|
SeanBeansShako posted:He's opened a whole new genie out the bottle now. I kind of want to know the Soviet naming conventions. I’ve never really heard any “official” nicknames for Soviet fighters. It’s always model numbers and they’re usually progressive numbering, including helicopters. NATO identifier nicknames are what you hear after all of them were always just words that started with F or B or H for the aircraft type/role. There is some numbering structure to Soviet systems though, you’ll very rarely find fighters with even numbers or bombers with odd numbers. They’ve also always gone really heavy on abbreviations added for airframe changes. For example the Su-30MKI: MKI stands for "Modernizirovannyi, Kommercheskiy, Indiski" meaning "Modernized, Commercial, Indian". Those changes can be pretty comprehensive over time. Mazz fucked around with this message at 11:52 on Aug 22, 2019 |
#
¿
Aug 22, 2019 11:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 10:55 |
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:I mean nicknames will also do. I feel like I’ve heard a couple over time from like aircrew nicknames but they’re not coming to mind, just the NATO identifiers this morning. The only thing I do remember is how the aircrews liked to siphon off the grain alcohol coolant/de-icer used on the MiG-25 and get shitfaced. I’m pretty sure it was partly methanol too, filtered through a loaf of bread. Mazz fucked around with this message at 12:08 on Aug 22, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2019 12:04
|
|
|
zoux posted:I don't want to get all current event so no one report me but these 50 B61 bombs an Incirlik, if they fell into Turkish hands, would it make Turkey a nuclear power? Do they have aircraft that can carry these bombs, or could they be repurposed? Or is it even something to be concerned about. Just to shortly follow up on this with more detail, the B61s all have full safety/PAL/manual disable functions that must be activated (or deactivated) correctly to achieve any sort of nuclear detonation as the warheads themselves are extremely physics based in operation. You can’t just blow up a nuclear bomb and get a nuclear explosion, you have to very accurately trigger the fission and fusion stages. You can get dirty bomb functionality but it’s probably a lot easier to do that domestically vs attacking a major US installation and stealing B61s. This doesn’t include the possibility that the underground storage facility (assuming it’s the same setup as European storage) is actually secure enough on lockdown that Turkey can’t actually get to those bombs and secure them before Tomahawks start raining into Incirlik from every major body of water around Turkey. I won’t get into the politics side of it because Turkey getting control of those bombs likely means they killed/captured several thousand USAF/NATO servicemen to do so, and probably still don’t have any feasible way to use them in the short or even medium term. It’s not a good idea for anyone involved. Mazz fucked around with this message at 13:22 on Oct 15, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2019 12:58
|
|
|
I will eat cooked/prepared onions without issue but I worked in a wholesale produce warehouse for a long time and the smell of wet or rotten onions and those 50lb mesh bags they have to ship them in (so they breathe) have tainted my perception. There were other items that were bad too but onions consistently sucked to handle; there is a smashed or rotten one in drat near every bag and that smell sticks to things like clothing/gloves.
Mazz fucked around with this message at 13:42 on Oct 21, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2019 13:40
|
|
|
bewbies posted:you can totally tell it is someone who thinks they're brilliant and witty and insightful and he/she gets increasingly irritated as the thread goes on and people don't recognize the spielberg-esque storytelling Was it’s XVIII Corps or 10th Mountain, I feel like I saw the latter originally Either way 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2019 00:52
|
|
|
Tias posted:The rumble of tanks seem to repeat itself often in memoirs as one of the most hated things. The soviets, maybe others as well, practiced "ironing" recruits, which is shoving them all in a trench and driving over them with tanks until they were no longer (as) frightened. There’s a old story of a Wirbelwind unit catching some Allied infantry out in the open and absolutely decimating them in the later part of the war. Like 100% of the unit was KIA/WIA. The Russians in Afghanistan also routinely took the radars off/out ZSU-23/4 and loaded them up with a shitload more ammo, same with M163 and M42s in Vietnam to an extent. Basically any situation where you take AAA and make it primarily anti-personnel they tend to be pretty effective by their very nature. And of course, There are some videos of the A-10 runs in Afghanistan that highlight how much it would suck to be in front of any 2000+ RPM autocannon. Mazz fucked around with this message at 17:03 on Dec 22, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2019 16:50
|
|
poo poo
|
Arglebargle III posted:It would be very funny if the Russians looked at design documents for the Shillelagh missile and were terrified enough to build a whole family of actual working barrel-launched missile systems. The Shillelagh/M81E1 is the one with the keyway that fatigues and breaks off after a while right? There was a whole bunch of things wrong with the MGM-51
