roguetechie
-
Posts
1,083 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Posts posted by roguetechie
-
-
On 5/15/2021 at 1:45 AM, delete013 said:
Low silhouette, sloped plates where possible, small or narrow cross-section of turrets. More or less how late cold war tanks were designed.
Good, so it is the composite armour that needs space.
Maybe it is not so tall, or at lest, the crew capsule is lower under the bulky armour. You might notice though that there is a flat window before the driver and there seems not much space for armour. It looks like driver's shot trap on a challenger 2. The hull itself is tall relative to vehicle width and there seems to be a superstructure that adds to the weight. All this are vulnerabilities that were attempted to be solved by tilting drivers chair back and lower the hull. Is that simply gone now?
I think that part is my most credible observation. The hull is very low. The final drive housing extends almost all the way to the track. Where is suspension travel supposed to go? It looks more akin to Churchill's suspension.
Sure, I merely asked why is it so. Maybe I don't know something.
1. Sloped plates, low silhouette, small or narrow turret cross section/how late cold war tanks are designed.
You must be looking at different late cold war tanks than the rest of us because this is all just outright puzzling.
2. (Second paragraph thing)
I'm going to be honest with you here, the more I look at these "artists impressions" the more I'm more or less convinced that if there was ANY engineering input at all to these illustrations it was a checklist or some shit given to hire out graphic artists.
That said though, you brought up shot traps. Even assuming that drivers vision block step is actually planned to be there you're looking at maybe 10-20 centimeters in height which is basically thin enough to not matter at modern tank gun ranges. You equated it to the chally situation which is it manifestly nowhere near the same thing. In the chally they carved a big fucking hole in it's UFP DEAD CENTER and even that's not a shot trap! (Shot traps when people are shooting high L:D long rods at you aren't really a thing. There's just bounce/no bounce angles THAT'S IT) The chally's issue is it has the tank equivalent to wearing crotchless panties to ride steeplechase not a shot trap. There's a big fucking hole just inviting a long rod to get deep the fuck up in it's guts!
On the superstructure on suspension things, I just flat have no idea what you mean by superstructure. On the suspension thing, reference my prior comments about these being graphic arts concepts more than anything like a concept drawing. Even if they planned to do it exactly like this though, with hydrogas suspension components etc it shouldn't particularly be a problem perse.
These "concepts" are too derpy to be all that serious to be honest.
If you want to see what a truly modern tank concept looks like check out the US army's OMT concept illustrations. (There's 3 or 4 of them and they're much more serious than whatever the fuck these illustrations are).
In some ways I think why several of us are confused by your commentary here is precisely because these things are so blatantly deviantart Level cartoony.
-
On 4/7/2021 at 4:46 AM, delete013 said:
These designs seem to stray from the usual good practices of tank building. Bulky, tall and with little space for suspension. Armour on the "cannon" seems equal to that of a c2(IFV?). How is that justified?
Which best practices are you specifically on about?
Let's start with your bulky complaint:
You do know that NERA is a thing right and that due to the specifics of how nera works it tends to be very mass efficient but comparatively massive right?
Now let's go to the tall thing:
How exactly are you getting that they're especially tall? I see the opposite TBH but I wouldn't even want to speculate on the height since there's nothing to gauge the scale by.
What about little space for suspension:
Gonna be honest here, this one blatantly makes it clear that you're just bitching to bitch with no actual grounding for any of it.
And Last, you're talking about the armor package of CONCEPT DRAWINGS.
You have no grounds to speculate about any of this at all.
-
I wouldn't expect much from FN...
They still can't get the mk48 right, the m240L is a piece of shit, and the army is paying FN to fuck up m2's in a similar way to Their other portfolio of fuck ups.
It would be genuinely surprising if they actually did something decent.
-
Yes, we see you edging closer to declaring victory even though you've had it explained clearly and thoroughly over and over in as simple language as possible.
-
Now give poor old delete some credit.
It DOES say something about the respective auto technologies... Just not what he thinks it does.
The Pershing worked specifically because american engineers were capable of engineering something that was within the limits of their automotive technology while the Germans couldn't even manage to not fuck that up!
Anyone Actually capable in their field would have known that the panther final drives wouldn't have even been satisfactory on something 15 tons lighter, like the Pershing, so they built final drives that would actually WORK with what they had!
