|
What is the most powerful flying bug? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| 🦋 |
|
15 | 3.71% |
| 🦇 |
|
115 | 28.47% |
| 🪰 |
|
12 | 2.97% |
| 🐦 |
|
67 | 16.58% |
| dragonfly |
|
94 | 23.27% |
| 🦟 |
|
14 | 3.47% |
| 🐝 |
|
87 | 21.53% |
| Total: | 404 votes | ||
|
Ardennes posted:There is a use for airpower even if it is to create a AD bubble around the rest of your fleet (and also keep enemy frigates/destroyers away from your subs). i don't think its a waste, i think they've let it get to the point where things are impossible to fix and they need a new hull. But maybe not. Maybe it can clean up real good 
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 15:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 07:07 |
|
|
i say swears online posted:that's right https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1320481440560132097
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 15:15
|
|
|
love a good lasting peace
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 15:16
|
|
|
mawarannahr posted:Donald the Dove is gonna end the wars
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 15:17
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Big fan of this one goddam, imagine if that was your house in the middle there
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 15:19
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:i think that The West's mode of action is largely automated at this point - that's the big advantage of the system as-is, it's very difficult to act counter to the structure of power in any effective or lasting way. or: the way western institutions pounced on ukraine in 2014 was to a large extent automatic and autonomous, performed by people whose jobs and world-view had placed them in a position where that was the natural thing to do and not to intervene would've been almost unthinkable. obama didn't need to call his council and build an international coalition, he just had to let the think-tanks, NGOs and the state bureaucracies perform normally. people like victoria nuland are systematically generated by the western process of elite formation; they simply show up as a supply response to a structural demand. that's right.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 15:19
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:i don't think its a waste, i think they've let it get to the point where things are impossible to fix and they need a new hull. But maybe not. Maybe it can clean up real good The issue hasn't been the hull, the engines are being replaced during the refit, and a bunch of other machinery, etc. The dry dock sank, but it really didn't have anything to do with the carrier itself, and the crane that fell on it was repairable damage. It does seem "unlucky," but if anything just seemed to add time to the refit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 15:21
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:goddam, imagine if that was your house in the middle there Front row seats to a beautiful Fenian victory. Lucky ducks
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 15:23
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:i think it's too important for them to have a carrier of somekind. It needed replacing but they were trying the European military spending method of not funding anything and hoping everything works out. Now it's probably too late? Still think they should just ask China for one. Maybe they have a spare. I generally think that Russia and the UK should have given up on big expensive aircraft carriers. UK at least has two so that one can often be available be (really takes like 3 carriers to be sure that one is available when you need it), but as a portion of UK’s spending it sure seems like a vanity project. Russia is still number two in the world when it comes to submarine capability and proficiency, so maybe doubling down on success and mature, professional legacy there would be better than keeping around a carrier that’s not very capable or good and keeps breaking itself and losing aircraft. China seems (for now) appears to not be trying to copy the US carrier fleet model, instead investing in novel weapons/sensors and sufficient fleet forces that help sideline carriers compared to their importance over the last 85 years.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 15:25
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:There is a use for airpower even if it is to create a AD bubble around the rest of your fleet (and also keep enemy frigates/destroyers away from your subs). Obviously it makes sense for China to build aircraft carriers since, 1) they have superior ship-building capabilities, and 2) the most likely area of conflict is around the South China island chains. Russia's problems are largely on the European peninsula and building a rusty aircraft carrier forces no additional costs on the US compared to the Chinese program.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 15:25
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:The issue hasn't been the hull, the engines are being replaced during the refit, and a bunch of other machinery, etc. The dry dock sank, but it really didn't have anything to do with the carrier itself, and the crane that fell on it was repairable damage. It does seem "unlucky," but if anything just seemed to add time to the refit. the kuznetsov suffering increasingly looney toones style accidents
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 15:26
