|
MikeCrotch posted:Meanwhile in C-SPAM: Riggy posted:Cool, I'll pick up a copy soon.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2017 04:08 |
|
|
# ? May 28, 2024 10:56 |
|
WW2 Data Today's topic is US Army Rockets. What can an Anti-Tank rocket be used for? What angle could it strike against Homogeneous Steel and still get a hit? What is the difference between of ogive and a hemispherical head? What's the difference between an M1A1 and an M9A1 Bazooka? What was the 2.36-inch Smoke Rocket used for? Which rocket(s) were used for anti-aircraft training purposes? All that and more at the blog!
|
# ? Dec 19, 2017 05:00 |
|
COMBAT DOPE SHEET #5 Algae the PollywogCOMBAT posted:As the mighty TINSMAN cuts through the calm of the blue Pacific, you are going to get a good long look at the ocean, so COMBAT is going to try to make you better acquainted. There‘s a lot of stuff that goes on in the dark down there in that ocean that you ought to know about and after seeing all these beautiful Pacific nights, you should be curious about the sky. You won‘t be surprised to learn that oceans cover 3/4ths of the surface of the earth; in fact you‘re probably wondering by now wotinhell‘s happened to that other 1/4 th . The average depth is 2 miles and once you get half a mile down it is pitch black. The deepest known place is 6.7 miles, off the Philippines, a nice tailor-made spot for depositing the Jap fleet. If you can imagine a pressure equal to about 20 boxcars loaded down with iron bars, you can imagine how uncomfortable Admiral Onochi and his honorable sons of heaven are going to be. I'm glad people are enjoying these.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2017 08:10 |
|
Sounds like some references to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line-crossing_ceremony in this one.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2017 10:15 |
|
Panzeh posted:I don't think there's anything wrong with reading it- if nothing else, you get a good idea of what Parshall is arguing against in his book. If one is just doing a smattering of recreational reading it is hard to get a sense of the, uh, vector / shape / whatever (topology?) of the historiography. It all goes into the random fact pile and I can't tell where I got it and if it was good info or the bad stuff. Talking about me here but it seems like it could happen to smarter people than me as well.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2017 11:33 |
|
I know I came up with the current title and I'm proud of it, but Ask About Military History Mk. III: your old friend COMBAT is pumping out bum dope wouldn't be too shabby either
|
# ? Dec 19, 2017 12:11 |
Thanks for posting this stuff oXDemosthenesXo, it is great.
|
|
# ? Dec 19, 2017 15:20 |
|
There are like 4 different uses for the word dope in that thing
|
# ? Dec 19, 2017 17:19 |
|
oXDemosthenesXo posted:COMBAT DOPE SHEET #5 Algae the Pollywog These rule, dude.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2017 18:04 |
|
So I'm writing the new sky boxes and it is infuriating me the liberties the RLM are taking with their designation system Is that a...bad sign
|
# ? Dec 19, 2017 21:26 |
|
Nebakenezzer posted:So I'm writing the new sky boxes and it is infuriating me the liberties the RLM are taking with their designation system Is this like the historical antecedent to Mercedes-Benz and BMW giving their 2-liter powered cars designations like "28" and "43?" Because that poo poo drives me nuts in a very small but persistent way.
|
# ? Dec 19, 2017 21:30 |
|
Nebakenezzer posted:So I'm writing the new sky boxes and it is infuriating me the liberties the RLM are taking with their designation system Perfectly normal response
|
# ? Dec 19, 2017 21:44 |
|
Spanish? Germany wasn't at war with Spain though?
|
# ? Dec 19, 2017 22:06 |
|
Throatwarbler posted:Spanish? Germany wasn't at war with Spain though? The civil war, maybe?
|
# ? Dec 19, 2017 22:09 |
|
Epicurius posted:The civil war, maybe? Yeah Condor Legion I assume. Spain sent volunteers to fight with Germany on the Eastern Front in WW2.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 00:04 |
|
Could've been Republican Spaniards that decided living in Communist Russia was better than Fascist Spain, no?
