|
Myths of Soviet tank building: early Great Patriotic War Queue: Influence of the T-34 on German tank building, Medium Tank T25, Heavy Tank T26/T26E1/T26E3, Career of Harry Knox, GMC M36, Geschützwagen Tiger für 17cm K72 (Sf), Early Early Soviet tank development (MS-1, AN Teplokhod), Career of Semyon Aleksandrovich Ginzburg, AT-1, Object 140, SU-76 frontline impressions, Creation of the IS-3, IS-6, SU-5, Myths of Soviet tank building: 1943-44, IS-2 post-war modifications, Myths of Soviet tank building: end of the Great Patriotic War, Medium Tank T6, RPG-1, Lahti L-39, American tank building plans post-war, German tanks for 1946, HMC M7 Priest, GMC M12, GMC M40/M43, ISU-152, AMR 35 ZT, Soviet post-war tank building plans, T-100Y and SU-14-1, Object 430, Pz.Kpfw.35(t), T-60 tanks in combat, SU-76M modernizations, Panhard 178, 15 cm sFH 13/1 (Sf), 43M Zrínyi, Medium Tank M46, Modernization of the M48 to the M60 standard, German tank building trends at the end of WW2, Pz.Kpfw.III/IV, E-50 and E-75 development, Pre-war and early war British tank building, BT-7M/A-8 trials, Jagdtiger suspension, Light Tank T37, Light Tank T41, T-26-6 (SU-26), Voroshilovets tractor trials, Israeli armour 1948–1982, T-64's composite armour Available for request (others' articles):  Shashmurin's career T-55 underwater driving equipment T-34 tanks with M-17 engines NEW  Oerlikon and Solothurn anti-tank rifles Evolution of German tank observation devices
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 03:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 04:10 |
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Evolution of German tank observation devices As in "Yep, that's a tank." ...?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 03:47
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:As in "Yep, that's a tank." ...? Don't be too hasty. It might be a tank destroyer
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 04:25
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Poor freckles, thought of counter battery fire and died. It occurs to me that one of our modern replacements for horses, the helicopter, is no less prone to self-inflicted destruction.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 08:04
|
|
|
Poor freckles, thought of
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 10:39
|
|
|
A random throught I had the other day that probably has no documented data associated with it. Are there any recorded cases of people being killed by the machine gun fire bombers formations would put out during massed ww2 raids? You'd have to be unlucky as hell but we hear cases of folks killed by celebratory gunfire every once in a while.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 14:35
|
|
|
Abongination posted:A random throught I had the other day that probably has no documented data associated with it. I assume you mean 'other than fighter pilots' 
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 14:46
|
|
|
Abongination posted:A random throught I had the other day that probably has no documented data associated with it. Anecdotal but I remember reading about an excited little boy watching a dogfight in the Battle of Britain and his mother yelling at him to come inside while holding her apron over her head to deflect falling brass Edit: any stats on civilian deaths to "friendly" flak fragments falling back down? GotLag fucked around with this message at 15:10 on Jun 13, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 15:05
|
|
|
That's an interesting thought actually, must've been a bunch of metal falling. I suppose it'd be extremely widely distributed due to how high up it was fired from and the bombers basically firing in a 360x360deg bubble around them. Like a 50cal fired 20° "up" from the horizontal at an altitude of 15k ft is gonna come down something like three towns over.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 15:59
|
|
|
AAA fragments, intact AAA UXO, bullets, casings, belt segments, debris from damaged aircraft… There’s a reason Civil Defense issued helmets.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 16:11
|
|
|
Those sheet metal light garden shelters too can certainly protect from that and worth hiding in when the sky is full of raining brass.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 16:34
|
|
|
By the time those rounds fall to earth they're almost certainly at their terminal velocity, which is going to be far slower than what they're fired at. Might still kill, but the chance of that I would imagine to be rather low until you get to cannon-sized rounds.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 17:05
|
|
|
Terminal velocity presumably depends on how much the bullet/shell is tumbling, but in any case I would not want to be outside if it's literally raining metal. Stuff doesn't have to kill you to ruin your day.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 17:09
|
|
|
A .50 cal bullet weighs approximately the same as a golf ball, and if someone was dropping boxes of golf balls from the sky I sure would seek shelter. But bullets will stumble all the way down which presumably will make it a lot slower. At least don't look up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 17:23
|
|
|
one time we had a helicopter drop brass on us and one poor fucker got a casing between his helmet and body armor and wound up having to go back to Germany for a month due to a third degree burn on the back of his neck. I feel like he should have gotten a purple heart for that, I dunno if he did
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 17:29
|
|
|
bewbies posted:one time we had a helicopter drop brass on us and one poor fucker got a casing between his helmet and body armor and wound up having to go back to Germany for a month due to a third degree burn on the back of his neck. Christ, that sucks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 17:49
|
|
|
bewbies posted:one time we had a helicopter drop brass on us and one poor fucker got a casing between his helmet and body armor and wound up having to go back to Germany for a month due to a third degree burn on the back of his neck. I am sensing a missed procurement opportunity for “combat umbrellas”!
