Volkswagen

Satelite navigation for a commander's tank will be my guess.

You invaded another country and you keep turning it into a pile of rubble. You are fully responsible for all what is happening. Don't even try to portay Russia as a victim. Noone was attacking Russia and noone is attacking it even now even though it fully deserves that and the only things which prevents that is nukes. 

That video is fucking awful piece of shit and because of it, I now have super-aids. Just first few points that come to mind:
 
-Dude has a PhD in physics, not in history, which is why it's a bit shady to use it so overtly in a video about history.
-the scale of battles are horribly uneven; capture of single frigate (without bloodshed) is considered good enough for jihad and made no distinction to events where tens of thousands of people get killed. Obviously he is trying to inflate the map with his fucking dots.
-stops counting crusades after the third one ??? (there are still 4th-9th crusades, reconquista, Albigensian crusade, Hussite wars, All the Swedish, Lithuanian, Prussian etc. crusades), some of them are obviously between christians or uneventful (6th crusade IIRC) but the same should then apply to "jihads" as well.
-counting almost all muslim conflicts regardless of who is fighting who and what is the motivation behind said conflict (Civil wars between muslims e.g. in Granada 1482-1484 or abbasid succession war in 811, defending from enemy campaigns (Granada conquest by Castillian forces, didn't have time to check but it seems that all of reconquista is somehow counted only as jihads but not crusades..).
-counting dishonestly bizarre events as jihads, such as; French exile of jews in 1306(???), 1999 Kosovo war, Turkish invasion of Cyprus, or counting possibly small skirmishes as battles (hard to say as there are no sources for these and the description is vague as hell).
 831 Spain war
 832 Spain war
 833 Spain war
 834 Spain war
 835 Spain war
 836 Spain war
and lot more from Spain with no sources.
-he's trying to evoke this muslims vs christians/western world by wording things vaguely ("..primarily battles against classical civilizations of rome and greece" ???)
-framing every muslim conflict as a way to enslave, rape and murder everyone non-muslim, but romantisizing crusades as just helping bretherens.
-pretending that every single one of these battles were fought because of religious reasons.
-cramming together ~1500 years of history, hundreds of millions of people from hundreds of civilizations and simplifying them to homogenic muslims and christians.
 
If you want to have super-aids as well, go check his sources:
http://cspipublishing.com/statistical/charts/Islam-BattlesDate.pdf

Consider the geometry of actual armor without ignoring the LFP.
In addition, the mass of the ammo is almost insignificant (25 kg per round and 40 or so rounds in the hull is 1 ton, vs 2 tons each for the engine and transmission plus fluids).
That's not how tracked vehicles work, at all.
You keep throwing this around without sourcing it. While I get that the Merk 4 is better protected than the previous ones, I'm interested in hearing what the actual professionals have to say.
Also, the Namer shows that when sufficiently motivated even the Izzys can adequately place armor around an AVDS if we ignore the LFP as usual.
The Mark 2D seems to show that the guys in charge disagree about the driver's visibility and armor on that side. On the engine side, continuing the hull line at the hump forwards to the beak instead of having it drop would make room for an armor module in front of the engine. That area is not in the FOV of the driver's central periscope nor in the FOV of the right one, which looks out over the engine deck.
Please don't throw around things like this, they betray just how little you actually know.
Let's compare the AVDS-1790-5A as found in the Merk 1 to the MTU 883 in the Merk 4, shall we?
First, the AVDS:

And then the MTU:

Notice something? The AVDS is nominally approximately 4" longer. But that includes the turbo arrangement, which isn't included in the MTU engine dimensions. Once you include the turbo, the MTU 883 is longer.
But wait, you say, the powerpack isn't only the engine! The Merks have used CD-850 Allsions and RK-304 and RK-325 Renk transmissions!
So let's take a look at those now.
First, the CD-850:

Note that the depth of the transmission, 29", is approximately 730mm.
next, the RK-304:

and finally, the RK-325:
https://www.renk-ag.com/en/products-and-service/products/vehicle-transmissions/rk-325/
Dimensions: 1,910 x 830 x 960mm
that's L*W*H.
So, in fact, the RK-325 as found on the Merk 4 is longer than the transmissions in any previous Merk model, as is the MTU engine.
So yeah, the "significant reduction in length of the powerpack unit" is a simple sign that you don't actually know what you're talking about, care to guess again?
You should know the drill by now. Source this claim.
You're zigzagging from "theres no problem with armoring the front along with the engine, slight weight bias forwards is a good thing" to "need to restore balance by uneven wheel spacing".
Also that's not the only reason for having wheels spaced unevenly, care to guess what the other ones are?
Again you're not bringing your A-game, step it up.
2 has a new powertrain with the Renk RK304 transmission, which necessitated changing the entire engine deck area, exhaust routed into the coolant air exhaust manifold, as well as turret changes like the mortar and special armor slapped on.
The drivetrain of the 2 is closer to that of the 3 than it is to the 1.
Well you'd also expect them to realize that ammo separation is the objectively correct way to go, but I suppose you can't get everything.
Also how exactly would you expect them to realize that the alternative is better when they don't have any experience with rear engine tanks newer than the M60A3, anyway?
Reminder that the Merk 3 has a roof sight.
There's a difference between making something work and it being a good idea which gives you what you actually want.
Red is not russian, even if you can't tell Eastern European accents apart.
What did the big bad Russians do to you anyway?
You're dragging the forum discourse level and SNR waaay the fuck down with your shitposting, cease.
 
Hybrids bring their own host of problems, not least requiring more volume and weight than equivalent mechanical transmissions. Also, why would you go to all the trouble of putting the drive sprockets in the front, if you decouple them from the engine? it's objectively a worse location for them.
This bit we've been over before, and I'm just qouting it again to rub your face in how wrong it is and how you never bothered to perform 10 minutes of googling because you lack any self-critical thinking ability.
You're gonna have to source this too, this claim in particular is interesting, as on the Merk the air filters were never in the way of the UFP in the first place!
Aaaand you're confirmed for never having viewed anything through a camera resting above a hot surface.
That's not only an incredibly asinine statement, considering how the IDF hasn't designed any rear-engine MBTs, but it's nevertheless still wrong:



 
In short, @Mighty_Zuk, you have a lot of unsubstantiated claims to back up, Referte Avt Morimini.
You've also said a lot of bullshit that betrays a basic and fundamental lack of understanding of the subject matter. Git larned, and kindly match the confidence displayed in your posts to your actual level of knowledge in the subject matter, and not to what you'd like others to believe it is. You are invited to step up your game and keep the baseless speculation and denial to other forums like AW, and refrain from overly nationalistic fanboyism.
Also, if you don't know something, even in a field which is close to your heart, just admit it. there's no shame in not knowing shit, but there's quite a lot in pretending to know stuff you don't and being flat out wrong.
Kindly raise the standard of your posting, we really don't want this place devolving into AW or worse, DFI. Which is unfortunately the current posting standard you are representing.
 
Sure, if you like your tanks immobile.
 

While the video is indeed garbage, your rebuttal is as well.
So your counterpoint to "the engine bay being hot and in the front is an issue with the Merk" is "It's more important and therefore it isn't an issue".
If you actually bother to look at how the Merks 1-3 and the AVDS-1790 are put together, you would very quickly notice that the hottest air from the engine is blown straight onto the deck above (which on the Merk 1, 2, and early 3 would appear to only be solid steel, with no give-away bolt heads to indicate composite armor of any kind), and from there out the side louvers, sideways (and slightly back). if it were thrown down it would kick up clouds of dust.
Steel is, of course, an extremely good conductor of heat, and this in turn means that if the lower surface gets hot, well, so too does the upper one. The thickness of this plate is, in fact, mostly irrelevant.
Additionally, if you knew anything about other tanks which use the AVDS, you'd know that the entire purpose of the funky grating on the back of the M60 (and originally the M48A3 with the AVI-1790-8) is to reduce the IR signature. And yet despite that grating and exhaust tunnel design, the M60 retains a non-negligible IR signature. I strongly suggest reading what Hunnicutt has to say on the topic. To assume that the Merks 1-3, which squeeze more power out of what is effectively the same engine and therefore have more waste heat to remove, and have less grating area to permit airflow, somehow end up expelling colder air is plain fantasy.
Unlike the Merk, the M60 spits out its hot exhaust rearwards, out of the line of sight, and therefore the exhaust grills are out of sight from the front. The Merk has its exhaust grills in the front arc of the tank, where they can clearly be seen (and of course the grills heat up to approximately the temperature of the exhaust air). On the Merk 1 it was waaaaay worse, as the engine combustion exhaust was just piped out to the sides and expelled there, resulting in a large patch of the vehicle which get hot enough to fry an egg on. On the later Merks the exhaust was routed to mix with the engine cooling air exhaust, indicating that this was a large enough problem that it needed to be solved.
The later Merk 3 has a layered deck above the engine (if the bolt heads are anything to go by), and layers (particularly if they include air layers) are extremely good insulators, so that bit should be mostly ok now; the Merk 4 has both a layered deck and an MTU engine, in which the air flows the other way through the engine, from the top downwards and out the side. The Merk 4 also what looks like layered sponsons around the exhaust grate, which the 3 lacks; so that area too should be better off than it was. These tanks however also have solid steel hulls, which the engine can and does heat up through its mounting points (as you need pretty solid mounting points to hold down a 1000+HP diesel), and the hull extends forwards to the nose (and to the non-modular sponsons on the Merk 3), giving a large area in the front radiating away. It should also be noted that transmissions produce non-negligible quantities of waste heat, as do the brakes (torque converters too, yay viscous fluid shear), for obvious reasons; more so that the engine if you're doing anything other than standing still. And having those stacked right up close against the steel hull is asking for it to heat up.
 