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 00:06 |
|
SKY BOXES: Air Transports in the Second World War 1. Ju 52 2. German Gliders 3. Fw 200 Condor 4. German Motor Gliders 5. Ju 52 replacements Let me beat this dead horse a little more: the Germans had problems replacing the Ju 52. It's not that they didn't try, though. Lufthansa requested Junkers design a replacement for the Ju 52 as early as 1938. Lufthansa wanted a airplane similar to the Ju 52 in reliability, with expanded performance in all other aspects - able to carry much more, further, for less. I'm just guessing, but I'm thinking it was more or less explicitly "build something superior to the DC-3" which by the late 1930s had become the world's most popular airliner. At the same time, the RLM tasked Arado with building a Ju 52 replacement as well - but one that stressed military concerns, IE operating out of rough/soft ground, and efficient loading and unloading. The resulting aircraft is something of a favorite among airplane nerds, as it combines weirdness with revolutionary innovation. Ju 252 - A fine design that underlined the weakness of Nazi industry compared to its enemies First Flew: October 1941 Empty Weight: 13,127 kg (28,880 lb) Loaded Weight: 22,257 kg (49,560 lb) Max. Takeoff Weight: 24,050 kg (52,911 lb) (overload) Max. Speed: 438 km/h (272 mph) @ 5,800 m (19,030 ft) Cruising Speed: 335 km/h 208 mph) Range: 3,981 km (2,473 mi) with maximum payload 6,600 km (4,100 mi) with 2,000 kg (4,400 lb ) payload Payload: (full): ~ 9979 kg (22,000 lbs) Initially, Junkers did what you'd expect them to do - make a 21 passenger airliner with a stressed aluminum skin and retractable landing gear - a modernized Ju 52. This design was rejected by the RLM for being unambitious. So Junkers decided to go bigger, adding engine power and pressurization. Then, in 1939, Lufthansa changed what *they* wanted, now requiring a 35 passenger plus luggage load. Back to the drawing board, to add yet more capacity. The result 1941 was the Ju 252. Early flight test in civilian markings. The Ju 252 was by all accounts a very good airplane for its time, that gave Lufthansa everything it wanted. (Aside from looks - to my eye it looks a little derpy.) The design remained a trimotor, but replaced the old-as-hell BMW 132 radials with Jumo 211 inverted V12s. This was the same engine used by the Ju 88 fast bomber, and the F version made 1300 hoursepower. Three of these made a German transport plane that was not underpowered. If it doubled its power compared to the Ju 52, it quadrupled its range, capable of flying 4000 km with a full load, and could cross an ocean with a two ton payload (actually this is a little wild, as had the Japanese been cool with it, this thing apparently could have handled Japan trade flights.) Full payload was nearly 10 metric tons, or three and a bit Ju 52s. As it was originally an airliner, it could originally handle 35 passengers, more than double the Ju 52. It even had pressurization, meaning that in the black gay Hitler world where it was still peacetime, it might have been able to compete with Boeing's revolutionary 307 airliner. Frankly these numbers are pretty drat great, assuming they are reliable. Frankly, I'm looking at them and wondering why Junkers (and the Third Reich) continued with the Ju 290, who's abilities were only modestly better. The answer is partially the civilian airliner nature of the Ju 252. Even giving it the most basic defensive armament was difficult, (mostly due to pressurization messing with the idea of "just stick turrets on it and open windows and poke machine guns out of them" praxis that was dominant for the era) and maybe more importantly when compared to the Ju 290, it had been developed exclusively for hauling people and cargo - it didn't have the maritime reconnaissance role baked into it. Naturally by 1941 the military had taken over the project. The main contribution they had to the 252 was the addition of the trappoklappe. The trapoklappe was an unusual solution Junkers had come up with to solve the problem of making tail-dragging aircraft better at loading and unloading. A hydraulic ramp raised the tail, making a steeply angled cargo ramp that could accept small vehicles with the help of an internal winch. (The Ju 290’s entry will have more detail.) So from a cargo-hauling perspective, it was a very useful aircraft - but one that was displeasing to the RLM, the ministry in charge of all things air-related. The Ju 252 - after all those notes saying go bigger - was now too expensive for the Third Reich. It used engines from a combat aircraft, and otherwise used too much scarce resources (this could mean actual metal, but could also mean manufacturing time.) Another problem from the RLM's point of view was that post-Soviet invasion, it was the classic Nazi manufacturing dilemma: to introduce a new model would require stopping production of an old model, and that would have to be a combat model (unthinkable) or the aircraft that it was replacing (the Ju 52, similarly unthinkable.) So the RLM did some extraordinary unhelpful things. First, it forbade the use of combat aircraft engines, which in Third Reich terms meant "you don't get to use good