|
Arquinsiel posted:That's true. One of the most Erich Hartmann's last interview is also pretty terrible. Apparently it got bad enough for some American GI's to start trading shots with the Red Army before beating a hasty retreat.
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 02:25
|
|
things in The End is Goebbels repeatedly making up some atrocity to spur on the troops only for the Soviets to top it within weeks.
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 21:06 |
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:You mean apart from being relatively stable weapons platforms allowing for directed fire and amalgamating the manoeuvrability of a helicopter with the speed of a prop-driven plane? Yeah, this is mostly what I was wondering. Is this a common/feasible tactic, hovering like a chopper does to put fire on an even more specific location than a flyby would do?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 02:33
|
|
|
Pharmaskittle posted:Yeah, this is mostly what I was wondering. Is this a common/feasible tactic, hovering like a chopper does to put fire on an even more specific location than a flyby would do? grover fucked around with this message at 02:46 on Feb 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 02:42
|
|
|
^^^^ You're completely forgetting about VTOL aircraft like the V-22 Osprey and ignoring ground-attack roles aren't you? ProfessorCurly posted:Erich Hartmann's last interview is also pretty terrible. Apparently it got bad enough for some American GI's to start trading shots with the Red Army before beating a hasty retreat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:^^^ If you're picturing an F-35B hovering around taking potshots like an Apache gunship, don't; it just doesn't work like that. F-35B is going to provide ground support in exactly the same way an F-35A or F-35C would.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 02:49
|
|
|
Pharmaskittle posted:Yeah, this is mostly what I was wondering. Is this a common/feasible tactic, hovering like a chopper does to put fire on an even more specific location than a flyby would do? The Harrier had
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 02:49
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:You're completely forgetting about VTOL aircraft like the V-22 Osprey and ignoring ground-attack roles aren't you? I told those tea-obsessed assholes to keep running, but noooooooooooo... my dad fucked around with this message at 02:53 on Feb 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
grover posted:F-35B is an STOVL fighter/attack aircraft. MV-22 Osprey is a VTOL transport. They're completely different aircraft for completely different missions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 02:52
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:I'm picturing it laying down some fire with the belly-mounted GAU-17 or the ramp-mounted MG to provide cover for the unloading operation. Haven't you learned anything from first person shooter cut scenes? The minute a transport aircraft stops and hovers, it will be hit by an RPG.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 03:28
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Chillyrabbit posted:The training in isolation I was just curious how long it takes a a country to make something from nothing. Are we talking about like if tomorrow Somalia decided they want a blue water Navy? I mean at minimum you buy an old WW-II era destroyer from Russian navy boneyard, arrange some fuel, and find 50 dudes who are literate and can swim decently, and one guy to translate the manual from Russian to Somalian, and you now have Navy!
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 04:48
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:Are we talking about like if tomorrow Somalia decided they want a blue water Navy? I mean at minimum you buy an old WW-II era destroyer from Russian navy boneyard, arrange some fuel, and find 50 dudes who are literate and can swim decently, and one guy to translate the manual from Russian to Somalian, and you now have Navy! Well I think it would be a pretty lovely navy, tech skills don't pop up over night and I guess you can make them sail the ship up and down the coast but as a military unit it would probably be a disaster. But yeah I guess that was the best way to put my question if the most lovely country in the world decides it wants a half decent military how do they start from scratch.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 04:53
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:Are we talking about like if tomorrow Somalia decided they want a blue water Navy? I mean at minimum you buy an old WW-II era destroyer from Russian navy boneyard, arrange some fuel, and find 50 dudes who are literate and can swim decently, and one guy to translate the manual from Russian to Somalian, and you now have Navy! I think we have a reality show idea right here. EDIT: http://www.mission4today.com/index.php?name=ForumsPro&file=viewtopic&t=9471 this isn't the first place I saw it, but this seems to be more or less complete. ProfessorCurly fucked around with this message at 05:11 on Feb 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
Pharmaskittle posted:This came up in the D&D GOP thread for some reason and I didn't think it was really the proper venue for my question: do VTOL aircraft have any advantages aside from obviously not requiring a landing strip? I know that that's a huge plus, but I'm wondering whether there's any advantage once it's in the air. If you want to do a job with an airplane, it will cost X. If you want to do the same job with a helicopter, it will cost X*3=Y. If you then want to have some of the same characteristics of a fixed wing airplane in a VTOL platform, that will cost Y*Z=V, where Z is the number of senators you have to buy to ram the project through congress. Basically, a VTOL aircraft can do everything a fixed wing aircraft can do, less effectively, but at least it costs a whole lot more!
