|
Alchenar posted:So there within a few days you have the total collapse of credibility of every element of the pro-fighting-on faction. And some of them attempted a coup to keep fighting on anyway? What a bunch of dicks.
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 19:37 |
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:And some of them attempted a coup to keep fighting on anyway? What a bunch of dicks. Imperial Japan is the most dysfunctional totalitarian society ever.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
The most surprising thing is that the IJN never invaded land held by the Japanese Army over who got control/that sweet war cash.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
The Japanese military leadership may have actually had a better chance of surrendering had the US said in no uncertain terms that they had no interest in invading Japan's home islands. A lot of the logic in the Army was that the US could only be bloodied in a great land battle(which is a dubious prospect, Japan is not particularly bad terrain and the advantage of US mechanized troops would have been quite acute).
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
Just FYI, thread: a goon has started an A/T thread on the working of World War 2 technology - I am pestering him about how a Kettenkrad works.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:The Japanese military leadership may have actually had a better chance of surrendering had the US said in no uncertain terms that they had no interest in invading Japan's home islands. A lot of the logic in the Army was that the US could only be bloodied in a great land battle(which is a dubious prospect, Japan is not particularly bad terrain and the advantage of US mechanized troops would have been quite acute). The Japanese terrain is loving terrible. First, you've got the beaches that are surrounded by cliffs and hills to land on. Then in the Tokyo region (the site of the second set of landings) you've got the rice paddies that are impassable by vehicles once flooded.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:The Japanese terrain is loving terrible. First, you've got the beaches that are surrounded by cliffs and hills to land on. Then in the Tokyo region (the site of the second set of landings) you've got the rice paddies that are impassable by vehicles once flooded. It's better than anywhere else in the Pacific. The best possible scenario for an invasion is one in which the Japanese are drawn out from the interior and into a fixed piece battle in the hinterland around the beaches because they fared extremely badly in that sort of fight. Most estimates seem to converge around 100k casualties, which seems sensible given we'll never know at what point of an invasion the Japanese government would have thrown in the towel.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2015 23:11
|
|
|
Alaan posted:The most surprising thing is that the IJN never invaded land held by the Japanese Army over who got control/that sweet war cash. Yeah it really is surprising that the IJN and the IJA never got into a shooting war with each other
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2015 23:57
|
|
|
Seeing this on the front page of imgur made me think of this thread, it's a gallery of images and gifs of the Soviet/Russian nuclear icebreaker ships in action. http://imgur.com/gallery/6d3fT I love that they painted shark teeth on the bow of one of them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
The "50 Years of Victory" does not much care for people telling it about of "irony" of name, "50 Years of Victory" crushes irony under its massive steel bow and leaves broken shards in its wake all over north pole  
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 05:55
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:The "50 Years of Victory" does not much care for people telling it about of "irony" of name, "50 Years of Victory" crushes irony under its massive steel bow and leaves broken shards in its wake all over north pole The Russians are certainly doing their part to claim dominance over northern sea ice. "Why build massive icebreaker when can release massive plumes of methane under Siberian permafrost and melt *all* ice? Do not need St. Petersburg anyway, is all crackhead and neo-nazi."
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 06:32
|
|
|
I did not expect to enjoy that link as much as I did.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 07:15
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:Is there a book that covers the Manhattan Project in good detail? http://www.historyofwar.org/bookpage/baggott_atomic.html is really good, and covers the British/German/Russian efforts too. Probably more of a 'holiday read' as it doesn't get too bogged down in the science but for a layman such as I it was ideal. A Viggen? In a grimy strip-lit tunnel seemingly carved out of a mountainside? coldwar.boner 
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 08:56
|
|
|
All the nordics are big into mountain cave bases. Where I was a firefighter for my first gig in Finland, a nearby Army mountain bunker had fire alarms go off couple times a year and we always had to find the origin detector from the winding tunnels. The place was huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge and filled with all kinds of poo poo. Swedish Navy;   Vahakyla fucked around with this message at 10:00 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 09:58
|
|
|
Five of those underground hangars were built back in the 50's before they decided to go with dispersed basing instead. They were located at Uppsala, Stockholm (two), Norrköping and Göteborg. The one in Göteborg is a museum (cold war as gently caress, go see it - that Viggen pic you posted above is from there), the two in Stockholm had their former air bases sold off and the property redeveloped and I'm pretty sure they've been either permanently sealed or sold for civilian use, the one in Norrköping I think is still used for military storage, but the last one in Uppsala is still on an active military base. God knows what they might be using it for. The Viggen was designed with a foldable stabilizer specifically so it'd fit in these. TheFluff fucked around with this message at 15:15 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:
Does the Gripen stabilizer fold too or is the plane small enough that it doesn't need to?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
david_a posted:whoa It doesn't fold, don't know if it fits or not. It just might, it's taller than the Draken but only by half a meter or so (the Viggen has a gigantic stabilizer in comparison).
