Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

N-L-M

Forum Nobility
  • Content Count

    207
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

N-L-M last won the day on September 17

N-L-M had the most liked content!

About N-L-M

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

83 profile views
  1. N-L-M

    Turkish touch

    Based on what we've seen of the Altay, it has ammo to the sides of the driver, M60 style. Perhaps the new improved model is intended to incorporate the lessons of the fighting in Syria and avoid such catastrophic Kabooms as seen in M60s and Leopard 2s.
  2. Kharkovites strike again!
  3. At that point I'd be more worried about someone just starting up the vehicle and running away with it, ERA or no.
  4. Are you actually worried someone will walk up to the vehicle with a ratchet and the right-sized socket and just disassemble the (presumably over 30 kg each) block and steal it?
  5. Has that ever been an issue for any other country operating ERA-equipped vehicles ever?
  6. Well the Germans had SmK rounds for 8mm, and 8mm Mauser was everywhere. So it should have gone without saying.
  7. Ever heard of Link Or Die? well fortunately for you I can link. And the Navweaps technical section is pretty good, and completely disproves the shit you are shovelling http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-003.php http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-029.php http://www.navweaps.com/index_tech/tech-104.php Speed Thrills 1, 2, and 5. The Iowas could and did consistently reach 32.5 kn under less than ideal conditions. You are exactly the kind of low effort and low energy shitposter I like eating for dinner, so thanks for an evening's entertainment. I won't be seeing you around.
  8. Yamato wouldn't run, and would let the Iowa dictate the range and shrek it because it's a shittier design and has no choice. It's dead if it tries to run and dead if it stays. what does this even mean The Japs did not have any form of NV. The closest they had was well trained sharp eyed operators with binoculars with comedy-large objective lenses. Not in any way shape or form a substitute for radar. Face it, the jap ship is low energy and sad. What happened at Samar? you mean that battle where a Jap heavy cruiser was destroyed by the gun of an escort carrier? or where the Yamato sunk at most an escort carrier and a destroyer? Piss poor performance for a supposed top-of-the-line battleship. in a target rich environment. And you have to bring it up because it's the only case the Yamato was even partially successful, and that's with no American battleships anywhere nearby. So yeah, the world wonders how the Japs could possibly be so terrible at this that a heavy surface action group cannot sink a practically undefended landing force. The Japanese fleet and every ship in it was low energy and sad, and the Samurai fears the 5"/38.
  9. hoo boy you are the fullest retard I've ever met. Your damping coefficient nears infinity and your Q approximates 0. So, one at a time: The USN superheavy shells more than match the IJNs shit. The IJN shells are only around 3200lb on a bore 2" greater. This means that their sectional density is worse, by a factor of roughly 7%. This basically nullifies any advantage you'd expect from a larger shell, and indeed the penetration of both guns is very similar. But the US guns are lighter, faster in both aiming and loading, and have far superior fire control layout, equipment, and technology. The Ford mk 1 Fire control computer was very good for the time and the Yamato had nothing of the kind. Optical rangefinders are fairly inaccurate, and ranging with them must be carried out in concert with salvo spotting. Radar gunnery gives very accurate ranges not only for the target but also for the shell splashes in each salvo, allowing quick and accurate correction of fire. Yamato falls WAAAAY short of the Iowa in this regard. Radar observation also works at night and in bad weather, where optical doesn't. There's a reason literally the entire world moved on to radar, and claiming otherwise is just objectively wrong no matter how you try to compensate. Read a bit about Surigao Strait and learn what integrated FCS with radars does. You clearly have not been educated on the classics of battleship design and optimization. A speed advantage greater than 3 knots pretty much allows the Iowa to not only dictate the range, but also maneuver to avoid fire in a stern chase without losing the Yamato. The Iowa's superior FCS, in combination with superior turret drives, allows