|
a travelling HEGEL posted:Oh dear. In retrospect, I have no idea WTF I was thinking and I am glad this is ten years ago. I was a dumb teenager.
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 22:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 07:05 |
|
|
BurningStone posted:In his memoirs, US Grant told a story of going for a ride to inspect his lines when he took over command at Chattanooga. Or, at least, what he thought were his lines, because he rode right up to a Confederate soldier. Grant writes that they chatted politely, then he just rode on. If only Felix Zollicoffer would have been so lucky.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 23:17
|
|
|
Italy also sent an expedition (later 8th Army) to fight in the Russian front, and a torpedo boat detachment to Lake Ladoga. Neither of them did too well. The MAS boats were transferred to Finland after the season of 1942.
|
|
#
?
Dec 24, 2013 23:35
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Italy also sent an expedition (later 8th Army) to fight in the Russian front, and a torpedo boat detachment to Lake Ladoga. Neither of them did too well. The MAS boats were transferred to Finland after the season of 1942. That's one way of putting it. Otroschenkov Sergei Andreyevich posted:When we got repaired we caught up with our troops. We arrived in the area; I will never forget the Cossack hamlet Khlebny. 3 km from there was another hamlet named Petrovsky. It was also occupied by Soviet tanks, but not those of our brigade. Between those two hamlets, which lay on hills, there was lowland. Early in the morning the 8th Italian army was passing along that lowland in an enormous thick crowd saving itself from the encirclement. When the Italian vanguard units aligned with us we heard the command being distributed along our columns: Go forward! Crush them!" Then we tore into them from both flanks! I have never seen a mess as that one. We literally ground the Italian army into the soil. You should have looked into our eyes to see how much anger and hatred we had then! So we were squashing those Italians like bugs. It was winter; our tanks were painted in white color. When we disengaged from the battle the tanks below the turrets were red as if had floated in blood. I looked at the tracks: hands and fragments of skulls were stuck here and there. The spectacle was appalling. We captured crowds of POWs that day. After that elimination the 8th Italian army literally ceased to exist. At least, I never saw a single Italian at the front after that. Probably in bad taste for me to post my woodcraft T34-85...  EDIT: VVV I believe those hatches are supposed to be the roof ventilators. Fangz fucked around with this message at 00:52 on Dec 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 00:11
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Probably in bad taste for me to post my woodcraft T34-85... That's one way of putting it. (the upgunned T-34 was not even close to being in service at the time!) That's a beautiful craft, although I miss the commander's cupola. And I'm not sure what the printed hatches at the back of the turret are supposed to be... but when I get back to home I'm sure to show what it's supposed to look like (that is, my Soviet-era toy T-34)!
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 00:47
|
|
|
BurningStone posted:It seems surprisingly common. Even more common seem to be wink-wink nudge-nudge arrangements between soldiers where they fake fight. I worked with a guy from Taiwan, who had served in their military while they were officially, but not really, at war with China. He said the Chinese would shell them at the exact same time every afternoon. It was something like at 2:55 they would go into the cave that served as a bunker and at 3:15 they'd come back out. When did this happen anyway? I imagine if they were close enough to shell it was probably Kinmen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 00:50
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:And I'm not sure what the printed hatches at the back of the turret are supposed to be...
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 00:52
|
|
|
I know in real life they're ventilation domes, but the printed graphic looks like they're hinged like the engine hatch.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 01:01
|
|
|
Frostwerks posted:When did this happen anyway? I imagine if they were close enough to shell it was probably Kinmen. A while back. I must have heard the story in 1990, and he had been in the US for years.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 01:11
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:I know in real life they're ventilation domes, but the printed graphic looks like they're hinged like the engine hatch.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 01:25
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:I know in real life they're ventilation domes, but the printed graphic looks like they're hinged like the engine hatch. Yes, they are supposed to be more dome-like. The designer of this model must not have been looking at the reference material too closely. The road wheel spacing is wrong, the suspension arms are on the wrong side of their wheel, and the turret seems to have horns.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 01:35
|
|
|
I just spent an hour reading those Christmas truce letters. I am almost in tears and I am usually not someone who gives two shits about the holidays.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 02:05
|
|
|
Frostwerks posted:When did this happen anyway? I imagine if they were close enough to shell it was probably Kinmen. Yeah, I would think it would have to be Kinmen or Matsu, probably after the Second Strait Crisis.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 08:07
|
|
|
To continue on the theme National socialist tree ornaments 
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 13:02
|
|
bewbies posted:I just spent an hour reading those Christmas truce letters. I am almost in tears and I am usually not someone who gives two shits about the holidays. I knocked this up quickly reguarding the truce. 
