LostCosmonaut

Page 20 of this report mentions that the Soviets were concerned by how the BMP performed during the Yom Kippur War (50-60% loss rates), although it also notes that its issues may have been due to Syrian incompetence more than anything else.

Hieronymus Bosch was a Dutch painter of the later Renaissance Period. Much of his artwork (like a signficiant proportion of Renaissance Art) dealt with religious themes. However, his style was somewhat different from his contemporaries. This thread is for discussion of Bosch's art, and the subjects it covers.

The Norse colony in Greenland lasted from the late 10th century to early in the 15th century (the exact date the colony died out is unknown). The most common theory is that it died out due to changing climate conditions (the Little Ice Age), and I have no personal reason to dispute this. Personally, I find the Greenland colony somewhat fascinating. Given the harsh conditions in Greenland, it's quite amazing that it survived as long as it did. Had it survived longer, or even lasted enough to be recontacted by Europe, it could have had interesting effects on history. Also, given that there is evidence that the colony traded with local native populations, I would be curious to know if anyone had any evidence that the locals had intermarried with the natives? Would there be any evidence in the genetic makeup of native populations in the area even 600 years later?

There are some who believe that Infantry Fighting Vehicles, such as the CV90 or BMP, are an inherently flawed concept. These people contend that IFVs try to be both a tank and an armored personel carrier, and fail to effectively perform in either role. As a result, were a sustained high-intensity conflict to occur, they would fare poorly. To my uninformed eye, this argument appears to have some merit. However, I am curious to hear to opinions of those more knowledgable than myself (or heck, anyone with an opinion at all).

Yes. It's described in more detail in this book, but what ultimately evolved into the Blackbird originally started out as a project to reduce the U-2's RCS. One of the early concepts involved attaching wires of various lengths to the U-2 to cancel out returns from Soviet radars.

The IKV 91 is pretty neat, I'm a fan of it. It will come.

I can confirm from personal experience that fire ants (at least the ones native to the Front Range) have a somewhat sour, but acceptable taste. Just remember to remove the head before eating. I believe it's due to the formic acid they contain.

I have managed to find a (photograph of) a plastic model of the UR-700M.

Does anybody have any ideas where I might acquire more information (preferably in English) on the Strv A? It appears to have been a competitor to what eventually became the Strv 103, and probably would have ended up as something closer to an M60.

Before the SR-71, there was the A-12. Before the A-12, there were many other concepts proposed for Mach 3 reconaissance aircraft. Many of these concepts were assigned 'Archangel' designations, and as a result, were known as the A-1, A-2, etc. Here's an example of one of them; As you can see, it's quite different from what would eventually become the Blackbird. Here's another;

This thread is for discussion of ICBM basing options, as outlined in the linked paper (written in 1980). While some of them seem absurd (dirigible basing!), others appear to be more realistic.

There are many who feel that the 5.56 NATO is a superlative rifle round. Much has been said about larger alternatives to 5.56, such as various 6.5mm and 6.8mm rounds among others. Less has been said about smaller rounds. Off the top of my head, I can recall that there was a German 4.6x36mm round, used in the HK36, and the British 4.85x49mm round. Neither of these rounds managed to gain widespread acceptance. My knowledge of the voodoo that is ballistics is somewhat limited, so I'm uncertain as to whether these failures were caused by flaws with the rounds themselves, or because they were below some lower limit of effective bullet size, beyond which performance decreases rapidly. Could we see a resurgence of these concepts in the future, or do they represent an evolutionary dead-end?

But wait, there's more! 750 tons to orbit, planned for use on a Mars expedition. Honestly, I'm somewhat surprised that that was called the UR-700M instead of some new designation, given that it would have used cryogenics instead of hypergolics. Shades of the Tu-22/22M distinction.

During the 1960s, there were many competiting designs for the rocket that would be used in the Soviet Lunar Program. Ultimately, the N1 was chosen, and proceeded to detonate and/or deflagrate vigorously on all four of its launches. One of the hypothetical competitors to the N1 was the UR-700. A development of Chelomei's 'Universal Rocket System' (which also included the UR-100, UR-200, and UR-500 (Proton)), there were several important differences between the UR-700 and N1. For one, while the N1 was to have used kerosene/LOX fuels, the UR-700 would have used hypergolics, namely UDMH/N2O4. This fuel combination has reduced specific impulse compared to cryogenic fuels. However, considering that Chelomei's other rockets in the series were developed as ICBMs fueled by hypergolics, it is easy to see why they would have been chosen for the UR-700. Additionally, while the N1 had no less than 30 first stage engines, the UR-700 first stage was to have been powered by only nine RD-270 engines. To be fair, the RD-270 was much larger than the NK-15 used on the N1. The UR-700 was planned to put 130-170 tons into LEO, which the Soviets judged to be the required amount for a direct ascent lunar mission. The choice of direct ascent, as compared to the lunar orbit rendezvous approach used by the Apollo missions (as well as Korolev's N1 based mission profile) results in a less efficient architecture. Most likely, Chelomei chose a direct ascent approach due to fears over the Soviet's lack of docking. Since the Americans had worked these issues out during the Gemini program, by the late 1960s, they were confident in the decision to use LOR. Given the numerous issues in the Soviet Lunar Program, it is unlikely that choosing the UR-700 over the N1 would have got a cosmonaut on the moon before Armstrong. However, it's an interesting what-if? Could the UR-700 have been modified for use in an LOR mission? I believe it could have, given the UR-series' modular nature. Of course, it is likely that the UR-700 would have run into many other unforeseen issues, which could have resulted in failure. I'm curious to see y'all's opinions on it.

I think that a turretless tank would be highly unsuitable for the types of operations the Soviets would have undertaken during the Cold War. However, given Sweden's unique set of requirements, and that the Strv 103 would fight in a purely defensive war, I can see how it would be a logical design.

I have a somewhat unhealthy obsession with Swedish armored fighting vehicles (although my disease is not quite as bad as T___A's attraction to communist frying pans and the like). By far the most well known Swedish AFV is the Strv 103, one of the more unusual MBT designs from the Cold War. However, there are also numerous other Swedish armored vehicle designs that I find interesting. Such as the Kranvagn, and the Strv 74. If you are interested in learning more about Swedish AFVs, I would highly recommend consulting this excellent site. Be warned, most of the documents therein are in Swedish, so at least have google translate open in another tab.

Personally, I believe that application of nuclear power in space would be very much in our interest. Not only do nuclear thermal rockets offer a major improvement over existing propulsion technologies, but the use of nuclear reactors as power sources for satellites, space probes, and the like could allow for much greater scientific return or utility. However, I realize that nuclear power does have associated risks, and there are others who may feel different. Whether you are for or against the usage of nuclear power in space, I am curious to hear your opinions. For reference, here's an interesting paper discussing the topic.