Lord_James
-
Posts
1,077 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
8
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by Lord_James
-
-
Launch was canceled.
-
-
So, to practice sending photos from my phone to the internet (in preparation for taking pictures of Artemis 2), I'd like to share some pictures of my most recent vacation to Mars. Yup, took one of Elon's rockets and blasted off! Utah is so damn beautiful.
I didn't want to derail looser's family photos thread, so I'll just make this new one.
Flying in
Spoiler
The first stop my family and I made on our trip was on the "wrong side" of Zion, or the less busy side. I loved the red rocks, and the sky was an incredible shade of blue; my phone camera doesn't quite capture that.
Spoiler
There's a whole lot of nothin' between towns and tourist stops, but the scenery is nice.
Spoiler
this last one is inside Ghost rock, and the pov is deceiving: you could just about maybe fit your shoulders through here if you're pretty thin.
The next stop was Arches national park, which you need to make a reservation to get into. I took few pictures of the actual Arcs, because I cannot into be bothered.
Spoiler
Arches in training
this one wasn't actually in Arches, but it's the best photo of an Arch I took the whole trip.
Next came Dead Horse Point; it's called that because the cowboys use to drive the wild horses up onto the plateau to catch them.
Spoiler
These 3 are sort of a panoramic.
Another plateau, nearby the point.
We also visited Goblins state park, where part of the movie Galaxy Quest was filmed.
Spoiler
The close up on the far wall looks almost like a cathedral or mural.
We went some other random places to. I don't remember which belongs to what, so I'll be lazy and put them all here
Spoiler
I think this is the best picture I took the whole trip
And our last stop was at Bryce national park, where I finally saw snow. I was ill prepared for such an event, however...
Spoiler
This was in the morning on the day we were leaving to go back home. We didn't really have any warm clothes except for a long sleeve sun shirt. Maybe not the best way to be introduced to snow.
I would have posted this an hour or so ago, but I honestly got distracted by something on Imgur, which was a nice start to the day.
-
2 hours ago, Sturgeon said:
A bit after 8 AM on the 29th, different times for the 2nd and 5th.
I don’t usually wake up before 8, but I’ll get some, weather permitting. -
52 minutes ago, Sturgeon said:
Anybody here gonna be in town for Artemis I?
I do indeed live in south Florida; I’m at work that day but what time does she go up? -
21 hours ago, Alzoc said:
That two consulting group wrote a report saying that it is possible isn't surprising (as usual, take the final result as granted, chose improbable starting hypothesis and voilà!)
What is really sad is that the head of the ESA (somebody with a PhD in physics) actually agree with the conclusion of the reports...
Maybe a PhD in metaphysics -
-
6 hours ago, Toxn said:
No, that was more "mumble mumble virus.... mumble infinite energy... blah blah regeneration... bullshit".
Dudes regrowing limbs on the fly and heating up hot enough to palm-slice through steel is solidly on the fantasy biology end of things.
I probably don’t remember enough of the movie to comment, but I do remember that a major plot point was the bad guy was making people blow up with his “miracle cure” or whatever. I may or may not have fallen asleep for the rest of the movie. -
On 8/18/2022 at 3:20 AM, Toxn said:
Relatedly, I've seriously thought about trying to found high-energy biology as a field:
As a post-graduate, I looked into the possibility that plant nitrating enzymes (eg: the whole nitrate reductase pathway) along with plant tissue specific promoters could be used to effectively grow a bomb. It wasn't very serious enquiry or anything, but as far as I can tell it's a perfectly feasible project to carry out.
Wasn’t this the plot to iron man 3? -
10 hours ago, Toxn said:
I remember being struck by the idea of an alien ecosystem (in a book whose name I absolutely cannot remember and cannot find online) where multiple ecosystems exist on the same planet as effectively giant organisms in their own right. So the characters are traipsing through and amongst what amounts to the cells of a continent-sized body.
I remember in Star Wars legends that there is a planet where the surface is covered in a type of algae, or other similar organism, which all basically function as individual neurons, making the entire planet essentially a brain. I don’t remember if it could communicate or not.
Warhammer’s Tyranids also come to mind when talking about organisms acting as cells to a larger entity (I hesitate to say hive mind because I don’t fully understand the concept).
-
I wonder how much weight they can pile on the Sprut before she can’t float anymore.
