Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
How to earn reputation in this forum ? I got 3 points .
+35
JohninMK
Odin of Ossetia
marcinko
Book.
victor1985
BTRfan
Svyatoslavich
PapaDragon
2SPOOKY4U
Dominus
zackyx
George1
mutantsushi
magnumcromagnon
mack8
Walther von Oldenburg
jhelb
Stealthflanker
Viktor
kvs
Regular
TR1
KomissarBojanchev
sepheronx
max steel
Mike E
GarryB
Morpheus Eberhardt
TheArmenian
VladimirSahin
RTN
medo
flamming_python
collegeboy16
Werewolf
39 posters
Questions and Ideas
max steel- Posts : 2930
Points : 2955
Join date : 2015-02-12
Location : South Pole
sepheronx
sepheronx- Posts : 8527
Points : 8789
Join date : 2009-08-05
Age : 34
Location : Canada
The + / - on the right hand of the post.
GarryB- Posts : 38924
Points : 39420
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
They know for sure how things goes for years coming.
No they don't... they can guess and make predictions, but they certainly don't know.
Militqry serious simulation on a real war are for sure maked.
Already widespread... from the game of chess, to the various Battlefield games and Operation Flashpoint type games...
Now i want to ask something that is discuss in military groups: the tank is still a must have weapon?
When you move infantry forward you need a well protected vehicle with a heavy gun to provide heavy direct fire. there are no alternatives to the tank at the moment.
Because its so helpless when aviation strikes
There are plenty of options including camouflage and air defence systems and of course your own air power.
and also can be replaced whit succes on war field by trucks whit short range land to land missile + 1 2 pieces of land to air missiles. Such trucks even if they dont have big armour have the speed , maneuvrability , ability to carry a lot of missiles and enough space and power to carry more countermeasures than a tank against a lot of types of threats : ATM, ATGM, MANPADs, grenade launchers.
Except that a truck can be defeated by small arms fire or even nearby impacts from artillery... the solution is heavier armour... which means it sinks in dirt so give it tracks and those rockets are expensive so replace them with a heavy accurate powerful gun... and what do you have?
A heavy armoured tracked vehicle with a big gun... what is that again?
Like i said a 1 2 air missiles coule be add. And all those can be carryied by a tank engine cause the tank engine is made anyway to carry a +50 tons armour.
Inside a heavy armoured vehicle you wont see enemy aircraft very easily... it makes rather more sense to fit a specialised vehicle with anti aircraft guns and anti aircraft missiles and radar and other sensors to detect and track aircraft, so your tanks can focus on ground targets and your IFVs can carry troops around and support them with light cannon fire and missiles etc etc.
A truck like this can hit at a range like 20 km but the tank can hit his HEAT or spike projectile from no more than 3 km.
A truck wont have better visibility than a tank, and even an old tank like the T-72 can see and hit area targets out to about 9km with HE shells... with gun launched missiles soft targets will likely be engaged out to 8-10km while armoured targets out to 5 or 6km.
No truck could match that except a Grad or Smerch...
Either way artillery can't replace the tank.
Well then a version of arena would help the truck. Knowing that the truck carry instead of armour countermeasures means a bigger version of arena can be put. Also i have a own concept of self defence against penetrators: lets say we have a proximity sensor and a stick whit a arc (spring), when penetrators approach the stick are managed by sensor and the powerfull spring spin them and hit the penetrator and deviate him.
ARENA doesn't stop HMG fire which would shred a truck to pieces.
Also how would be to have a remote controled truck whit no armour but whit a big cannon? Being operated by a armoured vehicle. Or a truck whit a well armoured cabin for 1 person that person being the only one manevrating truck and weapons.
One hit by a heavy calibre round like a mortar or handgrenade or RPG would take it out... can't say the same about a MBT.
Lets say we have 20 trucks each whit high accuracy missile.
Subsonic missiles?
Those trucks would not last long... those tanks would shred them with a mix of main gun ammo and HMG fire... even just HE rounds travelling at 800m/s would kill the trucks before their missiles even get close.
Well but SAMs are used when fighting in far away from own territory?
Soviet and Russian Army SAMs are to protect the ground forces from enemy air power even when the Russian AF is not available.
I am lucky to find patience guys here.
What can I say... I used to teach children how to play Hockey and then to use computers... lots of repetition and patience required.
