|
Jesus Christ, 11B in 1947? Internet tells me that's about $117.5B, so not as ridiculous as I was thinking. Edit: V Just over 10:1. Godholio fucked around with this message at 06:48 on May 2, 2016 |
#
?
May 2, 2016 06:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 01:13 |
|
|
I wasn't actually aware it was THAT much, Jesus Christ. That's an enormous multiplying factor. Now consider that while supplying all that poo poo the US was also supplying the British Empire, and fighting the Pacific Theater effectively on its own. Basically MassivelyBuckNegro posted:saying that the us was irrelevant in wwii is like the 'gently caress you dad school' of wwii historiography.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 06:47
|
|
|
You always hear about how many Soviet tanks were built, well, prolly about 1,900 steam locomotives worth, lol e- also the inflation gets wonky because I don't think it was sold at cost and people weren't making the same kind of money + benefits like today. It might be a 10:1 ratio on paper but you'd never get that amount of poo poo built and shipped for 100 billion today Seizure Meat fucked around with this message at 13:25 on May 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 13:22
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Jesus Christ, 11B in 1947? Taking inflation out of the equation, it's still five Manhattan Projects holy gently caress
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 14:04
|
|
|
Makes you wonder if, with the benefits of hindsight, the US would have reduced the amount of aid given to the USSR to help prevent the cold war. My old history teacher used to dip his toe in to crazy when he used to theorize about what would have happened if British troops had made it to the front during the Winter War like Churchill had intended.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 14:14
|
|
|
shame on an IGA posted:Taking inflation out of the equation, it's still five Manhattan Projects holy gently caress ...and that's just what we gave the Soviets e- and then tack on the Marshall Plan
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:e- also the inflation gets wonky because I don't think it was sold at cost and people weren't making the same kind of money + benefits like today. It might be a 10:1 ratio on paper but you'd never get that amount of poo poo built and shipped for 100 billion today Good point, that's probably why my guess was much higher. I'm used to much more gratuitous profiteering.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 15:29
|
|
|
Today on "And You Thought YOUR Force Was Incompetent", the Japanese Aircraft Carrier, Shinano. What, you thought I was going for the Taiho? Taiho's good, but everyone knows that story by now. Gander at this. Wikipedia posted:Though severe, the damage to Shinano was at first judged to be manageable.[20] The crew were confident in the ship's armor and strength, which translated into lax initial efforts to save the ship.[25] This overconfidence extended to Abe. He doubted the sub's torpedoes could inflict serious damage, since he was well aware that American torpedoes were inferior to Japanese torpedoes in both potency and accuracy. He ordered the carrier to maintain its maximum speed even after the last torpedo hit. quote:At 06:00 her list had increased to 20 degrees after the starboard boiler room flooded, at which point the valves of the port trimming tanks rose above the waterline and became ineffective. The engines shut down for lack of steam around 07:00, and Abe ordered all of the propulsion compartments evacuated an hour later. He then ordered the three outboard port boiler rooms flooded in a futile attempt to reduce the carrier's list. He also ordered Hamakaze and Isokaze to take her in tow. However, the two destroyers only displaced 5,000 metric tons (4,900 long tons) between them, about one-fourteenth of Shinano's displacement and not nearly enough to overcome her deadweight. The first tow cables snapped under the strain and the second attempt was aborted for fear of injury to the crews if they snapped again. The ship lost all power around 09:00 and was now listing over 20 degrees. At 10:18, Abe gave the order to abandon ship; by this time Shinano had a list of 30 degrees. As she heeled, her flight deck touched the water, which flowed into the open elevator well, sucking many swimming sailors back into the ship as she sank. A large exhaust vent below the flight deck also sucked many other sailors into the ship as it submerged. quote:Post-war analysis by the U.S. Naval Technical Mission to Japan noted that Shinano had serious design flaws. Specifically, the joint between the waterline armor belt on the upper hull and the anti-torpedo bulge on the underwater portion was poorly designed; Archerfish's torpedoes all exploded along this joint. The force of the torpedo explosions also dislodged an I-beam in one of the boiler rooms which punched a hole into another boiler room. In addition, the failure to test for water-tightness in each compartment played a role as potential leaks could not be found and patched before Shinano put to sea.[37] The executive officer blamed the large amount of water that entered the ship on the failure to air-test the compartments for leaks. He reported hearing air rushing through gaps in the water-tight doors just minutes after the last torpedo hit—a sign that seawater was rapidly entering the ship, proving the doors were unseaworthy.[38]