engines." Second, they told the development team to go back and take, well, value out of the aircraft, drop the pressurization, etc. And how about you look into wood substitution, huh?! Aircraft Aluminum doesn't grow on trees, y'know! This "decontenting" process produced: The main visual difference between the Ju 252 and 352 are the windows: on the 352, they are either rectangular or lacking entirely. Ju 352 First Flew: August 1943 Empty Weight: 12,500 kg (27,561 lb) Loaded Weight: 19,600 kg (43,216 lb) Max. Speed: 370 km/h (230 mph) Cruising Speed: 241 km/h (150 mph) Range: 1800 km (1,120 miles) Payload: 3500-4000 kg (7716-8818 lbs) increased to 3800-4300kg (8378 - 9480 lbs) in April 1944 Despite the fact that the aircraft look similar, you can tell how much revision was actually needed to meet the new "austerity" demands of the RLM if you look at the gap between the 252's and 352's first flight - a year and a half. The engine Junkers had secured was the Brambo 323 radial - an engine that dated back to the early 1930s as a licensed copy of the British Bristol Jupiter radial, and one that had a long history of being the engine for projects that couldn't secure anything better, such as the Fw 200 and the BV 222. While reliable, it only made 1000 hp, which was anemic by any sort of midwar standard. The biggest structural change was that the fuselage was now a steel frame on mostly wood, though it did retain the trapoklappe. The wings had been pushed back slightly, and it was, thankfully, easier to arm. The resulting aircraft was faster than the Ju 52 and slightly longer range than Auntie Ju (1800 km vs. 1200 km.) It was also capable of lifting at least double what a Ju 52 could. It took a long time to get here, but this seemed to be a solid win for the RLM. They named it Herkules. Of course, time makes fools of us all, especially the Luftwaffe. Plans were made for series production, but late '43-early 1944 was an awful time to be looking to build a new anything in the Third Reich's now overstressed-verging-on-hydrolocked aircraft industry. Said industry was now in a fight for its life, and finding production room for the successor of the Ju 52 was nearly impossible. The main production plant was Fritslar (43), but the Lvov plant in Prague was also tasked with manufacturing a few.(7) Production was: two prototypes, a V1 and V2, then a preproduction run of 10 A-0s. These were completed by Febuary 1944. The fourty A-1s were made after that, with production being cancelled in the 'Fighter Emergency' of the summer of '44. The last two A-1s were made at Fritslar in September 1944. Trapoklappe: DEPLOY Service History: The Ju 252 had a production run of fifteen (shortened from 25), with five initial prototypes, and the ten others being called the A-1 series, and all aircraft were all delivered by the end of 1942. Reading around, they were assigned to Four Engine Transport Squadron/Transport Squadron 290/Transport Squadron 5, the island of misfit toys of cargo transport flyers. Reading around a bit, I found mention in a book of the author flying a Ju 252 to deliver aircraft engines and jet turbines, a good use for the rare-but-capable transport. As a transport aircraft kept behind the lines, I assume that Ju 252s also found use in intelligence operations and under KG 200's efforts to keep hope alive in the dying days of World War 2. Unlike the Ju 252, it seems that the Ju 352 was actually used in some conventional army resupply missions - before like the Ju 252 they were drafted into KG 200. They were apparently well liked by the crews as well - they were tough like the Ju 52, and had reversible props, greatly helping in landing deceleration. 25 are reported to have survived into April 1945 - but most were destroyed on the ground by their own crews. Two were captured - one by the French, the other by the Soviets - who flight tested them. Czechoslovakia completed a half-finished Ju 352 they had hanging around Lvov, and then gave it as a personal gift to Stalin. At least one airframe was captured and put on display by the British, before it went through the normal cycle of assessment and scrapping around that time. Post War Use: None. Post-war Ju 352 in British Markings. The Czechoslovakian gift airplane. Ar 232 "Centipede" - Weird but ground-breaking First Flew: June 1942 Empty Weight: A: 11,135 kg B: 12,810 kg Loaded Weight: A: 16,100 kg B: 17,600 kg Max. Takeoff Weight (overload)- A: 18,600 kg B: 20,000 kg Max. Speed: A 283 km/h, B 295 km/h Cruising Speed: Unknown Range: A 1500 km, B 1400 km Payload: ~ 4500kg (9920lbs) One thing you might of noticed in the story above is that for all intents and purposes Lufthansa was replacing the Ju 52, not the Luftwaffe. In truth, the Luftwaffe put out its own contract for a Ju 52 replacement. Going to smaller manuacturers Fiesler and Arado in 1939, the RLM selected the Arado design as the more plausible of the two, and awarded a contract for its development. It was hoped the new design would use BMW 801 radials, a new mass production radial engine that would outperform the BMW 132 and the Brambo 323 radials. The 801 started making 1500 hp, and this would expand to 1900 hp by the war's end. As you can see, 'tail boom' was the