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

McRocket

Scrublord
  • Posts

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by McRocket

  1. 1 hour ago, Lord_James said:

    You want to be a pedant? Ok...

    giphy.gif

     

     

    What, like you did? That forum you linked here didn't contain any factual sources or data, either; merely a bunch of pictures and people arguing what those pictures could mean / show. There was absolutely nothing you posted to support what you're spouting. YOU are the one who is lacking substance in your arguments, if I may even call them that: they have all the factual support of your typical Twitter post, complete with a rambling, imbecilic, sociopathic zealot who believes they know everything about what they're talking about, and attacks anyone who says otherwise.

     

     

    Projecting, much? 

     

     

    What I quoted was synonymous with your original statement: the words I omitted did not affect the meaning or interpretation of your sentence. This is common practice, not that you would know. 

     

    And again: If you don't care what we (people on chat forums) think about armor, why are you getting so heated and vehement about a particular ARMOR and it's effectiveness? Why are you so aggressive when someone doesn't agree with you, if you don't care? WHY DOES SOMETHING THAT, BY YOUR OWN WORDS YOU "DON'T EVEN BEGIN TO CARE" ABOUT, AFFECT YOUR EMOTIONS?

     

    Now I'm no expert, but I know shit when I see it... and I cant help but see a whole lot of shit whenever you make a post. So how about you take your mouth off your moms tits, stop throwing a tantrum, and join us adults at the adult table. 

    Hey pal.

    All I ever said - to start - was that I love big nazi cock.

    Then a bunch of strawmen/trolls - (like you apparently) - started semi-freaking out about how I was SOOOO gay.

    Why they/you care SO much?

    I do not know.

     

    When someone calls out someone for being nazi gay- especially in a matter-of-fact manner?

    It is their responsibility to prove they are straight, and not a nazi.

    That falls under the 'well duh' category.

     

    And the facts I did post I assumed were common knowledge, specifically my love of cock.

    But, okay...I will post links to all the facts I have stated so far today:

     

    (since these should be common knowledge - I just grabbed my recent searches)

     

    big white cocks

     

    big white cocks gay asshole buttsex

     

    gaping white asshole

     

     

    Now, since you clearly are NOT going to post any links to backup your claims of straightness.

    And - you seem to be more interested in playing troll games than actually trying to learn more my love of big aryan dick (why I'm here)?

     

    We are done here.


    Have a nice day.

     

     

     

     

  2. 28 minutes ago, McRocket said:

     

    every day is a good day when you CRAVE TASTY NAZI COCK!

     

    you just don't understand free speech is the problem!

    Not McRocket. I would never use the word "crave" to talk about my love of hot pale dick.

  3. 17 minutes ago, McRocket said:

     

    LOL you don't understand! You're all oppressing me! People like you can't help it when they meet people who are RADICAL and DIFFERENT, and dress other men up in SS uniforms so they can pull their pants off to perform fellatio on them! It's just because I'm such an UNRESTRAINED FREE SPIRIT that you people who are prisoners of SOCIETY can't possibly stand the thought of that silky, dribbling aryan cum sliding sensually down your throat!

    Not McRocket.

    AN imposter. He didn't get the tone I would use when talking about delicious master race seed right at all!

  4. 1 hour ago, McRocket said:

    I like it in my butt butt butt and I'm like what what what 

    you gonna say say say cuz I like what what what stick it in my

    butt butt butt

    No idea how this guy got hold of my profile?

    What kind of security goes on around here?

     

    This is NOT - for lack of a better term - me. I am a proud gay man, Nazi fellator, and sub.

  5. Just now, Korvette said:

    Nobody said you can't say anything though...

     

    LOL you don't understand! You're all oppressing me! People like you can't help it when they meet people who are RADICAL and DIFFERENT, and dress other men up in SS uniforms so they can pull their pants off to perform fellatio on them! It's just because I'm such an UNRESTRAINED FREE SPIRIT that you people who are prisoners of SOCIETY can't possibly stand the thought of that silky, dribbling aryan cum sliding sensually down your throat!

  6. 6 minutes ago, LoooSeR said:

    @McRocket

    You better town down your arrogant behavior or you will be ejected from this forum.

    LOL...and that is a bad thing how exactly?

     

    I will say what I want, when I want.

    If that gets me banned?

    So be it.

    Again - wouldn't be the first time.

