Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
(Thread IKs: weg, Toxic Mental)
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Runa
Feb 13, 2011

Dr. Quarex posted:

Sorry for your loss :( I trust he died on the way back to his home planet?

boooo

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

celewign
Jul 11, 2015

just get us in the playoffs

Shaman Tank Spec posted:

How loving stupid do you have to be to say something like that with a straight face? If you stop thinking about it for one second, you have to realize you're off by loving 100x.

40% of US GDP is like 15 trillion dollars.

Pot Smoke Phoenix
Aug 15, 2007



Smoke 'em if you gottem!
Dinosaur Gum

celewign posted:

40% of US GDP is like 15 trillion dollars.

That’s enough to buy a wall of M1-A1s so huge you can see it from space

Vampire Panties
Apr 18, 2001
nposter
Nap Ghost

Shaman Tank Spec posted:

How loving stupid do you have to be to say something like that with a straight face? If you stop thinking about it for one second, you have to realize you're off by loving 100x.

someone on :rolleyes: reddit :rolleyes: responded to a shitpost of mine blaming inflation on Ukraine support. I think I just replied "hahahahahahahahah"


Pot Smoke Phoenix posted:

That’s enough to buy a wall of M1-A1s so huge you can see it from space

You could probably build an island out of nuclear aircraft carriers thats larger than Hawaii for that much money

The Locator
Sep 12, 2004

Out here, everything hurts.





Vampire Panties posted:

You could probably build an island out of nuclear aircraft carriers thats larger than Hawaii for that much money

Or you could get a dozen or so F-35's!

Yes I know, it's an F-35 cost overrun joke

Drone_Fragger
May 9, 2007


Putins shitposts are now more literal than figurative

bob dobbs is dead
Oct 8, 2017

I love peeps
Nap Ghost
the sales peeps being really really good unironically saved the f35

Lammasu
May 8, 2019

lawful Good Monster

celewign posted:

40% of US GDP is like 15 trillion dollars.

That would literally make Ukraine one of the richest countries in the world. Zelensky would be carried in a howdah atop a solid gold robot elephant.

Der Kyhe
Jun 25, 2008

bob dobbs is dead posted:

the sales peeps being really really good unironically saved the f35

The A and C variants also against odds ending up being not-terrible saved a lot.

But its not a surprise that Finland bought those as a way to keep the NATO option warm, and as it turned out it was the correct choice.

The Locator
Sep 12, 2004

Out here, everything hurts.





Pot Smoke Phoenix posted:

That’s enough to buy a wall of M1-A1s so huge you can see it from space

Just because I'm a nerd at heart...

40% of the US GDP for '23 is a bit over 10 trillion buckaroo's. Cost of an M1 Abrams without maintenance or training costs is around 4.3 million buckaroo's. I rounded up to 5 million.

40% of the US GDP for 2023 would purchase 2,071,680 Abrams tanks. Lol.

With complete air superiority we could just push the empty tanks out of large transport aircraft as bombs and never run out in my lifetime.

Drone_Fragger
May 9, 2007


Imo the UK should of bought the carrier varient of the rafale. For what we were using it for it would of been ideal.

Instead our entire budget is now like... 20 planes, on a diesel supercarrier, lmao.

Vampire Panties
Apr 18, 2001
nposter
Nap Ghost

The Locator posted:

With complete air superiority we could just push the empty tanks out of large transport aircraft as bombs and never run out in my lifetime.

rebrand Project Thor as Project Abrams and drop them on enemies from space

Mr. Sunshine
May 15, 2008

This is a scrunt that has been in space too long and become a Lunt (Long Scrunt)

Fun Shoe
BORN TO DIE
WORLD IS A gently caress
KILL EM ALL 2023
PUTIN IS TRASH MAN
2,071,680 AIRDROPPED TANKS

The Locator
Sep 12, 2004

Out here, everything hurts.






That would be very much a USA thing, to use the most expensive possible delivery system for dropping tanks on our enemies. The unbelievable cost of boosting just a single M1 into orbit would make me rich beyond my wildest dreams for life.

The Polyus was a Russian project designed to boost 80 tons into orbit, but failed. It's approximate cost was $3 billion according to what I could find.

tiaz
Jul 1, 2004

PICK UP THAT PRESENT.


Zelensky's Zealots
postin on page 2¹⁰ :c00l:

Lammasu posted:

That would literally make Ukraine one of the richest countries in the world. Zelensky would be carried in a howdah atop a solid gold robot elephant.

alright, you've talked me into it. is this a Boston Dynamics thing or do we need a new DARPA golden child?

