Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Contributing Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About AdmiralTheisman

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

146 profile views
  1. Trade-offs in WWII Fighter Design

    On the topic brought up previously about push-pull configurations, but sadly off topic for the thread, why didn't four engined bombers use push-pull configurations to reduce drag? They wouldn't have the bailing out, take-off, center of gravity, navigation, and vibration problems that fighters had, and the 4 engine nacelles on a bomber look like they would cause a lot of drag that could have been reduced with just two push-pull nacelles. Just not worth it on a heavy bomber compared to a fighter? There seem to have been quite a few 4-engined push-pull aircraft in the Interwar but their designs cease almost entirely by 1935 after having trailed off after 1930.
  2. The M4 Sherman Tank Epic Information Thread.. (work in progress)

    French armament 1940 makes the claim on pg. 94 that : ● Tank construction technology and Somua S35 tank The Somua S35 was intended to be produced in the USA but due to WW2 that never happened. All what the French learned about casting technology was transferred to the USA and that inspired more or less the turret of the Lee, the hull of the M3A1 and the Sherman general design. The conception/design of the future M4 Sherman is in fact partly inspired by these studies and French engineers were present in the US "Ordnance" during debriefing meetings in Washington beginning July 1940. But what is sometimes heard about the Sherman being directly linked to the Somua S35 is an urban myth. Is it known if there is any validity to such an assertions, that the Sherman was influenced heavily by the Somua S35? Frankly it sounds sort of like an attempt at face saving by "yeah we lost, but the silly Americans used our superior technology to build their tanks", but I mean, that's why I'm asking.
  3. Don't have any pictures unfortunately but I was reading a French document ( http://1951.polytechnique.org/URL/Launet_DCA.pdf) on anti-aircraft warfare and it reported that the French had a project to put a twin 90mm anti-aircraft gun on an AMX 13 chassis. Man the French loved that tank, its amazing all of the shit they tried to cram onto it. Ce matériel bitube de 90 mm résultait d’une évolution entreprise dès 1948 et qui devait aboutir à la définition d’un équipement en 1951. En effet la DEFA avait demandé à la Société des Forges et Ateliers du Creusot (SFAC), du groupe Schneider, par lettre du 17 septembre 1948 (44 94 ST/ART), d’établir un avant projet de «matériel de 90 mm DCA bitube sur affût automoteur à chenille», et dont la masse ne devait pas excéder 15 tonnes (9 ). La SFAC établissait alors un projet utilisant un châssis du char AMX 13 (10), mais ne parvenait pas à satisfaire toutes les spécifications. This twin 90mm gun resulted from a project undertaken in 1948 and which had an intended completion date in 1951. DEFA had asked the Société des Forges et Ateliers du Creusot (SFAC), of the Schneider Group, by a letter on September 17 1948, to establish a pilot project of a "twin 90mm anti-aircraft material on a tracked self-propelled mount", and that the mass must not exceed 15 tons. SFAC thus established a project utilizing the chassis of the AMX 13 tank, but this did not manage to satisfy all of the specifications. "Did not seem to satisfy all of the specifications" Hmm, however could that have been. Bonus: Finalement on renonça au début des années 60à l’un et l’autre de ces matériels, trop lourds et trop complexes. Certains les qualifièrent de «délire d’ingénieurs». Finally one renounced both of these equipments at the beginning of the 1960s, being too heavy and too complicated. Some people qualified them the "delirium of engineers".
  4. General news thread

    Normally I don't feel much sorrow from these events, but it is terribly sad that the Alexandrov Ensemble suffered such horrible casualties. They have such a proud tradition and have produced so much brilliant music, it is tragic that they've been so brutally winnowed. I can't imagine the difficulty they'll have in dealing with the grief of this and rebuilding seems almost impossible. According to Russia Today they lost the entirety of their choir except for three soloists...
  5. The Japanese Ferdinand

    If I may inquire, is it known how the Japanese planned to deploy and organize these tank destroyers? Were they going to be ad hoc groups or small formations, or integrated into larger forces like their armored divisions?
  6. My personal favorite university president letter, dating from October 24th; She also sent out a letter about post-election affairs, but it was depressingly drab. She has a salary of more than $300,000 if I correctly understand.
  7. 2016 Presidential Election Thread Archive

    There is a thread posted there about post-election suicide prevention.
  8. Lets talk about languages

    http://greatlanguagegame.com I thought it was an amusing game and somewhat relevant, it is interesting to hear the differences between various languages. On the other hand when it gets to things like distinguishing between Hausa/Swahili/Telugu/Javanese it gets rather difficult…
  9. I Learned Something Today

    Loans in butter were acceptable in 16th century Europe; European history provides examples of international lending in commodities to add verisimilitude to theoretical discourse. In the 1520s Lubeck made loans to Sweden in kind, that is, in goods, and in the 1550s King Gustav Vasa made loans in both money and goods (Heckscher, 1931 [1953], pp. 213-14). The 1520s loans were repaid, as well as made, in kind, and in consumption goods including, in 1532, butter. A payment due in 1527 was postponed, as it happened, because the food gathered for the purpose in Stockholm was suspected of having become tainted (ibid.). (A Financial History of Western Europe, pg. 260)
  10. The History Lecture Thread

