Lord_James

5 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

 

Looks like someone forgot to hit the “friends only” button when tweeting their battle plans 

In case you were still confused as to whether WT is just another WoT: 

https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/415339-extended-waiting-time-in-queue/&tab=comments#comment-7671916

Quote

In connection with the large number of participants waiting in queue for a battle to start, we have temporarily enabled the creation of battles with "all against all" nations in joint battles.

Since there is a considerable amount of (expected) progress, I will gladly assist you: 

Quote

everyone in the US State Department associated with our Korean policy needs to be drug out into the streets and publicly flogged.

How does the M551 based “Elke weapon test bed” reload? I saw it has a crew of 2, so unless they’re going the 1930s France route of tank design, it must have an autoloader... right? 

Edit: This thing. 

9 hours ago, Jim Warford said:

 

Baka; 

B-Baka! Don't you know T-34 is most advanced tank in the union? 

I was looking at it too and though of Nozh immediately. I’m doubtful of the effectiveness of this armor... or, at least how it is described. 

What about the roof hatch, it seems to penetrate into the crew compartment: 

you guys hear they took away the airspawn for the P-47? At least I can try playing my A6Ms again, without getting bounced by a squad of douchebags. 

guilty… 

though, tbh, they don't sound bad when you're depressed. But here's something better: 

9 hours ago, Serge said:

6 of them. 

9 hours ago, Alzoc said:

 

But that's quite a far cry from the 25 (I think that's the number) of the LVTP-7.

It could probably hold more troops if it didn't have that silly engine arrangement. 

7 hours ago, Rohrkrepierer said:

Hey guys. 

Does anyone have any primary sources that reference the perforation performance of German 120mm DM23 APFSDS-T ammunition? 

 

Best regards, 

Rohrkrepierer o7

Welcome to SH, Rohr  

5 hours ago, Pardus said:

 

1,000+ mm RHAe LOS penetration for the DM63 through the L/55.

That's impossible considering the rod isn't 1m long. 

8 hours ago, Serge said:

This is a Leclerc turret on a Leopard -2. 

Trials on the firing range were good. 

 

The French 140mm is very different but is said to be proposed for the MGCS. 

Wait... so I was right?! I just eyeballed it and though “hmm, that looks like a Leopard chassis and a Leclerc gun/turret profile”. 

And they’re sticking with the 140? I thought Rhm was gonna use their new shiny 130. I guess they couldn’t shove it in the Leclerc turret in time. 

Watch it be a Leopard 2 hull with a Leclerc T4 turret  

On a side note, it will be interesting to see what happens with the project, if it will end up like the Leopard 1 (Germany and France made their own things) or MBT/Kpz-70 (it all fails). 

6 hours ago, SH_MM said:

Germany won.

 

https://www.dvidshub.net/news/280177/germany-takes-prize-strong-europe-tank-challenge-winner

 

Sweden got the second place, Austria came in third. Like last year, the lower places probably won't be officially revealed.

last I checked, 810 > 763: 

7 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

... or is this chart wrong? 

3 hours ago, Collimatrix said:

although it is possible that the Leo 2 has received some FCS upgrades that the Chally 2 has no equivalent to.  Chally 2, hell, the entire British military has been cash-strapped and hurting for critical upgrades for years.

I totally forgot the Chally 2 also has the same FCS as it did in 1998 (along with armor, gun, 1200hp engine)... now 20 years old. I feel like Britain is competing with Germany on how quickly they can self destruct their country. 

On 6/6/2018 at 1:38 PM, Alzoc said:

 

Well it's their first time in the competition, so they are probably simply unfamiliar with how the scoring system works (Although the same apply for the Swedes).

I've read that last year the pistol shooting range was quite unexpected for our tankers for example.

 

Also comparing the scores of that edition to the previous one it is possible that scoring became harder this year:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

I was more implying their choice of (subpar) weaponry. ‘cough’ rifled main gun ‘cough’ 

Britain doesn’t appear to be doing very well... I wonder why 

I’m not sure how well a judge I will be, cause I’m an idiot (compared to most people here), but I’ll try. I do have some ideas for the MBT, but I’m bad@computers, so I guess I don’t have too much of a choice. 

What about an modern MBT? I'm not very eloquent with words, so I'm just gonna be semi-blunt: 

(In a fictional universe where Russia can build more than 30 Armatas a year) NATO strategists are panicking over the introduction of the Armata heavy universal platform in the Russian Federation. The remote main turret, active protection, high tech electronics and situational awareness aids, and separated/encapsulated crew compartment have sent chills down the West's collective spine. In their terror, they have turned to you (the scum on the internet) to draft up designs to combat this new mechanical monster! 

