Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing most liked content since 11/13/2017 in all areas

  1. 7 points
    Mighty_Zuk

    Israeli AFVs

    A new article from "Ynet News" adds new info on the Barak and other programs. Just a reminder, Barak is an upgraded Merkava 4M. https://www.yediot.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-5043863,00.html It's in Hebrew, but I have taken upon myself to translate the important bits here (some new, some old, I will mark it): 1)The Barak weighs 70 tons. (new) Ex: In Israel, exact figures are almost never given. It's not because it's OPSEC, but because that's the sort of mentality here. Only the engineers will handle that, and the plebs get rounded numbers. So it could mean about 69, or it could be 73. However up until now it's always been 60-65 tons, so we could see some solid amount of equipment added to the tank, which will be interesting. On the downside, it means weight reduction measures probably weren't taken and I shouldn't explain why excessive weight is bad. 2)Utilizes an AI-managed "mission computer". (new/old) Ex: Okay so we've heard plenty of times that many actions will be automated, and that means AI. It was said however mostly in the context of the firing loop. Now they say the mission computer, otherwise known as BMS, will automatically manage certain comms with other assets that will also include the Namers and Eitans among others. Info that was previously manually input by the TC (commander). The AI will be able to make various decisions based on the targets it identifies, whether based on the optics or the APS, and advise the crew on certain actions, and make terrain-mapping related decisions such as pointing optimal firing positions or dangerous areas. 3)Female voice selected to alert crews via BMS. (new) Ex: Easy to distinguish from a male voice, so it won't blend in with the crew's voices, and the crew will not ignore it (they tend to ignore messages from crewmen). Among the alerts it will give are "Missiles", "Short range ATGM", and "Turning over" which means it will not only alert the crew of the type of threat and thus approximate time to impact, but also of terrain related issues to minimize accidents. 4)It was tested as a fully autonomous vehicle. (new) Ex: But there is no operational requirement, for obvious reasons, so it's merely a test. 5)Hybrid powerplant. (new) Ex: To cope with the higher weight and to save on fuel, hybrid is the way to go. This could also give it an amazing torque and make it a "little" speed demon. And as an environmentalist it really gives me some relief. 6)IronVision helmet system tested last month (October). (old) Ex: I thought it was scheduled to be tested in April, but nonetheless it's good news it happened. The date for operational fielding has remained unchanged, and even rounded down to 2020, so there's no delay but a re-scheduling. 7)IronVision to be tested soon on Company-sized force. (new) Ex: Means less time required for full operational testing, if they segment the operational testing phases to do in parallel with the program. 8)Starting next year, 3 times as many Trophy-equipped vehicles will be manufactured as this year. (new) Ex: While the production rate is still minimal, to keep the work stable and allow to double the output when needed urgently, the front-line units will benefit greatly and at a quick rate from this decision. It also comes in light of the recent contract for 1,000 Trophy systems, and the decision to not only equip the Namers and Eitans with it, but also the Merkava 3. 9)USA is purchasing 100 Trophy systems (brigade-sized). (new/old) Ex: Some speculated on either possibility. Either the contract was merely for the support of the installation of systems, or for the purchase of a brigade-worth of systems. Now it's confirmed that they are indeed equipping an entire brigade. Big wall of text, I know, so I give you here Brig. Gen. Baruch Matzliach holding Israel's big stick's big stick:
  2. 5 points
    Transmission repairs on the Jagdpanther are even more fun than on the regular kind.
  3. 5 points
    ApplesauceBandit

    Your Gun Porn Thread

    I seem to have acquired something fun
  4. 5 points
    Xoon

    CV-90, why so much love ?