By all means continue to ask and I will try to give the most sensible simple answers I can... of course keep in mind I am not always right...
Morpheus Eberhardt- Posts : 1925
Points : 2032
Join date : 2013-05-20
victor1985 wrote:Question: a bubble of air surrounded by water till top in a ermetic bod can somehow be a guidance sistem? Also i think to the example in which a man stay on a car and when car change direction or stop the man falls befause of newtons first law. This kind of guidance could be cheaper
What you have described is an accelerometer. However, an air/water accelerometer may have practical issues like the air getting dissolved in water over time or the bubble getting split into multiple bubbles.
At the same time, I should mention that there are accelerometers that rely on very unlikely principles that at first sight may seem unworkable.
victor1985- Posts : 632
Points : 659
Join date : 2015-01-02
Point was that for a enemy to destroy your trucks must come close at least 30km. How he could do that when your trucks see to far away and carry lot of missiles that make a barrage of missiles to his troops? Being light the truck could carry big missiles and fast that overwhelm enemis defence. Try to put missiles and big radars on tanks and you get a slow and unmanevrable machines. And think that trucks see more far away have more elecronics and move faster. If a tank finally approach trucks they see from far pack all and put speed between them and tank. Some of them could have heavy machine guns for the enemys APC and IFV. In front of trucks could stay some defense machines for the group.GarryB wrote:They know for sure how things goes for years coming.
No they don't... they can guess and make predictions, but they certainly don't know.
Militqry serious simulation on a real war are for sure maked.
Already widespread... from the game of chess, to the various Battlefield games and Operation Flashpoint type games...
Now i want to ask something that is discuss in military groups: the tank is still a must have weapon?
When you move infantry forward you need a well protected vehicle with a heavy gun to provide heavy direct fire. there are no alternatives to the tank at the moment.
Because its so helpless when aviation strikes
There are plenty of options including camouflage and air defence systems and of course your own air power.
and also can be replaced whit succes on war field by trucks whit short range land to land missile + 1 2 pieces of land to air missiles. Such trucks even if they dont have big armour have the speed , maneuvrability , ability to carry a lot of missiles and enough space and power to carry more countermeasures than a tank against a lot of types of threats : ATM, ATGM, MANPADs, grenade launchers.
Except that a truck can be defeated by small arms fire or even nearby impacts from artillery... the solution is heavier armour... which means it sinks in dirt so give it tracks and those rockets are expensive so replace them with a heavy accurate powerful gun... and what do you have?
A heavy armoured tracked vehicle with a big gun... what is that again?
Like i said a 1 2 air missiles coule be add. And all those can be carryied by a tank engine cause the tank engine is made anyway to carry a +50 tons armour.
Inside a heavy armoured vehicle you wont see enemy aircraft very easily... it makes rather more sense to fit a specialised vehicle with anti aircraft guns and anti aircraft missiles and radar and other sensors to detect and track aircraft, so your tanks can focus on ground targets and your IFVs can carry troops around and support them with light cannon fire and missiles etc etc.
A truck like this can hit at a range like 20 km but the tank can hit his HEAT or spike projectile from no more than 3 km.
A truck wont have better visibility than a tank, and even an old tank like the T-72 can see and hit area targets out to about 9km with HE shells... with gun launched missiles soft targets will likely be engaged out to 8-10km while armoured targets out to 5 or 6km.
No truck could match that except a Grad or Smerch...
Either way artillery can't replace the tank.
Well then a version of arena would help the truck. Knowing that the truck carry instead of armour countermeasures means a bigger version of arena can be put. Also i have a own concept of self defence against penetrators: lets say we have a proximity sensor and a stick whit a arc (spring), when penetrators approach the stick are managed by sensor and the powerfull spring spin them and hit the penetrator and deviate him.
ARENA doesn't stop HMG fire which would shred a truck to pieces.
Also how would be to have a remote controled truck whit no armour but whit a big cannon? Being operated by a armoured vehicle. Or a truck whit a well armoured cabin for 1 person that person being the only one manevrating truck and weapons.
One hit by a heavy calibre round like a mortar or handgrenade or RPG would take it out... can't say the same about a MBT.
Lets say we have 20 trucks each whit high accuracy missile.
Subsonic missiles?
Those trucks would not last long... those tanks would shred them with a mix of main gun ammo and HMG fire... even just HE rounds travelling at 800m/s would kill the trucks before their missiles even get close.
