|
Psion posted:I believe you mean these How did this beautiful beast lose to the F-22 again?
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2013 05:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 06:29 |
|
|
Does it have a volleyball scene?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2013 18:03
|
|
|
Is that digital camo? Man they'll copy anything, even the bad stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2013 22:05
|
|
|
Does his patch say, Old Turk or Cold Turk? Either way, he's one fly motherfucker.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2013 03:52
|
|
|
bewbies posted:I don't think the Chinese did much direct copying of any Soviet tanks after the split. They tried to build counters/competitors but I don't think they ripped off any designs. They're probably content enough at that point having copied everything else the Russians came up with then and there after.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:10 F-35, two LCS or 50 Black Hawks. Think of savings! We can buy two of the worst boondoggles ever in limited quantity, or a fleet of choppers already in wide circulation that the military has expressed strong interest in replacing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 25, 2014 18:27
|
|
|
Got this in my email for somehow and for some reason. Save the EA-18 Growler
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:
Your video lead me to this: http://youtu.be/ihVszNrz6dQ It's one of those cheesy CGI proof of concept videos that military defense contractors release to help demonstrate, justify, and/or explain an expensive piece future hardware that usually ends up being too costly, too complex, or just plain badly designed. The difference is this one is for an Russian ground attack drone for when they invade the States. 
Back Hack fucked around with this message at 05:57 on May 5, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 5, 2014 05:35
|
|
|
How about this one Future Combat System , it looks like a 90's intro trailer for a video game. Fun starts at 2:57, it should be noted that all of the "future" vehicles and hardware displayed in this video has all been shelved, cancelled, or never developed before they were expected to be deployed in 2014.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2014 20:01
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:They went the way of the French on the Type 99 MBT and made the armor package modular, so they're probably done with tank development for the moment like the rest of the world. Maybe Lockheed Martin will take a crap at making the next M1A3 Abrams; It can't be any harder then making a plane, amirite?
|
|
#
¿
May 17, 2014 05:01
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jms2zOU2MZE
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2014 04:28
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Oh, and the early stab at Canada because There we go.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2014 18:56
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:There isn't a civilian airplane anywhere that has a chance against a godamned SA-11 emplacement. Well there's technically  one http://youtu.be/R2eehBk_DNQ?t=20s
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2014 03:24
|
|
|
simplefish posted:Since we're talking about guns vs missiles, have one of my favourites - the M551 Sheridan fire control video: Every time I read up on the Sheridan ,Starship, or the M70 I can't help but wonder how close they were to making a working and functional design/concept that we're only now beginning to consider for ground force vehicles; multi-function high precision launch platforms. Only now instead trying to get a working missile to fire out of cannons, they're getting cannon rounds to act like missiles. Edit: I spotted this gem in a image search for the Sheridan, what is it? The host page doesn't work but the imagine description says it had a 75mm autocannon of all things.   VVV Definitely wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of one these things, I wonder why they were never produced in limited numbers for testing; seems like a sound enough concept, have a light and mobile AA platform that could double as an AV(AT?) platform if required. Back Hack fucked around with this message at 08:12 on Jul 22, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2014 07:31
|
|
|
Scut posted:Ambition aside, I bet its crews are VERY happy it wasn't tested in a hot war en masse. I'm pretty sure they did their fair share of complaining because they were used during Vietnam.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
Zapdos posted:I'm guessing it is supposed to turn itself sideways? Ours just make a wimpy arch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwV-JucQktQ
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 02:38
|
|
|
priznat posted:A slow arc seems less risky that you won't just face plant the missile back in the water. They do that to help make it more difficult to pinpoint the origin of the missile. E: Always beaten
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2014 05:13
|
|
|
david_a posted:Can somebody explain jet <-> missile compatibility to a layman like me? For instance, in the above article they mention that it would have cost a lot of money to upgrade the F-14 to handle newer missiles. The F-106 was apparently also saddled with mediocre missiles that held it back. I'm guessing a "missile system" is a lot more than just a goodie-filled tube with fins on it? Not all missiles are fire and forget that allows some level of autonomous capability, many of the more advanced missiles require specialized components and/or electronic equipment on the airframe they're fired from to properly function. They are other considerations like hardpoints, weight, balance, empty space, and other things, but the right equipment is a big one. And that equipment cost money. E: Never not beaten. Back Hack fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Jul 25, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2014 19:39
|
|
|
Davin Valkri posted:What was a Russian mechanized column even doing in Ukraine in the first place? I thought the aid trucks were supposed to be, like, (underloaded?) trucks and stuff, not BTRs. All the aid trucks were suppose to take a specific route that lead into Ukraine controlled territory where they would be unloaded, inspected, and disturbed by the Red Cross. Well a large number of uninspected trucks complete with armed escorts toke a route that lead directly into separatist control territory, aids stopped at the border, escorts proceeded on. Ukraine is like: Hey dude, you're sending armed APC and stuff into my backyard, what the hell? Russia: No we're not, you're making this up. They don't exist. Ukraine: If you don't send them back in a few hours, we're going to blow them up, dude. Russia: Fine! Go ahead. Ukraine: Ok, we blew them up with artillery. Happy? Russia: Whatever, they totally didn't exist. (Dozen of sources have video and picture proof of them existing and crossing into Ukraine)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 20:02
|
|
|
Shooting Blanks posted:I'm still pissed off that NYC got a shuttle and Houston didn't. loving idiots even managed to damage it before putting it on display, assholes. At least we get the dedicated SpaceX launch site in couple years. World's first and only commercial spaceport. 