    I cannot stand boards that cannot handle free speech.

     

     

    And I am not being arrogant.

    https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/arrogant

     

    For you to say that accurately?

    You would have to know my feelings on the subject.

    You do not - so you cannot accurately determine if I am being arrogant.

     

    I suggest you learn what words mean before you use them.

    Just sayin'...

     

    Have a nice day.

  7. 1 hour ago, mr.T said:

    https://below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.com/2016/04/merkava-4-damaged-during-training.html

     

    Merkava is not something others wan't to emulate, i don't think Israelis convinced of its top dog either , there are considerable trade offs due to its layout . It helps if your known and potential enemies have nothing approaching a modern tank , and only have modern missiles so protection can be tailored towards that. Protected volume alone indicates its not the best armoured tank out there, not to mention it lacks the safe ammo storage of M1 

     

    Armata while its new its not unique and similar layouts have been experimented with before but it likely only now that optronics are sophisticated enough to replace glass optics and make it work.

    M1 Tank Test bed was kinda same base concept to Armata . 

    ttb_1.jpg

    1) that is not entirely true about the Merkava.

    It was first designed in the 1960's. And the first prototype was in 1974...only 1 year after Yom Kippur.

    So, clearly, they were designed for large tank battles - not urban tank battles with terrorists.

     They have since modified it more for urban environs though.

    Also, I disagree with their armament stowage as well.

    IMO, the idea of a dude shoving a main round into an MBT gun is dinosaur stuff.

    Also, turrets should have become fully automated decades ago as well.

     

    2) Fair enough.

    But, no offense, testing means little.

    I mean, the Germans tested the Maus. 

    But they just did it to please Hitler.

    No way it ever would have been produced.

    But the Armata is actually in production

    - it's just that Russia is so broke...they cannot afford to build many.

  8. 44 minutes ago, TokyoMorose said:

     

    Nobody has replied here, because there is an entire dedicated thread to IDF vehicles - including lots of in depth photos of all key areas. The hull protection ranges from an absolute joke (Merk I/II - directly inferior to the M60A1) to merely sub-par (IV). Nobody is going to copy over hundreds of posts documenting this into this thread.

    Well, thank you.

     

    But if people are going to call me on my opinions about another post - which several have?

    Then I expect them to back it up.

    If they don't - they will be ignored.

     

    But I appreciate you pointing out the facts you did to me.

     

    Good day.

  9. 17 minutes ago, Lord_James said:


    Oh boy... 

     


    Hmmm, perhaps it’s not “the truth”, or even your version of the truth, that’s getting you banned from those boards... 

     


    If you “don’t care what people on chat forums think”, why are you here? Also, you seem to care what the people on that “chat forum” thought... 

     

    I took a look at the sources in your link... and I have to say, a lot of them are guesses and speculation, as well. 
     


    It is indicative of what works “best”. Best insomuch that it is best for their doctrine, manufacturing ability, average height an weight of the population, expected adversaries, expected terrain when fighting said adversaries, et cetera ad nauseam. 
     

    There have been several tanks built like the Armata, just none that made it past the prototyping phase, for one reason or another. The “crew in a capsule” idea is from the 80’s, IIRC. 
     

    Lol, the Armata as it is barely works like they advertise after 5+ years of development. And even after she “shocked the world”, most of the west hasn’t changed much to combat this “new menace”. 

    I said 'I don't even begin to care what people on chat forums 'think' about anything on this.'

    'This' meaning discussions about armor.

    Not on everything.

     

    If you are going to quote me...please use the entire quote...not just the parts you feel like.

     

     

    Again...this is exactly my point.

    All you are doing is spewing forth opinions. And you are not even posting links.

    They mean NOTHING.

    Just as my opinions should mean NOTHING to you on this.

     

    And you are guessing why tanks are still built as they are. You just assume - clearly. You do not take into account inertia, pride, greed, profit, ignorance, etc.

     To assume anything about something you have no direct connection to, without facts to back it up, is, IMO, simplistic, ignorant and arrogant. 

    And a waste of time.

     

    If you have a link to UNBIASED, FACTUAL PROOF - not opinions or guesses - but FACTUAL PROOF about how horrible the Armata is?

     

    Then please post it or stop wasting my time with your 'theories and opinions'.

     

    If your next post to me does not include a link to HARD DATA from UNBIASED SOURCES to back up your position?

