|
Polyakov posted:I ask you in good faith, which figure would you buy? I can't speak for others, but personally I think the problem is the degree of editorializing you go into; when if you were more matter of fact about it I think no one would've batted an eye. Essentially to me the crux is your phrasing: quote:This is a guess on my part because the PLA numbers are for obvious reasons nonsense that cant be trusted. Where the obvious reasons seems to be ambiguous as to whether it's because the PRC is a closed society vs. because there's simply no verified sources. The former is a bit of begging the question while the later is on its face unobjectionable. e: One thing that confuses me is this claim: quote:The PLA are making a lot of, if not mistakes then questionable decisions, they are outnumbering the Indians something like 4 to 1 in overall numbers and are getting to attack indian positions piecemeal and are still suffering pretty savage casualties. Arguably they dont really have another option if they want to take ground but if the Indians were approaching this with any degree of competence at a command level the PLA would be suffering very badly. They are taking risks which are paying off but at the point where the Indians stand and fight from their positions and have the ammunition to do so things can look very dicey for them. Perhaps unusually for a war that went so badly for one side the casualty numbers overall will be relatively comporable in scale. This is a guess on my part because the PLA numbers are for obvious reasons nonsense that cant be trusted. Maybe I missed something, but you say here they are making mistakes/questionable decisions; but then go on to suggest that they are doing things that make sense (to my mind), which you said were paying off: i.e taking risks which is an important element in manneuver warfare, they have numerical superiority and appear to be correctly adopting a strategy of isolating Indian units; can you give an example as to what constituted some of their mistakes and how they could have done it differently? Sometimes risks don't pan out in war but I'm not sure if that would really fall under a "mistake" since doing nothing could have let a potential opportunity for exploitation go by. Like it feels natural that yes, when it comes down to it they have to at some point assault their positions in order to not have them there threatening their advance, and assaulting a fortified position in that terrain is going to have casualties and they probably don't have the equipment a western military at the time might have had to do it better; where could they done better in your mind? Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 20:08 on Aug 25, 2020 |
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 20:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 12:48 |
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I can't speak for others, but personally I think the problem is the degree of editorializing you go into; when if you were more matter of fact about it I think no one would've batted an eye. I dont buy that i have to be respectful of the feelings of the Chinese people no, the reasons why to be suspicious of the PRC official line are to me very obvious as i feel they should be to everyone, I'm not the BBC and i dont feel the need to adopt neutral phrasing in a situation I dont feel warrants it as some matter of principle. But that is something i fear that we shall not agree on, i see your point i just disagree. More directly to do with your point what im trying to get across is not that the PLA is an unbeatable force in this matter, they are taking risks which are working, but they could very easily not with the Indians having their poo poo together. The original post was (paraphrased) that we arent seeing the PLA's mistakes because of the overly Indian centric nature of the sources i am using and is that painting them as unbeatable supermen. As far as actual mistakes go there arent a great deal, with regards to the frontal attacks, they are sometimes sustaining those past the point where they really should. Eventually they get beaten back enough and just go round the side or refocus to hit another piece of the line, forcing the Indians out of their prepared positions because they have no means of stopping them from going past, that is something that they should be realising earlier in some circumstances. I see why they are doing what they are doing, but i feel like there must be a better method than attacking face on until your opponent has exhausted their ammunition, sure they have the lives to spend and are not shy about doing it but there must be a better alternative. But realistically speaking no they arent making very many mistakes at all. Honestly nobody has better equipment than the PLA do to fight in the himalayas right now, they have lots of man portable mortars, lots of man portable RCL's, lots of type 56's and lots of tibetans to build roads that they can drive supplies up. They could do with some of the Indians mountain artillery but that doesnt make up for it and they are having hideous problems getting ammunition so its a bit of a toss up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 20:59
|
|
|
You could be a bit clearer about where you are getting these numbers and how they contradict the PRC line. For example when you say the PLA outnumbered the Indians 4 to 1 is that based on the Indian estimate of how many PLA there are? Similarly when you say "The PLA had around 22’000 troops in the area" is that again based on the Indian estimate, and do the PRC official line say they had fewer or not? For example if PLA claims are quite similar to the Indian casualty figures that doesn't make the PLA figures look *that* bad. We also know that IIRC Chinese tactics in Korea led US forces on the ground to greatly overestimate the overall forces they were facing. Counting the number of casualties you are inflicting is usually also much harder than counting your own casualties. So I think despite the appropriate caveats the other side of the numbers should be mentioned, including whether they give a very different picture or not. Fangz fucked around with this message at 21:18 on Aug 25, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 21:09
