|
Soviet warships are so much more impressive looking than our own. Shame DNC can't tell the difference.
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 21:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 11:24 |
|
|
Yeah the soviets liked to have a lot of their missile tubes on full display, with stacks more CIWS all over the place.. A bunch of vertical launch tubes might make for a much cleaner profile but it doesn't pack a visual punch! Plus I liked how the Sovs would have the reddish-brick colour on the deck, any reason they painted it that way?
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 22:04
|
|
|
priznat posted:Yeah the soviets liked to have a lot of their missile tubes on full display, with stacks more CIWS all over the place.. A bunch of vertical launch tubes might make for a much cleaner profile but it doesn't pack a visual punch! Meh. The Iowa class remains simultaneously the prettiest and baddest-rear end-looking warships ever put to sea. Udaloys are cool, I guess, but a Sovremmeny looks like someone built a bunch of stuff with an Erector set and then dropped a cinderblock on it. quote:Plus I liked how the Sovs would have the reddish-brick colour on the deck, any reason they painted it that way? They probably just drunkenly slathered the deck in the same copper anti-fouling paint they used for the hull.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 22:19
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Meh. The Iowa class remains simultaneously the prettiest and baddest-rear end-looking warships ever put to sea. Udaloys are cool, I guess, but a Sovremmeny looks like someone built a bunch of stuff with an Erector set and then dropped a cinderblock on it. Yeah they didn't look that pretty but they sure had a lot of stuff slapped all over the place.. Sort of flexing the guns, so to speak. The Kirov-class was a pretty nice looking ship imo, and it had all the vertical launch tubes keeping the foredeck pretty clean.  quote:They probably just drunkenly slathered the deck in the same copper anti-fouling paint they used for the hull. Laff, so true.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 22:24
|
|
|
grover posted:Soviet warships are so much more impressive looking than our own. Shame DNC can't tell the difference. These days they look very similar to US/NATO ships. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steregushchy_class_corvette
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 23:09
|
|
|
priznat posted:Yeah they didn't look that pretty but they sure had a lot of stuff slapped all over the place.. Sort of flexing the guns, so to speak. See, to me that thing just screams "bad early 70s neo-futuristic." I'm picturing a nightclub populated by Slavic guys with thick chest hair and gold medallions. And they drive this to get there:  Except, you know, made by Lada and not Lotus.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 23:12
|
|
|
To me it looks like something Hasbro would be selling as the "Cobra BattleCruiser(tm)", which would have been AWESOME.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 23:14
|
|
|
priznat posted:To me it looks like something Hasbro would be selling as the "Cobra BattleCruiser(tm)", which would have been AWESOME. This probably came close to existing, to provide a counterpart to the USS Flagg.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 23:33
|
|
|
I had an acquaintance who had the USS Flagg, that was pretty neat. Never knew anyone who had that space shuttle monster though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 23:43
|
|
|
priznat posted:I had an acquaintance who had the USS Flagg, that was pretty neat.  A friend of mine had one, and it was most definitly the coolest toy ever.
|
|
#
?
Sep 12, 2012 23:56
|
|
|
priznat posted:Plus I liked how the Sovs would have the reddish-brick colour on the deck, any reason they painted it that way? I don't know about the Soviets, but commercial shipowners use that color because rust doesn't show as much. It's also one of those colors that doesn't "get dirty". Less maintenance. Anti-fouling is expensive as gently caress, I don't think even the sovs would use it on a deck.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 03:16
|
|
|
Google Reverse image search brings back a book cover. Perhaps a really bad photoshop Job. However I am guessing the book cover image was originally from somewhere else. I have to chuckle at the Seapower in the Air power thread though. http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415622622/  edit: It looks like we aren't the only ones who noticed either. http://www.navytimes.com/news/2012/09/navy-russian-warships-displayed-dnc-veterans-tribute-091112/ _firehawk fucked around with this message at 19:04 on Sep 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 14:51
|
|
|
I will almost guarantee that it's just a stock image owned by Getty Images or one of the other big stock photo companies. Chances are they just told some intern to get a suitably good looking picture of navy ships as a backdrop for the speech and that was the first (and likely only) stop they made. It's still pretty stupid that they didn't just do a GIS for a public domain photo from the Navy, but whatever.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 15:04
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:I will almost guarantee that it's just a stock image owned by Getty Images or one of the other big stock photo companies. Chances are they just told some intern to get a suitably good looking picture of navy ships as a backdrop for the speech and that was the first (and likely only) stop they made. I'm sure if some Democratic Party lackey had called a public affairs desk at the Pentagon and asked for some stock navy images they would of been more then happy to point them in the right direction. It's just sloppiness.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 16:24
|
|
|
DNC isn't the only one to grab the wrong images off google... http://www.bertisevil.tv/pages/bert038.htm
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2012 20:43
|
|
|
So a octogenarian nun and two of her sister protesters successfully broke into the enriched uranium facility in Tennessee to protest the lax security there. Uranium? Not plutonium?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2012 21:39
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2012 09:58
|
|
|
I'm not asking if it's pregnant, but drat...
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2012 14:18
|
|
|
PhotoKirk posted:I'm not asking if it's pregnant, but drat... It's a
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2012 21:12
|
|
|
 dat rear end... I have always had a soft spot for ramjets.
