|
Cythereal posted:The Battle of Midway is a case study in how you manage to lose such a weapon - namely, through mind-boggling arrogance and failing to properly maintain that weapon in the face of an adapting enemy that's increasingly coming to grips with how to fight that weapon effectively. It was rather Unhonourable of the USN to not follow their part of the Japanese Plan to a T. zoux posted:After Midway did IJN carrier doctrine move away from the Kido Butai model Yes, but mostly due to resourcing issues.
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 18:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 23:37 |
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:It's the same as the growth of cities and expansion of other professional trades, isn't it? People go off seeking opportunity and other people are looking for able bodies and have money to pay them. The development of trades as we understand them is actually super complicated and emerges out of a whole slew of old practices and regulations about who can conduct what businesses, where, etc. You've got overlapping authorities in the form of crown, city, and at times guild, and eventually universities expanding out to become their own crazy thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 18:44
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:Yes, but mostly due to resourcing issues. As I understand it, they still were thinking in terms of the Decisive Battle though. Like, their subs never went after American shipping, just after warships, so that they'd have fewer ships to fight in the inevitable major ship-to-ship conflict.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 18:46
|
|
|
We were all cheated out of a massive battleship vs battleship shootout in the Pacific by the cowardly actions of the Japanese and Americans both, and their idiotic airplanes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 18:48
|
|
|
Having watched the trailer, I think I'd caution that we are in the era where trailers are cut together by a different creative team and can be extremely deceptive, so those statements that appear as replies to each other like "Washington doesn't think so" could be in entirely different contexts in the film. I'm being super charitable though. Edit: ^^^ Surigao Strait
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 18:49
|
|
|
bewbies posted:We were all cheated out of a massive battleship vs battleship shootout in the Pacific by the cowardly actions of the Japanese and Americans both, and their idiotic airplanes. This man wears black shoes
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 18:55
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Wondering how the early modern people cobbled together relatively coherent/disciplined field elements out of, you know, drunken dudes with pointy sticks and guns. Incidentally the mercenaries were also noblemen and their bodyguards, just ones with business sense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 18:57
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:As I understand it, they still were thinking in terms of the Decisive Battle though. Like, their subs never went after American shipping, just after warships, so that they'd have fewer ships to fight in the inevitable major ship-to-ship conflict. Decisive Battle is a different thing than Kido Butai, though the idea of the latter was developed to help win the former, though they still expected it to be mostly big gun ships, not carriers, that carried the day. They did try again with the battle of the Philippine Sea, which went very badly for them both in terms of pilots and damage control. Technically the Leyte Gulf isn't because the carriers there were a distraction force and intended to whittle down the enemy fleet, which was a key component of the Kido Butai.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 19:03
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:The background is the Houthi’s attack on Saudi Arabia’s oil infrastructure. Reading about it, I think it’s the most effective military operation since much in the allied commando raid on the Nazis Uranium Research Facility. Tab8715 posted:From what I remember over the whole situation, none. The Nazis weren’t going to right direction in uranium enrichment so in the end it wouldn’t have mattered but at the time it was definitely a real concern. zoux posted:What are the biggest US intel failures (besides Iraq) I'm minded to agree with Pearl Harbor and more broadly the events of Dec 7th/8th across the Pacific as the most major intelligence failure in US history. From a position of great suspicion the Japanese managed to achieve total strategic, operational and tactical surprise across 11000km of ocean and eight time zones with multiple independent operations, hundreds of ships at sea unspotted, thousands of aircraft... And apart from "Those Japanese are up to something" nobody expected anything like it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 19:06
|
|
|
I don't consider Iraq to be an intelligence failure because people were actively lying to bring about an outcome they wanted.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 19:07
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:I don't consider Iraq to be an intelligence failure because people were actively lying to bring about an outcome they wanted. I prefer "tactical believing"  DARPA: Wait, have we considered killing the enemy zoux fucked around with this message at 19:16 on Sep 17, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 19:11
|
|
|
I see that DARPA has discovered microservice architecture, because boy does that look similar to a lot of power point presentations I've seen at my software company over the last year as my team transitions away from an old monolith application.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 19:30
|
|
|
Ice Fist posted:I see that DARPA has discovered microservice architecture, because boy does that look similar to a lot of power point presentations I've seen at my software company over the last year as my team transitions away from an old monolith application. Please don't pivot to lethality
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 19:31
|
|
|
zoux posted:Please don't pivot to lethality With some of my colleagues this is hard, but I will try.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 19:33
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:I don't consider Iraq to be an intelligence failure because people were actively lying to bring about an outcome they wanted. Also IIRC the US military gave pretty accurate cost and soldier requirements for the occupation and Rumsfeld just chose to ignore them
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 19:55
|
|
|
zoux posted:I prefer "tactical believing" "resilient collective of diverse and adaptive multi-domain kill chains" is the most US military sentence ever written
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 20:27
|
|
|
Geisladisk posted:"resilient collective of diverse and adaptive multi-domain kill chains" is the most US military sentence ever written Bingo, sir.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 20:31
|
|
|
Geisladisk posted:"resilient collective of diverse and adaptive multi-domain kill chains" is the most US military sentence ever written In laymans terms, "many shooty guns"
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 20:31
|
|
|
zoux posted:In laymans terms, "many shooty guns" "we need more ways to kill guys"
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 20:36
|
|
|
Google turned up the actual presentation. Mostly it's about building a shitload of automated murderdrones.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 20:41
|
|
|
Many shooty guns fired by robots
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 20:47
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Google turned up the actual presentation. ah yes, "we need more ways to kill guys" is a very quaint 20th century way of thinking, the battlefield of the 21st century demands "we need more ways to kill guys extralegally and with no accountability" 
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 20:49
|
|
|
I think it needs the term "warfighter" in there (or is that no longer in vogue since it admits we're, you know, fighting wars?)
