|
Gnoman posted:Red as a color of revolution, particularly leftist revolution, dates back at least as far back as 1787, in association with Revolutionary France. It became the color of international Socialism in 1848. The color was chosen to signify the blood of the martyred heroes of the struggle. As hinted, white has an association with monarchism/anti-revolutionaryism because it was the colour of the Bourbon monarchy, both before and after the French revolution.
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 12:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 22:49 |
|
GotLag posted:Speaking of white clothing, how did the soldiers who wore white uniforms back in the Napoleonic era keep them that way? Basically the pristine white uniforms of the Austrians/Poor Bastard Frenchmen who were part of that experiment/Certain old school Spanish and volunteer/militia regiments turned into a sort of dirty light grey when exposed to the elements on campaign. However the white leather cross belts could be kept clean and shiny with pipeclay.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 13:50
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:Bourbon soldiery wore a lot of white uniforms, as did the Austrian Empire. And red for blood. and can you guys please keep politics out of the thread? some of us happen to be monarchists
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 14:15
|
|
|
Don Gato posted:Also the red phrygian caps went out of style for some reason so it was boiled down to the red blood of martyrs by the Jacobins.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 14:16
|
|
|
Just popping in to say, if anyone likes Napoleonics and easy-to-read novels, I just finished my first Sharpe book (of Sean Bean teledrama fame), and I really appreciated the author putting in an afterword about the historical context, what was real and what was fiction, and why the fiction is still plausible.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 14:19
|
|
simplefish posted:Just popping in to say, if anyone likes Napoleonics and easy-to-read novels, I just finished my first Sharpe book (of Sean Bean teledrama fame), and I really appreciated the author putting in an afterword about the historical context, what was real and what was fiction, and why the fiction is still plausible. Cornwell is good for that sort of thing yeah, he did an interesting book with several other historians that covers the whole battle of Waterloo.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 14:24
|
|
|
...not that you'd be biased, given your username!
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 14:25
|
|
|
simplefish posted:Just popping in to say, if anyone likes Napoleonics and easy-to-read novels, I just finished my first Sharpe book (of Sean Bean teledrama fame), and I really appreciated the author putting in an afterword about the historical context, what was real and what was fiction, and why the fiction is still plausible. you're a huge nerd. welcome. you are among friends here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 14:26
|
|
simplefish posted:...not that you'd be biased, given your username! Well with modern Napoleonic stuff Cornwell is always going to be hanging on the outskirts peeking into it as he himself is a massive nerd. I'd also suggest Marching With Sharpe that covers the training and day to day activities of the Napoleonic British soldier. Then when you are ready to play with the big boys, Redcoat by Richard Holmes is where you should start.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 14:30
|
|
|
I know this is late but the "rational west" is nonsense https://medium.com/@sallylepage/in-2017-uk-water-companies-still-rely-on-magic-6eb62e036b02
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 14:36
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:And the colonel's personal company (and later the head of state's personal regiment) has white flags shan't https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcaUer4fuU8
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 14:37
|
|
|
I liked the Saxon Stories a lot, although I haven't read like the last 3 or so. Swords, basically.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 14:44
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:this is a weird question, but where did the coloring of red for labor/socialist movements and white for monarchists/reactionaries come from? "The people's flag is deepest red, it's shrouded oft our martyred dead. And ere their limbs grew stiff and cold, their heart's blood dyed its every fold." Good song. As to anarchists I think the reason for that is that they reject the concept of nation states so, while every nation has a flag, anarchists have an absence of one. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 14:49 on Nov 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 14:46
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:I know this is late but the "rational west" is nonsense https://medium.com/@sallylepage/in-2017-uk-water-companies-still-rely-on-magic-6eb62e036b02 Those must be some really loving expensive rods.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 15:03
|
|
|
I'd ring em up and complain, bloody cheap buggers coming to my house with their half arsed divining methods, haruspicy or get out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 15:09