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 19:37
|
|
|
I thought all fixed-wing aircraft from ww2 on caught their spent brass internally? Maybe that was only the in-wing guns in the fighters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 19:57
|
|
|
bewbies posted:one time we had a helicopter drop brass on us and one poor fucker got a casing between his helmet and body armor and wound up having to go back to Germany for a month due to a third degree burn on the back of his neck. Like that scene in Generation Kill where the helicopter rains brass on the humvee gunner.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 20:12
|
|
|
Uncle Enzo posted:I thought all fixed-wing aircraft from ww2 on caught their spent brass internally? Maybe that was only the in-wing guns in the fighters. It varied, but was typically (especially in US service) the opposite. Most fixed wing guns dumped brass and links, most flexible guns (and turret guns) retained theirs. Again, there are exceptions in every direction. Related: https://youtu.be/niJ82YCiuYU
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 20:15
|
|
|
Uncle Enzo posted:I thought all fixed-wing aircraft from ww2 on caught their spent brass internally? Maybe that was only the in-wing guns in the fighters. Honest question, why would you want to keep the extra mass around?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 22:37
|
|
|
US bomber doctrine was to fly in tight formation for mutual defense. I imagine they wouldn't want a rain of expended brass falling through the formation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 22:47
|
|
|
everydayfalls posted:Honest question, why would you want to keep the extra mass around? There was tremendous demand for copper during the war, and lots of shell casings (mostly naval but some small arms and heavier guns) ended up as pennies. And why give free brass to the Germans?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 23:02
|
|
|
everydayfalls posted:Honest question, why would you want to keep the extra mass around? If you are Germany, brass is precious and can easily be recycled.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 23:15
|
|
|
Uncle Enzo posted:I thought all fixed-wing aircraft from ww2 on caught their spent brass internally? Maybe that was only the in-wing guns in the fighters. In-wing guns were actually the mpst common to dump their brass...
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 23:37
|
|
|
Also one needs to keep in mind what guns and what planes are or are not saving brass. A bomber with a nose gun like the He-111 or the Ju-88 doesnt want loose brass up front, the nose guns on a 109 should retain brass, but the wing cannons of a 190 won't.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2021 23:40
|
|
|
everydayfalls posted:Honest question, why would you want to keep the extra mass around? Safely throwing things out of a moving airplane, so they don't hit other important parts of the plane, is actually a pretty challenging problem at WWII fighter speeds. It gets worse if you put high and unpredictable g-forces in the mix, like what might happen if a pilot is trying to line up their guns in a dogfight. So, why would you want to deal with that stores separation problem if you don't have to?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2021 00:06
|
|
|
Iirc there's also trim/balance issues with ejecting brass, though I think that might be limited to the A-10 due to the sheer amount & size of the ammo it's gun uses
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2021 00:36
|
|
|
Taerkar posted:By the time those rounds fall to earth they're almost certainly at their terminal velocity, which is going to be far slower than what they're fired at. Might still kill, but the chance of that I would imagine to be rather low until you get to cannon-sized rounds. Terminal velocity's still pretty potent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lazy_Dog_(bomb) bewbies posted:one time we had a helicopter drop brass on us and one poor fucker got a casing between his helmet and body armor and wound up having to go back to Germany for a month due to a third degree burn on the back of his neck. My buddy at the range once had a .45 case eject back and lodge right between the right temple of his shooting glasses and the very corner of his eye.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2021 03:02
|
|
|
Meant folks on the ground haha. I think winds and tumble would indeed slow the bullets a bit. But it's still hundreds or thousands of 30 and 50 cal bullets falling over Europe. In regards to flak, I've definitely read accounts of people injured by debris and recently went on a bit of a dive trying to find out the same thing regarding Israel's iron dome. Found a statement saying that there has been minor property damage from it but no injuries due to people seeking shelter when the dome is in operation. Who knows, lots of metal falling from the sky is never a good thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2021 05:08
|
|
|
Abongination posted:I think winds and tumble would indeed slow the bullets a bit. Tumble would, but it's not always a safe assumption that there will be tumble, as there's very little angular drag to reduce the spin rate. If you fire at a near vertical angle the thing will naturally 'stall' and start to tumble at the top of the arc, but if they're shooting at a reduced angle (as I assume they would with large calibre AAA with many km's of range) that poo poo will still be stable when it eventually returns to earth. Even regular rifle bullets will still be in a stable spin at the bottom of their arc if fired >20 degrees off vertical I think. PittTheElder fucked around with this message at 06:00 on Jun 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2021 05:58