Basic Design Requirements (all criteria with asterisks and 3 more of your choosing): 

• *Be less than 63 metric tons without additional armor packages. 
• *Have a weapon system that can get past the hard kill Afghanit APS (lets assume it doesn't work on projectiles traveling above 1500 m/s). 
• *Have a weapon system that can penetrate the Armata within it's frontal arc (turret doesn't count). 
• *Be able to engage the Armata at 2.5 km. 
• *Be transportable by railcar, somehow (can have some disassembly). 
• Have some parts commonality with, or be based off, any MBT or AFV/IFV currently available in NATO (Including Poland, but not Ukraine... cause they're not part of NATO). 
• Be able to withstand Vacuum-1 at 2km and Kornet-EM along the frontal arc. 
• Travel at 60 km/h. 
• Crew of 3. 
• Crew must be separated from ammo/engine compartments (doesn't have to be a capsule).  

Advanced Design Requirements (extra brownie points ): 

• Be less than 55 metric tons without additional armor packages. 
• Be able to engage the Armata past 4km. 
• Able to withstand Vacuum-1 at 500m and Kornet-EM along the front arc. 
• Has an active protection system. 
• Can travel at least 70km/h. 
• Crew of 2. 
• Use the "brute force method" (KE projectiles only). 

What do you guys think? 

I’ve never been that low to consider suicide, though I have noticed it’s harder for me to get out of bed and do everything I need to do for the day. A general lack of interest and motivation have also plagued me for a couple years now. 

Sorry for derailing, especially on such a sensitive/morbid topic. 

17 minutes ago, Scolopax said:

 

Here it is with the other two.

Ohh, Obj. 781 and 787. I thought he was talking about a T-72/90 hull with a Bakhcha turret. 

Thanks anyway. 

On 6/1/2018 at 3:52 AM, Toxn said:

http://slatestarcodex.com/2018/05/31/in-search-of-missing-us-suicides

On 6/1/2018 at 2:41 PM, Sturgeon said:

 

That seems like a bunch of logical leaps daisy chained together, to me. He cites a couple academic articles - as far as I can tell, they aren't even studies themselves - then comes up with this idea that if the US had no guns, it would have an extremely low suicide rate. That may be true, but nobody can really know, certainly not on the basis of the seemingly thin evidence SSC is presenting here.

 

The articles he is using as sources themselves cite many, many studies. So many, that there's no practical way for the reader to vet the information for themselves. If, for example, one study cited in one article is strong evidence for the article's thesis, but ten others are misquoted or misinterpreted, then that article has a pretty low veracity overall. So any reader must read all papers to verify the content. Yet SSC does not help us do that, probably because he himself has not bothered to do the reading.

I don’t think getting rid of guns will significantly lower the suicide rate, as there are MANY other ways to kill yourself. Ironically, the gun is one of the more humane ways someone could kill themselves, above hanging and plastic-bag-over-the-head, IMO. I’m not advocating or excusing people whom commit suicide, but there are more (and cheaper) ways someone can take their own life than a handgun. 

This also seems like another of those “feel guilty” articles, where they point to something other than the root cause of the issue. In this case, suicides. (un)Humorously, I believe the roots for suicides could lie in a similar place to why there is gun violence: mental health. Not so much like autism, but depression, anxiety, and paranoid schizophrenia (among others). How in hell we’re suppose to fix or mitigate those issues, I haven’t the foggiest idea, but the “ban guns” approach will NOT solve it. 

12 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

So, comrade readers, what you would like to see next - T-64 section started to be worked on, or T-72 sections being expanded to Post-Soviet models of T-72?

 

T-64, T-64A, T-64B, T-64BV are going to be in T-64 post. T-72BA, T-72B3 and T-72B3M (or "UBKh") in post-Soviet models of T-72.

Well, you have been beating around the bush when talking about the T-64. 

14 hours ago, LoooSeR said:

BMP-3 turret/Bakhcha-U - like systems was installed on one of Soviet prototypes of BMPT, after all. 

Pic? 

On ‎5‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 2:20 PM, Xoon said:

 

Thanks for telling us Iceland is, in fact, an island.  

On ‎5‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 2:20 PM, Xoon said:

 

Probably the US or China. 

Oh yeah, the EU does like to make fun of their friends across the pond... with Donald in office, I'm sure they could get a hard-on blaming the US on random events the US had no involvement in...