|
HEY GAL posted:don't tell me that, i was moved and you ruined it The war was won by big efforts even by small players.
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 09:11 |
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:R 35 I'd love to hear about the Type 95. Not much out there about Japanese tanks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:R 35 Thank you! quote:
Is this for the soviet Zis gun, or the 76mm CS Matilda?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
spectralent posted:Thank you! Soviet ZiS-5/F-96.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
I will fight anyone who thinks that a setting where the prince of wales is resurrected by dark American sorcery and used to fight the battle of midway is not the best setting. E: I don't care which prince of wales you interpret that to mean.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 02:53
|
|
|
It's an insult to American shipbuilding is what it is 
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 02:58
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I will fight anyone who thinks that a setting where the prince of wales is resurrected by dark American sorcery and used to fight the battle of midway is not the best setting. This is my new headcanon for how the war actually went and nobody will convince me otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 03:35
|
|
|
e: This certainly isn't the football gameday thread.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 05:00
|
|
|
RC and Moon Pie posted:e: This certainly isn't the football gameday thread. Go Cubs!
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 05:05
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:In Ohio, they dropped the bullshit and just spelled it "Wooster". Except then you've got to be all "no, it's not a long O"
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 06:17
|
|
|
Yeah, I learned it the hard way that historical video games are not. Except for maybe grognardy strategy games made by obscure studios and sold for $waytoomany. Getting interested in history through video games is embarking on a path of constant disappointment in games. Also, I had fun with Red Orchestra and Day of Infamy. Maybe not that much fun with bolt action rifles (I fire, I miss because I'm an idiot, I don't get to fire twice), but I had fun. Especially when you get to be playing battlefield buddies with the officer and RTO in Infamy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 06:21
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Battlefield one is a bit weird because all the footage I've seen is people running around with machineguns, semi automatic rifles, and interwar light tanks. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 10:33
|
|
JcDent posted:Yeah, I learned it the hard way that historical video games are not. Day of Infamy is pretty much fun but gently caress that one weird developer obsessed with putting way too many automatic weapons in WW2 squad FPS games. You know who you are, gently caress off please thanks! RO2 has the best tank interiors. Uh. That is it.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
I learned everything I know about history from Paradox games. Remember when Ulm conquered the planet thousands of times?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
I've heard it said that one of the reasons why (American) aircraft carriers are so useful for relief operations is their ability to generate hundreds of thousands of gallons of fresh water per day. 1. Does this have anything to do with the ship being specifically an aircraft carrier? 2. Does this have anything to do with the ship being specifically nuclear-powered? 3. How is this done?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 14:41
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I've heard it said that one of the reasons why (American) aircraft carriers are so useful for relief operations is their ability to generate hundreds of thousands of gallons of fresh water per day. I think these questions are best answered in reverse order. The desalination aboard aircraft carriers (and other large naval vessels, and in modern desalination plants) is through a process called reverse osmosis (the TL;DR is that by forcing water through hundreds or even thousands of extremely fine membrane at high pressures the impurities get basically strained out). This takes an INCREDIBLE amount of energy (it's not uncommon for land-based plants to consume a large fraction of the output of their local power station), especially if you want to make the setup compact enough to fit in the belly of an aircraft carrier, so while the nuclear power isn't specifically a requirement to desalinize water this way it sure helps a lot. Finally, as to #1, even compact versions of reverse osmosis rigs still need to be the size of small buildings (I think the smallest practical ones I've heard of are cargo container sized and can produce 1500-2000 gallons per day) if you want an output usable on large scales, so sticking it somewhere in a carrier that's already huge doesn't change much. Plus, a carrier is probably the best protected ship in the fleet, has the largest crew, and needs a source of coolant water for its reactors, all factors that make it so you want to put your big reverse osmosis rig in the carrier. Basically, it's not that all the big water filtration gear NEEDS to go in a carrier (apart from a small one to keep the crew hydrated and reactor cool, which iirc most ships do have), it's just more practical to stick it in what's already a huge ship that happens to have borderline infinite energy anyways.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:The desalination aboard aircraft carriers (and other large naval vessels, and in modern desalination plants) is through a process called reverse osmosis (the TL;DR is that by forcing water through hundreds or even thousands of extremely fine membrane at high pressures the impurities get basically strained out). We had a still on my boat that heated up seawater and collected the condensate (since salt doesn't precipitate with the steam) but I don't know how they do it on carriers, distillation or reverse osmosis. Fresh water is also used for steam catapults, turbines, hotel loads like showering, cooking, and drinking, and also deionized for use in equipment cooling. If you don't need those, you can probably generate quite a bit of surplus water.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 15:28
|
|
|