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:Basically, a VTOL aircraft can do everything a fixed wing aircraft can do, less effectively, but at least it costs a whole lot more! Name one VTOL aircraft that was half as successful as a comparable fixed wing design. (Pretend I posted a link here to that VTOL Wheel of Failure website that someone, I think you, posted over in AI)
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 05:55
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Name one VTOL aircraft that was half as successful as a comparable fixed wing design. Well, LockMart is going to sell more F-35s to the Air Force than F-22s, does financial success count? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 06:00
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:If you want to do a job with an airplane, it will cost X. If you want to do the same job with a helicopter, it will cost X*3=Y. If you then want to have some of the same characteristics of a fixed wing airplane in a VTOL platform, that will cost Y*Z=V, where Z is the number of senators you have to buy to ram the project through congress. I thought the Harrier kinda filled an important strategic niche for Britain nu? Its not like they could afford super carriers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 06:05
|
|
|
Besides, do those aircraft-mounted guns even have any degrees of movement, or do you have to tilt your entire aircraft at your target? I wouldn't trust the precision of thrusters to aim a giant cannon at someone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 06:18
|
|
|
Works for the A-10.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 06:24
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Stavka did intervene. The penalty for committing rape was execution. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_occupation_of_Germany Wikipedia and such but the Rape of Berlin happened on a vast scale and continued to happen for several years after the surrender of Nazi Germany. None of the Allied powers have clean hands in this regard, the Russians least of all.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 06:25
|
|
|
Phobophilia posted:Besides, do those aircraft-mounted guns even have any degrees of movement, or do you have to tilt your entire aircraft at your target? I wouldn't trust the precision of thrusters to aim a giant cannon at someone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 06:35
|
|
|
Chillyrabbit posted:
How much money does this fictional country have? Say I'm a despot and running Whateveristan. Sounds like the best short term investment for an armed force is one of the many... private contractor firms out there. You get a few thousand of those dudes, you hire some trainers, and slowly start training and rotating them in. Sounds like you could do pretty well with a bunch of Eastern bloc/NORINCO weaponry and after a year or two, a semi-competently trained core to work with.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 06:59
|
|
|
I read somewhere that the majority of the rapes committed by Soviet forces were not committed by front line troops but the secondary behind the lines guys who showed up once the fighting was over. Is there any truth to that?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 07:29
|
|
|
Arquinsiel posted:Depends on the plane. The Osprey has this and the ramp guns are basically a dude standing at a fancy pintle mount. Yeah, but that's a helicopter and they're good at standing in place as a stable firing platform. A harrier or an F35 sounds like a terrible idea for pulling this off.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 07:34
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:I read somewhere that the majority of the rapes committed by Soviet forces were not committed by front line troops but the secondary behind the lines guys who showed up once the fighting was over. Is there any truth to that? Hastings says as much in Armageddon. Front line troops were too busy actually fighting to do much whereas second echelon and service troops 'settle' down into towns and cities and stay put for a while.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 09:00
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Haven't you learned anything from first person shooter cut scenes? The minute a transport aircraft stops and hovers, it will be hit by an RPG. Now that you mention it a stationary big target hanging in the air is tempting. What would happen if you got at it with small arms?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 10:21
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Hastings says as much in Armageddon. Front line troops were too busy actually fighting to do much whereas second echelon and service troops 'settle' down into towns and cities and stay put for a while. I've seen that expanded (in fiction, I think) to a sort of 'clean Red Army frontliners' myth where the combat troops are more than just focused on fighting, they're downright chivalrous. Is there any truth to that? 'No' seems like the most reasonable answer but just in case there's a little  to be found on the eastern front...Also, totally different question WRT to training regimens. Let's say you're some kind of rebel organization in poorly-held lands, and to use probably apples to oranges examples AQ in Afg and the IRA in 1920s Ireland--how different/hard would it be to organize those types? In both cases you've got relatively experienced soldiers readymade - WWI vets in Ireland and... returning jihadis? Tribesmen with some Afghan on Afghan experience? or whatever in Afghanistan. The two organizations have broadly similar goals (drive the foreigners out) but a completely different set of tech, terrain, raw mateerial (and command experience?). They're broadly similar also in that they have fractious populations that generally don't like outsiders, I guess. How comparatively hard would it be to train up the smallest operational unit of AQ or the IRA? What is that unit anyway? I'm assuming a 4-10 man squad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 11:10
