|
Jobbo_Fett posted:But what will alcohol solve in this instance? at a high enough proof it should sanitize the data being poured over
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 13:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 09:35 |
|
|
So do you guys actually want to talk about lesser known WW2 head gear or?
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 13:27
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:So do you guys actually want to talk about lesser known WW2 head gear or? Hell yeah. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 13:29
|
|
|
Well here is a video that explains the development and progression of paratrooper helmets during said war for one. I am also trying to find some sort of evidence on the internet about the modern shaped looking helmets worn by Despatch riders of the Army as well but oddly enough I can't find it and I never book marked the loving page I saw in April so balls. Said helmet looked like a cork baby of an army helmet and a flight helmet combined.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 13:39
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Well here is a video that explains the development and progression of paratrooper helmets during said war for one. The kind Dick is wearing? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 13:48
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:But what will alcohol solve in this instance? Alcohol is by definition a solution.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 13:50
|
|
|
I think that is the one yeah. Thanks Dick.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 13:51
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:I think that is the one yeah. Thanks Dick. Here is another worn by the guy in the back with the white scarf. I don't know what helmet the guy kneeling is wearing though. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 13:57
|
|
|
I think that is actually one of the first models of trying to find a Paratrooper helmet that works too. Those early paratrooper helmets might seem weirdly familiar to you guys by the way. I think they were reused as props in the first Star Wars trilogy.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 14:09
|
|
|
LatwPIAT posted:I have a theory that the idea the Sherman was called the 'Ronson' comes not from any reputation of them lighting up all the time, but simply conflating the regular Sherman with 'Ronson' flamethrower tank, a Sherman fitted with the Canadian 'Ronson' flamethrower, so named because of the lighter. Once you have a specific version of the Sherman - one that's not even easily identifiable as special unless you know what you're looking for - named 'Ronson', it's easy to think that nickname applies to all Shermans. I think it's more to do with the post-war Wehrmacht mythologicalizing and cherry picking bad Sherman stats helps sell the idea of absurdly high German kill ratios.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 14:27
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Tanker helmets don't seem like they'd protect you from much more than bumping your head inside the tank? You say this like it is no big deal. I have a scar on my chin from a time on a CAX in 29 Palms when my driver hit an heavy irrigation pipe and brought my tank to a halt. I pitched forward and hit the housing that covers the gunsight; I bit through my lower lip and bled all over the interior of the tank for the rest of the exercise. My gunner mashed his eye into the gunsight; we later learned that he'd received a minor fracture to his eye socket. These were facial injuries, the sort a helmet wouldn't really protect against, but I think they illustrate the fact that you're constantly getting thrown around inside the vehicle with a lot of force. After a long time in the tank driving over bad ground you're going to be covered with minor bruises. Protecting your head with a helmet is vital.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 14:45
|
|
|
The last time this got posted, if I remember correctly, the data showed that while Ger/UK tankers were being killed at about the same rate as US/USSR ones, the Ger/UK ones had a higher rate casualty rate. In other words, they were being injured more, but dying about the same. It's not unreasonable to assume that almost all the fatalities were from enemy action, which padded glorified ye olde rugby helmets didn't help with, while a good chunk of the casualties are from just driving around, which they did help with. Driving a vehicle off road with no seatbelts in an environment absolutely littered with hard-edged metal doodads is super loving dangerous, even with nobody shooting at you. These helmets were there to make you only get a concussion when your tank drops into a ditch the driver didn't see at 30km/h and your head slams into the roof, and not a fractured skull. What about tank destroyer helmets?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 15:04
|
|
|
Geisladisk posted:The last time this got posted, if I remember correctly, the data showed that while Ger/UK tankers were being killed at about the same rate as US/USSR ones, the Ger/UK ones had a higher rate casualty rate. In other words, they were being injured more, but dying about the same. This is not true and extremely speculative anyway.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 15:13
|
|
|
CoffeeBooze posted:Whats the story with your friend getting shot in the head? Because it sure does sound like a good one. Cartels in Mexico right now are apparently well stocked with some of everything, and he's federal police. Leads to interesting questions sometimes, like 'what's this izmash stamped gun with an angled magazine and pulleys in it' and the followup of 'is this gonna be like the time I found a gyrojet?'  (I don't have a clean picture of the AN-94, sadly)
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 16:01
|
|
|
well that's not as much of a story as I was expecting 
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 16:14
|
|
|
Molentik posted:The kind Dick is wearing? Ol’ Dick is gonna be No Dick-Dick.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 16:39
|
|
|
Nothingtoseehere posted:Alcohol is by definition a solution. No, it's not. Pure alcohol is just pure alcohol, it's not something dissolved in something else. Unrelated: I'm re-reading The Making of the Atomic Bomb, and if you're interested at all in the topic and haven't read it yet you really need to bump it to the top of your list. It's incredibly comprehensive and isn't just about the Manhattan Project itself. It's a solid history of the developments in physics that led up to it, as well as the development of technology in warfare and the social factors that led to it. One thing I'm taken by is that a number of very, very smart people, the same people who developed the nuclear theory that showed that a chain reaction was possible, were still of the opinion that it was no more than a curiosity because it would require just too much investment even for the United States. And then it ends up being essentially a rounding error in the total amount of US war spending. Even though the attitude was "Okay, you've got five ways of potentially doing this, but you're not sure which one will work the best? gently caress it, fund all of them."
