|
Fangz posted:Were these applique armour applications ever effective? Dunno about concrete, but the air pockets and fillings in sandbags probably hindered WWII HEAT better than any GI could ever rationalize. For regular AP shells, I've heard that the sand and track links didn't do enough to impede the shell and could sometimes normalize the angle that the shell struck actual angle at. This would make it worse than useless. I had no idea concrete applique armour even existed, It probably did act as extra armour, but a half-foot layer of concrete sounds heavy as hell.
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 01:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 04:29 |
|
|
EvanSchenck posted:But I'm not saying there was no controversy, I was just telling you what source I was using to explain how I got it wrong? Oh, my bad, dude. the "And so on" sounded dismissive.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
The Soviets also tried concrete armour. It looked pretty silly. This design killed the mobility of the tank for little benefit, so it was not adopted. Tracks as improvised armour were a pretty common sight, and sometimes it didn't even matter whose tracks you used.  This is a StuG with a bunch of T-34 tracks welded to the front.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
Azipod posted:Track links were also easy to find and weld to the hull. These guys might have gone a little overboard. If I saw that thign coming at me I'd be a little frightened. It's an alligator made of freedom.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 02:31
|
|
|
The uparmored Shermans late in the war, such as the M4A3E2 Sherman Jambo were apparently in extremely high demand as their frontal armor could take shots at the head of columns that could knock out other Shermans. Patton liked them so much that when he couldn't get enough of them, he had his men strip armor plating off of non-functioning Shermans and welded it to the standard m4a3 HVSS Shermans he had, calling them "Expedient Jambos".
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 03:47
|
|
|
The concrete armor was hell on the suspension.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 03:51
|
|
|
Can anyone attest to the quality of the Oxford History of the United States series of books? I know everyone loves Battle Cry of Freedom but how about the volumes covering the earlier history such as The Glorious Cause and Empire of Liberty?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 04:05
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:
This is like taking ears and poo poo but for tanks. Metal war machines that cannibalize their vanquished foes and grow even stronger.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 04:43
|
|
|
Sometimes those foes take some of your parts, so you take them right back. Not a single matching road wheel on this bad boy. The middle one is from a Panther. Here are a few more examples.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 05:57
|
|
|
How did they make that work? I realise it's russia but really, how did they make that work? Wouldn't the axle and bolt pattern and literally everything be completely different? Soviet duct tape?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 06:30
|
|
|
Choosing Slavic as your race grants a +10 to ingenuity.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 06:35
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:Choosing Slavic as your race grants a +10 to ingenuity. I'm untermensch and I don't feel ingenious.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 06:40
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:How did they make that work? I realise it's russia but really, how did they make that work? Wouldn't the axle and bolt pattern and literally everything be completely different? Soviet duct tape? We get big hammer, da, is good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 06:47
|
|
|
The red army cobbled together ramshackle war machines like the orks from wh40k. The spirit of communism made them animate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 06:49
|
|
|
Azipod posted:We get big hammer, da, is good. It was probably this actually. The wheel connects to a metal stub connected to the suspension, the holes were either similarly sized enough or they drilled the hole to be larger. E: thinking about this, due to t-34 derivatives only having one row of track teeth, using them as replacements may have been the only time interlevened road wheels were useful. Raskolnikov38 fucked around with this message at 06:53 on Oct 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 06:50
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:It was probably this actually. The wheel connects to a metal stub connected to the suspension, the holes were either similarly sized enough or they drilled the hole to be larger. That is so totally not true they were awesome at impressing officers watching the trials.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 07:23
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Can anyone attest to the quality of the Oxford History of the United States series of books? I know everyone loves Battle Cry of Freedom but how about the volumes covering the earlier history such as The Glorious Cause and Empire of Liberty? They're pretty good, 3 have won the Pullitzer for history and 2 others have been nominated for it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 08:26
|
|
|
Just finished reading 'What Hath God Wrought' (the book just before Battle Cry of Freedom that deals with Jacksonian Diplomacy and the Mexican-American War) and it was pretty good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 10:02
|
|
|
Didn't Americans jerry-rig armour on their Humvees in Iraq? Were they any good?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 11:25
|
|
|
If you want to see more Fury silliness, watch the scene where the tank platoon supports works with infantry in the open field. In April 1945, the tactics had been hashed out enough that you wouldn't see a conga line of infantry hiding behind each tank(tanks draw fire, veteran infantry stayed AWAY from the tanks). Instead you'd see the tanks stay behind and provide supporting fire while the infantry leads the way. Tanks never drove that close to enemy infantry because that gets you into range of the improvised antitank weapons most infantry had, and tanks simply don't need to be that close to do what they do best.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 11:51
