Walter_Sobchak

Since nobody got it, I'll finish this one off.  It's the Martel "Mechanical Coffin".  Page 47, David Fletcher's book "Mechanized Force: British Tanks Between the Wars".  Martel had created some of the early tankettes in the late 1920's, but after a while, he decided those were too big.  So he created this silly thing.  A soldier was supposed to lay down in it and drive forward.  Once he got close to the enemy, it had a lift up panel he would use as armor and fire his rifle through.

Since nobody got it, I'll finish this one off.  It's the Martel "Mechanical Coffin".  Page 47, David Fletcher's book "Mechanized Force: British Tanks Between the Wars".  Martel had created some of the early tankettes in the late 1920's, but after a while, he decided those were too big.  So he created this silly thing.  A soldier was supposed to lay down in it and drive forward.  Once he got close to the enemy, it had a lift up panel he would use as armor and fire his rifle through.

Since nobody got it, I'll finish this one off.  It's the Martel "Mechanical Coffin".  Page 47, David Fletcher's book "Mechanized Force: British Tanks Between the Wars".  Martel had created some of the early tankettes in the late 1920's, but after a while, he decided those were too big.  So he created this silly thing.  A soldier was supposed to lay down in it and drive forward.  Once he got close to the enemy, it had a lift up panel he would use as armor and fire his rifle through.

M10 tank destroyers in Israel, circa 1957, with a French 75mm gun.
 

 

 
 

I'm not sure which particular book that is, but the artwork is by John Batchelor.  His stuff got reprinted and reused in a bunch of books, such as Tank: A History of the Armored Fighting Vehicle by Kenneth Macksey and Fighting Tanks by Ian Hogg, to name a few.  All decent books for their time but really of rather limited use in the internet era.  Still, I pick them up if I find them cheap, I like looking at them.  His art was used in a bunch of these magazine format tank books as well.
 

Straussler Light tank, V 4

Since Xlucine suggested it in the general AFV thread, here is a new version of the old Tank ID thread that used to exist at the WoT forums, back before the great exodus to SH.
 
The rules are simple.  Post a picture of some sort of AFV and everyone has to try to name what it is.  Try to avoid posting a new picture until the previous picture is identified.  Generally, the person who was first to correctly ID the picture in question gets to post the next picture, unless they want to pass.  If a picture is not ID'd in a day or two, the person that posted it should say what it is and bask in their own sense of superiority.   They should then post a new picture for the sake of keeping the thread moving.  Please, no fictional tanks, paper napkin drawings that never made it to prototype or pictures where the vehicle in question is obscured or particularly hard to see.  Also, if posting a picture of an unusual variant of a relatively common vehicle, be sure to note that you are looking for the specific variant name, not just the general family of vehicles it belongs to (for example, if I post a picture of a Panzer IV with the hydrostat drive, I would say in the post something like "What makes this Panzer IV unusual?" since everyone can ID a Panzer IV)
 
It is perfectly ok to shame those that make spectacularly wrong guesses.  That's just how we roll around here.  
 
I'll start 
 

Since Xlucine suggested it in the general AFV thread, here is a new version of the old Tank ID thread that used to exist at the WoT forums, back before the great exodus to SH.
 
The rules are simple.  Post a picture of some sort of AFV and everyone has to try to name what it is.  Try to avoid posting a new picture until the previous picture is identified.  Generally, the person who was first to correctly ID the picture in question gets to post the next picture, unless they want to pass.  If a picture is not ID'd in a day or two, the person that posted it should say what it is and bask in their own sense of superiority.   They should then post a new picture for the sake of keeping the thread moving.  Please, no fictional tanks, paper napkin drawings that never made it to prototype or pictures where the vehicle in question is obscured or particularly hard to see.  Also, if posting a picture of an unusual variant of a relatively common vehicle, be sure to note that you are looking for the specific variant name, not just the general family of vehicles it belongs to (for example, if I post a picture of a Panzer IV with the hydrostat drive, I would say in the post something like "What makes this Panzer IV unusual?" since everyone can ID a Panzer IV)
 
It is perfectly ok to shame those that make spectacularly wrong guesses.  That's just how we roll around here.  
 
I'll start 
 

Since Xlucine suggested it in the general AFV thread, here is a new version of the old Tank ID thread that used to exist at the WoT forums, back before the great exodus to SH.
 
The rules are simple.  Post a picture of some sort of AFV and everyone has to try to name what it is.  Try to avoid posting a new picture until the previous picture is identified.  Generally, the person who was first to correctly ID the picture in question gets to post the next picture, unless they want to pass.  If a picture is not ID'd in a day or two, the person that posted it should say what it is and bask in their own sense of superiority.   They should then post a new picture for the sake of keeping the thread moving.  Please, no fictional tanks, paper napkin drawings that never made it to prototype or pictures where the vehicle in question is obscured or particularly hard to see.  Also, if posting a picture of an unusual variant of a relatively common vehicle, be sure to note that you are looking for the specific variant name, not just the general family of vehicles it belongs to (for example, if I post a picture of a Panzer IV with the hydrostat drive, I would say in the post something like "What makes this Panzer IV unusual?" since everyone can ID a Panzer IV)
 
It is perfectly ok to shame those that make spectacularly wrong guesses.  That's just how we roll around here.  
 