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2020 22:45
|
|
|
FastestGunAlive posted:The parts are largely interchangeable which eases maintenance and pilot training- I know the marines and Air Force run f35 pilot exchanges. The goal was interchangeable but lol concurrency; the 35A, B and C have like less than 25% parts commonality, mostly because of the B. Also only the first 2 America’s dumped the well deck and that wasn’t specifically F-35 related; LHD/LHAs are helicopter carriers first and baby carriers second. It’s for more air assets in general. The standard fixed wing attachment is only like 4-6 F-35s IIRC. They can house up to 20 if needed but that’s not a priority of the LHAs at all. The rest of the America flight IIs have the well deck back in design. Mazz fucked around with this message at 14:45 on Jan 31, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2020 14:42
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:Italian Aircraft of World War 2 Part 6 What was the compressor doing? Is it creating extra thrust out the back (looks like some type of exhaust in the tail per the cutaway) or part of the contra rotating props? I don’t think I’ve ever seen a setup like that and 460 seems reasonably quick. Mazz fucked around with this message at 07:00 on Mar 10, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2020 06:57
|
|
|
aphid_licker posted:Man I'd take a 99% chance of vaporization over a 1% chance of drowning in a heartbeat. 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2020 19:48
|
|
|
Beardless posted:Apparently when they're refitting modern subs and have to replace big components, they just cut chunks out of the hull to get access to say the reactor or what have you, and then weld them back into place. They really don’t like doing this though because it is expensive and time consuming. Cutting open the hull to refuel a reactor will take it out of service for a year+ and cost hundreds of millions. The modern USN reactors are enriched to like 80% or something crazy so they can run 30 years without refueling. Mazz fucked around with this message at 19:18 on May 5, 2020 |
|
#
¿
May 5, 2020 19:12
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:That might be the case now, but they definitely use to refuel subs back in the Cold War at least. It was something of a one off so that might be why, but I was just reading about USS Narwhal and they refueled it twice. Yeah, I was referencing the newer reactors like the S9G. Old boats had holes cut in them and the new boats can too, but it’s not something you’d really want to do unless you have no other option. The point I was trying to make is the USN has chosen to enrich up to >90% to lengthen fuel life rather than refueling. I believe for the Virginia this buys them a full additional deployment before planned retirement. Mazz fucked around with this message at 05:06 on May 6, 2020 |
|
#
¿
May 6, 2020 04:56
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:The F-117 I’m hesitant to agree the F-117 really being a game changer; the coalition completely decimated the C2 of the Iraqi air defense structure pretty much immediately with a whole bunch of weapons beyond super secret stealth plane. The F-117 only shined in downtown Baghdad and didn’t even accomplish much that wasn’t accomplished by other available fighters given the information available now 20 years later. There's a reason they shelved the F-117 basically as soon as the F-22 appeared. I think stealth in general is kind of misunderstood as a thing but idk how much I should poo poo up the thread as a random tangent vs the airpower thread or whatever. Mazz fucked around with this message at 03:13 on Jun 15, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2020 03:03
|
|
|
Dance Officer posted:At this point in the war Hitler was well and truly a coke junkie, with the thinking ability that came along with it. It was Meth wasn’t it?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2020 13:42
|
|
|
Was reading about U boats today and remembered that post about S Class and how loving miserable they were and it got me thinking: What is the absolute worst job an enlisted man/women can get in WW2? All nations acceptable, please try to throw in a short reason why so we can get some interesting answers (or at least more than 1-3 word answers). Mazz fucked around with this message at 09:54 on Jun 25, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jun 25, 2020 09:49
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:They get genocided for being "abominations", probably. I KNOW I WOULD 
Mazz fucked around with this message at 16:07 on Jul 19, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2020 16:05
|
|
|
So random add to the thread but I've recently found that History has put lots of Modern Marvels up on YouTube; full length, commerical free. It's really babby's first view of lots of items but some of them are really good and harken back to a time when the History channel was actually good. Here's the playlist of what's there already: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4F4CD715F1A3E6C7&cmpid=Social_YouTube_ModernMarvelsPlaylist
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2020 17:31
|
|
|
