Stalins Organ
-
Posts
1,972 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Stalins Organ
-
-
Was thinking of reinstalling this as a good time waster, but I see there's no simple summary of what needs to be done these days to connect - any chance of an update??
-
Avional as mentioned in the 2nd picture is a high strength aluminium alloy - there's not a lot on the web about it.
but translating the info on the 2nd photo - I found reference to "Mines fire cartridge 93 with base fuse Mi Br Pat 93 BoZ " - a translation of this page (link is to google translate) under "Munitions"
There's a PDF about modern 30 & 35mm ammo here that is a good read, although I cant' tell if the ammo identified above is part of it - it's still pretty cool.....as long as you're not on the receiving end!!
-
I wouldn't think of it as armour so much as successive skins - the aircraft outer skin, perhaps some light armour around the cockpit area, and/or some internal structural members, the engine structure, etc.
-
On the contrary, the Americans were the least agile of the major powers when it came to introducing new classes of tanks as the situation warranted. I'd say it was the Russians who got the concept of the modern tank right with the T-34.
The T34 was not a modern tank tho - it had a 2 man turret and was unreliable and as awkward as all heck to operate. The engine/transmission layout was appalling so when the T34/85 was introduced it was grossly overbalanced - something that could only be rectified by massively increasing the strength of the front springs - which did nothing to improve the ride. Ammunition stowage was pathetic - 9 rounds ready in the '76!!
the T34 did have good armour, a good gun and good mobility for 1941 - but it was not as fantastic as many people would like to believe.
As for operational "agility" - the US introduced the 76mm Sherman in July 1944, the Russians got the T34/85 operational in May - so there's not a lot of difference in eth timeline there.
The Pershing was as good as anything anyone else produced - so again, not sure what your point is. A "political" decision was made to not produce it in numbers in favour of Shermans.......but that's certainly nothing to do with US design agility.
-
It wasn't the depression - that affected everybody. And everybody went for the same mix of tanks - "Infantry" and "cruiser" to use the British parlance - in Germany they were the Pz 4 and Pz 3, in Russia they were the BT (cruiser) and the T26 & T28, in France they were the H35 and R35 and Char as infantry, and Souma as Cruiser - cavalry tanks as they French termed them (although the French then fielded the R35 as a cavalry tank.....go figure!)
WW2 was a time of massive change - the Germans had tanks that were better suited to upgrading rapidly - 3 man turrets were a major advantage to them and were developed due to their better thinking about command and control during the depression. The Russians got it about 2/3rds right with the T34, and 90% right with het KV-1 in 1939-40 so had the "raw material" for effective tanks before they went to war. The British Cavalier was also specified in 1940, but was a bit of a turkey and eventually became eth Cromwell after a couple of years of development.
The Americans had nothing at all effective in 1939 - but like the Soviets had 1940-41 to absorb some of the lessons of the early war and got the formulae right with the Sherman (in the sense of a "modern" concept)
so IMO the Brits suffered because they were early into the war with a faulty doctrine & designs that they lacked the industrial clout to alter quickly at exactly the time they needed to.
-
-
At he start of the war the British had pretty much the same types of tanks as everyone else - light machine-gun armed recce vehicles, only marginally better armoured "cruisers", and "infantry" tanks - but British doctrine had some differences with others that aren't really important - tank guns only for killing tanks (so no HE), more armour for het Infantry tanks...
so...anyway - then WW2 comes along and the Brits tanks are just as good/bad as everyone else's, with a couple of standouts - the Matilda's have heavy armour & get a good rep. But as with everyone except the Germans their doctrine and command and control are rubbish and the get beat.
Here's where the problem starts - people start designing new tanks to learn the early war lessons, or they modify existing tanks.....but British tanks have some shortcomings - the main one is that the turrets are small - and the turret ring is too small to take bigger guns. So they are stuck with pre-ear concepts of tanks at the same time everyone else is moving on - the T34, Sherman and Pz-IV F2 onwards are all good medium tanks that the Brits can't match - they have no such tank in the development pipeline, nor can they make significant changes to existing designs.
They did up gun the Valentine and Crusader with 6 pounders (57mm) - but these arrived quite late - only 100 Crusader III's with the 6 pdr were available at el Alamain in October 1942, and the 6 pdr Valentines only became available at the end of the African campaign. Both modification also came at a cost - the Crusader lost a crew member so eth commander became het gunner, and the Valentine lost it's machinegun!!
so through 1942 the Brits are mostly still fighting with a lot of their cruiser designs that are great examples of the pre-war concept.......but out gunned/armoured and commanded.
So they have to design a "decent" tank from scratch - they make the Cromwell.....which would have been great in 1942 but isn't any more in 1944. The Churchill is in the pipeline as an old-style "Infantry tank" - slow with heavy armour - it is tough enough to be useful........but it's not great.
