|
Grenrow posted:Obviously it's because he was a wizard, right?
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 03:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 15, 2024 10:38 |
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:of course You can't just deliver food to armies, on wagons. Madness.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 03:44
|
|
|
Clearly this Loghistiks is some sort of magical glyph word.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 04:22
|
|
|
also one of his earliest biographers (the earliest?) was riding next to him at luetzen and saw the bullet bounce off but potato potahto
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 04:33
|
|
|
ChubbyChecker posted:Agreed, but please don't use D&D words like "kramer" here. kramer is from seinfeld dumbass (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 04:39
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Clearly this Loghistiks is some sort of magical glyph word. I would read this fantasy book.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 04:48
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I was talking to an acquaintance about Sun Tzu's the Art of War while having coffee. I forget exactly what started the conversation but I remember him basically being unsure of what edition/translation he should read? I honestly don't quite remember, but I remember talking about my edition that I happened to own in print which seemed to include a lot of interesting historical information about Chinese warfare at the time, such as economic details and statistics about the growth of Chinese army sizes over that time period. As well as some interesting descriptions of battles. I have Strong Opinions about all translations of The Art of War, but the Cleary version is the least terrible. The Giles version is absolute hack work and I wouldn't mop up a piss-stain with it. It's just garbage. Although I'll say it : the book is super over-rated. Sun Zi has some cool nominalizing constructions, I'll give hime that. Otherwise it's such helpful advice as "Maybe attack the enemy when/where he's weak instead of strong?". loving thanks. Great insight. Couldn't have thought of that myself. And 98% of Three Kingdoms is made up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 04:54
|
|
|
All great thinking needs to start somewhere. Somebody's gotta write down the more obvious ideas for the people who aren't as observant. There's a lot of value in just setting a baseline so people will at least not gently caress up horribly. I have a theory that a lot of people are capable of doing pretty good in leadership roles when push comes to shove, even though most never get the chance or willingly defer to someone else
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 05:16
|
|
|
I'm not making GBS threads on him as part of the historical record, more people who read him like he's gonna give them great insights. He was on all accounts an okay dude. Way cooler than Confucius. Confucius was a total dillhole and Mencius wasn't any better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 05:25
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:kramer is from seinfeld dumbass
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 05:33
|
|
|
Grenrow posted:Obviously it's because he was a wizard, right? Well, he was, but the wind wasn't because of that. It was the other wizard summoning up the power he needed to make Wallenstein die.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 05:37
|
|
|
sort of a weird question that popped into my head just now but is the NBC protection on tanks good enough to keep out coronavirus? Could you self-quarantine inside an Abrams (or whatever) assuming you could cram 2-3 weeks of food, water, toiletries and other supplies in there?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 05:58
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:kramer is from seinfeld dumbass You were warned and now your avatar became real.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 06:18
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:sort of a weird question that popped into my head just now but is the NBC protection on tanks good enough to keep out coronavirus? Could you self-quarantine inside an Abrams (or whatever) assuming you could cram 2-3 weeks of food, water, toiletries and other supplies in there? Judging by how a ton of NBC stuff that Russia sent to Italy was deemed useless, I'm going to say no, but the fact that people can't sneeze directly into your tank probably goes a long way to protect you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 06:20
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:I have Strong Opinions about all translations of The Art of War, but the Cleary version is the least terrible. The Giles version is absolute hack work and I wouldn't mop up a piss-stain with it. It's just garbage. Giles sounds familiar. The thing about Sun Tzu is that: 1. It was first. 2. It's readily approachable and simple; which means its widely applicible. Which I think is the big reason why it has such an outsized reputation. Sometimes many of the concepts introduced are not actually all that easy to understand for the longest time. Like we imagine the idea of, "Of course! Tanks should be kept together and massed together!" took a while too to figure out. Also I think there's the historical context of that having a professional standing army is kinda something Ancient China had a hard time consistently keeping around? So its useful to have a simple primer in which to quickly get young noblemen without army experience up to speed on the Do's And Don'ts. A lot of US army doctrine is also deceptively simple reading the field manuals and such. I wouldn't say its fair though to describe it tautologically like that. As an example for the "hide your strengths as weaknesses and weaknesses as strengths" it's more about getting into the mindset of opsec. If everyone knows you're Good Cav Island then they can prepare counters specific to you, but if they don't know it then they can't prepare for it. While in reverse if they think you're Bad Cav Island then they'll probably consistently underestimate your cav and get surprised again and again. Similar the "If you outnumber them 3 to 