|
|
|
Fangz posted:You could be a bit clearer about where you are getting these numbers and how they contradict the PRC line. For example when you say the PLA outnumbered the Indians 4 to 1 is that based on the Indian estimate of how many PLA there are? Similarly when you say "The PLA had around 22’000 troops in the area" is that again based on the Indian estimate, and do the PRC official line say they had fewer or not? The PLA claim being similar to the Indian claim is purely to do with the Indian casualty number which is why im inclined to trust it as an overall accurate representation. The figure i am skeptical of is purely the PLA self report of their own casualty numbers, because there is no corroboration at all, and it is a number which they have a vested interest in manipulating. I'm not sure if India ever formally published estimated PLA casualties, they must have made them but its not a figure ive seen come up. The numbers in question are all from the books im looking at (just to be clear that im not doing this counting myself), their sources for the count for the quantity of PLA troops is produced from the PLA report of what units were in the area and hence their numbers for troops total can be checked because we know what size roughly speaking a PLA regiment is in 1962. This is also something that cant realistically be checked because of just how badly it went for the Indians, they took literally zero prisoners throughout the war and so had almost no sources of intelligence from which they would get such information. Basically all information in any numerical sense we have about the PLA is what they have chosen to give us, so its a question of what of it is more or less likely to be trustworthy. I dont believe they would have a reason to significantly misrepresent troop numbers or statement of what units were where the same way they might their casualty numbers. There are also other ways to check like who received battlefield honours and what unit they were in which is available information.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 21:50
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I can't speak for others, but personally I think the problem is the degree of editorializing you go into; when if you were more matter of fact about it I think no one would've batted an eye. After reading multiple paragraphs about how Chinese soldiers routinely tied captured enlisted Indian soldiers in wire and executed them, in order to enable their aggressive expansionist war to seize Indian territory, what bothers you most here is that Polyakov is being too mean to the dear little PLA?
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 22:05
|
|
|
I find it interesting that the Indians took zero prisoners. Were they also likely executing captives, and if not, how did the PLA manage that one?
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 22:15
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:I find it interesting that the Indians took zero prisoners. Were they also likely executing captives, and if not, how did the PLA manage that one? Knowing nothing about the situation I'm going to guess because they're on the retreat and having their asses handed to them. Given how rapidly their positions were getting encircled and overrun I suspect any prisoners they did take would be re-captured pretty quickly. It's not like they've got a good road network to rapidly send prisoners back on, they're having trouble getting their own wounded off the front.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 22:18
|
|
|
Yeah makes sense. I figured at SOME point the Indians have to start counter-attacking, though, right?
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 22:22
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Yeah makes sense. I figured at SOME point the Indians have to start counter-attacking, though, right? They have a couple of times, they were just really badly planned and did nothing other than speed the collapse of whatever section of the front was assaulting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 22:26
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:I find it interesting that the Indians took zero prisoners. Were they also likely executing captives, and if not, how did the PLA manage that one? No they just really hosed it up and pretty much never managed to control any of the field outside of their emplacement positions. There was a story (one of many) I left out about the area around Se-La where the General commanding offered a sizeable bounty for any PLA prisoners and sent out aggressive patrols to try and get some. There was one group that successfully managed to snatch a sentry but his friends woke up and everything started exploding because there were a lot more PLA than they thought there would be so they killed him and ran for it (they were caught crossing a river on a log bridge and dropped him in the water). Outside of that the PLA are never really in a fixed position long enough that you can do the whole aggressive patrolling to look for people to capture and when their attacks fail it tends to be only a short time before they come back in again so the Indians dont get to go and clean the battlefield. They dont really counter attack, spoilers for the end but it will largely fizzle out when the PLA have decided they have achieved their aims and unilaterally nope out without the indians managing a significant counterattack. Polyakov fucked around with this message at 22:47 on Aug 25, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2020 22:41
