King Tiger

[Slapdragon]

"again quite rightly as another ignorant westerner"

This was quite racist and a flame -- intended to censor the discussion when it went beyond your control . Your are placing people into categories and it is unacceptable behavior no matter who you are. If the sentence were turned around, I would be banned from this group for a racist remark. If you were new to English I might understand (I once said something quite embarressing to a woman in Portugeuse when I asked "where does the small bus to town leave from?" but used the Spanish word for small bus buseta, which is a dirty word to a brazillian) a mistake in grammar, but you seem to speak English well.

I happen to believe all racism is wrong (although in many cases built in we still have to fight it). The funny thing is I am talking about the Soviets, on which a lot of research has been done about the poor quality of information transferal -- the communists were terrible at sharing and working with scientific data because the politcal system made failure, at least in the 1950s, severely punishable. You have taken the term "Soviets" and attached new meaning to it, that of a large group of people called "Easterners". Then became mad when people criticised the Soviet system.

Well -- I will make you even madder -- The Soviet system was terrible for the free exchange of scientifc information, and much of the data that one gets from former Soviet data sources is useless. I never said US/GB data was any better -- in many cases it is not, or has been redacted for security purposes until it is useless (but in many cases it is much much more reliable), I did say that Soviet data sources are often more suspect .

Does this mean all Soviet data is crap? Of course not. When I see a well thought out data set with a good test I grab it no matter were it comes from. When you read a test report from cover to cover you can tell how well it was made by what is kept and what is avoided -- for example I have read conclusions that do not even conclude what the tests show in the data.

To make sure everyone understands this: Soviet is not a race and never has been -- it is a former polictical unit. My disdain for the Soviet system of information transfer is great because the Soviet documents I have to deal with are often crap.

Science is based on skeptiicism and is hard to learn. Good science is understandable and is supported by evidence. Evidence that can be reviewed by all and which conforms to a number of apects already mentioned.

On previous threads Steve has build us a theory on how penetration works. Unlike anyone including me he has codified it into mathematics based upon a set of scientifc theories he has (not I do not say facts). This is the established reality.

To break a paradigm you must first show it to be wanting by showing that it does not correctly fit reality, then you must present a method that does fit reality. You cannot throw out two flawed tests or a picture of a shot up tank and say: see it is wrong. What you need is:

1) A body of evidence, including back ground on the evidence, which demonstrates the flaw.

2) A new theory which accounts both for existing evidence and does not exhibit the flaw.

When Steve comes on and says: "nothing new here, come up with something" You all get really mad, but he and Charles should be getting mad because no one is willing to, in one place, present the problem AND present a new set of math to handle penetration built from a coherent theory. My undergraduates cannot get away with that sort of sloppy thinking.

So: I challenge everyone in this to follow through and solve the problem. Gather your evidence in one place. Work out a set of math that accounts for everything from a .50 caliber to a 90mm, and then put it forward for peer review bu the list. If anyone did that instead of throwing odd tidbits out and then backing off or throwing racist invective out when you get disagreed with I would be writing 1800 words in support of your position. I am willing to lay odds that Steve and Charles would come to your way of thinking if you did it right.

[This message has been edited by Slapdragon (edited 09-25-2000).]

[Simon Fox]

This seems familiar hehe.

But slappy, you just don't 'understand' it's so much easier to be snide Anyway that's a pretty expensive collander the russians have there.

[Slapdragon]

Collander? I thought they were making a Gerbil "Panzertrail" and that is were they stick the little tubes.

Simon, I have an idea. I have 20 new possible cures for cancer. Lets grab one guy on the street and give them all to him on the same day. Think we could coauthor an article?

[This message has been edited by Slapdragon (edited 09-25-2000).]

[Paul Lakowski]

Steve, I ignor rasism which is why I ignor most of you rabblings.

Second the formula has been found wanting already in the area of slanted penetration which is why it was dismissed decades ago.

Third I'm aleady working on a replacement by simple adaptation of Andersons long rod formula which already has been shown to work in this region...but like anything this takes time and digging for data.

Again unlike you I'll do the work instead of waxing eternal.