Der Kyhe
Jun 25, 2008

tiaz posted:

postin on page 2¹⁰ :c00l:

alright, you've talked me into it. is this a Boston Dynamics thing or do we need a new DARPA golden child?

I think its about time to give those robot dogs shotguns, this can only work on our benefit. Yes I have seen Black Mirror and no I will not take any further questions.

Pot Smoke Phoenix
Aug 15, 2007



Smoke 'em if you gottem!
Dinosaur Gum

The Locator posted:

Just because I'm a nerd at heart...

40% of the US GDP for '23 is a bit over 10 trillion buckaroo's. Cost of an M1 Abrams without maintenance or training costs is around 4.3 million buckaroo's. I rounded up to 5 million.

40% of the US GDP for 2023 would purchase 2,071,680 Abrams tanks. Lol.

With complete air superiority we could just push the empty tanks out of large transport aircraft as bombs and never run out in my lifetime.

I want this to happen now.

Is this blood lust?

Am I the baddie?

WAR CRIME GIGOLO
Oct 3, 2012

The Hague
tryna get me
for these glutes

The US has given Ukraine 30,000,000,000,000 dollars and still no breakthrough

Der Kyhe
Jun 25, 2008

WAR CRIME GIGOLO posted:

The US has given Ukraine 30,000,000,000,000 dollars and still no breakthrough

Russian army is holding a steadyish front against the NATO's gift shop and exchange purse.

Vampire Panties
Apr 18, 2001
nposter
Nap Ghost

Der Kyhe posted:

Russian army is holding a steadyish front against the NATO's old toys their parents keep in a bucket for young kids who visit

Sedgr
Sep 16, 2007

Neat!


I was talking about how Starship is a heavy lift platform last year...

Sedgr posted:

You want the ship to basically come in hot and with enough lateral motion that it hits the ground with just enough force to tip it over and when it fully tips on its side the tank is already going full speed and blasts through the nosecone in a fireball.

Shock and Awe full speed Abrams delivery.

Plus everyone can repurpose their Starship Tank Watcher t-shirts.

:hmmyes:

spankmeister
Jun 15, 2008






Toxic Mental posted:

Wasn't "The Ukraine" kind of the western descriptor back in the Soviet Union days to describe it when it was an Oblast or whatever they called it?

It was, up until the time Ukraine became an independent country again. Before that it was The Ukraine, like we sometimes say The Congo or The midwest or The Mekong Delta. It refers to a geographical area and not a country (some exceptions like "The Netherlands" exist).

But moreover, in Russian there exists a similar distinction between в and на. Both are used as locative prepositions, but when referring to geographic locations на is generally used for territories and в is used for countries. So guess what happened to Ukraine when it became independent? It went from на Украине to в Украине in Russian. Only the thing is that nationalist shitbags in Russia would staunchly keep referring to it as на Украине, because it gives Ukraine the status of territory and not a full fledged county. Usage of "the" Ukraine mirrors that. (Although many people, mostly somewhat older people who still remember the Soviet Union, don't know any better and say it without malicious intent)

Tarquinn
Jul 3, 2007


I know I’ve made some very poor decisions recently, but I can give you
my complete assurance that my work will be back to normal.
Hell Gem

Pot Smoke Phoenix posted:

I want this to happen now.

Is this blood lust?

Am I the baddie?

- No, it's tank lust.

- Maybe.

Tai
Mar 8, 2006

Drone_Fragger posted:

Imo the UK should of bought the carrier varient of the rafale. For what we were using it for it would of been ideal.

Instead our entire budget is now like... 20 planes, on a diesel supercarrier, lmao.

This is a bad way to think about nuclear vs diesel carriers. Diesel has a lot of advantages over nuclear.

The unlimited range thing is a minsconception. Your support fleet isn't nuclear so therefore, you are not unlimited range. Crew need food, aircraft need fuel/ammo.

The cost of a nuclear ship vs diesel is loving massive in comparison and only a few countries could do this on mass. There is also the need to have specialist built docks designed for nuclear stuff along with paying boat loads for nuclear physicists and engineers sitting around while carrier(s) are at sea.

You are unable to dock or cruise in poo poo loads of places around the globe due to being nuclear so this has limitations.

Would you want a nuclear carrier? gently caress yea. UK had a choice of 0.75 nuclear or 2 diesel carriers.

Nuclear obviously has some big pros too but diesel isn't lol junk.

Tai
Mar 8, 2006
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3i0pVDMz3I

lol and lmao

Vampire Panties
Apr 18, 2001
nposter
Nap Ghost

Tai posted:

This is a bad way to think about nuclear vs diesel carriers. Diesel has a lot of advantages over nuclear.