Delete keeps trying to act like it's some sort of accomplishment to build a "medium" that's 15 tons heavier than it should be while having inferior fit out because he apparently doesn't understand that the goal is to get x set of capabilities with y mobility at the lowest weight and bulk possible.
It's a fundamental misunderstanding of what the purpose of tanks truly is at it's core.
Delete believes in the stat block over all else while sane people understand that AFV design is about striking the best compromise between all the competing factors and design considerations to come out with a system that does the most with the least so that you can make deploy and supply as many of them as possible.
These are not vegas air races aircraft delete. No points are awarded for the most sleek sophisticated and on the edge of your technological capabilities designs.
Your entire approach for deciding what is good is based in a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of afv's.
-
5 hours ago, heretic88 said:
Who? Then show me those "much better sourced" works.
It's literally not my job to show you but since this forum's unofficial motto is LINK OR DIE it's pretty safe to assume that what you're demanding is extremely easy to find on this very forum...
As to who exactly on here is published and what they've published, chances are if you don't know that they're published and what they've published it's because they don't want you to know likely because they think you're a fucking clown and don't want to be bothered with you.
Since you've been here for so god damn long without even once clicking the sticky at the top of EVERY SUBFORUM that contains the SH newb guide, which you're flagrantly stomping all over, I don't feel even a little compelled to take pity much less mercy on you.
I only stopped in to watch you get turned out like rupaul at florence supermax, not to help you stop being a fucking idiot.
-
6 hours ago, heretic88 said:
Just people who write... AND spend their time studying original archives, documents, reports and the actual surviving vehicles. This is the difference between amateurs (like it or not, all of us are amateurs on forums such as this) and experts... Of course they may make mistakes, but overall, their knowledge about their subjects is FAR above mine, yours, and anybody else on this forum combined.
He says on a forum populated with a very non trivial number of professionals in the field and authors who published and publish much better sourced works on the subject directly at hand.
Just because you're some dipshit on the internet doesn't mean the people you're arguing with are too...
I'm not one of those professionals for the record but I do find this incredibly funny.
-
17 hours ago, heretic88 said:
That was to show the double standards and hipocrisy.
One vehicle that had reliability problems, but generally performed well in combat is an utter piece of trash, one of the worst tanks ever.
The other vehicle that also had just as many reliability problems, generally performed badly in combat, is a good piece of equipment... Of course, for some people, the first vehicle is a black sheep, and the second is a "holy cow" or something like that...
Yes the old unreliable r34.... So unreliable that during the recent ukraine festivities we have MULTIPLE documented instances of t34's parked on display in the weather for the last 7 decades being started in short order and driven into battle.
Truly a disgrace that some impudent curs had the gall to call these moscovite failure tractors tanks!
-
2 hours ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:
Well, why didn't you do that here?
I know right?!
Also, I love how he's so free with his critiques of the competition threads and our "general knowledge Levels" Along with singing his own praises...
And yet, he's been here ALL THIS TIME and has somehow not managed to find subforum DOCUMENT REPOSITORY LINKS stickied at the top of every forum menu for each subcategory at SH!
Real high IQ hours.
If you read this spoony boy, go look in the clearly marked fucking folders... Reevaluate your life, reevaluate your attitude, realize that we all also have a metric fuck ton of shit that isn't even in these places, realize that we've all read large portions of these archives, and maybe come back apologize and show proper respect for people who have in fact already done all the hard work for you...
And maybe 6 months or a year after that you'll actually begin posting stuff interesting and worthwhile enough to actually get thoughtful and helpful responses from people here.
-
3 hours ago, Must Be Spoon Fed said:
"Meanie head dumb face"? Keep it going, you had regressed to kindergarten level mentality.
Do you think THIS is a gold mine? No, you post just bunch of videos and photos or news articles. Rarely you have any insight. Anything you do here is found a lot more efficiently in a book. If I want to go in depth, I go for white papers or very specialized books. This site is only good for very few threads where you provide links to other articles and books. For example, I'm reading ,,Technology of Tanks'' and so far I found it enlightening. However, after reading parts of said book I had come to conclusion that you people are truly allergic to putting any effort into your research, otherwise you would know how absolutely silly and impractical most of proposed designs are in design section. High caliber anti aircraft cannons with immense rate of fire and they are merely air cooled... Lightly armored (under 20 tons) aluminium car with medium velocity anti tank guns...Recoil impulse would shatter turret and hull with prolonged usage, not to mention how uncomfortable firing would be for the crew inside. Out of place technologies like second generation missiles (in first generation environment), futuristic non existent 2000 hp engines in 70-80's level tech. I could go on and on. When it comes to making statements rather than reposting information found elsewhere online, you are not much better than an average enthusiast.