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Is it true that until very recently in history, soldiers often fought in wars because they were uneducated and were manipulated into fighting? Basically I'm looking for info on the psychology of young men from around the early 1900s and back. Like the 30 years war is a big one, it seems like some rulers had feuds and told the peasants to all fight and the peasants just went with it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2021 09:02
|
|
|
What peasants? As far as I know, only the Swedes actually conscripted peasants, the rest of Europe fought the 30-Years-War with mercenaries. Infamously, the Duke of Celle had a personal guard of less then 100 men left during this time, and trying to get more via calling his feudal levies would have ended with people laughing at him. There's a reason everyone fought using mercenaries: Feudalism was dead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2021 09:18
|
|
|
Got my grandfather to maybe; maaaaybe talk about Korea again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2021 09:19
|
|
|
Saying that the only reason people might want to fight is that they are uneducated and that they must have had to be manipulated/coerced is hella projection of modern mindsets into the past. There's a very good reason to join up a campaign for most of history up till about the mid 19th century, and that is loot. A share of the plunder of a city, or ransom of a knight/soldier, etc, can be enough of a capital infusion to set you up for life, so you can go home, buy a plot of land and find a wife. Even the pay while you are on campaign is pretty good, if you actually get it at the end of a campaign- especially if subsistence farming on rented land or jobbing for day labour like most poor men would be. A primary driver of soldier recruitment is that promise, and that's why armies will often disintegrate or lose a bunch of strength on a defeat.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2021 10:11
|
|
|
Worth pointing out that in a broad range of historical societies, going off to fight was the chief hobby of the higher classes. Even in wars where most of the soldiers were "uneducated", this is in the context of societies where the vast majority of the population is uneducated.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2021 10:22
|
|
|
human garbage bag posted:Is it true that until very recently in history, soldiers often fought in wars because they were uneducated and were manipulated into fighting? Basically I'm looking for info on the psychology of young men from around the early 1900s and back. Like the 30 years war is a big one, it seems like some rulers had feuds and told the peasants to all fight and the peasants just went with it? Not even close. Well not exactly. Peasants generally speaking are not who you look to when you want to go war because they're not supposed to have a martial tradition and if they did that would be .. suspicious. From a feudal ruler perspective. You want young men who have high expectations for their living standard, but have yet to prove themselves, and come from a tradition that expects military service. These men will fight for honor, but also fight for money. There's a lot going on here and if you're looking for a comprehensive psychology of why young men join the army you're not going to find it easily. And you're example of the 30yw is dead wrong. Soldiers in that time period were earning as much as skilled artisans were on a daily basis in addition to loot... if they were fighting in the right army. And the commander actually had cash on hand to pay them. On the other hand, rampant famine and breakdown of civil order meant that being part of a roving gang meant food was less of an issue and that's a big deal. You'd have to break down each army to find out why the individual men are fighting in it. As to uneducated and manipulated that's a serious misrepresentation of life in this time period. It's not like that never happened, but it's not really at all a good way of looking at soldier life styles (or life in general) and the soldiers themselves might seriously disagree with it. Trust me, these guys expected to get paid for their service and if they weren't then you had drat well better prepare for what happens next. Once again, to use the 30yw as an example, the actual war could have ended in 1646, but dragged on for two more years due a breakdown in negotiations. The disagreement was over getting the money to discharge soldiers and it wasn't resolved until one side managed to loot multiple economic centers in Europe that the cash was on hand to actually disband armies of men who were angry over being owed back pay.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2021 10:27
|
|
|
Roughly D day My Uncle Tom used to have tons of stories about flying B24s over Italy… but he literally was only alive when he got sick and his normal plane crashed. Then a few months later he had food poisoning and his plane craned. It was seriously “If Tom Roemer is flying, do not get on that plane” Ugly In The Morning fucked around with this message at 10:43 on Jun 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2021 10:39
|
|
|
Also if you are looking into the motivations of young men fighting from 1800 to the early 1900's then the answer is often going to be 'I was conscripted'.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2021 10:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 04:10 |
|
|
Looking at little round top which is almost entirely some bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2021 11:15
|
|