right term. The resulting design did several clever things. In the interests of having a rear ramp for easy loading and unloading, it was given tricycle gear, and to make the ramp near to the ground, high, shoulder mounted wings were used. The "stepless" cockpit opened out into a fuselage maximized for efficient design. And then its nickname: the RLM specifically wanted an aircraft that could operate close to the front lines - specifying the aircraft should be able to take off over " trenches 1.5 m wide and small elevations up to 0.8 m high." Ground pressure (IE how much pressure exerts with its landing gear) is very important when operating out of actual fields instead of landing fields - so Arado gave the 232 a strip of ten semi-retractable landing struts running the length of the fuselage, using low-pressure tires for a maximum footprint. These struts allowed the 232 to operate even in mud, sand, and frozen bog - damned impressive for a large cargo transport. It could also take off at max. takeoff weight in 200 meters. The cargo hold was 6m long, 2.3m wide, and 2 m high. Adding to this cargo-handling ability was another modern touch - a internal cargo crane with a 1500 kg capacity. The crew was four - a pilot, a navigator, a radio operator, and a loadmaster - the second two of whom could use the mounted defensive machine guns. The result of all this was a military transport that was modern in its configuration, and aside from the millipede wheel arrangement and the stalk-like tail boom, it's the configuration most military transports use today. It should be said that in a case of convergent evolution, it seems most aircraft building nations settled on this configuration independently of each other, and even in the German genus of aircraft there were already many ideas that were modern: the BV 222's/Me 323's loading through the nose, the high shoulder mounted wings of the Go 242 glider, the universal feeling of "holy gently caress, ramps would be a huge help" after struggling manually unloading a tail dragger for the ten-thousandth time. Fairchild in America was working on what would be the C-82 Packet, which had nearly all of these features, and would be reworked into the C-119 Boxcar. Still, the Germans did it first, and deserve some credit for that. Another neat feature, and one that is found on some modern cargo aircraft was its ability to 'kneel' in the rear, to decrease the ramp angle for easier loading. So why wasn't this aircraft a replacement for the Ju 52 and produced in vast numbers? Oh, the usual. You have the Nazi manufacturing dilemma again. In addition to that, you have the other project of the Ju 252/352 to think about. Junkers was favored by the RLM both for its usually close links to the Nazi Regime, and because they strove to be especially "fordist" (IE assembly line) in their manufacturing techniques, which it was hoped would balance the material deficit the Third Reich faced compared to its enemies. The use of a good engine was predictably a sticking point. The A series production used BMW 801s making 1600 horsepower each - and the BMW 801 was in demand for other projects, such as the Do 217, Ju 88, and most notably ground attack versions of the Fw 190, essential for the Eastern Front. What's more, the more capable Ju 290 would also use BMW 801s, at the time decided that the birds were well in hand, as they were just over there in that development bush. (In an unfortunate bit of timing for Arado, the Ju 290 took its first flight a month after the Ar 242, so that certainly didn't help.) Plans to build 75 A-1s were almost immediately canceled, with an initial production run being just 10 A-0s (IE pre-production prototypes.) This was extended to 20, with the other 10 being assigned the NONSENSICAL NOMENCLATURE B-0 WHAT ARE YOU DOING RLM YOU INVENT THIS OBSESSIVE CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM AND THEN YOU JUST MAKE poo poo UP LIKE AN INITIAL PRODUCTION B SERIES, GOD, YOU SICKEN ME Sorry. The B series used four Brambo 323s , clearly the only engine left in the cupboard once the higher priority projects had taken their share. These radials are usually described as making 1000 hp, though late model Fw 200s had 323s that made 1200 hp, 1300 with the temporary methanol boost. This switch didn't really improve its chances in the RLM. Choice quotes from auto-translated German Wikipedia from the RLM on the Ar 232 from a meeting in the summer of 1942 include, from chief of planning at the RLM Major General Carl von Gablenz, that the Ar 232 could be cancelled as it was "worst-selling aluminum eater". Between one Ar 232 or two Ju 52s, von Gablenz preferred the two Ju 52s, even with the higher fuel and crew requirements. Countering this was another technical head, Flying head (sic) Walther Friebel, who pointed out the Ar 232 could land cargo in places the Ju 52 just couldn't, and was ideally suited for operations in snow and ice. RLM head Reichmarshall Milch couldn't really decide. On the one hand, its all metal construction (!) was seen as a disadvantage; on the other hand, the Ju 352 aside from its non-strategic material use only really offered a shorter takeoff and landing - and clearly the unusual Ar 232 offered