|
Not actual history.
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 19:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 15:13 |
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:This is probably part of why I never got through his WW1 podcast. He spends a lot of time explaining why it happened and trots out a lot of time worn cliches. I remember some rambling thing about it being destiny because look at all these crazy coincidences and if any one of a dozen things hadn't happened exactly this way Sarajevo doesn't happen. Only, it ignores the roughly dozen times that various European powers almost threw down in the previous quarter century, the inherently destabilizing effect of the unification of Germany, and the fact that ll the various governments were pretty much on board with it being time to settle some major international issues through a quick war that their side would obviously win before winter. I had the same kind of struggle with the WW1 series. When he does ancient history like Rome or Assyria, I give him a lot more leeway because we simply don't have as many sources and the sources we have are often problematic at best. So the story of the Roman Republic even as we receive it from authoritative modern literature isn't ironclad, and so turning it into an appealing narrative is less of a violation than trotting out the old stories of WW1.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 20:10
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:So this isn't just me bagging on him Ghosts of the Ostfront was a hell of a listen, though when he runs the numbers at the end it seems a bit unbelievable on top of the already shocking totals. Logical Insanity was pretty good too, the first hand accounts of firestorm survivors... jesus hold me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Sperglord Actual posted:Not actual history. I love this so much
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
Sperglord Actual posted:Not actual history. You sure? Seems pretty accurate tbh.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 21:19
|
|
|
Herv posted:Ghosts of the Ostfront was a hell of a listen, though when he runs the numbers at the end it seems a bit unbelievable on top of the already shocking totals. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qkmO7tm8AU That is my go-to for a summary of the staggering nature of the Eastern Front. Pretty sure I found it in this very thread originally (Cyrano?)
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
"Germany rolls up sleeves, looks at France and punches Belgium" makes me laugh every time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
http://www.newsweek.com/vladimir-putin-vows-eliminate-nato-threat-sweden-joins-619486
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 23:29
|
|
|
Sperglord Actual posted:Not actual history. Why is the United States portrayed as participating in the looting of Germany? Our position was for a mild treaty.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 23:38
|
|
|
A.o.D. posted:Why is the United States portrayed as participating in the looting of Germany? Our position was for a mild treaty. We still received spoils.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
Fearless posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qkmO7tm8AU Yeah, that Glantz lecture is really good. I know I found it either in this thread or the last round of the MilHist thread. Carlin aggravates the hell out of me for a lot of stylistic reasons- the way he builds up to saying something was really bad, or really big is particularly annoying. That said, he's probably no worse than your average US high school history text on any given topic and significantly more interesting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 00:20
|
|
|
A.o.D. posted:Why is the United States portrayed as participating in the looting of Germany? Our position was for a mild treaty. I suppose it should've been "America said they shouldn't take his wallet but didn't decline the round France bought" Or you know something funnier
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 02:02
|
|
|
The real problem is that the Entente took enough to piss Germany off, but not enough to degrade their ability to retaliate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 02:06
|
|
|
How much more accurate could you make a sniper rifle if it didn't have to be held by humans? Like a tube in a turret with wind sensors, GPS, extremely fine motor control, and "algorithms" controlled via a tablet?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
As accurate as you wanted. The problem isn't making the bullet hit the target, the problem is spotting the target, and making the system portable. A (mobile) tube in a turret with wind sensors, GPS, extremely fine motor control, and "algorithms" controlled is a tank. You could make it use a smaller calibre, but why?
