Author Topic: Revolting Uniting  (Read 265803 times)

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.840
    • View Profile
Re: Revolting Uniting
« Reply #5910 on: 26-01-2015, 14:01:54 »
It shows also how drastically Russian tactics change after 1943. The "just charge and win" gave way to actual combined arms and you can also see german casualties rising dramatically

Talking about unbiased books, if you want a true unbiased book about the sherman tank, wich also explains how it truly faired against the panzer, go get Steven zalago's armoured thunderbolt. No Yankee murica favourtism, no German panzer fanboy writing. Authetic, factual info.

But General patton fans better not buy this book, as this book has many data about how Patton stalled much of the tank development together with General Mcnair
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline Zoologic

  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4.141
  • In FH Since 0.67
    • View Profile
Re: Revolting Uniting
« Reply #5911 on: 26-01-2015, 15:01:41 »
Guderian is also known to stall the development of bigger Panzer than his beloved Panzer IVs. I think both Guderian and Patton preferred the battle-proven vehicles rather than the wonderful concepts of promises.

In today's world, we all being fed with marketing about F-35 Lightning and its capabilities (not being able to carry much weapon, no internal cannon, no VTOL capability - only US Marine get this version), while dismissing the deemed obsolete A-10C (which is far cheaper, more combat ready / less maintenance, more mission capable, more weapon, traumatizing-for-enemy internal cannon, etc).

It is all about taking sides IMO. I pick A-10C, M-551 Sheridan, and all US ordnance hated by Pentagon because of their apparent "unsophisticated-ness" and lack of marketing appeal (not sure about A-10) but was beloved by field troops because of their effectiveness and efficiency. I would not pick Guderian's opinion, I blame German engineers. I blame Patton and I blame Eisenhower for not being decisive enough.

I'd say, Guderian is proven to be right because the big Panzers are expensive and costing Germany a lot of precious resources and they lost the war anyway. While Patton, being proven wrong because we see the Allies' bigger tanks rolling without significant problem and they win the war anyway.

Offline Airshark79

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 453
    • View Profile
Re: Revolting Uniting
« Reply #5912 on: 26-01-2015, 16:01:37 »
Any competent force backed by a state and modern technology can turn a fleet of A-10's into trash in a matter of days. We've seen Iraq and we think this is too easy. But the truth is when you have 200 times the space and hills and forests to seek and destroy the SAM's, you just don't fly. This is exactly what is happening in Ukraine right now, just because the rebels are given adequate technology and we here think this is unfair.
« Last Edit: 26-01-2015, 16:01:41 by Airshark79 »

Offline Zoologic

  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4.141
  • In FH Since 0.67
    • View Profile
Re: Revolting Uniting
« Reply #5913 on: 26-01-2015, 18:01:33 »
The F-35 stealth ability won't do much either. If it is going to do the SEAD, CAS, and CAP at once, since it cost roughly 10 times more than A-10C per hour flight maintenance, it won't have its stealth. They need external pylons attachment. The Air Force will lose 10 times more money on that. And given the maintenance requirement, they won't be available for much of the time. Because of that, low-flying, last-minute pop up attack pattern is still valid tactic to avoid SAM. And A-10 is excellent at this for that special reason: when ambushed, it got armour protection, while F-35 does not.

Why not F-16C Block 52 with SEAD and A-10C with CAS and F-15C with CAP? All 3 of that still roughly 20% cheaper than a single F-35 (mostly model A) incompetently doing all of that job at once. Replace F-15C with F-22A, then it is going to be expensive. But F-22A can do CAP competently and perform stand-off ground attack adequately. F-35A, which is to replace F-16C and A-10C isn't competent at any.

However I can see the future in F-35B, which is the less popular variant, which is the only one that can perform the famous VTOL. Now this can really be used to support covert operations deep in enemy territory like that Bin Laden raid in Abbotabbad. Taking off from Marine's amphibious assault ship, along with the SEAL helicopters, protect the package, and clear the skies while they are at it. They can be ninja at this kind of mission.

Offline Kelmola

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2.854
    • View Profile
Re: Revolting Uniting
« Reply #5914 on: 26-01-2015, 20:01:48 »
Talking about unbiased books, if you want a true unbiased book about the sherman tank, wich also explains how it truly faired against the panzer, go get Steven zalago's armoured thunderbolt. No Yankee murica favourtism, no German panzer fanboy writing. Authetic, factual info.
Your spelling it wrongly again. Theirs no Steven zalago but Stephen Zaloga. Speaking of factual info (much data, unless your being Doge)...
But General patton fans better not buy this book, as this book has many data about how Patton stalled much of the tank development together with General Mcnair
Actually, that argument was the dead pet horse of Belton Cooper (in his book "Death Traps") up to the point where he substantiated scuttlebutt around the motorpool as "facts" that supposedly overrule piles of documents in which "Patton" is curiously spelled "McNair", but I guess Patton personally forged each and every page then. Are you sure you don't mean Cooper instead of Zaloga? Nevermind that a field commander such as Patton was not in a position to decide in the first place what was actually produced to begin with...

That being said, McNair was partly right for all the wrong reasons (ie. the loony tank destroyer doctrine that worked in one single battle during the entire US campaign in Europe). However, from a logistical point of view the 76mm Sherman (improvement on a tested and true design) made infinitely more sense than Pershing (completely new type). Especially so since the M26 was a bit too good a copy of German heavy tanks: underpowered engine and unreliable transmission leading to constant breakdowns, limited cross-country mobility, slower speed, and inferior range, being much slower and more expensive to produce, versus having marginally better armour than late-model Shermans still penetrable by German guns (no wait, Jumbo actually had better armour that was proof against anything except 88 at point-blank distance and 128) and slightly better gun than the 76mm one. And bumrushing Pershing to the front would also have copied the insufficient training of late-war German crews.

Guderian was right too, especially given the situation Germany was in. Panzer IV was easily produced, reliable, and easier to maintain, consumed less materials, and the missing invulnerable front armour is not that much of an issue when most of the kills are made from the sides anyway (if a tanker is in a situation where he relies on "impenetrable" armour instead of hitting the enemy's weak spot first, he's doing something very wrong or he's a German in 1945) and if most of your supertanks are destroyed by their own crews when they break down, they are simply not worth it. And metals needed for higher strength steel were simply not available to Germany from 1944 onwards (and even up to that there was a constant shortage), so that alone should have dictated what to produce, but then again, Hitler.

There is a funny but appropriate anecdote in Thomas Anderson's "Tiger": in Italy, Germans captured a Sherman, which they adapted to tow broken-down Tigers and Panthers. When they had used it as a tow truck for half a year without breakdown, the story was actually printed in one of Wehrmacht's newspapers, supposedly highlighting the importance of proper maintenance (or as a snarky poke at the quality of the Wunderwaffen, take your pick on the way to nearest KZ).

tl;dr: a mediocre tank that's available is infinitely better than a supertank that's not

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.840
    • View Profile
Re: Revolting Uniting
« Reply #5915 on: 26-01-2015, 23:01:43 »
The F-35 stealth ability won't do much either. If it is going to do the SEAD, CAS, and CAP at once, since it cost roughly 10 times more than A-10C per hour flight maintenance, it won't have its stealth. They need external pylons attachment. The Air Force will lose 10 times more money on that. And given the maintenance requirement, they won't be available for much of the time. Because of that, low-flying, last-minute pop up attack pattern is still valid tactic to avoid SAM. And A-10 is excellent at this for that special reason: when ambushed, it got armour protection, while F-35 does not.

Why not F-16C Block 52 with SEAD and A-10C with CAS and F-15C with CAP? All 3 of that still roughly 20% cheaper than a single F-35 (mostly model A) incompetently doing all of that job at once. Replace F-15C with F-22A, then it is going to be expensive. But F-22A can do CAP competently and perform stand-off ground attack adequately. F-35A, which is to replace F-16C and A-10C isn't competent at any.

However I can see the future in F-35B, which is the less popular variant, which is the only one that can perform the famous VTOL. Now this can really be used to support covert operations deep in enemy territory like that Bin Laden raid in Abbotabbad. Taking off from Marine's amphibious assault ship, along with the SEAL helicopters, protect the package, and clear the skies while they are at it. They can be ninja at this kind of mission.
Because a few persons, recieve moneh from one of dem cooperations, and they lobby for the F35. Everybody knows, this plane will fail in the long run. This was an aircraft designed to replace the F16, A10, F15..you name it. No plane can replace all those. A multi-role aircraft will Always be a jack of all trades.
And when your jack of all trades aircraft cost roughly 5 to 10 times more then already existing good aircraft. This has been the problem of US development for ages. It is vastly diffrent then the way russians and even the chinese think. Pretty much, the US became like the germans in WW2...

And yeah, if Albert speer was allowed to do what he wanted, the PZIII and IV were already phased out in 1940 and replaced by a proper universal, ready for war production Panzer. And he would also have waited or even prevented an assault on the soviet union

But yeah, that is all.. If
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline Hjaldrgud

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1.066
  • BF2 Enthusiast
    • View Profile
Re: Revolting Uniting
« Reply #5916 on: 27-01-2015, 00:01:53 »

And yeah, if Albert speer was allowed to do what he wanted, the PZIII and IV were already phased out in 1940 and replaced by a proper universal, ready for war production Panzer.
Intredesting. Did anything come out of that, like a blueprint or something, or was it stopped earlier?


"Generous and brave men live the best" -Hávamál

Offline Zoologic

  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4.141
  • In FH Since 0.67
    • View Profile
Re: Revolting Uniting
« Reply #5917 on: 27-01-2015, 04:01:49 »
This was an aircraft designed to replace the F16, A10, F15..you name it. No plane can replace all those. A multi-role aircraft will Always be a jack of all trades.
And when your jack of all trades aircraft cost roughly 5 to 10 times more then already existing good aircraft. This has been the problem of US development for ages. It is vastly diffrent then the way russians and even the chinese think. Pretty much, the US became like the germans in WW2...

Today, everything is about image, marketing, and public relations. Those "adequate" and well-performing military ordnance are not enough, they need to show the public, especially Hollywood that they are superior and false sense of security. This is similar with English football, the image of "plucky Brits" like David against Goliath was gone, they are now the big guy, the Goliath, and failing at nearly every attempts. I hope that doesn't happen, especially when they are going to fight the likes of Infidel State (IS).

Being Jack of all trades is what F-16 excel at, being cheap, capable, and easy. But this does not interest the Navy nor the Marine, the 'acting' step child of US military service. So to repeat F-4's success in gathering all of them together, they tried F-35. But this time, the Marine has been spoiled by the VTOL capability of their Harriers. They wanted that in the new F-35, which is expensive, complex, and forced to share components. The F-35B has stalled and skyrocketed the development cost, with repeated problems, and yet everybody is jumping at the conventional F-35A and the Navy's bigger F-35C, which constantly has to keep up with all the changes happening to fix F-35B's problems.

Yet, nobody look at the "real" F-35, which is the F-35B. Only 7% of total F-35 production is F-35B, which I think received the huge part of development cost. Stupid? F-35A, the Air Force conventional (no VTOL) variant will be too bulky to be nimble and maneuverable, with limited knick-knack gadgets, limited fuel space, because of F-35B's big lift systems. The F-35C will be unnecessarily heavy and big, because of that hollow lift system space again. And that stealth diamond-shaped wing, which require to be enlarged since it doesn't provide much lift at low speed, critical for aircraft carrier take-off/landing operations.

They say it doesn't need to be agile, because it can shoot enemy from far away, and US military tactic is too perfect, there will be other air assets with better radar doing the tracking thing for them. We'll see. At least in Red Flag.

Quote
And yeah, if Albert speer was allowed to do what he wanted, the PZIII and IV were already phased out in 1940 and replaced by a proper universal, ready for war production Panzer. And he would also have waited or even prevented an assault on the soviet union

I was about to blame him as well. Speer, despite how brilliant he was at industrialising German military, still is not a field guy. He is an architect.

Offline Turkish007

  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4.046
  • Mini-mod necromancer
    • View Profile
Re: Revolting Uniting
« Reply #5918 on: 27-01-2015, 11:01:53 »
I just got the chance to taste Irn Bru, a local soft drink of Scotland:



It kinda tastes like medicine and leaves a weird sizzle in the mouth after drinking it, but wasnt that bad.
Do you have any local stuff like this, FH forum community?

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.840
    • View Profile
Re: Revolting Uniting
« Reply #5919 on: 27-01-2015, 11:01:29 »
Yesterday i went to the pub..And people who tought they knew a thing about WW2, began talking. When i said that the Wehrmacht had nothing to do with the SS, they fucking freaked out.

When i even gave evidence that over 95% of ww2 warcrimes were commited by the SS, and that the allies did warcrimes on a simular level like the wehrmacht, they even freaked out more


I am never again discussing things with political correct assholes, again.
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline Slayer

  • Freeze Veteran
  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 4.091
    • View Profile
Re: Revolting Uniting
« Reply #5920 on: 27-01-2015, 12:01:19 »
I am never again discussing things with political correct assholes, again.
Huh? So if you don't know anything about WW2 you are politically correct?

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.840
    • View Profile
Re: Revolting Uniting
« Reply #5921 on: 27-01-2015, 13:01:40 »
I am never again discussing things with political correct assholes, again.
Huh? So if you don't know anything about WW2 you are politically correct?
Well its the subjects that followed that turned out they are politcally correct assholes.

They even nagged about someone saying "eskimos" when they are appearntly called "Inuit"
Now this was a trick of ours as a comedian once did a part about that, but they really nagged about that aswel.

Also they wanted to ban alcohol and smoking and everything else. But not Weed. Because "nobody dies of weed"
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline th_battleaxe

  • Bon Vivant
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.203
  • Bit of a Révolutionnaire
    • View Profile
Re: Revolting Uniting
« Reply #5922 on: 27-01-2015, 13:01:41 »
Yeah, as the Voice of Antwerp said, let them enjoy their non-smoking, non-alcoholic fruit juices.

More fun for the rest of us.
J'aime l'oignon, frît à l'huile
J'aime l'oignon car il est bon
J'aime l'oignon, frît à l'huile
J'aime l'oignon, j'aime l'oignon

Offline Slayer

  • Freeze Veteran
  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 4.091
    • View Profile
Re: Revolting Uniting
« Reply #5923 on: 27-01-2015, 14:01:08 »
I am never again discussing things with political correct assholes, again.
Huh? So if you don't know anything about WW2 you are politically correct?
Well its the subjects that followed that turned out they are politcally correct assholes.
OK, couldn't make that out at first.

They even nagged about someone saying "eskimos" when they are appearntly called "Inuit"
Not all "eskimos" are Inuit, some are Aleut and others are still other ethnicities. "Eskimo" is comparable to "nigger" imo, Belgian comedians or not. I don't expect everyone to know this, so I don't mind it too much, but "eskimo" is a bad name, like a scheldwoord.

Offline Ts4EVER

  • Banner of THeTA0123
  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 7.764
    • View Profile
Re: Revolting Uniting
« Reply #5924 on: 27-01-2015, 16:01:07 »
Why doesn't it surprise me that Theta still buys into that debunked bullshit of the "clean Wehrmacht". You'd think by the end of the 90s that old hat was buried, but I guess some people need that kind of fantasy to justify their own pseude-fascist sensibilities.