|
Rent-A-Cop posted:
If for some reason you only had 1 torpedo to shoot at a BB, setting it to detonate near the screws/rudder would do the most damage. The rudders would likely be destroyed or jammed, the propellers damaged, shafts bent, and heavy flooding in the engine rooms from blown shaft seals. Very good likelihood of a mobility kill.
|
#
?
May 11, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 01:31 |
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Feeling super smug right now. Which book is that?
|
|
#
?
May 11, 2015 23:40
|
|
|
esn2500 posted:
That's the minimum for a basic field strip, which is almost the same as an AR-15. Once you go further, however, you find that the internals are a mess of tiny parts and inserts that serve no purpose other than to give the parts something to sit on or wrap around when in the gun. Unrelated, I did a basic field strip in the game on the Chiappa Rhino. In real life if I had to fix it, I'd probably take the sideplate off, look at the internals, and go "hahaha nope" and throw the gun away. chitoryu12 fucked around with this message at 00:08 on May 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
aren't modern anti-ship missiles completely ludicrous to the extent where they pretty much obsolete surface fleets without air superiority? i thought this was a major part in why carriers are currently considered p. much necessary for any surface action
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 00:10
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:100 Years Ago Just a heads up - you write about the feldwebel moving to the eastern front and I think maybe the end of his quote about the lice staying with him on the western front is in error?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 00:28
|
|
|
More ammo tables for the tables god (warning: 35MB PDF) This is my own copy of the 1960 edition, scanned it at work. Didn't turn out super well but it's readable at least.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 00:30
|
|
|
bewbies posted:US and German torpedoes both had this feature (proximity detonator) from the get-go during WWII although the mechanism was really, really inconsistent, such that skippers from both sides resorted to impact fusing for the most part. A proximity detonator isn't the same feature. WWII torpedomen still had to set a depth that the torpedo would run at. To get an under-the-keel detonation, the depth would have to be set such that the torpedo's going to run deep enough to not prox on a torpedo blister on the hull, or the side of the hull itself, but not so deep that the sphere of influence of the magnetic detonator would miss the keel. Since doing that runs a higher chance of a clean miss than just setting the depth to maximize the chance of a hit, not even considering the flakiness of early-generation magnetic detonators, I'd be surprised if anyone ever tried it outside of tests. By contrast, a modern heavyweight torpedo will maneuver to put itself at the proper depth to put the worst hurting possible on the target. Or if the guys on the launching sub are wire-guiding it, they're steering it to do that. In either case, it's different than what they could do in WWII. The warheads are also different, a modern fill's going to be probably 30% more powerful than a given mass of Torpex. V. Illych L. posted:aren't modern anti-ship missiles completely ludicrous to the extent where they pretty much obsolete surface fleets without air superiority? i thought this was a major part in why carriers are currently considered p. much necessary for any surface action Even if you have air superiority, you're still going to want a serious air-defense network. Air superiority doesn't do much good against an SSGN.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
Polikarpov posted:If for some reason you only had 1 torpedo to shoot at a BB, setting it to detonate near the screws/rudder would do the most damage. The rudders would likely be destroyed or jammed, the propellers damaged, shafts bent, and heavy flooding in the engine rooms from blown shaft seals. Very good likelihood of a mobility kill. In other words, it's a definite kill if it's a Japanese BB, toss-up if it's an American, and merely probable for anyone else. 