You also are surprisingly proud of doing nothing constructive with your time. I said that I prefer to read books, everyone here was shocked by that. I had said that maybe you should start writing about military equipment as there is a distinct lack of information of in depth information. This is how I got my name changed...You people are very proud of very little. You have no presence in online communities. Various enthusiasts have reach of millions despite making a lot of errors. Everyone, even Gavins guy writes his own articles, however you guys can't do anything more than laugh at him from safety of your own echo chamber. I had offered you and this forum as a whole to be something more than its own echo chamber with non existent relevance in modern day discussions, however you had rejected this opportunity outright while demeaning everybody else who tries to do something constructive...
The difference between pride and arrogance is that one is proudful of tangible and important achievements in his life while an arrogant person has nothing to show for it when pressed, but still pretends to be a serious and respectable member/community. I don't need to boast or to pretend how knowledgeable I'm people, when they hear of that I do or read what I wrote, they are usually impressed with me. Can you say the same about yourself?
You talk about us being surprised you get your information by reading books...
You're right, we were surprised. We've all read all those books and far far more. We collect and trade dtic.mil documents, the biannual technology roadmap reports, and patents like you probably trade Pokemon cards...
You apparently just haven't figured out that because shitters like you who want to be spoon-fed everything are so incredibly prevalent that we do it several places people like you don't have access to.
The fact that you think you're unique different or special because you're just barely getting around to the very basics of the entry level reading list we all read FOREVER AGO, and your apparent total inability to comprehend and retain the knowledge in said books much less ACTUALLY SYNTHESIZE the information into a usable form reflects extraordinarily poorly on you not us.
I genuinely love too how you are genuinely too stupid, STILL in spite of people explaining to you multiple times why they exist and their purpose, to understand the purpose of the design competition threads.
It's an added bonus that "in your professional opinion" the designs "are totally impractical"....
Wanna know the part that's funny about that?
If you could even read properly, you'd see the math and 3d modeling simulations etc that show everyone's work including verifying that that their hypothetical solutions are in fact possible and would perform as desired/designed.
Bitch please
I've read through the equivalent of hundreds of pages of typed text, spreadsheets, mathematical calculations using the actual and far closer to up to date equations than TOT etc has evaluations of everything from the armor arrays ability to perform as designed to the extremely thoroughly specced and calculated ammunition designs that stop just short of an actual bill of materials and full up cost calculations for every step in the manufacturing process for each individual round gun and armor array.
But I'm sure your "professional opinion" is far more capable than the Monte Carlo Sims and etc the competitors and judges did to vet and benchmark the entries.
Have you not figured out yet that you're such a shitter so utterly laughable and unworthy of respect much less treatment as a peer that we're purposely using you as a punching bag when any of us could actually provide you everything you demand from us without any difficulty at any point we wanted to.
You've outed yourself as beyond a joke and too much effort for anyone here to be willing to beat you into not being a dumb fuck.
Honestly, you should probably apologize to the entire forum population very sincerely or just go away in the very near future.
Because at some point, people here will get bored of beating on you...
At which point, any one or more of the dozen people here who can tank your "defense writing career" with a single email to everyone you work for with some screenshots attached.
Pro tip: The defense technology world on the professional side is utterly ruthless and actively enjoys shitcanning the careers of annoying arrogant jumped up little dumb fucks like you. You're actually lucky that you landed here rather than other places where any chance you'd ever have of reporting on anything even DEFENSE ADJACENT would have already been taken from you weeks ago...
This is me officially saying, our forebearance and tolerance of you being a shitter is done.