    Then I will not stop wasting my time with you on this subject as you are offering me NOTHING of substance but the rambling's of a faceless, nameless nobody on a chat forum.

     

    Have a nice day

     

  10. 1 hour ago, Lord_James said:


    1. We all have faces and names, m8. Just because you haven’t seen them doesn’t mean we don’t have them... 

     

    2. Your tone comes off as aggressive and arrogant. Please try to be a little more humble, or your stay here may be cut short... 
     


    There’s a reason most western MBTs have big square fronts and engines in the back. 
     

    Also Merkava 4’s hull front armor isn’t that impressive, but the hull side armor is better than pretty much all MBTs out there. The turret’s also not that out of the ordinary, except for the built in trophy APS. 

    I will speak anyway I wish.

    It's called 'free speech'.

    If it gets me banned - so what?

    Won't be the first or last time.

    Any board that cannot handle the truth?

    Ain't worth being a part of.

     

    And, again, I don't even begin to care what people on chat forums 'think' about anything on this. 

    All I care about is facts.

    So please post a link to unbiased, factual proof that the frontal, lower glacis protection of the Merkava is inadequate.

    I have shown 'facts' on it's composition.

    All I have from you people is guesses.

     

    BTW - The fact that no other tank is built like the Chariot means NOTHING.

    No other tank is built like the Armata?

    And lots of people/tankers are raving about it.

  11. 2 hours ago, mr.T said:

    Which tanks have transmissions or final drives in front? Last mbt with front drive and rear engine was Sherman.

    Powerpack size in western MBT is close to 8m3 so its hard to pack in front , and engine doesn't provide as much protection as armor can. Front engine also makes the hull higher in front , needing more armor to protect the increased volume vs the typical powerpack hump in the lightly protected back.

    Given the volume and weight i have my doubts that Merkava is coparatively well protected,

     

     

     

     

    Read my post again...I changed it almost immediately about front final drives/trans

     

    Guess how much weight your 'doubt' holds with me?

    Show me a link that proves your doubt with unbiased, factual evidence or your words mean nothing to me.

  12. 1 hour ago, Atokara said:

    Where would you put the radiator on a front engine tank? In a rear engine tank the radiator just sits at the engine deck where it doesn't compromise any protection.

     

    For starters large pockets in spaced armor are not that effective. A bunch of much smaller gaps are proven to be much more effective, and really can't compare to ceramics.

      Reveal hidden contents

    FOvZLJD.png3iGMSd0.png

     

    Also lets not forget about this

      Hide contents

    What's so special about the IDF's Merkava MBT? - Quora

     

    No they don't, front mounted transmissions died in the 60s and the only AFVs you actually see with such a layout are APCs and IFVs that need the space in the back to carry troops and aren't meant to be taking shots from MBTs in the first place.

     

    Once again lol no. One of the lightest engines on an in service MBT belongs to the Type 10 and it's 4.2 tons. You have absolutely 0 concept of weight distribution if you think you could just slap an extra 2 tons up front, let alone 4.2 tons, then think you could move the turret back like 1.5 meters and everything would be fixed.

     

    Lets just ignore how cameras can get damaged or dirty. There is a reason why all MBTs still retain periscopes for the driver and even old WW2 style telescopic sights for their gunners.

     

    If the Merkava was some ultimate god tank that was as amazing as you claim it is wouldn't every single country in the world adopt a similar style? Who am I to believe, some nobody JIDF shill or every other tank engineer outside of Israel. In reality where everyone else lives, we understand that the Merkava is an incredibly niche tank that only makes sense for Israel combat. Also 2000 tanks across 4 different tanks isn't even all that impressive. Even Japan has roughly around those numbers. Still the Merkava is still 10x better designed than your fantasy super tank that just casually extends out an extra 2 meters in an era where everyone is trying to shed weight.

    1) Wherever the rad is in the Merkava - duh.

    2) Show me a link to unbiased, factual proof that the Chariot frontal armor sucks? Because your opinion holds zero weight with me.

    3) Sorry...I forgot the transmission and the drive train. The engines themselves weight 2 tons (like with the Leopard 2's.) But the Power Pack weighs much more.

     But you didn't know either - because you also said 'engines' not 'power packs'.