I'll start 
 

Since Xlucine suggested it in the general AFV thread, here is a new version of the old Tank ID thread that used to exist at the WoT forums, back before the great exodus to SH.
 
The rules are simple.  Post a picture of some sort of AFV and everyone has to try to name what it is.  Try to avoid posting a new picture until the previous picture is identified.  Generally, the person who was first to correctly ID the picture in question gets to post the next picture, unless they want to pass.  If a picture is not ID'd in a day or two, the person that posted it should say what it is and bask in their own sense of superiority.   They should then post a new picture for the sake of keeping the thread moving.  Please, no fictional tanks, paper napkin drawings that never made it to prototype or pictures where the vehicle in question is obscured or particularly hard to see.  Also, if posting a picture of an unusual variant of a relatively common vehicle, be sure to note that you are looking for the specific variant name, not just the general family of vehicles it belongs to (for example, if I post a picture of a Panzer IV with the hydrostat drive, I would say in the post something like "What makes this Panzer IV unusual?" since everyone can ID a Panzer IV)
 
It is perfectly ok to shame those that make spectacularly wrong guesses.  That's just how we roll around here.  
 
I'll start 
 

Since Xlucine suggested it in the general AFV thread, here is a new version of the old Tank ID thread that used to exist at the WoT forums, back before the great exodus to SH.
 
The rules are simple.  Post a picture of some sort of AFV and everyone has to try to name what it is.  Try to avoid posting a new picture until the previous picture is identified.  Generally, the person who was first to correctly ID the picture in question gets to post the next picture, unless they want to pass.  If a picture is not ID'd in a day or two, the person that posted it should say what it is and bask in their own sense of superiority.   They should then post a new picture for the sake of keeping the thread moving.  Please, no fictional tanks, paper napkin drawings that never made it to prototype or pictures where the vehicle in question is obscured or particularly hard to see.  Also, if posting a picture of an unusual variant of a relatively common vehicle, be sure to note that you are looking for the specific variant name, not just the general family of vehicles it belongs to (for example, if I post a picture of a Panzer IV with the hydrostat drive, I would say in the post something like "What makes this Panzer IV unusual?" since everyone can ID a Panzer IV)
 
It is perfectly ok to shame those that make spectacularly wrong guesses.  That's just how we roll around here.  
 
I'll start 
 

It's like Nexter and KMW looked at when General Dynamics slapped an Abrams turret on an M60 hull and said "we can do something even dumber!"

It's like Nexter and KMW looked at when General Dynamics slapped an Abrams turret on an M60 hull and said "we can do something even dumber!"

I will say this about Trump, I like that he opposed the merger of AT&T and Time Warner.  I suspect his motives were based on trying to hurt Time Warner and their subsidiary CNN, a frequent target of his.  For me, I just think there is too much consolidation of media in this country.

Did you not read the actual report?  Democrats were the ones that got hosed by Comey's inappropriate actions, not Trump.  Unless you think that the FBI bringing up the Hillary email two weeks before the elections somehow helped Hillary's campaign rather than hurting it.  So actually, liberals are the ones that should be most upset by this report.  Anyhow, the report notes that while they found that errors were made in judgement and procedure, they note that they did not find evidence of bias.

I find it amusing how Trump supporters seem to have two very different standards by which they judge the actions of their beloved Trump and anyone they perceive as opposed to Trump.  As Trump himself said, "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters."  So Rosenstein is a "corrupt scumbag."  Honestly, I don't know if he is or not.  But I am not going to take it on the word of someone that can't seem to notice that Trump regularly wipes his ass with the US Constitution and legal code.

Also, since it is now established that they Rebels have bombers, does that mean they have been conducting bombing raids on First Order cities?  I want to see the Mon Calamari version of Curtis LeMay.

Honest question here.  Let's say Kim is totally on board with getting rid of his nukes.  Considering the huge investment that NK has made in developing and building these weapons, would his own generals actually let him do it or would he fall victim to a coup?   How secure is his hold on power?

I really wish Jim Carrey would shut the fuck up.  I don't care about his stupid fucking paintings.  I don't care that he hates Trump.  I hate his movies and I think he's a slime bag who gave his girlfriend multiple STDs and lied about it after she killed herself.  Also, he is an anti-vaxxer.  Fuck that guy.

And when you try to justify everything, the same rules apply.

Don, I will agree with you that Lindsay Graham is terrible.  He is far too hawkish for my tastes.  One of the few silver linings I see in the Trump administration is that he seems to be willing to ignore the most hawkish members of the Republican establishment.  But then, he also hired John Bolton (king of the Neo-con hawks) and seems to alternate wildly from being all milk and honey (Kim is someone we can trust) to outright scary (Fire and Fury!).  It's this lack of consistency and discipline that leaves me very worried about the Trump administration foreign policy.  

This just makes it worse.
 

That was not my point.  The point was that Trump gets attention for criticizing current athletes who protest while talking about a pardon for Ali, who was one of the most famous protesting athletes of all time.  It's hypocritial.  Not that Trump cares, he only cares that Ali popular now, everyone having forgotten why he was such a controversial figure during his fighting career.