her to maneuver while firing with little loss of accuracy, and in a stern chase the Yamato would only have one turret available. For broadside fighting, salvo dodging would keep the Iowa very safe while she controls the range, while the Yamato cannot maneuver like that without giving up any semblance of accuracy. The Iowa's reloading equipment was faster, not only because of the automatic gun indexing and elevating during runout- the Iowa's shell hoists lead directly into the ramming tray, and the 2-stage powder cart eases handling which again speeds the procedure, while the whole system involves fewer, lighter moving parts and less complicated mechanisms improving reliability. If you don't know what makes the US 5"/38 a DP gun you have no business taking its name in vain. Protip- it's everything other than the gun itself that matters. from the semiautomatic ramming to the automatic fuze setters to the surface/AA director control to the turret drives and elevation range to the ammo scuttles and handling rooms. The USN 5"/38 is far and away the best intermediate gun of the war, even before VT became a thing. And with radar director control, vs a AoN armored ship, it's more effective than the Jap 6.1". Against destroyers as well, as they were not armored. The greater number of guns firing faster and more accurately the Iowa can bring to bear against any enemy ship or aircraft blows your Jap mess out of the water. Or at least it would had carrier aviation not gotten to it first. Do you know what a fineness ratio is? The Iowa has a far more efficient hull shape, and is much lighter and therefore smaller. Getting an Iowa places involves less fuel expenditure, particularly at high speeds. The Iowa has 212k SHP max, compared to the Yamato's 150k SHP. But power requirements roughly scale with the cube of the speed, and to reack 28kn, 1 knot faster than the Yamato can ever go, the Iowa needs only 110k SHP. It is a more efficient design. Battleships fight enemy ships at unknown ranges in rough weather, provide AA coverage to carriers and taskforces, bombard shore targets, and so on. In fact, let's take a look at the history of battleship actions, going backwards: Surigao Strait: night and poor weather. North Cape: Terrible weather in the early morning. Second Guadalcanal: Night. Casablanca: Clear day, supporting a landing. Shrekking of Bismarck: Clear Day, once the Bismarck could no longer run away after getting torpedoed (as it too was a shit design). Denmark Strait: morning, good visibility. Long range. Cape Spartivento: Day, long range. Beginning to get the idea? the battles are not a 2-way shooting range, they are more complex and tend to greatly degrade optical visibility. Battleships also support landings, in which case fire support is essential. The USN HC 16" holds 70 kg of explosive, 10 more than the equivalent IJN 18" shell. So any claims that the Jap shell is superior belong in the trash, next to your opinions. But the Iowa has 150 rounds per gun, while the Yamato only has around 100. So the Iowa has more firepower to rain down on targets. When it comes to secondaries the capacity disparity is huge- 500 RPG for the Iowa, and only 150 for the Yamato 6.1" and 300 RPG for its 5". Again, Yamato loses. It just can't compete, it is deficient in firepower and staying power. 1v1 duel? I'd put good money on the Iowa winning. If it's during the day it can simply stay away until night, and then come in and wreck the Yamato because the Japs were bad at radar and literally cannot do anything other than fire at muzzle flashes at long range at night. In more normal conditions, the Iowa has already won. Americans were actually competent TDS designers, and the Japs sucked at it. Deal with it bitchboi. TL;DR: learn a thing or two about ships before posting about them.
  10. If the Zero was so good, why isn't there a Zero 2?
  11. >superheavy shells don't real >surface gunnery radar don't real >superior speed don't real >superior reloading equipment don't real >DP secondary battery don't real >actual TDS don't real >Panama canal trafficability don't real >fuel efficiency don't real >Judging battleships by ideal 1v1 slugfest at known range in ideal weather and visibility instead of what battleships actually do Newsflash: you're retarded.
  12. For fucks sake, can't I have my ice cream politics-free?
  13. N-L-M

    French flair

    The French were hard at work getting rid of the last supplies of Nazi meth.
  14. N-L-M

    Competition Suggestions

    Oh no, you can go much fuller retard than that and still have it be a better idea.
×