|
Just another dude saying They Shall Not Grow Old is really good. It is not by any means an academic film but drat is seeing those guys colourized and TALKING something sobering. The "battle" segment is probably the first war movie I've seen that really makes me think "please let this loving be over," which is a success in my mind. I actually find the lipreading and dubbing over with appropriate voices more meaningful than the colour. The post-feature has Jackson talking about how much more footage of things besides "british infantry life" they have and I'd love to see it all get that treatment.
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 01:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 16:26 |
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:I feel like it's just easier to perform crazy modernization upgrades on tanks than planes because you don't have to worry about aerodynamics. I'll leave Frangible to cover the plane side of things, but modernization of tanks can often be accomplished by just bolting stuff to the outside of it. IR spotlight? Box next to the gun. Laser rangefinder? Box next to the gun. Thermal optics? Box next to the gun. Smoke launchers? Bolted to the turret. More armour? Bolted to the turret and glacis. Even more armour? Just put the modern spaced composites in a box bolted to the turret and glacis. There's a bunch of designs from the 80s and 90s that sought to enhance older tanks, and many of them (M60-2000/Super-M60, Super-M48, the prototype Panzer 68/89, Leopard C2 with MEXAS) have extensive, boxy turrets built on top of the original ones. The Olifant Mk.2 the Saffies use are a good example: a big rectangular box of extra armour around the original turret. Sometimes you want to replace the gun with something bigger, and conveniently, most tanks are designed to allow swapping the whole gun assembly out with ease, so the real limitations there are production costs, ammunition, and the size of the breech block compared to the turret ring. If the breech is too big, it won't fit inside the tank. Still, though, you can fit a Rh 120 L/44 gun to a Leopard 1 if you want. It's not as good as a new design that can integrate and streamline things, but once you have a solid design that fits the engine and breech block you want, you can just keep fitting armour boxes, sensor boxes, and electronics boxes to the thing until you're happy, and with luck you modernize the engine and fit a slightly bigger gun. (This'll often require modifications to the tank's turret drive systems. The Dutch Leopard 1s received an upgrade ca. 1984, to "Leopard 1V", with the v for "verbetret" - improved (I can't spell Dutch) It was a very fancy upgrade that fitted the old 1A1 vehicles with Blohm & Voss appliqué armour, a laser rangefinder, and the fire-control system of the Leopard 1A4, at the time one of the most modern and capable FCSes in existence before the laser rangefinder was mounted. Among Dutch tankers, it was known as Leopard 1 Verpest - ruined. The weight of all the extra equipment overtaxed the hydraulics, and hot hydraulic fluid frequently sprayed and leaked around the fighting compartment. The hydraulic fluid smelled a lot like an engine fire, and inexperienced commanders would activate the fire-retardant foam sprays, which then had to be scraped out of the engine room...)
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 03:52
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I actually find the lipreading and dubbing over with appropriate voices more meaningful than the colour. The post-feature has Jackson talking about how much more footage of things besides "british infantry life" they have and I'd love to see it all get that treatment. Gizmo! is a similar collection of old footage, except invention themed. They did the lipreading + dub on a lot of them too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONwe96StEpA&t=19s Tunicate fucked around with this message at 04:26 on Dec 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 04:24
|
|
|
https://youtu.be/QGKcvM2Hh4g 17:45 he pulls the back off and  I'm glad the cold war never went hot but good lord the poo poo they thought was feasible for infantry weaponry. FAUXTON fucked around with this message at 06:38 on Dec 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 06:32
|
|
|
That whole mechanism was sealed though so it’s not like you had overly exposed parts there, the ejection port is a tiny hole on the bottom that only cycles when the insane bolt mechanism rotates. It’s a crazy interesting gun.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 07:09
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Just another dude saying They Shall Not Grow Old is really good. It is not by any means an academic film but drat is seeing those guys colourized and TALKING something sobering. The "battle" segment is probably the first war movie I've seen that really makes me think "please let this loving be over," which is a success in my mind. 3D detracted from the experience, IMO. Men looked like video game models at times.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 07:32
|
|
|