Wonder what kind of output you could get out of a container ship sized nuclear-powered dedicated mobile desalination rig. Bonus points if the captain's title is Immortan.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 17:10
|
|
|
Is a carrier really the ideal ship for HA? I'm not a navy guy but I would imagine an LHD has more advantages: in addition to air lift (and the ospreys or 53s are gonna be able to carry more than 60s), you've got surface connectors, and a combat logistics battalion trained for HA and equipped with engineering assets. Being able to generate fresh water at sea is nice but you've got to move it ashore. When I was on an lhd and we did an exercise in a remote area, it was seen as easier to have engineers ashore make fresh water than to move it from ship to shore. Neither was truly ideal though. Also the ship was not allowed to make water while we were within territorial waters but i guess that wouldn't be an issue in an emergency situation. Ospreys did recently go onto a carrier to help support relief efforts in response to hurricane Matthew though
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
R 35 in German service Queue: Medium Tank T1E1, T-55, Strv m/38 and m/39, Vickers E, Christie Combat Car T1/Convertible Medium Tank T3, Type 95 Available for request:  T2E1 Light Tank M3A1 Combat Car T4 Combat Car M1 NEW  Medium Tank Mk.II Medium Tank Mk.III A1E1 Independent Vickers Mk.E  LTP T-37 with ShKAS ZIK-20 T-12 and T-24 T-55 HTZ-16 Wartime modifications of the T-37 and T-38 SG-122 76 mm gun mod of the Matilda NEW  Otto Merker's tanks  TK-3/TKS Trials of the TKS and C2P in the USSR 37 mm anti-tank gun  SR tanks  Renault NC Renault D1 Renault R35 Renault D2 Renault R40  PzI Ausf. B PzI Ausf. C PzII Ausf. a though b PzIII Ausf. A PzIII Ausf. B through D PzIV Ausf. A through C
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
Even the Romanians stopped using their R-35s after September 1941. They were just too much trouble compared to the R-2(A licensed czech LT-35). They did convert some to tank destroyers by putting a Russian 45mm in the turret but they never saw use, except possibly when the Romanians switched sides.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
FastestGunAlive posted:Is a carrier really the ideal ship for HA? I'm not a navy guy but I would imagine an LHD has more advantages: in addition to air lift (and the ospreys or 53s are gonna be able to carry more than 60s), you've got surface connectors, and a combat logistics battalion trained for HA and equipped with engineering assets. Being able to generate fresh water at sea is nice but you've got to move it ashore. When I was on an lhd and we did an exercise in a remote area, it was seen as easier to have engineers ashore make fresh water than to move it from ship to shore. Neither was truly ideal though. Also the ship was not allowed to make water while we were within territorial waters but i guess that wouldn't be an issue in an emergency situation. LHD is the weirdest euphemism for "amphibious assault ship"
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:LHD is the weirdest euphemism for "amphibious assault ship" Landing Helicopter Dock.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
Yeah I know what it means it's just a weird phrase for it. The fact that it can carry helicopters doesn't seem to be the most significant feature of the craft, most ships have a helipad on them afaik, the full flight deck or well deck would seem more pertinent.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Yeah I know what it means it's just a weird phrase for it. The fact that it can carry helicopters doesn't seem to be the most significant feature of the craft, most ships have a helipad on them afaik, the full flight deck or well deck would seem more pertinent. IIRC the "Landing" part refers to the well deck.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
Renault D1 next please, lets learn about French armour!
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:
This is really cool!! I wonder how tables were developed. I guess at some point it had to have been a pretty new/useful concept. In general I don't know much about the whole logistical side of military history.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Yeah I know what it means it's just a weird phrase for it. The fact that it can carry helicopters doesn't seem to be the most significant feature of the craft, most ships have a helipad on them afaik, the full flight deck or well deck would seem more pertinent. it carries the most helos as far as US amphibs go so maybe they wanted to focus on that. Dunno. Navy is weird.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
Fusion Restaurant posted:This is really cool!! e: tables were invented really early quote:Between the 4th millennium BC and the 3rd millennium BC, the ruling leaders and priests in ancient Iran had people oversee financial matters. In Godin Tepe (گدین تپه) and Tepe Yahya (تپه يحيی), cylindrical tokens that were used for bookkeeping on clay scripts were found in buildings that had large rooms for storage of crops. In Godin Tepe's findings, the scripts only contained tables with figures, while in Tepe Yahya's findings, the scripts also contained graphical representations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_accounting Hogge Wild fucked around with this message at 20:43 on Oct 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:LHD is the weirdest euphemism for "amphibious assault ship" For it to count as a euphemism it'd need to be "amphibious support ship" or something.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:For it to count as a euphemism it'd need to be "amphibious support ship" or something. Stealing this
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
The first archaic cuneiform was used for what can basically be understood as tables (symbol for thing, vertical line, number of things), and that gradually became a written language, so it could be said that tables predate writing altogether.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:no that's the george pickett medal Pickett and his men never had a chance and he wasn't the one who ordered it anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 01:16
|
|
|
