Humanities desk
< October 1	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 3 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 2[edit]

Soviet bomber off Cape Cod[edit]

We have an image File:F-106A 102FIW Tu95D CapeCod 1982.jpeg showing a Tu-95 bomber flying off Cape Cod in 1982. Where would it have come from, and where would it be going? Does this aircraft have the range to fly from Soviet territory to Cape Cod and back, or from Cuba to Cape Cod and back? Was this something that happened regularly? How close would it have flown to shore? --Amble (talk) 00:11, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It has an impressive range according to the Tu-95 article. Presumably it would usually stay at least 12 nautical miles offshore. Considering that the Tu-95 was originally the rough technological equivalent of the U.S. B-36, it's a little strange that it's still in service... AnonMoos (talk) 03:32, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, apparently a great circle route between St Petersburg and Havana (for example) map is well within the range of the Tu-95 and passes very near Cape Cod. So that could be a reasonable explanation. Presumably other locations in Cuba and the northwestern USSR would work out similarly. --Amble (talk) 05:59, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A great circle would be no option, as it passes over Finland, Sweden, Norway, Iceland and Canada. Passing north of Norway and Iceland and east of Newfoundland, it's 10,000 km from St. Petersburg to Havana, well in its range of 15,000 km, but passing not particularly close to Cape Cod. But they may have deviated a bit from the shortest possible route just to annoy the Americans (and test their response). Cuba isn't even necessary, as the Tu-95 can also fly from Murmansk to Cape Hatteras and back without refuelling or passing over land. With aerial refuelling from a tanker also based in Murmansk it could get even further.

Soviet bombers regularly passed over international waters close to NATO members, mainly to test their response. Russian bombers still do so. And so do the NATO countries and both not only use their aircraft, but also their ships and submarines that way. PiusImpavidus (talk) 09:36, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tu-95 at least has turboprop engines; B-36 had piston engines. The B-52 is of about the same vintage, still in service and not that much better than the Tu-95 (similar range, slightly faster and higher, double the payload and triple the climbing rate, but those aren't the most important statistics). PiusImpavidus (talk) 09:36, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Tu-95 has turboprops, while the the B-36 had a mix of basic propellers and jets. The B-52 is still in service because a new plane within its basic parameters (subsonic, capable of delivering heavy payloads long distances, flying low over the target) would probably not deliver big performance gains in a cost-effective way. AnonMoos (talk) 03:07, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I found some relevant information here: [1]. --Amble (talk) 16:41, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For regular Russian incursions into European NATO airspace, see Quick Reaction Alert. Russian "Bears" have recently been flying into neutral Irish airspace; the Irish Air Corps has to ask the RAF to shoo them away because it has no jet fighters. [2] Alansplodge (talk) 09:21, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That is a big part of why I asked the question — I expected this kind of encounter in Europe, Alaska, and maybe Florida, but Cape Cod seemed like an odd location (although it now makes sense). —-Amble (talk) 15:05, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to everyone for your contributions. I’m satisfied that the question is resolved. Amble (talk) 15:07, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Carl Sagan's 1985 novel "Contact"[edit]

Has anyone ever commented that the eccentric businessman S. R. Hadden (first name, Sol) is a parallel to the Assyrian king Esarhaddon? Wikipedia.org itself notes that Esarhaddon rebuilt the city of Babylon after his father destroyed it. "Contact" states that S. R. Hadden built a replica of Babylon as a daytime amusement park and nighttime pleasure palace. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.218.242.102 (talk) 03:13, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is discussed at Talk:Contact (novel) § Esarhaddon, so it has not gone unnoticed. --Lambiam 10:25, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth II tax arrangements[edit]

Officially the British monarch is not required to pay tax but the queen in 1992 agreed to pay income and capital gains tax.

Presumably because of the rule that she doesn’t have to pay tax she doesn’t have a National Insurance number. I may be wrong but she doesn’t require a passport or drivers license either because they’re issued by Her Majesty’s government so she’s be issuing them to herself, effectively.

Assuming I’m right and that she doesn’t have a national insurance number how does she pay tax and have the contributions she does make registered to her? After all, officially she has no way of identifying herself. —Andrew 13:13, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't assume that she doesn't have a NINO (she was not Queen in 1948 when they were introduced), but anyway she could presumably have a Unique Taxpayer Reference number, or UTR, about which we do not seem to have an article. Even absent both a NINO and a UTR, it would not be beyond the wit of HMRC to cope with a one-off of this nature. DuncanHill (talk) 13:28, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See also Guidance - Voluntary payments / donations to government - Find out how to make a voluntary contribution to government from Her Majesty's Treasury (not a page which attracts many visitors I imagine). Alansplodge (talk) 14:24, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

u.s. presidents who only attended their own inaugurations[edit]

excluding presidents who died in office, which u.s. presidents only attended their own inaugurations but not the inaugurations of their predecessors or successors — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.149.135.50 (talk) 14:34, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of presidents were not present at their predecessor’s inauguration. Only two skipped that of their successor (John Adams and Donald Trump). Blueboar (talk) 16:39, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Also Andrew Johnson, as I recall from the last time someone asked this type of question maybe a couple months ago. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:43, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ah… I did not know about Johnson… good catch. Blueboar (talk) 16:49, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    - When the question was asked in August, someone cited this,[3] which indicates both John and John Quincy did not attend their successors' inaugurations. The Adamses were a curmudgeonly bunch. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:05, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      - JFK didn't go to either of LBJ's. DuncanHill (talk) 17:13, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        He might have, but he was stuck in Arlington. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:44, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        The second time. The first time he was quite close by. —Tamfang (talk) 21:05, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        Good point. JFK actually was at LBJ's first swearing-in, aboard the plane in the coffin section, if we're remembering history correctly. That was likely the only exception among the eight who died in office. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:12, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        The legroom's better in coffin than in coach. DuncanHill (talk) 20:26, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- I think the previous question was restricted either to one-term presidents, or else presidents who had lost a re-election campaign. Without that criterion, another example is that Woodrow Wilson did not attend the Inauguration of Warren G. Harding, which makes sense after Wilson’s stroke. I don’t know whether there are more examples who skipped their successor’s inauguration and hadn’t been seeking re-election. —Amble (talk) 17:10, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - The OP's question was partly about predecessors, and I would think it would depend on whether there was a compelling reason for a predecessor to be there. Vice-presidents would very likely be there, to be sworn in themselves; and some of them later became presidents. If a senator or governor who later became president happened to be there, that would also work. Compiling a comprehensive list would require some research on who was on the guest lists. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:49, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t find a record that Wilson was at any previous inauguration, although it would be difficult to prove he wasn’t, given that parts of the event were open to the anonymous crowds. —Amble (talk) 21:15, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It might be easier to develop a list of which presidents (past and future) were definitely at inaugurations, and investigate the question marks. We already have the list of past presidents, of course. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:07, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose you could say that every two term president was at his predecessor’s inauguration … ie his own first inauguration. Blueboar (talk) 22:25, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

i forgot to clarify this, but when i said "successors", i meant not only their immediate successor, but subsequent presidents as well. so for example gwb attending biden's inauguration counts as "attending a successor's inauguration". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.149.135.50 (talk) 00:27, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]