    "Bombekaster på belter Hæren og Forsvarsmateriell demonstrerte den nye CV90BK (bombekastervogn) på Rena. Digitalisert kommunikasjon mellom våpensystem er hovedstikkordet for økt kampkraft. En stund lå tåken for tett over regionsfelt Østlandet til at demonstrasjonen kunne begynne. Det er nemlig ikke lov å øvelsesskyte uten klar sikt. Telemark bataljon, Hærens våpenskole og Forsvarsmateriell beholdt imidlertid både roen og troen, og ikke langt tid etter lettet tåken. Dermed kunne de fremmøtte få se hva den nye CV90-typen hadde å by på. RULLENDE BOMBEKASTER Fire CV90 bombekastere sto klare. Alle fyrte av fem granater hver i retning av målet, som befant seg mellom to til tre kilometer unna. Mortar Weapon Systems (MWS) er navnet på bombekastersystemet i vognen. Den store forskjellen fra eldre bombekastervogner er at innrettingen i CV90 er automatisk: MSW vet hvor det selv er, og i hvilken retning det peker. MSW kommer dermed mye raskere til skudd etter at vognen er kjørt i stilling. – BEDRE TREFFSIKKERHET Fagsjef ved våpenskole, oberst Trond Haande, forteller at vognene vil tilføre Hæren en betydelig kapasitet innen beskyttelse og mobilitet. De nye vognene gir også Hæren nye muligheter for å få ild på bakken i løpet av potensielt 1–2 minutter fra målet er observert, noe som er en betydelig oppgradering. – Takket være den nettverksbaserte kommunikasjonen mellom drone, stormpanservogn og CV90 bombekaster, oppnår Hæren bedre treffsikkerhet og utsetter personellet for mindre risiko enn før. Tidligere har informasjonen om målets plassering vært formidlet gjennom muntlig overføring. Nå kan dette skje elektronisk, sier oberst Haande. – Vi i Forsvarsmateriell er glade for å ha levert CV90 bombekaster til Hæren. Dette gir økt kampkraft gjennom gode og fremtidsrettede tekniske og elektroniske systemer, sier Forsvarsmateriells delprosjektleder, Per Rune Hansen i Kampvognprosjektet. " Translation: "Mortars on tracks Hæren and Forsvarsmateriell demonstates the new CV90BK (Mortar vehicle) at Rena. Digitized communication between the weapon systems is a important aspect of increased combat power. For awhile the fog laid too thick over the region of østlandet before demonstrations could start. It is not allowed to practice firing without clear sight. Telemark bataljon, Hærens våpenskole and Forsvarsmateriell meanwhile kept their cool, and not long after, the fog lifts. This meant that the visitors could see what the CV90 variant was capable of. ROLLING MORTAR Four CV90 mortar vehicles stood ready. All fired off five shells in the direction of the target, which was between two to three kilometers away. Mortar Weapon System (MWS) is the name of the mortar system on the vehicle. The big difference from the older Mortar vehicles is that the mortar system in the CV90 is automatic: MWS knows where it is, and in which direction it points. MWS comes with much faster rate of fire after the vehicle is in position. -BETTER ACCURACY Head of weapons school, Colonel Trond Haande, explains that the vehicles will add considerable protection and mobility capacity to Hæren. The new vehicles also gives Hæren new possibilities for rounds on the ground by potentially 1-2 minutes from the target is observed, which is a considerable upgrade. -Because of the network based communication between drones, IFVs and CV90 Mortar vehicles, Hæren accomplices better accuracy and exposes personnel for less risk then before. Earlier, information about the target whereabouts had to be communicated verbally. Now it can happen electronically, says Colonel Haande. -We in Forsvarsmatriell are happy to deliver the CV90 mortar vehicles to Hæren. This gives increased combat power through good and futuristic technical and electronic systems, says Forsvarsmateriell's part project leader, Per Rune Hansen in the Tank program." Source: https://forsvaret.no/aktuelt/testet-ny-cv90-bombekaster
  5. 5 points
    Gripen287

    Railguns

    Hello all, Gripen here. Long-time reader, first-time poster here. I'm drinking Founder's Breakfast Stout and come bearing documents about railguns (is there a preferred method of posting/uploading documents?): https://drive.google.com/open?id=1bZeNQNqLwoOxyGORELf7H80qI0ENFJ5M https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B21XX6zvOt4fdHpxVGdvaFdpR28 https://drive.google.com/open?id=1QUAUdaP_QGBmA9DTby6pWYINon8XZFn_ https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B21XX6zvOt4fWHJRdHZIdGlRWDQ https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B21XX6zvOt4fQjVyYkpWaG1CRkk And for the inductively minded: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B21XX6zvOt4fZDM3SHM3SWE5N2M Did I do it right?
  6. 5 points
    SH_MM

