Advertisement
by Sibauk » Fri Feb 19, 2021 7:34 am
by Champagne Socialist Sharifistan » Fri Feb 19, 2021 8:09 am
Champagne Socialist Sharifistan wrote:Could you design an Army uniform including a cloak (with trackpants covering the legs and body armour underneath)?
Would it be effective as uniform for medics and logistics soldiers?
by Puzikas » Fri Feb 19, 2021 10:29 am
Sibauk wrote:Would AShM TELs based on islands just 1700 and 600 km2 in size be too easy to find to be worth having? For comparison these islands would have roughly 20% and 10% of the coastline of Taiwan (which has AShMs on TELs) respectively.
Attack by nuclear weapons is not a consideration BTW.
Edit: Perhaps Singapore, a 700 km2 island nation that only fields ship and air-launched Harpoons is a better comparison.
Sevvania wrote:I don't post much, but I am always here.
Usually waiting for Puz ;-;
by The Manticoran Empire » Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:09 am
Romextly wrote:Quick question. Is the T-34 a better tank than the M4 Sherman?
by The Manticoran Empire » Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:10 am
by Romextly » Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:11 am
The Manticoran Empire wrote:Romextly wrote:Quick question. Is the T-34 a better tank than the M4 Sherman?
Depends on the metric. For the Soviet Union, it was. T-34s were cheaper and easier to manufacture than the Sherman. However, for the US, the T-34 would be absolutely the most useless pile of junk in the history of armored warfare. The T-34 worked for the Russians because they built it with planned obsolesence in mind and had rail lines to the factories. The US had to ship everything overseas. As such, while the Russians were alright in reducing the lifespan of a vehicle to reduce its cost and complexity, the US could not make that sacrifice. Anything that would be sent overseas HAD to be able to fight anywhere in the world for prolonged periods of time with the only maintenance facilities being a tent with a mud floor.
by Korva » Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:14 am
by Champagne Socialist Sharifistan » Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:20 am
by The Manticoran Empire » Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:27 am
Romextly wrote:The Manticoran Empire wrote:Depends on the metric. For the Soviet Union, it was. T-34s were cheaper and easier to manufacture than the Sherman. However, for the US, the T-34 would be absolutely the most useless pile of junk in the history of armored warfare. The T-34 worked for the Russians because they built it with planned obsolesence in mind and had rail lines to the factories. The US had to ship everything overseas. As such, while the Russians were alright in reducing the lifespan of a vehicle to reduce its cost and complexity, the US could not make that sacrifice. Anything that would be sent overseas HAD to be able to fight anywhere in the world for prolonged periods of time with the only maintenance facilities being a tent with a mud floor.
But in a fight tank v. tank, with all other variables considered, which would win?
by Dayganistan » Fri Feb 19, 2021 11:56 am
Champagne Socialist Sharifistan wrote:Thanks. You would for cultural reasons. TG me if you want more info.
by Triplebaconation » Fri Feb 19, 2021 12:10 pm
Gallia- wrote:United Earthlings wrote:Assume arable land and water exist within the vast interior of the supercontinent.
Not very Pangea then.
by Crookfur » Fri Feb 19, 2021 1:23 pm
by Champagne Socialist Sharifistan » Fri Feb 19, 2021 1:35 pm
by Korva » Fri Feb 19, 2021 1:36 pm
by Triplebaconation » Fri Feb 19, 2021 1:36 pm
by Champagne Socialist Sharifistan » Fri Feb 19, 2021 1:37 pm
Korva wrote:Yes, but which one is the atheist living in a theocracy whose parents are 3rd cousins of different faiths?
Will he make a good soldier?
by Champagne Socialist Sharifistan » Fri Feb 19, 2021 1:39 pm
Triplebaconation wrote:"Don't worry, ma'am, in the 80% likely event your 17.5-year-old 5' 12" son dies delivering this load of track pants his wife and mistress will receive a generous pension in addition to their salary at the cape factory. Are you chaste and devout enough to join my wives and me for dinner this evening?"
by Immoren » Fri Feb 19, 2021 2:30 pm
discoursedrome wrote:everyone knows that quote, "I know not what weapons World War Three will be fought, but World War Four will be fought with sticks and stones," but in a way it's optimistic and inspiring because it suggests that even after destroying civilization and returning to the stone age we'll still be sufficiently globalized and bellicose to have another world war right then and there
by Triplebaconation » Fri Feb 19, 2021 3:04 pm
by United Earthlings » Fri Feb 19, 2021 4:56 pm
Romextly wrote:Quick question. Is the T-34 a better tank than the M4 Sherman?
Triplebaconation wrote:Even today the vast majority of people live near the coast, I'm not sure how he expects this would change.
by Husseinarti » Fri Feb 19, 2021 7:17 pm
Romextly wrote:Quick question. Is the T-34 a better tank than the M4 Sherman?
United Earthlings wrote:Romextly wrote:Quick question. Is the T-34 a better tank than the M4 Sherman?
When you have to build 1.7 T-34s to equal 1 Sherman and your own soldiers think the lend-lease Sherman tanks their getting are better overall, that should tell you something. So, yes the T-34 is indeed the better tank, but only because I'm bias and I like the look of the T-34 better.
The Manticoran Empire wrote:Romextly wrote:Quick question. Is the T-34 a better tank than the M4 Sherman?
Depends on the metric. For the Soviet Union, it was. T-34s were cheaper and easier to manufacture than the Sherman. However, for the US, the T-34 would be absolutely the most useless pile of junk in the history of armored warfare. The T-34 worked for the Russians because they built it with planned obsolesence in mind and had rail lines to the factories. The US had to ship everything overseas. As such, while the Russians were alright in reducing the lifespan of a vehicle to reduce its cost and complexity, the US could not make that sacrifice. Anything that would be sent overseas HAD to be able to fight anywhere in the world for prolonged periods of time with the only maintenance facilities being a tent with a mud floor.
by Triplebaconation » Fri Feb 19, 2021 7:44 pm
United Earthlings wrote:but then what do I know
by Gallia- » Fri Feb 19, 2021 8:03 pm
United Earthlings wrote:Romextly wrote:Quick question. Is the T-34 a better tank than the M4 Sherman?
When you have to build 1.7 T-34s to equal 1 Sherman and your own soldiers think the lend-lease Sherman tanks their getting are better overall, that should tell you something. So, yes the T-34 is indeed the better tank, but only because I'm bias and I like the look of the T-34 better.Triplebaconation wrote:Even today the vast majority of people live near the coast, I'm not sure how he expects this would change.
Someone forgot to do their research, because last I checked, less than 40% didn't make a majority, but then what do I know, I only live in this alternate reality.
Advertisement
Return to Factbooks and National Information
Users browsing this forum: Tumbra
Advertisement