P-Mack posted:On the other side of things, Native American immune systems had less genetic diversity at the population level than old world population groups, which helped diseases quickly turn into epidemics without the diseases themselves needing to be any more inherently virulent. I'm skeptical of this theory because as Koramei already pointed out, pandemics brought about by colonization were not restricted to the new world. While genetic diversity in North and South America would have been relatively low compared to Europeans, that's absolutely not true of native Siberians, Aboriginal Australians, and the Khoikhoi of South Africa. All peoples who were really wrecked by smallpox and other epidemics in the modern era. Cythereal posted:Another part of the flaws in Diamond's research is that he holds that transmission of knowledge, microbes, and technology between North and South America was almost nonexistent due to the extremely rugged terrain of Central America, but he overlooks the naval route of things being transmitted across the Caribbean into North America, and we do know there was some trade and exchange that way along the arc of the Antilles. A lot of the archaeological evidence of syphilis in the New World comes from Caribbean islands, so for all we know it may have been primarily a disease of the Caribbean islanders rather than something endemic to the American mainlands. I think talking about the existence vs nonexistence of connections is somewhat of a red herring. In this context, connectedness ought to be considered as a quantitative variable, measured as something like transmission risk in x time interval. Although Siberians were not completely isolated from southern populations, the connections were few and infrequent enough that transmission risk was low and epidemics rarely spread into and within the region. Pointing out that Native Americans had long distance trade networks and big states and cities with domestic animals doesn't refute the idea that these factors created environments more conducive to the appearance and persistence of epidemic diseases in the old world, because if we measured them, the average old world society would have larger values than the average new world society. We can question whether or not the big urban new world societies crossed the threshold at which epidemic diseases could become endemic, but I think its far from certain they did. Something that is often forgotten is that colonization also initiated severe epidemics even within old world societies already exposed to European diseases. By 1900 its thought severe epidemics had swept across East Africa from Tanzania and Uganda into the Belgian Congo, killing hundreds of thousands of people and leaving entire villages depopulated. The cause was not the sudden introduction of a new disease, although European ships did frequently caused outbreaks wherever they stopped. In this case the main killer was sleeping sickness, endemic to the region probably since before humans existed. Instead newly colonial authorities spread disease through lifestyle changes and population displacement. Corvee laborers forced to build railroads in plague ridden areas they would normally have avoided, while porters carried disease into formerly remote and isolated villages. Further rinderpest, a disease effecting ruminants introduced by Europeans, killed millions of livestock destroying the subsistence base of many African economies. Lifestyle changes associated with colonization also exacerbated the effects of diseases for native American populations. In the Amazon for example, malaria is known as a white man's disease among Amerindians, as it was unknown to those still living traditional lifestyles. Generally it only becomes a problem in the region when people shift to permanent villages along the mainstream Brazilian model. wdarkk posted:Afro-Eurasia just gets a lot more rolls of the disease dice I guess. I think this is a good way to conceptualize the issue. The old world had a larger human population, in close contact with more animal species, with more expansive connections, over a longer time. This creates conditions where we would expect new diseases to be more likely to originate and more likely to persist after origination. Is there conclusive proof that this is the explanation? Not really. I'm not sure there's a more parsimonious explanation however, and without the ability to rewind history any conclusions we draw from the available evidence must necessarily be weak. Tangential but still related, probably the deadliest diseases introduced during the Colombian exchange don't even effect humans. Chestnut blight, first identified in North America in 1904, had killed approximately four billion American Chestnuts by the 1950. Infected trees suffered a 100% mortality rate and only a few isolated stands survived, leaving the species functionally extinct. In the last 100 years globalization has intensified the connectedness of the world such that all species are now at risk of the same sorts of international epidemics once confined to humans.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 08:15
|
|
|
Any opinions on Mike Duncan’s Revolutions podcast? I listened to the first few episodes of the first series, on the ECW, and thought it was good up until the supplemental episode about the armies of each side where he wasted no time in talking about the push of the pike (as in literally saying ‘you’d think all these guys with spears would have stabbed each other but actually they just shoved each other, and when they weren’t feeling it they’d just pretend’). Indicative of other research problems? One-off mistake? Or is bad cav isle also clueless at spears?
HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 09:36 on Dec 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 08:49
|
|
|
On the whole aim for the weak points thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3PL2HFLRMI0 Seems like soldiers were encouraged to try and supress tanks to make it easier for the dedicated anti-tank stuff to do its job
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 10:08
|
|
|
HookedOnChthonics posted:Any opinions on Mike Duncan’s Revolutions podcast? I listened to the first few episodes of the first series, on the ECW, and thought it was good up until the supplemental episode about the armies of each side where he wasted no time in talking about the push of the pike (as in literally saying ‘you’d think all these guys with spears would have stabbed each other but actually they just shoved each other, and when they weren’t feeling it they’d just pretend’). Indicative of other research problems? One-off mistake? Or is bad cav isle also clueless at spears? This here's the new model army we're talking about. Stabbin's an old model tactic, now we just have a scrum in the middle and the musketeers shoot at us until they run out of balls.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 11:28
|
|
|
Push of pike is a myth perpetuated by a lot of otherwise credible people, so I wouldn't disregard Revolutions just because of it. Edit: See also the Ronson, cowardly Italian mercenaries, medieval forced conscription and killology for similar memes that just won't die. Siivola fucked around with this message at 12:34 on Dec 28, 2018 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 12:29
|
|
|
Siivola posted:Push of pike is a myth perpetuated by a lot of otherwise credible people, so I wouldn't disregard Revolutions just because of it. It's also a sub-sub-topic in a 13 minute supplemental episode.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 12:31
|
|
|
Siivola posted:Push of pike is a myth perpetuated by a lot of otherwise credible people, so I wouldn't disregard Revolutions just because of it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 14:12
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:everyone in the middle ages is a sadpeasant excuse me you mean the dark ages
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 14:16
|
|
|
naked dudes getting lost forever
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 14:31
|
|
|
Laos still has t-34-85's in service, wonder what besides the hull is still original. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeDySf89qBw
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 14:37
|
|
|
Tias posted:naked dudes getting lost forever
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 14:46
|
|
|
Ragtime All The Time posted:Laos still has t-34-85's in service, wonder what besides the hull is still original. Yikes... that's well... run what you brung?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 14:51
|
|
|
They're probably cheap to operate, easy to use, good for training in, and don't really need much else?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 15:18
|
|
|
What's up milhist thread, at christmas dinner, my aunt told me that my grandfather left a diary of his time in the arbeitseinsatz, during world war 2. The diary is in Dutch, but would this be the appropriate thread to maybe translate/summarize the diary? And are people interested in the first place?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 16:14
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 16:21
|
|
|
Very interested!
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 16:42
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:bumping into walls over and over like a confused roomba Is it true that self-preservation and human emotions weren’t present on the battlefield until the mid 18th century?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 16:45
|
|
|
Ragtime All The Time posted:Laos still has t-34-85's in service, wonder what besides the hull is still original. Brazil keeps the M3 Stuart in service:  (It's not really an M3 Stuart. The Brazilian M3A1 Stuarts received an extensive modernization with a new turret, gun, fire control system, engine, suspension, radios, and add-on frontal armour. This X1A was taken out of service in the late 90s. Pictured is the X1A2, which had a new hull, engine, an extra bogie, and a new gun. While obviously based on the X1A and the M3A1 Stuart, it retains no original parts. It does remain in reserve as of 2017, though.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 16:46
|
|
|
LatwPIAT posted:Brazil keeps the M3 Stuart in service: The Tank of Theseus
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 16:48
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:They're probably cheap to operate, easy to use, good for training in, and don't really need much else? True... Laos better hope they never actually need to use them to do tanky stuff though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 16:54
|
|
|
EvilMerlin posted:True... Laos better hope they never actually need to use them to do tanky stuff though. Probably good enough to shoot up some drug smugglers on toyotas?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 16:58
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Probably good enough to shoot up some drug smugglers on toyotas? Well considering today's drug smugglers have anti-tank rockets and such...