|
|
|
Dance Officer posted:That same sort of pressure was on the US during Vietnam, and in Iraq, and now during the covid pandemic. In all three cases we have a pretty good idea how many died, and who they were. If you don't start backing up your claims of Indian censure, I don't really see why I'd take your word for it. It’s hilarious that you think official US figures on COVID deaths are reliable when every indication is that the trump administration and state governments are doing everything possible to obfuscate the real figures. But to get back to the original detail. I actually think Polyakov has done a great job researching and retelling the situation around the border conflict. I was just noting that his narrative is biased towards the India side if nothing else due to the lack of information from the Chinese side and that should be taken into account when it’s being presented as an authoritative description of a historical event. GlassEye-Boy fucked around with this message at 01:40 on Aug 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 01:31
|
|
|
Polyakov posted:I dont buy that i have to be respectful of the feelings of the Chinese people no, the reasons why to be suspicious of the PRC official line are to me very obvious as i feel they should be to everyone, I'm not the BBC and i dont feel the need to adopt neutral phrasing in a situation I dont feel warrants it as some matter of principle. But that is something i fear that we shall not agree on, i see your point i just disagree. I mean you can disagree but this is illustrative of the sorts of things I've found objectionable an further example I'll examine below. quote:More directly to do with your point what im trying to get across is not that the PLA is an unbeatable force in this matter, they are taking risks which are working, but they could very easily not with the Indians having their poo poo together. The original post was (paraphrased) that we arent seeing the PLA's mistakes because of the overly Indian centric nature of the sources i am using and is that painting them as unbeatable supermen. As far as actual mistakes go there arent a great deal, with regards to the frontal attacks, they are sometimes sustaining those past the point where they really should. Eventually they get beaten back enough and just go round the side or refocus to hit another piece of the line, forcing the Indians out of their prepared positions because they have no means of stopping them from going past, that is something that they should be realising earlier in some circumstances. I see why they are doing what they are doing, but i feel like there must be a better method than attacking face on until your opponent has exhausted their ammunition, sure they have the lives to spend and are not shy about doing it but there must be a better alternative. But realistically speaking no they arent making very many mistakes at all. Honestly nobody has better equipment than the PLA do to fight in the himalayas right now, they have lots of man portable mortars, lots of man portable RCL's, lots of type 56's and lots of tibetans to build roads that they can drive supplies up. They could do with some of the Indians mountain artillery but that doesnt make up for it and they are having hideous problems getting ammunition so its a bit of a toss up. Right, so you can see what I mean that it was confusing, because you originally claimed they were making a lot of mistakes but in reality (at least by your write up) they did not. I don't think it is necessarily reasonable, especially in hindsight, to suppose there is something they must to be able to be doing to do better; the way you describe it which strikes me as standard PLA doctrine, probing attacks in force followed by flanking/infiltration and maneuver all seem like reasonable decisions; especially when there's no obvious alternative to what they've been doing considering the fog of war and the imperfect information PLA commanders would be operating under. Like if the Indians had better commanders is like positing what if the CSA didn't make the same mistakes, or what if Hitler listened to his generals. If they had made better decisions then it's reasonable to suppose that perhaps the PLA does something different in response; it's not exactly Alien Spacebat Nehru but it feels like the sort of example I feel like makes aspects of your write up here problematic when you give a little too much credit/benefit of the doubt to one side and don't lend the courtesy when it's reversed. There isn't a reasonable basis to assume the PLA would make the same risks in the face of a more competent Indian command anymore than the idea that the Germans would be more competent without Hitler's micromanagement. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 01:55 on Aug 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 01:53
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:
Thought experiment: what if you didn't spend so much time defending the integrity of a dictatorship on the internet?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 02:14
|
|
|
You really aren't helping Grenrow.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 02:15
|
|
|
GlassEye-Boy posted:It’s hilarious that you think official US figures on COVID deaths are reliable when every indication is that the trump administration and state governments are doing everything possible to obfuscate the real figures. Not to derail, but the excess deaths statistics are a pretty solid and practically falsification-proof metric. Using that as a comparison, the verified-positive death estimates are probably low but basically honest.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 02:48