    The Leopard 2 Thread

    No, the figure is misleading. Only 36 (16 Leopard 2A6 and 20 Leopard 2A7 tanks) will be upgraded to the 2A7V configuration, but also 62 Leopard 2A4 tanks. The number used in the report (57 tanks) includes the parallel upgrade of Leopard 2A6M tanks to the Leopard 2A6M+ configuration. Of the 36 2A6 & 2A7 tanks to be upgraded to the Leopard 2A7V, the majority remains still in service and will be upgraded later (in fact 18 of the 20 Leopard 2A7 tanks will be the last tanks to receive the upgrade!). At the same time 68 Leopard 2A4 tanks are also being upgraded, the upgrade of these tanks takes longer (because more work has to be done), but AFAIK at least some of them have already been sent to the industry. France ordered the upgrade of 200 Leclerc tanks in 2015 as part of SCORPION programme. The number of active tanks is probably be greater. The United Kingdom has only 227 Challenger 2 tanks left in inventory, of which 168 tanks are belonging to active units; probably a few of these are in need of repair. After the introduction of the Ajax, the British Army might downsize from three active tank battalions to only two. Belgium has given up on tanks. They never bought a modern tank (only Leopard 1s) and decided against modernizing them in the late 1990s/early 2000s. Instead Belgium operates a handful of Piranha IIIC 8x8 vehicles, of which 40 are armed with a 90 mm gun, while 32 are armed with a 30 mm ATK Mk44 gun. Poland has one of the largest tank fleets in Europe, consisting of 247 Leopard 2 tanks (of which half are supposed to be modernized by Rheinmetall & Obrum to the new Leopard 2PL variant), some 230-240 PT-91 tanks and more than 150 operational T-72 tanks. The The US military has some ~2,000 M1A1/M1A2 Abrams tanks in active units with a similar amount of modern tanks in reserve/storage. I haven't kept up with the latest US Army plans, but supposedly they want to have something between 10 and 17 armored brigade combat teams (ABCT). Latest informations suggests that there were 14 ABCTs in 2016 with a new (15th) ABCT being set up in October 2017. Each ABCT has 90 M1A1/M1A2 Abrams tanks, hence there should be 1,350 Abrams tanks operated by the Army. The National Guard has either 5 or 6 ABCTs (there were originally six, but one was deactivated in 2016), adding 450-540 M1A1/M1A2 Abrams tanks over the Army's operational tank fleet. Supposedly the USMC bought a total of 403 M1A1 tanks, but it appears that not all are operational. Incomplete list: Germany (50 Leopard 2A6M+, 104 Leopard 2A7V), Poland (128 Leopard 2PL, PT-91M2 amount TBD), Denmark (38 tanks to Leopard 2A7/V), France (200 Leclerc Scorpion XLR), UK (Challenger 2 LEP bidding under way, amount TBD), Russia (T-90M), US Army (90 M1A2 SEP v2 to be fitted with Trophy, M1A2 SEP v3), Indonesia (Leopard 2RI) etc. In factory are German tanks for conversion to Leopard 2A6M+/2A7V tanks, Leclerc tanks,Polish 2A4 tanks to become Leopard 2PLs and probably the M1A2 SEP v2 aswell as maybe the Danish tanks. Rheinmetall has been upgrading 2A4 tanks to the Leopard 2RI configuration for Indonesia, I don't know if they finished this contract already. Also Russia might have already started upgrading the T-90A to the T-90M variant. Those are not all 2A7V tanks. This is a mixed value, most of the tanks are understood to be Leopard 2A6M tanks being upgraded to the 2A6M+ model (inofficial name). The Leopard 2A7V deliveries are set to begin in 2019. The very first two of these tanks are taken from the 20 Leopard 2A7 tanks and will be used for testing if everything works as expected. After these two initial Leopard 2A7Vs, the next 16 will be created from Leopard 2A6 tanks, which will be ready for service in 2020. Directly after the conversions of the 2A6 tanks are finished, 68 Leopard 2A4 tanks will be converted to the Leopard 2A7V. The last remaining 18 Leopard 2A7 tanks are scheduled for the 2A7V upgrade after the Leopard 2A4 tanks. 68 Leopard 2A4 tanks will be converted to the 2A7V configuration. 32 tanks will remain in the Army's stock for conversion to support vehicles (recovery vehicles, engineering vehicles, bridgelayers), used as spare parts or upgraded at a later time (if there is a requirement for a larger tank fleet); AFAIK the final decision hasn't been made yet.
  7. 5 points
    Proof that Tigers can stand up to modern AFVs
  8. 4 points
    This glorious monstrosity was the Yakovlev design bureau's VVP-6 concept. This would have been a gigantic, VTOL SAM platform armed with six (!) S-75 Dvina missiles. Radar equipment for guiding the missiles and reloads would be stored in the fuselage. Considering that each missile is about ten meters long, the entire aircraft must have been about fifty meters long, or a bit longer than a B-52. Sadly, the designers ran out of cocaine before their dream could be realized. How serious were the commies about building a helicarrier? I don't know, but it does at least appear to have been a real design exercise. It's in this book.
  9. 4 points
    There it is. PUMA with MELLS/Spike LR
  10. 4 points
    Ulric

