Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 03/13/2018 in all areas

  1. 2 points

    United States Gun Control Megathread

    Untrue. Oedipus likes to take his victims on death marches, just ask @T___A.
  2. 2 points

    United States Gun Control Megathread

    Guns still worry me, and I really don't think I'd like to live in a state where people can walk about openly carrying them. Then again, I think a lot of that worry likely stems from two things: a lack of knowledge about or experience with firearms, and a (largely) unfairly dim, cynical view of people. If you'd asked me five years ago about guns, I'd probably say that since I wouldn't trust myself with one, why would I trust anybody else? I like to think I've mellowed with time and come to see how unhealthy this attitude is. At the same time, I've become rather more interested in the workings of bolt-action, WW2 and Cold War firearms, and would like to at least fire a handful at a range one day. As far as I know, handguns are illegal in Scotland, and I've been having Hell's own game trying to find out just what kind of firearms other than hunting shotguns and some air rifles it's legal to own. If there's information about the Firearms Act on the Scottish Police website, I haven't found it. I think that education about the nature of firearms is ultimately far more beneficial to society at large than simply having an outright ban. I think we should get over it like we got over our other irrational fears and boogeymen, and I think it's inevitable that firearms will fade away as a convenient scapegoat like homosexuality did. And quite frankly, it's embarrassing that so-called professional news outlets and political leaders don't know the first thing about the firearms they're discussing or deciding whether we should ban them from society. Our government benches runneth over with overweight, overpaid and undereducated people trying to look good by looking busy. I have a perfect Sunday that I will wake up, polish off my egg and soldiers and walk down to the local firing range to practice my Lee-Enfield marksmanship for the Mad Minute, under the watchful tutelage of one of the Army sergeants who runs the range (because civilians can't be trusted, and it gives retired soldiers something interesting to do). I wouldn't even have to take the thing home with me; I could just buy it, keep it at a range armoury and visit to clean, maintain, use and take lessons on it.
  3. 2 points
    I have been remiss, and not been through this thread in a while. Turbo-Electric was largely a curiosity. Kind of cool, lets you do some nifty stuff, but reduction gears kept getting lighter in a way that tons of electrical gear didn't. Considering its main home was the USN, and up until the start of WWII they didn't make a design where weight wasn't limited (pre-treaty ships were limited as a proxy for budget), this really limited its adoption. During the treaty period, where everyone's ships were weight limited, yeah nobody was very interested in a bunch of weight in return for some smallish benefits. They would have been perfect for the Bismarcks, but the Germans were idiots had interesting requirements tangential to actual combat capacity (in this case they required the ability to go from full ahead to full astern within one minute for reasons. They actually do show up once more in warships, in an unlikely place: the Buckley class destroyer escort. Much like the glorious Sherman, the Destroyer escorts used a variety of engine technologies in order to avoid various bottlenecks. So the Buckleys have turbo-electric, and the Cannon class were diesel-electric. This is because reduction gearing was a bottleneck. Second, regarding triple turrets, the US turrets were space efficient, their triple 14"s were pretty close in diameter to the British twin 15" (New Mexico vs. QEs). This was at the cost of a greater use of manpower rather than machinery, which is potentially troublesome. I'd have to see if it was Friedman and look up the actual numbers and points brought up in British commentary. (I should also probably check in at some point whether there were any refits between then and Surigao and whether they actually missed many salvoes, but I remember that being almost entirely a function of the radar carried. I'll see if I have that much effort in me.)
  4. 2 points

    General AFV Thread

    Yes - this was the intent. I was not expecting the small diagram to gather much attention outside of a General WT community who did not understand specifics. I highlighted only general areas of protection outside of RHA. Not specific area's of the protection and thickness composure. The actual composite blocks are covering the middle and top of the hull (Yes to later mentioning if Type10 and Type90 share general block placements). The bottom flooring is spaced steel - not the same level of protection. But of that to protect against explosive discharge. Not the same. The tests were conducted at the primary composite blocks at the turret sides frontally. This is the primary defense against JM33. Mantlet is not protected by ceramic and other materials, basic lining only. Without fabric covering , revels external block shell. I will be happy to aid if you have questions or needed context - I will give what I can without breaking privacy agreement.
  5. 1 point
    B-29 complete with a bomb bay modified for a Tallboy. Alas this did not satiate the USAAF's lust for destruction, and instead a B-29 was modified to carry... ...TWO Tallboys. Just looking at this I've been both shocked, and awe'd.
  6. 1 point

