|
blackmongoose posted:This is literally Turtledove's Worldwar series except it has aliens instead of Satan. It's probably the least terrible of his series for what that's worth (not much) It's that damned first half of the sentence that's the sticking point.
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 03:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 07:39 |
|
|
My favorite Stuart Slade bit of lore is that time some Norwegian guy on his forum offering constructive criticism on his story so in response Stuart tried to own him by having Russia basically annex Finland in one of his books. also despite that I'd still rank the two Armageddon books above that of the world war series because they don't constantly remind you of a characters primary trait every time they show up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Probably-dumb-question: Modern armour has hilariously high RHA equivalent protection against kinetic penetrators, like several meters worth. Sure if you slap a modern tank with 152 mm of HE it will sweep the outside clean, but I highly doubt you'd get more than a mobility kill out of it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 03:45
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Modern armour has hilariously high RHA equivalent protection against kinetic penetrators, like several meters worth. Sure if you slap a modern tank with 152 mm of HE it will sweep the outside clean, but I highly doubt you'd get more than a mobility kill out of it. Well, if you can flip the tank then it's probably hosed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:My favorite Stuart Slade bit of lore is that time some Norwegian guy on his forum offering constructive criticism on his story so in response Stuart tried to own him by having Russia basically annex Finland in one of his books. He also lost his poo poo at a dude who was somewhat knowledgeable on Muslim history and politics who was critiquing the pan Arab Caliphate had had in those books as something that doesn't make any sense. On Stardestroyer he claimed one argument that it was simply a deconstruction of wishfulfillment of "This is what Arab extremists wanted" but on his private forums he insinuated the guy was a Muslim apologist.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 04:00
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Probably-dumb-question: 155mm HE rounds make a really, really big boom. Any modern MBT getting directly hit with one is going to be either in pieces or completely incapacitated, doubly so if it hits the deck armor. It is sort of correct to say that modern composite armor isn't really designed to defeat HE; it is designed to defeat penetrators and HEAT, so it sacrifices some performance against HE. That said, you really couldn't armor something enough to protect it against a direct impact from a modern howitzer round and still have it be mobile, so there isn't really any point to building a moving bunker (concrete would be a good choice for armor lol). The problem with HE is it gets a whole lot less effective as the boom moves away from the target; against something like a tank a direct hit is pretty much required and that is really hard to do even with precision rounds (assuming the tank is moving). Tank armor does a great job protecting against shrapnel and the concussion is only lethal in a short radius around the boom.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 04:02
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Probably-dumb-question: Tanks don't really deal with big HE shells well. If a 203mm artillery lands on a tank, it's toast. WWII AP rounds, sabot rounds, and HEAT rounds all try to do the same basic thing, which is concentrate a moderate amount of energy on a small portion of the tank. Modern tank armour is built around loving with the dynamics of armour penetration. An artillery shell/rocket doesn't really penetrate armour, it just destroys its structural integrity with an enormous amount of energy from high-explosive filler. It's a bad thing to come under heavy artillery attack at all though, so the direct hit business isn't that important in the big picture.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
Oh yeah, there's a difference between a hit to the front plate and a hit to the engine deck. It isn't possible to armour a tank to withstand 152 mm HE landing on it from the heavens, even for modern armour. Interestingly enough, you don't even need to score a direct hit on a tank to disable it. There was a neat article about it: Who says dumb artillery rounds can't kill armour?quote:Test Results. The first test was conducted in 1988. Researchers However, you absolutely need big guns for this. The Soviets recorded poor effectiveness of Japanese indirect fire field guns against even T-26es, and the British tests of the Churchill showed that it was almost immune to 20-pdr HE.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 05:45
|
|
|
6"+ artillery might be of limited effectiveness against armor, due to the need for a direct hit, but you don't need to hit the tanks to render them unable to advance. You can either hit their fuel trucks, which aren't far behind, or their infantry support, neither of which is real happy when artillery starts landing on them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 12:10
|
|
|
If you hit a tank with enough HE, surely even if the vehicle itself survives the shockwave will have done bad things to the crew?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 12:22
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:If you hit a tank with enough HE, surely even if the vehicle itself survives the shockwave will have done bad things to the crew? Isn't this the principle behind HESH? Forget actually penetrating the tank, gently caress up the insides with the concussion and shockwave.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 14:22
|
|
|