Well but SAMs are used when fighting in far away from own territory?
Soviet and Russian Army SAMs are to protect the ground forces from enemy air power even when the Russian AF is not available.
I am lucky to find patience guys here.
What can I say... I used to teach children how to play Hockey and then to use computers... lots of repetition and patience required.
By all means continue to ask and I will try to give the most sensible simple answers I can... of course keep in mind I am not always right...
Resuming all this: a tank or else could destroy trucks only if they get close. Which is hard because of today surveillance of area......
KomissarBojanchev- Posts : 1429
Points : 1584
Join date : 2012-08-05
Age : 26
Location : Varna, Bulgaria
Why do so many of you believe in the blood libel? There has never been any tangible evidence for it other than muslim-christian religious zealot and nazi propaganda, and no jewish scirpture has been found that authorizes it. All evidence shows the blood libel was merely a scare tactic to manipulate the lower classes to create lynch mobs and serve the wishes if the religious institutions and the beliefs of the ruling class.
Jews are responsible for many crimes, but the blood libel isn't one of them.
Jews are responsible for many crimes, but the blood libel isn't one of them.
TR1- Posts : 5435
Points : 5433
Join date : 2011-12-06
KomissarBojanchev wrote:Why do so many of you believe in the blood libel? There has never been any tangible evidence for it other than muslim-christian religious zealot and nazi propaganda, and no jewish scirpture has been found that authorizes it. All evidence shows the blood libel was merely a scare tactic to manipulate the lower classes to create lynch mobs and serve the wishes if the religious institutions and the beliefs of the ruling class.
Jews are responsible for many crimes, but the blood libel isn't one of them.
Because people are retards.
Why do people think the Jewish Mossad runs half the world?
max steel- Posts : 2930
Points : 2955
Join date : 2015-02-12
Location : South Pole
Bankers finance both sides during war .One major reason for the historical blackout on the role of the international bankers in political history is that the Rothschilds were Jewish. Anti-Semites have played into the hands of the conspiracy by trying to portray the entire conspiracy as Jewish. Nothing could be farther from the truth. The traditionally Anglo-Saxon J. P. Morgan and Rockefeller international banking institutions have played a key role in the conspiracy. But there is no denying the importance of the Rothschilds and their satellites. However, it is just as unreasonable and immoral to blame all Jews for the crimes of the Rothschilds as it is to hold all Baptists accountable for the crimes of the Rockefellers.--Gary Allen
GarryB- Posts : 38924
Points : 39420
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Point was that for a enemy to destroy your trucks must come close at least 30km.
So a single soldier with a KSVK bolt action 12.7 x 108mm rifle and say 30 rounds of ammo... sneaks up to where your trucks are parked and shoots a single armour piercing round through the engine block of each truck and a second round through the window killing the driver.
One man... 15 trucks stopped and disabled.
Firing from 1.5km away you will never spot the sniper till they open fire.
Point was that for a enemy to destroy your trucks must come close at least 30km. How he could do that when your trucks see to far away and carry lot of missiles that make a barrage of missiles to his troops? Being light the truck could carry big missiles and fast that overwhelm enemis defence. Try to put missiles and big radars on tanks and you get a slow and unmanevrable machines. And think that trucks see more far away have more elecronics and move faster. If a tank finally approach trucks they see from far pack all and put speed between them and tank. Some of them could have heavy machine guns for the enemys APC and IFV. In front of trucks could stay some defense machines for the group.
If all that were even possible... what you are talking about is Smerch... which carries 12 missiles with a range in the current model of about 120km.... but they would be useless to replace tanks.
The purpose of a tank is to support infantry operations.
Artillery... both tube and rocket artillery can support infantry operations... but not so well they can replace tanks... and they are horribly vulnerable to counter fire.
Trucks are not mobile enough... they don't have long range sensors to detect and track targets, and they would not be able to operate as infantry support vehicles in their current form.
Ironically with all this new net centric focus of the Russian military they are boosting their C4IR capabilities and introducing Hermes on a truck with perhaps 40 ready to fire guided rockets with a range of perhaps 40kms designed to engage point targets.
