|
bewbies posted:The Japanese trying to figure out what the hell just happened at Hiroshima is pretty interesting (and macabre, and sad, too). They obviously knew nothing about the weapon, no major bombing raid had occurred, the US fleet was a thousand miles away, and an entire city was burning. OK, now I don't doubt any of this. What I don't really understand is why they would think this, if they had a atom bomb project themselves.
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 01:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 17:29 |
|
|
I'd imagine a mix of not everyone knowing about it, and hey we couldn't make it work how could they?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 01:18
|
|
|
DeesGrandpa posted:I'd imagine a mix of not everyone knowing about it, and hey we couldn't make it work how could they? Yeah, consider how top secret our project was. I can imagine there would be a gently caress load of confusion if we'd had Boston nuked in '45 with all sorts of crazy suppositions before someone connected the dots between our own research and that. Plus, the Japanese A-Bomb project was laughable. They had their own nuclear experts, but they were about as far from the bomb as they were from cold loving fusion. It also doesn't hurt that before our very, very secret tests in Nevada no one had anything but educated guesses what an atomic explosion would look like in person. There was a fair bit of "gently caress it, throw the switch and see what it does" involved in early nuclear research.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 01:50
|
|
|
One of my never discuss while high topics was the Manhattan Project. Just how crazy an idea it was, during a time when money and scientists were desperately needed for advancements in areas that were guaranteed to yield at least something. Just all the people dealing with all the science needed for it, when none of them really quite knew what might happen, and that somehow over it all the loving government procurement system actually let it happen. Trippy as balls.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:It also doesn't hurt that before our very, very secret tests in Nevada New Mexico. We didn't start nuking Nevada until the fifties.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 02:23
|
|
|
Sperglord Actual posted:New Mexico. We didn't start nuking Nevada until the fifties. Correct, my mistake.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 02:23
|
|
|
Lumping the southwest together as one giant blob is really the kindest thing one could do for New Mexico.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:There was a fair bit of "gently caress it, throw the switch and see what it does" involved in early nuclear research. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_K._Daghlian,_Jr. Radiation safety procedures left a lot to be desired in the 1940s.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
DeesGrandpa posted:One of my never discuss while high topics was the Manhattan Project. Just how crazy an idea it was, during a time when money and scientists were desperately needed for advancements in areas that were guaranteed to yield at least something. Just all the people dealing with all the science needed for it, when none of them really quite knew what might happen, and that somehow over it all the loving government procurement system actually let it happen. Trippy as balls. The science wasn't so hard. The basic theory had been known for at least a decade when they set off on the path that ended at Trinity. The maths though. The maths was loving spectacularly balls-nasty, and there wasn't any Wolfram Alpha to help them out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
Sperglord Actual posted:New Mexico. We didn't start nuking Nevada until the fifties. The Nevada Test Site/Yucca Flat is fun to examine on Google Earth (south west of Groom Lake, west of Papoose Lake, and north of Yucca Airfield), it's ~25 sq. miles of cratered earth that would make the pimpliest teenager blush. And the further north you go from Yucca Airfield the larger the craters get until you reach the Sedan Crater.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 02:36
|
|
|
Project plowshare  also, Area 25.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 03:10
|
|
|
Memento posted:The science wasn't so hard. The basic theory had been known for at least a decade when they set off on the path that ended at Trinity. The maths though. The maths was loving spectacularly balls-nasty, and there wasn't any Wolfram Alpha to help them out. We did have calculators. Rooms full of them. http://www.mphpa.org/classic/HISTORY/H-06c18.htm Neutron propagation and equations of state for critical masses are not that conceptually difficult. But they are balls-rear end difficult due to the lack of analytical solutions to all these nasty coupled equations.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 04:43
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:nevermind, redundant. What's that steel colored little fighter up on the left of the Phantom?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 06:17
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:What's that steel colored little fighter up on the left of the Phantom? I think it's an F5D.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 06:25
|
|
|
The bright red A-3 Skywarrior with incredibly oversized engine is pretty great.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 06:26
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:What's that steel colored little fighter up on the left of the Phantom? Douglas F4D Skyray (aka F-6) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_F4D_Skyray Edit: efb, could be the F5D variant (skylancer) priznat fucked around with this message at 06:39 on Apr 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 06:36
|
|
|
priznat posted:Douglas F4D Skyray (aka F-6) Oh yep, so it is, missed the framing on the cockpit. Surprising, with all the other high performance planes around it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 06:40
|
|
|
My uncle had a cool model of an F-6, truly one of the forgotten fighters!
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 06:47
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:I think it's an F5D. Close, it's an F4D (F5D has a pointier nose and never entered service, with only a couple prototypes being built). Incidentally, the F4D is one of the best looking fighters ever built:             Yet another example of Ed Heinemann proving that if it looks right, it'll fly right.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 06:50
|
|
|
The probe on the nose threw me off, honestly. I adore Douglas planes from that period, the Skyhawk is just the coolest thing, and the Skyray and Skylancer aren't far behind.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 06:58
|
|
|
With the rounded delta it reminded me of the avro Vulcan somewhat, a mini version.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 07:11
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:The bright red A-3 Skywarrior with incredibly oversized engine is pretty great. Close; it's an RB-66 testing GE CJ805 engines.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 07:26
|
|
|
So I just finished Command and Control, which was a great and disturbing read. If I understand the book correctly the US has lost a number of nukes by dropping them in the ocean as well as dropping them deep into the ground? And in some of those cases (where it happened outside of the US) they didn't even try to recover the nukes?
