Military Equipment Sperging Thread - The Tiger II is a better tank than the M1 Abrams edition

[JJLiautaud]

Thunderbolt. Big ugly bitch but I love it so much.

It also has its own theme song:

 

[Hatewerfer]

No hate was meant I like the Brewster Buffalo as well it shows how quickly tech was advancing by how quickly it went from a hero to a goat. My favourite piston fighter of WW2 is probably the Hellcat because I'm a massive naval autist

Agreed on the naval aspect. I always was interested in the early convoy defense techniques used by the Brits to stop Condors from harrassing the convoys hundreds of miles from any support. CAM ships with what were effectively disposable Hurricanes on rocket launch rails to fight them off was certainly an interesting idea, the later MAC ships of course were a better idea, being merchant ships made into auxiliary carriers to supplement the limited number of escort carriers. Eric Winkle Brown's account of flying Martlets (British service Wildcats) from the escort carrier HMS Audacity against the big FW200s is certainly interesting.

Rocket launching off a merchant ship, expected to bail/ditch into the sea after combat. CAM ships were true desparation-kino.
​

I have wondered if the converted aircraft carrier could ever make a comeback. Some sort of cheap and easily run cargo ship (at least comparative to purpose designed military vessels) launching helicopters, drones and fixed-wing COIN aircraft could be an interesting concept for nations supporting distant low intensity conflicts on a budget. Cross ocean force projection is difficult and extremely expensive, but if you don't expect to be in direct conflict with other superpowers, do you really need ASM and CIWS systems on such a vessel, especially if it never gets within visual range of shore while launching COIN strikes on the rebel group of the month?

 

[Internorth Inc]

Apparently the Russian navy has elected to free themselves of the Admiral Kuznetsov.

 

[Sleazy Car Salesman]

Agreed on the naval aspect. I always was interested in the early convoy defense techniques used by the Brits to stop Condors from harrassing the convoys hundreds of miles from any support. CAM ships with what were effectively disposable Hurricanes on rocket launch rails to fight them off was certainly an interesting idea, the later MAC ships of course were a better idea, being merchant ships made into auxiliary carriers to supplement the limited number of escort carriers. Eric Winkle Brown's account of flying Martlets (British service Wildcats) from the escort carrier HMS Audacity against the big FW200s is certainly interesting.

View attachment 7625679
Rocket launching off a merchant ship, expected to bail/ditch into the sea after combat. CAM ships were true desparation-kino.
​

I have wondered if the converted aircraft carrier could ever make a comeback. Some sort of cheap and easily run cargo ship (at least comparative to purpose designed military vessels) launching helicopters, drones and fixed-wing COIN aircraft could be an interesting concept for nations supporting distant low intensity conflicts on a budget. Cross ocean force projection is difficult and extremely expensive, but if you don't expect to be in direct conflict with other superpowers, do you really need ASM and CIWS systems on such a vessel, especially if it never gets within visual range of shore while launching COIN strikes on the rebel group of the month?

How typically British. Perennially short on actual war ships to the point you can't even protect your own logistics chain so instead of doing things the right way by building more warships in a hurry because your workers absolutely refuse to learn how to weld you just bodge some retarded shit together.

How shit must the rest of Europe be that these chuckleheads became the best of the lot?

 

[The Grognard]

Apparently the Russian navy has elected to free themselves of the Admiral Kuznetsov.

It isn't surprising that they have chosen to not continue keeping it going. Their actual strength is in the submarine fleet.

 

[74164978231]

I have wondered if the converted aircraft carrier could ever make a comeback. Some sort of cheap and easily run cargo ship (at least comparative to purpose designed military vessels) launching helicopters, drones and fixed-wing COIN aircraft could be an interesting concept for nations supporting distant low intensity conflicts on a budget. Cross ocean force projection is difficult and extremely expensive, but if you don't expect to be in direct conflict with other superpowers, do you really need ASM and CIWS systems on such a vessel, especially if it never gets within visual range of shore while launching COIN strikes on the rebel group of the month?

I can't imagine you'll ever see conventional carriers pumped out in masse again with the advent of drones. Even smaller America class lhd cost 4 billion dollars.

Small ships with platforms large enough to launch and recover drones seems much more logical especially with how expensive sea warfare is nowadays as said. Or hell with the range and endurance bigger drones have you may not even need ships at sea to carry them, just islands as they cover so much already.

