|
HEY GUNS posted:If you've really got to know, my ideal monarchic system is elective. There was nothing special about Hapsburg blood except its remarkable lack of genetic diversity. My ideal system is random selection from the population, really. I don't think anyone who wants to be the monarch should be.
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 20:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 12:11 |
|
|
Having a crapload of resources does allow you to do some astoundingly inefficient things.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 20:15
|
|
|
My ideal governmental system is one that isn't corrupt. So, none that have ever existed or are ever likely to.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 20:15
|
|
|
[quote="“HEY GUNS”" post="“480420663”"] harsh burn on the english outa nowhere [/quote] Also works if read as being at the expense of Japan  No offense meant tho, Tonga.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 20:18
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:My ideal governmental system is one that isn't corrupt. So, none that have ever existed or are ever likely to. My friend have you heard the good news about a benevolent dictatorship with me as the dictator
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 20:23
|
|
|
Cythereal posted:My ideal governmental system is one that isn't corrupt. So, none that have ever existed or are ever likely to. There are certainly governmental systems that encourage corruption to greater and lesser degrees though
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 20:24
|
|
|
"Efficiency" is a lovely word. Utterly meaningless without saying what the efficiency is of, and you can learn much about people and places based on the unspoken implications that exist when it and similar words are being used on their own.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 20:30
|
|
|
Victor Hutchinson's POW Diary Thursday 18th January, 1945 Spent the morning in the ‘pit’ to make up for loss of sleep last night. The afternoon brought a spate of rumours. 1. Warsaw & Kraukau. 2. 15:00 NCO’s arriving tomorrow to be housed in the adjoin new camp.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 20:34
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:harsh burn on the english outa nowhere Just like syphilis.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 20:43
|
|
|
Squalid posted:The argument is complex because in the last 200 years monarchies that become unstable have tended to quickly turn into similarly unstable but more persistent Republics. So while existing Monarchies may have a high average stability how can we say if the Monarchy produced stability, or if stability has preserved the Monarchy? Much as the atavistic and primitive species of oceanic isles have survived millennia in isolation from competition and environmental disruption, so too may human social institutions survived. I don't think feedmegin intended to imply any sort of causal link, and I think your analogy is terminologically problematic in that it tends to imply that evolution takes the form of a directed progression toward an end state. Having said that, there's some merit to the comparison of introducing political instability into a regime and introducing environmental instability into an ecosystem: both are likely to create a period of rapid change in response to the new circumstances.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Just like syphilis. I do like how we and the Italians called it the French disease and they called it the Neopolitan or Spanish disease. Foreigners got cooties basically.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:I don't think feedmegin intended to imply any sort of causal link, and I think your analogy is terminologically problematic in that it tends to imply that evolution takes the form of a directed progression toward an end state. Having said that, there's some merit to the comparison of introducing political instability into a regime and introducing environmental instability into an ecosystem: both are likely to create a period of rapid change in response to the new circumstances. A fair point, though in this circumstance I felt it necessary to sacrifice biological rigor to facilitate my joke at kiwi’s expense
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2018 21:46
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Just like syphilis.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 01:45
|
|
|
Well last time I checked I couldn't self multiply. Would explain why there is so much of us around the world.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 01:48
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Well last time I checked I couldn't self multiply. Would explain why there is so much of us around the world. or fungus
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 01:53
|
|
|
The source is an anonymous diary from 1612. The people it's talking about are army women. a recurring part of your war experience in the 16th and 17th centuries would have been small dogs. Not big dogs: small dogs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 02:02
|
|
|
Were the small dogs, perhaps, vicious? Small, but vicious?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 02:03
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:I do like how we and the Italians called it the French disease and they called it the Neopolitan or Spanish disease. Speaking of which, there's new research that Cortez didn't wipe out the Aztecs with smallpox. It was salmonella. https://www.nature.com/news/collapse-of-aztec-society-linked-to-catastrophic-salmonella-outbreak-1.21485
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 02:06
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:
For what purpose?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 02:06
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:For what purpose?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 02:08
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:you bud like yeast This is the real reason why our beer is kept in a cold basement and why you come across some many classic rural pubs outside the UK. The beer being cold is just a bonus.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 02:09
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:Were the small dogs, perhaps, vicious? Small, but vicious? Given my experience with dachshunds, probably. All dogs, from the tiniest Chihuahua to the biggest rottweiler, are still a wolf in their own minds. They've just accepted the oddly-shaped hairless wolf (i.e., their owner) as the pack leader.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 02:46
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
lol, just lol, if you've never gone to war with at least one small dog
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 02:57
|
|
|
Reminds me of a milhist urban legend I heard from the Napoleonic Wars. A 95th Rifleman had got attached and befriended a small dog that a Portugese Cazador shot one day during the march into the Pyrenees. The 95th Rifleman of course handled this like a well adjusted adult and sold the huntsmen some cheap slices ham a few days later. The ham was actually flesh cut from the dead arse of a French soldier. They never say how recently deceased this poor bugger was. Hilariously petty and (hopefully) not true. Anyone else got these weird urban legend sort of stories they'd like to share?