    WoT v WT effort-thread

    Best aircraft kill yet, brought to you by @RobotMinisterofTrueKorea MiG-15 taken out with artillery strike.
  11. 4 points
    Ob.477A1 "Nota" Well better photo then "bulgarian ones:
  12. 4 points
    http://otvaga2004.mybb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=1732&p=3#p989780 Some modeller made a Nota No idea how accurate.
  13. 4 points
    Collimatrix

    General news thread

    As an Administrator I am privileged to occasionally present my wild-assed guesses: The Zimbabwe coup is Chinese backed, and furthermore it was greenlit by the Trump administration as part of a quid pro quo on a North Korea deal.
  14. 4 points
    Cnn: Moore is a rapist! We have very old and unreliable proof! Alabama voters: ok... So you just got this information. Coincidentally, during the run up to an election. Cnn: look! We have this easily fakable picture of a yearbook signature! Alabama voters: right, ok. Still seems like convenient timing. Like, I get that sexual assault is wrong. No one is disputing that. But these allegations are from years ago, and the media has been known to stretch truths to sway elections. And I'm not sure how these allegations stop him from doing his job. I mean, bill Clinton did his job and probably was a way worse guy in this regard. Cnn: breaking! All Alabama residents are terrible hypicrits who love under aged rape! Alabama voters: that's not at all what- Smarmy internet jerkoffs: haha the Bible says no pedophilia, you ignorant Southerners sicken me. Alabama voters: you know what, fuck it. He gets my vote.
  15. 3 points
    SH_MM

    General AFV Thread

    The UAE ordered ERA packages from the German manufacturer Dynamit Nobel Defence, which also provides ERA for the Puma. This Leclerc seems to be fitted with such ERA. As you can see at 1:15, the DND ERA also covers the rear of the turret.
  16. 3 points
    KSP was calling my name this afternoon, so I had to do something ridiculous. 85x21x21m 520 ton obelisk, landed on Ike so that it always points at Duna.
  17. 3 points
    Hey guys, you know what is great for our tank industry? Making a tank that requires twice as much steel when our metallurgy went to shit.
  18. 3 points
    Second Testbed for Object 477 of the Molot design program on modified T-80 or T-80U chassis (7 rollers instead of 6 per side) http://gurkhan.blogspot.ru/2017/12/blog-post_7.html
  19. 3 points
    Collimatrix

    Tanks guns and ammunition.

    I have been thinking about this a bit. Here are my thoughts: For the NATO 120mm, GLATGMs of any sort don't seem to make much sense if they use pure rocket propulsion. They are very space inefficient because the 120mm cartridge case is strongly bottlenecked: All of the volume inside the ammunition rack occupying the difference between the case diameter and the gun caliber is wasted when using GLATGMs. This isn't so bad with the 125mm and 105mm guns, because they are not as strongly bottlenecked as the 120mm. Really, the 120mm NATO smoothbore was designed to do one thing and do it really well, and that is fire the meanest APFSDS rounds on the battlefield so it can kill Soviet frying pan tanks dead. It's a bit less efficient at everything else, but killing Ivan's endless sea of tanks was understandably prioritized. Wasting volume is an important consideration because volume costs mass. Every cubic centimeter inside a tank has to be protected by some amount of armor, and armor costs weight. So wasting any of that space is an inefficiency that adds up surprisingly quickly. So this gun-launched guided projectile is an improvement over GLATGMs, efficiency-wise because none of the volume of the projectile is wasted by being a rocket motor. The projectile can, in principle, extend from the maximum overall length of the projectile to nearly the rear inside wall of the case head like M829A3 with all the necessary propellant packed around it. The only problem is that all the electronics and fin actuators and whatnot in the guided projectile need to be hardened to withstand acceleration inside the gun tube, which is quite a bit higher than the gentler acceleration of a rocket motor. But that still leaves the question of why you would want this in the ammo rack instead of another round of HEAT-MP or APFSDS. In my opinion, indirect fires are best left to dedicated artillery. And if the MBTs are out on the prowl without artillery or air support, someone has some explaining to do. The place where I see this sort of round being very useful is on one of those light-medium "expeditionary tanks" that are periodically popular, or even on something like a Centauro. Those sorts of vehicles are supposed to be light enough that they can be easily deployed internationally to sudden crises in lighter transport aircraft than proper MBTs require. In that sort of situation, it seems a lot more likely that the expeditionary force won't have proper artillery support, since SPGs have become just as big and almost as heavy as MBTs and will likely be left at home.
  20. 3 points
    Collimatrix