 

[The Grognard]

I can't imagine you'll ever see conventional carriers pumped out in masse again with the advent of drones. Even smaller America class lhd cost 4 billion dollars.

Small ships with platforms large enough to launch and recover drones seems much more logical especially with how expensive sea warfare is nowadays as said. Or hell with the range and endurance bigger drones have you may not even need ships at sea to carry them, just islands as they cover so much already.

My thoughts on carriers is that they are an all-or-nothing sort of a deal. Either you commit to having a proper task force with an extensive fixed-wing naval force or don't bother at all. Trying to do some penny-packet single carrier thing or jump jet carriers is for the penny-wise and pound-foolish.

 

[VF-1J Armored Valkyrie]

My thoughts on carriers is that they are an all-or-nothing sort of a deal. Either you commit to having a proper task force with an extensive fixed-wing naval force or don't bother at all. Trying to do some penny-packet single carrier thing or jump jet carriers is for the penny-wise and pound-foolish.

There are a lot of second and third rate militaries that are going to look closely at cheap drone carriers for power projection in bullying their peers, but that comes to a small fraction of what a carrier airwing is expected to do for a first rate military. This last exchange between Israel and Iran had hundreds of one way attack drones in the air at once with intercept rates consistently over 95%, because they are very easy prey for fixed wing fighters, especially if they have radars with good EW. On the Iranian side, the vast majority of damage was still done by ballistic missiles, and the Israelis still did most of their work with fixed wing airpower. The IAF only flew recon drone flights after the Iranian air defense already collapsed, and still lost drones to pop-up threats.

A real carrier group is still the best thing to have if someone was going to try to use cheap drone carriers to attack your global interests, both to defeat a massed drone attack and to take part in any kind of response. It's still the only tool avalible for a sustained and comprehensive naval presence across the planet.

I can't imagine you'll ever see conventional carriers pumped out in masse again with the advent of drones. Even smaller America class lhd cost 4 billion dollars.

Small ships with platforms large enough to launch and recover drones seems much more logical especially with how expensive sea warfare is nowadays as said. Or hell with the range and endurance bigger drones have you may not even need ships at sea to carry them, just islands as they cover so much already.

The existing helicopter decks on modern surface combatants are probably sufficient to launch all manner of drones with minimal added equipment. The nations that are still legitimately interested in full-sized carriers are paying for capabilities that drones can't offer.

 

[InnocentKitten]

Apparently the Russian navy has elected to free themselves of the Admiral Kuznetsov.

its suspension of repairs, it is entirely likely it gets restarted but its fate has always been debated, aircraft carriers have been obsolescant since the 50s and increasingly ever since, but their value of providing the volume of space for function as flagships, and ability to support distant amphibious operations, or land operations in distance of a coastline does have value, even for the russian navy, so keeping the ship atleast in a reserve capacity will maintain naval aviation knowlege and culture which is not easy to resbuild while having new carriers built would be the preferable option if its decided to have carriers in the future, discussions are currently being held at the highest levels about what form the russian navy is in for the future..

I have wondered if the converted aircraft carrier could ever make a comeback. Some sort of cheap and easily run cargo ship (at least comparative to purpose designed military vessels) launching helicopters, drones and fixed-wing COIN aircraft could be an interesting concept for nations supporting distant low intensity conflicts on a budget. Cross ocean force projection is difficult and extremely expensive, but if you don't expect to be in direct conflict with other superpowers, do you really need ASM and CIWS systems on such a vessel, especially if it never gets within visual range of shore while launching COIN strikes on the rebel group of the month?

unlikely considering the corrosion proofing, manning, cost of modifying etc makes it no longer viable for smaller nations, while being vulnerable to obsolete anti-ship capabilities which have proliferated, nevermind modern anti-ship capabilities exceding 1000+ kilometers, its possible a nation could use a cargo ship as an 'arsenal vessel', with shipping containers fitted with drone launchers, could be used as an opening salvo as a surprise attack, but would be most likely a 'one-and-done' thing.

Israelis still did most of their work with fixed wing airpower

launching standoff munitions, the US did the same with yemen which is interesting

The IAF only flew recon drone flights after the Iranian air defense already collapsed,

if iranian air defence had collapsed why were the israelis still only using their airforce to launch standoff munitions? and the only israeli aircraft confirmed to be operating in iranian airspace proper were israeli herons/similar uavs, which they continualy used from the very start (along with DRGs with ATGMs and small drones), that comment is a contradiction.

