Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 05/23/2018 in all areas

  1. 6 points

    Contemporary Western Tank Rumble!

    From the Strong Europe Tank Challenge 2018. The dispersion of five round fired by a Swedish Strv 122 (at just 500 metres distance). Interim results... note that Romania is missing (no show?).
  2. 5 points
    Meanwhile at Eurosatory 2018 : The Euro Main Battle Tank (EMBT), a private venture project intended for the export market.
  3. 5 points

    Tank “document” misleading

    各位最近可能在WT论坛上见过这张图片,在一些争论陆上自卫队90式战车的讨论串里: Some of you may have seen this pic recently on WT forum, in some thread arguing the protection of JGSDF Type 90: Discussion on WT forum 我就直说吧,表格里的中文注解说了,这不过是个“猜想”,GUESSING。 To be straight, the Chinese annotation in the table said it is just a GUESSING. 注解内容可能完全是编造的,但不幸的是,不同语言间的障碍使你们无法看穿这点。 This annotation could be totally nonsense but unfortunately a barrier between languages prevent you guys see throught it. 实际上,这又是一份关于陆上自卫队10式战车的文件,说的并不是90式。 In fact, again, this document itself is about JGSDF Type 10 MBT, not Type 90. 同样的花招,不一样的人,是吧? Same trick, different people, huh? ↑陆上自卫队的10式战车规格书 JGSDF specification handbook of Type 10 MBT ↑59页,附录B,性能(规定)以及诸元 page 59, Appendix B, performance (regulations) and data 下面简要说说这些性能规定如何编写、如何加密。 Let's talk about these regulations and how they were made and encrypted. 大家可能知道日语中有平假名和片假名,和拉丁语中的字母还有大写字母是差不多的。 You may know that Japanese have Hirakana and Katakana, like Latin have letters and capital letters. 正如图中所示,一些最关键的数值和描述用平假名、片假名、罗马字(拉丁字母)隐去了。 As you can see, some of the most crucial numbers and descriptions are covered by a Hirakana or Katakana or Romaji(Latin letters). 这些数值和描述被归在一起,编入附属的手册,称为“别册”。 These numbers and descriptions were collected and listed in some append book, called Bessatsu(別冊). 在查阅别册时,就好比在看试卷的答题卡。但如果把别册里面的数值和描述涂黑,你就根本不知道说啥。 When you look up to the append book, just like viewing the answer sheet of an exam paper. But when numbers and descriptions were censored, you'll never know what it said. 比如说,正面防护: For example, the frontal protection: “耐弾性 - 正面 - 正面要部は、【あ】に射距離【え】m相当存速において、貫徹されない。” 读起来是这样的: 耐弹性 - 正面 - 正面重要部位可抵御【あ】以相当于射击距离【え】米存速的射击,不会贯穿。 It read like this: Protection - Frontal - Frontal crucial part should withstand 【あ】 firing at a distance of 【え】meter speed reduce equivalent, and not penetrate. 【あ】代表某种弹药,可能是尾翼稳定穿甲弹,但不知道是量产弹种还是实验弹种。 【あ】stands for certain type of ammunition, probably APFSDS, but don't know whether it is production shot or experimental. 【え】代表某个射击距离,可以是1000、1500或2000(米),但这么远的距离,炮弹会受到风力和重力影响,故无法精确瞄准靶车的防护区域。 【え】stands for certain firing distance, could be 1000 , 1500 or 2000 (meters), but on such a long distance, shot could be effect by wind and gravity, thus cannot aim on the protection area of target vehicle precisely. 一个常见的解决方式是在更近的距离上开火,比如说200到550米,同时减少推进药量,使得穿甲弹的终点速度符合特定距离的速降。这是一种等效方法。 The usual solution is to fire from a much closer range, from 200 to 550 meters, while reducing the propellant charge so that the end speed of AP shot could match the speed drop on certain distance. This is an equivalant method. 有的人争辩说90式战车可以抵挡另一辆90式战车发射的穿甲弹(JM33),距离大约250米。这一说法源自一段未知视频片段,具体什么视频他们自己也没看过。较近的射击距离是为了能更好的瞄准,为此可能使用了减装药来模拟远距离终点速度,但也无法证明。 Some people argue that Type 90 MBT can withstand AP shot (JM33) firing from another Type 90 MBT, on a distance about 250 meters. The source of this statement came from an unknown video clip, which they have never seen. Firing on closer range is for better aim, and they could have use reduced charge to simulate a much longer range, but we cannot prove.
  4. 5 points