    WoT v WT effort-thread

    On TS we concluded that they need to add a Canadian tree. Top of the tree will be one of those Canadian Leo 1s with the add-on armor, LRF and other goodies. So the game will have an amazing, super-upgraded Leo 1 that can give a T-64A a run for its money... but not on the German tree.
  21. 3 points
    The stuff about all the top level FBI people being corrupt cunts that let the hildabeast walk really has me pissed off. At the corrupt FBI assholes, Comey, Meuler, the Storzk guy, also the press for basically doing zero investigating while Obama was in office, while sucking his dick and acting like he did anything worthwhile, and Obama admin for being both corrupt as fuck as and incompetent. Throw the democrats in for abandoning the first amendment to embrace identity politics, group thing and socialism while fucking over health care, and I don't think I've ever been as disgusted with politics as I am now. The republican mainstream guys are no better, hell the democrats have trained them to be polite losers with no fight, so fuck them too!
  22. 3 points
    ‘合作-2017’"Сотрудничество-2017" Joint anti-terror exercises Boys from 604 special tactical center and SOBR Lynx are having the true Chinese experience.
  23. 3 points
  24. 3 points
    SH_MM

    The Leopard 2 Thread

    That's quite interesting. As far as I know, there aren't really any modern (i.e. 2A6/2A7) Leopard 2 tanks available for loan or leasing. Germany doesn't seem to be interested in giving tanks away considering that they are upgrading older tanks and want to increase then German tank fleet. The Netherlands have sold most of their 180 Leopard 2A6 tanks to Canada (20), Portugal (37) and Finland (100) - all these countries don't . The 16 last Dutch Leopard 2A6 tanks were incorporated into the German army (together with 2 tanks loaned from Germany they are operated by Dutch crews). That leaves only Greece with 170 Leopard 2A6 and Spain with 219 as other sources of the Leopard 2A6. The Leopard 2A5 is only operated by Poland, Sweden and Denmark, all these countries are currently upgrading/enlarging their tank fleets. The market for new leased/loaned tanks isn't really there. The M1 Abrams might be available - and maybe the Leclerc tank. I can imagine that the German industry manages to persuade the government for some kind of odd deal, that would end in Norway being offered German 2A6 tanks, while the Norwegian Leopard 2A4 tanks then are added to the Leopard 2A7V upgrade. In the end we have loaned/leased Leopard 2 tanks to the Netherlands, Canada, Sweden and Spain over the past two/three decades. AFAIK Rheinmetall and KMW still own a few Leopard 2 tanks, so they might upgrade them and offer them in 2019 or they use these tanks to replace the German ones loaned/leased to Norway. The former could mean that Rheinmetall might in theory be able to offer a variant of the Leopard 2 ADT (formerly known as "Revolution" until Rheinmetall saw that some customers - i.e. non-democratic countries or those with instable democracies - might link the word "revolution" to something bad). I don't really know if a Leopard 2 replacement will be ready in 2025. The MGCS might still need a few years, so essentially they have to replace the leased/loaned tanks Leopard 2 tanks (or a version of the Leclerc/Abrams). ___ On an unrelated note: Austrian Leopard 2A4 "upgrades" Leopard 2A4 for riot controll Leopard 2A4 with shield for the loader ... and the latest upgrade: Leopard 2 with new external storage racks! Each tank made as limited edition (one piece per upgrade).
  25. 3 points