They are not intended to replace tanks or fire support vehicles... they will most likely be used against a sophisticated enemy like NATO or China with a lot of armour vehicles... to thin out the ranks a bit before Russian forces engaged.
victor1985- Posts : 632
Points : 659
Join date : 2015-01-02
Well lets say infantry must take a city. Why bother going from street to street whit infantry exposing to fire when could just blast the area whit a rocket? Or you are on flat land searching for enemys. You move slowly because of tanks you cant hit at distance .....imagine some drones that say you have tanks getting to you at 100 km. You get the information you wait until they reach your target area then you hit them. Ofcourse tanks will not come alone but neither you.
Question: how you defend against projectiles shooted from far away like 40km by enemy artilery? Those kind of projectiles are no more than a meter are fast and somethimes separates submunition on close to you. They are easier to carry can be fired fast and are numerous so in this case you must take alot of counter missiles which is unpractical.
Question: can change of center of gravity of this kind of projectile or a missile be a kind of guidance?
Question: how you defend against projectiles shooted from far away like 40km by enemy artilery? Those kind of projectiles are no more than a meter are fast and somethimes separates submunition on close to you. They are easier to carry can be fired fast and are numerous so in this case you must take alot of counter missiles which is unpractical.
Question: can change of center of gravity of this kind of projectile or a missile be a kind of guidance?
GarryB- Posts : 38924
Points : 39420
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Well lets say infantry must take a city. Why bother going from street to street whit infantry exposing to fire when could just blast the area whit a rocket?
Kinda depends on why you want to take control of that city... If you are Georgia and you want to take cities and towns in South Ossetia and Abkhazia then it kinda looks bad if you kill all the civilians you are pretending you want to liberate.
If it is a foriegn city with hostile natives who want to kill your people... then do what the Germans did to Stalingrad... level it with air power and then send in troops to occupy the rubble... except even reducing a city to rubble doesn't kill everyone in that city and then the air raid is over all that rubble offers excellent cover and concealment for defenders and limits mobility of heavy vehicles for the attackers.
Or you are on flat land searching for enemys.
Even flat land has trees and things to hide behind... you wont have enough ammo to level every tree....
You get the information you wait until they reach your target area then you hit them. Ofcourse tanks will not come alone but neither you.
What makes you think when you can hit them they can't hit you?
More importantly they are heavily armoured and protected so just any old missile wont defeat them easily. You on the other hand are in trucks... easy kills.
Question: how you defend against projectiles shooted from far away like 40km by enemy artilery?
Your average artillery fired projectile starts slowing down as it leaves the muzzle of the weapon that fires it... modern APS should be effective and with guided rounds things like Shtora should also be effective.
More importantly local artillery should detect the incoming rounds... determine the source of fire and have retaliatory fire on the way before the enemy shells land.
For large shells... ie 152mm round TOR and Pantsir should be effective.
can change of center of gravity of this kind of projectile or a missile be a kind of guidance?
No. A change in cg is not related to the targets position and there will be no correlation between those two things... in simple terms the amount of fuel left in the fuel tank of your car cannot be used as a guidance system to determine how close or how far you are from your destination except to tell you how far you have travelled... if you take a wrong turn or you car uses a lot of fuel you might find you have to refill quite a bit for a long trip... but most guided rounds might use a base bleed or rocket assistance to extend range... neither of which will tell you very much except that rocket assistance burns out in less than ten seconds so you know you will probably be about 8-10km from the launch gun when it burns out.... but that would be the same for a target that is 40km away or 60km away.
victor1985- Posts : 632
Points : 659
Join date : 2015-01-02
I am not talking about fuel but about something that has enough weight in that when fowarded or backwarded inside rocket or projectile slowly change trajectory. Or have side motion.
Morpheus Eberhardt- Posts : 1925
Points : 2032
Join date : 2013-05-20
victor1985 wrote:I am not talking about fuel but about something that has enough weight in that when fowarded or backwarded inside rocket or projectile slowly change trajectory. Or have side motion.
In principle It would work, but for missiles and normal types of aircraft it is not really feasible.
However, weight-shift control is used in hang-gliders.
Last edited by Morpheus Eberhardt on Tue Mar 31, 2015 10:51 am; edited 3 times in total
Morpheus Eberhardt- Posts : 1925
Points : 2032
Join date : 2013-05-20
Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:However, weight-shift control is used in hang-gliders.
