Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Rutibex
Sep 9, 2001

by Fluffdaddy
if they don't like it they can simply vote for a different navy

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

crepeface
Nov 5, 2004

r*p*f*c*

lol we're going to find out the storage tanks were using the same steel supplier that faked the strength tests for submarines

KomradeX
Oct 29, 2011


Big 1910- June 1914 vibes off that

Cerebral Bore
Apr 21, 2010


Fun Shoe
back in the day i was a dipshit conscript in our local army, and even during that short stint i quickly realized that the main innovative force in any military is in the field of incompetence

Frosted Flake
Sep 13, 2011

Semper Shitpost Ubique

crepeface posted:

lol we're going to find out the storage tanks were using the same steel supplier that faked the strength tests for submarines

The linked article says the Navy was told the pipes were steel instead of PVC, which breaks down from contact with jet fuel, and the contractor apparently substituted it to cut costs.

crepeface
Nov 5, 2004

r*p*f*c*
lmao gently caress yeah

CODChimera
Jan 29, 2009

crepeface posted:

steel supplier that faked the strength tests for submarines

there was a time when something like that would've shocked me but now its just like yeah of course they did that

Palladium
May 8, 2012

Very Good
✔️✔️✔️✔️

CODChimera posted:

there was a time when something like that would've shocked me but now its just like yeah of course they did that

this is why america makes jokes about russian weapons designed to malfunction

yellowcar
Feb 14, 2010

Frosted Flake posted:

The linked article says the Navy was told the pipes were steel instead of PVC, which breaks down from contact with jet fuel, and the contractor apparently substituted it to cut costs.



holy lol

Palladium
May 8, 2012

Very Good
✔️✔️✔️✔️
thats look like a million dollar valve change job to me

Goast
Jul 23, 2011

by VideoGames
so did no one in the navy ever look at the pipes lol

yellowcar
Feb 14, 2010

Goast posted:

so did no one in the navy ever look at the pipes lol

the saw it but decided it was too expensive to replace them all lol

Mirthless
Mar 27, 2011

by the sex ghost

Goast posted:

so did no one in the navy ever look at the pipes lol

the navy knew they were PVC after they were installed but didn't want to pay to fix it. The implication in the article is that they were just doing extra maintenance on the gaskets

this accident happened because somebody ran a golf cart into the pipe, it probably would not have done this on it's own just from being the wrong material

Palladium
May 8, 2012

Very Good
✔️✔️✔️✔️

yellowcar posted:

the saw it but decided it was too expensive to replace them all lol

im sorry we got no money for domestic maintenance after $1 trillion per year went to rust-in-rain wunderwaffes and de facto overseas country clubs

The Oldest Man
Jul 28, 2003

Frosted Flake posted:

The linked article says the Navy was told the pipes were steel instead of PVC, which breaks down from contact with jet fuel, and the contractor apparently substituted it to cut costs.

wait i was told jet fuel cant melt steel beams

yellowcar
Feb 14, 2010

The Oldest Man posted:

wait i was told jet fuel cant melt steel beams

the contractor lied to the navy and said they used steel but actually used pvc without telling anyone

Ardennes
May 12, 2002

Mirthless posted:

the navy knew they were PVC after they were installed but didn't want to pay to fix it. The implication in the article is that they were just doing extra maintenance on the gaskets

this accident happened because somebody ran a golf cart into the pipe, it probably would not have done this on it's own just from being the wrong material

I mean if it is going to take a golf cart for things to go bad…

Cao Ni Ma
May 25, 2010



I was in the DoD up until recently (promoted into another agency) and when I came in as a civilian we were working off a trailer because they were renovating the building we were supposed to work out of. The turn over was delayed for like 2-3 years, and the contractor kept cutting corners that did not pass muster. Eventually they fixed it up as much as they could and the corp of engineers relented (with the contractor being blacklisted). I spent little over a year in building before I left and it suffered from tons of HVAC issues with our server room sometimes suffering from tons of humidity (at best) to potentially catastrophic heat sometimes.

Now when I was still in the military they renovated the USARC I was in too, but that time it was mostly done in time. Well the HVAC also crapped out with one entire wing of the building not having AC most of the time, and the offices not having any windows you could open up. Then Maria hit and for some god forsaken reason they had the top floors with some weird transparent plastic light catchers in the ceiling that got blown off and flooded the top floors of the building.