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I'd ring em up and complain, bloody cheap buggers coming to my house with their half arsed divining methods, haruspicy or get out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:bibliomancy is cheap, most people have either a bible or a copy of Virgil lying about I think the only book I own that is remotely prestigious enough to use for divination is this one:   Which while nice is probably fairly likely to get you arrested for racially motivated violence if you use it as an instruction book. Also that dude on the cover is having a whale of a time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 15:22
|
|
|
"When the round is fired, acceleration in the gun barrel causes the fingers of the crown breaker to open up, allowing the electrolyte vial to break against the bottom of the breaker. Centrifugal force distributes the electrolyte throughout the energize, activating it in 0.2 to 0.3 seconds. Centrifugal force also opens the handling safety switch, which previously had been shorting the firing condenser. The firing condenser begins to accumulate a charge through its high-resistance electrical delay, and electrical energy is fed to the electric mechanism in the V.T. element. Centrifugal force causes the small globule of mercury in the mercury switch to move through a porous membrane into the lower chamber, thereby removing the electrical short circuit across the primer leads. This requires from 0.2 to 0.9 seconds, depending on the fuze and the rate of rotation of the projectile. When the firing condenser has accumulated enough electrical energy to allow firing of the electric primer, 0.6 to 1 second, the fuze is fully armed. Upon approach to a target under proper conditions, the reflected electromagnetic signal from the target causes the V.T. element to discharge the firing condenser through the electric primer. The blast from the primer functions the auxiliary detonating fuze, which, in turn, initiates the detonation of the projectile."
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 15:36
|
|
|
It's pretty extraordinary that they managed to make actual proximity fused munitions in WW2.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
Interestingly, and according to my ordnance book, at least one type of V.T. fuze experienced a 20% failure rate against normal/long-range targets, where the rounds would burst prematurely. Additionally, it [The Mk 32] suffered a 50% failure rate after 8 months, due to the dry energizer. Another Mark of V.T. fuze experienced a 30% premature detonation rate "at extremely long range", and at long range, 30% will function prematurely, with 50% will work properly, the other 20% is presumed to be duds. The last Mk with similar data in the book states a failure rate of 20% for premature detonations, 65% functional, and the rest, again, presumed duds. Another edit: Its also important to note that, due to the nature of the V.T. fuze, the minimum range is, generally, kept to 500 yards. And they also have dedicated fuzes for low-flying aircraft, as water could disrupt the V.T. fuze. And they mention using V.T. fuzed rounds against ground targets. Jobbo_Fett fucked around with this message at 15:45 on Nov 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:It's pretty extraordinary that they managed to make actual proximity fused munitions in WW2. There's a surprising amount of stuff in WWII that seems like it shouldn't even have been possible with pre-digital technology. I think the Germans actually managed to build an integrated automatic air-defense system to protect one of their dams, where the guns would be aimed and fired at radar signatures with next to no manual input necessary.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
Well also just the manufacturing fiddlyness involved, I can believe making some very complex electromechanical devices but being able to mass produce them enough to put them in guns and lob them at aircraft is another thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 15:51
|
|
|
On the flip side, I always found it very strange that WWII era militaries (particularly the Germans) didn't really figure out missiles, especially SAMs. Germany had everything it needed tech level-wise to build something like a Nike Ajax during the war years and that poo poo would've absolutely wrecked the Allied heavy bombers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
Perestroika posted:There's a surprising amount of stuff in WWII that seems like it shouldn't even have been possible with pre-digital technology. I think the Germans actually managed to build an integrated automatic air-defense system to protect one of their dams, where the guns would be aimed and fired at radar signatures with next to no manual input necessary. That's pretty much how the radar directors on US and UK ships worked.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Well also just the manufacturing fiddlyness involved, I can believe making some very complex electromechanical devices but being able to mass produce them enough to put them in guns and lob them at aircraft is another thing. Definitely, I just think its interesting because things like failure rates and/or sensitivity or other purposes doesn't often get mentioned.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
bewbies posted:On the flip side, I always found it very strange that WWII era militaries (particularly the Germans) didn't really figure out missiles, especially SAMs. Germany had everything it needed tech level-wise to build something like a Nike Ajax during the war years and that poo poo would've absolutely wrecked the Allied heavy bombers. They did, although relatively late in the war and at a point where it would have had no appreciable affect on the outcome. Speaking of, my book has a section on guided missiles! Things like the Bat and the Loon (A V-1 Copy) are detailed 
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 16:00
