|
grover posted:Only 4,640 killed enemies? :yawn: I backed up the video when I heard that just to make sure.
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 05:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 17:41 |
|
|
So, we were talking about colorized WW2 photos a couple pages back, how about we go farther back with colorized Civil War photos?      All of these are done in Photoshop obviously and as such aren't perfect, but it sure does make you realize that these people were real.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 07:12
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:It's been EIGHT YEARS since there hasn't been a Spectre gunship forward deployed somewhere in the world. Looks like someone finally got their killstreak interrupted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 07:41
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 15:09
|
|
|
Fresh from Syria, specifically Darayya, yesterday: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=91e_1358349215 Looks to be a pair of T-64s awkwardly fitted with with ERA. Probably an offensive decision rather than a defensive decision as I've heard that Soviet ERA packages tended to protect the tank at the cost of shredding anyone nearby. Also, note at 1:18 that the guy throws some kind of pistol out of the window. It almost looks like a Tokarev, but it has some kind of weird barrel extension.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 15:20
|
|
|
They're T-72s, look at the roadwheels and radiator grill. -64s were never exported either.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 16:45
|
|
|
Red Crown posted:Fresh from Syria, specifically Darayya, yesterday: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=91e_1358349215 You'd think a pair of tanks that just put 2 rounds into the building next to yours and then swiveling around before aiming right at you would provide something of an extrinsic motivation to get away from the window. Nope.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 16:50
|
|
|
He had a couple more takbirs to say before he was allowed to turn the camera off.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 16:59
|
|
|
I assume the EOD techs are the guys in the yellow high visibility jackets. Safety first! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TylrKgfG2dI And this is either a homemade incendiary RPG round, or a pee RPG round https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3GIMH7dMhc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mVCsYf6oNo
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 21:08
|
|
|
How effective would HEAT or straight up AT rounds from a T-64 or any tank be against a building? Its gonna penetrate but will it just keep passing through like a bullet or will it gently caress poo poo up in the room on the other side?
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 21:12
|
|
|
Branis posted:How effective would HEAT or straight up AT rounds from a T-64 or any tank be against a building? Its gonna penetrate but will it just keep passing through like a bullet or will it gently caress poo poo up in the room on the other side? Well, they still explode.
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 21:19
|
|
Branis posted:How effective would HEAT or straight up AT rounds from a T-64 or any tank be against a building? Its gonna penetrate but will it just keep passing through like a bullet or will it gently caress poo poo up in the room on the other side? The concrete would spall inwards with an AP round. I don't know how concrete would react to HEAT. It was probably shooting HE though.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 21:34
|
|
|
The Marines did that during Phantom Fury II. Insurgents in a building? Tank nearby? BOOM
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 23:03
|
|
|
Branis posted:How effective would HEAT or straight up AT rounds from a T-64 or any tank be against a building? Its gonna penetrate but will it just keep passing through like a bullet or will it gently caress poo poo up in the room on the other side? SABOT is the one that would go through the house. And the next one...and the next one...
|
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2013 23:11
|
|
|
AB posted:SABOT is the one that would go through the house. And the next one...and the next one... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uV1SbEuzFU
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 00:32
|
|
|
grover posted:I wonder how many houses a railgun slug will go through? The Mach 7 dart with the 200+ mile range, I mean, not the intentionally unstable non-aerodynamic one used in these tests (lest an errant shot penetrate a whole neighborhood of homes 200 miles away). I really want to believe that the guy pulling the trigger/pressing the button on that thing has a brightly red ABORT-button with 3 exclamation marks on his screen, but those are fake screenshots to cover up sensitive test-data and the actual control/readout interfaces are much more complex with endless streams of scientific data, right? RIGHT...?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 01:12
|
|
|
Duzzy Funlop posted:I really want to believe that the guy pulling the trigger/pressing the button on that thing has a brightly red ABORT-button with 3 exclamation marks on his screen, but those are fake screenshots to cover up sensitive test-data and the actual control/readout interfaces are much more complex with endless streams of scientific data, right? 8th grade reading level, remember?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 01:14
|
|
|