Begone thot
-
-
On 9/19/2020 at 10:11 AM, Must Be Spoon Fed said:
No, I want you to have self respect and self esteem not tied to acceptance of some extremely obscure, half dead forum, because it sounds really pathetic when a grown man aspires to one day become accepted into an anonymous online community. By becoming a writer, having your own blog and getting publishing deals with some newspapers you could develop as a person. It is not that hard, I just went and asked a person whom I know and he had agreed to publish me, his news site has connections with other news sites and thus I will have a very wide reach just at my first attempt. I had offered to do something as constructive for yourself, because with time, those blog posts and comments have very little staying power or worth in society as a whole.
As for you lashing out at me so violently and without a solid cause. Well, usually people just project their own insecurities at me. A good example is how you went through threads to attack me and now suddenly it is my fault for merging your outbursts from both threads. I'm sorry for trying to help you. As you say, you know what you are doing and I assume those nicknames are your online friends. It is good that you have at least them.
Was all of this supposed to make me care that you think I'm a meanie head dumb dumb face?
P.s. any "news site" stupid enough to employ you as a writer is... I'd say only good as toilet paper but you're essentially just an "online defense commentator" which is right up there with terms like anal fissures for it's negative connotation to pretty much everyone whose not one of them.
Congrats on getting yourself into the exalted camp as such luminaries as Nicholas Drummond and blacktail defense I guess.
You know, if you just stopped being so exceedingly stupid this place could be a gold mine for you. But, you and I both know that will never happen.
-
Yeah, we get it, you want us to do all your work for you.
But we're not going to.
Nice try on insisting we write up faq's and etc though.
And oh by the way, you finding the competition threads and managing to so badly mangle the intent just goes to show how monumentally fucking defective you are.
P.s. yes, I do know a metric fuck ton more than you... But that's just not hard or something to actually be proud of. Even diagonal sushi mightyzuk and lastdingo would be highly disappointed by you, and that truly says worse things about you than anything else I could add.
-
7 hours ago, Calicifer said:
That is basically like...any modern combat since cold war. Replace word: ''drone'' with a recon team with a radio set and you will have a same thing. I would argue that similar capabilities existed since WW2 as artillery barrages and infantry collaboration had achieved quite high standard at the end of WW2. Drones in this case do not provide anything revolutionary in terms of capabilities, if we would use any other system in its place we would receive the same results. It is also completely superfluous as drone in that case did not provided something which more conventional system could not do just as well. It however is an improvement over our existing capabilities. However, outside of few exceptions, most high end drone projects are still being developed and I predict that it is during 20's to 30's when we are going to see a serious rise in drone warfare. A good indication of that are all those high profile drone systems being developed like Poseidon or X45 series developments, Tanaris, ACV-30 Korkut. However, my point was that in modern combat drones do not take a serious role. They are superficial in modern warfare and outside of some niche roles, militaries across the globe either do not have much of a drone inventory and can do perfectly without them or they do have large drone inventory, but most of them are small reconnaissance drones. There are notable exceptions however, but an exception does not make a rule. Examples which were provided was against an adversary without basic capabilities like air monitoring capabilities and defense. I do however did not considered their use in hybrid warfare where their role is a lot greater and they serve as an improvised replacement for more capable platforms.
I could offer same advice and to you. You seem to be awfully eager to judge me without even bothering to understand what I'm saying or to fully read all my comments in a same thread. However, his comment did not disproved anything I had said. He had even proven partly of what I was saying. As for whatever a person should have right to express himself. Well, nobody knows everything. Top officials also make a lot of mistakes and poor judgement calls. Sometimes I'm astounded by stupidity of those people due to statements they make on media. Your view is very technocratic however and I find this forum to be very traditionalist in terms of unwavering support of ongoing developmental efforts and people do have a strong tendency to attack or dislike anyone daring to critique the establishment. In our case it would be government, research teams, military, projects.
I also believe that a lot of hate coming my way is at least partly unwarranted. I do support same projects like F-35. I do think that drones are the future. Our views are different only on some more complex and niche topics like: Do drones provide significant combat value in conventional war environment? Would a properly set up defense of Mantis system would negate all drone activity all together? However, my highly critical outlook on those subjects do make me a target. I do understand that not all communities enjoy more negative and thought provoking people. However, I do think that this forum needs to change as it will die out as all the other similar hardcore forums had died out. It is happened even now, take a look at how many new threads were created (there are very few new threads popping out). Take a look at how active and serious those people are (most veterans are content with posting low effort content posts, no analysis, no insightful comments, no opinions), forum is already becoming a vegetable if it isn't one yet. I also saw other new guy being viciously attacked and harassed for smallest, unspecified mistakes. Not only you have no new blood coming in, but you also actively attacking anyone new by default who do not fit into your very specific mindset which you had set for this forum. Without new blood you will eventually die out.