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 09:04
|
|
|
On destroying intelligence in the event of capture... Reading Wiki I see Powers here failed to activate the self-destruct mechanism before climbing out(!) of his swiftly disintegrating U2. Should have installed a leash activation like on a treadmill or jet ski - if the pilot goes missing then the film canisters shouldn't remain intact.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 13:12
|
|
|
LostCosmonaut posted:I have had people in other parts of the internet try to tell me that the F-86's wing design was copied from the 262. Because all swept wings are the same. If World of Tanks players have taught me anything, it's that there are a ton of loving imbeciles out there who jerk off to shows about FEARSOME GERMAN ARMOR on the Military History Channel.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 13:17
|
|
|
Oh god do they ever. Glorious Invincible KruppStahl!
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 13:52
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:If World of Tanks players have taught me anything, it's that there are a ton of loving imbeciles out there who jerk off to shows about FEARSOME GERMAN ARMOR on the Military History Channel. Imagine having to play against those clods in a tabletop wargame 
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 13:54
|
|
|
Tumorous Typhoon:   And F-18  And F-16 
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 13:55
|
|
|
For whatever reason (probably camera angle) the others just look like they got some sort of electronics pods added to them, but the F-16 looks like it got swole. As for the German tanks, did they continue to be overengineered pieces of precision watchmaking after the end of WWII? I actually know very little about post nazi German armor, and most of what I know about WWII German armor was taught to me by Tamiya in 1/35th scale.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 14:11
|
|
|
They are conformal fuel tanks (I think).
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 14:14
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:If World of Tanks players have taught me anything, it's that there are a ton of loving imbeciles out there who jerk off to shows about FEARSOME GERMAN ARMOR on the Military History Channel. Russian bias.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 14:49
|
|
|
stealie72 posted:As for the German tanks, did they continue to be overengineered pieces of precision watchmaking after the end of WWII? I actually know very little about post nazi German armor, and most of what I know about WWII German armor was taught to me by Tamiya in 1/35th scale. The Leopard 1 was a pretty exceptional bit of engineering; it and the Chieftain are generally regarded as the best tanks of the era. The The US of course was rolling about in halfassed upgrades on WWII heavies for this entire period.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 14:53
|
|
|
bewbies posted:The Leopard 1 was a pretty exceptional bit of engineering; it and the Chieftain are generally regarded as the best tanks of the era. The The US of course was rolling about in halfassed upgrades on WWII heavies for this entire period. I thought the Leo 1 suffered pretty badly from the "any tank that gets hit will be destroyed by a HEAT shell anyway, so lets not armor it much and rely on speed"? Of course, the Leo 1 never faced enemy MBTs in the open field so we will never know how it would have done.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:CFTs No FAST packs? I'm disappointed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
Besides the Leo, Germany also had a post-war tank destroyer. It was very similar to (possibly based on?) the Jagdpanzer IV, though significantly reworked, and had the 90mm from the M47 Patton. It was called the Kanonenjagdpanzer. vvvvv edit: The joke in this case was my phones autocorrect. Q_res fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Apr 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
Uh...is there a joke I'm missing or should that be Kanonenjagnpanzer? EDIT: welp! Nevermind then!
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:Skyray goodness This must be the cutest fighter ever developed 
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 17:33
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
bewbies posted:The Leopard 1 was a pretty exceptional bit of engineering; it and the Chieftain are generally regarded as the best tanks of the era. The The US of course was rolling about in halfassed upgrades on WWII heavies for this entire period. German tank design got a lot better once they started to use proper manufacturing techniques and didn't have completely insane design boards/requirements. ArchangeI posted:I thought the Leo 1 suffered pretty badly from the "any tank that gets hit will be destroyed by a HEAT shell anyway, so lets not armor it much and rely on speed"? Of course, the Leo 1 never faced enemy MBTs in the open field so we will never know how it would have done. A lot of the Cold War-era armor before the introduction of composites was based on the mostly correct idea that RHA just wasn't suitable for tank armor anymore. Studies also showed that there was a remarkably small area of a tank that would normally get hit anyways (Upper Front Glacis to turret) so many of the post-war designs focused on making that more resilient. Severe slopes and low profiles to minimize exposure. Sometimes with pretty thick turret fronts as well.
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
That's easy enough to solve. Get rid of the turret. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stridsvagn_103
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 17:29 |
|
|
Taerkar posted:German tank design got a lot better once they started to use proper manufacturing techniques and didn't have completely insane design boards/requirements. Remember that the Leopard I was built on the theory that it would be fighting largely from prepared positions,
|
|
#
?
Apr 23, 2014 19:30
|
|
