|
arma3 really kind of nailed everything that's a fuckin prowler
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 06:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:23 |
|
|
Danann posted:https://twitter.com/ronkainen7k15/status/1630901981954064384 the M2 was introduced into service 90 years ago
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 06:44
|
|
|
Nothing wrong with the m2 What's idiotic is making what amounts to an armoured car with no armour or even doors I mean look it isn't that hard, orcs can do it:  Literally just more money for less vehicle, the perfect grift
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 06:54
|
|
|
they made the warthog from halo
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 06:57
|
|
|
Centrist Committee posted:they made the warthog from halo the US will get teabagged in WW3
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 07:19
|
|
|
Danann posted:https://twitter.com/ronkainen7k15/status/1630901981954064384 C&C rear end vehicle
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 08:00
|
|
|
don't they pull a similar PR campaign every decade or so, where they do a bait 'n switch where they hype ultralightweight assault vehicles that can be airdropped with special forces commandos and show off vids of the things pulling some sick air off dirt ramps in some proving ground and then congress approves the usual purchases of elephantine APCs and life moves on
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 08:04
|
|
|
Filthy Hans posted:don't they pull a similar PR campaign every decade or so, where they do a bait 'n switch where they hype ultralightweight assault vehicles that can be airdropped with special forces commandos and show off vids of the things pulling some sick air off dirt ramps in some proving ground and then congress approves the usual purchases of elephantine APCs and life moves on Everyone knows it is scientifically impossible to hit a ground vehicle doing more than 100kph.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 08:27
|
|
|
If you need an armoured 4wd, just buy a panthera, which is an armoured 79 series landcruiser. Thoguh posted:Why does New Zealand have a space chief. Our space agency is new and primarily does industry promotion and regulation, mostly in response to rocket labs, a private firm doing a handful of launches a year. They started to get USA government contracts so they moved headquarters to the states and the NZ operation is now a subsidiary of the American one, but most of it's staff are still in NZ. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket_Lab There's other stuff though, we're partnering with the dingo dickers to develop some better GPS satellites for instance. https://www.gpsworld.com/australia-new-zealand-commit-to-develop-sbas-by-2023/
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 08:57
|
|
|
You can do it New Zealand, we believe in you. Hopefully you can keep your staff native and continue doing great work. The world appreciates and needs your space innovation. Go RocketLab (or whichever venture is doing the best work)! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 09:57
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 12:51
|
|
|
Here are some terrible photos of them trying to sell us that  This is the Canadian configuration, which idk has metric parts or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 13:04
|
|
|
It looks like the car from Halo
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 13:54
|
|
|
palindrome posted:You can do it New Zealand, we believe in you. Hopefully you can keep your staff native and continue doing great work. The world appreciates and needs your space innovation. Go RocketLab (or whichever venture is doing the best work)! No, gently caress Rocket Labs and their MIC bullshit imo. gently caress their staff too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 14:08
|
|
|
Trimson Grondag 3 posted:Everyone knows it is scientifically impossible to hit a ground vehicle doing more than 100kph. Just hoping the Chinese forgot to research Ballistics
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 15:17
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:It looks like the car from Halo There's this thing in defence, I'll take photos at the conference this year too, whenever they try to sell "the weapon of the future" they deliberately make it more angular, including panels that do nothing, and I don't mean angular for armour value either, pretty much to have that effect. You always see it in the concept stages and prototypes of things they are trying to sell. It's really interesting because it has no practical benefit, is nearly always done away with when serial production starts, but part of the MIC now is playing off gullible politicians, and so when politicians are thinking about future (as in temporal) procurement, they are looking for future (as in aesthetic) equipment to buy. The most efficient allocation of resources etc. etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 15:24
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:Nothing wrong with the m2 These two vehicles do different things though. And this doesn't fit 9 dudes, either. The GWOT-poisoned brain thinks that every military vehicle has to be armored to the gills, when in reality a large number of conventional vehicles are meant to be unarmored.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 15:29
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:There's this thing in defence, I'll take photos at the conference this year too, whenever they try to sell "the weapon of the future" they deliberately make it more angular, including panels that do nothing, and I don't mean angular for armour value either, pretty much to have that effect. You always see it in the concept stages and prototypes of things they are trying to sell. It's really interesting because it has no practical benefit, is nearly always done away with when serial production starts, but part of the MIC now is playing off gullible politicians, and so when politicians are thinking about future (as in temporal) procurement, they are looking for future (as in aesthetic) equipment to buy. The ISV-9 might suck or not, I dunno, but it’s literally a Chevy Colorado ZR2 chassis. The only thing approaching any weird lines are the hood and fenders. The rest of it is just a basic roll cage on a banal commercial truck chassis. It’s surprisingly boring and normal looking, like a budget offroad truck. For weird lines, the new Panther, Armata, or pre-design renders of the US next gen combat vehicles. The renders of NGCV will almost certainly not look like what actually gets bought. It’s rather plain compared to more expensive and hyped things like MATVs or JLTVs. https://www.army.mil/article-amp/259571/production_model_infantry_squad_vehicles_airdrop_tested_for_long_term_ruggedization mlmp08 has issued a correction as of 15:34 on Mar 16, 2023 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 15:32