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 02:57
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Italian Aircraft of World War 2 Breda While bigger than Ambrosini, Breda was a relatively unknown company when compared to Fiat, Savoia-Marchetti, or Macchi. Still, the Societa Italiana Ernesto Breda built a number of aircraft that were in use before, and during, World War 2. Breda 46  A development on an earlier plane, the Breda 32, this aircraft was designed to fill the transport and bomber roles. It could carry twelve troops and a normal bombload of 2200 pounds. Despite doubling its power output from the Breda 32 model, this was necessary to fill a military requirement at a loaded weight of 20,460 pounds. The craft had stations for 4 gunners, two in dorsal positions, and another two in ventral turrets. If no troops were carried, the bombload could be increased to 4400 pounds. Empty weight: 12,100 pounds Normal load: 12 Men and 2200 pounds of bombs or 4400 pounds of bombs Maximum weight: Not stated, but text points loaded weight to 20,460 pounds Wingspan: 98ft 5in Length: 54ft 11⅜in Wing area: 1119 sq ft. Height: 9ft 6in Cruising speed: 161mph / 260km/h Maximum speed: 196mph / 315km/h Range: 683 to 1242* miles (4400lb and 2200lb* bombloads, respectively *2200lb payload, sans troops*) Service ceiling: 25,360 feet / 7700 meters Climb to 16,400ft/5000m: 18 mins Breda 64 and 65  The Breda 64 was the predecessor of the only really well known Breda vehicle, the Ba 65. This multirole project was designed with fighter, light bomber, and reconnaissance tasks in mind. It was an all-metal low-wing monoplane with retractable landing gear, and used a 700hp Alfa Romeo Pegasus radial engine. It was armed with four 7.7mm machine guns, in its fighter configuration; as a reconnaissance aircraft it had a gun mounted in the rear cockpit; the bomber variant could carry twelve 8.8lb bombs, or up to four 220lb bombs. Empty weight: 3300 pounds Maximum weight: 5500 pounds Wingspan: 39ft 8in Length: 31ft 6in Wing area: 252.8 sq ft. Height: 10ft 11in Cruising speed: Maximum speed: 224mph / 360km/h Range: 560 to 932 miles (Depending on load) Service ceiling: 26,240 feet / 8000 meters (in the fighter configuration) Climb to 16,400ft/5000m:  Breda Ba.65s in flight While the Breda 64 was a disappointment when faced with anything remotely as modern as it, the Ba 65 attempted to rectify its shortcomings. It is safe to say the attempt failed, as seen with their dreary combat results in North Africa against a capable enemy. Although this upgraded plane had a closed cockpit, many Italian pilots kept it open anyways, preferring the old style. (Flying with the cockpit closed would not become the accepted method of flight until the later stages of the war!) Another change was the engine, going from a 1030hp Fiat A.80 R.C.41 radial engine to a 900 hp Isotta-Fraschini K.14 (A license built version of the Gnome-Rhone 14). Apart from that, the fuselage was larger and the vertical tail surfaces were modified. It carried 4 machine guns, two 7.7mm guns and two 12.7mm guns. Bombloads could range from 160 8.8lb AP bombs to one 2200lb pound. Two-seat versions of the Ba.65 had a gun in the rear cockpit, with some examples being fitted with a hydraulically-powered turret, which contained a 12.7mm MG. (Stats are for two-seater version) Empty weight: 5291 pounds Maximum weight: 6504-7716 pounds Wingspan: 39ft 8in Length: 31ft 6in Wing area: 252.9 sq ft. Height: 10ft 6in Cruising speed: 227mph / 365km/h Maximum speed: 255mph / 410km/h Range: 684 miles Service ceiling: 25,290 feet / 7700 meters Climb to 16,400ft/5000m: Breda 75  A prototype aircraft with a close resemblance to the Breda 65, the 75 was built as a two-seat ground-attack reconnaissance aircraft, having mostly the same shape as the 65 but with a different canopy, fixed landing gear, and higher-set wings. The design never progressed very far and was eventually dropped. Armament was two 12.7mm MGs. Empty weight: Maximum weight: Wingspan: 51ft 2⅛in Wing area: Length: 37ft 0¾in Height: 10ft 2in Cruising speed: 186mph / 300km/h Maximum speed: 233mph / 375km/h Range: 1056 miles (with 3968lb payload) Service ceiling: Climb to 16,400ft/5000m: Breda 82  Moving away from the single-engine fighter/bomber/reconnaissance aircraft, we have the Breda 82, a twin-engined medium bomber. Fitted with two 1000hp FIAT A.80 R.C.41 radial engines, and split-flaps in the wings. It also carried one gun in the nose, as well as one in a ventral and dorsal position. The Regia Aeronautica eventually canceled this design, citing preference on tri-engined aircraft and difficulties with the Fiat engines. Empty weight: Maximum