DoD infrastructure is probably the biggest scam after weapons procurement.

Palladium
May 8, 2012

Very Good
✔️✔️✔️✔️

Cao Ni Ma posted:

DoD infrastructure is probably the biggest scam after weapons procurement.

same for anything that is a "HQ unit" overseas

Frosted Flake
Sep 13, 2011

Semper Shitpost Ubique

yellowcar posted:

the contractor lied to the navy and said they used steel but actually used pvc without telling anyone

It’s loving incredible

MLSM
Apr 3, 2021

by Azathoth
https://twitter.com/ChrisLynnHedges/status/1546239068757016578?s=20&t=ZXLPw2MSpvp6jPM2E2Hx9Q

Frosted Flake
Sep 13, 2011

Semper Shitpost Ubique

Flying Camelot: The F-15, the F-16, and the Weaponization of Fighter Pilot Nostalgia

Flying Camelot brings us back to the post-Vietnam era, when the US Air Force launched two new, state-of-the art fighter aircraft: the F-15 Eagle and the F-16 Fighting Falcon. It was an era when debates about aircraft superiority went public—and these were not uncontested discussions. Michael W. Hankins delves deep into the fighter pilot culture that gave rise to both designs, showing how a small but vocal group of pilots, engineers, and analysts in the Department of Defense weaponized their own culture to affect technological development and larger political change.

The design and advancement of the F-15 and F-16 reflected this group's nostalgic desire to recapture the best of World War I air combat. Known as the "Fighter Mafia," and later growing into the media savvy political powerhouse "Reform Movement," it believed that American weapons systems were too complicated and expensive, and thus vulnerable. The group's leader was Colonel John Boyd, a contentious former fighter pilot heralded as a messianic figure by many in its ranks. He and his group advocated for a shift in focus from the multi-role interceptors the Air Force had designed in the early Cold War towards specialized air-to-air combat dogfighters. Their influence stretched beyond design and into larger politicized debates about US national security, debates that still resonate today.

A biography of fighter pilot culture and the nostalgia that drove decision-making, Flying Camelot deftly engages both popular culture and archives to animate the movement that shook the foundations of the Pentagon and Congress.

lmao

Palladium
May 8, 2012

Very Good
✔️✔️✔️✔️

Frosted Flake posted:

It’s loving incredible

you are vastly overestimating the admin's intellectual curiosity over PVC versus steel

Aglet56
Sep 1, 2011

KomradeX posted:

Big 1910- June 1914 vibes off that

so China will lose in a catastrophic war against nato, then become fascist and then lose an even bigger war?

gradenko_2000
Oct 5, 2010

HELL SERPENT
Lipstick Apathy

Where the hell is my F-15 Strike Eagle and Falcon 3.0 HD sequels, gaming industry?

gently caress, it's like flight sim development slowed and got as bad as the actual procurement process

We didn't even get F-35 sims like we did with the F-22

Danann
Aug 4, 2013

it's basically a coin toss between whether it'll be war thunder or DCS for the first f-35 sim isn't it

Real hurthling!
Sep 11, 2001




f-14 tomcat had da fat rear end and we lost our way when we abandoned that motif

Wheeee
Mar 11, 2001

When a tree grows, it is soft and pliable. But when it's dry and hard, it dies.

Hardness and strength are death's companions. Flexibility and softness are the embodiment of life.

That which has become hard shall not triumph.

the f-14 may not be the best plane, it may not even be a very good plane, but it is the coolest plane

The Oldest Man
Jul 28, 2003

Wheeee posted:

the f-14 may not be the best plane, it may not even be a very good plane, but it is the coolest plane

The Iranians got some pretty serious bang out of theirs

gradenko_2000 posted:

We didn't even get F-35 sims like we did with the F-22

Nobody wants to fly the F-35

The Oldest Man
Jul 28, 2003

Actually where the gently caress is my Top Gun: Islamic Republic of Iran sequel, we trained a bunch of their guys and then some of those guys fought Iraq in the 80s

This is the top F14 pilot in history by air to air kills, where's his movie

The Oldest Man has issued a correction as of 05:31 on Jul 11, 2022

Lord of Pie
Mar 2, 2007


gradenko_2000 posted:

Where the hell is my F-15 Strike Eagle and Falcon 3.0 HD sequels, gaming industry?

