Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin
The Poles were probably OK with the west giving up on the Czechs, since they joined Hitler to seize their side of Czechoslovakia.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin
Can the crew adjust the amount of propellant on the fly in a rocket and not use so much on a nearer target? A lot of the criticism above seems to be more of an argument for more mortars closer to the action than an argument against rockets replacing big guns.

I would think that a fin stabilized rocket would be easier to turn into a PGM than an artillery shell.

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin
There was an actual point to having big battleships though, in that they have huge guns and it's hard to fit huge guns and their ammo and the engines needed to move them on a small ship. Once you've gone to missiles, and/or planes with missiles you've solved that problem.

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin

LimburgLimbo posted:

Japan's buying neither the B nor C variants, so there's no way they could fly them off of a DDH as is. I don't know how different the A and C varians are, but with Japan's tech base I'm sure they could manage to alter them to a C-equivalent, but it would probably be pretty obvious if they did so.

At any rate what difference does it make? Really Japan should have at least some limited strike capacity. Article 9 is pretty much completely self-imposed and if anything the US would likely prefer Japan to drop it. As-is North Korea could start hurling missiles at Japan and there would be no way, literally no way, for Japan to stop it without outside support.

They have AEGIS equipped destroyers that can shoot down missiles before they escape the atmosphere, and North Korea is already within the combat radius of their land based F15s?

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin
I thought the point of a ship based ballistic missile defence system was to that you can park ships near the enemy's launch sites and destroy missiles during the launch stage.

I meant that they don't need a carrier born F35 because all their potential enemies are within range of their land based aircraft and any air combat would be too. Can the F-2 do aerial refuelling? Even if they want to bomb North Korea, they could just refuel somewhere outside North Korean air space.

EDIT: Also supposing the F35 will eventually exist it has a longer range than the F-2.

Throatwarbler fucked around with this message at 16:36 on Apr 29, 2013

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin
Taiwan also falls under sort of the same category as Korea as it was ceded to Japan under the Treaty of Shimonoseki in 1895, except while Korea became nominally independent with a Japanese puppet ruler, Taiwan was outright annexed. I'm not tremendously familiar with the history of Taiwan under Japanese rule but I get the impression that they took a relatively(very much relatively) enlightened approach and there was a serious effort to assimilate the non-Aboriginal Taiwanese population into the Japanese fold proper, to the extent that tens of thousands of Taiwanese fought on the Japanese side during WW2.

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin

Rodrigo Diaz posted:

MIGHT I SUGGEST GEORGE R. R. MARTIN'S A SONG OF ICE AND FIRE

This unironically. I posted this in one of the GoT megathreads but one thing that particularly struck me was GoT's depiction of the Night's Watch is exactly how I think such an organization would actually be like in real life - i.e. mostly a bunch of fuckups and incompetents dumped into a wasteland(both literally and politically speaking) from which they will neve rreturn, with the odd one or two high-born commanders with some actual ability who ended up there because of politics. In any other swords/sandals universe, or even probably in most pop-histories of antiquity, they would be unstoppable super-ninjas sworn to uphold their oath like robots. The rest of the show is also a very realistic depiction of how feudal states would actually work.

I've never read the books, I don't actually even like the TV show all that much, but when credit where it's due. v:downs:v

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin

Rodrigo Diaz posted:

No, it's really not.


as I understand it, dragons in the world are kind-of surrogates for cannons, since they knock down castles with ease or w/e

Eh, OK. My original comment only refered to the Nights Watch and I edited in the last bit as a throwaway line. It seemed reasonable and believable enough to me, but I don't know enough about either the GoT universe or actual feudal states to argue the point.

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin
This is all my fault. What I had in mind was that the depiction was realistic because by the internal logic of the show, stuff like the Night's Watch works out exactly the way you would expect, contrary to other fantasy settings. No, it's not a facsimile of an actual real life feudal religious order. I don't know why I said the latter when I meant the former but let's just say that I am bad at posting and leave it at that.

EDIT: Before we have to start adding giant disclaimers and spoiler tags everywhere.

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin

Azran posted:

Out of curiosity, which were the ridiculous tank projects? I'd wager the King Tiger is somewhere there. :v:

The Tiger II was actually built and put into action, sometimes under its own power, so it's not particularly ridiculous by the standards of Nazi Germany.

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin

Obdicut posted:

Aside from camesl, horses, dogs, and elephants, are there any other animals that have seen serious and regular offensive use in warfare?

:argh: Edited.

The ancient Egyptians seem to have used donkey drawn chariots, before the widespread use of horses.

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin

ripped0ff posted:

The most prolific myth you'll find attached to this is about GEN "Black Jack" Pershing threatening to bury Moro rebels with pigskins and pig blood so that they don't find their way to paradise. According to the rumor, this so frightened the Moros that it brought about an immediate end to their rebellion. As far as anyone can tell, this is a total myth and never happened. If anyone would have done this anyway, it'd of been "Howling Wilderness" Jake Smith, and he ended up being prosecuted for war crimes for what he did. If Pershing had done anything similar, it would exist as more than a rumor.

