Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

Lord_James

Contributing Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,077

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Lord_James

  1. Lord_James
    They just got tired of the fuel bills. Having to measure your fuel economy in gallons per mile (1.67 gal/mil or almost 4 liters/km, IRL) is not optimal for 3rd world hellholes.
  2. Lord_James
    Been a little while; busy with all kinds of stuff, but here's an update: Added suspension components, as well as front idler and drive sprocket. Revised gun mount and C3 cannon Turret needs another revision, as I removed the loader and am going to use a version of the T22E1 autoloader ( I also don't need the long bustle for a ready rack). Weight thus far is 23.3 tons. 700mm roadwheels (drive sprocket is also 700mm) Ground clearance is ~600mm Gun depression is (ATM): Front - 19.5 Side: -29 (when it hits the ground ) Rear: -8 Elevation: +36 Breach is now a semi-automatic, vertical sliding wedge, similar to the 5" Mark 12 naval gun. The front idler needs to be raised and enlarged slightly, and maybe I need to shorten the suspension arms slightly (as well as increase the angle of the arms, from the vertical), but I'm pretty pleased with my first suspension attempt. Might put some holes in all the wheels to reduce their weight. Turret revision: I realized that the gunner wouldn't be able to see what they're shooting at when at maximum depression, so I have to rework some parts of the turret face, as well as remove the rear bustle since there's no need for it anymore. Though, I could use something like the TZF 9 sights on the Tigers (both 1 and 2) to avoid the roof sight messing up my turret shape. I am also considering offsetting the gun to one side and placing both commander and gunner in line, as well as modifying the autoloader (one rack will be smaller than the other); this will allow me to increase the size of the gun mount to place a coaxial MG comfortably, rather than having to cut into the front armor... or I could go full Ferdinand and not have any coax
  3. Lord_James
    Does that mean the SEP 1 and 2 are now the M1A2A and M1A2B, respectively?
  4. Lord_James
    It’s a Type 61 vismod’ed into the Panzer Vor H. I’ve seen that picture around for a while.
  5. Lord_James
    BuT TEh HetZ iS dUH BeST ToNk eVAR!!!!! REEEEEEEEE!!!!
  6. Lord_James
    Curious... can you spawn planes at the beginning of a match too, or is that still the same?
  7. Lord_James
    So they’re not going to give the AAV7 the Gavin treatment (many variants)? I’m disappointed. Also, $5 the replacement vehicle will also be canceled before mass production and the USMC will still be stuck with the AAV for another 15 years.
  8. Lord_James
    I just noticed something, Trump’s presidency is similar to Grant’s presidency: Both are republican. Both had very little political experience before running for office. Both had very narrow wins during their first terms. Both were embroiled in scandals that were mostly hot air. Both were elected after a previously ineffective president (unfortunately, Obama served 2 terms). Both believe in nepotism and I predict (using pure Columbian cocaine, and Grant as a guide): Trump will have exceptional foreign policy successes later in this term. Trump will be re-elected by a very large margin (bonus points if his rival dies within months of Trump being re-elected, x10 if it’s Hillary). Trump will push for more peace (rather than the typical warmongering) all over the world. Corruption and abuse will plague Trump’s cabinet, but Trump will be innocent on all accounts. Trump will get his face on a dollar bill (maybe the 100, cause it’s yuuuge)
  9. Lord_James
    Next year, they’re going to make a damn 6 barrel mortar, cause they can’t stop slapping guns on the CV90.
  10. Lord_James
    You mean Saudi Arabia before 1980?
  11. Lord_James
    ... ... ... But mah narrative!!! For or those who don’t want to look at the NYP article, here’s their source, with lots of pretty pictures and graphs :3 https://crimeresearch.org/2018/08/new-cprc-research-how-a-botched-study-fooled-the-world-about-the-u-s-share-of-mass-public-shootings-u-s-rate-is-lower-than-global-average/
  12. Lord_James
  13. Lord_James
    I’ve seen that mentioned on this forum before, but I can’t find any meme-y threads about the T110 on the WoT forum, but some people are saying they want it buffed or removed from the game, now: http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/675756-anyone-playing-with-t110-e5-wot-can-delete-this-tank/ i guess the meme is the typical WoT forum’er is retarded?
  14. Lord_James
    ... ... North Korea? I agree that having an “all purpose ship” is not optimal for a navy, as being a “jack of all trades” means you are the king of nothing. My (uninformed) opinion: Why not have 2 different weight classes of ships (non aircraft carriers, submarines, etc.), and then name them by their intended role? I.E. “destroyers” and “cruisers” are both 10,000-12,000 tons but the difference is their primary role: destroyers are anti-ship/ground, and cruisers are anti-air. Both could still keep their helicopter pads for ASW work, and both could use the same hull to ease construction. The destroyer still has air defense armament, but it’s those SeaRAMs that won’t interfere with the cruisers’ long range SAMs; and conversely, the cruiser could have ship to ship armament, but not as much as the destroyers. Same applies to the ~3000 ton frigates and corvettes, one is more specialized for anti-surface, and the other is anti-air.
  15. Lord_James
    New turret to accommodate gun is practically done: 20.8 tones, 1.97m high (currently), 8.81m long, 3.1m wide. Hull is getting revised, later.
  16. Lord_James
    I know exactly what this is:
  17. Lord_James
    New, C3 L/50 Cannon, and mount: I managed to keep the width (420mm) as the previous C2, but this new mount is about 100mm longer and slightly taller.
  18. Lord_James
  19. Lord_James
    I upgraded my Shot mk-1 to Shot mk-2... I now need to make a new gun, but still: 18.11kg complete shell, 800mm total length, and now has a 130mm bottle shape. New propellant mass: 5.25kg New velocity: 1207 m/s out the barrel (with 50 caliber barrel). projectile is the same as before (5.84kg complete, 275mm length, 50x200mm tungsten carbide slug) I'm getting penetration values that I believe are a little high (173mm @ 2000m @ 0o), but then again my shell is going hella fast, so IDK.
  20. Lord_James
    To be clear, was the damage done from mines/grenades or just driving around on rough terrain? I cant read the caption, but the hole beneath each tank would suggest explosives were involved.
  21. Lord_James
    Lets be honest, is anyone surprised this turned out to be a scam?
  22. Lord_James
    Just had a (possible) revelation in regards to my gun: Since it is a squeeze bore, wouldn't the shell increase in velocity proportionally with the decrease in diameter? Or am I misremembering how that works? If I'm dead wrong, please tell me.
  23. Lord_James
    I think it’s from them locking their knees for a long period of time. This always happened to someone (usually the first year cadets) in my ROTC classes, especially right before we would start marching after standing around for 15+ minutes, didn’t matter the weather.
  24. Lord_James
    Maybe they couldn’t produce enough T-84s for the parade until 2025
  25. Lord_James
    The thing between the headlights? It sorta looks like another headlight, though I guess it could also be a driver’s camera.
×
×
  • Create New...