1 attack them" or whatever it says, is just like basic US army doctrine, specifying ballpark figures of what you should do in general situations, because otherwise maybe you have someone like McClellen who just sits on his thumbs and hems and haws indecisively; if you have solid intel, "Hey we outnumber them three to one, bring it!" it solves problems of choice paralysis. Then there's just how interesting Sun Tzu is and how much more holistic of an approach it is, combining matters of state and warfare together and being explicitly keen on the issues of exhausting the nation fighting fruitless wars and specifically warning against it, while European military theory I hear may have learned the wrong lessons from Clauswitz. So I think the real values of AoW is that your supposed to go through it and really think about it, and get into a mindset of thinking about things to think about, hence the "know yourself" idiom near the beginning. Also there's other things, like the importance of the chain of command, trusting your generals and not micro-managing for political ends, and maintaining strict discipline, and that with the right training and discipline, anyone can be made into soldiers, "even concubines". So most importantly it's a well balanced work looking at it from multiple perspectives and you can probably derive any effective doctrine from its lessons. I don't wanna be the guy who is like, "Because I play historical strategy games well actually" but anecdotally I do feel like all other factors relating to mechanical skill being equal using the basic lessons as rules of thumb I do feel like there is an edge it gives you in regarding to split second decision making versus someone who only knows how to click buttons to make number go up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 07:29
|
|
|
it's really old and also there's lingering orientalism from the 80s leading business dudes to revere it for more than what it is
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 07:41
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:sort of a weird question that popped into my head just now but is the NBC protection on tanks good enough to keep out coronavirus? Could you self-quarantine inside an Abrams (or whatever) assuming you could cram 2-3 weeks of food, water, toiletries and other supplies in there? The NBC system is not the relevant part, it's the isolation that keeps you from getting infected.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 07:48
|
|
|
Dance Officer posted:The NBC system is not the relevant part, it's the isolation that keeps you from getting infected. And nothing says isolation like a dude in a heavily armored death machine telling people to gently caress off.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 10:31
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Judging by how a ton of NBC stuff that Russia sent to Italy was deemed useless, I'm going to say no, but the fact that people can't sneeze directly into your tank probably goes a long way to protect you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 10:47
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Which ones? All of the tanks I mentioned made it to prototype phase and the T-50 even entered limited production before they figured out there weren't enough factories to make them and switched to the T-60 that could be made with truck parts. Well, I know of the T-50 but all the other ones are total mysteries to me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 10:54
|
|
|
HEY GUNS posted:of course There's a storm in the sky in the night when you die, you're a wizard.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 10:55
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:sort of a weird question that popped into my head just now but is the NBC protection on tanks good enough to keep out coronavirus? Could you self-quarantine inside an Abrams (or whatever) assuming you could cram 2-3 weeks of food, water, toiletries and other supplies in there? The NBC protection is based on overpressure made by the engine. While you would be safe unless someone sneezed down the gun barrel, it would only be certifiably virus proof for as long as you have fuel. I suppose you'd need to service the air filter as well at some point. Obviously you should take refuge inside a nuclear submarine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 11:01
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:sort of a weird question that popped into my head just now but is the NBC protection on tanks good enough to keep out coronavirus? Could you self-quarantine inside an Abrams (or whatever) assuming you could cram 2-3 weeks of food, water, toiletries and other supplies in there? The overpressure system would keep everything away, and the NBC filters would propably keep the incoming air clean. You Need to run the engine to use it though, which means you would be limited to however long your fuel lasts. In an M1 the turbine would make this a rather short safety, even if the NBC system wouldnt overheat. We are talking few days tops. So no, the active NBC system wouldnt be any better that basic ”sit inside and close the hatches” method which would be very effective.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 13:03
|
|
|
Nuclear submarines are no joke the best fallout vault imaginable. And NBC protection in tanks is mostly down having an oversized fan in the air condition. Run it at full power and you create a pressure difference inside compared to outside, exactly like a pressurized airliner = no germs can get in. Oh, and make sure your air filter for intake air filters them out too first.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 13:06
|
|
|
When you realise you need to poop you'll decide you'd rather get coronavirus.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 13:11
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:When you realise you need to poop you'll decide you'd rather get coronavirus. Poop into a can, ram the shitcan up the gun barrel, load a shell and fire?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 13:38
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Poop into a can, ram the shitcan up the gun barrel, load a shell and fire? Now that's a way to get barrel fouling!