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:Didn't Americans jerry-rig armour on their Humvees in Iraq? Were they any good? In the recent gently caress up over Iraq documentary posted in the thread with a US Soldier and Marine I think they interviewed only just survived IED attacks because of those kits. Only just I guess if you don't mind being horribly injured. Sending soldiers into combat without the proper equipment will always be a lovely thing though.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 12:21
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:Didn't Americans jerry-rig armour on their Humvees in Iraq? Were they any good? They worked sometimes. Sometimes is the key word. The biggest problem is that the jury-rigged armor did a number on everything else on the vehicle (including comms gear which is how I know much about this), which is one reason why the chain of command frowned upon the practice so heavily; Eventually, they rushed out the uparmored humvee to at least end the need to jury-rig armor (and improve the suspension and transmission and everything else that needed to be upgraded to handle the armor), with the MRAPs following very slowly behind. (It is absolutely true, however, that Rumsfeld and friends did not provide gear that everybody knew was going to be needed. They tried to do war at bargain prices. Hint: You get what you pay for.) The secondary problem is that often times, jury-rigging armor reduces very necessary things like visibility, which makes you easier to attack. The short of it is, they ban the practice for very good reasons, not the least of which is, if it doesn't work, you've screwed yourself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 14:01
|
|
|
Spacewolf posted:(It is absolutely true, however, that Rumsfeld and friends did not provide gear that everybody knew was going to be needed. They tried to do war at bargain prices. Hint: You get what you pay for.) What gear was this?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 14:37
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:How did they make that work? I realise it's russia but really, how did they make that work? Wouldn't the axle and bolt pattern and literally everything be completely different? Soviet duct tape? If you're befuddled by that picture, this one will really get you.  It's not a photoshop, there are more pictures of this thing from various angles.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 15:11
|
|
|
Tomn posted:Concrete on a tank? That SOUNDS like it should be a terrible idea for any number of reasons. Was it? Could give a decent cushion against spalling for non penetrating hits/have interesting effects on heat rounds. Who knows.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
bewbies posted:What gear was this? Body armor, appropriately colored uniforms, vehicles that could survive if hit by anything, ammo, modern magazines (P-mags) for weapons. A lot of dudes I know that deployed ended up having to pay for a lot of poo poo out of pocket, and many families purchased off the shelf armored vests to send their kids. Basically it was a cock up. EDIT: a lot of units that did other things such as drive tanks etc ended up being put on police/patrol duty which requires rifles and the like; and they didn't have them. More than a few units were running around with captured AK's for this reason. Rhymenoserous fucked around with this message at 16:57 on Oct 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 16:55
|
|
|
Rhymenoserous posted:Body armor, appropriately colored uniforms, vehicles that could survive if hit by anything, ammo, modern magazines (P-mags) for weapons. A lot of dudes I know that deployed ended up having to pay for a lot of poo poo out of pocket, and many families purchased off the shelf armored vests to send their kids.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
bewbies posted:What gear was this? Armor for their vehicles. Also in some cases, proper armor for their bodies.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
Azathoth posted:I remember these very forums having a fundraiser for a National Guard unit that was being deployed without being given body armor. Yeah that was really heart-warming. SA and FARK raised about $20,000 to buy the new Trauma IV plates that insert into body armor. This was back in 2003/2004. http://www.somethingawful.com/news/update-from-frontlines/ Kaal fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Oct 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 17:32
|
|
|
Rhymenoserous posted:Body armor, appropriately colored uniforms, vehicles that could survive if hit by anything, ammo, modern magazines (P-mags) for weapons. A lot of dudes I know that deployed ended up having to pay for a lot of poo poo out of pocket, and many families purchased off the shelf armored vests to send their kids. FAUXTON posted:Armor for their vehicles. Also in some cases, proper armor for their bodies. Since the time it was happening I've found this argument to be...a little hollow. The ground forces that fought OIF/OEF were prohibitively the best equipped force of that size that has ever been deployed, let alone in an expeditionary mission halfway around the world. If there is something worth criticizing, it is the combat developers and acquisition strategists who almost universally did not forsee long-term, wide area, mostly mounted counterinsurgency operations as being a potential primary mission for a large land force. That being said, I don't really think even that is a particularly great criticism, as we as a species have never really figured out how to prepare ourselves for the next war rather than the last. In any case I've always found it a bit shrill to blame the political/strategic-level policymakers for relatively minor shortfalls in manning and equipment, if that is what you are suggesting. Those issues fall squarely upon the force providers. There are plenty of far more important criticisms of OIF/OEF we can lay at the feet of the policymakers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 19:52