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
Redeye Flight posted:Today on "And You Thought YOUR Force Was Incompetent", the Japanese Aircraft Carrier, Shinano. Am I missing the serious incomptenece? Looks like they got dusted by their own design engineers
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 18:39
|
|
|
Generally speaking you don't keep going at full speed when you get blasted by a torpedo, on your zigzag course out away from land that was supposed to prevent you from running into that submarine that just nailed your rear end. That and "lax" damage control after four torpedo hits, all of which actually exploded (the main flaw with American torpedos in WWII was them not exploding). Shinano was killed by her design flaws but by not reducing speed, the flooding happened exceptionally faster. There's also trying to get two destroyers to tow a Yamato-class hull and not ordering an abandon-ship until you're thirty degrees over, an hour after you've lost all power and two hours after you ordered the engine room crew out.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 18:50
|
|
|
Bernard McFacknutah posted:He did his best to undermine NATO and probably the closest the world has ever come to a nuclear weapon falling in to terrorist hands was a bunch of French officers wanted to seize a nuke and use it as a bargaining tool so the French had to set it off as a 'test'. Where could I find out more about this nuclear incident?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
Soylent Pudding posted:Where could I find out more about this nuclear incident? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerboise_Bleue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algiers_putsch_of_1961
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
Soylent Pudding posted:Where could I find out more about this nuclear incident? It gets talked about in Command & Control which I'm sure half of GiP have read and in a lot more depth in The Last Great Frenchman. I'm sure there are specific books about the incident but I've not read them.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
Redeye Flight posted:Generally speaking you don't keep going at full speed when you get blasted by a torpedo, on your zigzag course out away from land that was supposed to prevent you from running into that submarine that just nailed your rear end. That and "lax" damage control after four torpedo hits, all of which actually exploded (the main flaw with American torpedos in WWII was them not exploding). I thought the Mark 14s had been defucked by that point? But holy gently caress they were bad earlier. I think the dud rate was something like 80-90%. Edit: I also remember there being at least one instance where an American sub could've smoked Japanese carriers if not for lovely torpedoes. LostCosmonaut fucked around with this message at 22:38 on May 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
LostCosmonaut posted:
Sailors off the carrier Kaga were using part of a dud torpedo from USS Nautilus as a life preserver.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 23:23
|
|
|
Didn't they get Einstein to unfuck them which involved rotating the crush fuze 45 degrees or something. Also wasn't there a problem with Motor Torpedo Boat crews drinking the Ethanol from the torpedoes so they deliberately poisoned the alcohol leading the crews to simply filter them through loaves of bread to render the alcohol safe for consumption again. Fun fact, when the British sunk the Belgrano in 1982 they picked a WW2 torpedo because it had a bigger warhead instead of the newer, faster, guided Tigerfish torpedoes because the Sub Captain wasn't sure the more modern torp would bust a hole in the side of the cruiser. Bernard McFacknutah fucked around with this message at 23:26 on May 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 23:24
|
|
|
Bernard McFacknutah posted:Didn't they get Einstein to unfuck them which involved rotating the crush fuze 45 degrees or something. Also wasn't there a problem with Motor Torpedo Boat crews drinking the Ethanol from the torpedoes so they deliberately poisoned the alcohol leading the crews to simply filter them through loaves of bread to render the alcohol safe for consumption again. I don't think Einstein had anything to do with it. They just made the crush fuze stronger. I think a spring may have been added. But the Mk. 14 torpedo debacle basically went like this: Sub commanders: We think our torpedoes are running to deep. Bureau of Ordnance: THE TORPEDOES ARE FINE YOU JUST SUCK Sub commanders: No, really, they're running too deep. Admiral: Yeah, I did a test. They're running too deep. Bureau of Ordnance: WE DON'T BELIEVE YOU Everybody: gently caress you, Ordnance. Bureau of Ordnance: WE DID A TEST THE TORPEDOES RUN TOO DEEP. THEY'RE OKAY NOW, GO OUT AND SINK SOME SHIPS Sub commanders: The magnetic influence exploder doesn't work. Bureau of Ordnance: gently caress YOU IT WORKS FINE YOU JUST CAN'T AIM FOR poo poo Sub commanders: gently caress you. We're turning off the magnetic exploders. Bureau of Ordnance: YOU CAN'T TURN OFF THE MAGNETIC EXPLODERS YOU WILL REGRET THIS Sub commanders: We're getting better results if we deactivate the magnetic influence exploders, but we're also pretty sure that when we hit ships at textbook 90 degree angles, the torpedoes don't explode Bureau of Ordnance: gently caress YOU THE TORPEDOES ARE PERFECT Admiral Lockwood: Um, no, I ran a test. We dropped torpedoes onto concrete floors and we fired torpedoes into cliffs. The impact crushes the impact fuzes before it detonates the warhead. Bureau of Ordnance: WELL THAT'S JUST LIKE YOUR OPINION MAN Other bits include BUORD sending a guy out to do a torpedo inspection. He proceeded to install a gyroscope backwards (which would have made the torpedo do a circular run and sink the sub that fired it), which was caught by a member of the crew. The guy then wrote up the incident and blamed the crew for his screw-up.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