-
-
Not quite as extreme as elke, but probably very similar
-
“What is cyber punk, friend? Never heard of it! Why do I need to know about air rights or Kowloon city or socio-economic disparity?” -
14 hours ago, HAKI2019 said:
The armour layout of ZTZ99A is foolish，totally a disaster in warthunder and real world.
Ah yes, the most credible source for top secret and complex armor details, wart chunder. -
9 hours ago, HAKI2019 said:
I thought maybe K2NO/PL have excellent armor protection,but the baseline version not.The distribution of special armor looks terrible and enemy fire will easily hit ammunition.
It’s not even 60 tons, of course the armor had to be cut somewhere. -
3 hours ago, Serge said:
Poland is said to purchase 180 K2 MBT for delivery by 2024.
Talks are in progress about AS21 Redback.
@Laser Shark, do you think this will sway Norway’s opinion on the K2 now that there is another European buyer? -
6 hours ago, Beer said:
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’s a rather broad accusation to make: not everyone is a conscientious objector or lives in a country that won’t arrest them for protesting. From what I’ve seen, a lot of (if not most) Russians hate this war too, but can’t do anything about it. Correct me if I’m wrong on that, and feel free to snap at me for being far enough away to not have to worry much about Vlad, Ivan, and Boris showing up on my doorstep with some artillery, but I doubt that anyone other than Putin and his yes-men wanted this war, and everyone else is just stuck with it now. -
On 7/15/2022 at 8:09 PM, mr.T said:
You do realize how artillery shrapnel works , typical 155 or 152mm grenade fragment can pierce an armored SPG armor at 50+ meters , stanag 4569 level 1 armoring which is kinda common on SPG is actually rated to protect against 20g artillery fragment only at 100m imagine unprotected artillery with lightweight titanium frame .
When it comes to STANAG 4569 protection levels only once you reach IV vehicle is protected from a HE 155mm shell at 30m , and level V at 25m from the impact of HE shell.
No SPG supplied to ukraine has level 4 protection and level 5 is basically frontal armor of a modern IFV again way beyond protection levels of any SPG
Original Bradley survivability requirement was 1 x 152 mm airburst at 18 meter and zero crew compartment penetration. Bradley has a least level V all roudn and level 5 frontal armor.
Folks expect destroyed artillery means its blows up in flames , which is not really the case ,typical shrapnel does enough damage with close enough misses to render things inoperable or at least unsafe (note that barrel steel is very ductile but quite soft to handle the pressure , in comparison to armor stell shrapnel goes trough barrel steel like knife trough butter ) that is why Artillery shells make such great IED base very few armored vehicles can survive being hit by shapnel from one at any practical distance.
152mm shell fragments
http://fotki29.ru/war_in_the_donbass/photo/ukraine_1417474109_.jpg
''The commander of the logistics service of the ground forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, Brigadier General Volodymyr Karpenko, specifically mentioned M777 Howitzers.
Karpenko addressed his grievance to the United States regarding the M777 howitzers they are supplying to Ukraine. As per Karpenko, the situation is extremely difficult, as these howitzers “constantly break down and require repair.”
In an interview with National Defense on June 15, Deputy Minister of Defense of Ukraine Denys Sharapov said after each “artillery duel”, on average, two of the six M777 howitzers have to be repaired because the components of these guns are damaged by Russian shells.''
In a strike like this naive folk think that because there are not 3 fireballs howitzers survived , in reality that is highly unlikely even if some can be moved or even driven away likely hood of any of them remaining operational is very small. And then you have an Issue where you get spare parts and things repaired which is particularly an issue with foreign gear supplied in low numbers
An example on how artilery fire damages armor....
In 1988 US Artillery command performed a series of tests to determine the effect of non-guided conventional HE shells, fired indirectly on targets, with the aim of modelling a potential engagement with soviet artillery. The ammunition used were 155mm HE shells.
First test was performed by a battery of 155mm M109 howitzers utilizing soviet fire control protocols and ammunition consumption norms of the time. Targets were mannequins, army trucks, M113 APCs, M577 command vehicles and M48 tanks. Three fire missions were executed on targets, 56 HE shells each with contact and non-contact detonators (50/50). Effect on the infantry and the trucks was very close to prior US calculations. However, effect on the armored vehicles far surpassed expected levels, reaching as high as 67% of vehicles disabled.