Rgds Paul

[PzKpfw 1]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon:

When Steve comes on and says: "nothing new here, come up with something" You all get really mad, but he and Charles should be getting mad because no one is willing to, in one place, present the problem AND present a new set of math to handle penetration built from a coherent theory. My undergraduates cannot get away with that sort of sloppy thinking.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This realy belongs on the 88 Lacking thread. I don't agree that Steve or Charles should be mad at all, we are mereley attempting to quantify what is correct, no one is paying us to do it etc, nor does it ruin CM.

The detractor/conspiracists here are not the ones who claimed the wartime KwK.43 test data was no good, so Why do we have to provide anything? we didn't claim that the KwK.43 LF test data was incorrect nor has BTS supplied any evidence matching your criteria's metholodgy to prove CM's KwK.43 results.

We questioned this & were branded various monikers, we were then told if we disagreed to 'provide' hard data that proves the results are wrong. Yet we have never been provided hard data that they are correct.

Usualy when ppl makes a claim that goes against the grain, they provide the data that led them to that conclusion; so ppl can determine how they reached the conclusion in question. Instead here it falls on anyone who dares disagree to prove the oposite.

And now it turns out that the KwK.43 @ 30^ data was not provided by the formulas base which was the B ritish 1950 armor pen report, but provided by an outside source.

So all this is moot as BTS's formula apperently didn't generate any of the 30^ results. As well as the fact that BTS doesn't even use LF test data, so you could have 3 nations that got the similar results and that would mean absolutely nothing to this discussion.

So Slapdragon; how do we 'present a new set of math to handle penetration built from a coherent theory'? with no examples of how BTS even reached their formula results, used in CM terms & we wont see an example as it's 'propritery' etc, etc, etc.

Regards, John Waters

--------------

"You can take anything you want, but you better not take it from me".

[This message has been edited by PzKpfw 1 (edited 09-25-2000).]

[Slapdragon]

Easy, you do not need their formula. Math is math and mathematical formulas do not need derivation to be created. I can create three different formula strings in Mathematica that come up with almost the same answer, just done differently.

Why should you prove it? I don't think you should prove it. I think the 88L71 is modelled just fine as it is. I think you should just drop the whole thing.

However, if you really really want to build a model and argue coherently, than not only do I support you, but I will help you form the basis for the argument, and if you strike gold I will provide my energies, despite initially not thinking you are correct, to lobby for a change in the engine.

In other words, it seems any attempt to bring this discussion around to actually doing something constructive leads to name calling and racism, which in science means their is nothing here. The Cold Fusion guys were the same way ten years ago. This is our boards cold fusion.

In science (which yes, I know many people are in the antiscience crowd) the established does not have to prove itself, the information outside the establishment has to first show that the establishment is wrong, then come up with a new model.

If however you just want to have a beer and pretzels crystal rubbing on the subject, just say so in your post heading. You could form the Subjective Agreement Club, and vote on matters of physics, maybe even repeal gravity by acclimation, and I wont post one line in disagreement . Or you can discuss the issue as a matter of historical note, and I will put on my historians cap and follow the rules of historical research, which is far easier to argue subjectively because all history is subjective.

I just think no one wants to put forward their own theory, and I am willing to bet no one will. It is a lot of work, for no financial gain, as I well know from the real world of research.

[Paul Lakowski]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon:

Why should you prove it? I don't think you should prove it. I think the 88L71 is modelled just fine as it is. I think you should just drop the whole thing.

However, if you really really want to build a model and argue coherently, than not only do I support you, but I will help you form the basis for the argument, and if you strike gold I will provide my energies, despite initially not thinking you are correct, to lobby for a change in the engine.

In other words, it seems any attempt to bring this discussion around to actually doing something constructive leads to name calling and racism, which in science means their is nothing here. The Cold Fusion guys were the same way ten years ago. This is our boards cold fusion.

In science (which yes, I know many people are in the antiscience crowd) the established does not have to prove itself, the information outside the establishment has to first show that the establishment is wrong, then come up with a new model.

If however you just want to have a beer and pretzels crystal rubbing on the subject, just say so in your post heading. You could form the Subjective Agreement Club, and vote on matters of physics, maybe even repeal gravity by acclimation, and I wont post one line in disagreement . Or you can discuss the issue as a matter of historical note, and I will put on my historians cap and follow the rules of historical research, which is far easier to argue subjectively because all history is subjective.