unique advantages. It seems this compromise position was so the issue could be revised if necessary; unfortunately, the advocate of the Ar 232, Fribel was killed in an air crash in 1943, meaning the 20 unit production would be it. Arado, like Junkers, was told to get back to work, and build a four engine version made from non-strategic materials. As the B-series was only flying in later 1943, it is likely these efforts fell by the wayside once the Ar 234, the world's first jet bomber, metaphorically took off. Service history: The first prototype (V-1) flew on June 28th, 1942, and the second flew in November '42. Because I HATE YOU SO MUCH, this aircraft was known as A-01, and would crash on the 6th of February 1943, having been the last aircraft to fly out of Stalingrad. (I'm not sure if the crash was at the end of that flight or later.) The rest of the initial bastard series of 10 A-02-10 followed, with the last flying first on the 17th of July 1943. These aircraft were used singly in whatever crisis the Third Reich happened at the time, except for the A-05, which might have been known as the V2 for reasons I can only imagine involved The B-series first flew on August 3rd, 1943. The first prototype burst into flames on its second flight and managed to land safely but was a total write-off - despite this, nine additional B series aircraft followed. These were all delivered before May 1944, where one is still listed in KG 200's inventory. As a flyer capable of landing in very unusual places, it was popular in German intelligence for landing spies and saboteurs. Post War use: Amazingly, two B-series Ar 232s fell into the hands of the British. After flight testing them (famous British test pilot Eric "Winkle" Brown apparently thought they were quite good) they were used for a few years as transports between Britain and occupied Germany before being scrapped. Nebakenezzer fucked around with this message at 03:39 on Dec 20, 2017 |
# ? Dec 20, 2017 00:53 |
|
13th KRRC War Diary, 19th Dec 1917 posted:Frost still holds. Enemy movement observed again at MAST FARM. Enemy aircraft was very active during the day. One E.A. was brought down in enemy's lines. Enemy's M.G's were very active from MAY FARM, CIRCUS POINT and BASSEVILLE CABARET. Work was carried on as usual.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 01:01 |
|
Nebakenezzer posted:SKY BOXES: Air Transports in the Second World War If academic writing conventions allowed people to do this I'd have probably stayed a history major
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 03:18 |
|
oXDemosthenesXo posted:COMBAT DOPE SHEET #5 Algae the Pollywog Does anybody know WTF this sheet is talking about when it mentions mining silver off of copper sheeting off the bottoms of ships?
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 03:58 |
|
Deptfordx posted:I've a feeling this has been mentioned, might be thinking of 'Destroyer Captain'. The Fuchida book is not, it's a good narrative of the battle and an entertaining read, but key moments are fabricated. Destroyer Captain hasn't been debunked, but there's a few passages I could pick out as having been written with hindsight. Anyway, read Destroyer Captain, it's one of the great first hand accounts of any war. frankenfreak posted:Meanwhile in PYF: mllaneza fucked around with this message at 04:54 on Dec 20, 2017 |
# ? Dec 20, 2017 04:44 |
|
Comrade Koba posted:Alfred and I strolled around the empty Charleville, and Alfred documented the occasion with his film camera. This recording I still have to this day, and although the colors are starting to fade, you can still recognize our faces and some of the surroundings. Please say you found the film.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 05:46 |
|
COMBAT DOPE SHEET #6 Manus IslandCOMBAT posted:If the year was 1844 instead of 1944, and you were on an old wooden sailing vessel steaming into Seeadler Harbor, Looey the native would be standing on the shore looking you over and thinking what a nice roast of “long pig” you would make turning on a spit over a fire. Or if he got a close-up of the wrinkles and bumps in your shaven dome, he would think ”now wouldn’t that head look nice on the mantle right alongside that nice old missionary”. Luckily for you, tomorrow he will be standing on the shore loaded down with beads, shells, bananas, grass skirts, and pineapples thinking what a rooking he was going to give you sailors when you dropped the hook. As a matter of fact, though, even today if you stray too far into the bush you’re liable to hear swish and next thing find yourself hanging out to dry with everything below your chin missing. Whatever you do stay within sight of 51 and Winfield will pull you out of any tough spots. In #7 our friend COMBAT will get into some actual war news along with the travel advice. The references to football are interesting because my midwestern grandpa mentioned that the first time he ever saw the game was during shore leave in some east coast city (NYC maybe) shortly before they took off on the "war cruise" that the dope sheets are documenting.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 06:35 |
|