So yeah, handwaving away the heat from the automotive components being in front as "Not true"
You wouldn't happen to have a single fact to back up that rather bold statement, would you? Like, a source of some kind?
Regarding the pic you posted, there's a certain component that deserves some attention there. Specifically, the tires on the roadwheels. You may note, that they are white and therefore cold. Now, what do we know about roadwheels on tanks?
hint: they ain't cold when the vehicle is moving:

So by the fact that the wheels are cold, we know that the Merk you posted has not been moving, and indeed one cannot tell how long the engine has been running; nor can the LFP, which is by all accounts part of the steel hull, be seen. Using a photo such as that to demonstrate the effect of the engine on the thermal signature is disingenuous at best.
 
The LFP is a thing on the Merk 4 too, you know; and considering how the rest of your treatment of this point is "I'd rather have a damaged engine", you're effectively trying to squirrel out of the fact that yes, the engine on the Merk is more vulnerable than it is on MBTs.
Not if said conventional design had, y'know, armor there, like, I dunno, the Abrams or Leo 2.
Again, do you have a single fact or source to back that opinion up?
And, as usual, you are ignoring a much more vital component than the engine, care to guess what it is and why?
In actual competently designed tanks post-1973 there are no fuel tanks in the crew compartment (excluding derivative designs which inherited them), so that's a bit of a moot point. Most modern tanks keep the fuel in the engine bay and/or the sponsons, and not in the front of the hull where armor belongs.
I find that hard to believe, you wouldn't happen to have a source for that would you?
Cause if we take that at face value, that would make the Merk the first tank designed without armor compromises since what, 1916?
Also the multiple generations of modules and sideskirts spotted on Merks suggests that that is not actually the case.
Of course another point that both you and Red missed is that tank armor is designed to meet a reference threat. What that threat is is a different question, but considering how Egypt, Jordan and Syria all operate tanks which fling APFSDS and which the Merk 4 is at least notionally supposed to be able to go up against and win, the idea that its armor doesn't at least do something against KE is laughable, to say the least. What the CE threat is is also an open question. Red also clearly doesn't get how "special" armors work against CE.
Again, fact to back that up? Cause without a source, that's just meaningless handwaving.
Cause even with the most modern turret modules seen on the Merk 4m, there doesn't seem to be any burster plate to prevent the blast from an ATGM disassembling the armor inside, the way we've all seen the pictures of it happening from 2006. If the declasified Brit Burlington docs are anything to go by, NERA arrays have trash multi-hit ability without burster plates, and there's no reason to believe the Izzys have some super duper sekrit sauce nobody else does to solve this problem.
That's a very strong statement to throw around unsubstantiated. You wouldn't happen to have anything resembling a source to support this claim would you? Official claims that this is indeed the case? Product page on one of IMI's websites that claims this gun ever existed? pictures of a testbed with the gun?
The last time I saw someone taking the claims of a 140mm gun on the Merk 4 seriously was back in the early 2000s, before the thing entered mass production, and even then it was presented as only being rumors and not thrown around as if it were a fact the way you're doing.
Both these claims also need to be sourced.
For reference, L/55 guns have a whole host of problems accompanying them, including balance issues, elevating mass and inertia, recoil impulse and length (same problem faced with more energetic ammo in L/44 guns), and so on. As part of the upgrade to the L/55 in the Leo (part of the A5 upgrade pack), the gun drives were replaced and the entire mantlet area redesigned -the newer mantlet is much narrower, and the gap is filled by armor boxes attached to the fixed turret structure, most likely to reduce the elevating mass and restore margins.
L/55 guns are enough of a headache that the US seems to have decided to not go that route because of the problems the testbeds had with them. Handwaving away integration issues like this as "no biggie" is being deliberately ignorant.
We've already been over the whole thermals business and that picture, but what I don't get is even if we assume you are correct and the Trophy antennae are a stronger radiator in the relevant wavelengths*, how is this greatly increased thermal signature a point in favor of the Merk?
*even with extreme emissivity differences, I don't see how that could be the case. Comparing to a similar radar by the same manufacturer, I get 110W continuous power draw for the radars at most (comparing to the Elta EL/M-2129), as opposed to several hundred KW waste heat in the exhaust even at idle.
A. You are aware that the wonders of modular armor mean that armor packages can be changed mid-batch, and that therefore doesn't make it a 4a/4b difference.
B. If you think minor changes like that (and whatever internal changes to the armor module it covers) are enough to prevent the blast from a warhead shrekking the armor after a hit you're somewhere between deluded and hopeless.
 