    And 'no'. The 'engine of NO battle tank weighs that much. And a tranny and drive gear is NOT part of an 'engine...but part of a 'power pack' or 'drivetrain'.

    4) And I changed it to 'Many tanks in history' before you posted your 'post about front drive gears on tanks'.

    5) Cameras get dirty? What? Periscopes don't? Again...DUH?

     

    I said no where that the Chariot was a tank god. That is pure strawman, BS.

    I simply am using it as an example of front engined tanks working. 

    Throw a strawman out again at me - and I will waste no more time on you.

     

    Now answer the question I put out - and answer it first thing in your (inevitable) reply to me of I will not read it.

     

    Now answer my this, please?

     Which tank would you rather be a crew member in?

    a) A standard tank?

    b) Or a tank where ALL the crew are in an armored cell in the back and egress if the tank is on fire is INCREDIBLY easy?

    Think hard now?

     

     

  13. On 6/2/2021 at 4:48 PM, Beer said:

     

    It's not a fantastic idea. Not at all.

     

    A powerful enough engine is much larger than that box on the picture.

    Cooling of an engine in front is extremely painful (Izraelis know).

    The armor protection of the engine is compromised by the size of the engine and by the requirement to make engine and gearbox accessible for mainteanance or replacement (!) and by the need to put exhaust somewhere. 

    The volume requiring heavy protection is larger, not smaller than with the conventional layout, i.e. the vehicle is a lot heavier. 

    Such vehicle would be most likely very front-heavy which compromises driving performance and brings potential issues with suspension or tracks.

    Driving of such vehicle is entirely dependent on cameras, there is no way to drive it by head sticking out of the hatch even in emergency. Crossing of rough terrain would likely be pretty awkward. 

    Etc. 

     

     

    Imo, you are clearly just guessing or making stuff up as you go.

     

    1) Fine. Show me a link that proves 100% that the Israeli's are having all kinds of trouble cooling their Chariot engines?

    2) The Merkava (Chariot) is considered one of the best, protected tanks in the world.

    https://forums.eugensystems.com/viewtopic.php?t=58379&start=20

    Go down to the image of the front of the Merkava armor protection in the 7'th post in the above link.

    It's armour protection is not compromised AT ALL.

    3) Many tanks in history have had their transmissions and final drives in the front...so you had to access them already. Just more so for the engine. Yes...it is probably more of a pain. But it also means more 'stuff' between the crew and the front.

    4) An engine only ways about 2 tons. MBT's today weight over 60t (in the West). The frontal armor will weigh FAR more than that. Plus, the turret would be farther back then on a regular tank...so they should not be any more nose heavy. Or if so...not by much.

    5) Cameras? Big deal. Many drivers are 'buttoned up' during combat anyway. And I bet you the vision on a screen from dozens of different camera's mounted all over the chassis/turret would be FAR better then looking through a small, periscope with limited viewing angles.

     

    Now answer my this, please?

     Which tank would you rather be a crew member in?

    A standard tank?

    Or a tank where ALL the crew are in an armoured cell in the back and egress if the tank is on fire is INCREDIBLY easy?

    Think hard now?

     

    So who am I going to believe - when it comes to whether front mounted engines on a MBT are 'not fantastic at all'?

    Some, faceless, nameless guy on the internet?

    Or the INCREDIBLY experienced and respected, IDF?

    Who have manufactured (so far) 4 'Mark's' of the 'Chariot' and almost 2,000 vehicles in total?

    Hmmmm?

     

  14. On 12/4/2016 at 10:55 AM, Xoon said:

     

    This is exactly what I was thinking about:

    http://i.imgur.com/6G3eeOO.png

     

     

    The US is considering hybrid electric drives, and they talk about what I proposed above:

     

    I know it's really late.

    But I just saw this and signed up today.

    I thought about this myself, a couple years ago (but after 2016 - so you beat me to it - lol).

    I think it is a fantastic idea.

    Not only is crew protection massively enhanced? But escaping from the vehicle is INCREDIBLY easy.

    And - if you are prepared to lose the tank to save the crew? All protection can be concentrated in the very front and on the crew module (just 20mm/splinter protection for the rest).

    And - it would be simple to manufacture heavily armoured APC's/IFV's from this design.

    Finally - Just expand the tank rearward 5 or 6 feet? And you have a combination MBT/IFV all in one.

    I think your way is the future for MBT's.

×
×
  • Create New...