By the late war the Brits have figured it out and the Comet and then Centurion show that they weren't idiots by any stretch of the imagination.
-
Guy I know visited the set during filming and they got the Tiger out just for him when they found he'd come all the way from NZ - he got to climb all over and in it.......bastard!
He pretty much agrees with JJR's assessment!!
-
who says you have to have any qualification to leave school?
Does the USA keep people in school forcibly past the age of majority if they do not get whatever is required to "graduate"?
I suspect not.
and it is probably no different in Aus.
Certainly here in NZ there is constant measurement of how many kids are getting qualifications at each level of high school and efforts made to teach them things that they might be interested in if not the traditional academic subjects - but some still don't get any.
-
If it is the programme I am thinking of..... these girls have been selected precisely because they are what one might call vacuous bimbo's - they are not a random or representative selection of Australian youth!
-
Wow - I never realized that pizza covered in various cheap manufactured sauces, cheeses & other stuff was so artificial.
(sarcasm alert)
Seriously - did anyone ever think it was anything else??
-
Huh?
and again Huh? 'cos I need more letters....
-
I'm not sure if that's their primary motivation, but it could be a part of it for sure. As I said before, I think it's more of a ploy to keep the same revenue coming into state coffers through volume instead of premium. Put another way, if they used to sell 1 barrel at $110 they will be almost as happy selling 2 barrels at $70. What they won't be happy with is selling 1 barrel at $80. The latter problem is what Russia has right now.
Each country has an average cost of production/break even price, and of course many of them have budgeted for certain prices - eg see here for 6 countries that are "screwed" (Businessinsider's term, not mine!) by dropping prices.
Forbes has this analysis of break even and floor prices for oil that is also interesting reading.
-
No he didn't, not really.
-
Of course he didn't die at the Alamo - he made 2 more 1 hour TV programmes after that!!
-
20 August 1940
Tasman Sea - New Zealand Shipping Co freighter TURAKINA is sunk by German raider ORION 260 miles west of Taranaki. 36 crew are killed, and 20 survivors are taken prisoner.
An illustration of the risks taken by merchant ships even half a world away from "the war":
The raider signalled the Turakina to stop instantly and not use her wireless. Captain Laird at once ordered maximum full speed, turned his ship stern on to the enemy, and instructed the radio office to broadcast the ‘raider signal’. The Orion then opened fire at a range of about 5250 yards with the object of destroying the Turakina’s radio office and aerials. Nevertheless, the Turakina was able to make her signal several times, and it was received by stations in Australia and New Zealand in spite of the raider’s efforts to jam it. She gave her position as approximately 260 miles west by north from Cape Egmont and some 400 miles from Wellington.The Turakina at once replied to the enemy’s fire with her single 4.7-inch gun, and, in the gathering dusk, there began the first action ever fought in the Tasman Sea. It was an unequal contest, but Captain Laird had vowed that he would fight his ship to the last if ever he was attacked. At the close range of two and a half miles, the raider’s fire quickly wrought havoc on board the Turakina. The first salvoes brought down the fore topmast and the lookout, partly wrecked the bridge, destroyed the range-finder, and put most of the telephones out of action. The galley and the engineers’ quarters were hit by shells which set the vessel badly on fire amidships. In little more than a quarter of hour she was reduced to a battered, blazing wreck and was settling aft; more than half her crew had been killed and others were wounded. At least one of her shells had burst on board the raider and wounded a number of Germans. To hasten her destruction, the raider discharged a torpedo at a range of about a mile, but ‘due to the swell it broke surface and hit the steamer on the stern. No visible damage results. The vessel burns like a blazing torch,’ wrote Captain Weyher.
Meanwhile, Captain Laird had given the order to abandon ship. The two port lifeboats had been wrecked, but one of the starboard boats got away from the ship with three officers and eleven hands, seven of whom were wounded. A number of wounded were put into the remaining boat, but when it was lowered a sea swept it away from the ship’s side and it was some time before it could be worked back again. When the lifeboat came alongside, the badly wounded chief radio officer was put into it and the others were told by Captain Laird to ‘jump for it’. At that moment a second torpedo struck the Turakina, which sank two minutes later. The only survivors of the explosion were the third officer, the seventh engineer, an apprentice, two able seamen, a fireman, and a steward. They were picked up by the raider, as were the fourteen men in the other boat. An able seaman, who had been badly hurt when the Turakina’s foremast was shot down, died on board the Orion and was buried next day. Captain Laird and thirty-three of his officers and men had died in the Turakina, and twenty survivors were prisoners in German hands.
In refusing to stop when challenged and in ordering wireless messages to be transmitted, Captain Laird had carried out an obligation that was accepted by thousands of British and Allied shipmasters. The Turakina and her ship’s company paid a great price, but the raider was compelled to leave the Tasman Sea and did not sink another ship for two months
the cruiser HMNZS Achilles was in Wellington harbor and undertook a search when it could sail 2 1/2 hours after the raider call was received, but found nothing.