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 13:42
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Poop into a can, ram the shitcan up the gun barrel, load a shell and fire? Or maybe just not try to lock yourself into a tank for 2 weeks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 14:00
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:I have Strong Opinions about all translations of The Art of War, but the Cleary version is the least terrible. The Giles version is absolute hack work and I wouldn't mop up a piss-stain with it. It's just garbage. I remember when we read it in Classical Chinese class at university the commentaries / marginalia from later generals and literati were good. IIRC even Cao Cao’s commentary is on the historical record, although I’m not sure about authenticity of that. E: Mencius was a total dick who looked at Confucius and thought “hmm, I like the reactionary traditionalism but it’s just not authoritarian enough.”
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 14:15
|
|
Xerxes17 posted:Now that's a way to get barrel fouling! Hah hah, poop cannon.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 14:41
|
|
|
Confucius wasnt a reactionary traditionalist. He was a reformer who said that rulers have an obligation to the people they rule, that governments shouldn't use the fear of punishment to get people to follow the law, but instead teach morality, and that the first duty of government is to look after its people rather than to pursue wealth or lower at their expense.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 14:58
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:How long did it take a factory that was making automobiles to retool to start making tanks? Vauxhall Motors (GM's British arm) makes a good case study since it had only one relatively small, albeit very modern, factory. Vauxhall was selected to be the lead contractor/design parent for the Churchill tank, but was involved in the development and trials of the preceeding A20 design project which had begun in September 1939 and was superceded by the A22/Churchill in June 1940, which was also when the contract with Vauxhall was signed. Having been involved with the project already, Vauxhall presumably knew what was coming since car production (which had already been reduced on the outbreak of war in favour of Bedford trucks) was stopped altogether in May 1940, a few weeks before the Churchill contract became official. Prototypes were ready in December 1940 and the first production batch of 14 Churchills was produced in early June 1941, with volume production being acheived by the end of July. Vauxhall did not acheive full production until May 1942 when a brand new government-funded factory was opened nearby to take over (and expand) Bedford truck production, allowing the Vauxhall plant to be dedicated to Churchills. So it took a little over a year to refit a single factory to switch from building cars to making tanks in decent numbers (although you allow for the fact that that period also covered designing the tank in the first place). It took about nine months to scratch-build an entire new factory to make trucks of an existing design, going from undeveloped green fields to trucks rolling off the line
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 15:23
|
|
|
Tias posted:Groups targeted include SDS, Black Panthers, AIM Good, the Advanced Idea Mechanics have always been a threat (this is probably where Stan Lee got the name, isn't it)
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 15:33
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Like, most of the revolutions in the last hundred years did not really have a stage of "the local legislatures made a decision." The Military Revolutionary Council of the Supreme Soviet says what. Or, about a century and change before America, so does Parliament. Or, for that matter, ask the French National Assembly. Legislatures absolutely do, and in the case of a rebellion by a small part of a polity then they will be local to that part.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 15:50
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Is Wallenstein basically Zhuge Liang? Who is the 30yw Cao Cao? Richelieu.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 15:58
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:Confucius wasnt a reactionary traditionalist. He was a reformer who said that rulers have an obligation to the people they rule, that governments shouldn't use the fear of punishment to get people to follow the law, but instead teach morality, and that the first duty of government is to look after its people rather than to pursue wealth or lower at their expense. Yeah, my understanding is that his original point was that society is constructed from two way relationships (father to son, lord to subject, husband to wife, etc) where each side had duties and obligations. Later scholars tended to strip out the stuff saying that the superior in the relationship had duties because it's kind of inconvenient if you're the superior, but Confucius himself was more about fairness and harmony.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 15:59
|
|
|