gently caress, it's like flight sim development slowed and got as bad as the actual procurement process

We didn't even get F-35 sims like we did with the F-22

gotta be able to fly before you can simulate it

Danann
Aug 4, 2013

iirc it was gradenko who read up on the sino-vietnamese border conflict? how different is this thread from your conclusions?

https://twitter.com/snekotron/status/1546737008256684032

quote:

Reading about the Sino-Vietnamese border conflicts of 1979 through the 1980s, one can’t help but get a sense of déjà vu. In fact the prelude with the buildup in 1979 eerily echoes the current special military operation. /1


And once the fighting was underway, talk of the war was subdued, without even public displays in the PRC for supporting the troops. The operation had to be limited in scale and time so as to not attract outside attention, especially from Vietnam’s ally, the USSR. /2


Ostensibly, the reason for the intervention was to halt Vietnam’s intervention in Cambodia, but there were deeper motivations, such as the Sino-Soviet tensions (Mao split over destalinization), the historical problems with Vietnam’s relationship with its larger neighbor, and /3


The repression and expulsion of the Hoa (Chinese ancestry) minority in Vietnam. Because the Hoa were overwhelmingly represented in South Vietnamese small business (petit bourgeoisie), “de-kulakization” in Vietnam had a nasty ethnic component. /4


You can already see where the parallels are, but it gets better. Prior to the invasion, Vietnamese intelligence consistently downplayed the Chinese threat and were convinced that there would be no attack. The attack was launched on Feb. 17, 1979. /5


One of the key differences between this “Special Military Operation” and the current SMO was the time constraint. It was only slated to last one month, because Vietnam was a formal ally of the USSR and threatened to get the USSR involved. /6

Retrospective analyses generally play up the experience and grit of the Vietnamese defenders, but his where another odd parallel surfaces. Where have we heard this before? Brave guerrilla fighters holding out against impossible odds. /7

In the war with the Americans, guerrilla tactics were a means of keeping forces in the field. In general, they didn’t have much staying power due to their lack of heavy weapons and could not really dictate results on the battlefield. /8

The results of less than 3 weeks of fighting bore that out. Basically every single city that the PLA attacked was taken, including 3 provincial capitals, in just days of fighting, with defenders suffering proportionately greater casualties together with unfortunate civilians. /9


But Vietnam was perfectly aware of what these tactics could and couldn’t do. This is why the best forces (including air force) were consciously kept in operational reserve around Hanoi and only local units were thrown in platoon and co. sized elements into the path of the PLA./10

Ultimately it was the combination of the PLA’s own time constraints, the threat of Soviet response, and Vietnam’s own intact reserves capable of counterattacking that brought this SMO to an end. On March 5th, Beijing announced the end of combat operations and withdrew. /11

Out of a force of 320k deployed by the PLA, some 22k were casualties, ~7k KIA. Which for 3 weeks of combat was a very high number. There are no accurate figures for the Vietnamese side, but 3 entire provinces had been subject to “scorched earth tactics.” /12

Hastily organized militia and armed civilians, fighting largely without the support of regular forces, would have suffered tremendously. POW totals hint at the direction of the results: 1636 POWs held by China vs. only 238 held by Vietnam. All were exchanged together in June. /13

It was a victory for Vietnam, but it was a costly one. Vietnam was forced to maintain a mobilization posture at a time when the economy was just recovering from the war against the US. Not only was it deployed in Cambodia but had to deal with China and destroyed provinces. /14

For China, the war exposed many of the shortcomings of the PLA which basically received no upgrades since the late-50s. In a way that might be familiar to followers of the current SMO. Debate inside the PLA highlighted a laundry list of inadequacies… /15

The difficulty of coordinating maneuver over difficult terrain, the lack of airpower, outdated maps, and the inadequacy and vulnerability of logistics convoys. All this was brought up then. After this, there was an increasing technology focus in the PLA. /16


The shortcomings of the PLA’s equipment spurred R&D in the nascent Chinese defense industrial complex, growing in size and capability with the economic reforms. Vietnam and China fought again a number of times in the 1980s, and the pattern is again a familiar one. /17

After the operation of 1979, China just leveraged its artillery advantage to control the border by pounding any would-be incursion with massed fire. In one 20 km2 patch of Hà Giang Province, some 2 million artillery rounds landed between 1984 and 1989. /18