-
11 August 1943
Pacific - During fighting for Munda airfield, on New Georgia Island in the Solomon Islands, First Commando Fiji Guerrillas kill over 1,000 Japanese troops. Six New Zealanders in the Guerrillas are killed and three wounded.
.....
Interesting - I'd never heard of this unit - a quick google search turns up a fair bit.
Here's a (longish) extract from the first page of a quite long work on the Pacific commando units, explaining the rationale for them being set up:
At the "Washington Conference in 1922, Great Britain and America agreed to the expansion of the Japanese Navy within certain limits. However, this Navy grew and grew until, in 1941, Japan had absolute supremacy in the north-west Pacific. By the early months of 1942, the Japanese had had a succession of victories (though mostly unresisted), which brought them as far south as Guadalcanal in the Solomon Islands: they had also established bases in the Gilbert Group, less than eight hours flying time from Fiji. At this period the British Navy was being kept busy in the Atlantic and Mediterranean, while the American Navy had not yet recovered from the Pearl Harbour attack.
The combination of these factors placed Fiji in a very critical position for several months while the United States was organising her forces. Fiji possesses, among other things, two good harbours and two airfields: its geographical position put it astride the sea and air routes of all supplies transported from America to Australia and New Zealand. Thus, apart from the use Japan could make of Fiji as a base, the enemy was well aware that to deny the Allies the use of Fiji would mean disaster to New Zealand and Australian life lines.
The small number of troops garrisoned in Fiji was reinforced with all the men New Zealand could spare, or divert from her commitments in the Middle East. It also became necessary to mobilise Fijian manpower where practicable. Even with reinforcements the Force was not large enough to maintain defensive positions at all points of the Fiji Group, so it was divided and troops stationed at each end of Viti Levu, the main island of the Group. These troops were to defend the important strategical points of Suva Harbour and Naurosi Airfield in the east, and Lautoka Harbour and Nandi Airfield in the west. The rest of the island was covered by mechanised patrols; but as there was only one road winding for three hundred miles around the island, and as visibility was restricted because of the dense bush on all sides, the position was not entirely satisfactory. The Third New Zealand Division therefore decided to set up commando units at all the most inaccessible spots between the fixed defence positions. The commandos were to oppose, with delaying action, enemy landings from sea or air, and to deny the enemy the use of the road until the main Allied forces could be brought into position.
The island was divided into three sectors — Western, Eastern, and Southern—and in April, 1942, commando companies were formed in each of these sectors.
The name "commando" was used in its older sense and applied to these units because they were independent companies, almost self-contained. They were more strictly speaking, "guerrillas," for had the Japanese actually landed in Fiji they would have adopted a harassing role; and while they were not large enough forces to prevent a landing, they would have been sharp thorns in the sides of an invading enemy.
-
I think WW1 Grand Strategy, done properly, would make for a very good wargame.
Guns of August remains by far and away the best grand strategic WW1 game around IMO - it is unashamedly GRAND strategic - none of this namby pamby division level stuff - you get Corps, you get fleet battles (if you want), arbitrary air points for recce, simple but deep resource allocation for everything (infantry equip, tans, artillery, air, gas, naval - the whole shebang), national morale/manpower, starvation, international commerce, political revolution - all brilliantly and simply integrated in one of my all time favourite "counter" style computer games.
Unfortunately it has to be said there are some bugs and although the interface is also brilliant it isn't intuitive!
But it's also now 7 years od and cheap
Hopefully Frank Hunter will do something to improve it for this centenary anniversary.
I can't stand Strategic Command WW1 and CEAW WW1 - sorry, but they are kludges, even though I beta tested both of the original games - I don't like them for WW2 either - blech!
-
I currently have 3 games of TOAW on the go.......all of them essentially strategic rather than operational!!
Third Reich - WW2 in Europe 1942 on div level
Europe Aflame: WW2 in Europe from June 1939 (so you can change a few things on either side
) - Corps levelFire in the East - Eastern Front Reg level for Axis, div for Soviets
-
Someone is taking up your calling Jon - 26 June 1918 Wimmera sinks after striking mine laid by Wolf a year before.
-
My only experience with "cops" in the USA was when I as about 20 in an Casino in Atlantic City and a blonde security officer asked for my ID....I think I was a little slow on the uptake tho
-
Here's McKeich's page in the Auckland War Memorial archive.
There is no record for a Robert McKeigh - more than likely the headstone was incorrectly completed some time after his death from imperfect records.
-
Which part of NO POLITICS wasn't clear to you?
-
Still playing The Operational Arty of War on a daily basis
Anyone played steel fury by graviteam? Thoughts?
in General Discussion Forum
Posted
Quite an old game now and the developer no longer exists....
Sadly I also just started playing War Thunder, which has proved to be utterly addictive and I no longer have a life!