    Israeli AFVs

    The difference is their use. Nagmasho't is the baseline version with a decently protected superstructure and slightly improved protection. Basically just a Sho't remade to become an APC. Nagmachon was later developed with a higher superstructure called 'doghouse' with protective armored glass and 7.62mm machine guns. Few versions were made but this one is the latest one to which all were converted: Nakpadon took armor protection even further and up-armored the front with composite armor instead of the outdated Blazer ERA, got new and better side armor, lower superstructure and better protection for it as well. A recon version is called Nagmapop: A Combat Engineering Vehicle is called Puma: And a specialized (also made in very low quantities) transport for the special engineering unit Ya'alom is called Nakpilon: All these are used in very low quantities, and only where some unit must have heavy armor but doesn't yet have the Namer.
  5. 4 points
    The design of the Leclerc allows a more convenient gun balance (on or very close to the trunnions axis). This allows the minimize momentums. The turret is balanced as well to control any momentum to achieve the same controls over momentums. Turret traverse and gun elevation have high acceleration rate (~45°/s²) dispite the 30°/s max speed. The autoloader allows a constant rate of fire whatever the tank is doing. I'll stop here, I'll skip FCS and suspension because, they have proven their values. The thing is none of the persons here can judge the value of any tanks because the hardware hasn't been shown into their worst conditions. Abrams, Challenger 2, Leclerc, Léopard 2 and others have just fired at worst on bumpy dirt roads with the crews doing all the SOP requirements to ensure a steady speed and minimise the vibrations. No matter what the competitions or tests have shown, people always forget that there is a huge piece of meatware that seats between the seat and the handelbar that can f**k things up... I won't hide that I consider the human loader as a risk at high speed high bumpiness. But in real combat, the pace of engagement is much slower than we think.
  6. 4 points

    General AFV Thread

    KMW and Nexter apparently developed a new amphibious vehicle. No idea if this will be KMW or Nexter branded...
  7. 4 points
    Pictured, the Union being awesome:
  8. 4 points

    Israeli AFVs

    As we can see, it has everything a turret might need but I caught a few unconventional things, for the better and worse: Commander seems to have an MWIR night sight with a recognition range of 5km on the main vision block (FLIR), while the gunner has an EMWIR sight with a somewhat longer range, neither of which however are mentioned specifically on Elbit's site. Their HDTV cameras are also different, probably the gunner also having a longer range, higher quality one. There are 2 MATADOR anti-bunker/materiel/personnel short range rockets for up to several hundred meters, primarily for urban warfare scenarios where you may need a little more punch than a 30mm gun can provide. These are, of course, fully interchangeable with Spike LR 2 missiles. The Trophy system does not seem to have an autoloading mechanism on this one. We know the IDF required, about a decade ago during trials of the Trophy against the Iron Fist, for both contenders to have 3 interceptors per side, for a total of 6. This meant the autoloader would accommodate either 3 munitions, or 2 with 1 already loaded. It would be quite ridiculous for it to only have 1 charge per side. We do not know yet if this was intentionally left out from this presentation, or a temporary design choice. But we can see that the mortar's autoloading mechanism was also omitted.
  9. 3 points

    Jell-O Shots

    M855A1 in ballistics gel with velocity and pressure
  10. 3 points
    APS systems and at which range they can be spotted by radar systems according to the ADS manufacturer...
  11. 3 points


