[QUOTE=Destroyox;50438808]Weren't the plans for fighting in Normandy super top secret? Also I don't think they really realized the potential hedgerow hazards considering it turned out to be a huge problem on the first day of Overlord that wasn't accounted for in any of the planning and required impromptu designs like the Rhino Sherman.[/QUOTE]
Secret, yes. Surprising or unexpected? Nope. They [I]had[/I] to land in Northern France. Normandy specifically might not have been the obvious pick, but it's in Northern France, and you needed shit that fits Northern France. Which is quite full of hedgerows and walls. Like most of Europe. It's a design for the environment it's intended for, and a decent one at that. Probably just a little too specific and little not good enough to be actually adopted, but by no means a bad design or any sort of example of 'mid-war stupidity'. No, for that, you want the French (minus the S-35, which was pretty much the best early war tank) or Italian tanks.
Itallian tankettes are adorable, I will agree.
[T]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f1/Carro_Leggero_3_35-001.jpg/1280px-Carro_Leggero_3_35-001.jpg[/T]
I actually don't think its a bad design for its intended purpose, which i believe was originally to drive at light machinegun-emplacements and rooting them out. Problem was that the battleplans of the italian army might as well have been crayon drawings and colouring books for all the effect it had.
A better army could have put those tanks to better use i think, and like, not thrown them at anti-tank emplacements in a wildly unorganized formation of tankers who had no idea what the plan was, and with no ability to communicate with each other.
[QUOTE=Sprockethead;50439895] Problem was that the battleplans of the italian army might as well have been crayon drawings and colouring books for all the effect it had. [/QUOTE]
This is great
[QUOTE=Riller;50437582]First off, no, it wasn't designed before WWII. Second, it's not a tank, it's an universal carrier. Third, it was made directly in response to combat experiences during the war related to walls and Normandy's infamous hedgerows.[/QUOTE]
the video even explains that it was made from the combat experiences from ww1 not ww2
as for when it was designed, its in the same vein of the other crazy pre war tanks
the first itteration was built in 1937 and later a 2nd prototype (the one in the museum) was built in 1943. it was not connected to the normandy invasion in any way. yes he had the idea of using hedges and walls as cover, but that wasn't exclusively because of the french hedgerows, anywhere between france and russia could have been the battlefield and those obstacles were commonly used in ww1
[editline]1st June 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sprockethead;50439895]
A better army could have put those tanks to better use i think, and like, not thrown them at anti-tank emplacements in a wildly unorganized formation of tankers who had no idea what the plan was, and with no ability to communicate with each other.[/QUOTE]
to be fair, nobody but the germans could communicate with each other at the onset of ww2. tank crews had to basically know what to do before they set off or have some unfortunate soul stick his head out and wave. its not really surprising radios were quickly adopted by pretty much anyone who could build them
[QUOTE=Sableye;50440603]
to be fair, nobody but the germans could communicate with each other at the onset of ww2. tank crews had to basically know what to do before they set off or have some unfortunate soul stick his head out and wave. its not really surprising radios were quickly adopted by pretty much anyone who could build them[/QUOTE]
Firstly, signal flags were used for the exact purpose you are talking about and had been in use since the first world war.
Secondly, the majority of AFV at the outset of the war did not have the ability to directly communicate with one another, outside of command vehicles - early German tanks had only a receiver for hearing radio commands and sets of signal flags. The communication was one-way in the case of a commander giving orders - signal flags or hand signals had to be used for regular tank crews to intercommunicate.
[QUOTE=snapshot32;50440989]Firstly, signal flags were used for the exact purpose you are talking about and had been in use since the first world war.
Secondly, the majority of AFV at the outset of the war did not have the ability to directly communicate with one another, outside of command vehicles - early German tanks had only a receiver for hearing radio commands and sets of signal flags. The communication was one-way in the case of a commander giving orders - signal flags or hand signals had to be used for regular tank crews to intercommunicate.[/QUOTE]
radio sets are still better than having to wave flags around while being shot at, also the amount of info you can send and receive with signal flags is poor
[QUOTE=snapshot32;50440989]Firstly, signal flags were used for the exact purpose you are talking about and had been in use since the first world war.[/QUOTE]
Signal flags were never ever even a halfway passable way for tankers to communicate with each other. You could pretty much only ever reliable give the 'go forward' signal. Then you would have to close the hatches and go. There was no way the group leader was ever going to get the attention of all his tanks again, even if he opened the hatch and stood there in a sweltering barrage of bullets, waving his flags, yelling. The other tankers were inside closed compartments only able to see out of extremely limited view-ports, with a battle going on around their ears. No fucking way could you coordinate any sort of tank-operation that way.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/HWGcJDf.jpg[/img]
Good god
You see Ivan, when gun is more than half silencer enemy think you of holding can instead of firearm.