Enough HE will destroy anything, and yes past a point it's the crew getting pasted by sheer over-pressure even if the tank is still fine. Explosion location and distance still means a lot however. HESH more works on the fact that if you have a pure steel plate, severe spalling will occur on the opposite side of HESH detonation even without the plate itself being breached. However, many tanks anti-radiation liner on the inside often pulls double duty as a spall-liner. Also, any kind of spaced armor, NERA or composite armor array will resist it just fine as HESH relies on what it hitting being one big lump of metal. If there is a gap in there due to say, spaced armor, it will fail to "penetrate". So really HESH is not going to be effective against any modern MBT, assuming a frontal engagement. However it will do even better against light skinned vehicles such as a BMP will be utterly wrecked by this round, even more so than a HEAT strike. There's also the fact that HESH is very good against buildings too. This is the main reason why the UK has kept using KE and HESH rounds and eschewing HEAT. Anything that is big enough, use KE, anything that is light, HESH does a better job than HEAT. Edit: Thinking about it I actually don't know the exact design of HESH shells, but the design would have reduced fragmentation against open field targets compared to HE-FRAG but is likely not that much of a problem to be a concern. Edit2: The other thing is that the UK still uses rifled guns, which reduces the effectiveness of HEAT unless you use a device like the Orbus-G ball-bearing sleeve that was used on French cold-war tanks. Which is another factor as to why they don't use HEAT. Edit3: Now with a picture!  
Xerxes17 fucked around with this message at 15:30 on Jul 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 15:22
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:It actually makes sense in-universe. The idea is that Hell and Heaven only checked up on Earth once every few centuries, since human technology stayed basically stuck at "Stab the other guy with something sharp" for millennia. This meant that when Armageddon actually came, they were totally unprepared for the Industrial Revolution causing humanity to go from muskets to nuke-carrying supersonic jet planes and .50 caliber machine guns over the course of 200 years and were just prepared to conquer medieval-era armies instead of a modern military. Sharing only because the pain from knowing this alone is too much to bear. But that's not actually correct, Demons have been driving people crazy with quantum entanglement psychic powers the whole time. And you know how the humans counter this? Tinfoil hats. Tinfoils hats over part of your head protects you from something that already crossing frigging dimensions, or alternative universes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 15:37
|
|
|
Xerxes17 posted:*HESH* Ah, neat. First I'd ever heard of HESH was in World in Conflict as the special ability for NATO's medium tanks (British Chieftains). Didn't know how it actually worked.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
HESH wants blow up tank!
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:6"+ artillery might be of limited effectiveness against armor, due to the need for a direct hit, but you don't need to hit the tanks to render them unable to advance. You can either hit their fuel trucks, which aren't far behind, or their infantry support, neither of which is real happy when artillery starts landing on them. Also just breaking up formations is useful. I know the US broke up a German counterattack with artillery during one of the battles in Lorraine and they had to back down.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
WW2 tanks were open to the outside via various viewports etc. though, while probably all modern tanks are hermetically sealed for one or more of the reasons NBC protection, wading, and presumably rain protection of all the electronics in there. It would make sense to me to assume that WW2 tanks were much more vulnerable to HE near misses even before armor strength comes into play.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:WW2 tanks were open to the outside via various viewports etc. though, while probably all modern tanks are hermetically sealed for one or more of the reasons NBC protection, wading, and presumably rain protection of all the electronics in there. It would make sense to me to assume that WW2 tanks were much more vulnerable to HE near misses even before armor strength comes into play. Nope! Modern MBT's rely on over-pressure systems to protect against NBC threats, they still need to be caulked up in places when they do water fording, just like WW2 tanks. Hermetically sealing tank without air-con would also destroy crew comfort in summer/desert to the point that they might not even be able to use the tank due to the heat.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
The Hell vs Earth series was badass cause Bill Clinton kills a succubus with a shotgun after she tries to seduce him, Israeli troops do a beeline to the part of hell where the Nazi war criminals are to capture them and a kaiju sized Satan is killed by getting shot missiles to the dick by F-16s.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
This terrible sci fi you guys read is giving me a headache. Read the goon created Bio Apocalypse instead.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
post your violent masturbatory fantasies itt
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
TheLovablePlutonis posted:Israeli troops do a beeline to the part of hell where the Nazi war criminals are to capture them To do...what to them? Execute them so they go to hell? The theology of this whole thing seems a little suspect.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
Xerxes17 posted:Nope! Also, well, you''d need an oxygen supply and some way to vent carbon dioxide unless you want your lovely shiny tank to be full of suffocated corpses!