|
|
|
the kuznetsov damaged by rogue falling anvil, causing the ship to fold up like an accordion and develop a massive red bulge at the impact site
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 15:29
|
|
|
Building a giant concrete wall in the North Sea and painting it to look like the ocean is now a core part of NATO's plan for war with Russia
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 15:30
|
|
|
genericnick posted:Obviously it makes sense for China to build aircraft carriers since, 1) they have superior ship-building capabilities, and 2) the most likely area of conflict is around the South China island chains. Russia's problems are largely on the European peninsula and building a rusty aircraft carrier forces no additional costs on the US compared to the Chinese program. The Arctic Ocean and the North Sea are both potential areas of conflict, there is a reason you would want to contest it and that is why the bulk of the Russian navy including its sub fleet is there. Also, even if China is better at shipbuilding, that doesn't mean the Russians shouldn't build a fleet for their needs. It also absolutely puts costs on the US, there is only one US navy, it can't be everywhere at once. An additional "hostile" aircraft carrier is another factor they have to consider, especially if the British can't step up. If anything, it is why the US most likely isn't trilled about it being refitted. It doesn't have to be top-notch, it needs to be a threat that the US has to consider as it attempts to fighting what seems like a 3 front war. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 15:35 on Apr 7, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 15:31
|
|
|
A teenager allegedly became injured and stranded in a uniform-involved press-ganging in the third year of Russia's illegal war on Ukraine
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 15:46
|
|
|
lol https://www.politico.com/news/2024/04/07/russian-propaganda-house-floor-00150940 quote:Russian talking points being heard on House floor, Ohio Republican says
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 15:55
|
|
|
Gripweed posted:goddam, imagine if that was your house in the middle there Presumably some stuck up rear end in a top hat already kicked you out of it because they didn't want to camp like the rest of the unwashed rabble.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 16:03
|
|
|
Russia is finished Orcdom in shambles
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 16:09
|
|
|
DJJIB-DJDCT posted:
I don't think they could go that low because commandeering under liberalism is still a capitalist market process. Maximum material cost-saving is a matter of material planning, which centralized economies can put strong directed effort into without political difficulty by inherent virtue of the system. Like, it isn't a matter of then negotiating prices between different firms, even if they are state-owned: is a matter of the GOSPLAN-equivalent directing mines, infrastructure, workers, different input factories etc into "what do we need to reliably produce X in Y quantity". There can optimization processes, such as designing machinery that really makes production pop, etc, which can increase time estimates and overall planning effort, but it is nothing compared to the incredible anomie of some attempts at state intervention
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 16:13
|
|
|
supersnowman posted:Well obviously it the best ting ever because the margins will be higher if they save the expenses those 8 dudes cost to paint those barrels. Pretty high since some primers and decoppering agents are corrosive, barrels are swabbed with water
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 16:16
|
|
|
DaysBefore posted:Front row seats to a beautiful Fenian victory. Lucky ducks 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 16:24
|
|
|
dead gay comedy forums posted:I don't think they could go that low because commandeering under liberalism is still a capitalist market process. Maximum material cost-saving is a matter of material planning, which centralized economies can put strong directed effort into without political difficulty by inherent virtue of the system. Yeah, the manufacturers are gouging but manufacturing is simply expensive in the West, especially in the US. They need to source materials which aren't price-controlled, pay their workers competitive wages, provide health care insurance, etc. Obviously, $8,000 is ridiculous but isn't going to pencil out to $300 bucks either, especially if you need a bunch of capital investments. Companies aren't jumping in on the idea either because they don't know if within less a year there will be little interest in shells because there will be a different administration or a lack of funding. During WW2, not only did the US have a large industrial and manufacturing base that could gear up to scale but the government could reliably be trusted to keep on buying for years to come. (Arguably, a factor propelling the Cold War forward is the MIC which had already geared up, didn't want to back to the pre-1940 status quo.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 16:29
|
|
|
speng31b posted:I have never heard anyone genuinely use the phrase "silo mentality" that wasn't loving a silo
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 16:39
|
|
|
If you think about the plan to hold Canada hostage to trade for Eire, the Fenians were Hamas (pejorative).
