Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 02/22/2018 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    While this is being portrayed as a purge of conservatives, all I see is dollar $igns. Force users to fork over important personal information, in this case phone numbers. Twitter will blandly assure users that they only need the numbers for "security purposes" whereupon at a later date they'll sell that information to the highest bidder. As with all free social media, the users aren't the customers, they're the product being sold. Once again, I'm glad that I've never joined Twatter.
  2. 3 points
    TokyoMorose

    GLORIOUS T-14 ARMATA PICTURES.

    It's a HRG. Hemispherical Resonator Gyroscope - it would be a major accomplishment of Russian industry if they have actually put these into mass production. Only two firms on the planet so far make them. (Also, first actual post of a longtime lurker!)
  3. 2 points
  4. 1 point
    Ulric

    United States Gun Control Megathread

    It's been said before, but the ideal compromise is to make bump stocks, cranks, binary triggers, etc machineguns, but reopen the registry so you aren't forcing people to sell/turn in/destroy them.
  5. 1 point
    I would happily give up the bump stock I don’t own if it meant I could buy a suppressor without a tax stamp.
  6. 1 point
    Mighty_Zuk

    Israeli AFVs

    Yep, it's Trophy alright. Looking good! Note: The smoke grenade launcher was removed and the gap that was usually taken by it was filled with armor. Notice the gap: Shame they didn't take the opportunity to make a more serious overhaul. The Mark 3 could probably use a little rearrangement in its frontal section, some weight reduction wherever possible, and an improved frontal armor on the hull. I know it's more needed on the sides, but it can't be very economical to have the engine frequently damaged.
  7. 1 point
    Sgt.Squarehead

    Syrian conflict.

    Blimey.....The National Interest is gonna have an aneurism!
  8. 1 point
    What's Korean for "What is wrong with you Abu Hajaar?"
  9. 1 point
    Bronezhilet

    Syrian conflict.

    Well hello there @Collimatrix
  10. 1 point
    Legiondude

    United States Gun Control Megathread

    Since it's being floated on my Facebook news feed, an alleged plot for a school shooting in the Los Angeles area was thwarted when school security overhead a potential threat and reported through the proper channels with school authorities and the local Sheriff's office that led to the student being arrested Basically the "connected the dots" model that should have happened in Florida Of course the kid could have been talking full of shit, but they're going to pin him for possessing an unregistered AR-15 anyway(the other belonged to his Army vet brother)
  11. 1 point
    Worst Korean soldier was never taught the decades old known concept of "backblast" it would appear.
  12. 1 point
    https://vk.com/wall-160278262_235?w=wall-160278262_235 about AEKs, AFAIK this comrade tested both A545, A762 and AK-12 as well
  13. 1 point
    Collimatrix

    General AFV Thread

    According to Richard Ogorkiewicz's Seven Habits of Highly Effective AFV Designers, if you make a monocoque tracked vehicle hull out of RHA steel, about the point that it's structurally sound as a vehicle hull, it is also "shell proof." So the only way an AFV could really fail to be shell proof is if it's open-topped.
  14. 1 point
    Collimatrix

    General AFV Thread

    It depends exactly how and when the HE round explodes. If the HE rounds are exploding overhead and throwing shell fragments, the Western paper-tanks should be safe. In fact, even the aluminum-armored M113 was safe against this sort of threat. HE round fragments have good initial velocity, but very poor sectional density and aerodynamics, so they are crummy armor penetrators. The invention of proximity fuses at the end of WWII meant that it got a lot easier to have large-caliber HE shells explode before they hit the ground. The proximity fuse detected the ground and triggered the shell some distance before it hit the ground. This meant that the fragments spread from a higher level above the ground and chewed up more area around the shell strike, which is very good for pulverizing infantry. I'm not sure when the Soviets got proximity fuses, but I doubt they were too far behind the USA. If the HE rounds are exploding on contact with the armor of the vehicle, the armor needs to withstand not just the impact of the fragments but also the blast overpressure wave from the explosion. Here again I would guess that the Western tanks are safe, since 30mm would be considered quite thick for belly armor against mines. That said, there is a difference in the sort of steel that is ideal for armor against armor-piercing shells and armor that is good for dealing with blast overpressure. Armor against armor-piercing shells is ideally rather hard but a bit brittle, armor against blast overpressure is ideally tough but a bit soft (toughness and hardness are always a trade-off in steel). If the HE round in question is an APHE round that has some degree of structural integrity and is fused to explode a few fractions of a second after hitting something, I think the Leo 1 is screwed. Regular HE rounds don't really overmatch thin armor well, since overmatch essentially involves the shell bending it's flight trajectory abruptly after hitting something hard. Regular HE shells have enough of a shell wall to generate fragments, and they're not really well-suited for such extreme maneuvers. But semi-AP HE projectiles have enough of an armor-piercing body, and usually have delayed-action fuses such that they could probably poke right through. So as long as those 76mm guns have APHE, AP or they could pose a threat from the side. Regular HE, especially with a contact or proximity fuse will probably not work well. That said, there was also a HEAT round for the 76mm field gun, the UBP-344A. I haven't been able to find performance, but it could be that those were a threat from the front.
  15. 0 points
  16. 0 points
    I hadn't seen this one before, and I chuckled. Pro or anti Trump?
×