One study of the early 1990s concludes: “The war was most successful when seen as a tactic in China’s strategy of a protracted war of attrition.” And here we are 30 years later talking about the attrition of an artillery war. /19

Ultimately, Vietnam and China normalized relations. Vietnam pulled out of Cambodia, and China pulled its forces back from the border, and despite occasional issues both countries seem to be down with the business of doing business. /20


Sadly, I don’t think this kind of relatively amicable result can happen from the current SMO between Russia and Ukraine. Active hostilities between China and Vietnam was short and limited consciously by both sides. /21

Ukraine, however, is heading up the escalation ladder on a path that will ensure demographic catastrophe, where it’s likely a significant portion of families in what’s left of Ukraine will be “baptized by blood,” ensuring that there will be no reconciliation. /22 END

Addendum: Soviet advisors actually told the Vietnamese that light infantry was incapable of holding back the PLA's advance and that they needed to maintain a reserve force around Hanoi, which they did with emergency reinforcements sent back from Cambodia.

Frosted Flake
Sep 13, 2011

Semper Shitpost Ubique

If you haven’t read it, Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat is great. Someone scanned it and put it online too.

I was reading that the Iranians have more Tomcats in service now. Seems as they’ve got the expertise to make their own parts, they’re taking mothballed ones out and fixing them up. Some aircraft have practically no hours on them as they were left in storage after the Revolution, those are practically brand new. They also worked with Russia and maybe China to get the Phoenixes working again, and similarly I believe they’re either making more or have more available as they come out of storage.

It rules.

Wheeee
Mar 11, 2001

When a tree grows, it is soft and pliable. But when it's dry and hard, it dies.

Hardness and strength are death's companions. Flexibility and softness are the embodiment of life.

That which has become hard shall not triumph.

looking forward to the Ahmadinejad tweet following the first time an Iranian top gun f-14 pilot shoots down a trespassing American f-18

Weka
May 5, 2019

That child totally had it coming. Nobody should be able to be out at dusk except cars.

Frosted Flake posted:

the best of World War I air combat.

Sweet mustaches? IE

The Oldest Man posted:

Actually where the gently caress is my Top Gun: Islamic Republic of Iran sequel, we trained a bunch of their guys and then some of those guys fought Iraq in the 80s

This is the top F14 pilot in history by air to air kills, where's his movie



Aglet56 posted:

so China will lose in a catastrophic war against nato, then become fascist and then lose an even bigger war?

In this comparison America is Germany, who looked at Russian industrialization prior to WWI and thought 'it's now or never' about winning a war vs them. And who looks to be about to spiral into fascism.

Frosted Flake
Sep 13, 2011

Semper Shitpost Ubique

Report’s out more Canadian paras were severely injured during peacetime training. 1 fatality, it was that accident in 2019.

Southpaugh
May 26, 2007

Smokey Bacon


I'm just not convinced that the arsenal of democracy is really up for it tbh. How about the MIC but wait for it... Software as a Service.

indigi
Jul 20, 2004

how can we not talk about family
when family's all that we got?

KomradeX posted:

Big 1910- June 1914 vibes off that

the good news is that everyone in the us military and congress is too loving stupid to actually believe that, which is why the guy resigned, and thus won’t feel the same pressure of becoming lost to history

strange feelings re Daisy
Aug 2, 2000

New York City released a PSA about what to do if the city is nuked lmao. My favorite part is "you've got this". My friends, if you are in NYC when a nuke lands, you absolutely do not "got this".
https://twitter.com/CarlZha/status/1547067687171661824?s=20&t=kkJinJqKedZBoz6p7_tE0w

As an alternative to watching the PSA, I recommend citizens just watch the movie "Threads" instead. Much more instructive.

strange feelings re Daisy has issued a correction as of 07:50 on Jul 13, 2022

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

gradenko_2000
Oct 5, 2010

HELL SERPENT
Lipstick Apathy

Danann posted:

iirc it was gradenko who read up on the sino-vietnamese border conflict? how different is this thread from your conclusions?

I stringently disagree with the characterization that the conflict with Vietnam was downplayed within China. Deng wanted/needed the conflict to shore up domestic support for his reform policies, and the way the Chinese logistics system worked at the time, it would have been absolutely necessary to mobilize civilians along the border region to provide supplies and support to the troops going in.