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
my dad posted:post your violent masturbatory fantasies itt Once had a dream where I was jerking off and pulled too hard and my dick came off in my hand. I think that counts as violent, masturbatory, and fantasy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 19:23
|
|
|
my dad posted:post your violent masturbatory fantasies itt Lets be fair here, I'm sure if they were (a) Better written and (b) the Author(s) didn't turn out so often to be militeristic authoritarian cunts we'd be all over it. Like Red Army? Ralph Peters is a bit of a foo but the book stands well on its own and lacks much of the soap boxing that makes Clancy or Slade obnoxious.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 19:40
|
|
|
Ainsley McTree posted:I just watched a video where an expert claimed that Vikings were such fearsome warriors because they didn't fear death, on account of how they believed they were going to Valhalla.  Forums Viking Tias chiming in! While it is true that early "Vikings*" believed a warrior's death would get them into the best afterlife possible( in fact, a warrior's death was the ONLY way to get there), this is far from the only reason viking society was so violent. A sparsely populated and densely forested/mountainous home region meant clans would have to spend several generations worth of back breaking labour to excavate rocks and roots from the soil enough to farm it - Raiding was just the sensible option! Also, the viking tribes were greatly capable traders, but their good ships also meant they had an easy time bushwhacking less capable civilizations from the sea. These people didn't want to die, but they believed the moment and cause of death was predetermined, and if a warrior's death got them into Valhalla.. Well, if you're already good at fighting and got rich neighbours, why not fight? * (the term is dumb and actually the invention of an 1800s librarian who wanted a mythic warrior figure for the Danish nation-state to rally around. "Vikings" can cover anything from 600s hunter societies to iron age farmers or high middle age traders, depending on what viewpoint you want to push) Fangz posted:Norse sagas and accounts of Vikings commonly speak of Berserkers, warriors who went without armour, fought in a blind fearless fury, who refuse to retreat "from fire or iron". There's enough accounts to probably conclude this was a real phenomenon, whether brought through training or through some type of drugs. However, the fact that such accounts exist underlines the point that this is *unusual*. If your average Viking didn't fear death, why do they write stories about these big scary madmen? I have it on good authority that berserkers were totem warriors of a sort, capable of self-induced frenzy that they learned in shamanic rites - make of that what you will, but it seems plausible to me. Kellsterik posted:Walk me through this one: why would Viking belief in Valhalla produce less fear of death than Christian belief in Heaven? Because the most often seen cause of death in those times, particularly in the north - violence - does not necessarily get you into heaven. Otoh, dying in battle was a guarentee of getting into Valhalla. That said, vikings themselves actually realized this flaw in the faith, and many converted to christianity because they could now get to a swell afterlife without dying violently. Tias fucked around with this message at 19:56 on Jul 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
my dad posted:post your violent masturbatory fantasies itt Very well then *unfurls a comically large scroll that lists my favorite doujin and light novels*
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
P-Mack posted:This terrible sci fi you guys read is giving me a headache. Read the goon created Bio Apocalypse instead. That was a wild ride. P-Mack delivers once again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
Sorry if it's been covered before (struggling to keep up with the thread), but why were saw-toothed bayonets singled out? I understand murdering the gently caress out of the dude with a flame-thrower, but wouldn't a saw toothed bayonet be functionally the same in combat, just more useful for mundane things? I don't think I've ever heard of soldiers actually sawing each other.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
P-Mack posted:This terrible sci fi you guys read is giving me a headache. Read the goon created Bio Apocalypse instead. a classic
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
Xerxes17 posted:Nope! Really? So if your tank's engine stalls or you run out of gas in an NBC environment you're proper hosed?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Really? So if your tank's engine stalls or you run out of gas in an NBC environment you're proper hosed? Hope that your ventilation runs on batteries and that the battery lasts long enough to get your gas mask on!