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 02:45
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Raenir Salazar posted:How much more accurate could you make a sniper rifle if it didn't have to be held by humans? Like a tube in a turret with wind sensors, GPS, extremely fine motor control, and "algorithms" controlled via a tablet? Antipersonnel rifles, fired from a stable position, already have more trouble hitting because targets move unpredictably than because the operator has shaky hands. If you want to use antimateriel rifles as small-calibre, direct fire artillery, maybe there’s more room for improvement there.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 02:45
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:As accurate as you wanted. The problem isn't making the bullet hit the target, the problem is spotting the target, and making the system portable. I'm just wondering if "shakey hands" is the largest contributor to missing your target and whether you could hypothetically solve it as long as the target didn't suddenly zig zag in a random direction. Suppose you had a stable robot tripod the weapon is attached to; and maybe a second tripod that had all the sensors and could act as a spotter; and you sat a few meters away with a tablet that alerted you if any targets were visible and all you had to do is tap the target displayed on the screen and the gun would automatically lock to it; tries to average out its movements to predict where he might be at the time the bullet reaches its position and then after a confirmation tap takes the shot. If money was no object kind of theory crafting. e: It gives me a cool idea for an probably very expensive and niche game. Fly around with a drone with a camera and you have to pick out people you think are terrorists that the app predetermines and you have to figure out the correct one with only limited resources like in Papers Please but as an Augmented Reality Game. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 03:03 on Jun 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 03:00
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:
Lockheed Martin business model.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 03:06
|
|
|
Reminder a SEAL popped a guy from one boat to another in the middle of the ocean. The tech exists even with an ape holding it, it's just probably both too expensive and too finicky for too many grunts to carry around.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 03:17
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Suppose you had a stable robot tripod the weapon is attached to; and maybe a second tripod that had all the sensors and could act as a spotter; and you sat a few meters away with a tablet that alerted you if any targets were visible and all you had to do is tap the target displayed on the screen and the gun would automatically lock to it; tries to average out its movements to predict where he might be at the time the bullet reaches its position and then after a confirmation tap takes the shot. There are people who build what amounts to heavy-duty bespoke no-human-touching-anything benchrests for long-range hobby shooting. I don't know what king of MOA they achieve, but eventually other items in the error budget will be larger than pointing inaccuracy. You'l have variation in the bullet velocity due to shot-to-shot small differences in the powder, you'll have thermal gradients in the firearm from ambient weather subtly changing its shape, you'll have rigid body vibrations from any active pointing mechanisms, you'll have wind turbulence between you and the target changing the atmosphere during the nontrivially-long flight, etc, etc. At the end of the day though, you have the very hard limit of bullet drop. You just can't get a low-sectional-density projectile to go all that many more km before it runs out of steam and falls to the ground. So beyond a couple km it rapidly gets more efficient to just use something with active guidance.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 03:38
|
|
|
Guns and Ammo did an accuracy test on .22LR match ammo last year, which involved buying one of the most expensive .22 rifles available (to ensure there were no issues caused by the weapon), putting it into the most absurdly precise rest they could put together (to eliminate shooter effects), and firing at a fairly short range (to minimize any effect of the air on the relatively light bullets in use). Even with this setup, there was noticable dispersion.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 03:56
|
|
|
Sperglord Actual posted:Not actual history. Also Germany, Russia, and England are literally cousins.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 05:12
|
|
|
a kitten posted:"Germany rolls up sleeves, looks at France and punches Belgium" makes me laugh every time. The part about Japan calling out that it was on Britain's side and then staying on the other side of the room killed me. I like to imagine it took a sip from its drink while casually observing the scuffle.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 05:23
|
|
|
Japan: yells out to Britain from the far side of the bar that they're on the same side, sidles over to the table Germany were sitting at a little while ago and ate their peanuts, thinks to themselves "I should buy a bigger boat".