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Stavka did intervene. The penalty for committing rape was execution. While the above is true, and I've read both Zhukov and Rokossovsky irritably comment on the actions of their soldiers making the post war situation with German civilians difficult, the scale of atrocity in East Prussia and around 2 million rapes by the Red Army is almost industrial in its level of punitive warcrime. I've always been a huge admirer of Russian culture and history but I really get sick of the bullshit I hear about how it was 'punishable by death' as if that's the end of it. On the ground however the reality was basically Red Army Officers saying do what the gently caress you want to the fascist beast and their women. War crimes were committed continuously by the Red Army on reaching Prussia and were backed up by a flow of Soviet propaganda where soldiers were encouraged to keep 'revenge diaries' by commissars to carry out once they reached the borders of the Reich. WW2 was utter bullshit across the board and Germany committed so, so many evil acts there is definitely a vibe of 'they had what was coming to them', but white washing crimes against civilians with stuff like the above quote (which may not have been it's intention, but I've heard it used as such plenty of times) is pretty strong no matter what the context. maev fucked around with this message at 12:59 on Feb 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 12:56
|
|
|
quote:While the above is true, and I've read both Zhukov and Rokossovsky irritably comment on the actions of their soldiers making the post war situation with German civilians difficult, the scale of atrocity in East Prussia and around 2 million rapes by the Red Army is almost industrial in its level of punitive warcrime. I've always been a huge admirer of Russian culture and history but I really get sick of the bullshit I hear about how it was 'punishable by death' as if that's the end of it. On the ground however the reality was basically Red Army Officers saying do what the gently caress you want to the fascist beast and their women. How are estimates like '2 million rapes' derived? EDIT: Googling suggests: http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=84324&highlight=rape+beevor If this forums poster is correct, it seems to be based on extrapolation (and some assumptions) from a single hospital for a single short period. I don't think it's at all sufficient to judge from that the real scale and nature of what happened. Fangz fucked around with this message at 13:24 on Feb 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 13:18
|
|
|
A good read / movie: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Woman_in_Berlin If you have Merridale's book "Ivan's War", there's also a chapter about the rapes. I'm sure the Red Army also had strict rules about consuming alcohol.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 14:54
|
|
|
I was reading up on bullpup-design firearms, and it occurred to me: Are there any weapons (any weapon across history, not just firearms) that are/were designed specifically for lefties?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 15:02
|
|
|
When I did my time in the army, a few of my comrades were issued an older variant of the Stg77 that had a selective ejection port. Actually the port was left and right, and you could switch it by fixing a small plate. The scope would still be awkward though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 15:29
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I was reading up on bullpup-design firearms, and it occurred to me: Are there any weapons (any weapon across history, not just firearms) that are/were designed specifically for lefties? Any left/right asymmetrical weapon would probably have an equivalent for lefties if out was used outside of a formation context (the hand guards on complex-hilted swords like the schiavona come to mind). For a more modern example, there are plenty of left-side ejecting rifles of an otherwise identical design to the right-ejectors. AR-15s are one example but I think SCARs are also made ambidextrous and there's others I'm sure I'm forgetting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 15:32
|
|
|
Aren't there a few service rifles that eject shells straight forward/down?
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
Fangz posted:How are estimates like '2 million rapes' derived? The estimates are cited by historians from Beevor to Overy, and in other cultural history books on West Germany. You could revise and fiddle with the statistics to 'cut the numbers down' I'm sure, but in the same way that Eric Hobsbawm (himself a Jewish historian) says that the holocaust was probably in the region of 4 million deaths, the fact is the numbers so large and the crime so horrendous it makes it no better. The Red Army's 'rape spree' has been more recently considered to have been more indiscriminate than merely 'punitive punishment' also. quote:Beevor is careful to qualify any suggestion that what happened from 1944 onwards is in any way typical of male behaviour in peacetime. But he admits that he was "shaken to the core" to discover that Russian and Polish women and girls liberated from concentration camps were also violated. If you add these it's likely higher. Though impossible to get a full, accurate figure of the numbers the broader picture is pretty clear. The Red Army indulged in a rape spree from East Prussia to Berlin and was little affected by the belated actions of Stavka and other elements of Soviet High command.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 15:43
|
|
|