Before being a Democrat and blaming Russian propaganda, consider the following:
1. Is it wrong? If it is correct, or at least has a good change of being so, crying "propaganda!" is a great way to discredit your viewpoint.
2. Cui Bono? If the Russians don't stand to benefit (and indeed, what good does mocking the IR signature of an irrelevant third world country's tank does to the Russians), why would they waste their propaganda efforts on it?
Kindly use your brain before posting.
Also kindly try and keep your shitposting on this forum in full grammatically-correct sentences. 

Thank you very much Sovngard !
 
Here is the file (hopefully): https://docdro.id/zvIkXJz

Show your work on the hydrodynamics calculations you're citing as evidence
 
https://www.amazon.com/Dreadnought-Britain-Germany-Coming-Great/dp/0345375564
 
https://www.amazon.com/Castles-Steel-Britain-Germany-Winning/dp/0345408780/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_t_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=T3FBS6V13RH264FMDYP0
 
https://www.amazon.com/Great-War-Sea-Naval-History/dp/1107036909/ref=pd_sim_14_41?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1107036909&pd_rd_r=bde4423e-dc74-11e8-a3d1-552a6c0f9979&pd_rd_w=qqYKt&pd_rd_wg=KcfZp&pf_rd_i=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_p=18bb0b78-4200-49b9-ac91-f141d61a1780&pf_rd_r=T3FBS6V13RH264FMDYP0&pf_rd_s=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_t=40701&psc=1&refRID=T3FBS6V13RH264FMDYP0
 
https://www.amazon.com/Price-Admiralty-Evolution-Warfare-Trafalgar/dp/0140096507/ref=pd_sim_14_43?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0140096507&pd_rd_r=bde4423e-dc74-11e8-a3d1-552a6c0f9979&pd_rd_w=qqYKt&pd_rd_wg=KcfZp&pf_rd_i=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_p=18bb0b78-4200-49b9-ac91-f141d61a1780&pf_rd_r=T3FBS6V13RH264FMDYP0&pf_rd_s=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_t=40701&psc=1&refRID=T3FBS6V13RH264FMDYP0
 
https://www.amazon.com/Influence-History-1660-1783-Classic-Reprint/dp/1440080003/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540925517&sr=1-1&keywords=Mahan
 
https://www.amazon.com/Interest-America-Power-Present-Future-ebook/dp/B004TRQVWQ/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540925517&sr=1-4&keywords=Mahan
 
https://www.amazon.com/Influence-Revolution-1793-1812-Classic-Reprint/dp/B008ZT5YKY/ref=pd_sbs_14_9?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B008ZT5YKY&pd_rd_r=4fd2f5be-dc75-11e8-bf93-dbc3134547a0&pd_rd_w=Dgqpw&pd_rd_wg=aZRxD&pf_rd_i=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_p=7d5d9c3c-5e01-44ac-97fd-261afd40b865&pf_rd_r=KSFRTJEY4M5R36TCBHD6&pf_rd_s=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_t=40701&psc=1&refRID=KSFRTJEY4M5R36TCBHD6
 