Although zero direct hits were achieved, fragments of the 155mm shells delivered serious damage to the armored vehicles - they penetrated armor, destroyed tracks, optical and targeting equipment and even caused fire in one of the APCs. This test has definitely confirmed the efficiency of indirect fire against armored vehicles.
This command vehicle was successfully penetrated by HE shells fragments.
This APC has suffered damage of the gun and external equipment.
Next stage of tests lasted for seven months and was meant to research the effects of direct hits of 155mm shells on the armored vehicles. The outcome was that maximum effect was achieved by air detonation shells with non-contact detonators. The shrapnel successfully damaged gun barrels, external equipment, sights, engine radiators and chassis elements.
The third stage of testing was the most spectacular - a full stationary fortified position was created with trenches and all. A full motorised platoon was deployed on the fortified position (with mannequins instead of men, of course). APCs, tanks, weapons and mannequins were all properly positioned and entrenched.
To achieve 50% targets disabled the 24-gun 155mm artillery battery used 2600 HE shells. Even when properly dug in, 50% of APCs and tanks were rendered inoperable (mission kill). It was also noted that the testing did not take into the account such additional adverse effects as smoke, dust, scopes alignment displacement, physiological and psychological effect of HE blasts of people.
General outcome of the testing was formulated as follows:
- A direct hit from a 152/155mm HE shell from above is guaranteed to achieve a mission kill on any armored vehicle.
- A hit within 30m from the vehicle is potentially able to damage the vehicle sufficiently to achieve a mission kill.
- APCs are exceptionally vulnerable to indirect artillery fire and high irrecoverable losses are to be expected in case of incoming 152/155mm artillery fire both of vehicles and of carried personnel.
In an effort to be less condescending, please leave out phrases like “you do realize/ know/ understand (point your making), right”. We are piers here, unlike some other forums and blogs, and can glean the meaning of a coherent argument.
But, in Beer’s defense (not that he needs it), destroyed and damaged are not the same thing. M777’s damaged but towed away and repaired later are most definitely not destroyed, though I do agree not everything salvaged from a battlefield can be repaired. As for the maintenance issue the Ukrainians have for their M777, that’s just normal for new equipment: I don’t know many military vehicle or weapon systems that don’t have reliability or maintenance problems on introduction, even if that system has been around for a while in someone else’s inventory.
Also, no one brought up any doubts as to the effectiveness of the 6 inch artillery shell. There’s definitely a reason armies rarely use anything larger than 6 inch anymore, but it’s nice to have some data on that; thank you.
-
-
4 hours ago, Chanou said:
Hello guys
Our article about ASCALON,
Any review would be pleased
https://lasd.online/140-ascalon/ -
4 hours ago, Stimpy75 said:
The gavin will never fucking die…Also, what’s with all the direct vision ports; didn’t we learn that periscopes are best for armored vehicles? Or have the Turks had bad experiences with periscopes?
-
On 6/21/2022 at 5:24 PM, LoooSeR said:
I'm interested in this. Basically Deep Space 4-...ish
Saw a YouTube commercial for this yesterday, and I wasn’t logged into my account or even on the same device. Either i got lucky with an ad or those personalized ads are getting a little to personal
-
- watch_your_fire, Beer, Scolopax and 3 others
-
6
Evolution of Fighter planes since WW II
in Aviation
Posted
Without watching these, can I hazard a guess to how aircraft evolved? The 2 primary things designers have always been looking to improve are altitude and speed, which could probably be placed together under “performance”, and secondarily weaponry when they can manage. Biplanes gave way to monoplanes (except for niche roles) because the monoplane is generally faster. Forced induction replaced natural aspiration so bombers and interceptors could fly higher. The introduction of jet engines replaced props, which let aircraft fly higher and faster at the same time, and the cycle starts anew with the advancement of jet engines. Once missiles finally became reliable enough to use exclusively, the weaponry category probably takes a more leading role in the equation. For modern times, stealth is becoming a hot topic, but the actual list of “stealth aircraft” is rather short, and I suspect that fuel consumption is going to become rather important with all the environmentalist policies being thrown around.
Hmmmm, that just gave me an idea, but it will have to wait for tomorrow.