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 05:27
|
|
|
Memento posted:Japan: yells out to Britain from the far side of the bar that they're on the same side, sidles over to the table Germany were sitting at a little while ago and ate their peanuts, thinks to themselves "I should buy a bigger boat". I think we could charitably describe Japan's WWI participation as holding England's beer. (Sending DD's to patrol the med)
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 08:27
|
|
|
Sperglord Actual posted:I remember the Ambrose rant. You should repost it some time. Oh crap, I've read a lot of his books, am I stupid now? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 08:41
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I think we could charitably describe Japan's WWI participation as holding England's beer. (Sending DD's to patrol the med) I thought they took advantage of the conflict to seize Germany's Micronesian territories, knowing there would be no backlash.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 09:41
|
|
|
Captain von Trapp posted:There are people who build what amounts to heavy-duty bespoke no-human-touching-anything benchrests for long-range hobby shooting. I don't know what king of MOA they achieve, but eventually other items in the error budget will be larger than pointing inaccuracy. You'l have variation in the bullet velocity due to shot-to-shot small differences in the powder, you'll have thermal gradients in the firearm from ambient weather subtly changing its shape, you'll have rigid body vibrations from any active pointing mechanisms, you'll have wind turbulence between you and the target changing the atmosphere during the nontrivially-long flight, etc, etc. At the end of the day though, you have the very hard limit of bullet drop. You just can't get a low-sectional-density projectile to go all that many more km before it runs out of steam and falls to the ground. So beyond a couple km it rapidly gets more efficient to just use something with active guidance. one of my friends swears by not letting the cartridge stay in battery for too long because the brass heats up and changes the characteristics or something
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 10:36
|
|
|
The answer is "drone-fired Hellfire." CMANO lp is convincing me that fighter pilots are what needs replacing with robots the most. What human qualities do you need to take off, sling BVRs at AVACS painted targets and then either die to terminal radar guided missiles or land.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 12:13
|
|
|
*Top gun theme in a minor key*
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 12:15
|
|
|
Captain von Trapp posted:So beyond a couple km it rapidly gets more efficient to just use something with active guidance. http://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2015-04-27
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 13:44
|
|
|
JcDent posted:The answer is "drone-fired Hellfire." All the mission sets that don't involve slinging BVRs at optimal range on direction from the AWACS. Also that pesky issue of who to blame when MHXXX gets shot down live on CNN.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I'm just wondering if "shakey hands" is the largest contributor to missing your target and whether you could hypothetically solve it as long as the target didn't suddenly zig zag in a random direction. This is the kind of thing the TrackingPoint rifle solves for. Basically you tag a target with a laser dot, and then hold down the trigger. When the barrel is lined up, it releases a catch and fires. http://www.tracking-point.com/how-it-works/
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 15:15
|
|
|
Blam the AWACS crew, duh. What missions are, say, your F-22 carrying out that a robot wouldn't do better? I doubt that CAS needs that much of a human touch either, especially if the target is lazed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 15:17
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Blam the AWACS crew, duh. This discussion comes up a lot and always ends with the people who know what they're talking about, even those who have a healthy disregard for pilots' egos, agree that we are nowhere near full-unmanned fighter capability.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 15:24
|
|
|
Buttcoin purse posted:Oh crap, I've read a lot of his books, am I stupid now? He's ok for grandpas stories of kicking Hitler in the nads especially if it's your intro to history. His historical arguments are poo poo though. I'll dig up my Ambrose rant later.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 16:15
|
|
|
Also be operable when comms are jammed or spotty. We are a far way off of combat ready AI.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 16:15
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Blam the AWACS crew, duh. You're entirely wrong, sorry. To answer your question, all of them. Even cruise missiles have a "man in the loop" with the ability of ending the mission if necessary. The problem is that if you're in an EM-contested environment (which we've never really fought in), you might not be able to just send that signal so you need someone actually there. When you're talking about interpreting the kind of information required to actually identify and target an aircraft, you absolutely need a person to do it. It's not as simple as BEEP BOOP Information X+Information Y=Z which is a target so shoot it. poo poo hasn't been that permissive since WWII. "Fog of war" is the term used to cover the billions of stupid little things that gently caress with plans that basic, and it happens even in a permissive air environment like Iraq (pre ISIS) and Afghanistan. Godholio fucked around with this message at 17:45 on Jun 4, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
There were battles fought in WWII in churches with both sides alternately attacking it and then occupying the first floor repeatedly while hundreds of children sheltered in the cellar over days. Including directing hundreds of HE rounds into the building. It's going to have to be a hell of a conflict to get to that level of weapons free again which is where you would have to pretty much be to have autonomous targeting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 15:13 |
|
|
I guess a game LP isn't a realistic depiction of modern air warfare. Consider me corrected.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2017 18:05
|
|