The unlimited range thing is a minsconception. Your support fleet isn't nuclear so therefore, you are not unlimited range. Crew need food, aircraft need fuel/ammo.

The cost of a nuclear ship vs diesel is loving massive in comparison and only a few countries could do this on mass. There is also the need to have specialist built docks designed for nuclear stuff along with paying boat loads for nuclear physicists and engineers sitting around while carrier(s) are at sea.

You are unable to dock or cruise in poo poo loads of places around the globe due to being nuclear so this has limitations.

Would you want a nuclear carrier? gently caress yea. UK had a choice of 0.75 nuclear or 2 diesel carriers.

Nuclear obviously has some big pros too but diesel isn't lol junk.

:hmmyes: Nuke carriers are supremely cool but you have to go all-in on them or it doesnt make sense (:rubby: noting about the US MIC actually makese sense)

In the future, the nuclear aircraft carrier will likely also be the tender ship for the rest of the carrier group

Zero VGS
Aug 16, 2002
ASK ME ABOUT HOW HUMAN LIVES THAT MADE VIDEO GAME CONTROLLERS ARE WORTH MORE
Lipstick Apathy

Tai posted:

lol and lmao

"When did they decide that I'm a stupid moron with an ugly face and a big butt and my butt smells and I like to kiss my own butt?"

El Jebus
Jun 18, 2008

This avatar is paid for by "Avatars for improving Lowtax's spine by any means that doesn't result in him becoming brain dead by putting his brain into a cyborg body and/or putting him in a exosuit due to fears of the suit being hacked and crushing him during a cyberpunk future timeline" Foundation

The Locator posted:

That would be very much a USA thing, to use the most expensive possible delivery system for dropping tanks on our enemies. The unbelievable cost of boosting just a single M1 into orbit would make me rich beyond my wildest dreams for life.

The Polyus was a Russian project designed to boost 80 tons into orbit, but failed. It's approximate cost was $3 billion according to what I could find.

Don't worry, we've already awarded Musk a 300 trillion dollar contract to mine asteroids for the materials needed to just fabricate the Abrams in space! This will eventually save us thousands of dollars in the long run. Trust me.

EasilyConfused
Nov 21, 2009


one strong toad

Mnoba posted:

when this is over hopefully russia has to go back to 1991 borders, and give up kaliningrad as punishment for all of the war crimes. residents will most likely just stay for the overall improvement in quality of life.

I don't think anybody would be willing to take Kaliningrad though.

Oscar Wilde Bunch
Jun 12, 2012

Grimey Drawer

I like the wave of moving back and forth between everything sucks and our shameful army retreated from Kiev, Kherson, and Kharkiv. But, we gained 3 Crimea's worth of territory and 10 million new Russian citizens. But it's also poo poo and mined. Lol and lmao at the line about how they have the greatest MIC in the world and because of that by the end they'll be the strongest around, but maybe not.

bob dobbs is dead
Oct 8, 2017

I love peeps
Nap Ghost

Vampire Panties posted:

:hmmyes: Nuke carriers are supremely cool but you have to go all-in on them or it doesnt make sense (:rubby: noting about the US MIC actually makese sense)

In the future, the nuclear aircraft carrier will likely also be the tender ship for the rest of the carrier group

you can have two out of three: fast good and cheap. the procurement strategy of the us mic is to put a big rock on the fast button, a smaller rock on the good button, and go home and eat jalapeno cheese spread

Der Kyhe
Jun 25, 2008

Vampire Panties posted:

:hmmyes: Nuke carriers are supremely cool but you have to go all-in on them or it doesnt make sense (:rubby: noting about the US MIC actually makese sense)

In the future, the nuclear aircraft carrier will likely also be the tender ship for the rest of the carrier group

Putting a ****ton of money into a permanent blue sea fleet only makes sense if your country is behind an ocean on two directions, and one of the others is an ally and the other one has problems with its own internal security so they aren't invading anything anytime soon.

I could bet money on the fact that for example Finland will be scrapping most of its Baltic sea fleet in the future, because the bodies of water are so narrow that a 2-3 submarine chasers/minelayers and maybe 2 missile corvettes will do as a peace time deterrence, and everything else is "drone observers look for targets and anti-ship missile barrage from the mainland does the job". Coastal regiments can do their island hopping with airforce, missiles and artillery securing the way in the archipelago.

Der Kyhe fucked around with this message at 22:28 on Oct 2, 2023

bob dobbs is dead
Oct 8, 2017

I love peeps
Nap Ghost
mexico is also an ally inasmuch as if someone invades it americans will deffo defend it as an intrusion close to the american heartland

Tai
Mar 8, 2006
So from 2024, Russia is increasing it's military spending and cutting back heavily on stuff like health.