God help me, but I'm reading Turtledove's new thing, and it's not that bad. Not that bad relative to his other works, just so you know. It does the horrible thing that most Turtledove works do of recycling anecdotes and expressions and other stuff. This series posits that, in the winter of 1950-51, the Korean War becomes a greater world atomic conflict. This was obviously chosen for certain factors. Atom bombs fall like rain, but they're Hiroshima/Nagasaki atom bombs, not the later hydrogen types. Nobody has yet come up with a bomber greater than the B-29/Tu-4, so that's what the war is fought with. I'd still not recommend it, but he's at least chosen an interesting point of departure. This beats his trilogy about how history would be so different and better if Eastern North America wasn't where it was in real life, but floating out in the mid-Atlantic. If it was some other author, I would tell you to read this book.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 08:36
|
|
|
FastestGunAlive posted:Is a carrier really the ideal ship for HA? I'm not a navy guy but I would imagine an LHD has more advantages: in addition to air lift (and the ospreys or 53s are gonna be able to carry more than 60s), you've got surface connectors, and a combat logistics battalion trained for HA and equipped with engineering assets. Being able to generate fresh water at sea is nice but you've got to move it ashore. When I was on an lhd and we did an exercise in a remote area, it was seen as easier to have engineers ashore make fresh water than to move it from ship to shore. Neither was truly ideal though. Also the ship was not allowed to make water while we were within territorial waters but i guess that wouldn't be an issue in an emergency situation. When we had a catastrophic typhoon in Saipan last year that knocked out the water systems, the Navy sent an LHD up from Guam for relief efforts, which included carrying utility poles and bucket trucks, and bringing in a reverse osmosis system.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 08:39
|
|
|
FastestGunAlive posted:Is a carrier really the ideal ship for HA? I'm not a navy guy but I would imagine an LHD has more advantages: in addition to air lift (and the ospreys or 53s are gonna be able to carry more than 60s), you've got surface connectors, and a combat logistics battalion trained for HA and equipped with engineering assets. Being able to generate fresh water at sea is nice but you've got to move it ashore. When I was on an lhd and we did an exercise in a remote area, it was seen as easier to have engineers ashore make fresh water than to move it from ship to shore. Neither was truly ideal though. Also the ship was not allowed to make water while we were within territorial waters but i guess that wouldn't be an issue in an emergency situation. I guess it's all down to how much power/water you need and how much you mind burning through fuel to generate it. I bet you can get an LHD to a lot more places than a full sized carrier as well though. OwlFancier posted:Yeah I know what it means it's just a weird phrase for it. The fact that it can carry helicopters doesn't seem to be the most significant feature of the craft, most ships have a helipad on them afaik, the full flight deck or well deck would seem more pertinent. I have some bad news about the well deck 
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 10:24
|
|
|
LHD's might have their uses, but I think we can all agree on that allowing Marines to put toy planes on them is dumb.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 11:34
|
|
|
Crossposting from the Cold War/airpower thread but figured it might be of interest here too: I went to the Tangmere Military Aviation Museum in Sussex, UK on Saturday. It's an independent museum on the site of an old RAF base with a pretty cool range of postwar/Cold War British aircraft on display. Took a few pics that I thought this thread would be a good place for - on a phone so excuse poor quality. I also somehow failed to get any pics of the Lightning and the Sea Vixen they also have.  Westland Wessex helicopter   F4 Phantom in RAF livery - this airframe was one of the first delivered to the RAF in 1968, and spent the next 24 years doing not a lot in various places in the UK and Germany before being retired in 1992.   Hawker Hunter MK3 - this airframe was flown by the very Britishly named Squadron Leader Neville Duke to set a world air speed record of 727mph in 1953.  Hawker Hunter MK5 - nothing too remarkable about this one, except it took a brief holiday to Cyprus for five months on air defence duties during the Suez Crisis.  Slightly blurry Supermarine Swift FR5. Spent a couple of years in Germany in the late 50s/early 60s and sat on the ground in instructional and museum display roles ever since.   Gloster Meteor F4. This airframe is another world speed record setter, this time reaching 616mph when piloted by Group Captain Teddy Donaldson in 1946.  Lockheed T33 Shooting Star. This one was given as military aid to the French airforce in the 1950s, then transferred to the UK for use on US airbases when the French pulled out of NATO.   Interior shots of the pilot's seat and bomb aimer's position in the cockpit of a Canberra BR 3.   Hawker-Siddeley Harrier GR3 (right) and Sea Harrier FSR2. The Sea Harrier airframe was originally an FSR1 airframe but was used as the prototype for the upgrades that became the FSR2. If anyone's in the area I'd recommend checking the place out - as well as the aircraft above and the Lightning and Sea Vixen they also have a Vampire and a Meteor F8, as well as cockpits from a few different aircraft and functioning replicas of the first Spitfire prototype and a Hurricane Mk1, and a load of aviation and SOE-related WW2 stuff.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 12:04
|
|
|
As far as boat euphemisms go, nobody can gently caress with the JMSDF's "helicopter destroyers."
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 09:11 |
|
|
BF1 is a really really really good battlefield game, and thankfully multiplayer is not a simulation but instead pulls every experimental gun around in 1918 and doles them out so you can have a fun game in the setting. It also does a pretty good job of creating situations analogous to reality. just yesterday me and my friends spent 5 minutes defending a capture point while hunkering in a trench, getting shelled and gassed, and fighting in close with shotguns and melee weapons as the attackers stormed the trench. I would hazard to guess it will also spur far more actual interest in WW1 among young people as the single player is intended to at least somewhat depict reality https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/790476192444846080/pu/vid/314x180/dl6p-WfrVAjpwyU7.mp4
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:21
|
|