Duzzy Funlop posted:I really want to believe that the guy pulling the trigger/pressing the button on that thing has a brightly red ABORT-button with 3 exclamation marks on his screen, but those are fake screenshots to cover up sensitive test-data and the actual control/readout interfaces are much more complex with endless streams of scientific data, right?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 01:34
|
|
|
Duzzy Funlop posted:I really want to believe that the guy pulling the trigger/pressing the button on that thing has a brightly red ABORT-button with 3 exclamation marks on his screen, but those are fake screenshots to cover up sensitive test-data and the actual control/readout interfaces are much more complex with endless streams of scientific data, right? I'm sure there are plenty of configuration pages and technical readouts, but I'm not surprised that actually firing the thing is done with a very simple "make boom?" button. And no matter what the context, ABORT buttons kind of have to be big and conspicuous.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 02:08
|
|
|
grover posted:I wonder how many houses a railgun slug will go through? The Mach 7 dart with the 200+ mile range, I mean, not the intentionally unstable non-aerodynamic one used in these tests (lest an errant shot penetrate a whole neighborhood of homes 200 miles away). Like I said the last time this got posted: 1. Jesus, look at those cables flex. 2. I don't even care so much about the gun, I want to know about the power source.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 02:13
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Like I said the last time this got posted:  Puts out about 3 million amps. It's the current that creates the magnetic field, so the more current, the more powerful the weapon. A production railgun will require about 16MW to continuously fire at a rate of 6 shots per minute. Less power (like in a Burke) wouldn't mean it couldn't fire a railgun, just that it would operate at a lower firing rate. 
grover fucked around with this message at 02:56 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 02:50
|
|
|
So if you put this on a nuclear-powered ship, would you be able to charge the capacitors to achieve a reasonable firing rate off one reactor without killing power to the rest of the ship? It seems like you would need a vessel built around this weapon system to make it work. One gun and a giant power plant.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 03:16
|
|
|
AB posted:So if you put this on a nuclear-powered ship, would you be able to charge the capacitors to achieve a reasonable firing rate off one reactor without killing power to the rest of the ship? It seems like you would need a vessel built around this weapon system to make it work. One gun and a giant power plant. 16MW is a poo poo ton of power but I'm not sure what carrier turbine generators can output.....my guess would be that they'd have to have bigger ones or a dedicated one for the rail gun. v0v e: I thought I read about these and the barrel life is basically nothing anyways genderstomper58 fucked around with this message at 03:26 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 03:24
|
|
|
genderstomper58 posted:e: I thought I read about these and the barrel life is basically nothing anyways That's another good point, I wasn't even thinking about the barrel. Best analogue I can think of from personal experience is the Abrams- high velocity rounds like the super sabot count as 2.5 shots on a barrel rated for 2500 shots. Betting that rail gun rounds just eat barrels.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 03:33
|
|
|
AB posted:So if you put this on a nuclear-powered ship, would you be able to charge the capacitors to achieve a reasonable firing rate off one reactor without killing power to the rest of the ship? It seems like you would need a vessel built around this weapon system to make it work. One gun and a giant power plant. Wouldn't need to be anything ridiculous. When I was interviewing at NAVSEA in Philly I saw the 30,000shp electric motor that was at the time slated to be used on the DD-21 ships, so even without a fancy railgun that ship would have needed 22 megawatts of generator just to feed that motor. Even the early Arleigh Burkes had 7.5MW worth of electrical generation, the later flights have more. Surprised they're using caps rather than a homopolar generator, but the one I built was only 48 millifarad's worth of capacitors at 600VDC, so they probably know something I don't. AB posted:Betting that rail gun rounds just eat barrels. It's not the round, it's the arcing between the armature and the rails that causes rapid erosion. It's one reason why you want to keep the voltage as low as possible (since as was pointed out, it's the current that sets up the Lorentz force that moves the armature). That's historically been one of the major problems in actually weaponizing one of these things, but if they've solved it then there's not a whole lot of reason it'd be hard to field. Phanatic fucked around with this message at 03:42 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 03:39
|
|
|
genderstomper58 posted:e: I thought I read about these and the barrel life is basically nothing anyways In this test last year, this projectile was fired horizontally at Mach 5, penetrated a steel panel and went another 7km. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 03:40
|
|
|
grover posted:Yep. It's amazing, but prototype railguns already meet all the operational goals for power and range and all the things that most people would think are the major challenges, and barrel life is the single largest hurdle right now from making an operational naval railgun. They're trying to get from 100 shots to 1000 shots. Where could they even go from here? Just experiment with new crazy alloys? Trying to increase a barrel life 10x seems like a whole lot of work and money but I'm no materials engineer