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 13:04
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:To continue on the theme You sonofabitch. I thought I had forgotten about the depressing story behind this  Reading Antony Beevor's Stalingrad last year was not the best Yuletide literature choice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 13:19
|
|
|
I got Shattered Sword for Christmas as well! The other milhist book I got was Quest for Decisive Victory by Robert Citino. Does anyone here have a good grasp on the history Imperial Japanese Army? In particular, I'm interested in its leaders. We always hear about Patton, Montgomery, Zhukov, and Rommel, but nary a word about skilled Japanese (land) commanders. Through its history, did the IJA have any important theorists? How did the experiences of the First Sino-Japanese War and the Russo-Japanese War shape the IJA?
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 19:01
|
|
|
Recently I finished Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin In conclusion: gently caress wars. Best thing one can do in such a situation is not to be a participant in war crimes. However as it turned out, if a German refused to shoot somebody, they had auxiliaries to do it for them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 19:15
|
|
|
Shattered sword goons, how different is that book from Symonds' book? I got a BN giftcard and would't mind picking it up if its at least some what different.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 19:33
|
|
|
brozozo posted:I got Shattered Sword for Christmas as well! The other milhist book I got was Quest for Decisive Victory by Robert Citino. The IJA had what you might call a high turnaround for officers starting with Guadalcanal. They died with their men most times so any lessons they learned they took to their graves.
|
|
#
?
Dec 25, 2013 22:03
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Shattered sword goons, how different is that book from Symonds' book? I got a BN giftcard and would't mind picking it up if its at least some what different. Shattered Sword seems to tackle the subject more from the POV of the IJN, whereas Symonds' book looks at the American side, in particular with a long background on what the American carriers were doing prior to Midway, such as Coral Sea and the raids by the Enterprise and Lexington on outlying Japanese bases shortly after Pearl Harbor (which was the first I had ever known of such action)
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 17:02
|
|
|
Got a new kindle for chrimbo and picked up Shattered Sword as one of my first purchases- I don't post here, but this thread is my main source of entertainment on the forums so the recommendation must be sound. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 17:24
|
|
|
Alright, that took longer than I thought it would. I took a whole lot of photos and combined with family taking over most of my time, it took me a few days to go through all the photos and find the ones that weren't crap. I can try to provide explanations for what I took pictures of, but right now I've got to go so I'll just leave this here for now. I got a question though, some of the European armors had giant spike things sticking out of them, I thought that they were there to help remove the armor, but why didn't all of the armors have them? Seems odd that some suits and helmets had those spikes and some didn't. http://imgur.com/a/Hn9gt
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 17:33
|
|
|
Don Gato posted:I got a question though, some of the European armors had giant spike things sticking out of them, I thought that they were there to help remove the armor, but why didn't all of the armors have them? Seems odd that some suits and helmets had those spikes and some didn't. Could you be more specific, maybe circle some of what you're talking about? The only armour I can see with an actual spike is a suit clearly designed for jousting, though I do not know if it served a purpose other than looking cool.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 17:50
|
|
|
This is a lance rest. I can't see how it's attached, but it would either be able to fold in (if it's on a hinge) or rotate upwards (if it's on a screw) while not in use. I'm not sure, but I thiiiiink this is where you'd attach a...shield thing in Stechzeug armor as one more step towards the goal of turning yourself into an immobile box of metal with a human inside:  The spike corresponds to a hole in the shield; you slot it through and then tie it off, as so:  Where's this from, by the way? The wheel on red looks just like the coat of arms of Erfurt.  HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Dec 27, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 18:13
|
|
|
a travelling HEGEL posted:I'm not sure, but I thiiiiink this is where you'd attach a...shield thing in Stechzeug armor as one more step towards the goal of turning yourself into an immobile box of metal with a human inside: How are you meant to see out of this? I realise that stopping people from jabbing you in the eyeholes is good but seriously, where is the vision hole?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 20:26
|
|
|
You don't need to see a whole lot while jousting. Presumably you can just take off that big face piece and use something else for actual battlefield use.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 20:32
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:How are you meant to see out of this? I realise that stopping people from jabbing you in the eyeholes is good but seriously, where is the vision hole? I think the point in a tournament was to blindly flail at where you thought your opponent might be until someone landed some hits, like two duelling piņatas.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 20:33
|
|
|
Possibly apocryphal: Romans had a class of gladiators who specialized in this. They'd fight each other with solid helmets with no eye or ear holes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 20:35
|
|
|
a travelling HEGEL posted:I'm not sure, but I thiiiiink this is where you'd attach a...shield thing in Stechzeug armor as one more step towards the goal of turning yourself into an immobile box of metal with a human inside And hundreds of years later, they succeeded! 