https://www.amazon.com/Naval-War-1812-Complete-History/dp/0486818977/ref=pd_sbs_14_7?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=0486818977&pd_rd_r=4fd2f5be-dc75-11e8-bf93-dbc3134547a0&pd_rd_w=Dgqpw&pd_rd_wg=aZRxD&pf_rd_i=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_p=7d5d9c3c-5e01-44ac-97fd-261afd40b865&pf_rd_r=KSFRTJEY4M5R36TCBHD6&pf_rd_s=desktop-dp-sims&pf_rd_t=40701&psc=1&refRID=KSFRTJEY4M5R36TCBHD6
 
https://www.amazon.com/Power-State-Sergei-Georgievich-Gorshkov/dp/0870219618/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540925733&sr=1-1&keywords=Sergei+Gorshkov
 
https://www.amazon.com/Admiral-Gorshkov-Challenged-U-S-Navy/dp/1682473309/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540925733&sr=1-6&keywords=Sergei+Gorshkov
 
https://www.amazon.com/Fleet-Flood-Tide-America-1944-1945-ebook/dp/B01BJSJMHI/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540925808&sr=1-3&keywords=last+stand+of+the+tin+can+sailor
 
https://www.amazon.com/Neptunes-Inferno-U-S-Navy-Guadalcanal-ebook/dp/B004C43FXE/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540925808&sr=1-2&keywords=last+stand+of+the+tin+can+sailor
 
https://www.amazon.com/Last-Stand-Tin-Sailors-Extraordinary-ebook/dp/B001L83PM0/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540925808&sr=1-1&keywords=last+stand+of+the+tin+can+sailor
 
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1591142474/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i1
 
https://www.amazon.com/Jutland-Unfinished-Personal-History-Controversy-ebook/dp/B01LXCAJJ1/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540925888&sr=1-2&keywords=Jutland
 
https://www.amazon.com/Skagerrak-Battle-Jutland-Through-German/dp/1783831235/ref=sr_1_8?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540925888&sr=1-8&keywords=Jutland
 
https://www.amazon.com/Jutland-Analysis-Fighting-Maritime-Classics/dp/1558217592/ref=sr_1_10?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540925888&sr=1-10&keywords=Jutland
 
https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Jutland-30th-June-1916-ebook/dp/B00MDYPLKA/ref=sr_1_19?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540925916&sr=1-19&keywords=Jutland
 
https://www.amazon.com/Jutland-Eye-Witness-Account-Great-Battle/dp/B000GL6LGA/ref=sr_1_20?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540925916&sr=1-20&keywords=Jutland
 
https://www.amazon.com/Jutland-German-Perspective-Great-Battle/dp/1860199178/ref=sr_1_22?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540925916&sr=1-22&keywords=Jutland
 
https://www.amazon.com/Battleship-Bismarck-Design-Operational-History/dp/1591145694/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540925982&sr=1-5&keywords=Denmark+Strait
 
https://www.amazon.com/Killing-Bismarck-Destroying-Pride-Hitlers-ebook/dp/B009EE9GAI/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540926030&sr=1-1&keywords=sink+the+bismarck
 
https://www.amazon.com/Sink-Bismarck-Cecil-Scott-Forester/dp/0553105418/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540926030&sr=1-2&keywords=sink+the+bismarck
 
https://www.amazon.com/Last-Nine-Days-Bismarck-ebook/dp/B0076BSV2K/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540926030&sr=1-3&keywords=sink+the+bismarck
 
https://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/CloseQuarters/index.html
 
https://www.amazon.com/Military-Strategies-Spruance-Halsey-Philippines-ebook/dp/B01L4O5VRC/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540926125&sr=1-4&keywords=surigao
 
https://www.amazon.com/Last-Big-Gun-Naval-Battle-Surigao/dp/1889901083/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540926125&sr=1-2&keywords=surigao
 
https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Surigao-Strait-Twentieth-Century-Battles-ebook/dp/B00866HB20/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1540926125&sr=1-1&keywords=surigao
 
That'd be a good place to start

I would, at least, like to compliment Peasant for sticking to his guns despite being horrendously overmatched qualitatively and quantitatively, and getting slaughtered as a result. In this, he does the IJN proud.

long sentence short,  “Zero is already have no advantage against F4F-4 in East Solomon，and later facing F6F with 2x stronger engine power Zero is being slaughtered one side. This end up by a total massacre in battle of philipean sea(マリアナ沖海戦)"
second part is pretty much shitting on japanese zero lover " Zero is the most famous aircraft made by japan , the sign of japanese industry and patriotism. I (the author) can understand this emotion and feeling of yours(japan local zero lover), but as a weapon it get outclassed very quickly, battle of east solomon is where it falls, and later become basically free EXP."