    I hope that this is for others adding in with some of our own? I had posted this but then my normal tendency to second guess myself came into effect and I was giving myself thoughts about it being primarily for you to post seminars that you have collected. MIT has its own recorded courses ( http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/audio-video-courses/#history ), but there are only 2 in the history section, and they are significantly shorter than their Open Yale Courses equivalent, and they weren't even playing for me earlier… which is admittedly probably more due to me not upgrading relevant software than the actual course. Asia in the Modern World looks quite interesting; I haven't looked at the others in the same detail but they are available on . I also really recommend the already-mentioned Open Yale Courses' Global problems of population growth, which while not in the history department was a majority or at least a plurality devoted to historical matters, and which was my favorite course that I had watched there. And there was even one about France, so high praise from me!
  11. Current Reads Thread

    I think the Nantucket ones were the better part of the series for the Change ones, but it may just be a personal preference. A stranded remnant of modern civilization isolated in ancient times and fighting to both survive and to defeat its own sins is more interesting to me than the post apocalyptic society with the primary change being a lack of modern technology, not to mention that while I'm fine with the single magic element throne in - "The Change" - I had thought the vaguely pseudo-magic boogeyman they were fighting against from Montana? less palatable. I'm also unconvinced that nationalism would disintegrate to feudalism so easily, although admittedly in the shock and chaos I could see a reversion for a period of time. But provided that reasonable quality printing presses exist, universal literacy is possible, and is the bane of a feudal organization of society ultimately. I haven't read that side of the series in a long time and I haven't read some of the newer books at all though. I did like the earlier books more than the later ones. I have finished reading China against the Tides: Restructuring through Revolution, Radicalism, and Reform. In general it is a bit (maybe more than a bit) biased in favor of the Chinese communists and of the hardline Maoist period, but it did provide a comprehensive view of the evolution of CCP politics and policies, and PRC internal social and governmental structures. I also thought the part on Nationalist China to be intriguing for its analysis of its problems; some of what it says is backed up elsewhere (such as its tax policies, which saw most tax income come from industry and indirect sources rather than the landlords and the countryside, in addition to having a wretched financial structure overall), and some not, such as when it downplayed the Nationalist Chinese role in the war against Japan and lauded the Communist contribution. Admittedly, this could be due to the older publishing date of the version I read, from 1997, I vaguely remember something being said about the Western scholarly view over the Nationalist contribution becoming more rosy over time. Next I am either embarking on A History of Modern India, 1480-1950, or finishing Strategic Views from the Second Tier: the Nuclear Weapon Policies of France, Britain, and China. I also intermittently read A Storm of Swords, the third Song of Ice and Fire book. Downloading books I will never read from FreeBookSpot is also a pleasurable way to feel better without exerting any effort.
  12. I Learned Something Today

    Today I learned 18th century Chinese needed to work on their tiger drawing skills; (larger picture = http://i.imgur.com/qYX0VO9.png = from Album of the Yongzheng Emperor in Costumes) The paper I found it in - Kleutghen, Kristina. "Chinese Occidenterie:The Diversity of "Western" Objects in Eighteenth-Century China." Eighteenth-Century Studies 47.2 (2014): 117-35. Project Muse. - was actually very interesting and dealt with there being a similar "Occidentalist" craze in Chinese court culture as there was an "Orientalist" fixation in Europe, with interest in Western modes of painting and clothing, import of Western "curious things" ie. goods like mirrors, glass working, clock making, enamel working, spectacle manufacturing, tabletop amusements such as miniature perspective theaters, and the establishment of manufactories for their domestic production. Its fascinating that a similar phenomena occurred in China as in Europe, for an admittedly brief period of time, given that previously only Orientalism was explored and the Chinese are perceived as having rejected European goods as inferior - which they were in most cases, there was a reason why the only thing that sold was opium. But that tiger drawing was hilarious.
  13. Wargame Thread

    South Africa can be added, and so that we can simulate the Bush Wars we can add an opposing faction with low morale, poor organization, bad training, inefficient planning, mediocre equipment, wretched logistics, and reliant on their sponsors for any successes, which will represent an excellent opportunity to add in Italy.
  14. Thanks for the responses to my query, it clears up why they were used instead of single engine fighters. The concept makes sense, even if I still find the idea of a 6-person and rather big medium bomber conducting strafing attacks like that rather funny.
  15. This is sort of only tangentially related, basing on this being one of the strafing bombers, but why were the twin engined strafing bombers of the A-20/A-26/B-25 types either successful or at least viewed as so successful in their roles? It seems as if having a twin-engined bomber doing work like that would be inefficient and they would be less effective in providing strafing interdiction and close air support than fighter and fighter-bomber aircraft. True, they had more machine guns, but surely the 6-8 machine guns of the average American fighter were sufficient for ground tasks, and having 12+ is reaching the point of diminishing returns? Or were their advantages stemming from greater structural strength enabling more sustained support operations, longer loiter times and more range due to more fuel, more eyes observing targets on the ground, greater capacity of ammunition, or reluctance of fighter pilots to engage in ground support operations? Or just greater general capacity, in that they would be able to bomb targets, but also be able to conduct prolonged strafing missions afterwards, and thus the addition of forward-firing machine guns simply represented an expansion of their general capabilities, without significant opportunity cost?