I really wonder how that sounds
[QUOTE=Holt!;50444763][img]http://i.imgur.com/HWGcJDf.jpg[/img]
Good god[/QUOTE]
Wrist breaking turned into a fine art.
That should just be illegal
[QUOTE=paul simon;50444909]I really wonder how that sounds[/QUOTE]
Loud.
[video=youtube;z7KY28qQ4Ts]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7KY28qQ4Ts[/video]
We Duty now.
[QUOTE=Holt!;50444763][img]http://i.imgur.com/HWGcJDf.jpg[/img]
Good god[/QUOTE]
That's about as close to a silenced grenade you will ever find I guess
[QUOTE=StrykerE;50445335][video=youtube;z7KY28qQ4Ts]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7KY28qQ4Ts[/video]
We Duty now.[/QUOTE]
So here in the US we ask ourselves, "should we build a killbot?" Instead we spend time figuring out how to teach it to maneuver and stuff
In Russia they just go straight to killbots
You know that's not a silencer, right?
It's a big cup for sticking grenades in. Those are smoke grenade launchers for mounting on armored vehicles.
[t]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/98/75/b5/9875b5114dabd565bb01cc81c323e37d.jpg[/t]
[QUOTE=StrykerE;50445335][video=youtube;z7KY28qQ4Ts]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7KY28qQ4Ts[/video]
We Duty now.[/QUOTE]
the augmented reality gun aiming thing is totally halo
[QUOTE=Holt!;50444763][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/HWGcJDf.jpg[/IMG]
Good god[/QUOTE]
Oh my god, its just like that idea I had of making a one shot tube gun that works pretty much like a pulled signal flare tube.
What a stupid idea.
[QUOTE=Rocâ„¢;50445604]What a [del]stupid[/del] [b]BRILLIANT[/b] idea.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=StrykerE;50445335][video=youtube;z7KY28qQ4Ts]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7KY28qQ4Ts[/video]
We Duty now.[/QUOTE]
-flexes arm, makes fist-
-truck explodes-
I know it was unintentional but that made me laugh really hard
[QUOTE=Holt!;50444763][img]http://i.imgur.com/HWGcJDf.jpg[/img]
Good god[/QUOTE]
With that small of a trigger mechanism, you can make a plethora of extremely deadly IED's.
Box some up and just airdrop it in the middle of some random resistance hub.
[t]https://66.media.tumblr.com/452c05353eab06f4ac30fe557b48e65f/tumblr_o861b4PBIg1u8wbhro1_1280.jpg[/t]
The grips are eh and I'm not a fan of case hardening but that engraving is ~gorgeous~ and I'm a sucker for commander 1911's
[url=http://norseminuteman.tumblr.com/post/145325796561/wilson-combat-supergrade]src[/url]
Personally i much prefer shapes that are entirely informed by functionality.
which in English means, nice, plain and simple.
[QUOTE=Sprockethead;50448281]Personally i much prefer shapes that are entirely informed by functionality.
which in English means, nice, plain and simple.[/QUOTE]
I am of the same mindset, except when it comes to old hunting rifles and shotguns.
Holland & Holland made some beautifully engraved rifles/shotguns and still do.
[IMG]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/ea/95/53/ea955365e2e1dc4a7aee2e803fbf25c0.jpg[/IMG]
Personally I prefer Beretta SV10 Pernnia III's engravings without paints or enamels:
[IMG]http://www.beretta.com/assets/0/15/DimGalleryLarge/sv10perennia3_zoom002.jpg[/IMG]
Also O/U double-barrels are pure beauty.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/L7wjMhA.jpg[/img]
Yes, they are.
that looks like a cool way to break a wrist
[editline]3rd June 2016[/editline]
[video=youtube;VSPBIHRLYr4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSPBIHRLYr4[/video]
hey an AR thats considered an antique!
seriously cool gun