Lott is a controversial figure primarily because his analyses are difficult for anti-gun groups to defend against. I've read a lot of his research and he generally is extremely fair and even-handed with his data - the data just does not support the agenda those people want it to. So, just like the leftist constitutional scholars who debunked the "collective right" of the Second Amendment, Lott has been unpersoned for heresy, essentially. Naturally, once labeled as shills for the NRA, the opinions of Lott, Tribe, and anyone else who points out uncomfortable or inconvenient facts can be safely dismissed.
 
All this sounds terribly melodramatic, but it's something gun owners have been dealing with for years. Opinionated turds from the coastal megalopoleis and from foreign countries with no gun rights tell us all sorts of nasty things about us and our guns, despite not having the first clue. We're all quite sick of it.

No, because Lott is counting shooters, not casualties:
 

 
Sorry you've been lied to. :|

At football world cup, part of which is held here, in St.Petersburg (thanks for problems with subway and station closing, assholes) Saudi Arabia lost to Russia 5:0. I want to point out that Russian footbal team is made 50% out of fail and 50% out of hack frauds, currently it is number 70 ranked football team, which is fucking terrible (below Saudi Arabia, Côte d'Ivoire, Honduras, etc). 

 
Joke pics:

 
After the match

Coming to a forum l like this to whine about a game not being fair to japanese fanboys and supporting a lying scumbag is not a good move if you want to be taken seriously.  
 
No one here gives a fuck about your feelings if you're making shit up to make a game better for you and your scumbag weaboo friends. 

Oh boy you'll last a long time here, I can tell.

I forgot to post out my reference:
 
JACAR  C14011075200
JACAR  C13120839500
Tomio Hara: "Japanese tank"
Gakken: "Tank and Gun Tank"
KAMADO: "Japanese Heavy Tanks"
and help from Mr.Taki.

This is an article simply to show you guys here how Waffentrager is a faker. The original article  ( https://www.weibo.com/ttarticle/p/show?id=2309404213101531682050) was written in Chinese and Japanese. For better understanding I will translate and edit the article and post it here. 
  And I must tell you why I want to reveal this shit: Long time ago I found many sayings from Waffentrager’s blog which I had never heard of, so I turned to my Japanese friend and IJA tank researcher Mr.Taki and asked him to confirm a few of them. In the end it turned out that none of Waffentrager’s article is true. I once argued with him and he not only failed to give out his reference but also deleted my replies! I’m very angry!
 
  Now let’s get started.
 
  At the very beginning I recommend all of you who opened this post to take a look at Waffentrager’s original article, that will help you understand what I’m debating.
 
  Here is the link to the original article: https://sensha-manual.blogspot.jp/2017/09/the-ho-ri-tank-destroyer.html?m=0  
 
  In China we need to use VPN(aka “ladder-梯子” or “the scientific way of browsing the Internet-科学上网” in Chinese)to open that link above so at first I post out Waffentrager’s original post in the form of screenshots in my article. I’ll skip that here.
 

 
Fig.1: I will skip his original article.
 
  Now, I had raised my first question here: Please take a look at the screenshot:
 

 
Fig.2: My first question
 
  In the original article, Waffentrager insisted that the Type 5 gun tank was built in July, 1944 and fully assembled in August. It was also put into trials at the same time.
 

 
Fig.3: Waffentrager’s original article.
 
