Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Peasant

How Not to Post in the Historical Warfare Section

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Sturgeon said:

 

Please please please let him make claims about IJA small arms next!

This is the deepest I go with Japanese WW2 tech, so I don't have anything to talk about Japanese small arms.

3 minutes ago, Bronezhilet said:

You keep repeating the shallow water meme, but where in the fuck did you get it from?

 

I've been looking for a while for sources on it, but I can't find anything. Only thing I can find is that the New Jersey sailed at 35.2 knots for 6 hours straight. So you're saying that it found a 390 km long stretch of shallow water at exactly the right depth?

Full load & shallow water or? Conditions not stated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

Well, guardianleopard, you've really brought us back to the good old days. Thanks for that. We'll notify your family that you died to feed hungry people in need.

Lol

 

I could make a claim just for the heck of it.

 

Msg and GiB then I actually say. I really like reading this forum. I suppose I turned into shark bait but alls well that ends well right? I (hopefully) served to some benefit.

 

Because I am freeloading off your postings.

EE transformed me into a Soviet tank enthusiast already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

Well, guardianleopard, you've really brought us back to the good old days. Thanks for that. We'll notify your family that you died to feed hungry people in need.

Peasant (2018-2018): Died Tragically Rescuing His Family From The Wreckage Of A Destroyed Sinking Battleship

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Toxn said:

Peasant (2018-2018): Died Tragically Rescuing His Family From The Wreckage Of A Destroyed Sinking Battleship

Around lunch time till 2 hr later*

 

Inb4 make alternate account for the sole purpose of baiting you to post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Peasant said:

Full load & shallow water or? Conditions not stated

Can't find anything.

 

But nice try at trying to steer the conversation, my dude. If the reports don't state it's in shallow water, then neither can you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bronezhilet said:

Can't find anything.

 

But nice try at trying to steer the conversation, my dude. If the reports don't state it's in shallow water, then neither can you.

I was going off memory on a Nav Weps post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Peasant said:

Around lunch time till 2 hr later*

 

Inb4 make alternate account for the sole purpose of baiting you to post.

See it's not bait if we openly enjoy it.

 

Then it's just food.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Peasant said:

Later models like Ki 84 and N1K, are superior to Zero are they not?

 

Because Russian plane uses inline, so less drag. Japan does not try so much.

Climb rate, energy retention, acceleration, roll rate, turn rate, are important.

To a point but the acceleration is very important in that, no?

No,Russian don't always uses inline and their radial one (Lavochkin) are as good as the yaks and maybe even better.

 

Ki-84 and N1K both are better than Zero yes but what can they do? N1K fight P51H in 1944 with 620km/h top speed?what is he going to wait P51H to turn and cut it with katana? lmao

ZgjH0jW.jpg

 

 

FaxoGih.jpg

 

 

Ki-84 is the only one that worth getting some credit, since it actually can match F6F,TAIC doesn't care about Ki-84,and giving the estimate report 156A that is totally contradiction to other report like F-1M-1119C-ND (which also is estimate but marked as fucking FACUTAL, TWAT). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ogypnCf.pngBUT that's it

it can't even dive right, it's just a shit that is better than the existing shit (Zero)

eulHxtT.png

It never reach 687km/h since it's the misread of 156A and F-1M-1119C-ND

Bushido won't help them, turning rate won't help em. Koyama himself knows better than you Jap plane fan ,he decide to rise wing load and weight exchange horizontal maneuverability to high speed performance.

that's all, Ha-45 cannot give 1900 horse power. And Hayate is just a broken dream. There goes the end of the story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Peasant said:

Why would Yamato run?

 

I'm not claiming otherwise: I am skeptical that the advantage in adjusting for pattern will change much.

 

Night fight wise; doesn't Fischer claim Yamato has night vision RF's?

 

The world wondered. What really happened at Samar.

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.
 

Quote


I am skeptical that the advantage in adjusting for pattern will change much.

 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Peasant said:

Last is a hydrodynamics calculation? I will have to check again to give you link.

In reality it is unimportant for a BB duel.

 

That would be if you knew your enemy was OP.