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 15:11
|
|
I had no idea the Viggen had a foldable stabilizer. loving  photos too.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 15:18
|
|
|
Cold War plot twist: a former underground submarine base in Norway is now being rented by Russian research vessels after the military sold it a few years ago. The guy who bought it clearly got a pretty good deal. quote:Norway is ruing the day it sold off a key submarine base near the Russian border and now, with President Putin flexing his muscles in the region, there is growing alarm among Nato chiefs that the west has left itself woefully unprotected. http://www.newsweek.com/2015/03/27/secret-submarine-base-norway-accidentally-handed-russians-314989.html
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 15:20
|
|
|
    
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 22:25
|
|
|
Can we just appreciate for a moment that the place Norwegians palm off their unwanted crap is called Finn?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
https://soundcloud.com/magneticart/firefight-no-name-village audio from the hot side of the cold war
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
Scratch Monkey posted:https://soundcloud.com/magneticart/firefight-no-name-village Goddamn
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
jesus christ e- lol @ the dude berating the wounded guy, I know why he's doing it but 
Seizure Meat fucked around with this message at 03:00 on Mar 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 02:56
|
|
|
inkjet_lakes posted:A Viggen? In a grimy strip-lit tunnel seemingly carved out of a mountainside? coldwar.boner Yes, what else would you expect from a nation whose idea of a perfect spot for a server farm is inside a nuclear bunker.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 12:54
|
|
|
There's a lot of surplus bunkers here, you see them going up for sale on the local eBay equivalent with some regularity. Server farm is one of the more popular uses for them. That particular one used to be a local command post for the civil defense and it's pretty tiny, but it's cool because of the futuristic redesign and because it's right underneath Stockholm city. There was pretty big one (2400 square meters usable space) for sale in Uppsala last year; there are some pictures and plans here. It was sold to some geothermal research company, I believe. Before it was demilitarized it was supposed to house the headquarters for the local military staff, some civilian authority higher-ups and a lot of safe storage space for Uppsala University as well as a local pharmaceutical company.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 15:24
|
|
|
And now 50,000 budding mad scientists all change their plans: "begin world domination in SWEDEN. Pre-decorated Evil Lair HQ available. Convenient access to Starbucks, transit."
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 16:46
|
|
|
There are some landing techniques that allow the Gripen to fold: https://gfycat.com/EagerImmaculateAfricanhornbill (PIO resulting from FCS issues and difficult landing conditions, the pilot broke his elbow but was otherwise fine)
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
Mr. Showtime posted:There are some landing techniques that allow the Gripen to fold: https://gfycat.com/EagerImmaculateAfricanhornbill Yea but that's a one time use technique.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
Hey, TheFluff (or any other Swedish military experts here), are the squadron compositions listed on this page accurate? Also, holy poo poo was the Swedish Air Force big in the 50s.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
Mr. Showtime posted:There are some landing techniques that allow the Gripen to fold: https://gfycat.com/EagerImmaculateAfricanhornbill It's just not the same without the right swedish audio commentary Pimpmust fucked around with this message at 20:16 on Mar 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 20:14
|
|
|
LostCosmonaut posted:Hey, TheFluff (or any other Swedish military experts here), are the squadron compositions listed on this page accurate? Should be accurate, that guy knows his stuff in general. I only had a brief glance but it looks correct enough. F 7's Gripens are only used for training/tactical development though, it's not really supposed to be a fighting unit. And yeah, 1000-ish combat aircraft in the mid 50's. Late 40's/early 50's was a really confusing time too, lots of aircraft types came and went within a few years (de Havilland Venom and Vampire, Hawker Hunter, WW2 surplus Mosquitos, Spitfires and Mustangs, Saab 18, Saab 21, Saab 29 Tunnan). The WW2 milsurp in particular was really short-lived and only lasted for a few years in many cases. Mustangs won't do vs MiG-15's. They spent most of the 50's trying to clean that mess up and move towards jets only and standardize on a few types. TheFluff fucked around with this message at 20:36 on Mar 31, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:
LostCosmonaut posted:Also, holy poo poo was the Swedish Air Force big in the 50s. I'm not quite sure it was in this thread, but the Swedish AF was something like third in the world for jet fighters in the 1950s.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
There's also the Stockholm crash (last half of video) with a similarly awesome commentary. I remember that they showed that video with complete audio tons of times on TV news back when it happened 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 01:16
|
|
|
Anyone able to confirm whether csmonitor is a decent site? I'm under the impression they've got their poo poo straight the vast majority of the time. If so... http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2015/0327/Grounded-Russia-s-answer-to-US-next-gen-fighter-hits-the-skids Russia is slashing its T-50 (aka PAK-FA) plans to a dozen aircraft in total.  Cant find any other info though aside from some Indian sites, and knowing their involvement in the project and the politics surrounding it I'm not too sure if they should be taken at their word yet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 04:33
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:Russia is slashing its T-50 (aka PAK-FA) plans to a dozen aircraft in total. That's just so they can make hypersonic transport stealth planes 
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 04:40
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:Anyone able to confirm whether csmonitor is a decent site? I'm under the impression they've got their poo poo straight the vast majority of the time. If so... It's actually the initial testing purchase is cut down to 12 with "According to Kommersant, the military will buy only 12 fighters initially and, after their operational testing and commissioning, will decide on how many more aircraft of this type it can afford." http://in.rbth.com/economics/2015/03/25/russian_air_force_to_buy_fewer_pak_fa_fighter_aircraft_42179.html Of course that number could be 0 if they are still getting hosed economically in a few years. And 12 fighters about as useful as 0 fighters with the bonus of throwing out some billions in dev money.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 04:48
|
|
|
They're putting all their resources into their Nimitzsky and that hypersonic transport plane.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 05:15
|
|
|
LostCosmonaut posted:Also, holy poo poo was the Swedish Air Force big in the 50s. All Air Forces were huge in the 1950s. Fighters have become more and more expensive, though, so air forces have shrunk. Cf. Augustine's 16th Law I'd love to see yearly inventory stats on, say, the top 20 or 30 air forces from WW1 to nowadays.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 11:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 19:37 |
|
|
Alaan posted:It's actually the initial testing purchase is cut down to 12 with "According to Kommersant, the military will buy only 12 fighters initially and, after their operational testing and commissioning, will decide on how many more aircraft of this type it can afford." In a few days time I'm going to check all the sites were Russian posters usually go full retard with stuff like "F-22 fail plane PAK-FA is superiority in eavry way!1!" and just post "PAK-FA canceled lol xa xa xa". Repeatedly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 12:18
|
|