|
|
|
bewbies posted:Since the time it was happening I've found this argument to be...a little hollow. The ground forces that fought OIF/OEF were prohibitively the best equipped force of that size that has ever been deployed, let alone in an expeditionary mission halfway around the world. If there is something worth criticizing, it is the combat developers and acquisition strategists who almost universally did not forsee long-term, wide area, mostly mounted counterinsurgency operations as being a potential primary mission for a large land force. That being said, I don't really think even that is a particularly great criticism, as we as a species have never really figured out how to prepare ourselves for the next war rather than the last. The problem wasn't that they were equipped for the wrong war, the problem is they weren't equipped for any war. Really two different issues.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
Rhymenoserous posted:The problem wasn't that they were equipped for the wrong war, the problem is they weren't equipped for any war. Really two different issues. That's...a kind of ridiculous statement. Even the average RC unit at that time was better equipped than 95% of the rest of the world's militaries.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
Rhymenoserous posted:The problem wasn't that they were equipped for the wrong war, the problem is they weren't equipped for any war. Really two different issues. Your anecdote about tankers forced to serve as infantry is equipping for the wrong war, not being unequipped in general. You are going to have to convince me that troops going in to OIF were significantly more underequipped than troops going in to pretty much any other war. Every war is rife with anecdotes about inadequate equipment.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
bewbies posted:If there is something worth criticizing, it is the combat developers and acquisition strategists who almost universally did not forsee long-term, wide area, mostly mounted counterinsurgency operations as being a potential primary mission for a large land force. That being said, I don't really think even that is a particularly great criticism, as we as a species have never really figured out how to prepare ourselves for the next war rather than the last. I would have thought the last war the combat developers and acquisition strategists were thinking about was a long-term, wide area, counterinsurgency operation?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 21:39
|
|
|
Hogge Wild, I am reading a book review that says that the lingua franca of the Swedish army in the 17th century is German. Have you heard this anywhere else? (I mean, GA's wife is German and GA himself writes in German, but all of them?) Edit: That review is fairly loving sweet in places: quote:The overall picture of civil-military relations in the Swedish territories that emerges from Lorenz's study is one all too familiar to anyone who has approached late medieval and early modern militaries via criminal records. Large numbers of underemployed young men with ready access to weapons and an exaggerated sense of the honor to which the profession of arms entitled them appear to have spent most of their waking hours in drinking establishments consuming excessive amounts of alcohol (for which they did not always pay), or intermittently engaging in brawls, either with other soldiers or with other male youth, such as apprentices. At a more socially elevated level, officers fought duels with their peers and with members of the local elites, threw their weight around in local society, and mistreated their subordinates. Somewhat less frequently, officers and men alike might engage in sexual harassment of women who crossed their path. In addition, all ranks were conspicuously reluctant to pay for goods and services consumed....  HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Oct 22, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
ulmont posted:I would have thought the last war the combat developers and acquisition strategists were thinking about was a long-term, wide area, counterinsurgency operation? They were either fighting the most recent war (Gulf War 1) or NATO/Warsaw.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Historically, when a Russian head of state puts restrictions on vodka, it does not end well. Let's see: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_Russian_Empire_and_the_Soviet_Union) quote:In the Soviet Union, there were three major anti-alcohol campaigns: started in 1958,[4] in 1972, [5][6] and in 1985. 1914 -> Czar out in 1917 (3 years) (Lenin and Stalin never did that, although the Czar restrictions were still valid until 1920s) 1958 -> Khrushchev ousted in 1964 (6 years) 1972 -> Brezhnev died in 1982 (10 years) Two old farts in between ... 1985 -> Gorbachev ousted in 1991 (twice!, 6 years) Not very statistically significant sample, but you could be on to something..
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 22:14
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:Hogge Wild, I am reading a book review that says that the lingua franca of the Swedish army in the 17th century is German. Have you heard this anywhere else? I have never heard about it before, but it would make sense, because by 1632 less than one tenth of the 150000 man Swedish army was made up of native troops and not even all of them spoke Swedish. I haven't read much about the mercenaries contracted by the Swedish army, but they were mostly German with around 30000 Scots. Could someone make a post why there were so many Scottish mercenaries around?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
I know that Scottish agriculture basically imploded toward the end of the century but pre ECW I'm not sure why either.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 23:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 04:29 |
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:Could someone make a post why there were so many Scottish mercenaries around? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCqprbH7mrg  
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2014 23:24
|
|