A real carrier group is still the best thing to have if someone was going to try to use cheap drone carriers to attack your global interests, both to defeat a massed drone attack and to take part in any kind of response

i think claiming the validity and sustainability of aircraft carriers (and aircraft as air defence) from the israeli/US vs iran conflict is extremely questionable, if that methodology was so successful why was it the side using that methodology so quick to try to get a ceasefire in a conflict it had started without having achieved its objectives? when if you want to go into the sperging of drones vs air defence, its industrial warfare, claiming air defence is sustainable because it lasted 12 days is like claiming you are good in bed because you can last slightly more then 1 minute. forcing the air defence to consume more resources then it can replace over a prolonged period is the essense of drones vs air defence sperging.. im also not sure the carriers were positioned in an optimal area that we can judge their effectiveness and iran also didnt use its 'cheap drones' in large numbers, it was primarily balistic missiles as you mention. TLDR, war too short

 

[VF-1J Armored Valkyrie]

if iranian air defence had collapsed why were the israelis still only using their airforce to launch standoff munitions?

I'm not sure where you saw this, but it's blatantly false. Several underground ballistic missile storage facilities were hit with BLU-109s, and the road mobile TELs were usually hunted via direct observation. 'Stand off' is a relative term; nobody was launching ROCKs from 400 km at individual TELs.

Tl;dr, lie too big, not adressing the rest.

 

[Hatewerfer]

unlikely considering the corrosion proofing, manning, cost of modifying etc makes it no longer viable for smaller nations, while being vulnerable to obsolete anti-ship capabilities which have proliferated, nevermind modern anti-ship capabilities exceding 1000+ kilometers, its possible a nation could use a cargo ship as an 'arsenal vessel', with shipping containers fitted with drone launchers, could be used as an opening salvo as a surprise attack, but would be most likely a 'one-and-done' thing.

sad
So the fantasy of a North Korean converted cargo ship fitted with an old school deck launching modified old CJ-6 trainers fitted with rocket pods to strike some african force in a random civil war is doomed to never be real. truly we live in a cursed world in which fun is truly not allowed. If Kim set that up I'd be heading straight for best korea to volunteer to fly some classic carrier kino.

 

[Foltest]

Apparently the Russian navy has elected to free themselves of the Admiral Kuznetsov.

Reminder that they only build a dry dock to handle it, a few years ago.
That poor fucking ship was like Robert Barheton in GoT after he got attacked by the boar.

 

[Slurgle]

Reminder that they only build a dry dock to handle it, a few years ago.

Yeah but it caught fire and died.

The Kuz is real world evidence that curses might actually exist, anything and anyone that's touched it has either gone up in flames or otherwise had extreme bad luck.

 

[Sleazy Car Salesman]

The Kuz is real world evidence that curses might actually exist, anything and anyone that's touched it has either gone up in flames or otherwise had extreme bad luck

The Kuz is proof of the old adage that all of Slavic history can be summed up in its entirety by five words: "And then it got worse."

 

[Falcos_Commisar]

The radars are carrying a lot of shit for the defense of the ship. And don't forget RAM and Phalanx if they escape the ESSM. There are layers to the defense, layers upon layers. That isn't even counting the aircraft on board which could also intercept missiles and drones.

Also don't forget the autocanon

 

[WelperHelper99]

Also don't forget the autocanon

Oh yeah, the carriers have 25mm bushmasters too for pt boats, lol

 

[Sexual Chocolate]

How typically British. Perennially short on actual war ships to the point you can't even protect your own logistics chain so instead of doing things the right way by building more warships in a hurry because your workers absolutely refuse to learn how to weld you just bodge some retarded shit together.

Are you retarded or something? The Royal Navy knew about welding.

In 1939, at the start of World War II, the Royal Navy was the largest in the world, boasting over 1,400 vessels. This included 15 battleships and battlecruisers, 7 aircraft carriers, 66 cruisers, 184 destroyers, 60 submarines, and numerous escort and patrol vessels.

And they had to protect the largest merchant fleet in the world from submarines that could pop up almost anywhere:

In 1939, the British Merchant Navy was the largest in the world, comprising roughly a third of the global merchant fleet and employing around 200,000 men and women. This fleet was crucial for Britain's survival, importing vital supplies and transporting troops during wartime.

And they had to do this while fighting Germany, Italy and Japan at the same time, and with the Luftwaffe bombing their shipyards and factories. And they were already pretty close to being broke at the start of the war.