    I like turtles

    Snapper hanging out inside a dear carcass
  7. 1 point
    Red Star-White Elephant? Article on Soviet heavy tanks.
  8. 1 point
  9. 1 point
    If that's all they get I can live with it. AR Weapons of the DEVil still must be available at 7 elevens and when you register to vote in Texas.
  10. 1 point
    Low enriched uranium strikes again! Without going into too much detail that could get me in trouble, the US Navy is looking into switching to low enriched uranium for future reactors. Or at least they were, since the election of Trump it's probably dropped off. But in any case, there would be some ~interesting~ challenges associated with putting LEU in subs and still keeping a long interval between refuelings. Also, it'd be a long time before an LEU reactor got into a sub; Columbia's reactor design (S1B) is already pretty advanced, so the earliest you'd get it is in a Virginia replacement. And considering how weird an LEU reactor would be (at least compared to current fuel fabrication techniques and reactor layout) the Navy would probably want to do a land-based test reactor.
  11. 1 point

    AFV Engines

    It might be the same type of logic used to defend the Merkava 3's 1,200 HP engine compared to the 1,500 HP AGT-1500C: the transmission is more efficient than the previous model, so that it can deliver more performance out of the 675 HP engine to the drive sprockets than the old transmission could extract out of a 800 HP engine. I.e. the old transmission would loose something like 150 HP out of 800 (thus effectively having 650 HP at the drive sprockets), while the new transmission would only loose 25 HP. The same argument was being made by some IDF soldier in the ARMOR magazine quite a while ago - i.e. the Merkava 3's 1,200 HP would come a lot closer to the AGT-1500C due to the higher efficiency of the Renk 304S tansmission. Given that Hunnicutt claims that there are 1,232 net horsepower available in case of the Abrams', this statement was probably exaggerated.
  12. 1 point

    Contemporary Western Tank Rumble!

    There's no rule that says they have to use the same composite fill for all armour blocks. There could be a different array with greater space efficiency (and poorer mass efficiency, or higher cost) filling the spaces where the location of components reduces the volume available for armour. If the left cheek only gets ~40cm eq. from ~80cm LoS, then the obvious thing to do would be to put solid steel in the thinner right cheek - for a total eq. protection of ~70cm! That's probably not what the germans used, but there's clearly room using simple technology to vastly improve upon the space efficiency of the composite armour
  13. 1 point
    Every single ton of carrier you put into a single hull gives you more capacity than the last one. It takes a lot of tonnage to be able to launch even one plane, let alone launch, maintain and arm one plane. If you compare the air wings of light carriers to supercarriers, the latter have a lot more air wing per ton because things like maintenance, seakeeping, launch facilities and deck space are amortized over more planes. Big missile batteries end up on their own platforms with their own superstructure optimized for radar and so on for very good reasons because the USN can afford the tonnage to make their carriers part of a task force. Lastly, VLS cells are a non-trivial cut in the flight deck, which is part of the strength deck and has to have four long cuts in it for catapults, as well as the cuts in the ship girder for the hangar exits onto the elevators. The cuts that already exist are only possible due to classified structural shenanigans of the deep wizardry sort. The Charles de Gaulle has to have a weak spot in her deck because the reactor needs refueling more frequently. As a result, when their new short catapult designs turned out to only work with literally neck-breaking accelerations, they had to cut down to two cats, and the island is way the hell forward, which sucks because that's prime real estate for spotting planes before launch. The Zumwalts are the first missile focused ships to not need the VLS cut to be in prime centerline real estate, and the way they talk about that development indicates that it's bigger than you'd think.
  14. 1 point

    Ryan XV-5 Vertifan

  15. 1 point
    That and 'herd mentaility'.....Stonking video, not sure the tune would hold up so well without it though.
  16. 1 point
    Microburst over Phoenix, AZ
  17. 0 points
    So basically Damian is having a meltdown. What a shock.
  18. 0 points
    Tillerson out, Pompeo in.
  19. 0 points

    Israeli AFVs

    It's less about 'why not' than it is about 'why'. Why would the IDF just publish documents it has on the Merkava 1? And unless none asked the IDF to publish it, it would probably still be classified simply because the expiration date hasn't passed. Though it's probably not hard for some fanboy to go to the Czech Republic with some special gear and measure the armor all around.
  20. 0 points

    Syrian conflict.

    list of some of those, majority are officers
  21. 0 points
    Results of Irma on the Dutch Antilles: Video (Dutch): https://www.rovid.nl/def/km/2017/def-km-20170908-id93semla-web-hd.mp4