then took a valve from an old bike tire and secured it to the opposite end of the pipe, sealing the inside.
With that complete, we are able to attach a bike pump to the valve and pump air into the pipe. In the earlier videos, before we had a pump with a pressure gauge on it, we were not getting much psi - probably around 50, max. However, with the pressure gauge, we know that we were getting around 115 PSI - that was generally where air started leaking from around the seal between the bottle and the pipe.
We would either launch with the bottle 1/2 full of water, or with just air. The water made it launch slower, but maintain its speed longer as the water shot out, whereas just air is much more explosive, causing the bottle to shoot off the pipe very quickly but then spin out almost immediately. Regardless, the water and steam shooting out from the pipe during the launch made all of them look pretty cool. (Less)
The Case of the "Missing" Nukes - 1 B-52s at Minot AFB, North Dakota.
(More) B-52s at Minot AFB, North Dakota.
http://formerspook.blogspot.com/2007/09/case-of-missing-nukes.html
A Minot-assigned bomber inadvertently carried five nuclear warheads during a cross-country flight to Barksdale AFB, Louisiana on August 30th, raising concerns about weapons safety and accountability.
http://www.projectcamelot.org/
http://www.kfyrtv.com/News_Stories.asp?news=10465
http://www.shreveporttimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070915/BREAKINGNEWS/70915012
http://www.kxmc.com/News/161562.asp
http://www.kxmc.com/getArticle.asp?ArticleId=140988
http://www.bismarcktribune.com/articles/2007/07/20/news/state/136489.txt
http://www.komotv.com/news/local/9679367.html
There's something a bit strange about this Drudge-trumpeted story, concerning the Air Force's "temporary loss" of five nuclear warheads. As reported by the Military Times papers, the warheads were mounted on advanced cruise missiles being flown by a B-52 bomber from Minot AFB, North Dakota to Barksdale AFB, Louisiana. Both Minot and Barksdale are B-52 bases; the movement is part of an effort to decommission 400 of the cruise missiles. The warheads were supposed to be removed before the missiles left Minot, but the error wasn't discovered until the "Buff" touched down in Louisiana last Thursday.
According to the Times, that left the weapons "unaccounted for" during the 3 1/2 hour flight from North Dakota to Louisiana. However, that's a specious claim, at best. As Air Force spokesman Lt Col Ed Henry noted, the weapons were in the service's custody and control at all times. He also reported that all other nuclear weapons at Minot have been accounted for.
What's more disconcerting is the (apparent) break-down in the nuclear chain of custody. Readers of my profile know that I spent portions of my career around nukes, both as an operational intelligence officer and a targeteer. My duties didn't involve the actual handling or loading of those weapons, but you learned quickly that nukes are governed by a completely different set of rules, for obvious reasons. Those regulations are strictly enforced, with "no tolerance" for mistakes.
First, nuclear weapons are segregated from "ordinary" munitions, with additional layers of security and access control. All personnel involved in the protection, storage, handling and loading of the weapons are carefully vetted through the military's Personnel Reliability Program (PRP). Anyone whose loyalty, judgment or stability comes into question loses their PRP certification, and they're no longer allowed to work around nuclear weapons.
Other safeguards are built into the system as well. There's a very tight chain of control; the device is literally "signed for" at every step of the journey from the weapons storage area to the aircraft, and the two-man "rule" is strictly enforced. An individual pilot or load crew member is never allowed to "control" the weapon on the ground. In combat, the pilot of a single-seat fighter would be permitted to launch with a nuclear weapon--and use it in combat--but only if the pilot was certified for the mission, and the "tasking" had been properly authenticated through the chain of command, beginning with the President, or in tactical scenarios, the theater commander--under authority granted by the POTUS.
MSNBC is now reporting that a B-52 squadron commander at Minot has been relived of his duties, because the service has "lost confidence" in his ability to handle nuclear weapons. That move is hardly surprising, given the obvious emphasis that the Pentagon places on nuclear safety and control. And, it's likely that other heads will roll as the Air Force continues its investigation. As we noted in the preceding paragraphs, the movement, loading and protection of nuclear weapons is a carefully regulated process, involving a number of specialists. All could be found culpable in this incident.
But that still doesn't explain how nuclear-tipped cruise missiles were loaded onto a B-52, flown 1450 miles across the United States, and the mistake wasn't discovered until the bomber reached its destination in Louisiana. With most of the Advanced Cruise Missile fleet (AGM-129) is being retired from operational service, we can assume that Minot crews had been through this drill before. Remove the warhead from the missile, then fly the inert weapon to Barksdale for decommissioning. Retiring the warhead--if that's part of the plan--entails a separate (and completely different) process which does not require a B-52 flight.
Given the elaborate safeguards, security procedures and chain-of-control associated with nuclear weapons, it's difficult to fathom how five warheads made their way onto that Buff and they weren't noticed until it arrived at Barksdale. It would be interesting to know how the 5th Bomb Wing (Minot's B-52 unit) fared on its last Nuclear Surety Inspection (NSI), which evaluates unit procedures for controlling, handling and safeguarding those weapons. (Less)
T J Hart Air Tight Sc3 
2009-12-16 - extension: avi - size: 64 MB
T J Hart Air Tight Sc3
Hosted on: rapidshare.com
Johnni Black Air Tight 2009-11-16 - extension: avi - size: 63 MB
Johnni Black Air Tight
Hosted on: rapidshare.com
air-tight-8-scene2 2009-07-13 - extension: avi - size: 190 MB
air-tight-8-scene2
Hosted on: rapidshare.com
air-tight-8-scene5 2009-07-13 - extension: avi - size: 186 MB
air-tight-8-scene5
Hosted on: rapidshare.com
HWR - Air Tight Anal 2009-05-20 - extension: rar - size: 59 MB
HWR - Air Tight Anal
Hosted on: rapidshare.com
air-tight-8-scene1 2009-07-13 - extension: rar - size: 28 MB
air-tight-8-scene1
Hosted on: rapidshare.com
Groups results for: air tight 1 