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2012 22:37
|
|
|
Museum at Le Bourget is full of such wacky projects.     (last one is a VTOL Mirage III) 
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 08:09
|
|
|
Gervasius posted:Museum at Le Bourget is full of such wacky projects. Ok, what the hell are these?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 08:33
|
|
|
2ndclasscitizen posted:Ok, what the hell are these? First one is a Payen Katy, early jet-age experimental plane, second one is Leduc 0.22, prototype ramjet interceptor. One more:  Trident, prototype jet/rocket interceptor.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 08:46
|
|
|
All of those are wacky, but jesus that second one looks like something seriously out of the Thunderbirds.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 08:51
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:All of those are wacky, but jesus that second one looks like something seriously out of the Thunderbirds. Fabulous, isn't it? Look it dem cockpit:  There was a room for a man inside 
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 08:56
|
|
|
Gervasius posted:Fabulous, isn't it? Look it dem cockpit: Yeah, that's what I thought I saw which is what inspired my comment...here's a ramjet, and cockpits are kind of draggy so we're just going to put the pilot in the nose cone, no big deal. The '50s: when airplanes were designed by 8 year olds.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 09:04
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Yeah, that's what I thought I saw which is what inspired my comment...here's a ramjet, and cockpits are kind of draggy so we're just going to put the pilot in the nose cone, no big deal. The '50s: when airplanes were designed by 8 year olds.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 10:38
|
|
|
Yarr, th'Area Rule be a harsh mistress...
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 13:53
|
|
|
 
Force de Fappe fucked around with this message at 14:09 on Sep 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 14:07
|
|
|
 "So I'm supposed to bail out right before I hit, huh?"
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2012 16:00
|
|
|
I have a quick dumb question related to the cold war. I'm watching an older discovery channel wings on the Mig-29 and Su-27 and they just got to the first demonstration of the Mig-29 in England and I started to wonder something. How did the logistics and permissions for getting military equipment from the East out to places like Paris and England for the shows during the Cold War?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 16:51
|
|
|
LP97S posted:I have a quick dumb question related to the cold war. I'm watching an older discovery channel wings on the Mig-29 and Su-27 and they just got to the first demonstration of the Mig-29 in England and I started to wonder something. How did the logistics and permissions for getting military equipment from the East out to places like Paris and England for the shows during the Cold War? I don't really know enough to answer your question properly, but it was kind of accepted that neither side was going to surprise nuke an airshow or something. Also, all involved were pretty pumped about the air shows, from what I've read/heard because you got to play the game of trying to get as much info as possible about your enemy without revealing your own secrets. It was and still is common for aircraft attending international airshows to have very strict rules set about by the sending country's military about what the aircraft can/can't do, particuarly with regards to radar, certains sensors, etc in order to deny the enemy of opportunities to exploit your systems or collect ELINT or SIGINT.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 17:09
|
|
|
Did NATO countries ever send aircraft over to Warsaw Pact countries for airshows?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 17:56
|
|
|
Craptacular posted:Did NATO countries ever send aircraft over to Warsaw Pact countries for airshows? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 18:14
|
|
|
grover posted:Yes, the US frequently did fly-overs of Soviet airshows with U-2s. They even donated a permanent display. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 18:34
|
|
|
Craptacular posted:Did NATO countries ever send aircraft over to Warsaw Pact countries for airshows? I'm not sure there even were any major airshows in the pact area. I certainly haven't heard of any. Flyovers and military parades, sure, but airshows where the general public could see aircraft up close?
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 19:43
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:I don't really know enough to answer your question properly, but it was kind of accepted that neither side was going to surprise nuke an airshow or something. Also, all involved were pretty pumped about the air shows, from what I've read/heard because you got to play the game of trying to get as much info as possible about your enemy without revealing your own secrets. It was and still is common for aircraft attending international airshows to have very strict rules set about by the sending country's military about what the aircraft can/can't do, particuarly with regards to radar, certains sensors, etc in order to deny the enemy of opportunities to exploit your systems or collect ELINT or SIGINT. Don't forget the TU-144 incident at the Paris Airshow. We really, really wanted to get a better look at the canards on the TU-144. Oops.
|
|
#
?
Sep 30, 2012 23:39
|
|
|
PhotoKirk posted:Don't forget the TU-144 incident at the Paris Airshow. We really, really wanted to get a better look at the canards on the TU-144. Maybe or maybe not. The most that's been released to support that (popular in the USSR) theory is that there was a Mirage in the air nearby, not that it was actually involved in the crash which coincided almost immediately with the completed deployment of the canards. At the opposite end of the spectrum, the popular French theory was that the Soviets were fed flawed information about the Concorde, used it in the design of the Tu-144, and it resulted in structural problems. Probably also false, though the Soviet effort to steal anything they could about the Concorde to help with the Tu-144 appears to have been real. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 03:08 on Oct 1, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2012 00:58
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:Maybe or maybe not. The most that's been released to support that (popular in the USSR) theory is that there was a Mirage in the air nearby, not that it was actually involved in the crash which coincided almost immediately with the completed deployment of the canards. Now there is another popular in Russia theory about this, that it was a WATCH THIS accident, where the crew was ordered to deactivate (or put in a experimental program) the load limiters to pull more impressive maneuvers off.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2012 09:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 11:24 |
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBNON6NTFIY The part at the end where dude is just lighting up a cig is never not awesome.
|
|
#
?
Oct 1, 2012 19:14
|
|