    There's a lot that's subtly wrong with the 1911 that makes it a suboptimal issue gun. Mind you, most military personnel could probably be armed with flintlocks or even hi-points and it would matter very little. But there's still a lot that's less than ideal. The 1911's barrel is tilted in and out of locking engagement with the slide by a little articulated, swinging link: This was a simplification by Browning from his previous design, the 1902 Military, which had two links. It turned out that the locking system would work with two links, still work just fine with one link, and as Browning later discovered, work best of all with no links, like in a Hi-Power or Glock: The older linked barrel system in the 1911 causes the locking surfaces to describe a relatively small arc of movement as they engage and disengage. This is bad, because they're not arc-shaped, they're flat, and over time they tend to grind themselves into a shape conforming to the actual motion they are performing. The linkless system of the Hi Power and almost all subsequent automatic pistols also describes an arc, but it's an arc with a way bigger radius so it's practically flat. The slide and barrel locking surfaces last a lot longer, which is one less thing for the armorer to worry about. Speaking of things the armorer needs to worry about, 1911s just have a lot of parts compared to modern pistols. I want to emphasize that part; 1911s are dead simple compared to a lot of their contemporaries. But pistol design has moved on, and modern pistol designs simply have more rugged, and fewer parts than a 1911. Compared to other pistols, 1911s are significantly more maintenance-intensive to keep in action. The manufacturing quality and tolerance of the 1911 is a bit of a mess. Not Browning's fault, not Colt's fault (well, it might be there's a little, long story), but manufacturing technology has moved on since the thing was designed. 1911 parts aren't exactly interchangeable by modern standards. It is, relative to modern designs, a pistolsmithing intensive design to keep going. Now, all of these things are actually sort of good for the 1911 when it comes to competition. The fact that it has lots of parts that do lots of things mean that there are plenty of places for the smiths to tinker to get those moving parts to hum along exactly how they want. The feed angle and unlocking time can be adjusted by the link length. The tightness of the barrel-to-slide lockup can be adjusted by fitting the barrel bushing. Modern pistols don't have barrel bushings or links, so fine-tuning those aspects would require machining work on a much larger and more expensive part. The fact that the 1911 was in service so long also meant that the AMU had a lot of time to figure out exactly how to turn them into competition guns, so there is a large body of knowledge on the minutiae of 1911 smithing. Finally, 7 rounds of ammo per magazine and a single action trigger with a manual safety are just sort of archaic.
  26. 3 points
    A leak picture from a private exhibition of new PLA spec-ops night vision device one on the left basically is PLA version of GPNVG-18 for both day and night using the one on the right says pyro-magnetic imaging device the earlier leaked three bino head mount night vision seems like didn't make it after all
  27. 3 points
    The Panther's invulnerable Kruppstahl was too strong for any Allied gun, so they had to attack the ground around it until the Panther was stuck on a slight elevation and could not move in any direction without breaking its final drives.
  28. 3 points
    A lot of picture of HAVE DASH II aka stealth AAM,and the picture of a model of it i never seen these picture before and it makes me ashamed to even just to ask where did the guy find these..... anyone have any idea?
  29. 3 points
    Mighty_Zuk