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 16:46
|
|
|
DJJIB-DJDCT posted:If you think about the plan to hold Canada hostage to trade for Eire, the Fenians were Hamas (pejorative). The Easter Rebellion was the Al Asqa Flood of its day
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 17:01
|
|
|
DaysBefore posted:Lol even the amount of government control over factories during WWII, which still gave private companies a fair amount of leeway, would be unthinkable in the austerity-based neoliberal economies of modern NATO. That is, if there were any factories left to control Ardennes posted:Yeah, the manufacturers are gouging but manufacturing is simply expensive in the West, especially in the US. They need to source materials which aren't price-controlled, pay their workers competitive wages, provide health care insurance, etc. Obviously, $8,000 is ridiculous but isn't going to pencil out to $300 bucks either, especially if you need a bunch of capital investments. I had a pretty orthodox prof back in econ uni (taught micro III, intro to behavioral econ, etc). The guy did his doctorate/phd in the UK. In an incredible feat of eccentricity, he got brokebrained just in the right way where nobody in the establishment can say he isn't a liberal economist but he goes and gets on their nerves by often arguing against it using the terminology Case in point: while teaching about market flaws/failures, to the surprise of a lot of us, suddenly he blurts the arms industry as an example of ridiculous inherent moral hazard that should not be private at all: demand is driven by conflict, there are more than enough statistics to show that it absolutely cannot be treated as a consumer good (for small arms like in the USA), military hardware has to be sold for governments and as such there is immense incentive for criminal behavior, collusion and causing market defects etc Turns out that he did write a bunch of stuff about that while doing something at the LSE and caused a hubbub when he argued that, ultimately, no matter what efficiencies can be obtained by market factors, there's simply too much aggregate risk and cost to society anyway, so might as well be directly under the state and thus be under some guaranteed level of public oversight
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 17:07
|
|
|
That’s why they hire the economists from King’s College London who say that Britain is stronger than ever now that BAE has cornered the market.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 17:15
|
|
|
dead gay comedy forums posted:I had a pretty orthodox prof back in econ uni (taught micro III, intro to behavioral econ, etc). The guy did his doctorate/phd in the UK. In an incredible feat of eccentricity, he got brokebrained just in the right way where nobody in the establishment can say he isn't a liberal economist but he goes and gets on their nerves by often arguing against it using the terminology That said, it really can't end at the arms industry either, even if you had a nationalized arms industry, if your educational system and health care is market-rate and you imported much of your materials etc...then those costs would be put in the cost of the final product. It is why low cost education, health care, and some state investment in heavy industries, if not state management of railroads etc... are actually \ national defense issues, not bleeding-heart liberal claptrap. You don't have just your shell industries to function, you want a network of shell factories, tank factories, steel plants, and workers not burden by student loans and medical bankruptcies. You want state railways to make sure moving materials between them is facilitated over sofas. It isn't just about going after BAE but really neoliberalism itself. Ardennes has issued a correction as of 17:30 on Apr 7, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 17:27
|
|
|
Well it says, when they built these plants in the first place they also built schools and hospitals. Nobody would link those two now.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 18:08
|
|
|
Beyond the questionable utility of the Kuznetsov, having a one-of-a-kind ship which has been out of service for 6 years also leads to crew difficulties. In contrast, when Russia fields surface warfare ships and subs, they have an experienced pool of corvette/frigate/destroyer/submariner crews to pull experienced sailors from when manning their new ships an subs. Izvestia News posted:Izvestia’s sources refused to name the exact number of ship personnel. But we are talking about more than 1.5 thousand military personnel. Due to the installation of new automated systems and units, the crew was slightly reduced. Previously, it amounted to more than 1.9 thousand sailors. https://iz.ru/1495800/roman-kretcul-aleksei-ramm/podniat-flagman-dlia-avianostca-admiral-kuznetcov-nabiraiut-novyi-ekipazh
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 18:11
|
|
|
Look, it's very simple. If the state refuses to perform the basic functions necessary to keep existing then it will just not exist anymore.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 18:11
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Yeah, the manufacturers are gouging but manufacturing is simply expensive in the West, especially in the US. They need to source materials which aren't price-controlled, pay their workers competitive wages, provide health care insurance, etc. Obviously, $8,000 is ridiculous but isn't going to pencil out to $300 bucks either, especially if you need a bunch of capital investments. Also they aren't jumping in since they know the budget that will be spent no matter the number of shells. If you tried jumping into the market with both feet you'd get whistleblowed boeing style.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 18:59
|
|
|
It anything you want to have those sailors start training up on the Kuznetsov so they have at least have a trained crew pool for later carriers and similar vessels.