Back Hack fucked around with this message at 17:59 on Sep 25, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
I would argue you need to actually put people in "space" before you can call yourself a spaceport, in which case the race to being the first spaceport is still on; however I'll concede point anyway. That aside, I can't wait to drive down and watch them launch the Dragon 2, that thing is going to be so awesome.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2014 14:36
|
|
|
Cippalippus posted:In case you're right, you're still the one who will fight for me. Why would we fight for you?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2014 08:37
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:...let's post some loving planes Or Helicopters for that matter; The Army is pretty committed to replacing the Blackhawk and Apache with a single muti-role helicopter at this point and several companies have already submitted potential designs. Some of them are pretty out there concept wise as far a helicopters go. The Defiant, which is going to be a larger troop transport variation of Sikorsky's Raider  Bell's V-280 Valor which is a redesign of the Blackhawk into a mini-osprey.  The Eurocopter X3  The Piasecki X-49A  And the AVX OH-58D showed up again to be laughed at. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2014 00:39
|
|
|
Mazz posted:That all really seems to stem from the really high cruise speed the army is looking for. It's behind a paywall unfortunately. 
Back Hack fucked around with this message at 04:58 on Oct 6, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2014 04:52
|
|
|
bewbies posted:If there is an area where we clearly lag behind the Russians it is in producing fantastically good videos about our weapons systems. Difference is we actually build the weaponry we  to, not write fanfiction about it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
Hubis posted:Am I off base? Not at all.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Yeah there's a good loving reason nobody fucks with NK, and it's not their state of the art armed forces. That has more to do with the fact with they're protected by China, and no one wants to invade China to get to NK.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 10, 2014 18:00
|
|
|
I don't believe anything Lockheed is selling at this point. 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:It's what we're going to power the laser with, silly! Remember when the Comanche stealth helicopter was going to have a laser cannon instead of an auto-cannon.  priznat posted:S/VTOL reactor? Marines and their silly requirements. Back Hack fucked around with this message at 19:36 on Oct 16, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
Pornographic Memory posted:Probably because the F-35 is a shitpile that progressively smothers the design and manufacture of
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2014 14:14
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:The Meteor is slated to enter service in 2015 too, that should make it even easier. If it works, that is. New and untried tech is scary. I know the Royal Air Force is falling apart and regressive, but this is ridiculous.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2014 00:58
|
|
|
Waldstein Sonata posted:Oh hey, it's 28 North just past 267. I always wondered what was in that weird inverted glass trapezoid building. Really? I know the Russian propaganda machine is well beyond ridiculous, but who are they trying fool? It's no secret to anyone and even their own people they've been sell rocket motors to us for years.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
Scratch Monkey posted:http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/04/us/f-35-fighter-carrier-landing/index.html Somewhere in there, there is a fishing joke to be made.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2014 19:05
|
|
|
The real easy money is in network infrastructure, what with everyone going crazy and  about cloud computing; I've never had it so good.
Back Hack fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Nov 9, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
Medicinal Penguin posted:Compared to the F-35, "hasn't been built yet" is a pretty big competitive advantage. From what I understand, the baby Paks they've built have just as many mechanical problems as the F-35, not that they'll be able to effort them anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2014 21:47
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:If only you didn't need stuff like "fuel" and "ammunition" to fight a war, Western Europe would be set! We should repurpose NATO into a giant protection racket at this point since no one else in NATO is willing to spend that minimum 2% on their military anymore. Don Gato posted:NEVER. ENUFF. DAKKA! If it was functional, would you really even try to approach something that could shot a literal wall of lead? Back Hack fucked around with this message at 09:34 on Nov 17, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2014 09:06
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:I hear there's an opening for that job. Why would they do that, they have enough gold filling to retire on.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2014 06:49
|
|
|
I'm so giddy right now, someone just did a low flying pass over my neighbor in a B-17 here in Houston. loving amazing 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
Scratch Monkey posted:Which one? Look like this was the culprit, The Texas Raiders...unless there are more B-17s flying around in the area. 
Back Hack fucked around with this message at 04:45 on Nov 27, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2014 04:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 06:29 |
|
|
mlmp08 posted:In the world of military acquisitions or pitches to be acquired that aren't picked up, there is no insane. If you're going to go down that route you might as well make a modern day version of the greyhound with a 20mm turret controlled from the passenger seat. Back Hack fucked around with this message at 02:14 on Dec 10, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2014 02:09
|
|