mllaneza posted:Please say you found the film. I don’t have it personally, but I’m sure it’s still with all the other stuff he saved up over the years. I do know he had it copied to a VHS cassette in the 90s along with a bunch of other old film reels, so it shouldn’t be too hard to have it digitized if/when I ever get my hands on it.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 08:08 |
|
Scribbled on that combat dope to try to restore some of the original lines
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 09:06 |
|
mllaneza posted:The Fuchida book is not, it's a good narrative of the battle and an entertaining read, but key moments are fabricated. Destroyer Captain hasn't been debunked, but there's a few passages I could pick out as having been written with hindsight. Anyway, read Destroyer Captain, it's one of the great first hand accounts of any war. Yeah, I think Hara's pretty good about not trying to hide what he's writing with hindsight but it's definitely there.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 15:25 |
|
13th KRRC War Diary, 20th Dec 1917 posted:No movement on the part of the enemy was observed, owing to a thick fog during the day.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 17:41 |
|
I have a confession to make: I am a firm believer in the efficacy of bat bombs. Somebody please convince me otherwise.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 22:04 |
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:I have a confession to make: I am a firm believer in the efficacy of bat bombs. Somebody please convince me otherwise. I mean, they're OK but they have very narrow fields of application. Here's a documentary on the subject. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dghbyBaQyI
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 22:13 |
|
Cyrano4747 posted:I mean, they're OK but they have very narrow fields of application. I think you're mistaken, this is a documentary on the USS Indianopolis
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 22:15 |
|
How the gently caress did over 8 million people die during the 30 Years War? That's gotta be the most deadly war in the Western World until WW1 right?
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 22:19 |
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:How the gently caress did over 8 million people die during the 30 Years War? That's gotta be the most deadly war in the Western World until WW1 right?
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 22:33 |
|
Also it lasted 30 loving years.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 22:35 |
Shimrra Jamaane posted:How the gently caress did over 8 million people die during the 30 Years War? That's gotta be the most deadly war in the Western World until WW1 right? The 30 years probably helped. e;fb
|
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 22:35 |
|
Well the French Revolutionary/Napoleonic Wars lasted 23 years and didn't come close to that.
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 22:41 |
|
Yet more evidence that the pike is the perfect killing machine
|
# ? Dec 20, 2017 22:57 |
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:I have a confession to make: I am a firm believer in the efficacy of bat bombs. Somebody please convince me otherwise. I've heard people say online that the reason for the project getting cancelled was because of its ineffectiveness but IIRC it turns out that the people doing the testing determined that they were surprisingly and startlingly effective against their prospective targets. I doubt they would have been anywhere near effective against a model city in the European style but I could be mistaken. As for what might have made them ineffective, I'd say that the effects of Japanese AAA probably was not accounted for in their little Japanese village. The flak would probably savage them up but really I think the sound of bursting shells might disorientate them more but who knows. The other reason it might have actually sucked was logistical. Seems like it'd be a pain in the rear end to capture, transport and equip bats by the millions without losing tens to hundreds of thousands to shock, disease and being transported from New Mexico half a world away to a radically different environment. Also, not actually knowing how the bombs were actually attached, woe be to the poor fucks handling a natural carrier of rabies.
|
# ? Dec 21, 2017 00:04 |
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:I have a confession to make: I am a firm believer in the efficacy of bat bombs. Somebody please convince me otherwise. Well they did get used pretty succesfully in '45, sunk a few ships. And by they I mean the ASN-N-2
|
# ? Dec 21, 2017 01:15 |
HEY GUNS posted:food supplies got hosed up, disease Decrease in the harvest, trade both on land and the roads disrupted, lovely weather and the economy of the nation dropping hard are also reasons for a shitload of non combatant deaths in pre-20th century conflicts. Oh and the occasional mini ice age.
|
|
# ? Dec 21, 2017 01:31 |
|
|
# ? May 28, 2024 10:56 |
|
Hey guys it's the main battle tank a zombie concept? Is it already dead thanks to the advent of top attack atgm available at the squad level?
|
# ? Dec 21, 2017 03:44 |