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:Right, so you can see what I mean that it was confusing, because you originally claimed they were making a lot of mistakes but in reality (at least by your write up) they did not. I don't think it is necessarily reasonable, especially in hindsight, to suppose there is something they must to be able to be doing to do better To dial it back a little bit from Grenrow but still say basically the same thing, I don't think we have to be giving the benefit of the doubt to the PLA. I agree I would have appreciated more neutral phrasing originally, but this war occurs hot on the heels of the Great Leap Forward, an event where endemic misinformation played a pretty central roll in the deaths of tens of millions. Maybe the situation in the PLA was different, but I think it's also extremely reasonable to view the Chinese claims with intense suspicion in this period.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 03:44
|
|
|
Koramei posted:To dial it back a little bit from Grenrow but still say basically the same thing, I don't think we have to be giving the benefit of the doubt to the PLA. I agree I would have appreciated more neutral phrasing originally, but this war occurs hot on the heels of the Great Leap Forward, an event where endemic misinformation played a pretty central roll in the deaths of tens of millions. Maybe the situation in the PLA was different, but I think it's also extremely reasonable to view the Chinese claims with intense suspicion in this period. The issue that I'm disputing is not so much that we should trust what the sources they publish, again, as I said there is not objectionable on its face to say that "The sources are either unavailable or suspect." We're both essentially in agreement. However, the context of the part of your post you're specifically responding to was criticizing something that we can reasonably put forward the argument about. Which is specifically regarding the military performance, their choice of tactics and strategy for that conflict. My post was mainly speaking to this: quote:The PLA are making a lot of, if not mistakes then questionable decisions Which raised my eyebrows from the resulting explanation. Which later Polyakov appropriately backs away from that position, conceding: quote:As far as actual mistakes go there arent a great deal But still I question the conclusion of: quote:sure they have the lives to spend and are not shy about doing it but there must be a better alternative My argument is that, just from Polyakov's own description I can think of plausible alternative assessments, purely on the merits regarding the military science of the situation. Relatedly but maybe separate is my objection to the notion that the PLA's mistakes are only mistakes assuming a counterfactual which I think is a questionable position to take.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 04:04
|
|
|
Oh yeah, fair.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 04:23
|
|
|
GlassEye-Boy posted:It’s hilarious that you think official US figures on COVID deaths are reliable when every indication is that the trump administration and state governments are doing everything possible to obfuscate the real figures. You can take your loving salt about this elsewhere. Last I checked the death toll sits at 170,000 and the majority of Americans don't very much like that number. If the trump admin is doing everything in its power to doctor the stats, they're either failing hard, or they're not doing everything and we have some semblance of the actual numbers. Either way, listed covid deaths is not a number to be presumed the actual number for any country other than Belgium.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 07:56
|
|
|
Also a hilarious example given that China's 'official' COVID tally is nowhere close to any model of the deaths they should have suffered.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 08:25
|
|
|
Hi thread, longtime reader/lurker since the first one, first time poster. Can anyone recommend me a good book or two on the battle of the Huertgen Forest?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 08:39
|
|
|
Dance Officer posted:You can take your loving salt about this elsewhere. Last I checked the death toll sits at 170,000 and the majority of Americans don't very much like that number. If the trump admin is doing everything in its power to doctor the stats, they're either failing hard, or they're not doing everything and we have some semblance of the actual numbers. Yeah no, Boy is in the right on this one. US COVID death numbers are not at all accurate. The New York Times estimated the real numbers were at least 50% higher earlier this month, and there’s reason to believe that even that’s an underestimate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 10:03
|
|
|
There's a certain subgenre of argument in this thread that revolves around the relative karmic value of governments. It is rarely productive.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 11:03
|
|
|
Fly Molo posted:Yeah no, Boy is in the right on this one. US COVID death numbers are not at all accurate. The New York Times estimated the real numbers were at least 50% higher earlier this month, and there’s reason to believe that even that’s an underestimate. Everyone's stats are all over the place because everyone is counting and testing differently (and yes, there's a bit of political massaging of how official stats are being counted). The difference is that in 5 years time we will almost certainly have a pretty good picture of how COVID played out over the Western World, with like-for-like research into excess death rates etc. Meanwhile China will remain a black hole of data.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 11:18
|
|
|