quote:The estimates are cited by historians from Beevor to Overy, and in other cultural history books on West Germany. You could revise and fiddle with the statistics to 'cut the numbers down' I'm sure, but in the same way that Eric Hobsbawm (himself a Jewish historian) says that the holocaust was probably in the region of 4 million deaths, the fact is the numbers so large and the crime so horrendous it makes it no better. They are cited by all sorts of historians, but what's their source? If you are indeed deriving these figures by extrapolation from a single clinic (that saw 12 cases of possible rape), you can be many, many orders of magnitude out from the real number. EDIT: I don't intend to deny that a large number of cases of rape did happen. But the evidence is scant and does not seem sufficient to distinguish between multiple isolated clusters of rapists, general lawlessness, and the idea of rape on an 'industrial scale'. The anecdotes confirm that in some locations it was pretty loving bad, but you have alternatively anecdotes where nothing happened. If our picture of what happened rests too heavily on this '2 million' figure, I just don't think that it can hold the load. It *might* be true, but I can't see how it would have been possible to form a view of the prevalence of rape in the post-war environment. It's a near impossible exercise to even estimate the order of magnitude of the amount of rape in today's society, let alone try and do it in an uncooperative state in the throes of post-war chaos. Fangz fucked around with this message at 16:12 on Feb 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 15:49
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:Aren't there a few service rifles that eject shells straight forward/down? I recall a weapon that ejected upwards into the air.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
I assume it's credible enough if it's used by historians whose works are generally respected, peer reviewed and subject to a great deal of outside criticism. It's possible that it is taken from The One Clinic but it's clearly been robust enough to have seen consistent use as a number, even if it's generally regarded as higher end. If that's the case then it becomes a question of what's the most likely case and why statistics are selected in the first place. Clearly it's a big issue for pro  historians (something which I've been occasionally partial to) and nationals because it's an emotive and lovely topic which can easily be used to downplay the role of the USSR in fighting back Nazi Germany. The 2 million number tends to pop up a lot in the books of historians who otherwise wouldn't really have a huge reason to want to poo poo on the Red Army's face for the sake of it by bigging up the numbers though. I appreciate it's more sensationalist and plays into the hands of cold warriors by saying WE TRADED ONE TERRIBLE DICTATORSHIP FOR ANOTHER but recent historians are a little past the point of taking Guderian's diaries as gospel and 1950s Red Scare history as fact, which makes the higher end of the number scale seem a little more likely. tldr: if it was an absurd number based on one terrible source I don't think it'd be used by historians who want to remain somewhat credible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 16:15
|
|
|
maev posted:tldr: if it was an absurd number based on one terrible source I don't think it'd be used by historians who want to remain somewhat credible. Well, historians aren't necessarily smarter than you or me. I think they are equally vulnerable to using a particular number because everyone else uses it, which would be a pretty safe decision whichever side of the former iron curtain you'd find yourself, if you don't want to be in a poo poo-storm. If they are privy to additional information, then, sure. If someone dug into the Soviet War Archives, and found out a confirming document, then okay. But at this point it's unlikely the 2 million figure will ever at this point be either debunked or confirmed. This is unlike the stuff like the holocaust casualties, because I think well documented studies *were* carried out (not least because it was politically convenient to do so), and we know pretty well that there's millions of people missing. I think it's fairly justified to be at least somewhat skeptical of the rape figure. It would not be the first time that a dodgy factoid has become commonly believed history even amongst respectable people. In such a case, I would not say that Beevor etc was lying and certainly not lying purposefully. He simply used an easily available number and (IMO) did not give it the heavy caveats it deserved. Fangz fucked around with this message at 16:32 on Feb 18, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
While I don’t want to start getting into the overall debate, I don’t know enough about what happened as the Soviets pushed west. However relying on evidence because other people do especially if the source of this evidence is unclear is really shaky. Time and again people repeat common knowledge as fact and it becomes accepted as such until someone points it out, even then it lingers on. As an anecdotal experience a friend of mine edited Wikipedia a few years ago to make a pastiche of himself inventor of a common household item. It slipped by, probably because it was convincing enough and he picked the item well, we don’t know who invented it (apparently), everyone is familiar with it but no one is fanatical about it. Anyway, at last count this fact is published in two books and on hundreds of websites. Now this is apples and oranges as no one really cares who invented this item and it really doesn’t matter compared to industrialised rape, but attitudes towards facts about the eastern front have changed a hell of a lot in the last 60 years, especially since the collapse of the USSR. I’m not saying this is a case of everyone repeated something enough it became accepted as fact without evidence but logically it’s a pretty terrible argument. And I’m not saying what the item is, it’s really interesting to track its progress and goons ruin everything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 21:06 |
|
|
Tangentially related, but reading through Firestorm: Allied Airpower and the Destruction of Dresden, the author spends an entire chapter about the historiography of the event, specifically calling out David Irving as a revisionist bastard and Nazi apologist that was proud of misleading large swaths of the academia when he drastically overstated the number of casualties involved in Dresden (300k-450k supposedly, instead of the now accepted 20k-30k figure). People believed him because he was first out of the gate with a book about it, and people just kept using his book as a source until it became widespread. Not to say that this is what's happening here, but it has happened as far as historians who have no real agenda ending up using something inaccurate anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2014 16:53
|
|