|
|
|
Trimson Grondag 3 posted:Everyone knows it is scientifically impossible to hit a ground vehicle doing more than 100kph. i loving wish i can't remember the last time someone actually missed their first shot at me in war thunder
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 15:40
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:These two vehicles do different things though. And this doesn't fit 9 dudes, either. The GWOT-poisoned brain thinks that every military vehicle has to be armored to the gills, when in reality a large number of conventional vehicles are meant to be unarmored. Think about it, those nine dudes are meant to shoot at people. The vehicle has to get them close enough to do that. Unless they're planning on walking several kilometers after being dropped off I think having doors and some kind of shrapnel protection night be a good idea, otherwise you could just use a normal truck.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 17:29
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:Unless they're planning on walking several kilometers after being dropped off Believe it or not, armies used to do this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 17:39
|
|
|
I’m no war expert so Frosted Flake feel free to dunk on me, but I believe the idea behind vehicles like the Chevy Warthog is that realistically it’s not worth trying to up-armour light vehicles since a useful amount of armour means you get one of those ridiculous 20-ton GWOT wheeled tanks. Better to go light and easy to rapidly embark/disembark
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 17:43
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:Believe it or not, armies used to do this. Ukraine still does this, works real good But again, if you're going to do it that way, trucks already exist
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 17:43
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:I’m no war expert so Frosted Flake feel free to dunk on me, but I believe the idea behind vehicles like the Chevy Warthog is that realistically it’s not worth trying to up-armour light vehicles since a useful amount of armour means you get one of those ridiculous 20-ton GWOT wheeled tanks. Well, this category of vehicle has had a bit of an identity crisis since the GWOT. If you look at its predecessors, Humvees before the M1114, even the M1114 compared to what came after, G-Wagon Wolf, Volkswagen Iltis, Land Rovers, 3⁄4-ton Weapons Carriers etc. etc. they were unarmored, all the way through the Cold War except where they were deployed in counterinsurgencies. So Land Rovers had armour kits in Ireland, the French put armour on about everything in Indochina, the US up armoured light trucks in Vietnam etc. The real masters of this were the South Africans, fighting bushfire wars and imposing apartheid in the townships, who developed the first MRAPs, and the RG-31s everyone would purchase in the mid-late 2000's. On NATO's central front, where conventional war was expected, this was done without. In Iraq and Afghanistan casualty minimization was even more important than it had been in those conflicts, as hard as it is to believe, so no expense (or weight, or mobility) was spared in up armouring vehicles. This is where all of those MRAPs that are now useless to us and have been shipped to Ukraine came from. Well, nobody really knows which way things are going to go, at least from what I've seen. People talk about China, but land force procurement is still in counterinsurgency / MIC profit maximization mode. There's no M113 replacement, MBTs aren't in serial production, self-propelled guns ditto etc. That crisis extends to doctrine, where military doctrine is still either the "light, lean, mobile, digital" etc. expeditionary force of the 1990's or the dispersed and spoiled counterinsurgency force of the 2010s. It would make sense to procure a uniform fleet of LAVs or equivalent as infantry section carriers, but while all of these changes to equipment, force structure and doctrine were happening from the 90's on, the MIC totally captured state procurement and so 6x6 MOWAG Piranha derivatives went from simple and cheap, to €2.74m for the French VCBI, to reportedly up to €5m for the German Boxer. Most of them have a variety of problems, cost overruns, they're incredibly bloated in terms of what's been shoved into each vehicle. So, deindustrialized, neoliberal states are in a pickle, particularly as they can't raise taxes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 18:04
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:Well, this category of vehicle has had a bit of an identity crisis since the GWOT. If you look at its predecessors, Humvees before the M1114, even the M1114 compared to what came after, G-Wagon Wolf, Volkswagen Iltis, Land Rovers, 3⁄4-ton Weapons Carriers etc. etc. they were unarmored, all the way through the Cold War except where they were deployed in counterinsurgencies. So Land Rovers had armour kits in Ireland, the French put armour on about everything in Indochina, the US up armoured light trucks in Vietnam etc. The real masters of this were the South Africans, fighting bushfire wars and imposing apartheid in the townships, who developed the first MRAPs, and the RG-31s everyone would purchase in the mid-late 2000's. On NATO's central front, where conventional war was expected, this was done without. Thats genuinely hilarious
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 18:07
|
|
|
Adding any armor or weapons to a vehicle means it is now a tank. It must have everything a tank should have because that is the standard by which it is judged. The vehicle’s original purpose is secondary.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 18:15
|
|
|
they could raise taxes. that’s an answer to a large number of current problems. I think we all think that’s not going to happen. but it’s an error conflate what one thinks probable with what is actual possible
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 18:17