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:They did, although relatively late in the war and at a point where it would have had no appreciable affect on the outcome. Didn't the Battleship Roma get taken out by basically a very early anti-ship missile?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 16:00
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:Didn't the Battleship Roma get taken out by basically a very early anti-ship missile? Yes.  A B-17 launching a US copy of the V-1 "Buzzbomb"
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 16:04
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:Didn't the Battleship Roma get taken out by basically a very early anti-ship missile? Sort of. It was a glide bomb that was steered via a radio link. The US had one too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azon
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 16:06
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:They did, although relatively late in the war and at a point where it would have had no appreciable affect on the outcome. They figured out glide bombs to an extent, not so much proper guided missiles. So far as I can tell the only tech issue Germany would've had to overcome was miniaturizing a commo device sufficiently small to fit on an interceptor, which seems like it would've been worth pursuing over just about any other potential capability.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 16:07
|
|
|
Certainly a better use for them than digging holes in southeast England.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 16:07
|
|
|
bewbies posted:On the flip side, I always found it very strange that WWII era militaries (particularly the Germans) didn't really figure out missiles, especially SAMs. Germany had everything it needed tech level-wise to build something like a Nike Ajax during the war years and that poo poo would've absolutely wrecked the Allied heavy bombers. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheintochter
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 16:08
|
|
|
bewbies posted:On the flip side, I always found it very strange that WWII era militaries (particularly the Germans) didn't really figure out missiles, especially SAMs. Germany had everything it needed tech level-wise to build something like a Nike Ajax during the war years and that poo poo would've absolutely wrecked the Allied heavy bombers. The Germans had one major problem with missiles: guidance. Aside from visually guiding it in, they had no method for targeting a warhead. They managed to deploy a few other technologies like wire guidance and even (in a experimental prototype) a primitive TV picture that could be sent along the guiding wire to the aimer in the aircraft, but figuring out a method for autonomous guidance was beyond Nazi electronics. (My impression is that the Nazis were not very advanced in electronics compared to other major belligerents, please correct me if I'm wrong.) The other problem they had with their SAM experiments was a really simple one: their missiles had to make physical contact to explode. As they were the first ones doing stuff like this it's not much of a criticism, but it would have made their missiles less effective than if they exploded with proximity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 16:17
|
|
|
bewbies posted:They figured out glide bombs to an extent, not so much proper guided missiles. So far as I can tell the only tech issue Germany would've had to overcome was miniaturizing a commo device sufficiently small to fit on an interceptor, which seems like it would've been worth pursuing over just about any other potential capability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wasserfall https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henschel_Hs_117 The only issue with these three is that they still aren't completely autonomous, or they don't have proximity fuzes, or both. The Germans had the basis for it but there was no way they were getting a properly working design into mass production anytime soon.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 16:18
|
|
|
it's me i am the rhine toucher
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
Is now a good time to post about pigeon-guidance, or is that one of the thread things that's often talked out, like Wojtek?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 16:22
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:it's me *tocht am rhein starts playing*
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 16:23
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:The other problem they had with their SAM experiments was a really simple one: their missiles had to make physical contact to explode. As they were the first ones doing stuff like this it's not much of a criticism, but it would have made their missiles less effective than if they exploded with proximity. Not true, as some could be remotely detonated, and another allegedly used two proximity fuzes. They wouldn't have been as accurate, that's for sure. I can't even begin to wonder how hard it must be to try to remotely detonate a missile 7 thousand meters up without any help.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 16:24
|
|
|
Wouldn't the allies have learned quickly to jam those missiles if they were rolled out in a big way?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 16:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 22:49 |
|
|
simplefish posted:Is now a good time to post about pigeon-guidance, or is that one of the thread things that's often talked out, like Wojtek? Which is more effective, incendiary bats or incendiary soap? Discuss.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 16:25
|
|