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 19:00
|
|
|
Don't we have a bunch of 60 year old Ukrainian refugees who know how to run a state industry?
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 19:00
|
|
|
Which takes me back around to this being understood in early modernity, but not now? The government is the only buyer of bronze cannons. That's a process manageable by ordering from church bell foundries since they can move back and forth between cannons and bells. The government is the only buyer of gun carriages. That's manageable, because coach makers can move back and forth between gun carriages and coaches, as orders come and go. However, the government is the only purchaser of iron cannon balls, which has no civilian equivalent and for which there is no civilian use. The government decides to simplify the process by making cannon balls themselves. This was understandable in 1724 (and 1624, and 1524) but not 2024? Also, cannon balls stayed in service until they were expended, bronze guns could remain in service for over 100 years, and carriages could be replaced every 30 or so, depending on innovations in gunnery developing new ones, whereas now even if materiel could last, this market logic requires that we "incentivize" arms makers by constantly placing orders? DJJIB-DJDCT has issued a correction as of 19:09 on Apr 7, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 19:07
|
|
|
Isn't that the reason for church bells, for the gunnery factories to have something to produce in peace time? Like the space program and ICBMs. Fat-Lip-Sum-41.mp3 has issued a correction as of 19:17 on Apr 7, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 19:14
|
|
|
DJJIB-DJDCT posted:Which takes me back around to this being understood in early modernity, but not now? they were thinking of things in terms of production and satisfying demands. we are thinking of things in terms of buying things at the market and have no other frame of reference
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 19:14
|
|
|
another way to put things is that the people in 1724 had other gods than the god of the market. what you are proposing is on the same level as blasphemy No salvation outside the church!
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 19:16
|
|
|
Fat-Lip-Sum-41.mp3 posted:Isn't that the reason for church bells, for the gunnery factories to have something to produce in peace time? Vice versa. The reason for church bells was... you know, churches. As an industry and craft, it has to do with how cities in Germany displayed their status. So increasingly large, ornately decorated bells, bells cast to specific thicknesses to produce certain tones, bells that could be light and have thin walls but were nevertheless very strong so as to not crack. These developments all greatly enhanced the kinds of guns that could be made, which is why cannon took off in Europe compared to China, which had gunpowder much earlier but didn't have the metallurgy for practical gunnery and so made more use of rockets. e: In the parts of Germany that became Protestant, bells just became civic, so we still see the production of giant belltowers, pushing the limits of metallurgy. Or, very small, delicate bells, and the elaborate mechanisms to ring them, which was important for developing fine casting. Advancements in clockmaking also made the wheellock possible, and then later the simpler snaphance and flintlock. So again, this is why European small arms really took off compared to the matchlocks that were used in China, Japan, India and Persia until the Victorian era. DJJIB-DJDCT has issued a correction as of 19:21 on Apr 7, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 19:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 07:07 |
|
|
DJJIB-DJDCT posted:
here is a similar article with a funny third paragraph 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2024 19:21
|
|