weight: Wingspan: 68ft 11in Wing area: Length: 45ft 11in Height: 14ft 9in Cruising speed: Maximum speed: 264mph / 425km/h Range: Service ceiling: 31,160ft/9500m Climb to 16,400ft/5000m: Breda 88  Continuing a tradition in disappointment, the twin-engined attack bomber Breda 88 "Lynx/Lince" was initially designed in 1936 and demonstrated its speed to good effect by breaking F.A.I. records twice. The initial model was fitted with a single-tail unit, but a second type used a twin-fin and rudder setup. Even though it was able to break speed records, it quickly became clear that those speeds were only achievable with a stripped-down aircraft, and not one flying at the Regia Aeronautica's combat standards, even after swapping to the more powerful 1000hp Piaggio P.XI R.C.40. The maximum speed of the combat version was 305mph, while the earlier record-breaker reached 20 to 40 miles per hour more, depending on loads. It was fitted with three nose-mounted 12.7mm BREDA-SAFAT machine guns, and one 7.7mm MG in the rear cockpit. Additionally, it could carry three 100lb bombs, three 220lb bombs, or two 550lb bombs. Examples shipped to North Africa all proved disappointing, and the production run was ended after only 105 examples were made. Three aircraft were further modified into dive-bombers, with dive brakes added and a 4th 12.7mm mounted in the nose. Empty weight: Maximum weight: 14,881 pounds Wingspan: 51ft 2⅛in Wing area: 358.5 sq. ft. Length: 35ft 5in Height: 10ft 2¾in Cruising speed: 273mph/440kmh Maximum speed: Range: 1019 miles Service ceiling: 26,240ft/8000m Climb to 9,840ft/3000m: 7 min. 30 sec. Breda 201  This prototype was an attempt for the Italians to build a dive-bomber that would fill in the role of the Ju-87 that was being purchased from the Germans. It bore a slight resemblance due to its inverted gull wings and nose profile, but was otherwise different. The first example was tested in 1941, using a DB 601 engine rated at 1050hp. It carried a bomb internally, and used a swinging arm to launch the bomb outside of the propeller's arc. Two cockpit locations were tried, one near the leading edge of the wing and the other over the trailing edge of the wing. In trials, the former gave better visibility to the pilot, while the latter improved aerodynamics. Empty weight: Maximum weight: 8598 pounds Wingspan: 42ft 8in Wing area: Length: 36ft 6in Height: Cruising speed: Maximum speed: Range: Service ceiling: Climb to 9,840ft/3000m: Breda Zappata Project  One of a number of Filippo Zappata's projects was the BZ.303, a mixed construction night fighter, mounting two Piaggio P.XV R.C.60/2V radial engines rated at 1450hp. It was to have eight(!) 20mm Mauser cannons in the nose and a 12.7mm gun in the dorsal position. Despite being built and in testing, it was eventually destroyed by the Germans due to the shifting nature of the war. While Zappata had other projects in the pipeline, the BZ.303 was the only one built and tested before the end of the war. Empty weight: Maximum weight: 24,251 pounds Wingspan: 67ft 11in Wing area: Length: 55ft 8½in Height: Cruising speed: Maximum speed: Range: 962 miles (est.) Service ceiling: Climb to 9,840ft/3000m:
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 03:54
|
|
|
Someone please give me a couple book recommendations covering the history of the Islamic Caliphates.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 03:58
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:For what purpose? Dogs are also good night watches and they don't have to be big for that purpose - the Prince of Orange was saved by his dog Pompey. Breed isn't clear, but according to some versions it was a predecessor of pug. And a small dog doesn't require as much leftovers from its master.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 04:59
|
|
|
Did military camps have rat issues because of all the refuse? The right kind of small dog could help with that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 05:04
|
|
|
Night10194 posted:Were the small dogs, perhaps, vicious? Small, but vicious? I see what you did there, rat-catcher.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 06:14
|
|
|
Small dogs are also very cute and will not yell at you for not cleaning your gladius/pike/rifle. Everyone needs a mascot too.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 06:25
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Breda 46 Wait, designed to fill the bomber and transport roles at the same time? That decision seems, uh, questionable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 06:30
|
|
|