Wasn't there some land invasion of Canada in the western great lakes at some point and they tried it in winter and all froze to death?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 11:41
|
|
|
Fly Molo posted:Yeah no, Boy is in the right on this one. US COVID death numbers are not at all accurate. The New York Times estimated the real numbers were at least 50% higher earlier this month, and there’s reason to believe that even that’s an underestimate. That article estimates an undercount of 60k out of a true count of 200k, or about 30% overall. Really though even 50% error isn't bad for even more recent preliminary medical statistics where it's not possible to test every dead person. The count will get better as new research is done. We're not talking a situation where the government says the official count is zero and go to jail if you disagree. In the context of military statistics, there's definitely a difference between errors from the fog of war and orders-of-magnitude underreporting for propaganda purposes. The latter is also hard to research on account of organophosphate in the researcher's tea and whatnot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 12:04
|
|
|
Fly Molo posted:Yeah no, Boy is in the right on this one. US COVID death numbers are not at all accurate. The New York Times estimated the real numbers were at least 50% higher earlier this month, and there’s reason to believe that even that’s an underestimate. Read the second paragraph. I say that the covid fatality numbers are not accurate
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 12:22
|
|
|
Well, the official Chinese figures for their casualties in the Korean war is about half of what the US estimated that they inflicted. It's not really an order of magnitude out and I'd argue that those figures seem at least plausible from a qualitative POV. I don't think there's any massive propaganda value for the CCP in using their numbers vs the US numbers, both of which are quite high (it's the US casualties figures the Chinese claim that are blatantly nonsense) so I'd probably put down the discrepancy to fudges about definitions (e.g. counting support personnel as civilians) than outright making numbers up. For this Sino-Indian war the claimed Chinese casualties are about same as the Indian casualties, with a smaller proportion killed (about half that of the Indians). I don't think this is necessarily unbelievable. Though I guess the Indians also have about the same number MIA/captured and the Chinese figures don't include any MIA at all. I think looking at the numbers critically an assessment of "roughly equal casualties on both sides" seems about right. Frankly I don't really buy the logic that "these are bad people and therefore their numbers are all bad and should be ignored" as applied broadly in history. A critical eye should be applied, for sure, but I think governments more usually bend the truth (note: I would count stuff like calling blown up Panthers 'damaged' as bending the truth) than make it up wholesale. For example, in terms of casualties, really relative casualties are the important numbers for propaganda value. So the motivation to say that one thousand PLA soldiers died instead of three thousand is surely fairly minimal because both are just a statistic to the regular citizen. If we are saying that really a million PLA soldiers died and the war was a massive disaster that was covered up then things will be different, but it seems to me that in this kind of conflict propaganda value is easiest to obtain by just saying well these guys died, but they took out two, three times their number in enemies. That's a much easier lie, matches with what veterans will have you believe anyway, and who will contradict it? The hated enemy? To China one way or another this was a minor conflict and I don't think on the scales we are talking about, the numbers of "martyrs" really matters to the CCP. In the modern context I think the Chinese covid figures are probably broadly correct (correct being here defined as having an error not distinguishable from unintentional mismeasurement/incompatible definitions, which can be quite large - possibly up to a maximum of a factor of two to four!). Popular claims about qualitatively higher chinese covid deaths (on the scale of millions) seem more and more implausible over time - simply on the basis that almost all experts agree at this point that the covid pandemic is essentially under control in China and their "high intensity, but very localised" approach could not possibly have worked if there was hundreds of millions of cases. Ultimately I think in covid counting there's a fairly big grey area when it comes to the question of "intent" in underestimating figures. Even excess deaths is an underestimate, because e.g. we see lower than average deaths in US states without covid, so using previous years mortality as a baseline is dubious. But this is a derail I honestly don't want to keep going. Fangz fucked around with this message at 13:14 on Aug 26, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 12:50
|
|
|
 How accurate is this to a real M1A1 Abrams?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 13:08
|
|
|