Ships in red were lost during WW2

It didn't develop enough thrust nor go fast enough to gain any aerodynamic benefit from the swept wing. The acute wing angle was incorporated solely to even out the center of gravity, which would have been too front-heavy with a straight wing and the 2 engines.

Nitpicking the Me-262 only makes sense if we take into account the circumstances this plane was built under. As a first generation jet, it had lots of problems, but the miracle is that Germany was able to develop and field a new plane at all.


The Me-262 arrived in 1944. This is what German cities looked like at the time:


Millions of them were already dead before the Me-262 came into service. Their cities were wrecked, most of the Luftwaffe's best pilots had been killed by the USAAF and RAF, the civilian population was nearing starvation and they were critically short on non-ferrous metals and fuel. The main shortcoming of the plane was its engine. Germany was unable to build good jet engines because they lacked access to strategic metals in quantity, and were also running out of time:

The initial 004A engines built to power the Me 262 prototypes had been built without restrictions on materials, and they used scarce raw materials such as nickel, cobalt, and molybdenum in quantities which were unacceptable in production. Franz realized that the Jumo 004 would have to be redesigned to incorporate a minimum of these strategic materials, and this was accomplished. All the hot metal parts, including the combustion chamber, were changed to mild steel protected by an aluminum coating, and the hollow turbine blades were produced from folded and welded Cromadur alloy (12% chromium, 18% manganese, and 70% iron) developed by Krupp, and cooled by compressed air "bled" from the compressor. The engine's operational lifespan was shortened, but on the plus side it became easier to construct

Despite that, it was a better design than the Meteor or Shooting Star. It was more heavily armed (4 x 30mm autocannon), and the swept wing gave it better prospects for further development. In the unlikely event of Germany winning the war, they could have upgraded the engines, refined the airframe, and rolled out a Super-Schwalbe version that would have been competitive throughout the 1950's. The US had to wait until 1949 for the swept wing F-86 Sabre.

And it was faster than anything the Allies had available in 1944. Not a small achievement for a country that was bleeding to death and fighting the three biggest military powers on the planet at the same time.

 

[Welf Welf]

I have read that there is German paperwork claiming the Me.262 HG III (pic related), the next generation of the plane, had a prototype constructed in 1945. But no trace was ever found of the actual plane, it probably got bombed into smithereens or scraped by those who didn't recognize its significance. One wonders how it would have performed.



There's a few differing representations of what the tail would have looked like, the V-tail and standard cruciform tail from the production plane seem to be the most common depictions.

 

[Curzon Dax-sama]

they were critically short on non-ferrous metals

Kind, kinda not. The Speer-ministry, which in cooperation with the dreaded Zentrale Planung, had the best overview over the stockpiles estimated that depending on the material armaments production could be kept on 1944's second quarter levels until the end of the 1945. The problem wasn't so much access to these resources. It was transportation; they were running out of two things, primarily: coal for the trains and rolling stock. The Allies kept hitting the Reichsbahn 24/7, seven days a week throughout most of '44. After a certain point it became a 'chicken/egg'-problem.

Molybdenum was covered by the Knaben mine in Norway. Nickel came from Petsamo, until it didn't. Cobalt again is more complicated, and is largely a by product of copper and nickel processing. There are reasons why the Germans tried to hold onto the Balkans (mostly for the copper and access to Turkish chromium) and Scandinavia for as long as they did.

fuel

Yep. The USAAF-induced fuel crunch of May, June and July 1944 did probably more to end the war than turning the cities into smoldering ruins. Speer deployed over a half a million workers to the synthetic fuel plants and refineries to do very little else than damage control. The files related to that alone are a thrilling read. They became desperate enough to consider wood and coal gas generators for trucks and other vehicles.

War economics, man. They should do a spreadsheet simulator about that shit.

 

[Falcos_Commisar]

was a better design than the Meteor or Shooting Star. It was more heavily armed (4 x 30mm autocannon), and the swept wing gave it better prospects for further development

Pressing X to doubt.

Those 30mm guns were really more like grenade launchers as they had low muzzle velocity and pretty low ammo loads.

The prototype German Mauser MG 213 20mm and 30mm revolver canon were much better weapons and US M39 canon and the ADEN and DEFA canons were essentially clones of those. Never saw service in WW2 though.

The engines just weren't as reliable at the Meteors and the P-80 and Meteor matched or nearly matched in on performance and the British already had the Vampire about to enter service as well.