OpenlyEvilJello posted:Wait, designed to fill the bomber and transport roles at the same time? That decision seems, uh, questionable. Its simple! Bomb the airfield and then air-land troops to take it over. Italians were ahead of the game! Imagine if they had helicopters... 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 06:39
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Its simple! Bomb the airfield and then air-land troops to take it over. I'm disappointed somebody asked about it first. I was reading this: Jobbo_Fett posted:A development on an earlier plane, the Breda 32, this aircraft was designed to fill the transport and bomber roles. It could carry twelve troops and a normal bombload of 2200 pounds. quote:The craft had stations for 4 gunners, two in dorsal positions, and another two in ventral turrets. If no troops were carried, the bombload could be increased to 4400 pounds.  "Wait really? They really did stuff some people in there with the bombs? What the gently caress?!"But this: quote:Although this upgraded plane had a closed cockpit, many Italian pilots kept it open anyways, preferring the old style. (Flying with the cockpit closed would not become the accepted method of flight until the later stages of the war!)  
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 07:58
|
|
|
Rocko Bonaparte posted:Internally that went something like, "Hehehe shouldn't that be 'or?' That would be funny to stuff some people inside the plane with some bombs. It would all be like, 'Hey guys we'll drop you off but I gotta take a detour.'" That's kind of funny--
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 08:00
|
|
|
Maybe you guys should find something better to do with your time  As I learned the term, "first world" doesn't really refer to any specifical alliance or area, but means that the speaker considers their nation innately civilized and well-functioning, which is a hoot when someone acts like I was talking about America. It was colourful exaggeration and I'd apologize for making you all fly off the loving handle if it wasn't your own responsibility to begin with. FAUXTON posted:Why would they use a halon system in an armored vehicle I'm was/am on my first day of chem 101 and so not exactly sure what halon is, but here's the report FWIW( has chest radiographs, safe for work) : https://www.sto.nato.int/publicatio...faultItemOpen=1
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 08:26
|
|
|
You learned the term wrong, then. I know it's changed from the original intended definition but that is stupid Halomethane is/was used in fire extinguishing systems in AFVs because burning to death sucks, and it will put out fires at a low concentration that allows people in the fighting compartment to Not Suffocate unlike CO2 systems. KYOON GRIFFEY JR fucked around with this message at 11:28 on Jan 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 11:25
|
|
|
Could you please explain to me what it is I misunderstood instead of going on about how dumb I am? The above report explains that three dudes died because of poisoning, and I read that the fire suppression system can create HA at high temperatures. Which part is wrong, and why?
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 11:36
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:hey, i was under NO impression that the english gently caress Uhhh am I misremembering or isn't your boyfriend English? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 11:37
|
|
|
Tias posted:Could you please explain to me what it is I misunderstood instead of going on about how dumb I am? The above report explains that three dudes died because of poisoning, and I read that the fire suppression system can create HA at high temperatures. It's not wrong. But if you read the report, there was a literal direct RPG strike on a HFC-227 tank that was part of the fire suppression system in each case. In very intense heat (like way more than for a normal vehicle fire), HFC-227 will turn in to HF. It's just that the chance of a very unlucky direct explosion occuring on the HFC-227 tank does not outweigh the purpose of the fire suppression system in all other cases. It's kind of like, yes, in certain types of crashes wearing your seatbelt will kill you. But it's such a low-probability event that it makes a lot more sense to wear it for all the other cases.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 12:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 12:11 |
|
|
To up the early modernness, publish pamphlets accusing the small adorable dog of being a demon, and when it dies claim it was slain by a skilled necromancer. http://ota.ox.ac.uk/tcp/headers/A81/A81604.html
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2018 12:21
|
|