Polyakov posted:If you are interested in the Typhoons running costs in practical use: I’ve seen lots of data that puts the Typhoon significantly higher than that. The big problem with CPFH is that the reporting method can include or exclude a large number of variables. Are we taking purely fuel/flight costs or operating costs per flight hour including maintenance? Is each source using the same metrics or reporting methods? There’s a reason Austria is so dissatisfied with their Tranche 1 Typhoons they are about to retire and/or sell them to Indonesia less then 15 years after they received them. That, and that AFAIK the Typhoon has never been downselected in any possible international sale outside of Arabian Peninsula pocket lining exercises; its a very expensive airplane for what it is. In fact, the last reported flyaway cost has it at ~$10 million more than a F-35A, although the F-35 is greatly benefiting from current economies of scale in that equation. England/Germany/Italy/Spain will make it work, sure, but you can say the same for the 5x as many F-35 operating nations. In the mean time they’ll both continue to swallow money like a MIC black hole. Honestly if I was going to spend 100 million per plane, I’d be buying F-15EXs. It’s big, mature, extremely capable and is getting into Ace Combat levels of loadout craziness with the outboard stations active. 28 GBU-53s 
Mazz fucked around with this message at 06:05 on Aug 3, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2020 05:24
|
|
|
Polyakov posted:Its a reasonable point but one that i think applies to basically all planes that arent out of the US. The Rafale has had the same sort of adoption pattern as the eurofighter, outside of the Arabian gulf yes the Indians have bought some but the Spanish have bought significantly more eurofighters than them. Gripen sales seem to happen largely based on very favourable loan terms from the Swedish government or on long term lease, and a few of their sales have been up to their tits in corruption allegations. Ah, okay. I misconstrued your post/argument, we’re basically in agreement.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2020 15:00
|
|
|
Tias posted:Which eastern country was it that took the T-55 and made some pretty substantial upgrades to it in the modern age (outside of Poland and Russia)? I want to say Romania, but I can't find it on wikipedia, and someone posted here about it at one point, I rememeber. drat near everyone who fielded it, as Kyoon said. The Russians themselves were still putting out upgrade packages into the mid 90s, see the T-55M6. It’s the same thing for nearly all tanks, planes, etc; if the platform allows it, you can modernize for quite a long time and maintain some degree of capability in an otherwise outdated platform. At some point it makes more sense to just start over with those capabilities in mind instead of having to find ways to fit everything in. The F-15 and 16 are also very good examples; it’s easy to forget those planes entered production 60+ years ago. The F-16V and F-15EX are like the 4th or 5th generation of those platforms, and comically more capable than the originals because of available avionics, radar, weapons, etc, even if the airframes are relatively unchanged. But in the end, the F-35 and F-22 were designed/built because there’s only so much you can do with a 60 year old airframe (ignoring cost and internet bullshit of course). Mazz fucked around with this message at 12:38 on Aug 11, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2020 12:31
|
|
|
Arban posted:By the way, is there any contries that still use the T-55 in active units? NK and China still have T-55 deriatives in active service in some form, and they still show up all over the Middle East and Africa. Probably some others too.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2020 14:00
|
|
|
Cessna posted:Are you posting this from 2035? Is Trump still President? For some reason I was thinking mid 60s this morning, anyways you’re correct. Either way that’s still 45+ years in active service and still in very active production.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2020 05:19
|
|
|
There was an F-18 shot down by a Mig-25 in GW1 but that’s all I can remember. The rest were all SAMs and AAA.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2020 07:24
|
|
|
Would Allied strategic bombing poison the soil of Berlin and other cities like you hear of WWI battelgrounds or were the explosives, etc different?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2020 13:04
|
|
|
Perestroika posted:That makes me wonder: Is there some practical limit to recoilless guns in terms of calibre/muzzle energy, aside from crew considerations? Without having to worry about liquefying the user, could you reasonably make a 155mm+ recoilless howitzer? Or do you eventually reach a point where just outright using a rocket/missile instead would be more sensible? I assume past a certain point single piece ammo gets untenable and I don’t think you can do powder bags in a recoilless rifle In any kind of reasonable way. Also the backblast would probably be like “ don’t stand within a mile of this thing.” Also yeah past a certain size a rocket/missile is just going to have much higher performance in the same package. An MLRS is only 227mm. Mazz fucked around with this message at 13:41 on Sep 15, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2020 13:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 19, 2024 10:55 |
|
|
I’m almost positive a C-17 pilot I know had LASIK done. It was not allowed a ways back but they changed that In like the last decade or so. EDIT: Yeah, LASIK was cleared in 2007 and the other thing shortly before that. Mazz fucked around with this message at 06:10 on Oct 3, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2020 06:08
|
|