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:aren't modern anti-ship missiles completely ludicrous to the extent where they pretty much obsolete surface fleets without air superiority? i thought this was a major part in why carriers are currently considered p. much necessary for any surface action A big ship killer like the SS-N-26 hits with something like 12x the kinetic energy of a 16" Superheavy AP shell and carries a warhead 13x heavier than the 16" shell's bursting charge. So yeah, they're pretty scary.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:saborg is getting theirs these days, having recently got a monument in Oslo approved, though not without its controversy (the controversy is that the aesthetic is somewhat, uh, unsubtle): That is so unsubtle it's almost juvenile and I really goddamned like it for exactly that reason.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 01:06
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:Which book is that? Armored Champion.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 01:26
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:That's the minimum for a basic field strip, which is almost the same as an AR-15. Once you go further, however, you find that the internals are a mess of tiny parts and inserts that serve no purpose other than to give the parts something to sit on or wrap around when in the gun. The things I like in particular, aside from the little awkward rollers that have to be inserted in precisely the right order, are The retaining bolt for the butt of the gun has a teeny tiny spring on it. The metal bit of the butt that attaches to the rest of the gun is actually two separate pieces of metal, with a screw with a washer attaching the first piece individually to the wood. Instead of having a metal buttplate, the corners of the butt are two individual pieces of metal with two screws each, with the wood inbetween textured in a slot pattern. And that's just the butt alone. Yes this is the gun you make when you are busy losing a war.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 02:16
|
|
|
Fangz posted:The things I like in particular, aside from the little awkward rollers that have to be inserted in precisely the right order, are Even the MP 40 is more complex than you expect. It has a three-piece telescoping recoil buffer tube that contains the firing pin and its separate spring, and the bolt is a separate piece in front of it; the firing pin needs to pass through a hole in the bolt to reach the cartridge. It also uses a ton of screws for everything but the most basic field stripping requirements, so anything past separating the upper and lower receivers will likely require a tool and time; anyone well-versed in firearm construction will tell you to minimize the use of screws because of this. They even use double screw setups where a smaller screw prevents the big one from coming out if it gets loose.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:In other words, it's a definite kill if it's a Japanese BB, toss-up if it's an American, and merely probable for anyone else. I thought USN damage control during WWII was pretty drat good. Or is that just compared to the IJN?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 03:29
|
|
|
Hunterhr posted:I thought USN damage control during WWII was pretty drat good. Or is that just compared to the IJN? That's what he's saying-Toss-Up>Probable>Definite Kill.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 03:30
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:They even use double screw setups where a smaller screw prevents the big one from coming out if it gets loose. That's because Nazis are twice as screwy as everyone else.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Feeling super smug right now. A Goddamn Red (statistician)
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 03:41
|
|
|
During the Italian campaign of the Second World War, were any major temples to the Roman gods damaged?
Benny the Snake fucked around with this message at 04:41 on May 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
What, you mean like the Old Ones?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 04:10
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:That's what he's saying-Toss-Up>Probable>Definite Kill. Ah yeah. Misread it the first time.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 04:21
|
|
|
Frostwerks posted:What, you mean like the Old Ones?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 04:37
|
|
|
I did hear a story about an ancient evil that haunted the Alps that had been awakened by accident during WW1, but that was more of a tomb than a temple that had been disturbed.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 04:39
|
|
|
sullat posted:I did hear a story about an ancient evil that haunted the Alps that had been awakened by accident during WW1, but that was more of a tomb than a temple that had been disturbed. Kinda want to read this now. Something about 20th century warfare really lends a lot of gravitas to the admittedly hokey Lovecraft and Gang cosmology.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:In other words, it's a definite kill if it's a Japanese BB, toss-up if it's an American, and merely probable for anyone else. Well it was PoW that disemboweled herself when she took a hit like that. It really depends on where exactly the hit is, I think the Bismarck's hit was a bit farther back on the rudder, and it merely(!) caused the entire stern structure to flex and collapse because it was a flexible (read lightly armored) structure right next to the freakish overlong belt they put on the thing and the stern didn't have enough buoyancy to support itself because the middle of it had to be raised high to fit the archaic triple screw design, which involved really big screws to absorb WWII levels of SHP.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 04:52
|
|
|
sullat posted:I did hear a story about an ancient evil that haunted the Alps that had been awakened by accident during WW1, but that was more of a tomb than a temple that had been disturbed. I want to hear about this because it sounds like some Castle Wolfenstein poo poo. E: Return to Castle Wallenstein. FAUXTON fucked around with this message at 05:02 on May 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 05:00
|
|
|
MrBling posted:On the topic of odd incidents at the tail end of WW2. Pretty sure Bornholm got the rape-steal-smash treatment and the people were treated as if they were Germans.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 05:13
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:E: Return to Castle Wallenstein.    in Jičín    in Prague
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
Benny the Snake posted:During the Italian campaign of the Second World War, were any major temples to the Roman gods damaged? Gods schmods, just don't gently caress with Timur. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timur#Exhumation
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 05:56
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Frostwerks posted:Kinda want to read this now. Something about 20th century warfare really lends a lot of gravitas to the admittedly hokey Lovecraft and Gang cosmology. It probably influenced Lovecraft and co pretty drat hard. Others as well--I think some of Tolkien's Mordor imagery was inspired by his time in the trenches.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 06:14
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:It probably influenced Lovecraft and co pretty drat hard. Others as well--I think some of Tolkien's Mordor imagery was inspired by his time in the trenches. Mordor is WW1 trenches when they're dry. Dead Marshes are WW1 trenches when they're wet.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 06:50
|
|
|
Polikarpov posted:A big ship killer like the SS-N-26 hits with something like 12x the kinetic energy of a 16" Superheavy AP shell and carries a warhead 13x heavier than the 16" shell's bursting charge. It also sprays remaining rocket fuel into a ship so that's added bonus as well. Have fun putting out that fire, damage control teams!
