Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Collimatrix last won the day on March 3

Collimatrix had the most liked content!

About Collimatrix

  • Rank
    The Atomic Prince of Punk

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

15,832 profile views
  1. Contemporary Western Tank Rumble!

    There might be some sort of spaced metal plates inside the fuel cell to improve its effectiveness as armor.
  2. Hi, I'm MrCatKK and I cannot Post

    You should stop doing this.
  3. Bash the F-35 thred.

    The most interesting thing I've learned about the F-35 lately is that the nose radome is apparently sealed. To service the radar... you don't. The active emitter portions of the radar are so reliable that they are expected to out-last the airframe.
  4. Collimatrix's Terrible Music Thread

    I just discovered this and it is amazing: They take bad songs and jazz them up until they are good. Or, in some cases, jazz them up until they are merely tolerable:
  5. Not only that, he was fired two days before he would have earned a pension!
  6. AFV Engines

    There's usually more than one shaft. The AGT-1500, for instance, has two shafts taking power from the high and low pressure turbines to the compressors, and a third, completely separate power turbine with variable inlet geometry that actually delivers the power to the transmission. So the power turbine could be at or near stall but the rest of the engine wouldn't necessarily.
  7. AFV Engines

    His specific argument is that a tank's actual power to weight ratio is not the gross horsepower of the motor divided by the weight of the tank, but rather the sprocket horsepower divided by the weight of the tank. Sprocket horsepower is the gross horsepower of the engine minus losses from the cooling system and the transmission. Since the Merkava mk III is supposed to have a particularly efficient transmission, its actual power to weight ratio isn't as bad as the more simplistic numbers would suggest, and in fact the merk has no worse of a power to weight ratio than tanks that have more powerful engines, but less efficient transmissions. I don't buy it. Here is the full quote from Technology of Tanks concerning the difference between gross horsepower and horsepower available at the sprocket: So the Merkava has a transmission that never dips below 71% (he claims), and it's up against transmissions that are only doing 61% efficiency. That's a 16% improvement in power actually delivered to the sprocket. But so what? A 1500 horsepower engine has 25% more gross horsepower than a 1200 horsepower engine, so a 1500 horsepower engine through a shitty Allison transmission is still going to be putting more ponies into the drive sprocket than a 1200 horsepower engine going through a magical Israeli transmission. The numbers don't add up. It's horseshit. On top of that, in the particular instance of the Abrams vs the Merkava, the Abrams has a higher percentage of gross engine horsepower available as net engine horsepower because turbines are (nearly) self-cooling, and don't loose significant power to radiators or fans.
  8. Aerospace and Ordnance discussion/news.

    There was an attempt to make the Standard into the world's biggest AAM; the AIM-97 Seekbat.
  9. Israeli AFVs

    Did the Arab forces ever get BK-15M ammunition?
  10. Leading congressional Democrats have released a new plan that they intend to implement if given a majority in 2018. It's... a tax hike. I am certain that this is a brilliant piece of political maneuvering that is guaranteed to win the Dems more votes this fall, because if there is anything Americans love, it's paying taxes. Seriously, what the fuck?
  11. Forum Improvements and Changelog

    March 9, 2018 The tagging continues.
  12. Terror Attacks and Active Shooter Events Thread

    Developing situation at a veteran's home in California.
  13. Just so everyone is on the same page, here is why the L85 should have ended at A1: When an army is looking to improve its equipment, there is a perennial debate between getting a completely new design or upgrading the existing design. A new design usually offers more potential, but an upgraded version of the old design usually has at least some parts commonality with the existing spares pool, some commonality of production with the existing production line, and users will usually be familiar with the old design. Therefore, upgrading the old design is usually the lower cost and lower risk alternative to purchasing an entirely new design. Except with the L85 none of that is true. L85A1 and L85A2 have almost no parts commonality. This is because the L85A1 was a garbage rifle made of garbage parts, and all the parts needed to be replaced. By "all the parts" I mean that the barrel, bolt carrier group, piston, charging handle, trunnion, gas block, hammer, firing pin, bolt hold open and magazine are all new. All of these new parts are color-coded or marked to prevent armorers from installing old parts, both because they are crap and because in some cases they will not interchange. L85A2s are made by un-folding L85A1s, pulling out everything inside, re-folding the receivers (correctly this time), and filling them with a compliment of entirely new parts. So much for being able to re-use the existing pool of spares. The British SA-80 production line was shuttered decades ago. It was not re-opened. There is no savings from re-use of existing tooling. The L85A2 was reverse-engineered from the L85A1, and then made to actually work. The L85A2 does have the same controls as the L85A1, but the controls are crap. The fact that it's the same crap is not a compelling case for keeping them around. L85A3 appears to be a new-built receiver with a new railed handguard and L85A2 parts inside (possibly with some small improvements on those). It's likely that making an L85A3 is cheaper than making an L85A2, since L85A2s were made out of extensively re-manufactured L85A1s, and that remanufacturing process was so involved that it was so involved that it was cheaper to make new guns. So L85A3 is an improvement, but it's still a far less effective solution buying Colt Canada C7s the way the SAS did.