 

Oooh please show your work. I think I still have a copy of NavCAD 2014 lying around, or I could just teach myself how to use ANSYS.

 

I don't care if it's important or not, when you're citing things that are not documented in builder's trials that you're claiming you've seen calculations of, fucking show your work

 

Also, fuck you if you think CFD was viable before like 1978-1979. You cannot model to any useful degree of accuracy how a ship moves through water without using pretty hefty computers, and it's still not as accurate as well done model testing because there's so much turbulence at the stern and the scale is so large. If there's data on that, it's from builder's trials, acceptance trials, or model test data, and the USN was the only organization in the world with a large enough properly instrumented controlled model basin to do that sort of testing until the '60s or '70s. The David Taylor Model Basin was hands-down one of the most critical pieces of infrastructure, and contributed to the success of the US Navy ship design more than any other single facility. 

 

Now, on to your more recent comments:

 

Length to beam ratio matters more than thrust to weight, and the Iowa has better of both because it's not bluff and stubby. They also have a finer prismatic coefficient

 

The 35.2 for six hours was in open ocean in the Pacific, with IIRC reasonably cold water -- ships are faster in colder water because it's marginally denser and you don't melt things quite as quickly. 

 

As to why Yamato would run, for the same reason Bismarck would -- because it's asinine to go on a todesritt into the waiting lap of a superior force. Knowing the IJN, though, they'd do it and get shredded because all the Iowa has to do is sorta turn around and lead them on until they run out of gas.

 

The Yamato supposedly had some IR equipment of some sort, but even the best IR night vision equipment of 1945 Japan would be laughably useless compared to a functional and well-designed fire control radar.

 

Honestly, I'm kind-of dissappointed in you. You're failing to mention the issues the Iowas had as a result of their extreme fineness forward, namely being quite wet forward of the B turret in rough seas, or that the bulbous bow wasn't as refined as that on the Yamatos, or the pile of other minor flaws in the design. 

 

Oh wait, that'd require you to know what you're talking about, and have some understanding of naval architecture. 

 

Overall, 2/10 the German naval architect who put a twin 6" mount on the bow of an already-front-heavy destroyer was better informed than you and he designed a ship that would sink itself in the intended operating environment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

 

You realize I'm the admin, right?

I was actually joking.

I really enjoy reading the articles here, and if I could be entertainment for the well studied, I would try to render assistance to some degree.

4 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:

 

"Going off memory" = all purpose excuse for sourceless cowards.

You can google it and find it I think.

3 minutes ago, Akula_941 said:

No,Russian don't always uses inline and their radial one (Lavochkin) are as good as the yaks and maybe even better.

 

Ki-84 and N1K both are better than Zero yes but what can they do? N1K fight P51H in 1944 with 620km/h top speed?what is he going to wait P51H to turn and cut it with katana? lmao

ZgjH0jW.jpg

 

 

FaxoGih.jpg

 

 

Ki-84 is the only one that worth getting some credit, since it actually can match F6F,TAIC doesn't care about Ki-84,and giving the estimate report 156A that is totally contradiction to other report like F-1M-1119C-ND (which also is estimate but marked as fucking FACUTAL, TWAT). 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ogypnCf.pngBUT that's it

it can't even dive right, it's just a shit that is better than the existing shit (Zero)

eulHxtT.png

It never reach 687km/h since it's the misread of 156A and F-1M-1119C-ND

Bushido won't help them, turning rate won't help em. Koyama himself knows better than you Jap plane fan ,he decide to rise wing load and weight exchange horizontal maneuverability to high speed performance.

that's all, Ha-45 cannot give 1900 horse power. And Hayate is just a broken dream. There goes the end of the story.

Talking about the Yak specifically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which of the eight or however many points I made are you referring to?

 

The one where you claim to have data that I spent a week looking for in the library of one of the three best naval architecture schools in the world that I'm like 95% sure doesn't exist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Peasant said:

I'm saying it exists with confidence.

 

@A. T. Mahan I actually do know that, but is it really that pertinent?

 

Nobody gives a shit about your confidence. You've demonstrated a record level inability to think critically or address even simple counterarguments.

 

You are low energy and sad... But on the upside very tasty with blue cheese sauce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×