  12. 3 points
  13. 3 points

    Jell-O Shots

    M855 Green Tip for comparison
  14. 3 points
    Every single one of these is dated Nov 7, 2016. Apparently it was a hot topic for all of one day. No wonder I don't remember it. Looking at these sources, they are not particularly liberal. Lets go through them. 1. The ABA Journal. This is the official journal of the American Bar Association. I'm guessing it does not have a strong political bent other than being pro-lawyer 2. The Telegraph. Pretty much the paper of record in the UK, generally considered conservative. 3. The Wall Street Journal. Generally pro-business and conservative, very conservative editorial page. 4. Quora.com - this does not even count as a news source. 5. Canada Free Press - I was not familiar with this one, but according to their own description they are "Espousing Conservative viewpoints, cornerstone of which focuses on love of God, love of family, love of country." 6. Valuewalk.com - I don't know much about this site but it looks like its mostly business news. I would not call any of these sources "liberal". To me, it looks like this was a news story that ran for about a day in centrist and conservative media sources and was mostly speculative. These are not news articles, they are mostly op-ed pieces or legalistic theory-making.
  15. 3 points
  16. 3 points
  17. 3 points

    General AFV Thread

    And so it begins:
  18. 3 points
    Since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, virtually every single Federal elected office of any importance has been held by people within or cushy with a good ol' boys club known to some as "the Establishment". Certain board members might call it "the Cathedral". Described, this group is descended from the white anglo-saxon protestant ruling class, although for various reasons they may not be white, anglo-saxon, or protestant, these days. All hold roughly similar views and are in broad terms chummy with each other. They also fiercely defend their seat of power against the "wrong people". Trump was one of the "wrong people". The people who voted for him, virtually to a man, were "wrong people", and worse they did not put on hair shirts as penance for it. Instead, they stood tall and proud of their deplorableness, and fucking elected the man that the Establishment least wanted to take the reins of power. Prior to this, I did not think the Cathedral could be defeated. I felt that it was impossible for real changes to happen in my country because the coalition of powerful interests would simply block it from happening, while sending up plausible-seeming justifications. But that isn't so, apparently, in the Billionaire Age. Azathoth is too old and weak, and still a blind idiot while increasingly no longer a god. Trump, despite how much Azathoth hated him and did not want him to win, took power anyway. From November 2016 to February 2017, I saw a 240 year old, rusted, abandoned machine sputter to life and elect someone that powerful people did not want elected. Before then, I really did think our Constitution was functionally dead. It's not, Trump proved that.
  19. 3 points