I posted before my brain fully engaged and that initial preamble did not help the point i was trying to make. The point im trying to get across is far more on the side of questionable decisions. To me its a little like the battle of France narrative, to draw a comparison. On a very surface level it looks like the Germans are unstoppable and flawlessly led but when you scrape a little they are taking phenomenal risks and getting away with it, does that mean that their generalship was flawless? Im not 100% convinced that it does in either case. How do you distinguish between brilliant generalship and good generalship with good luck? That i think boils down to whether they had sufficient intelligence to be able to reasonably know that things were going to turn out that way, or were they just willing to accept the potentially much higher casualties to achieve their aim and they fortunately did not have to. The fact that we get such maximum aggression both in the place where its works and they successfully encircle, (excellent) and in places where they just repeatedly hammer men into fortified positions when the Indians dont break, makes me think that the approach they are taking is to hit everywhere hard on the assumption that the Indians are going to break, when that doesnt happen it goes badly for them, this strategy doesnt have in my view appropriate regard for trying to save their own casualties when its possible, it is however certainly a way to get results if you have the men. I think that if they had approached it with more flexibility that they could have achieved their aims with fewer casualties on their own side by sacrificing speed and performing more careful recconaisance to identify these points before they ram into them. India doesnt really have the logistical capacity to get extra men into the theater with any speed and the PLA know this, a potential concern might have been the weather but the fighting will go on well into November so i dont believe that going further than that into December will significantly impede the PLA's ability to fight, (especially given that they will keep military activities going in December itself in the NEFA, but thats a story for later). Having said all this there is a political reason why such aggression occurs and that was that one of the the PLA's primary goal was inflicting as many casualties on the Indians as possible, we have seen this already with their behaviour towards Indian prisoners and isolated pockets, and we will see it very much highlighted later on, probably next post, when things somehow get even worse for the Indians and their front collapses around Bomdila. The PLA unilaterally declares a ceasefire will occur in 48 hours and in that period there will be deliberate and aggressive attempts by the PLA to kill as many Indian soldiers as possible at a point well past their ability to put up organised resistance, you have pockets of Indian soldiers trying to flee getting killed quite ruthlessly in this roughly 2 day period with few prisoners being taken, even to the point of exceeding their own orders when they would kill General Singh (A man they explicitly set out to capture) and 30 other men in an ambush while they were retreating from the battle we are about to get to. In this context of inflicting maximum damage in as short a time as possible the PLA's haste makes a lot of sense along with their concern that there might be foreign intervention if the war drags on (A not completely unfounded belief with a US carrier lurking in the Indian ocean).
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 13:09
|
|
|
Fangz posted:There's a certain subgenre of argument in this thread that revolves around the relative karmic value of governments. It is rarely productive. Everyone listen to this very wise poster. COVID-19 is not military history.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 14:18
|
|
|
I think at some point, Polyakov, you're asking the PLA to fight differently from their doctrine and the terrain and supplies available. Especially at the time and based on Korean war lessons, the PLA doctrine was very much to spend lives in close-in infantry fighting. Maybe you can maneuver a little better and reduce casualties in individual tactical engagements, but terrain is against you and the PLA seemed to maneuver very effectively at an operational level - which indicates that recon was probably sufficient. At some point, you have to get the job done and doing it with somewhat fewer casualties but taking longer is not necessarily a good answer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 14:26
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:
 Close-ish, I guess? It does it well enough to convey an M1A1 but with the constraints of a 640X480 CRT in technicolor EGA. The searing sound of hydraulics, turbine, and the steady cursing of a TC is still burned in my mind.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 14:57
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:
 
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 15:02
|
|
|
That's pretty cool! Thanks 
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 15:44
|
|
|
Yooper posted:Close-ish, I guess? It does it well enough to convey an M1A1 but with the constraints of a 640X480 CRT in technicolor EGA. The searing sound of hydraulics, turbine, and the steady cursing of a TC is still burned in my mind. Oh, I can imagine that rather well thanks to the in-game audio to that game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 15:44
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Everyone listen to this very wise poster. COVID-19 is not military history. Yeah, fair enough.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 16:49
|
|
|
what's the plug and chain up by the laser warning label? some kind of mechanical safety or fuse? Also it's page 420, everyone should be chill with each other 
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 18:23
|
|
|
There was that US ship captain who was sacked for trying to protect his crew from COVID, wasn't there?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 18:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 12:48 |
|
|
Gort posted:There was that US ship captain who was sacked for trying to protect his crew from COVID, wasn't there? If you're talking about the captain of the TR, he actually got fired for an inadequate reponse to the virus when it first showed up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2020 18:46
|
|