|
|
|
They can raise taxes the way Russia can invade Ukraine. The consequences will be interesting to say the least.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 18:22
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:they could raise taxes. Christ in heaven read some goddamn theory, gently caress
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 18:27
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:Christ in heaven read some goddamn theory, gently caress
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 19:21
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:Believe it or not, armies used to do this. nobody wants to fight anymore
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 20:07
|
|
|
The ISIS used a Toyota.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 21:14
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:Christ in heaven read some goddamn theory, gently caress re-read the post: “I think we all think that’s not going to happen.” my point is that it’s bad analysis to disregard the unlikely but still technically possible. if the poo poo actually does hit the fan in the US in the summersaults of events things that are improbable now might become suddenly more probably. look at it this way. before the revolution in France how probable would it be that church lands would get nationalized? it went from improbable to done rather overnight. The things the ruling class won’t do right now because of neoliberalism, that can change in a blink. frankly it’s a bit weird to assume it can’t. the longer it goes on without changing the more likely it is to suddenly change.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 21:20
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 21:31
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:re-read the post: “I think we all think that’s not going to happen.” For that to happen you would need capitalism to collapse totally and be replaced by a socialist regime that by definition won't want to prosecute a war against china. It quite literally cannot happen under neoliberalism, ever. It just can't. Literally impossible. It is not technically possible. The ruling class have to stop ruling for anything like that to happen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 21:43
|
|
|
Which really encapsulates the thread. War created the state. War has always strengthened and expanded it. Neoliberalism cannot really get on a war footing, fight a war, win a war, because of all of the ideological obstacles to the state built into it. It exists to extract rent. If they've deluded themselves into thinking they can go to war without any of the state things the abhor, or as we mentioned basic social contracts, popular participation in politics, they don't really understand that they're beyond their depth here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 21:57
|
|
|
Slavvy posted:For that to happen you would need capitalism to collapse totally and be replaced by a socialist regime that by definition won't want to prosecute a war against china. It quite literally cannot happen under neoliberalism, ever. It just can't. Literally impossible. It is not technically possible. The ruling class have to stop ruling for anything like that to happen. except the US has rather done parts of this before. we’ve rather suddenly transitioned to a command economy in the past for war. the thing is I think it only happens if the war is actually existential. imperial wars I think the neoliberal never quite getting on a war footing FF points out will continue. existential war, and I think a war with China would be that, that’s a very different thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 22:07
|
|
|
covid demonstrated america will never get its poo poo together
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 22:11
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:except the US has rather done parts of this before. I don't disagree, during the Civil War in particular state capacity had to be created out of nowhere, because the antebellum Jacksonian ideology, particularly in the planter south, opposed the state about as much as neoliberals do now, albeit for different reasons. What I think a difference is, is that what they would have to do now is not just converting car factories to make tanks, but restoring even basic social contracts, a belief in the nation as a shared project, with means material redistribution, popular participation in politics, a belief in all of the above strong enough to die for. Bernie could not get a critical mass of people to believe change was possible. Clinton and Obama have fundamentally damaged belief in any promises from the government, which to reiterate, is required for people to make sacrifices for it. Biden has done dick all, and all he really had to promise was to not be Trump. So, supposing the Neoliberals decide to go to war, how are they going to completely reorganize society, in a way that would basically be revolutionary, while also maintaining their position in it? More likely they would end up in the position of Napoleon III, creating the Paris Commune, or the many oligarchic Greek City-States that accidentally triggered revolutions when a war lasted into harvest time. War, beyond the economic reasons given, is a social phenomenon. Neoliberals believe "there is no such thing as society". Ergo, they cannot go to war. Bottom line: What are the ruling class offering people that makes fighting on their behalf preferable to the ruling class being defeated by China?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 22:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 22:23 |
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:except the US has rather done parts of this before. The us was not a hollowed out neoliberal shell at the time. In the lead up to WW2 the US had an enormous industrial capacity and people in charge who knew what they were doing. Now it is a shadow of it's former self ruin by third generation failsons. There is no way to get from here to the previous state of affairs because: Frosted Flake posted:I don't disagree, during the Civil War in particular state capacity had to be created out of nowhere, because the antebellum Jacksonian ideology, particularly in the planter south, opposed the state about as much as neoliberals do now, albeit for different reasons. Also another fantastic use of 'we', really gives the game away
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2023 22:24
|
|