    Israeli AFVs

  20. 3 points
  21. 3 points
    On Sept. 15, 1896, two trains collided in a pre-arranged collision at a site three miles south of current-day West, Texas. The trains, moving at approximately 50 mph, were the main attraction at a publicity stunt created by a man named William George Crush, general passenger agent of the Missouri-Kansas-Texas Railroad, who conceived the idea in order to demonstrate a staged train wreck as a public spectacle. No admission was charged, and train fares to the crash site were offered at the reduced rate of US$2 from any location in Texas. It is believed that 40,000 people showed up to witness the event, making it temporarily the second largest city in Texas. Things went horribly awry because the violence of the collision was far worse than anticipated. The boilers exploded, sending huge chunks of metal hurtling through the air. Two or three people were killed and many more wounded. Of of the wounded was the man who took this photograph at the moment of collision. He was a photographer named Jarvis Deane, and an instant after he snapped this photo, a bolt struck him in the eye, blinding him in that eye. For the rest of his life he was known as "One-eyed Deane."
  22. 3 points
    Trump issues executive orders to reduce restrictions on firing federal workers http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/389450-trump-administration-will-reduce-restrictions-on-firing-federal The orders call for federal workers to devote at least 75 percent of their on-the-clock time to work-related purposes, direct agencies to reward "performance over seniority" and push agencies to renegotiate contracts with unions, among other provisions. TYRANNY!!! The American Federation of Government Employees, the largest federal employee union which represents 700,000 government workers, issued a statement calling the move an "assault on public servants." "Our government is built on a system of checks and balances to prevent any one person from having too much influence," the union's president David Cox said, according to BuzzFeed. "President Trump’s executive orders will undo all of that. This administration seems hellbent on replacing a civil service that works for all taxpayers with a political service that serves at its whim.” Of COURSE the Union is upset that the gravy train is coming to an end. White House officials announced the impending orders on a call with reporters. The officials said the changes are aimed at saving taxpayers $100 million per year. I'm still not tired of #WINNING yet
  23. 3 points
    That is a fair and good question. My model is that Trump is an insurgent, populist candidate. His opposition is what could loosely be termed "the establishment," which consists more or less of the entire US government minus the military and some law enforcement. There are exceptions here; there are plenty of anti-Trump officers in the military, although his popularity with the enlisted is near-universal. There are probably also some anti-Trump law enforcement officers. I can't imagine that many senior FBI members are fans, for example. Trump's opposition also includes organizations that are not formally part of the US government, but work in concert with it so closely that they might as well be. These are organizations such as all accredited institutions of higher learning, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), most of the press, any respectable publications such as scientific journals or magazines that people read to look smart, like The Economist, and the trendy and cool part of the tech industry (e.g. Google and Facebook), which has been in bed with spooks and worse for at least the past ten years. Trump's base consists of an extremely ad-hoc coalition of evangelicals, manufacturing-sector union workers, certain sectors of industry but not others, nationalists, anti-immigration hardliners (who substantially overlap with the union workers for obvious economic reasons), the NRA (although they're not exactly in love with him), and various ideological cranks. Also, much was made of Trump's support among extremist racialists, but it's been pointed out before that those people are too rare to matter when it comes to counting votes. Think tanks, libertarians and churches can go either way, no way to safely generalize. However, Trump is extremely polarizing so there are relatively few people in the US who are entirely indifferent to his presidency. Trump has very few friends in the government, his base of support lies almost entirely outside of it. So he has to make frequent appeals to that base, and keep them excited and fired up otherwise his many enemies could dismantle his presidency. He is, again, so polarizing, that if Trump were to lose power, the results would probably be extremely painful and humiliating for him. Therefore, if Trump did anything to strongly alienate what little support he has in the government, I would be shocked and conclude he had lose his mind. For example, if he tried to win over socially liberal opponents and bolster some of his libertarian-leaning base by de-funding and publicly humiliating the DEA for the years of awful and pernicious shit they've done, I will conclude that he's nuts. It would make some people happy, but it does not fit into the model of a dispassionate and Machiavellian Trump that I entertain. The Trump I envision always puts practical concerns before ideological ones; he simply has too many enemies to do otherwise. If Trump were to concede on the border wall in any public way, I will conclude that he's mentally incompetent. This is not the same thing as not building the wall, although at this point I think he will. If Trump publicly says that, no, on second thought the wall is a stupid idea and he spoke to some economists at the Reason Institute and actually free trade and immigration is totally a good idea, he's fucking screwed up. A lot of Republican politicians have tried to make peace in the past by publicly sacrificing some previously held principle (c.f. Dubya's "I'm a uniter, not