For new military tech and research into stuff? Nah. It's has to spend more to keep its military at its current levels due to inflation and the tanking ruble lol.

Vampire Panties
Apr 18, 2001
nposter
Nap Ghost

Der Kyhe posted:

Putting a ****ton of money into a permanent blue sea fleet only makes sense if your country is behind an ocean on two directions, and one of the others is an ally and the other one has problems with its own internal security so they aren't invading anything anytime soon.

I could bet money on the fact that for example Finland will be scrapping most of its Baltic sea fleet in the future, because the bodies of water are so narrow that a 2-3 submarine chasers/minelayers and maybe 2 missile corvettes will do as a peace time deterrence, and everything else is "drone observers look for targets and anti-ship missile barrage from the mainland does the job". Coastal regiments can do their island hopping with airforce, missiles and artillery securing the way in the archipelago.

:haibrow:

We're not quite there yet, but I'd say drone carriers will be a big thing. A marinized Bayraktar could probably parachute into the carrier, or just splash in and be lifted out with a crane.

mllaneza
Apr 28, 2007

Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1993-1952




Vampire Panties posted:

We're not quite there yet, but I'd say drone carriers will be a big thing. A marinized Bayraktar could probably parachute into the carrier, or just splash in and be lifted out with a crane.

Turkey has an amphibious ship and they're using it as a drone carrier in addition to the helicopters.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TCG_Anadolu

Small Strange Bird
Sep 22, 2006

Merci, chaton!

Dwesa posted:

the time has come again to test the hopeless Wunderwaffe and spread radiation in the Arctic Ocean

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1708814109028827643
Project Pluto is back with Russian safety standards and corruption, baby! Aroooooooo!

Tafferling
Oct 22, 2008

DOOT DOOT
ALL ABOARD THE ISS POLOKONZERVA

Dr. Quarex posted:

Sorry for your loss :( I trust he died on the way back to his home planet?

He died by being old, lazy and fat. His home planet was the couch sooo maybe they were related, who knows.
And yes, Poochie was Pucci in the italian version.


I hope all those tests succeed, maybe they'll be satisfied and get over it.

Tafferling fucked around with this message at 23:55 on Oct 2, 2023

CommieGIR
Aug 22, 2006

The blue glow is a feature, not a bug


Pillbug

Payndz posted:

Project Pluto is back with Russian safety standards and corruption, baby! Aroooooooo!

And they've already launched one and killed a bunch of engineers recovering it! Oops!

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

tiaz
Jul 1, 2004

PICK UP THAT PRESENT.


Zelensky's Zealots

Vampire Panties posted:

:hmmyes: Nuke carriers are supremely cool but you have to go all-in on them or it doesnt make sense (:rubby: noting about the US MIC actually makese sense)

In the future, the nuclear aircraft carrier will likely also be the tender ship for the rest of the carrier group

that was in 2014, where's my $4 ocean avgas :mad:

bob dobbs is dead posted:

you can have two out of three: fast good and cheap. the procurement strategy of the us mic is to put a big rock on the fast button, a smaller rock on the good button, and go home and eat jalapeno cheese spread

okay wait I changed my mind, tell me more about this jalapeno cheese spread

Der Kyhe posted:

I could bet money on the fact that for example Finland will be scrapping most of its Baltic sea fleet in the future, because the bodies of water are so narrow that a 2-3 submarine chasers/minelayers and maybe 2 missile corvettes will do as a peace time deterrence, and everything else is "drone observers look for targets and anti-ship missile barrage from the mainland does the job". Coastal regiments can do their island hopping with airforce, missiles and artillery securing the way in the archipelago.

that makes sense, provided merchant shipping is protected by all those places you can't project power to. I don't know if NATO currently requires it but I wouldn't be surprised to see a push for some kind of "contribute some amount, preferably in the form of sorties, to freedom/security of navigation operations" akin to its current "spend x% GDP on your own defense and have it ready"

e:

Vampire Panties posted:

:haibrow:

We're not quite there yet, but I'd say drone carriers will be a big thing. A marinized Bayraktar could probably parachute into the carrier, or just splash in and be lifted out with a crane.

they've demoed autonomous aerial refueling, I bet autonomous carrier landings will be possible. Alternately radio control directly from the carrier to the ICLS path would probably make it low-latency enough that a drone operator with appropriate carrier training could land them interactively.

tiaz fucked around with this message at 00:07 on Oct 3, 2023

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply