Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 05/06/2018 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    Collimatrix

    Bash the F-35 thred.

    I'm dubious. When stealth aircraft are flown around casually, they wear devices that increase their RCS dramatically. These are corner reflectors or Luneburg lenses. Not only do these devices obfuscate the RCS of the stealth aircraft when it is clean, they also allow it to show up on civilian air traffic control radar, which is a useful safety consideration. Even assuming that passive radar would be a helpful guide to the RCS of the aircraft, why wouldn't it be thrown off by these measures?
  2. 1 point
    Stimpy75

    Documents Repository: Small Arms

    History of Sniping and Sharpshooting Colt 1911 Early Prototypes Full Auto Conversion for Browning Pistols(Don`t DIY!)
  3. 1 point
    That’s actually the codename of the LCT it was carried in The number 6 also refers to that — both were on all the Shermans Vs and Crabs carried in that particular landing craft. It’s just a generic stowage rack, going by photos of the tanks in use in early November 1944: “Cock o’the North” is on the right, behind the crowd, in both photos. The other one, “Bramble” (actually another LCT codename) is the tank that’s on the right in the first photos I posted, and also the one shown firing on German positions in the YouTube film I linked to above. All these photos appear to be stills from (the uncut version of) that film, as the picture below shows if you’ve watched the film: And a few more, of the tanks supporting Commandos:
  4. 1 point
    Will moving pictures of Shermans (these, plus Crabs) coming ashore under fire do? How about of Shermans firing on Germans (hey, that rhymes)? Plus the odd AVRE, more LVTs and M29Cs than you can shake a stick at, and as a bonus, Hawker Typhoons making attack runs? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIber1VFkn4 Edit: why doesn’t it embed the video? Or doesn’t this forum support that? You’re not going to say that anymore after you’ve tried fitting the 1/35th scale one by Resicast into a model. Thanks
  5. 1 point
    Please excuse me, but there is very little information on this pistol. This is a pistol for the cartridge .45 ACP; In the manufacture of the modification with a polymer frame, 3D printing technologies were used. The first version of the pistol with an all-metal frame turned out to be too heavy, but it was not completely rejected. It is preserved as a separate modification. And the photo I came across only one. Here it is entirely: In the figure with computer graphics, the silencer of the new modification with the lower location of the expansion chamber is most likely represented. The project of the pistol is being developed in Tula, in TsKIB SOO (ЦКИБ СОО). And it is supervised by its director, Alexei Sorokin. Data on the beginning of the project began to appear in early 2016. Alas, that's all I know about this pistol.
  6. 1 point
    Much as I like the R975, the GAA was by far the better engine. The Chrysler Multibank I like just because ONLY Chrysler could get it to work.
  7. 1 point
    Let us not forget that the Obama administration also tried to call unemployment a good thing. It was an opportunity to spend time with the family, or pursue hobbies that you had let slip by without all the stress of having to work all the time. I believe they used the term "funemployment". Also, in that article they finally point out the bullshit numbers manipulation that was happening under Obama, but claim that it's happening under Trump (and it might be, too, who the fuck knows). I'm not surprised by any of this, though, considering how much the left accuses everyone else of exactly what they themselves are doing.
  8. 1 point
    https://imp-navigator.livejournal.com/727411.html T-72 Shafrah shaving islamist beards in Yarmouk T-72 Shrek with Viper thermal imager Shilka BMP-2
  9. 0 points
    Isn't London a cruise-missile free zone?
  10. 0 points
    Two things spring to mind on reading this: 1) There is a cogent and internally coherent argument to be made that a falling unemployment rate isn't necessarily a good thing. Low unemployment rates per se are not always an indicator of optimal economic health. They might indicate that a lot of people are stuck in jobs that aren't the most productive ones possible, and future businesses might have a harder time getting going because there is no pool of available workers to draw on. That's assuming things are on the up and up; the numbers could be gamed in a number of ways, like adjusting the number of people who are considered to be "looking" for jobs, or by placing people in economically meaningless make-work jobs. However, this does need to be balanced against the fact that employment has substantial pro-social externalities. The optimal employment rate for keeping everyone sane and happy is probably a lot higher than the optimal employment rate for best economic growth. 2) I don't fucking care lol. The economics spokesman under Obama tried to claim that the recession wasn't as bad as it looked by trying to pass off the first derivative of the unemployment rate vs. time as the unemployment rate. Trump drumming up buzz based on ambiguous economic indicators that are at least actually true is peanuts compared to the bullshit that Obama would spout that everyone was supposed to just accept. The establishment is a pack of murderous liars and thieves, and they've proven their incompetence over decades. If they're bitching and moaning that Trump is going to burn everything to the ground, then fucking good. They're in closer proximity to Trump than I am, they'll catch on fire first.
×