People have unfortunately latched onto this myth and routinely propagate it. Various Israeli figures have recommended employing it as a tactic against extremists, and some Jewish settlers claim to have actually done it. All the claims are highly dubious though, and come from second and third hand accounts relayed through disreputable tabloid sources.

Doubtless, there have been religiously motivated war crimes and atrocities that focus on Muslims, but there has been no actual campaign based on such ideas. As dumb as many military planners can be, they do occasionally learn from history. The Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 was caused simply on basis of (inaccurate) rumors that the gunpowders cartridges were greased with pig/beef tallow (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_Indian_Rebellion_of_1857#The_Enfield_Rifle). If a rumor is powerful enough to lead to that, a strategic campaign to do something along just those lines would be flatly insane.


Fizzil posted:

Being around, petting, touching, or kissing a pig isn't haram either. Just eating it, also an additional exemption is if for survival purposes there isn't anything around besides pork meat then its ok.

Speaking of the use of camels, has there been any actual historical account of their usage in battle as anything but a stable platform for archery/shooting? I know they were of great benefit for mobility, so alot of military corps centered around camels used them as mounted infantry, and this goes back thousands of years, but never as a mount for charging. I know there exists a specialized breed of camel for speed, but these are too fragile for charging too, and only ever recorded use for racing.

The Wiki article doesn't make this clear, but the way troops were drilled using those rifle muskets involves a paper cartridge containing the ball and powder which the user tears open with his teeth, so you were kind of eating it. Here's one of the wiki article's references.

http://www.militaryheritage.com/enfield1853.htm

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin
The German and Japanese airfields at home were also presumably under attack from the air which might have made training a bit dicey.

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin
How did night fighters work anyway? Did they have spotlights? Just used moonlight?

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin
Singapore also has a huge army and F15s. They could probably run roughshod over half of SE Asia if they wanted to.

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin

bewbies posted:

Believe it or not the US is seriously examining putting HIMARS launchers on ship decks. I dunno.

That seems like a more reasonable thing to do esp since nowadays you can make the rockets somewhat guided for not too much money? Load up a freighter with modernized FROG-7s in VLS tubes and drop them on All The Things. :dance:

Putting field guns and tanks on ships? Isn't the ship moving and bobbing up and down with the waves? Without some kind of stabilization platform how would you even hit anything?

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin
I thought that the red actually faded into a sort of russet/brown that was pretty decent camoflague in a lot of circumstances.

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin
Most of the fighting happened in the south, and I think that people fighting a few miles from their homes and on familiar soil probably dealt with the dysentery better than people roughing it in a tent a thousand miles from home.

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin

Seaside Loafer posted:

What does 'bear-march' mean? I did several googles on that term with other bits and got gently caress all. Its probably something really obvious my morning brain isnt getting but its annoying me now!

The correct way of marching is where you take a step with one leg while swinging the arm on the opposite side. You know, like how normal people walk. Parade drill is stressful especially for new recruits so people gently caress up and walk like bears.

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin

Xiahou Dun posted:

So, this has been bothering me for a while. I've been reading all of these documents from Chinese military outposts, and I'm currently up to the 8th century or so. (Not a history guy, this is unconnected. I'm just a linguist who needs them writing about loving anything*.)

Anyway, so I'm basically reading like quartermasters' reports and poo poo and it's pretty boring ; it's mostly just lists of what they got and what they ain't got and how much they used and yadda yadda yadda. Probably some cool stuff in there, but nothing that's really making me jump for joy.

Except the silk. Every drat outpost I read about, the sons of bitches get a good 200 pounds of silk like every loving month, and it's bothering the hell out of me what they're doing with it. None of it seems to leave, or at least isn't listed. They seem to use about the same whether or not they're actually fighting, so I don't think it's bandages, and they weren't writing on silk in this period. (And even then, that's a gently caress ton of writing.)

Anyone got any guesses? This is just kind of bothering me. At this point, I've just taken to quietly assuming that the early Medieval Chinese army was the most FABULOUS army and the soldiers just spent all day rolling around in piles of silk, like an 8 year old would with leaves except more naked.

:psyduck:

I just don't get it.




*"Say 'isn't' you, fuckers! I don't care how much rice you got shipped in! Just say 'isn't'!"

Silk was a valuable trade commodity akin to metallic currency, especially when dealing with steppe nomads who won't have much everyday use for shiny metals but could sure appreciate some pajamas that aren't horse hide. If you read the various treaties signed between the Chinese and the Jurchens/Khitans/Xiongnu there are always gits ans tributes paid in rolls of silk.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Throatwarbler
Nov 17, 2008

by vyelkin

KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:

I need to start reading history books again. Any recs on the Great Northern War or Austrian Succession? I like napoleonic and revolutionary poo poo but should probably branch out a little.

I sort of recently read that pulitzer prize winning biography of Peter the Great that goes into the Northern war in pretty good detail.

  • Locked thread