Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Sign in to follow this  
Priory_of_Sion

Failures in Historic/Scientific/Military Journalism

Recommended Posts

I don't know, Andrei Sakharov did once propose putting the warhead of the Tsar Bomba in a torpedo in the very early 60's before he turned into an activist, the idea being to clear a naval base or an area of a coastal city with a tsunami before an amphibious landing.

 

As far I know the idea just stayed on paper though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're referring to Andrei's death wave torpedo, that "could" be something like it I guess, but this was back in the 50s-60s when Hydrogen Bombs were first discovered.

 

It was called the T-15 and, while it was supposed to be carried on the outside of the delivery submarine due to the massive projected size (1500mm in Diameter), that's probably not it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

"Calm down everyone, there’s no plan to put an F-35 production line in India"

 

WHY THE FUCK NOT?

 

Can you just IMAGINE the potential comedy value that could come from this?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Khand-e said:

 

WHY THE FUCK NOT?

 

Can you just IMAGINE the potential comedy value that could come from this?!

But then the issue of quality control gives fuel to the sputtering methane flame that is the TEH F-35 IS BAD crowd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Scolopax said:

But then the issue of quality control gives fuel to the sputtering methane flame that is the TEH F-35 IS BAD crowd.

But you gain all the weirdo Indian nationalists as F-35 fans 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/23/2018 at 7:24 PM, Collimatrix said:

It's an improved jagdtiger with upgrades to its mobility.

And reliability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real tanks are the friends you met along the way.

 

Edit: ahahaha

 

Quote

 


Tanks, first and foremost, are:

Extremely heavily armored, often weighing upwards of 60 tons as a result.
Equipped with a big gun, usually in at least 120mm caliber in modern tanks.
Tracked, rather than propelled by wheels and tires.

 

 

Leopard 1 is not a tank

PzI is not a tank, and neither are any American tanks pre-1940s ish

Ansaldo-Pavesi Wheeled Tank Modello 1925 is not a tank

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, EnsignExpendable said:

The real tanks are the friends you met along the way.

 

Edit: ahahaha

 

 

Leopard 1 is not a tank

PzI is not a tank, and neither are any American tanks pre-1940s ish

Ansaldo-Pavesi Wheeled Tank Modello 1925 is not a tank

T-55 also not a tank. And T-62. And T-72, T-80 and even T-90 are not tanks as they are less than 60 tons. And BTs also are not tanks, as the had tires/wheels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EnsignExpendable said:

The real tanks are the friends you met along the way.

 

Edit: ahahaha

 

 

Leopard 1 is not a tank

PzI is not a tank, and neither are any American tanks pre-1940s ish

Ansaldo-Pavesi Wheeled Tank Modello 1925 is not a tank

 

Not a tank:

MarkIVFemaleTankAshfordKent.jpg

 

Can I call this misogyny? I'm calling this misogyny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you're writing a serious article about SLS and the KSP you snorted hits you hard; http://www.thespacereview.com/article/3429/1

 



But why stop there? The SLS could be redesigned to go well beyond the 130-metric-ton LEO lift capacity planned for its problematic Block 2 configuration. The SLS core stage’s 8.4-meter diameter could be ringed snugly by ten Falcon 9 cores. Doing this would transform SLS from a would-be Saturn 5 into a truly ultra-heavy brute lifter. Using very reusable Block 5 Falcon 9 cores, such a beast would generate over 21 million pounds-force of liftoff thrust and could haul as much or more to orbit, reusably, as SpaceX’s 2016 Interplanetary Transport System concept. Anyone who thrilled to the sight of Falcon Heavy’s two side cores landing should be ecstatic at the prospect of seeing a kick line of ten of them landing in line abreast.

Of course, such a beast would also have 98 engines firing simultaneously at liftoff. But, as the recent Falcon Heavy demo flight amply demonstrated, there’s no reason to be fazed simply by a large engine count. Engineering would actually be easier than for the Falcon Heavy as each Falcon 9 core in the booster ring would brace its adjacent neighbors as well as attaching to the SLS core stage. Much less scope for inimical vibration modes or aerodynamic flutter.

Ideally, reusable SLS (R-SLS) should also have a recoverable second stage. That lets the currently envisioned EUS out. And its four RL10 engines are too dinky to sit atop the huge, and hugely revised, R-SLS. By the time R-SLS could be redesigned and built, the best choice of basis for an appropriately scaled 2nd stage would be SpaceX’s BFS—at least the freighter and tanker versions of same—which both should have been flying for some time by then. To carry the maximum mass which R-SLS could launch, the standard BFS design would likely need some beefing up of its structure, but most components should carry over without issue.

 

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
Sign in to follow this  

×