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 17:01
|
|
|
whatever happened to that canadian ww2 eyewitness thing someone was posting? it was really good.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 17:04
|
|
|
A t34 is still a lot better than no tank. Still armored against hmg fire and has a gun that pens anything that's not a tank.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 17:25
|
|
|
vuk83 posted:A t34 is still a lot better than no tank. Still armored against hmg fire and has a gun that pens anything that's not a tank. Is it really on a battlefield where RPGs etc are presumably ubiquitous? Also even the aforementioned " guys in Toyotas were able to decimate T-72s in multiple conflicts, I can't imagine a T-34 being anything more than a liability in an actual war.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 17:39
|
|
|
how did the machine guns on the PzKpfw I work? was there any traverse separate from the turret? did they fire linked? what kind of sights did the Commander have?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 17:42
|
|
|
LatwPIAT posted:I'll leave Frangible to cover the plane side of things, but modernization of tanks can often be accomplished by just bolting stuff to the outside of it. Bolting stuff to the outsides of aircraft willy-nilly is likely to cause things like adverse stability effects, speed reductions and precipitous drops in house prices around your testing airfield. It's not that it can't be done though, canards at the front to increase manoeuvrability are a good example: Belgian Mirage upgrade:  Israeli Mirage upgrade:  Swiss Mirage upgrade:  South African Mirage upgrade:  French Mirage upgrade:  Pakistani Mirage upg... dammit Pakistan  You can do other stuff like refueling probes, bulges for avionics or fuel, leading edge extensions etc. but all of that is really relatively unimportant for modern aircraft compared to avionics changes. The Kfir C.10 pictured above as the Israeli upgrade started out life as a Mirage IIICJ in the 1960s but now has a modern radar, modern multi-function displays for the pilot and the capability to carry modern air to air and air to ground munitions that allow it to punch far above its theoretical weight as a "second generation" fighter. Even within aircraft types, the difference between an F-16A Block 1 (Can dogfight with Sidewinders or drop bombs on people in good weather) and an F-16C Block 52 (Can do pretty much anything it's possible to ask of a combat aircraft to some degree) is night and day, but it's mostly internal. Unlike tanks in bewbie's tier system it's perfectly possible for older aircraft to equal or even surpass their brethren in "higher" generations. I'd rather a Kfir C.10 than a MiG-23ML and I'd rather an F-4E Peace Icarus 2000 than a Mirage 2000EG.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 17:42
|
|
|
Mazz posted:That whole mechanism was sealed though so it’s not like you had overly exposed parts there, the ejection port is a tiny hole on the bottom that only cycles when the insane bolt mechanism rotates. It’s a crazy interesting gun. It would probably pass the InRange mud test with flying colors.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 17:47
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Is it really on a battlefield where RPGs etc are presumably ubiquitous? Also even the aforementioned " guys in Toyotas were able to decimate T-72s in multiple conflicts, I can't imagine a T-34 being anything more than a liability in an actual war. RPGs aren't that ubiquitous. They are among ground forces prepared and equipped for tanks, but they're not everywhere.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 17:57
|
|
|
EvilMerlin posted:Yikes... that's well... run what you brung? According to the always-reliable Wikipedia they've also got T-54/55s and have recently taken delivery of T-72B1s.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:how did the machine guns on the PzKpfw I work? was there any traverse separate from the turret? did they fire linked? what kind of sights did the Commander have? Assuming you mean the Panzer I Ausf. A or early B's. They were in a rotatable turret and could be elevated or declined a bit. Since they were MG13's you couldn't do much with them against any tank. Sights were a few slits in an armored panel.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 18:41
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Is it really on a battlefield where RPGs etc are presumably ubiquitous? Also even the aforementioned " guys in Toyotas were able to decimate T-72s in multiple conflicts, I can't imagine a T-34 being anything more than a liability in an actual war. It isn't always a battlefield. More often than not it's "keep the locals in line," and under those circumstances a tank is useful.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 18:43
|
|
|
GotLag posted:According to the always-reliable Wikipedia they've also got T-54/55s and have recently taken delivery of T-72B1s. Yeah, a whole ten T-72B1MSs. Here they are arriving nine days ago:  Apparently this is only the first delivery and apparently they've run out of funding to buy any more, so I don't know what's happening there. Major differences between that thing and a 1980s era T-72B are the lack of a gun launched missile, the Sosna-U thermal sight system from a modern T-72B3, an Eagle Eye thermal panoramic sight (the dustbin thing) and the 12.7mm MG on the top is now in a remote weapons station rather than a pintle. It's... okay. Against a modern tank like the Vietnamese T-90s or the Thai Oplots and VT-4s it's going to struggle a bit but it's fine against anything Cambodia has.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 18:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 16:26 |
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Is it really on a battlefield where RPGs etc are presumably ubiquitous? Also even the aforementioned " guys in Toyotas were able to decimate T-72s in multiple conflicts, I can't imagine a T-34 being anything more than a liability in an actual war. Most of the weapons on even a ww2 tank can outrange effective RPG fire. Yes, tanks can be destroyed. A T-34/85 is also more resistant to fire from things like AA guns than an IFV.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 18:48
|
|
