|
Bob Zubrin thinks it might work? Investors might want to do a 360 and walk away.
|
#
¿
May 1, 2016 00:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 14:32 |
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:Any Kraut-speakers ITT know the pronunciation of Sylt? My dumb English-speaking mind says it should sound like "Silt" but I assume that's wrong. Blagh I wouldn't know how to explain the Y. The pronunciation key says 'as in shoot (scottish)' but ehhh?
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2016 08:16
|
|
|
The goldmine is readily accessible without archives though.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:Agreed. It's my favourite thread on internet. aaaa 
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2016 04:08
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Really? drat, I have to read that book.  etc...
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
I even felt fremdschämen while reading it on my iPad, in a German airport, all by myself. Don't mention the war and all that.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
The blood, sweat, and tears shed in EVE online are going to be a big driver in the 211X MilHist thread. You know, the three picoseconds it's going to take the machine minds to process it, or through perpetual retellings within the go'onlord clan - who have come to rule the wind-swept wastes of the endless raddesert.
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2016 13:22
|
|
|
Help me out here, what's the point you're trying to get across?
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
There's multiple separate design bureaus and factories involved in building that 'series', and that's not even taking the tanks that didn't make it to full production into consideration. Would you consider the US post-1962 sequential fighter aircraft classification a lineage of some sort? e: ^^^^ model...
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
In the same vein US aircraft designations can be pretty non-linear as well: a late 1970s light bomber program gets a pre-1962 fighter prefix and design number because it's a black project, following the lineage of secretly acquired Soviet fighter planes part of a whole different black program operating out of the same region  Fangz posted:I mean the numbering scheme. It seems highly random. IIRC postwar it becomes M-year minus 19, and with the Abrams they do a rebranding :dunno:
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
Yeah that's what I meant by different factories and bureaus but you fuckers actually know your stuff 
|
|
#
¿
May 18, 2016 21:11
|
|
|
JcDent posted:Soviet T- numbers are based somewhat around the year of introduction. That would be the 1962 tri-service commission, the year I mentioned upthread. -22 is part of the fighter sequential system (though they skipped over -19 for marketing reasons tyvm Northrop) but the X-35 retained its experimental number after coming out of the JSF fly off.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2016 09:39
|
|
|
Saint Celestine posted:Hello friends. Can anyone recommend a good book about the history of the Cold War? Which part? I'm not really up to speed with the hottest historiography but AFAIK it's a very fractured field.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2016 12:12
|
|
|
Speed, even taking into account tactical applications, says very little about operational or strategic mobility. Which includes stuff like mileage, ground pressure, and reliability to begin with, and extends into larger questions of simplicity in training and serviceability.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
Again, I think a big reason why armor on ships went kinda right out of the window is that crossroads was done in 1946, and the effect of shot Baker can pretty much be summarized as "welp." NBC survivability is still an important driver in weapons design (or it should be, at least).
|
|
#
¿
May 25, 2016 15:26
|
|
|
spectralent posted:I've been told this is just the misconceptions of establishment fools who resisted evidence. In general, I've been told there was never any superiority in soviet armour throughout the cold war, and western gear was, for the duration, always strictly better*. Oh someone was chanelling Warbadger? In any case, not every (part of a) Cold War army was equipped with the best and the latest stuff. The UK 4th ID for example, their backstop force across the Weser in the 70s and 80s, was a strictly truck and recce vehicles affair for a long time. Very little 'superiority' against a second echelon Soviet Tank Division I'd say, even if the latter were only equipped with T-55s and old BTRs. Throatwarbler posted:The Soviet emphasis on things like range (aux fuel tanks, diesel instead of gas turbine engines), river fording and "being light enough to cross bridges without crushing them" meant that yeah in general the Red Army was more likely to have a tank around when they need it. It might depend on what exact period of the Cold War we're talking about, but forces were incredibly mech- and armor heavy pretty much for the duration. Chances are you'll have the tank around, but the other guy could have two to five times more. Also 1) in West Germany at least there weren't supposed to be any problems with crossing bridges even for the heavier NATO tanks in the 1980s, I'd gather 95% of them were good for the highest weight class (the yellow roadsigns are still there). Though seeing how much problems they have with those same bridges nowadays...; 2) River fording or whatever tactical mobility trick you've got up your sleeve is a function of ground pressure rather than weight, and I think both sides' tanks were about the same at that; and 3) only the Abrams and the T-80 ever used a gas turbine engine across the central front. Both those tanks only entered service in numbers during the 1980s, and even then they were still eclipsed by vastly more common diesel- (and some petrol I guess) engined ones, so I really don't know where you're getting that particular nugget of truth from. e: sp Koesj fucked around with this message at 23:01 on May 29, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 29, 2016 21:38
|
|
|
Do note that we're talking about old-school chemical agents here, with pretty different employment profiles than what we've come to expect in the postwar era. Nerve gas was a strictly German affair during WWII.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2016 03:10
|
|
|
cheerfullydrab posted:Does anyone have an opinion on Red Storm Rising? Significantly worse than Ralph Peters' Red Army.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