    Israeli AFVs

    Below the drum we see a schematics of the hull ammo rack, along with different colors and markings to tell which shells are where. The controller shows the number '6', which may indicate how many shells are left in the drum.
  30. 3 points
  31. 3 points
    The short answer is no. The long answer is kind of, but not really. In 1940, Canada was starting up its own tank brigade, and a decision was made to arm it with domestically produced tanks. Producing the Cruiser Tank Mk.VI at Canadian factories was impossible, so a decision was made to use the American Medium Tank M3 chassis to build a tank that isn't shit. At this point, the Somua S35 was actually considered for production (among many other designs from other nations), but ultimately rejected. The result of this process was the Ram tank, a cast hull on the M3's riveted chassis. The Canadians actually ended up hiring one of the French guys who worked on the S35 to help with setting up casting production. Some historians argue that the Ram influenced the Sherman, but that is rather unlikely. The Ram entered production first, but the Medium Tank T6 was already completed by the time a sample arrived at Aberdeen.
  32. 3 points
    And then the Internet happened...
  33. 3 points
    By the way, for future reference, directly linking to my profile doesn't actually do anything, you have to do @ name without the space for it to page someone. Also, while it's fine here, don't bother doing it on the general discussion boards because I very rarely read that forum. Anyway, the newer 14.5mm rounds used by the Chinese are rather interesting, and while it is suggested they use it, both on fixed tripod mountings and in turrets for certain vehicles aswell as for export, alot of where and how exactly it's used is unknown for the most part. As for data on the SLAP round made for it, well, let's take a look. The round itself is called the DGJ02, there's a few interesting things to note about it, like, unlike the US .50 SLAP design, it has a fully covered nosed designed to break away in petals after firing (originally it was design to separate after 150-200m, I've heard that's been improved on though.) This is rather interesting, as some machine gun designs and rifles can't actually use US styled open tipped SLAP without modifications, example, the Barrett M82/M107 can't because the sub caliber tip won't actually engage the feed ramps properly without a modified barrel and ramping. You'll also notice from the image above that it has a tracer in the back, nothing out the ordinary, one minor point of interest however is that it harkens back to old school ranging tracers of WWI in that it uses a dual colored tracer that's Green out to 500m and then Red out to 1000m+ (I don't know the exact burnout range on the 2nd stage of the tracer.) As for how it performs, the thing is a goddamn brute, the Tungsten Carbide penetrator has a weight of 45g and has a MV of approximately 1,250 m/s and will reliably punch through 20mm of RHA at a 60 degree incline at 1000m distance. some speculations on why the Chinese chose to go with a new HMG design in the QJG02 over the Type 56 and 58 (old license produced KPVs and ZPUs) is that these run quite a bit hotter than WW2 vintage ammunition, or that maybe it feeds better, or just that they wanted a fresh design to replace the aging fleet of KPV clones, I've never really gotten a straight answer on this, but the point is it was deemed necessary to move on to a new design, which we'll discuss later. There's also a second round they designed to go with it called the DGE02, which is listed as an "APHEI" round designed against soft skinned and light armored vehicles and low flying aircraft, basically, the test for this was, once again, at 1000m, it will penetrate 15mm of RHA set at a less punishing 30 degree incline, then there's a second test where they shot 2 thin RHA plates at 300m, one 2mm thick and another behind it 1.2mm thick (distance apart is unknown), they claim that "at least 20 fragments will penetrate with 75 to 95 additional incendiary pellets being produced which have an average of an 80% chance to ignite aviation fuel." what fuel type exactly they were using, once again I don't know as obviously there's more then one type of aviation fuel. note that this also features the double colored tracer of the DGJ02. So, in addition to the SLAP round, they also made kind of sort of an Mk. 211 analogue to team up with it, they supposedly also made 12.7mm versions of these but I don't have performance characteristics of these. (one of the pictures I used to have for the of DJE02 I used as a stand in was of the 12.7mm version, green case with a yellow tip and black band painted below it.) I'm going to do a part 2 on weapons but, I need to clear some things up first.
  34. 3 points
    FUCK, Trump just became my second favorite president ever
  35. 3 points
  36. 3 points
    It seems the tack being taken by the Moore campaign/attorneys is that the signature was lifted from the divorce paper work that Judge Moore presided over in 1999. And rather than the "D.A." standing for "District Attorney" the initials instead belong to the law clerk who handled his paper work who would - presumably - sign them with a stamp or Auto-pen and add her initials after. honestly? I buy it.
  37. 3 points