Okay, well he certainly had some opinions on it https://research.archives.gov/id/305254
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
Bernard McFacknutah posted:Okay, well he certainly had some opinions on it Holy poo poo, BUORD actually asked Einstein how they could make a torpedo suddenly turn to make a glancing blow because their poo poo was hosed. Hahhahahahaaha nice.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
McNally posted:I don't think Einstein had anything to do with it. They just made the crush fuze stronger. I think a spring may have been added. It's good to see some things never change in the Navy.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
Holy poo poo. Nice to see the British are as stupid as Americans with regards to procurement, testing, and field reports. Is there a comparable movie regarding the Brit's like Pentagon Wars?
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
Syrian Lannister posted:Holy poo poo. Nice to see the British are as stupid as Americans with regards to procurement, testing, and field reports. What? No, that was the US Navy in WWII.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
While British procurement is some of the worst in the world, all of the above is American. I can't think of a film like the Pentagon Wars but a staggering portion of the equipment we've gone to war with in the last 70 years has been completely unfit for the job. We fought the first Gulf War without a reliable service rifle or a reliable radio system or a reliable helicopter orrrrrrrr Hardly anything worked apart from the Navy and the Fighter Bombers that the Krauts helped build.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2016 23:56
|
|
|
ManMythLegend posted:It's good to see some things never change in the Navy. Based on my own experiences dealing with Corona (the follow-on agency in the Navy), I wholeheartedly concur.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 00:12
|
|
|
 I apologize. For some reason I thought this was going to or about a discussion regarding the Falkland Island War.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
Syrian Lannister posted:
it's ok, just think of the Vulcan raid and that clusterfuck
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 01:28
|
|
|
There are so many bad procurement stories. One of my "favorites" has to be that of the Ross rifle. Basically, goes like this.  gently caress you England, you won't give us the license to build the SMLE so we'll build our OWN rifle and it will be better!Enter the Ross rifle. Straight pull bolt action in either .303 or .280 Ross. A supremely accurate rifle for our mounties and troops! A few problems, however. Which became evident immediately on entering the trenches. See, the Ross has pretty tight tolerances, and it doesn't seem to like mud. Or dirt. Or any sort of FOD whatsoever. Getting the rifle dirty means jamming the rifle. And even WORSE, on disassembling the rifle to clean it, if you were in a rush (say under attack or some such hogwash), it was possible to re-assemble it so that the locking lugs didn't secure, promptly ejecting the bolt into the face of the fine young Canadian lad using it at high velocity. Our troops were picking up SMLEs from dead British troops rather quickly. On hearing reports on "possible" issues with the Ross (IE, sudden bolt-to-face insertions) the minister of Militia and Defence, Sam Hughes, basically went on a PR rampage saying "PISH POSH NOTHING IS WRONG WITH THE ROSS THEY'RE JUST USING IT WRONG" (He was the one who pushed for the Ross to be introduced in the Canadian military in the first place). It got so bad that Douglas Haig finally said "gently caress it, All Canadians get Lee-Enfields, send the Ross' back to Canada for use in training." Some were kept as sniper rifles, but it was remarked that they required "immaculately clean" ammunition to fire, and any dirt would cause them to jam.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 01:39
|
|
|
did he say sorry
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 01:41
|
|
|
And in non trench clusterfuck conditions with ammo that doesn't blow they're absolutely fantastic. They fixed the "assemble the bolt carrier sideways and the locking lugs won't work" problem on the Mk.III but by that point the name was sullied and we were all issuing Enfields or sending them to snipers in the Expeditionary Force. Forgotten Weapons did a video on both the Mk.II and III Ross rifles that's pretty good.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