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 10:06
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:"Landsknechting" someone just isn't as catchy as "swatting". I actually "landsknechted" once, though in me and my friends parlance it was just mixing immergut and landsknecht vodka and downing it. One of the most glorious blackouts I ever acquired!
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 10:13
|
|
|
What did Landsknechte actually drink most of the time? Camp made beer? Wine? Being fully pissed with beer makes for a hangover that you'll never forget.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 10:46
|
|
|
JaucheCharly posted:What did Landsknechte actually drink most of the time? Camp made beer? Wine? Being fully pissed with beer makes for a hangover that you'll never forget. common soldiers? wine by the quart in drinking bouts nightly. you club together with your friends and pool your booze resources. officers? start the morning with hard liquor like vermouth or brandy, if you can afford it, then taper off to wine or beer through the day, then drinking bouts at night beer seems to have been an all-day kinda thing, we have Wallenstein's beer receipts (he hates dark beer, prefers pale) and I encountered an Oberst in the early 20s complaining to the Elector of Saxony that he had received no money so his soldiers were pawning their clothes and he himself "had to buy beer on credit" for his free company Edit: I am honestly not sure if any of these people would be physically capable of getting drunk on beer any more. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 11:27 on May 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 10:54
|
|
|
my dad posted:Mordor is WW1 trenches when they're dry. Dead Marshes are WW1 trenches when they're wet. There is no better description of what it was like to come out of a rest period in the rear areas and go up the line than this. quote:The hobbits were now wholly in the hands of Gollum. Also, they don't travel in direct sunlight in case the Enemy spots them from the air. All that's missing is the sound of the guns and the overt stench of death and open latrines.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 11:16
|
|
JaucheCharly posted:What did Landsknechte actually drink most of the time? Camp made beer? Wine? Being fully pissed with beer makes for a hangover that you'll never forget. HEY GAL posted:I do not know about the 16th century, this is a 17th century answer: We're still living in a time where people didn't drink water typically if they could avoid it. Beer and weak wine were the staples, and much safer to drink. Drinking all day if you could was a given. The real question is how strong is the wine and beer. Typically the everyday beer of a 17th century person was weak by modern standards, as I understand it.
|
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 11:28
|
|
|
It was, much weaker. I came across an interesting anecdoate about the dude who started the Danish workers teetoller society, because blue cross (the society already in place) were made out of white upper class ladies who banned the drinking of beer in their strictures. As he puts it, "I work on a darned rickety platform three stories up in the biting wind. Drinking warm beer is a matter of survival, and we shall make it so that it's not full of spirits. Good day!" Tias fucked around with this message at 11:45 on May 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 11:42
|
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:Pretty sure Bornholm got the rape-steal-smash treatment and the people were treated as if they were Germans. Not really. The soviet troops where confined to quarters the most of the time. There was some disturbances but it was just drunk ivans. Fun fact, there was never any nato troops stationed on Bornholm and the bornholms værn which was responsible for the defense of Bornholm was not under the NATO chain of command.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 12:17
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Well it was PoW that disemboweled herself when she took a hit like that. It really depends on where exactly the hit is, I think the Bismarck's hit was a bit farther back on the rudder, and it merely(!) caused the entire stern structure to flex and collapse because it was a flexible (read lightly armored) structure right next to the freakish overlong belt they put on the thing and the stern didn't have enough buoyancy to support itself because the middle of it had to be raised high to fit the archaic triple screw design, which involved really big screws to absorb WWII levels of SHP. Yeah, it was just a joke about Japanese damage control (or lack thereof) in WW2.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 14:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 01:31 |
|
|
HEY GAL posted:I do not know about the 16th century, this is a 17th century answer: Vermouth is fortified wine, or at least it is today. Was it different then? Disinterested posted:We're still living in a time where people didn't drink water typically if they could avoid it. Beer and weak wine were the staples, and much safer to drink. Drinking all day if you could was a given. The real question is how strong is the wine and beer. Typically the everyday beer of a 17th century person was weak by modern standards, as I understand it. Posting these again because that's not true. People were fine with drinking water and generally knew which water was safe to drink and which would make you sick. And if you were diluting your wine and beer with water anyway, it'd still make you sick unless you had a clean souce. http://leslefts.blogspot.com.au/2013/11/the-great-medieval-water-myth.html https://zythophile.wordpress.com/2014/03/04/was-water-really-regarded-as-dangerous-to-drink-in-the-middle-ages/
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 14:23
|
|