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 20:39
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:And hundreds of years later, they succeeded! 
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 21:00
|
|
|
Man that dude standing on his cape is a huge dick.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 21:07
|
|
|
uPen posted:Man that dude standing on his cape is a huge dick.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 21:36
|
|
|
If you're in armor which makes you incapable of regaining your footing, something has gone seriously wrong.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 21:40
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:That makes me think that pushing over a knight would almost be funny enough to be worth it considering that after someone helps him up he'll probably stab you. If it is jousting armor, he'd just lie there feeling sad about life until someone helped him out. Then he'd stab you. veekie posted:If you're in armor which makes you incapable of regaining your footing, something has gone seriously wrong. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Dec 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 21:40
|
|
|
Rabhadh posted:You don't need to see a whole lot while jousting. Presumably you can just take off that big face piece and use something else for actual battlefield use. This is partly right, but I hope you aren't implying that the guy is actually unable to see his target and/or his lance, because that would be ridiculous. The advantage of smaller eyeslits is that by the 16th century lances typically shattered in the joust, and indeed that was one of the main ways of scoring points. What this means is that you have lots of sharp splinters of wood flying everywhere and, occasionally, killing kings. Back to the armour in question: that picture is taken at too low an angle, but there is definitely an eye slit there. However, to use it more effectively one would typically need to lean their body forward. This upper view of a 15th century jousting helm gives a better idea of what i mean: http://collections.glasgowmuseums.com/starobject.html?oid=243290 However, not all helms had cuts of this size or shape, and some jousting helm eyeslits would be very narrow indeed, as seen in this example: http://www.flickr.com/photos/roelipilami/6502394433/ Nenonen posted:I think the point in a tournament was to blindly flail at where you thought your opponent might be until someone landed some hits, like two duelling piņatas. That's really stupid, and here's why: 1. This is armour for the joust not the tournament 2. Tournament helms look entirely different. here are some examples  Notice they provide a ton of visibility, almost as if you need to see what you're hitting. Rent-A-Cop posted:That makes me think that pushing over a knight would almost be funny enough to be worth it considering that after someone helps him up he'll probably stab you. Considering that knights were avid wrestlers and they could do somersaults and leap into their saddles in armour he'd probably rip your balls off. Observe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hlIUrd7d1Q Keep in mind that these dudes have not regularly been wearing plate armour since they were 8 years old, as people like the Black Prince and other men-at-arms would have, so they are less capable than their historical counterparts. Rodrigo Diaz fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Dec 26, 2013 |
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 22:15
|
|
|
a travelling HEGEL posted:If it's not jousting armor, it'd be your rear end, since combat armor was less unwieldy than you'd think; there's one early modern king of France (forget which one) who could do backflips in full harness. veekie posted:If you're in armor which makes you incapable of regaining your footing, something has gone seriously wrong. Rodrigo Diaz posted:Considering that knights were avid wrestlers and they could do somersaults and leap into their saddles in armour he'd probably rip your balls off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 22:29
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hlIUrd7d1Q 
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 22:42
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:The combat roll is a thing of beauty It's official. Demons'/Dark Souls is historically accurate. I remember a video from a few years ago that had a guy doing backflips in a suit of plate. Can't seem to find it though, can anyone help out?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 23:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 07:05 |
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:Oh I know, but the armor pictured above with that big rigid skirt looks like it would make trying to stand up after you fell down a pretty tricky prospect. I don't expect anyone ever wore anything into a real fight that they couldn't actually fight in. It doesn't actually look that unwieldy actually, the skirt ends above the knees, and retains plenty of mobility within it's space, while being rigid prevents it from constantly flapping around and hindering your movement. It'd also protect your vulnerable crotch joints from being stabbed. More than enough to perform a quick recovery if toppled, though you won't be doing any high kicks.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2013 23:19
|
|