I bet all Anglo countries have hosed up procurement stories. Any time I want to shut up my Canadian friend, I just ask him about the Upholder subs or Sea King Replacement. Edit: on a different note, have a recoilless 55mm aircraft mounted autocannon; http://www.deutscheluftwaffe.de/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/m/MK%20115/mk%20115%20%20motorkanone.html LostCosmonaut fucked around with this message at 03:17 on May 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 03:15
|
|
|
LostCosmonaut posted:I bet all Anglo countries have hosed up procurement stories. i see your 55mm autocannon and raise 2mm https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M00f5RxhxLY
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
the mosquito kicked all kinds of rear end
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 04:59
|
|
|
57mm is bitch stuff, toss a PaK-40 on that mofo
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 05:33
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:it's ok, just think of the Vulcan raid and that clusterfuck People think that the Vulcan raids were meant to crater the runway at Mount Pleasant. That wasn't the intended purpose, that was just the side effect. The intention was to remind the Argies that we had no difficulty flying strategic bombers in to the south Atlantic and Argentina if we wanted. The people doing the planning understood all too well that for a fraction of the resources used for the Vulcan missions they could have been running Sea Harrier ground attack missions around the clock but letting the Junta know that we could bomb the Mainland and sink their ships outside the exclusion zone added an extra strategic concern for Galtieri. It gets explained in great length in a book by Commander 'Sharky' George who ran the airwing on one of the two aircraft carriers, it's called Sea Harrier over the Falklands and is a loving great book. Sink the Belgrano is another great book and explains that while the Conqueror had just sunk the Belgrano another Sub was shadowing the Argentine Aircraft carrier (which had a broken steam catapult that they couldn't launch any aircraft) and was waiting for the order to fire. Thatcher was about to give the order but was then disuaded by her cabinet because they were worried that if they killed another 1500 Argentine sailors that it would be impossible to get Argentina to negotiate a surrender. The funny thing about sinking the carrier was that the only ships capable of detecting and destroying the British sub were the two Type-45 Destroyers escorting the Argentine carrier which we had recently sold them. All their other escorts were WW2 vintage with useless sonar that had a shorter detection range than the British Torpedoes, so the intention was to sink the Carrier, then sink the escorts effectively killing every sailor in the task force. Anyone who has anything bad to say about the Mosquito needs to take a long hard look at themselves. It also only happened *in spite* of British Procurement. The war office had rejected it but De Haviland were so sure it would work they went ahead and built it anyway. Over a long range it could carry almost the same bombload as a B17 100ish MPH faster and only weighing 1/3rd of the weight. Bernard McFacknutah fucked around with this message at 11:05 on May 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 11:02
|
|
|
British tank procurement was a special kind of nightmare. Say what you will about the Sherman, the British were unable to get reliable tanks with effective guns until maybe the Cromwell and by the time it entered service, it was iffy. The Comet was pretty good, and it entered service in the winter of '44. Bad doctrine, bad engines, bad transmissions, small turret rings and therefore small guns.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 16:08
|
|
|
Strange though, when it came to turning the tanks over to REME and Royal Engineers they did a pretty stand-up job of pimping them like Hobarts funnies and the Firefly. At least by Korea we almost had a world class tank in the form of the Churchill which at the time had the best gun and best armour in the world.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
Bernard McFacknutah posted:People think that the Vulcan raids were meant to crater the runway at Mount Pleasant. That wasn't the intended purpose, that was just the side effect. The intention was to remind the Argies that we had no difficulty flying strategic bombers in to the south Atlantic and Argentina if we wanted. No, I know what the message was to the Argentinians, but the mission itself to convey that message was a pretty convoluted and hosed up affair. It was more a joke than anything.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
i love the mosquito because it was a loving wood and canvas plane in an era dominated by aluminium and steel
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 01:58
|
|
Bernard McFacknutah posted:Strange though, when it came to turning the tanks over to REME and Royal Engineers they did a pretty stand-up job of pimping them like Hobarts funnies and the Firefly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centurion_%28tank%29 centurion not churchill
|
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 02:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 01:13 |
|
|
MassivelyBuckNegro posted:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centurion_%28tank%29 Oops, I knew that. Still had a hosed engine though.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2016 10:08
|
|