  But, is that true? Let’s have a look at the Japanese archive:
 

 
Important Fig.4: Archive code C14011075200, Item 4
 
  Notice the part with the red, this is the research and develop plan for the Japanese Tech Research center in 1943, and had been edited in 1944. ◎砲１００(Gun-100) is the project name for the 105mm gun used by Type 5 gun tank. The column under it says: “Research a tank gun with 105mm caliber and a muzzle velocity of 900m/s”. This means that the gun had just begun to be developed and from the bottom column we can know that it was PLANNED to be finished in 1945-3[完成豫定 means ”plan to be finished” and 昭２０、３ means ”Shouwa 20-3”. Shouwa 20 is 1945 in Japan (you can wiki the way for Japanese to count years I’m not going to explain it here)]
  Next let’s move on to the Type 5 gun tank itself, here is the Japanese archive:
 

 
Important Fig.5: Archive code C14011075200, Item 7
 
  “新砲戦車(甲)ホリ車” is the very very first name of Type 5 gun tank, it should be translated into:”New gun tank(A), Ho-Ri vehicle”. “ホリ” is the secret name of it. Still from the column we can easily know that Ho-Ri was also planned to be finished in 1945-3. But under that column there is another one called:”摘要(Summary or outline)”, in this it says:”砲１００、第一次試作完了昭和１９、８”, In English it is: “Gun-100, First experimental construction(prototype construction) finished in Shouwa 19-8(1944-8)” What does it mean? It means that in 1944-8, Only the 105mm gun used by the Type 5 gun tank was finished! If the Ho-Ri tank itself was finished why it was not in the 摘要 column? So how could an unfinished tank mounted the prototype gun? Waffentrager is talking bullshit.
Also from Mr.Kunimoto’s book, he gave the complete schedule of the 105mm gun, here it is:
 

 
Important Fig.6: Kunimoto’s schedule
 
  “修正機能試験” means ”Mechanical correctional test”, it took place in 1944-8, this matches the original Japanese archive(though this chart was also made from original archives). At that time the gun had just finished, not the tank.
 
  Next is this paragraph from Waffentrager’s article:
 

 
Fig.7: Weighing 35 tons
 
  From the archive above(important Fig.5) we can learn from the second large column”研究要項(Research items)” that Ho-Ri was only PLANNED to be 35 tons, and maximum armour thickness was PLANNED to be 120mm, not was. Waffentrager is lying, he used the PLANNED data as the BUILT data. I will post out the correct data below later to see what Ho-Ri is really like when its design was finished.
 

 
Fig.8: 全備重量-約三五屯(Combat weight-app.35t), 装甲(最厚部)-約一二〇粍(Armour, thickest part-app.120mm)
 
  At this time, some of the people might inquire me that:”Maybe the Type 5 gun tanks were really finished! You just don’t know!” Well, I will use the archives and books to tell these guys that they are totally wrong. None of the Type 5 gun tank was finished.
  Always let’s look at Waffentrager’s article first. He said that a total of 5 Ho-Ri were completed.
 

 
Fig.9: Waffentrager said 5 Ho-Ri were completed.
 
 He also put an original Japanese archive(C13120839500) to “enhance” his “facts”.
 

 
Fig.10: Waffentrager’s archive
 
  Everyone can see the”ホリ車,1-3-1” in the document, and someone might actually believe that 5 Ho-Ri were actually built. But they are wrong! Waffentrager is cheating you with “only a part of the original document”! Here is what the original archive really looks like:
 

 
Important Fig.11: Archive code C13120839500, Item 7
 
  “整備計画” is “Maintenance plan” in English, again it was PLAN! The whole plan was made in 1944-12-26. I don’t actually know how Waffentrager can misunderstand this, maybe he doesn’t even know Japanese or Chinese!
 

 
Important Fig.12: The cover of the same archive, “昭和十九年十二月二十六日” is 1944-12-26” in English.
 
I have other archives to prove that Ho-Ri were not finished as well:
 


 
Important Fig. 13 and 14: Mitsubishi’s tank production chart made by the American survey team after the war ends.
 
  From the chart you can only find out Type 4 and Type 5 medium tanks’ record. There is no existence of Type 5 gun tank Ho-Ri, or the”M-5 Gun Tank” in the chart’s way.
 
  Except for the archives, many books written by Japanese also mentioned that Type 5 gun tank were not finished:
 

 
Fig.15: Kunimoto’s record.
 
  “二〇年五月完成予定の五両の終戦時の工程進捗度は、やっと五〇パーセントであり、完成車両出せずに終戦となった。” In English it’s: “When the war ended, the five Ho-Ri planned to be finished in 1945-5 had finally reached 50% completion. No completed vehicle were made when the war ended.”
 