Bold of you to assume you have advice worth giving, especially when you are completely tone deaf to what people are saying to you as well as the actual tone of the forum.
Your comments about uav's not being revolutionary is especially funny when you turn around and accuse people of being blindly technocratic.
The whole point of uav's for the most part right now is to do the things we used to do other ways better, faster, cheaper, with less manpower, much lower latency, much higher certainty, over much larger areas, and In a much more usable and effective way.
In that respect, they have been wildly successful almost beyond expectations. Your inability to grock that everyone here is far more aware of their limitations and weak points is not winning you friends nor is it making you come off as anything like intelligent. On the plus side, it is slightly less cringe than your constant talk of being more informed than public officials tasked with decision making and guiding development decisions. You definitely aren't by the way, you need to understand that.
A great example is your surprise and wonderment at drones being a great tool in the hybrid warfare toolbox. They're also great in COIN operations other than war and probably most importantly in the role of dealing with gathering ISR and a myriad of other missions involving hostile nations we don't want a shooting war with.
Especially now that under the new normal we find ourselves in, people can potshot and outright steal each other's drones without even the slightest risk of it triggering an escalation spiral.
And herein lies the issue people here have with you. You are falsely under the impression that you are far smarter and more knowledgeable than you actually are. You preach to people who have forgotten more than you'll ever know and chide them about their stances on things you're plainly far out of your depth on.
I'm by far one of the least intelligent and well read people here and yet my knowledge is still encyclopedic In comparison with your own.
If you were to actually go through my post history here though, outside of my very limited areas of knowledge, you'd see that I tend to be the one asking more questions than answering.
At the same time though, you'll find that my posts also clearly show in their wording that I've went out and looked for answers/data to back up my stance on a subject even if it's outside my field.
Honestly, if you actually want to get something out of this forum you should be spending much more time reading existing posts and rhe links etc in those posts before you jump in and try to "educate" people who actually know the things you think you know.
Your comments in this thread pretty plainly show that your own internal ideas of what uav's are supposed to be and do are very divergent from what they actually are. This should have given you pause and made you stop to consider whether you actually know what you think you do instead of triggering you to post wildly laughable admonishments and batshit insane proclamations.
You're either going to actually learn how to be a good poster here or you'll go back to whatever shithole forums you came from.
The choice is yours.
-
To top our hatred of entitled whiners, your question about why you can't just jam the f35's systems and capabilities into an F16 is a great example of how entirely you've failed to do your own research since that's a conversation that's been had multiple times on this board, is extremely well covered on secret projects.co.uk and has probably literal thousands of pages worth of discussion freely available and well indexed on the f16.net forum.
You can literally type that question into Google and read dozens of masters grade theses on THAT EXACT QUESTIONS off what you get in the first page of a Google search.
It is not anyone else's job to do your googling for you. We have all long since done our reaearch on questions like that and purged the links to source material from our favorites list years ago for the sake of having actual important information and links at our fingertips.
And that's really the issue, you're expecting to be spoonfed stuff by the people here that is inexcusably easy to find on your own.
As to your accusation that we don't like our favorite systems being criticized, you stupid petulant little child, this board is almost 70% shit talk of any and every system, program, and other sacred cow/individual members here favorite systems. We collectively spend most of our leisure time Actually looking for stuff to criticize or otherwise discuss the flaws of, especially if we like the systems.
Quite frankly we have had far better posters than you flounce off in far more impressive huffs and histrionics more times than it's worth keeping track of.
One of the mottos of this forum is that we strive for and expect posters to be high signal to noise contributors. (I.e. exactly what you are not. You have been all noise no signal)
Hopefully this clears up your misunderstanding of what the purpose of this place is and convinces you to actually contribute meaningfully rather than petulantly demanding that we provide you education on your terms.
-
And there we go, as beer has so ably pointed out, calcifiers seems completely unaware of what drones are for and just how amazingly successful they've been.