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
Bulgaroctonus posted:Sorry if it's been covered before (struggling to keep up with the thread), but why were saw-toothed bayonets singled out? I understand murdering the gently caress out of the dude with a flame-thrower, but wouldn't a saw toothed bayonet be functionally the same in combat, just more useful for mundane things? I don't think I've ever heard of soldiers actually sawing each other. The saw edge would make a wound look worse, and probably hurt more. Objectively, the big problem is getting spiked in the gut at all, rather than the pattern around the wound, but front-line soldiers don't have the luxury of looking at those statistics. My knee jerk reaction would be that saw toothed blades are for cutting wood and meat, and theoretically I am neither. Slim Jim Pickens fucked around with this message at 20:31 on Jul 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Really? So if your tank's engine stalls or you run out of gas in an NBC environment you're proper hosed? On the Abrams at least there's an auxiliary generator that can run things like the ECU if the main engine goes down. I think it is a pretty recent addition though; during the Cold War when all that NBC stuff mattered a lot more there wasn't one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Really? So if your tank's engine stalls or you run out of gas in an NBC environment you're proper hosed? If you're in a tank in an NBC environment, chances are that the entire world is proper hosed.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Really? So if your tank's engine stalls or you run out of gas in an NBC environment you're proper hosed? In Chieftains they mention having their NBC gear on inside the tank afaik. After all, if your tank gets disabled and you need to bail out you hardly will have the time to get the suit on. But yes without any electrical power, batteries or APU, you're kinda hosed!
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
P-Mack posted:Once had a dream where I was jerking off and pulled too hard and my dick came off in my hand. I think that counts as violent, masturbatory, and fantasy. I can't figure out an appropriate smiley, and am phone posting, so probably couldn't do it anyway, but I've had the exact same dream. So do we fist bump, or just acknowledge each other as hosed up?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:The saw edge would make a wound look worse, and probably hurt more. Objectively, the big problem is getting spiked in the gut at all, rather than the pattern around the wound, but front-line soldiers don't have the luxury of looking at those statistics. Well, yeah, but wouldn't they still be a stabby thing? That's what I meant about how you never hear about people in war sawing each other up. It seems like the saw blade would be useful for all kinds of poo poo, but used as a bayonet would function in the same way. Y'know, stabbin' motherfuckers as last resort.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
Bulgaroctonus posted:Well, yeah, but wouldn't they still be a stabby thing? That's what I meant about how you never hear about people in war sawing each other up. It seems like the saw blade would be useful for all kinds of poo poo, but used as a bayonet would function in the same way. Y'know, stabbin' motherfuckers as last resort. That's what I'm saying, getting stabbed is the bad thing, not the sawblade. But that wouldn't stop anybody from deciding to gently caress up guys with serrated blades. We just decide that some things are worse than others, even if they aren't that different. For me, I guess it would be the this weapon that looks like industrial machinery/cooking utensil, apparently meant to stab me, a human being. Slim Jim Pickens fucked around with this message at 22:17 on Jul 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 07:39 |
|
|
Mostly it was propoganda, like the Germans complaining about Americans using shotguns. Barthas seems to realize they're multi-purpose tools, and he complains about being issued swords for more efficient dispatching of POWs and wounded.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2016 22:20
|
|