I just think no one wants to put forward their own theory, and I am willing to bet no one will. It is a lot of work, for no financial gain, as I well know from the real world of research.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Steve I think your losing it, this bit about racism is a 'cop out' as its taken out of

context .I told you that if you talked to the Russian source and imply that there results are flawed because there Russian, he'd ignore you, as another ignorant westerner. I said this cause I've seen it happen to others.

What you seem tobe saying is that you see nothing wrong with the way the 88 is

handled , so why fix it if it ain't broken...well you point is duly noted.

If your serious about this, answers can be found but it requires digging.I guess what

your saying to us in this round about manner is that you have nothing to contribute.

[Slapdragon]

Your comment was racist, and your post an attempt to start a flame war. Even worse you cannot see it as racist.

I don't want to stop the crystal rubbing and tarot card reading of the 88L71 group, do it all you please. My attempt was to help you form a useful argument, since everytime this subject comes up there is a barrage of slandering the game designers for no useful end. I just want to make sure everytime you read some fact from your tarot cards, a scientific explanation is there for a little reality check.

So, rub crystals and pull tarort to your hearts content! Be happy! You may be able to soon repeal the theory of gravity if you pull the correct tarot cards.

[Slapdragon]

OK, I admit defeat. Science is not useful in talking about ballistics. I will however, carry on the argument using the 88L71 gangs own techniques against them.

That is my side of the argument. Let us see your cards.

[This message has been edited by Slapdragon (edited 09-25-2000).]

[Paul Lakowski]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon:

Your comment was racist, and your post an attempt to start a flame war. Even worse you cannot see it as racist.

I don't want to stop the crystal rubbing and tarot card reading of the 88L71 group, do it all you please. My attempt was to help you form a useful argument, since everytime this subject comes up there is a barrage of slandering the game designers for no useful end. I just want to make sure everytime you read some fact from your tarot cards, a scientific explanation is there for a little reality check.

So, rub crystals and pull tarort to your hearts content! Be happy! You may be able to soon repeal the theory of gravity if you pull the correct tarot cards. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Steve what are you on about with this rub crystals stuff

[Slapdragon]

Rubbing crystals? One of my students cited her father during a dinner conversation as proof that violence on television effects children. I asked her if I could cite my crystals as inspriation and she said, "what is wrong with crystals?"

[PzKpfw 1]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon:

In science (which yes, I know many people are in the antiscience crowd) the established does not have to prove itself, the information outside the establishment has to first show that the establishment is wrong, then come up with a new model.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I wasn't aware anyone had scientificly established, anything concerning the KwK.43 penetration Slapdragon, please point me to the post that established it & i'll goi read it.

Regards, John Waters

------------------

Notice: Spelling mistakes left in for people who need to correct others to make their life fulfilled.

[Slapdragon]

Thank you for agreeing PzKpfw 1. You are right, only tarot readings have been done on the weapon. I cannot point you to one because I have yet to find one, and I am extremely happy you have come around to this way of thinking.

I congratulate you on figuring out my main argument. I will pull a couple of more cards to help you out in your research just to show how happy I am that you have admitted no rational basis for your arguments!!!

Opps, sorryt, just unlucky in cards. These say that the system works unless you prove it does not.

For all of Paul's racist east - west dribble drabble, at least he is working on a new math with a useful basis. So I will just stick to the tarot cards for discussing penetration on ballistics.

[This message has been edited by Slapdragon (edited 09-25-2000).]

[M Hofbauer]

ok whatever you are propagating I agree with all of you just let me go through this crowd for a virtual handshake with Valera...

Valera! Didn't want to miss this opportunity to greet you. Hope everything is going jolly fine for you! CM is a great game, you should take a look at it.

Markus Hofbauer

btw: Slapdragon, you are distorting the results by using french tarot cards. It is a well-established fact in the tarot science community that french tarot cards are about 2 to 4(!) mm shorter, have a slight ultraviolet hue and consequently are, roughly speaking, 34.7 % less effective in finding the Only Real Truth.

------------------

"Say i think u all need to chill out." (GAZ_NZ)

[This message has not been massaged]

[This message has been edited by M Hofbauer (edited 09-25-2000).]

[Vanir]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Paul Lakowski:

.

Second the formula has been found wanting already in the area of slanted penetration which is why it was dismissed decades ago.

Rgds Paul<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Paul, you seem to have missed the later happenings in the 88/71 thread. Charles has stated there that CM's sloped penetration values are based on Robert Livingston's formulas, not the British 1950 report. Unless you meant to say that Livingston's formulas were dismissed decades ago.

Like Slappy I too question if whether or not the 88/71 penetrates 150 or 165mm of armor at 1000m is really worth 300+ posts. It really seems academic as at the engagement ranges we see in CM the 88/71 will go through any Allied vehicle at any angle like a hot knife through butter, so it doesn't affect gameplay. Then again, people should feel free to discuss these things if thats what flips their switch.

Steve has stated that he will likely revise the CM formulas when Livingston publishes his book, so hopefully that will happen before CM2. Until then I'm not really sure what more there is to say about the subject (I'm sure someone will think of something

Michael Graham

------------------

No, there will be no sequels. Charles and Steve have given up wargame design in disgust and have gone off to Jamaica to invest their new-found wealth in the drug trade. -Michael emrys

[This message has been edited by Vanir (edited 09-25-2000).]

[Teutonicc]

Penetration smenitration. Just give me one of these and I will say who cares about a little 88/L71.

http://www.members.home.net/teutonicc/t28194~1.jpg

http://www.members.home.net/teutonicc/t28194~2.jpg

http://www.members.home.net/teutonicc/t28194~3.jpg

http://www.members.home.net/teutonicc/t28194~4.jpg

------------------

Teutonicc

edited because i have no clue as to this html/ubb stuff and if you have a problem using the links suggest copying link into a new browser window.

[This message has been edited by Teutonicc (edited 09-25-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Teutonicc (edited 09-25-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Teutonicc (edited 09-25-2000).]

[Slapdragon]

Markus!!! You imbecile!! Are you suggesting that science should use German Tarot cards? I spit on the idea. I fart in your general direction, I wave my private parts at you!!!!!!

Of course:

[PzKpfw 1]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon:

Thank you for agreeing PzKpfw 1. You are right, only tarot readings have been done on the weapon. I cannot point you to one because I have yet to find one, and I am extremely happy you have come around to this way of thinking.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was refering to the fact that in these threads no one had produced anything that invaladates the Wa Pruf test results to date. I have no idea why tarot cards are even being mentioned, other then an attempt at sarcasm/ humor.

I'm also a bit confused on these constant racist referals to Paul, I read the posts; all I saw was a observation where if a person runs off with an attitude and tell's a Russian his countries testing methods are suspect, because they are Russian, and as such are obvioiusly not up to Westren standards etc, & expect to be treated in kind, I have already seen the results first hand, & so has Paul.

Anyone can feel free to drop in on the RMZ forum & tell everyone their, how they know Russian tests are all unreliable etc, & bring up the concerns over the KT article in the same tones used here, by many & just watch the reaction.

Considering David Glantz, Charles Sharp, etc, all, hang out their the reaction should be quite interesting & informing.

Regards, John Waterts

------------------

Notice: Spelling mistakes left in for people who need to correct others to make their life fulfilled.

[This message has been edited by PzKpfw 1 (edited 09-26-2000).]

[Slapdragon]

All SOVIET testing must be looked at twice. I am not ware of any Russian tests presented -- although I am sure quite a few of the ballistic scientists involved in both the Soviet tests and the US/GB tests were Russian. If you are aware of any testing that was restricted to people of Russian descent, then you have an interesting tidbit, but I question why Georgian, Azerbijiani and Armenian researchers were restricted from the testing.