The specific phrasing of "the Chinese did not exploit the war's existence to mobilize national unity for domestic programmes" is complete bunk, as far as I have read.

_

With respect to the United States, there's also a level of murkiness there: the Americans insist that Deng was not sufficiently explicit with Carter that the PRC was planning to invade Vietnam when they met in-person right before the Chinese invasion, but the Chinese account claims that there was enough of an understanding that the Chinese felt like they had America's blessing or permission.

This is similar to the US saying that April Glaspie's conversation with Saddam Hussein did NOT constitute giving him free-rein to invade Kuwait as something that the US was not interested in intervening in, while Iraq claims it was, and that America's subsequent reaction constituted them going back on their word.

That said, in any case the US didn't intervene either way.

_

The second tweet and the third tweet are also somewhat in conflict: it is true that China's official position, that the invasion was solely about halting the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia, was not the entire story. Rather, within the context of the Sino-Soviet split, and Mao's belief that the post-Stalinist USSR had become revisionist, the PRC was worried about Vietnam becoming a Soviet-controlled proxy state right on their border, the same way Cuba is/was to the US. Accordingly, the invasion was [also] about punishing Vietnam and prevent/discourage them from becoming too closely tied to the Soviet state.

In this sense, it doesn't follow from the second tweet that China's position in the war was "subdued" relative to the USSR - they absolutely wanted to send a message to the USSR, and indeed posted additional troops on their border with the Soviet Union, in the event that Moscow reacted and decided to broaden the conflict.

_

I don't recall too much about the ethnic tensions revolving around the conflict without digging back into my sources, but I do recall that there were some problematic elements because of the intermixing of Vietnamese and Chinese peoples along the border area, combined with the general feeling that these two nations were brothers in the broad Asian sense, along with their shared struggle against Western imperialism.

_

I agree that the Chinese invasion caught the Vietnamese military/intelligence somewhat off-guard.

_

Tweets 7 to 9 are largely correct: the Chinese did accomplish the broad objectives they had laid out for themselves. There is some disagreement as to whether they had taken excessive casualties in trying to do so, or whether the Vietnamese defense was stiff enough to frustrate the Chinese battle plan, but this does sound a lot like the media coverage of the Ukraine conflict where the Baddies are assigned an arbitrary standard of "are they winning fast enough?", and then are judged to have "lost" because they didn't meet such a goal.

Taken a little further, people then like to claim that the Sino-Vietnamese War was a defeat for China because they never took Hanoi and didn't get to annex any territory, but that was never Beijing's goal anyway.

_

One thing I want to point out is that the end of the war wasn't really the end of the war. Even though the Chinese forces pulled out of Vietnamese territory after a month, and launched no further major combat operations afterwards, there was still active fighting and skirmishing along the border region well into the late 1980s. Indeed, fighting didn't completely end until after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

[fake edit: I see that the thread does address this in tweets 18 and 19]

It's in this context that I'm of the opinion that China did win - it managed to extract concessions from Vietnam when it came to determining the future of Cambodia, it prevented the USSR from gaining a strong foothold in Vietnam (whether or not that was ever really going to happen), and they "out-waited" the Vietnamese until their "sponsor" in Moscow eventually collapsed and the perceived threat was removed. It was Hanoi that had to send a delegation with hats in their hands to negotiate a peace and a normalization of relations.

_

The thread also makes a correct point in that the conflict revealed some weaknesses in the PLA that Beijing themselves acknowledged - that they were lagging behind in air-power and organization, and that their war planning was still based around WW2 principles. To be clear, it did work, but they saw what warfare was like during the Gulf War, right after they'd wrapped-up this affair with Vietnam, and realized that they were well behind the West, and this was a driver of some reforms within the military.

_

Finally, I agree that there is no comparable parallel to the end of this conflict, to that of Ukraine today. The West is not (at least as far as we can see right now) on the path to collapsing as the USSR did, and will likely continue to feed the conflict well into the short- and medium-term.

And even in a scenario where somehow there is a large pull-back of support from Ukraine and Kiev is left to fend for itself, the political sphere in Kiev has been molded to a point where there will likely be enmity against Russia for a long time. Most of the civilian population will likely go along with their occupation by Russian forces, but terrorism and guerrilla warfare and harassment fire? That's going to be in the cards for years.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply