Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/14/2018 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    No, not a fan of any president, regardless of party, being able to conduct acts of war without congressional approval. I think the US has become far too comfortable with the idea that the president can just drop bombs on anyone they want to. I remember when Bill Clinton launched cruise missiles at Sudan in what was obviously a pathetic attempt to deflect from his domestic problems. Anyhow, the fact that the British and French were onboard with this action makes me even more suspicious. When have they ever had altruistic motivations in the middle east? (remembers the Suez war of 1956)
  2. 2 points
    LoooSeR

    Syrian conflict.

    SAA AA systems crew to Trump
  3. 2 points
    @Andrei_bt posted this archive on Livejournal, I'm going to share it here. This folder has the English language documents and books, if you go one up there's a ton of Russian stuff. The server is very wonky, so if you download anything (click the checkbox and then Скачать in the toolbar above) only do one or two docs at a time. Also the site periodically 404s, but it always comes back.
  4. 2 points
    EnsignExpendable

    Books About Tanks

    From a brief overview of his books they seem a bit sensationalist and more analytical than technical (even though he is an engineer), but he also opposes Suvorov/Rezun, so that's something. I can't find what book this is supposed to be translated from, it might be an adaptation of "June 1941: a pre-programmed defeat".
  5. 1 point
    No. This is the contrary. It’s easier to train because tasks are easier. Did you train tank crew ? I did. This is why Merkava is a 4 men crew in an outnumbered country ? It make me laugh to read such a thing when talking about Russian AFV. Russian tanks are 3 men crew and... are zippo too. With a big ammo rack in the middle of the crew compartment. So, your analyses are funny. When a Txx is hit, it’s « earth, wind and fire ». BMPT have no big ammos in the crew compartment. It’s far safer than any other Russian AFV today. So, survivability of its crew is better, far better. Decreasing the crew increases tiring. Did you fight in urban area ? I was trained to and I trained too. Your logic is an internet one. BMPT was designed for this purpose and, considering Russian standards, it works. No. BMPTs are complementary to tanks. They are no supposed to replace them. How Shilkas performed in Grozny ? Just a question. This is is not the question here. Because BMPTs with tanks can manœuvre with infantry too. BMPTs are the only AFV to watch in 5 directions and to fire at 3 of them.
  6. 1 point
    LoooSeR

    Syrian conflict.

    MoD: .... - Duvalla airfield - 4 missiles, all shot down; - Dumeir airfield - 12 missiles, all shot down; - Bley airfield - 18 missiles, all shot down; - Shayrat airfield - 12 missiles, all shot down; - unused Mezze airfield - 5 missiles were shot down; - Homs airfield - 13 of 13 missiles were destroyed, no serious damage; - objects in the Barz and Jaramani area - 30 missiles, 7 shot down; objects, partially destroyed, the objects themselves have not been used for a long time, people and equipment were not on them. - none of the CM entered in the zone of Russian air defense, Russian air defense was not used.
  7. 1 point
    LoooSeR

    Syrian conflict.

    ANNA news, with eng subs.
  8. 1 point
    Sgt.Squarehead

    Syrian conflict.

    So 100+ cruise missiles later.....Is it WWIII yet?
  9. 1 point
    Trump needs permission and Obama didn't? Not that I support this, though as long as it's missile strikes and no troops or aircraft used, it's not the end of the world, I think the NBC attack was BS done by the rebels, but that's just me. Trump being goaded by the media into attacking Syria is not a good thing in my book. Let that shithole country be the Russians problem. I say crank up US oil production even more so we can tell the Saudis to fuck off too.
  10. 1 point
    Meplat

    Documents Repository: Small Arms

    And if you were unlucky enough, you even owned one of the silly things (or at least an attempt at it). It took a long time for me to not laugh when someone mentioned "bushmaster" in the same sentence with "AR-15". Ah, yes Chinn's works are excellent. Another to look for is "Automatic Arms" by Johnson and Haven. The "Johnson" is "Melvin Johnson".
  11. 1 point
    Now that I think about it, it's kind of funny that the staunchest Trump supporters on this forum, Doward, Roguetechie and Jeeps live in the liberal bastions of Seattle, Portland and California, while the strongest Trump denouncer (me) lives in the very conservative locale of Kent County Michigan. Perhaps we all just like being contrarians in our local environment? Just a thought. Edit: Also, I have no idea what sort of environment is responsible for Colli. It must be a strange place indeed.
  12. 1 point
    LoooSeR

    Syrian conflict.

    I have my own version, with blackjack and hookers - in reality, outside of theatrical perfomances of politicains this chemical attack or "chemical attack" doesn't matter as attack didn't killed\"killed" more than any other serious weapon system killed in Syria, it didn't changed anything from military POV, it didn't brought down human rights or dignity more than artillery did in Eastern Ghouta. Now we have this theater of hollowbodied bastards the real event doesn't matter for them either. It is simulacrum that exist outside of an actual event.
  13. 1 point
    Photos stolen from otvaga, BMO-Ts in Ekaterinburg Typhoon-K. -U is rare, compared to KamAZ-assembled MRAP
  14. 1 point
    BMPT that is offered by UVZ isn't even most optimised designs of BMPT-like vehicles (some of Soviet prototypes made more sense that UVZ creation for claimed job). 1) BMPT inflate manpower of the unit. For 2 BMPTs you need 10 people to train and support in the field. Russian tanks and current/future IFVs allow you to have 3 vehicles per 9 people. Army is saving money on every fucking bolt (T-72B3 pic should be here for no apperent reason), inflating number of people needed to crew a unit of vehicles isn't best decision from economical POV (salaries, social benefits and so on in peacetime, especially during local conflicts). Moreover, vehicle carry 5 people into battle, and simple logic speaks that this will increase chances of higher casualties per vehicle, especially because they are intended for urban warfare. One critical mistake done by single vehicle - more people would be at risk that in a 3-man tank. Best decision would be decrease number of humans in unit that you send on a frontline to risk their lifes, to decrease overall casualties. I wouldn't mind higher number of soldiers (per vehicle) send to place where they have high chance of being killed if that vehicle provided serious increase in chances to win fight. 2) BMPT from UVZ isn't usefull in open fields. Everything what BMPT can do in field tanks can do better. BMPT's autocannons have inferior range and firepower than 125 mm gun, 125mm cannons also can be used to suppress enemies from max 12 km range using HEs with indirect fire. In open fields using ATGMs such as Ataka (which cost more than your usual Fagot or Konkurs that you got from free from Soviet Union) against infantry isn't best idea either. Instead of bying BMPTs designers could upgrade existing T-72B3s by installing programmable HEs and probem more or less solved. 3) In urban-ish conditions tank gun is still more usefull than 2 30 mm autocannons - for example in Syria militants in Eastern Ghouta created serious defensive lines with hardened MG nest, observation points and so on. 30 mm would have hard time to punch through it, thats why tanks or even 152 mm SPG like Akatsiya in direct fire are used to break through. Only useful role that BMPT can occupy is suppression, that is currently occupied by Shilka. But you don't need 5 guys to do this job. 4) In big cities with tall buildings ("true" urban warfare) tanks could be supported by infantry moving through buildings around it. Soviets in late part of WW2 developed and used rather effective tactics to do that. I don't think that problem of not being able to aim at enemies is frequent, but problem of spotting their movement and positions first - is. Moreover, enemies are usually trying to not engage targets from tall structures and keep themselfs closer to the ground so they will have higher maneuverability, ability to move through multiply buildings is easier to achive on ground/underground levels. The more they stay in same place, the higher is a chance to get smacked by something more serious than autocannons or tank cannon. So AFAIK main problem with enemy infantry in urban fights is ability to detect enemies first, before RPG gunner or other AT weapon team will engage you. After they fire it is either too late, or they are already running away, as fire from RPGs and ATGMs are not particularly noiseless and unnoticeable events, they will draw fire from every other vehicle/infatryman that saw that anyway. BMPT doesn't have anything more in that aspect than modern tank have. Thermal imagers and panoramic sights are not locked to BMPTs only. And problem of firing at targets beyond main gun elevation can be solved by RCWS with AGL in it, like Turkish upgrade of M60T apprently have, or Chinese RCWS. In fact our tanks already were tested with 30 mm autocannon in RCWS, they could just put AGS instead and problem with high recoil of 30 mm AC will be solved. So instead of buying BMPTs engineers could put RCWS with AGS and add more sophisticated 360 degrees observation system with cameras/thermal imagers with software to detect movement, probably intergrate it into digital battlefield management system on top of that. UVZ's BMPT simply doesn't have any aspect that can't be intergrated on existing systems, without bloating human count per army unit. If they want BMPT/BMOP anyway, they should change design. What would i like to see instead of current vehicle is 2-3 man AFV with tank level of armor (including sides and rear, higher level protection of roof), armed with 40-60 mm autocannon with medium-high velocity shells and programmable HE-frags in unmanned turret. Vehicle will be able to engage infantry in trenches/cover with fragmentation (OICW on tracks, basically), can detect and destroy drones, and even ATGMs (like Pantsir claimed to be able to do), so it will have a place on open field combat of frontline SPAAG/APS with ability to suppress and kill lower priority targets like infantry (non AT teams), light AFVs, technicals and so on at same distances as tanks in direct contact to leave more important targets for tanks. Moreover, lower number of people inside of this vehicle will allow to decrease internal volume and this "BMPT" could be made smaller, and weight savings could be used to put more armor on this thing. That AFV needs serious protection from tandem HEAT from sides, rear and roof also should be able to hold direct hits from mortar rounds and light AT at considerable angles. Unmanned turret also should be able to hold well against 23 - 40 mm autocannons and RPG/ATGMs. Some sort of short range APS will be usefull. Vehicle should have serious package of passive sensors that are able to detect small drones at distance (including suicide drones) and ATGMs (incl. top attack) and destroy them with high probability. Same package of sensors will be usefull to detect and destroy infantry in fields/forested areas/villages/towns. Combination of weapon and sensors will make this "BMPT" capable to do things that no other AFV can do - tanks can't engage drones and ATGMs, Pantsir (or other SPAAGs) can't be deployed to frontline to cover them either without high risk to a crews. In urban warfare high caliber autocannon can deal with VBIEDs, technicals, an destroy infantry in protected areas (thanks to higher penetration of AP rounds than 30 mm and programmable HE-frags) and not just suppress them.
  15. 1 point
    Sturgeon

    General news thread

    AFAIK this was never a "dogwhistle" of racist sectors, it was literally created by 4chan as a way to troll snowflakes on campuses.
  16. 1 point
    Mighty_Zuk

    Israeli AFVs

    It's been in progress for a long time. This will definitely add some depth to it, but I still need info on the Mark 1 and 2 tanks. @Molotav_DIGITANK Is there anything on the physical thickness of the armor, rather than just protection values? Also, there's a photo of the up-armored Mark 3 there, in a configuration that didnt enter service. Does it say anything special about it? Purpose and such. Thanks.
  17. 1 point
    It means that weaboo wankery will get you swatted, repeatedly with facts and research. And if the wankery persists, then you'll be shown the door. This is a fact and document based forum. Cite your work or GTFO. Or, it's ok to be a bit of an asshole here if you are factually correct. If you make statements that are not based on fact, or knowingly perpetuate false data, that shit doesn't fly. This isn't 'World of Fail' or 'Wartchunder' forums. We don't care about if a tech tree is balanced, at least in the non-fiction area of the forum. Take any debates about the merits of a tech tree to the one minor thread we have for that in the fiction and entertainment area.
  18. 0 points
  19. 0 points
    So, uh, we are attacking Syria. Honestly, I don't even know what the heck to think about this. Can the president do this without an act of congress? I know, dumb question.
  20. 0 points
    Ramlaen

    Syrian conflict.

    Oh boy here we go.
  21. 0 points
    LoooSeR

    Syrian conflict.

    Hold on US, E-Stonia is coming to help you!
  22. 0 points
    LoooSeR

    Syrian conflict.

    I want to see CNN penal battalion and Ingimashi squad made out of US politicians and "hawks".
  23. 0 points
    Jeeps_Guns_Tanks

    Books About Tanks

    His name is Boris, so he's probably legit!
  24. 0 points
    Every time I think I've met the dumbest person I'd ever meet, there will be *someone* going to prove me wrong.
  25. 0 points
    Rest in peace Harry Dean Stanton. One of the best character actors ever. Now I want to watch Repo Man again.
×