Gervasius posted:Tangentially related to F-35 procurement, were there any USSR equivalents of massively hosed up weapon programs? I seem to remember that T-64 was basically F-35 of 1960 MBTs. Well, it depends on how you define 'hosed up'. Like the T-64, for example. It was a bit of a poo poo show when first developed, with its new everything! design philosophy making a mess. But, it pioneered several bits of technology now standard today, and for a long time was superior to what the west was fielding. The clusterfuck aspect of Soviet tanks was having three different types in service, all with different sub systems and costs. I think generally, that was a big problem for the later USSR: they had gone so overboard in military spending they were producing redundant weapons systems. But, bad planes: Tu-22 Blinder: In the 1950s, both cold war superpowers wanted a supersonic high altitude bomber. Both pushed the absolute limits of technology to do it. And it must be said the results look fantastic, like space ships in Star Wars: B-58 Hustler  Now with the Armageddon action playset!  Tu-22 Blinder:   But they were similar in that some real safety tradeoffs had been made to get the performance wanted, and by the time they entered service, both were to a great extent obsolete, as surface-to-air missiles had made their whole high-speed/high-altitude attack profile dubious. The Tu-22 was worse than the B-58. First, both aircraft were touchy as hell to land. They had been optimized for greatest efficiency at supersonic speeds, and so really couldn't do the whole fly slowly thing. So runway approaches had to be done at lightning speed with no margin for error. Out there on the Internets, there's a diagram of the B-58's approach pattern, and it starts with them descending while flying three or four circuits of the airbase while they just scrub off speed, and then another circuit where you land at something like 250 knots. The Tu-22 pilot would not be able to see the runway he was landing on during final approach, as the aircraft's nose blocked his view. He also had to fight his aircraft's ergonomics. Tupolev, who had been gulag'd before, took his deadlines very, very seriously, and thus got the aircraft working, not got the aircraft working with usable controls. The cockpit ergonomics on the Tu-22 usually had the pilots tying strings to certain important switches, so they wouldn't have to unstrap themselves from their ejection seats to work them. So the Tu-22 would kill lots of its own aircrews when landing. Part of this was because of the ejection seats, which thanks to some technical limitation, fired downward instead of upward. Wikipedia also lists some other problems: at supersonic speeds, friction could warp rods and control surfaces, "adversely effecting handling." The design also had a flaw where in certain flight profiles, aerodynamic forces could reverse the aileron controls, like one of those video game bosses that reverse your control input. Ugh, only after writing all this do I remember this over here, which treats the subject in much more detail
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 16:49
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:The thing about Sun Tzu is that: The book was very fashionable in the 90's USMC. Lieutenants would carry a copy and recite its fortune-cookie aphorisms like they were deep wisdom. I despise that book. Don Gato posted:And nothing says isolation like a dude in a heavily armored death machine telling people to gently caress off. Tanks are very dependent on logistics. You'd run out of fuel in a day. (Edit: I see this has been addressed.) Alchenar posted:When you realise you need to poop you'll decide you'd rather get coronavirus. In real NBC conditions you'd just poo poo in an empty ammo can. Tankers in my unit (which is scheduled to be deactivated) would have contests to see how long they could go without leaving the tank (stepping off onto ground). Once you've got a supply of food and water and mastered the art of hanging over the side to defecate and showering by pouring water on yourself on the engine deck you can go almost indefinitely. Some guys went for weeks during Desert Shield. Cessna fucked around with this message at 17:01 on Mar 28, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 16:53
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Well, it depends on how you define 'hosed up'. haha drat So why did the seats fire downwards? Would the pilots have been sucked in the engines otherwise? Which other planes fired the seats downwards?
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 17:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 15, 2024 10:38 |
|
|
Cessna posted:The book was very fashionable in the 90's USMC. Lieutenants would carry a copy and recite its fortune-cookie aphorisms like they were deep wisdom. Yeah, like someone said it was popular with yuppies too, just like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Book_of_Five_Rings Buying stocks is like wielding two japanese swords at the same time. Cessna posted:In real NBC conditions you'd just poo poo in an empty ammo can. hahaha Reminds me a bit of some quote about french cavalry officers in the Napoleonic wars who hated walking even short distances, and rode from the mess tent to the latrines. ChubbyChecker fucked around with this message at 17:12 on Mar 28, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2020 17:08
|
|