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 20:49
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:I think it needs the term "warfighter" in there (or is that no longer in vogue since it admits we're, you know, fighting wars?)
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 21:39
|
|
|
force application specialist
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 22:03
|
|
|
Geisladisk posted:force application specialist Sounds like a power bottom.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 22:04
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jy3JU-ORpo Princeton put out this (creepy) simulation of what a nuclear war between us and the Second: I notice that no B-2s take off from Missouri or Diego Garcia in the simulation, so what is that bomber for exactly
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 22:19
|
|
|
Geisladisk posted:force application specialist Those are jedi
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 22:27
|
|
|
zoux posted:After Midway did IJN carrier doctrine move away from the Kido Butai model That depends on what you mean by the Kido Butai model. Operationally, the Kido Butai was the world's first carrier task force, and that comes down to "have a bunch of carriers operating together and launching massed air strikes." In this sense yes, every world power realized that carriers were best off employed in numbers to combine their airpower into a massive force. Japan never again mustered the numbers of carriers or carrier aircraft to approach the Kido Butai again, but the basic principle was used whenever possible. Strategically, the Kido Butai was most significant as a highly mobile striking force that could hit and run - the Japanese understood the Kido Butai to be a raiding force that could move quickly with overwhelming firepower and range. This is how the Kido Butai was used until Midway, and after Midway never again. Not only did Japan lose the modern, fast carriers required for this strategy, but Japan was put onto the strategic defensive and fuel shortages became acute. Even if they had the carriers and planes, they probably wouldn't have used them like this until and unless the strategic momentum could swing the other way (i.e. after the Decisive Battle).
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 22:33
|
|
|
Other than Jutland and Tsushima were there ever actually Decisive Battles of the type envisioned by the doctrine, like during WW2 for example? Granted those two were p.decisive? Also is Rising Sun and Tumbling Bear good?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 22:38
|
|
|
zoux posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jy3JU-ORpo In theory an aircraft can be retargeted after launch. So one, if you can target an enemy division or something that moves on the battlefield. And two, you can recall them after launch, which lets you threaten imminent use without having to carry out the threat. You can’t really do that with a submarine. As a practical matter, now that SLBMs are accurate enough for counterforce strikes I don’t think that counts for much. Assuming that recallability was ever really a thing anyway.; I don’t think there were actually verification procedures in SAC for “the President changed his mind!” Phanatic fucked around with this message at 22:44 on Sep 17, 2019 |
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 22:41
|
|
|
Midway was pretty decisive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 22:42
|
|
|
zoux posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jy3JU-ORpo Once you're dusting London and Paris and Berlin is the exchange really tactical anymore (unless "tactical" means "not hitting American cities", obvs.?)
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 22:45
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:Other than Jutland and Tsushima were there ever actually Decisive Battles of the type envisioned by the doctrine, like during WW2 for example?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 22:47
|
|
|
I wouldnt say that was really a battle as envisaged. It was certainly decisive but it wasnt really a fleet on fleet engagement as i think was envisaged by people that followed that doctrine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 22:53
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:I think it needs the term "warfighter" in there (or is that no longer in vogue since it admits we're, you know, fighting wars?) Warfighters totally don't fight in wars. They fight the war itself. Sort of a war to end all wars. Come to think of it, they also die alot in wars.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 22:54
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:Once you're dusting London and Paris and Berlin is the exchange really tactical anymore (unless "tactical" means "not hitting American cities", obvs.?) Funnily enough it wouldn't be the first time I've seen an American projection of World War 3 that only really seemed to care about nukes on American soil. Europe is better Dead than Red I guess?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 22:55
|
|
|
I'm not convinced Jutland was decisive. The Germans did not have freedom of movement before Jutland, and they didn't gain it afterwards. The losses were not meaningful to either side. Midway was decisive. Manila and Santiago were pretty decisive, is that too early for you?
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 22:55
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:Funnily enough it wouldn't be the first time I've seen an American projection of World War 3 that only really seemed to care about nukes on American soil. Europe is better Dead than Red I guess? shockingly countries put their own immediate interests above those of their allies
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 22:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 23:37 |
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Somewhere, Hey Guns just sat bolt upright.
|
|
#
?
Sep 17, 2019 22:55
|
|
