AssaultPlazma
-
Posts
101 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by AssaultPlazma
-
-
Has any country actually expressed interest in this thing? Seems kinda unnecessary since most European countries seem to operate the Leopard 2.
-
20 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:
Not to mention dangerous for the rest of us.
Although, to be perfectly fair, it must be said that the UK is just as bad if not worse.....Have you guys been following the exposure of the rather ironically named 'Integrity Initiative'?
nope
-
On 12/25/2018 at 8:37 AM, LoooSeR said:
I figured that was common knowledge, but the amount of people I talked too when it first happened who genuinely believed it is disturbing. Yeah because whenever the government claims someone did X therefore we have to take action they're always 100% and trustful amirite? The amount of people in my country with short term memory when it comes to this kinda of shit is disturbing.
-
11 hours ago, Ramlaen said:
MPF isn't supposed to be air droppable in the first place.
I'm dumb lol, I know for a while they were talking about an air droppable light tank though. Still not really sure if this is a niche the Army really needs (lol armchair general right here).
-
Sweet a worthless vehicle that will never actually get airdropped anywhere. Instead they'll just get boated/railroaded to where they need be. Then they're gonna get opened up real bad due to low armor which will necessitate tons of armor packages that will overload the engine/transmission and make it un airdroppable.
-
46 minutes ago, Ulric said:
No no no, you don't get it. They weren't taking about using the military to confiscate everyone's guns, they are talking about using the military to commit democide when law and order breaks down after they try to get the police to take away everyone's guns.
But seriously, they don't care how it happens, they just want to disarm the population. There have been way too many politicians calling for disarmament for years for me to believe that I won't be able to own anything more than an air rifle if they get their way.
No I understand the specific context of this situation. I was just making more of a broader point overall. In order to actually enforce gun confiscation only the police would be capable of doing it. Even then theres a good number of cops who are pro Second Amendment so the various police departments would likely see some internal conflict and strife.
-
Why do people still think the Government can/will use the Military to enforce gun confiscation? Like ignoring the massive legal hurdles needed to even get a point where that's even legal in the first place (repealing the 2A and the Posse Comitatus Act Mainly). What makes people think the Gov can just delcare nation wide confiscation and then tomorrow the Army is gonna be picking up peoples guns lol? I don't even feel like going into detail about how ridiculous a scenario like that would even be. If anything I'd be the General Public vs Law Enforcement.
-
Anyone else watch "Hunter Killer" lol? I was a pretty terrible movie, with a paper thin plot as usual. Pretty good acting though, plus I'm a sucker for military movies like that.
-
But seriously why do Warships seem to keep crashing into one another? I guess it's probably the same principle of air traffic control and the collisions that would result without it.....
-
Holy @%# the ship is a total loss? Dang I know water can cause alot of damage but to that extent? Well I guess a couple million taxpayer dollars went down with that ship.
-
What tank is that?
-
They couldn't stop the ship from sinking? Obviously I'm no sailor so I don't know anything about this kind of stuff. Also how the #%!@ do warships or ships in general collide with one another?
-
Do you believe that it would have been a good idea for the Russian military at the time to adopt Object 187?
-
Why is each iteration of the JS tank such a major departure from the last in terms of hull/turret design?
-
-
11 hours ago, TokyoMorose said:
You sure about that? According to that Army chart it's called the "1M2A4" - I'm not sure I even trust them to manage the Bradley.
(But that chart is a comedy of goofs - at least one typo, magical 100mm Kornets, not bothering to account in potential ammunition advances for guns, no counting of protection at all, magic 8-balling the optics on T-15, really confusing TOW nomenclature...)
100% positive call me cynical lol....
-
I don't trust the US Army to make a good decision on trying to "replace" the Bradley. I say they just invest in the M2A4/M2A5 and replace the turret.
-
You don't just turn the turret to face the threat you turn the whole tank to face the threat. Worst case scenario most TC's would just have the driver orient thank tank so he has an angle on the target. Also Taking on threats from multiple angles is why you have wing men. Remember tanks always fight in a section as part of a Platoon (4 tanks). Each tank has a sector of fire to cover which in turn covers roughly from 10-2 on the clock. If you're getting shot by anything under that you're kinda fucked. Trying to base things off getting shot in the ass which is already bad business to begin is kinda silly.
edit: Main reason why the CROWS on top of the dog house is so the TC can reach it with his hands from the TC's hatch and can load, unload and perform immediate action if necessary.
-
7 hours ago, Renegade334 said:
Still, it doesn't look like the RWS can be manually swung sideways much unless the gunner traverses the turret or the commander climbs out of his hatch and kneels next to the CITV turret. I guess he has to button down and remote-control the RWS to accurately hit a target that stands to the tank's three o'clock or six o'clock? (without traversing the turret - let's say the gunner is busy concentrating on another target)
You can very much manually traverse the CROWS manually. You don't fire off the side of the tank that's a no-no for any given weapon system unless it's a emergency. If you're having to shoot off your six of clock you're probably screwed anyway.....
-
The A4 cutoff doesn't surprise me (already guessed it yesterday on AW forums) But even the AMPV? Jesus as if things couldn't get any worse.
But hey I'll just repeat what I said on AW forums. Big Army is gonna cuttoff/Cancel all these developed and basically ready vehicles in favor of sinking billions into some fancy new projects. That is said projects will get canned without a single serial vehicle being made flushing those billions of $$$$ down the toilet. Remember the GCV anyone?
-
On 9/18/2018 at 9:37 AM, Conner Webb said:
You must have been double fucked in that situation then. I’m guessing replacement engines aren’t just on hand.
Depends on the circumstances. In this instance our tank got the new engine of a sister platoons tank since said tank didn't have functioning internal coms anyway. That being said once the problem was over a replacement engine was ordered. in reality if a engine blows they just order a replacement and it's always expedited anyway so it usually just takes a few days to up to like a week and a half.
During my first problem (coincidentally the same kind of field problem) my tanks engine blew up (no air filters while driving around in a desert on a turbine engine will do that) and we had a replacement engine within 1 week of getting back from the field.
-
2 hours ago, Karamazov said:
Does the crew have difficulties with the tank? Any troubles with engine or transmission after hard exercices?
Depends on how you define difficulties. In general yes the tanks are always difficult. This is a result of never being to do actual services on the tanks due to time constraints. As far as engine/transmission it all just depends man. Our engine actually blew during this field problem, alot of it just comes down to engine age and luck. I think the Brigade as whole blew at least 10 packs during that rotation as a whole.
-
5 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:
I don't know about Soviet-era competitions, I think the general rule of thumb was that T-80 was superior to all other T-tanks but accordingly expensive, while T-90 with welded turret was between the T-72 series and T-80 in effectiveness.
The recent modernization programs intend to put them all in roughly the same state in terms of firepower, situational awareness, night fighting capabilities etc. The T-90 though would still enjoy a more comprehensive protection suite.
EDIT: Oh and the T-64 was trash, *spit*.
Funny because the common belief amongst many even to this day is that the T-64 was a revolutionary design n all. So revolutionary and expensive that they had to build the T-72 instead lol.
-
2 minutes ago, Karamazov said:
of course
Ok, what you can say about M1 technical service?Please elaborate on that question.
Main Ground Combat System (MGCS) and Euro Main Battle Tank (EMBT)
in Mechanized Warfare
Posted
Poland eh? I was under the impression they were gonna try to do their own indigenous design after that whole Leopard 2 deal fell through.