That's what he is doing. In this case, the shifting weight is the body of the pilot.
collegeboy16- Posts : 1135
Points : 1134
Join date : 2012-10-05
Age : 27
Location : Roanapur
rewatching GitS:Arise series and was wondering why the hell are they still using puny pew pew in 9mm against full cyborgs?!? 
i mean you would expect something like a hand cannon like that new rsh-12 at least, something a cyborg user(90%of the cast) can use comfortably.
i mean you would expect something like a hand cannon like that new rsh-12 at least, something a cyborg user(90%of the cast) can use comfortably.
KomissarBojanchev- Posts : 1429
Points : 1584
Join date : 2012-08-05
Age : 26
Location : Varna, Bulgaria
If the dollar is essentially backed by oil("petrodollar" and proven by US imperialism in the middle east) then why didn't it in any way lose it's value even a little bit when the oil prices collapsed?
Werewolf- Posts : 5914
Points : 6103
Join date : 2012-10-24
KomissarBojanchev wrote:If the dollar is essentially backed by oil("petrodollar" and proven by US imperialism in the middle east) then why didn't it in any way lose it's value even a little bit when the oil prices collapsed?
Who do you think controlls the currency exchange mechanism when the Dollar is World's reserve currency? It is an unfair game where the control of such mechanisms lies in the same hands as the one private bank that is allowed to print money out of thin air without any counter value of gold, silver, platin or whatever.
Regular- Posts : 3868
Points : 3842
Join date : 2013-03-10
Location : Ukrolovestan
So if US falls and new world power emerges, what can we expect?
Do we need new global policeman? Would Russia or China would be better in US shoes moral wise?
Do we need new global policeman? Would Russia or China would be better in US shoes moral wise?
Werewolf- Posts : 5914
Points : 6103
Join date : 2012-10-24
Regular wrote:So if US falls and new world power emerges, what can we expect?
Do we need new global policeman? Would Russia or China would be better in US shoes moral wise?
Nobody needs any country as a policeman because it is always a bully and not a fair cop and no country is in position to tell another country what values, laws and political or economical systems they have to adopt. Such behavior is nothing else but terrorism. By the time the US finally falls and shatters there will be already unipolar world without one bullying all others around, that will give ground for development and i hope after the US falls the arabic world can thrive without interference from anglo-zionistic backed terrorists and unite and make their own politics and repel any politics forced upon them, same goes for South America. An unipolar world is much safer than a monopolar world.
max steel- Posts : 2930
Points : 2955
Join date : 2015-02-12
Location : South Pole
You both are getting it wrong .
Werewolf- Posts : 5914
Points : 6103
Join date : 2012-10-24
max steel wrote:You both are getting it wrong .
So than what is your opinion on that?
flamming_python- Posts : 8988
Points : 9050
Join date : 2012-01-30
Regular wrote:So if US falls and new world power emerges, what can we expect?
Do we need new global policeman? Would Russia or China would be better in US shoes moral wise?
If Russia or China were in the US's shoes then it would end up as more of the same, perhaps not immediately - but certainly not long after they've got drunk with their new found power, sudden lack of opposition in the world to counteract them, and the exposure of international law as mere formalities that can be safely ignored.
In other words - much as the US itself did in the years following the USSR's fall. Perhaps Russia and/or China might come up with their very own 'War on Terror' to make the world safer for their hegemony too.
The point is that fools are doomed to repeat the past and never learn from history.
But neither Russia nor China are fools and I have some confidence that they can learn from the events of the last 25 years; and help build a more balanced, multipolar world based on the BRICS, International Law, UN instruments, etc... in which their positions would be powerful, influential and secure, but not overbearing, imperalistic or dictative.
victor1985- Posts : 632
Points : 659
Join date : 2015-01-02
If a message is sent in radio spectrum in a codified way such that when you receive signal to know what is missing and how much of message was jammed. Short language sent could make also all easier. Also transmiting same message on different devices and different frecvency and carryer would make all easier.
victor1985- Posts : 632
Points : 659
Join date : 2015-01-02
Best is when you emit 100 frecvencies in order then jump to another 100 frecvencies upper or lower. And how would be that missiles when they receive signal to have a autocomplete like when you writing something on pc. I mean how would be that message to be sent in human letters to missile then the missile software complete the message was jammed. Or not in human language but in a artificial maked one
victor1985- Posts : 632
Points : 659
Join date : 2015-01-02
Emitting on frecvencyes that noise signal used is a way to foul jamming
|
|
|