I think there's an ex-NVA (the east German one) officer who wrote a WWIII novel with NATO as the aggressor.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2016 14:45
|
|
|
lenoon posted:But the novel has everything to do with violence? This is how propaganda works, right? It's how antagonists work in badly written war porn; The book's not about a war with muslims, so the general gist of your points notwithstanding (nor Clancy's one-dimensional hackery), I don't really see the specific issue here.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
Tree Bucket posted:Hi thread! I'm putting together a (very) light strategic board game for a friend, based on the wars of medieval Europe. For balance purposes I need to divide the bit covered by today's Germany into two seperate regions/zones/provinces. Any thoughts on the least worst way to do this? Also I have learnt that maps of the HRE are literally incomprehensible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wei%DFwurst%E4quator
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2016 12:43
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:Draw the line further north, separate those fucks who speak Platte from the normal people? Oh me and my family you mean?  jk I don't speak that poo poo and we're not German anyway, but north-south might still be the most logical divide though.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2016 12:50
|
|
|
BeigeJacket posted:Are any of these Cold War Gone Hot trash novels any good at all? I just want to grog out with tank porn. Red Army, Chieftains, maybe Hackett's WWIII (though he's very much in the Enochian mould).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
Deptfordx posted:There's a more recently written Cold War gone hot trilogy by Harvey Black. Oh hey I forgot about those. IIRC the dude's ex-BRIXMIS (British Military Mission in the Soviet Occupation Zone, basically legal spies) and he obviously knows his technical stuff. Not much in the way of great prose though.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
I scoff at y'all for reading unavowed trashy SF. Pulpy time travel/ISOT/alien stuff though, yowza! I'm not even ashamed to admit to trawling the alternatehistory.com forums for decentish shlock, since prose and politics notwithstanding, some people there have at least got a sense of irony. Like that one abortive story with the 18th century EIC types trying to cash in on a portal to our world. Or the actually rather good, longrunning thread with 80s Britain being sent back to the 18th c (I sense a pattern here). Which has Maggie Milksnatcher instituting rationing and a massive nationalization program, and it includes the dawn massive social movement coalescing around a crusade to abolish slavery. Tasty.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 12:48
|
|
|
Elyv posted:I've read 15+ honorverse books ama No thanks!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
E. Germany, or: how a notionally 'socialist' regime descends into the most extreme form of petit-bourgeois navel gazing.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:the mustache is part of my appeal Goes really well together with upper body strength and a stabby weapon, in a bad 80s action flick kind of way.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:What got me thinking about this were the "elite" units: 1st SS-Panzer Division Leibstandarte SS Adolf Hitler, Panzer Grenadier Division Großdeutschland and Fallschirm-Panzer-Division 1. Hermann Göring. All three have great war records and are still celebrated. I respect their accomplishments, This does not read well btw.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2016 01:31
|
|
|
Koramei posted:People have said in this thread numerous times that Nazi Germany didn't go into a full war footing until incredibly late, because they were worried about discontent at home. It's probably beside the point but IIRC the last couple of times we went over this the 'late industrial mobilization' thing was refuted. There was very little resource slack in the German economy, and they were facing hard choices in the early years already regarding aircraft production numbers, ammo prioritization, etc. Speer's miracle is pretty much a myth macroeconomically, and on the plant- and supply chain level they never got it quite right for certain pieces of equipment anyway. This was very much a political/socio-cultural problem indeed, but had very little to do with any unwillingness to go the whole mile AFAIK. e: Comstar posted:This post just blew my mind. Is there any books that go into detail on this? Forczyk's Schwerpunkt delves into the details in a very matter of fact manner, and I thought it was a nice and quick read. Also that forum poster seems to operate on some strange economic assumptions. Koesj fucked around with this message at 13:11 on Jul 6, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 12:49
|
|
|
After three solid recs inside a couple of hours I'd like to point out that Schwerpunkt is $2.42 on Kindle atm.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
C3 is command, control, and communication; CSS are combat support services. NTC is probably the National Training Center in the US? It's where they've been doing operational maneuver training for a couple of decades now. Haven't gotten far enought into that thread to see the abbreviation pop up though.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
Unless you vaporize the target the debris cloud is still going to be around for some time though. Quite some time if we're talking about non-LEO.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2016 12:29
|
|
|
Basically, gently caress steampunk.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:Edit: You've heard me speak in English, you know how I default to a flat, choppy, ugly, "neutral" vowel a lot of the time? We do that a lot. Especially in my regional accent, though, which is not English-English. Ummm you speak American???
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2016 11:20
|
|
|
Goddamn. Didn't these waves of trials (I think there were distinct ones at least?) end up with a big 'ol purge of the security services to cap it off and tie up loose ends?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
I used to go off on cold war tangents, but there's more knowledge people here nowadays 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 14:32 |
|
|
We'd first need to get a friendly mod/admin in here again who can goldmine this thread for easy, archiveless linking.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2016 13:41
|
|