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 03:45
|
|
|
genderstomper58 posted:Where could they even go from here? Just experiment with new crazy alloys? Trying to increase a barrel life 10x seems like a whole lot of work and money but I'm no materials engineer
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 03:50
|
|
|
genderstomper58 posted:Where could they even go from here? Just experiment with new crazy alloys? Trying to increase a barrel life 10x seems like a whole lot of work and money but I'm no materials engineer heat sinks, lubrication and software optimization also
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 03:52
|
|
|
grover posted:Crazy alloys and novel techniques, yep. But I think the ultimate answer will be something they haven't even tried yet. High-energy plasma from the 3 million amp electrical arc is like a combination of arc-welding and plasma cutting and just erodes the gently caress out of the rails. For example, one technique they tried but didn't work out was injecting a layer of plasma between the rail and armature to act as a buffer to keep the hottest part of the arc away from the rail. Haha thats wayyyyy out of my league I don't really see how they could cool the barrel enough as it fires to reduce wear considering the velocity involved and just how fast it would heat up, but yeah I guess I didn't think of lubrication to try and reduce friction
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 03:58
|
|
|
front wing flexing posted:heat sinks, lubrication and software optimization also I just imagine some E2 squirting like 3,000 gallons of Arctic Silver 5 down the barrel between shots.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 04:01
|
|
|
can there be a future weapons thread or something because I have some questions about rail guns and I know vas will come in here and lock it down again if this gets taken too far.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 04:08
|
|
DEVILDOGOOORAH posted:can there be a future weapons thread or something because I have some questions about rail guns and I know vas will come in here and lock it down again if this gets taken too far. I'm amazed that grover hasn't created one or someone dedicated one to him.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 05:13
|
|
|
Duzzy Funlop posted:I really want to believe that the guy pulling the trigger/pressing the button on that thing has a brightly red ABORT-button with 3 exclamation marks on his screen, but those are fake screenshots to cover up sensitive test-data and the actual control/readout interfaces are much more complex with endless streams of scientific data, right? I can't believe you watched that video and what surprised you the most was the big ABORT button 
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 06:53
|
|
|
I wonder what's with the red laser that appears on the dude's leg at 0:12 in the Railgun video..
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 11:01
|
|
|
grover posted:The reality it is that this thing is going to be fired by a 17 year old kid who just barely managed to not fail out of high school and needs a detailed procedure to pick his own loving nose. That's what the interface is designed for. All the scientific data you'd be expecting to see is occurring so fast it's impossible to digest in real-time and is recorded and analyzed afterwards. Yeah,figures. I wasn't trying to imply this was the final control interface, I've just never really seen any experimental weapon control interfaces, so I was somewhat surprised at the simplicity. DEVILDOGOOORAH posted:can there be a future weapons thread or something because I have some questions about rail guns and I know vas will come in here and lock it down again if this gets taken too far. Well, this one about rail guns didn't end up doing too well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 14:28
|
|
|
Duzzy Funlop posted:Yeah,figures. I wasn't trying to imply this was the final control interface, I've just never really seen any experimental weapon control interfaces, so I was somewhat surprised at the simplicity. Duzzy Funlop posted:Well, this one about rail guns didn't end up doing too well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 14:37
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure the interface is NI's Labview, its easy to hook up a variety of instruments to it and it doesn't require actual coding. Very robust if implemented correctly and entire factories depend on it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 15:39
|
|
|
Bensa posted:I'm pretty sure the interface is NI's Labview, its easy to hook up a variety of instruments to it and it doesn't require actual coding. Very robust if implemented correctly and entire factories depend on it. Was just about to post this, is that loving LabView of all things controlling the Railgun? Also I think there was a future weapons thread at some point here, might have fallen into archives.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 16:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 23, 2024 17:41 |
|
|
I'll go dig up the latest on combat lasers and the XM-29 and post a future weapons thread; it's been a while since the last one anyhow. While you're waiting, enjoy this photo of an Il-76 packing a giant loving laser. No, it's not a cold-war relic, it's an ongoing project the Russians successfully tested in 2009 and are still moving forward, with new testing of the upgraded system planned this year. 
grover fucked around with this message at 16:41 on Jan 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2013 16:34
|
|