a divider.") Trump has so far not taken that bait, but if he does on the wall, I will have to conclude that everything he did heretofore was some sort of gigantic fluke. If he gets politically outmaneuvered and is unable to build the wall because he can't secure funding, that's different. If that happens, you'll know because he'll be screaming that the only reason there isn't a big, beautiful chunk of concrete standing proud above the Rio Grande is that the goddamn Democrats just couldn't get their act together. That is the tactic he's using now, but the Democrats have proven so feckless that I don't think they can deny him his wall in the long run. That's also why I disregard any piece that talks about how wrong Trump is on issue XYZ and he really needs to change his mind. For starters, nearly the entire media hates Trump and will publish any fool thing that paints him in a negative light. It's beyond parody at this point. Second, that's exactly the sort of bait that previous Republicans became notorious for chomping down on. Even if Trump actually is wrong on issue XYZ, he's maintaining the stance he has for a reason. He can't afford to break up his coalition by suddenly changing course. Even if an important part of his coalition really is wrong on issue XYZ (see DEA above). Similarly, in the international arena, if Trump were to start talking about how the Saudis are horrible allies really, and frankly they deserve to lose all US support and weapons sales, and if that results in them all being dragged out into the street and messily murdered so much the better, and then if he were to actually withdraw US support, I would conclude that Trump was crazy. If he were just to say it as a way to put pressure on the Saudis, and then squeeze them for something he wanted before going back to being friends, then that would be classic Trump. Again, abandoning the Saudis would make some people happy, but the Saudis make themselves too useful to Trump to just abandon like that, odious though they are. Particularly if you believe the rumors that MBS had his close relatives tortured, and then passed the juicy information about whom they were making campaign contributions to on to Trump. I don't know if I endorse that particular theory, but I suspect something like that did happen. Basically, if Trump were to do anything to attempt to win over detractors but at the expense of part of his base, I will become convinced he doesn't know what he's doing. If he says one thing and then does something that seems completely at odds with what he said, then I am not convinced that it is a sign of incompetence necessarily. Trump posturing just to put pressure on people I can buy. That's smart, in a cutthroat sort of way, and Trump is definitely cutthroat. Trump actively undermining his own support in any sort of attempt to appease or win over his opponents would genuinely surprise me. That isn't going to work, and he should know better. If Trump were to carelessly reveal what he actually believes in a way that alienated his base, I would consider that a mistake. How grave a mistake would depend on the circumstances. I have only a vague notion of what Trump actually believes or what his actual motivations are. But let's suppose he's actually a snobbish elitist who views most of his supporters as ignorant mud-yokels. Actually, I think it's pretty unlikely he thinks like that; he has trophy wives and gold-plated hair and everything. He's so nouveau riche it's painful to look at, and he probably thinks of himself as a man of the people, just rich thanks to hard work, talent and some luck. But for sake of argument. If he were to publicly indicate that he actually holds his supporters in contempt, that would convince me that he'd either gone senile or just gotten astronomically lucky thus far. Or let's suppose that Trump really is a white nationalist. Again, I'm having difficulty reconciling that idea with what I've seen, but for sake of argument. If he were to publicly disclose this, it would make a very small part of his base overjoyed and the majority of them disgusted. Pumping up a tiny portion of your base at the expense of the greater portion is just stupid politics. So if Trump has any wildly unpopular opinions that would drive away voters, he'll keep them private. That's what it would take. I would be looking for a large, unforced error that cost Trump his political base. If he says things that sound idiotic, that doesn't necessarily mean he's an idiot. He could be posturing to make his opponents spend money they don't have to, like he did in 2016 when he held rallies in states he had no hope of winning, but did anyway to get the Hillary campaign to waste more money on their safe states because her campaign and events were more expensive than his. If Trump says something that seems at odds with his previous stances, again, it's not necessarily a fuck-up. I think we can say in retrospect that his tweets about being willing to continue DACA were a ploy, and a very successful one at that. The ploy did make his base anxious, but only the most drama-prone actually split with him over it. As Trump took no concrete actions to actually reverse his position, the vast majority of his base were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt and where rewarded by the conspicuous public humiliations that the Democrats suffered from the ploy. If Trump says something that is only dubiously in English and doesn't make any logical or semantic sense, that doesn't necessarily mean he's an idiot or that he's had a stroke. I mean, it could be, but it will be a while before we know because Trump says complete nonsense every once in a while. I am convinced that he does this for the sheer joy of watching people go ballistic on Twitter. If I could make thousands of people lose their shit just by typing "covfefe" with my thumbs, I can't imagine it's a vice I would or could resist.
  24. 3 points

    French flair

  25. 3 points
    From Syrian parade in 1956: Both were armed with the (supposedly) Breda SAFAT 12.7mm machine guns.