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 16:44
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:Ol’ Dick is gonna be No Dick-Dick. This is the sound of my Walther, which is pointed directly at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-Bqycjw_tw
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 17:02
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:No, it's not. Pure alcohol is just pure alcohol, it's not something dissolved in something else. You were so preoccupied with whether or not you could make this post that you never stopped to consider if you should.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 17:17
|
|
|
Cessna posted:You say this like it is no big deal. I have an old story from a guy who was in the RAF Regiment with an FV103 Spartan APC. They were fitted with smoke grenade launchers, possibly after they were made, and the controls for the smoke grenades were on a little control box that hung from its wire in front of the commander. The Spartan is a fast vehicle. Doctrine was to make a tactical stop by going from full acceleration to full brakes before disembarking infantry. When the vehicle stopped the control box continued forwards at 70kph, reached the end of its arc and swung back into the commander's face. Every. Single. Time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 17:23
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:gyrojet?' OK, how long before the Federales recover the Spear of Longuinus from the body of sicario?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 17:29
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Cartels in Mexico right now are apparently well stocked with some of everything, and he's federal police. Leads to interesting questions sometimes, like 'what's this izmash stamped gun with an angled magazine and pulleys in it' and the followup of 'is this gonna be like the time I found a gyrojet?' The AN-94 is goofy as gently caress but I love it to death ever since BF3 introduced me to it. If I was going to own a rifle, and it was anywhere near legal for me to have, it would be that over-engineered son of a bitch.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 17:32
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Arban posted:So I have a question. Tirpitz was firing ad-hoc AA shells that were just regular HE shells with a timed fuse and the ballistic cap removed. I think the Germans had come under air attack so many times that they decided to spend some time between modifying shells.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 17:39
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:The AN-94 is goofy as gently caress but I love it to death ever since BF3 introduced me to it. If I was going to own a rifle, and it was anywhere near legal for me to have, it would be that over-engineered son of a bitch. The An-94 is the Commie Space Magic gun right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 18:05
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:The An-94 is the Commie Space Magic gun right? Yup. Two round hyperfast burst.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 18:07
|
|
|
Geisladisk posted:What about tank destroyer helmets? Ooh! I know this! They tended to use infantry helmets because their vehicles were open-topped and shrapnel was a real issue. The same as with halftracks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 18:14
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:The An-94 is the Commie Space Magic gun right? yep and its internal workings are basically a rube golberg machine
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 18:45
|
|
JcDent posted:OK, how long before the Federales recover the Spear of Longuinus from the body of sicario? I will be impressed if that spear is somehow gone through the Khyber pass treatment and been merged with an old firearm.
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 18:50
|
|
|
Ice Fist posted:yep and its internal workings are basically a rube golberg machine On that note, has anyone ever looked at the G-11's internals? Its like an old fashioned wind up clock that the Germans somehow got to shoot bullets out of.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 18:55
|
|
|
Why do tankers get special hats/helmets at all rather than just wearing infantry helmets?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 19:10
|
|
|
Infantry helmets are hard to use with headphones on.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 19:12
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Infantry helmets are hard to use with headphones on. Exactly. The CVC helmet plugs into the vehicles intercoms and radios. It also gives a little bit of hearing protection (not enough; I have permanent tinnitus).  Once you're out of the vehicle you swap it for a regular grunt's helmet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 19:24
|
|
|
Saint Celestine posted:On that note, has anyone ever looked at the G-11's internals? Ian's got a good video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGKcvM2Hh4g Feels like it should be stamped with "NO USER SERVICEABLE PARTS INSIDE" but apparently in operation it wasn't that bad. Just not better enough than the M16 to be worth it. I wonder how the recoil is on the full-auto setting. That's a lot of reciprocating mass, given that almost the entire gun moves back and forth instead of just a bolt assembly. Phanatic fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Aug 26, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 19:38
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Why do tankers get special hats/helmets at all rather than just wearing infantry helmets? 1. What EE said 2. They're not that great inside a cramped tank (meaning a hazard if your tank catches fire) 3. They are heavy with no particular advantage unless you're unbuttoned also a padded cap or soft helmet is easier on the instruments that you are banging your head against but also probably absorbs the shock better? anyway they're lighter so with less momentum the shock is smaller anyway. Nenonen fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Aug 26, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 19:39
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:also a padded cap or soft helmet is easier on the instruments that you are banging your head against but also probably absorbs the shock better? anyway they're lighter so with less momentum the shock is smaller anyway. The interior of an AFV isn't so delicate that hitting something with your head is going to do more damage to the vehicle than your head. (Yeah, that was an oddly constructed sentence.) I know the Russians stick with soft helmets for tankers, but there's no advantage to a crewman there. You want a hard shell; that distributes the impact over the padding better than padding alone. It doesn't have to be shrapnel-proof kevlar, just something hard, like a bicycle helmet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 19:44
|
|
|
A helmet is going to be ideal for any vehicle-in-motion type of environment by a long shot, but I feel that most people underestimate how much protection even a ball cap or beret gives your delicate scalp when you’re working around machines. I’ve absolutely been saved from multiple head lacerations just wearing a cotton twill baseball cap around airplanes. It still hurts when you brain yourself, but you tend to not get blood in your eyes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 19:56
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:I wonder how the recoil is on the full-auto setting. That's a lot of reciprocating mass, given that almost the entire gun moves back and forth instead of just a bolt assembly. Looks fairly jumpy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_didDgUjn0
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 20:20
|
|
|
C.M. Kruger posted:Looks fairly jumpy. It looks jumpy but slow, so the recoil is probably gentle to the soldier even if it throws off your aim. General doctrine is to keep it on semi-auto anyway, so the actual full auto firing would have only been used up close or for suppression.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 20:27
|
|
|
C.M. Kruger posted:Looks fairly jumpy. Those are 3 rd bursts, right? Assuming they are that's quite a bit of force hitting pretty much all at once, I assume way more than a single 556 round
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 20:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 09:35 |
|
|
The first couple shots are 3 round bursts, yeah. With headphones you can hear the separate reports.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2019 20:52
|
|