If your not even aware of what their place is on the battlefield, you probably shouldn't be commenting about them in such an attempted authoritative fashion.
-
After reading your takes on the f35 and drones (lmaooo) I'm going to outright call your "land vehicles knowledge" pure unadulterated bullshit. (Your t55 post does that for you anyway since even one of our least favorite britbong shills apparently knows way more about the state of t55 fleets than you do)
You keep talking about how you have all this knowledge, while at the same time spewing utterly inexcusably stupid takes everywhere you go on here.
Now this last post of yours in here about how you shouldn't have to do your own research...
Quite frankly, as one of the dumber people here, I find that incredibly offensive and simultaneously laughable.
To be even more brutally honest, unless and until you can actually put down the whole ensemble of negative character traits you have put on display here...
Even books aren't going to help you
-
You somehow missed the part of the war where an entire Ukrainian division got localized then annihilated by a massive cross border artillery barrage apparently...
Your shit takes are the shittiest takes.
-
On 6/29/2020 at 8:53 AM, Calicifer said:
Drones provide negligible combat value and are not in mainstream service yet. Most of high profile projects are still under development. It will take a good decade when such things as drone artillery spotters, tanks using drones to extend their awareness or when drones will be able to perform roles of more complex machinery like military aircraft or submarines.
I'm not gonna lie, this is a way stupider take than your comments in the f35 thread.
Not only does beer disagree with you but the Ukrainian army does too. So do the syrians, the Iraqis, the afghanis, the houthi and a fuck ton of other people too on account of them getting their shit wrecked repeatedly by drones of a shockingly wide variety!
How the fuck have you managed to miss the last 2 decades?
-
-
2 hours ago, DIADES said:
I had forgotten how much I enjoy the witty repartee so often a feature of forums in general. Thank you for reminding me of both that enjoyment and my own failings.
Seriously though, the cannon is the important part of Brutus and it's actually a very major development that heralds not only interesting future possibilities but also the era where foob and etc weapons are finally crossing the technical maturity line in a meaningful way.
This is all but the textbook definition of a big deal.
This and the gd ngsw bullpups are harbingers of actual advancements in gun technologies across the board which have the potential to let us do things we haven't actually been able to do before in pretty significant ways which also happen to be pretty synergistic with other stuff being developed as well as having some low key potential to dig us out of some holes we're currently in or facing capabilities wise.
-
On 10/14/2019 at 6:51 PM, DIADES said:
Jeebers! That had better be cheap. Only one (very small) step up from a Technical.
This comment alone makes me severely question essentially everything else you say or will say in the mechanized warfare forum...
Do you actually have an idea of what you're looking at in the Brutus platform?
Because I can assure you the God damn truck it's mounted on is so far beyond irrelevant to any potential thereof of the real thing Being showcased as to be entirely laughable for someone even peripherally interested in this realm to comment on that it's genuinely disconcerting.
TL;DR it's not about the God damn truck dummy
-
On 11/25/2018 at 6:57 PM, Walter_Sobchak said:
As opposed to being what exactly?
A fucking Muslim brotherhood agent masquerading as press to keep from getting his and his family their rightful dances with JDAM's
-
3 hours ago, Lord_James said:
Why does it seem like a twin gun system is a winning option for defeating APS? Though, I suppose some kind of autoloading system that can *double tap* the target could work.
*maybe an autoloader system that has a mode that loads a shell, then holds a second shell near the gun, and reloads it rapidly when firing at APS protected tanks. Something like FASTDRAW for the M1.
The AN-94 of tank guns?
It's a better idea than two actual main guns, which is likely not going to end well if the Russians already had issues with unwanted rotation mounting autocannons.
At that point your best bet is likely supersizing the 76 & 90mm CT autocannons we already developed.
I can't really speak to the quality of this suggestion, but it's a way to pound out two shots really fast.
Ukrainian Civil War Thread: All Quiet on the Sturgeon Front
in Open Discussion
Posted
Y'know, in general people who "quote themselves" when they're fucking nobodies pissing in someone else's pond is kinda the sign of an asshole.
Might wanna, y'know actually prove you have value to people here before you bother TRYING to act like your words should hold any water for anyone here.
We don't fucking know you, at the rate you're going we'll never know you because you'll be gone, and even if we did know you we'd think you're a self important asshole for trying to pull what you just did.