Good Morning, Oppo

"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn) 09/26/2019 at 10:00 • Filed to: None

1

13

Anybody looking for a career change?

facw > ttyymmnn 09/26/2019 at 10:05

1

I’m not sure tank driver is a good career path... I’m still of the opinion that tanks are largely obsolete.

MrDakka > ttyymmnn 09/26/2019 at 10:10

1

Atlas needs a new job, he sorta burned a couple bridges back at his old job

ttyymmnn > facw 09/26/2019 at 10:16

4

It was kind of scary to see how many Abrams were knocked out during the Gulf War. Of course, driving slowly down a city street was never their intended job.

My bird IS the word > ttyymmnn 09/26/2019 at 10:32

1

Friends dad was almost deployed, i forget the number he quoted me but the life expectancy he had to sign on his army life insurance policy was abysmal

ttyymmnn > My bird IS the word 09/26/2019 at 10:39

2

My understanding is that most of them got knocked out from close range by RPGs fired into the wheels. 

Azrek > ttyymmnn 09/26/2019 at 10:42

0

Tanks were designed for the fields of Poland and not an urban fight. With all the missiles/rockets/UAVs coming around a slow moving tank is too easy to destroy.

The Stryker vehicles were designed to be a tad better and faster as well as cheaper, but still a POS.

Now the way with Armor is like Newton’s Law. There is an equal and opposite reaction. So you make the armor 1 inch thick, I make my weapon penetrate 1 inch armor. So you make it 2 inches thich and I make my weapon penetrate 2 inches. The weapons are always cheaper than the armor.

Eventually it becomes a cost issue. This is the same reason why Knights went out of style. A crossbow or a gun could penetrate the expensive armor and suddenly you have a very expensive corpse. 

ttyymmnn > Azrek 09/26/2019 at 10:54

1

Eventually it becomes a cost issue. This is the same reason why Knights went out of style. A crossbow or a gun could penetrate the expensive armor and suddenly you have a very expensive corpse.

See: Agincourt  

Azrek > ttyymmnn 09/26/2019 at 11:04

0

Well, yes and no. The Longbows were used as well as the terrain in that fight. The French were just straight up stupid in that fight.

The bows could penetrate some of the armor and because the French used almost no tactics it was pretty easy to just rain on them.

Now if that same fight had happened with Crossbows mixed in with the Longbows it would’ve been over faster. The Pope, I forget which one, banned the Crossbow for many years as it was considered to be too deadly and against the rules of combat. 

Chariotoflove > ttyymmnn 09/26/2019 at 11:11

3

My first car was a green ‘73 Custom Cruiser. So I’m qualified. 

ttyymmnn > Azrek 09/26/2019 at 11:34

0

Yes, it was a combination of factors. See also the Battle of Crecy for more French stupidity

A ll battle is horrible, but I can’t even imagine how awful those battles  must have been.

Just Jeepin' > ttyymmnn 09/26/2019 at 12:19

0

I’m no t sure which would have been worse: the battle or the aftermath. All those gruesomely wounded warriors with no competent medical treatment.

ttyymmnn > Just Jeepin' 09/26/2019 at 12:33

1

Oh, you mean Crecy. I thought you were talking about the Civil War. 

My bird IS the word > ttyymmnn 09/26/2019 at 13:49

1

I think the life expectancies were calibrated for ww3