  Here is another book written by Japanese with the help of former IJA tank designer, Tomio Hara:
 

 
Important Fig.16: Tomio Hara’s book
 
“完成をみるには至らなかった” Again he emphasized that the tank was not finished. Also when Ho-Ri’s design was finished its combat weight was raised to 40 tons, not the planned 35 tons. It was only powered by one “Modified BMW watercooled V12 gasoline engine”, rated 550hp/1500rpm. In Waffentrager’s article he said later a Kawasaki 1100hp engine were installed, but obviously that’s none sense. There was really existed a Kawasaki 1100hp engine but that is the two BMW V12 engine(Same engine on Type 5 gun tank or Type 5 medium tank) combined together for Japanese super-heavy tank O-I use. It will take much more room which Ho-Ri do not have.
 

 
Fig.17: O-I’s engine compartment arrangement. There’s no such room in Ho-Ri for this engine set.
 
  And last here are the other questions I asked
 

 
Fig.18: Other questions I asked
 
  I have already talked about the questions regarding C13120839500 and the engine. As for the gun with 1005m/s muzzle velocity, the Japanese never planned to make the 105mm gun achieve such a high velocity because they don’t have the enough tech back then. Also from the archive C14011075200(important fig.4) the 105mm gun was designed only to reach about 900m/s.
 
  So, after all these, how did Waffentrager replied? I will post out the replies from my E-mail(because he deleted my replies on his blog).
 

 
Fig.19: Waffentrager’s first reply
 
He kept saying that my archive is not the same as his and he is using his own documents. I didn’t believe in these shit and I replied:
 

 
Fig.20: My reply
 
  Last sentence, the Ho-Ri III he was talking about is fake. There are only Ho-Ri I(The one resembles the Ferdinand tank destroyer) and Ho-Ri II(The another one resembles the Jagdtiger tank destroyer). He even photoshoped a picture:
 

 
Fig.21: Waffentrager’s fake Ho-Ri III
 

 
Fig.22: The real Ho-Ri I and the base picture of Waffentrager’s photoshoped Ho-Ri III in Tomio Hara’s book. Many same details can be seen in Waffentrager's fake Ho-Ri III
 
  The 4 variants of up-armoured Type 3 Chi-Nu medium tank is also fake, I will post his original article and the confirmed facts I got from Mr.Taki by E-mail.
 

 
Fig.23: 4 models of up-armoured Chi-Nu by Waffentrager
 

 
Fig.24: Mr.Taki’s reply
 
  Waffentrager used every excuses he could get to refuse giving out the references, and finally he deleted my comments. What an asshole!
 

 
Fig.25: Our last “conversation”
 

 
Fig.26 He deleted my comment.
 
  So, as you can see, Waffentrager is really a dick. He is cheating everybody because he think that we can’t read Japanese. Anyway I still hope he could release his reference and documents to prove me wrong. After all, I’m not here to scold or argue with somebody, but to learn new things. Also if you guys have any questions about WWII(IJA) Japanese tanks, feel free to ask me, I’m happy to help.

Waffentrager YOU FAKE BULLSXXT and FXXK OFF

In case you guys here cannot read Japanese:
It says "Height of lens assembly is about 380 mm"
May be taken from a manual of digital camera or sth. else. 
 
 

STILL TOP 1 INDIAN WEAPON THAT MAKES THEIR ENEMIES TREMBLE WITH FEAR

STILL TOP 1 INDIAN WEAPON THAT MAKES THEIR ENEMIES TREMBLE WITH FEAR

STILL TOP 1 INDIAN WEAPON THAT MAKES THEIR ENEMIES TREMBLE WITH FEAR

STILL TOP 1 INDIAN WEAPON THAT MAKES THEIR ENEMIES TREMBLE WITH FEAR

STILL TOP 1 INDIAN WEAPON THAT MAKES THEIR ENEMIES TREMBLE WITH FEAR

STILL TOP 1 INDIAN WEAPON THAT MAKES THEIR ENEMIES TREMBLE WITH FEAR

It's interesting.
Presentation (which contains this page) which available now on ontres.se is 110 pages long
about 2-and-a-half years ago i've downloaded on my computer presentation which was 119 pages long. Apparently it's exactly the same as one available now online, except for some pages on tank protection https://cloud.mail.ru/public/FVLe/iUZw87trH 
(according to Chrome history file, which i've backed up in dec.2015 and still have now, this pdf was without a doubt downloaded from ontres.se https://i.imgur.com/ysAJQgr.png)

...
new link https://cloud.mail.ru/public/579x/2Z1Bqxm2m