    This is an interesting topic. Modern fighter aircraft have very little free space in them. Almost every cubic centimeter inside is filled with something: There are gigantic bays crammed full of electronics with just enough space around them to ensure adequate air circulation, and there's fuel stuffed into every available space to feed the thirsty jet engines. Second World War fighters are quite a bit more open inside. Above is a shot of the inside of the rear fuselage of a Spitfire. As you can see, there's a whole lot of nothing back there. I'll skip a detailed derivation of it, but the Breuget Range Equation explains that the cruising range of an aircraft is a linear function of cruise airspeed, lift to drag ratio, specific fuel consumption, and the natural log of the fully fueled weight over the empty weight. This looks sort of like the Tsiolkovsky Rocket Equation, and I suppose it's a distant relative. So why not just cram every single corner of the fighter full of fuel? That ought to do the trick! Very simply, they couldn't. Back in World War Two the designers didn't have the luxury of computer-controlled everything. That means that, if the aircraft had multiple fuel tanks, the pilot needed to manually select which ones were feeding to the engine. It meant that flight computers couldn't automatically re-trim the aircraft if the balance shifted in flight. Also, they didn't have fancy fly-by-wire systems, so the aircraft had to be statically stable with the center of gravity in front of the center of lift: Moreover, since we're talking about fighters here, the center of lift has to be fairly close to the center of gravity, or the fighter will suffer from pitch stiffness and the pilot will really have to pull hard on the stick to get the nose to move. Again, the vast majority of WWII fighters relied on the pilot's muscles to actuate the flight controls, so having heavy control forces was out of the question. All this together meant that the fuel tanks in a Second World War fighter could really only be placed close to the center of gravity so that consuming the fuel would affect the stability and trim of the aircraft as little as possible. Ideally the ammunition for the guns would be near the center of gravity as well for the same reason. On a typical WWII fighter the center of lift will be located somewhere a little bit back from the front quarter mark of the chord length of the wings. Airfoils generally have their aerodynamic center around 25% of of the Mean Aerodynamic Chord, but the horizontal stabilizers push it back a little further. The center of gravity will be in front of that. So, basically, a designer would want the fuel tanks to be centered at about the leading edge of the wing. That's the reason that most WWII fighters only have fuel tanks in the fuselage, often immediately behind the engine or under the pilot. Surprisingly few have fuel tanks in the wings, given the amount of volume the wing represents. Generally speaking the wings were already full of landing gear, guns and ammo, and sticking gas tanks in there wasn't worth the bother. It may have been possible to put auxiliary fuel tanks in the wings further outboard of the guns, but this would have reduced roll rate at least until that fuel was consumed. I'm not aware of any designs that did this, but that doesn't mean they didn't exist. One big exception is the P-51 Mustang. The P-51 had those wonderful laminar-flow wings that did everything except actually make the airflow laminar. Laminar flow airfoils can be much larger for a given amount of drag than their conventional counterparts, and the P-51 had gigantically thick wings. This meant that there was plenty of room for guns, ammo, landing gear, and a generous amount of fuel: So, practically speaking, most designers were stuck with the amount of internal fuel they could pack under the pilot and behind the engine. Increasing lift to drag ratio typically optimizes for aircraft with very smooth, cigar-shaped fuselages and long, skinny wings. So, basically B-29 shaped sorts of things. That synergizes well with optimizing for sustained turn rate, but as we've seen, optimizing for sustained turn rate conflicts with just about everything else. Most WWII engines tended to have samey fuel efficiency, although the British sleeve-valve engines had a small edge in fuel economy. The Soviets did try using diesel engines in bombers, but for a variety of reasons this didn't really work. This may not have been a total loss; according to some sources the V-2 diesel in the... well, just about every Soviet medium and heavy tank was derived from a diesel intended for aircraft. I've never seen the final word on whether that's true or not. @EnsignExpendable, do you know? Flying at higher altitude tended to result in better range. At the end of the day, the best way to solve the problem was probably drop tanks.
  38. 3 points
    https://andrei-bt.livejournal.com/635729.html
  39. 2 points
    So, the ATF has regulations regarding what all can and cannot be done to serial numbers. One such thing is that you cannot even re-engrave a worn or faint serial number because that introduces uncertainty about what the original was. I would imagine that this same kind of logic is being applied to this situation: the original has been modified, so the whole thing is in question now. That, and all the other accusations have fallen flat on their face.
  40. 2 points
    The first M1296 delivered to the 2nd Cavalry Regiment.
  41. 2 points
  42. 2 points
    Mighty_Zuk

    Israeli AFVs

    Someone claims to be personally familiar with the incident - says it occurred in 2006 after an ATGM hit the powerpack section. Fire was put out quickly enough, engine replaced and it returned to service very shortly after. I don't know what kind of data and statistics MANTAK have, and I know they make overall very practical decisions, but I think it's about time the LFP gets some armor. The hull is too tall to neglect that area and focus all the frontal armor on the UFP.
  43. 2 points
    Well you know those eight page of charging documents I posted/linked are so difficult to read and understand. You mean December of 2016 came AFTER the November election?
  44. 2 points
  45. 2 points
    Source is SPF posts from this https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,14091.0.html thread. Desktop model photos - I've found em several days ago at WorthPoint. FB-23 model was stolen from NG model shop by off-staff repair technician, before it was sold to one unsuspecting guy for a fistful of $$ and then offered for sale on eBay before partyvan has arrived.
  46. 2 points
  47. 2 points
    RobotMinisterofTrueKorea

    WoT v WT effort-thread

    Fitting that it was a North Korean MiG I shot down.
  48. 2 points
    Ulric

    The Crossout thread.

    I got rushed by several at once, and killed three of them without even overheating my guns......
  49. 2 points
  50. 2 points
    The water propellers are gone.
×