Of course, the good thing about racism is that it can be ignored when he agrees with your point. I compliment you on your elastic ethics. The comment: "just another ignorant westerner" is just as racist as if I said "just another ignorant Jew", "just another ignorant Quebecker", or "just another ignorant Russian". Your acceptance of racism is alarming. The world has a great history of acceptance of actual racism (I am not talking political correctness -- that is the removal of the ability to make all critique, equally wrong). The most famous racist events are of course Nazi Germany's treatment of jews, but we can point to the Florida Rosewood massacre of blacks as a closer example. These terrible events come from a group of people who are unwilling to point out racism in its everyday manifestation: the ability to generalize the intelligence or position of one race over another. We, the common people, are who accept racist attitudes and feed the Rwandas of the world.

Since this is a racist discussion, I am leaving it (see: no need to argue facts, your tarot reading is waiting!) and I would advise everyone who is sickened by racism to leave it to the people who accept this sort of behavior.

Good luck!

[This message has been edited by Slapdragon (edited 09-26-2000).]

[JoePrivate]

Slapdragon,

Another observation after reading this thread, whether from prior experience or conditioning in your life you are way off base here with your (incomprehensible) talk of racism, crystals and tarot cards. You appear unable to view the discussion and participants in a clear or fresh manner, instead smothering it with your biases. If I may be permitted to offer a suggestion, it is to ask you to read and reflect upon the posts as they are and not as you wish. Your creative talents regarding tarot cards and the like may be better suited in the Cesspool.

[Paul Lakowski]

Steve I have been on the recieving end of racism so I know what it is. As far as I'm concerned this racist discussion is over.

I would like to know how BTS is going to deal with Russian penetration data in CM-2?

If the German data is ignored is the Russian data also going to be ignored?

I include Charles in a small Email discussion on Russian projectiles and we found out, from Valera, that the 122mm APHE round had a tendancy to detonate right after impact. Which suggest that spaced plates could defeat this projectile. Valera also suggested this might explain why the 122mm was defeated by Tiger -1 mantle [ spaced plate].

If you don't go to the Russian sources you won't find out these little tidbits.

[risc]

Hi John,

What do you mean by "RMZ forum" I would like to check it out...

Thanks...

Peter

[PzKpfw 1]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Since this is a racist discussion, I am leaving it (see: no need to argue facts, your tarot reading is waiting!) and I would advise everyone who is sickened by racism to leave it to the people who accept this sort of behavior.

Good luck!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Excuse me??? where has this discussion gone racist? please point it out, I take offense at your labeling this discussion as 'racist'and sugest you either back it up with evidence or troll somewhere else.

Thats fine Slap as your whole contribution to this thread has been to dodge the issues & use poor sarcastic attempts at humor or whatever, know it all remarks, tarot card infatuations, accusing naysayers of slanderous comments vs BTS, & finaly spreading racist insinuations; when your opinion is not accepted, here & in the "Are Shermans overpriced" thread.

So Bye,& good luck in your racist witchunts etc, etc, etc....

Regards, John Waters

------------------

Notice: Spelling mistakes left in for people who need to correct others to make their life fulfilled.

[This message has been edited by PzKpfw 1 (edited 09-26-2000).]

[PzKpfw 1]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by risc:

Hi John,

What do you mean by "RMZ forum" I would like to check it out...

Thanks...

Peter<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Peter head on over to Valeriy's Russian Military Zone it's an very unique site at:

http://history.vif2.ru/

Goto Military forums & enjoy..

Regards, John Waters

[This message has been edited by PzKpfw 1 (edited 09-26-2000).]

[Combatboy]

I know you guys don't like people to disagree with you, and since I am new to the thread I am sticking my neck out here.

I think that comment was predjudice and maybe ignorant, but I also think that guy has a 1st Amendment Right to say it. Slapdragon sounds like he is some sort of minority, so maybe he is just more touchy than the rest of us are. So if he just agreed that people had the right to say things even if they are predjudice, and if you agreed he was allowed to be against it, then it would all be ok.

His science stuff though is stupid. You guys are right, it is just a game, and German tanks rocked in real life, so making sure they rock in the game is cool! I don't understand the whole tarot thing. I hated science in College cause they are so uptight about everything.

He made a good point though. Even I know that Russians and Soviets are two different things. I had a class at SPJC in European history, and you guys keep saying Russian, when it is Soviet -- cause there was a hole lot more people in that country than just Soviets.

Thanks for letting me speak.

[This message has been edited by Combatboy (edited 09-26-2000).]