Military Photos

Stars and Stripes · 22-04-2017 04:37PM

Jawgap wrote: »

ah, I see we're ninja editing......;)

What happened to asking for links to the FAA deployments?

Don't forget some of us get email updates as soon as a post is made.

EDIT: And there it is above ^^^^ - apologies for suggesting otherwise.

Fine stick 'em up. But see post #749 again. Edit again, can you reply soon to #749 as I'm almost finished work and will be gone by 5.00, I seemed to have put you in a bit of a spot

tac foley · 22-04-2017 04:58PM

Owryan wrote: »

As much as s+s's anti Brit bias is annoying at times your pro Brit bias can be as bad.

1. I was born in London.

2. My mother was a Brit.

3. My wife is a Brit.

4. I was in the British Army for thirty-three years all but ten days.

And I have pro-Brit bias?

No sh*t, Sherlock?

tac

Jawgap · 22-04-2017 05:01PM

Stars and Stripes wrote: »

According to Major Walter F. DeHoust of Marine Corps Development and Education Comman of Quantico, Virginia -

.....

you know they say the USMC is most intellectual of all the branches of the US armed forces......and that people like Boyd are more honoured there than in their own service.....so yes, quoting a Leatherneck would seem like a good move (even if the USMC doesn't really 'do' strategic bombing).......however, as you carefully omitted......the-since-promoted-to-Col Maj DeHoust is not on the faculty of Quantico......your quote is from a paper he prepared, no doubt, while attending the Marine Corps Command and Staff College.....to give at a seminar entitled "War since 1945" - so yes, definitely, your student paper should trump the view of someone like VanCreveld :rolleyes:

What i don't understand is that there is so much criticism out there of VanCreveld that the best you can up with is staff paper from 33 years ago

It's not like the man hasn't raised hackles from here to Australia!

Anyway, I'll not trouble you with my links - I wouldn't want to burden you with such works of fiction - I've already referenced VanCreveld's book......the figures and deployments of the FAA comes from the recently declassified file (ref:- DEFE 58/274) "Strike Command Intelligence Branch: Operation Corporate (Falklands Conflict): historical record; an examination of Argentine air effort during the Falklands Campaign" - a copy of which sits on my computer......as well as verious papers from Maxwell, prepared by both faculty and staff there.

Owryan · 22-04-2017 05:02PM

Jawgap wrote: »

True, but sure it's a bit ridiculous to suggest that the Union's artillery superiority was the significant reason for their victory? If anything, it was probably the arrival of generals like Grant who could campaign, instead of merely make battle?

It was a plus no doubt about it but in terrain like the wilderness it's value would be been minimal.

The true ability of union artillery was probably best seen at Malvern Hill and at Gettysburg.

Then there is the quality issue, Confederate fuses were notorious in their unreliability and Confederate cannons were of a lower quality to those cast in the north.

Owryan · 22-04-2017 05:29PM

tac foley wrote: »

1. I was born in London.

2. My mother was a Brit.

3. My wife is a Brit.

4. I was in the British Army for thirty-three years all but ten days.

And I have pro-Brit bias?

No sh*t, Sherlock?

tac

And this is an Irish site, should you not be on some UK site doffing you cap to the inbreds at buck palace.

It's no problem being proud of what the British army has done but Ffs acknowledge to deny anyone else any credit.

I was a kid during the Falklands but can still remember the delight at the news of British losses and sadness at the Argentine. As an adult (allegedly) i can recognise the bravery on both sides.

tac foley · 22-04-2017 05:31PM

aaaaaaaaaaaand 5. My father was Irish.

tac

Owryan · 22-04-2017 05:33PM

tac foley wrote: »

aaaaaaaaaaaand 5. My father was Irish.

tac

Who the fcuk cares?

tac foley · 22-04-2017 05:34PM

So I have as much right to be here as you do.

tac

Conchir · 22-04-2017 05:52PM

Well this thread has kind of gone to **** in the past few days.

Here's Wilhelm Bauer, originally U-2540. Having been scuttled towards the end of WWII, it was raised over 10 years later and served until 1980 in the West German Navy. I find it fascinating that, having spent so long as a wreck, it was not only raised successfully, but then recommissioned. It's now a museum ship (boat?).

tac foley · 22-04-2017 05:57PM

If an American is talking about a submarine, he calls it a submersible ship. If most everybody else is talking about it, it's a submersible boat.

The Germans call it a boat, and it's a German U-Boot, so I'm going to call it a boat.

And yes, it's remarkable, not only for its post-war renaissance, but for the incredibly modern appearance of this wartime vessel. The Russians based their Whiskey-class subs on this model, I believe, some of which are still serving in Third World Navies today.

tac

knucklehead6 · 22-04-2017 06:01PM

tac foley wrote: »

If an American is talking about a submarine, he calls it a submersible ship. If most everybody else is talking about it, it's a submersible boat.

The Germans call it a boat, and it's a German U-Boot, so I'm going to call it a boat.

And yes, it's remarkable, not only for its post-war renaissance, but for the incredibly modern appearance of this wartime vessel. The Russians based their Whiskey-class subs on this model, I believe, some of which are still serving in Third World Navies today.

tac

Americans ALWAYS call subs Boats

Conchir · 22-04-2017 06:10PM

tac foley wrote: »

And yes, it's remarkable, not only for its post-war renaissance, but for the incredibly modern appearance of this wartime vessel. The Russians based their Whiskey-class subs on this model, I believe, some of which are still serving in Third World Navies today.

tac

That's what struck me too. When I first saw the photo, I assumed it was modern and still in service. Definitely didn't think it was WWII-era.

I've been on a different sub, the USS Pampanito in San Francisco. I was blown away at how cramped it was. I knew from films and photos that subs are cramped, but they really don't do them justice, at least not this one. Remarkable machines all round.

BeardySi · 23-04-2017 10:21PM

If we're doing subs, here's a couple of HMS Ocelot in Chatham...

Stars and Stripes · 24-04-2017 02:37PM

Here's a link about the history of bayonet which originated from the town of Bayonne southwest France in the 16th century. It was developed by hunters to facilitate the hunting of dangerous wild boars. The first recorded use was in the Netherlands around 1647 with the troops carrying bayonets with blades around 12 inches long. They have been utilized for various functions down the years such as anti cavalry tactics, which might explain why their length has changed to the much shorter bayonet generally in use today.

http://www.warhistoryonline.com/guns/8-key-stages-history-bayonet-x.html/2

Stars and Stripes · 25-04-2017 12:22PM

One of the most awesome weapons developed by the Soviets the Katyusha. Nicknamed Stalin's organ by the Germans it was said they legged it when it was brought into action and who could blame them from the barrage of missiles with the screeching as if they were coming out of hell itself !!

BoJack Horseman · 02-05-2017 11:28PM

The F-35 making a visit to the Mach Loop in Wales today.
A beaut of a picture here.

You can see the cooling intakes at the start of the wing & the two radar reflectors towards the rear.
(needed so that it will appear on radar).

c3b4c26334474045be6d7ea0e3aae3a5

*edit.... some more:

(this last one is from the Lightning's visit to Bulgaria.

helimachoptor · 03-05-2017 04:43PM

Detail here
https://www.yahoo.com/news/army-photographer-captured-explosion-moment-111325497.html

Reggie. · 03-05-2017 05:06PM

helimachoptor wrote: »

Detail here
https://www.yahoo.com/news/army-photographer-captured-explosion-moment-111325497.html

Is it just me or do the soldiers just look like mannequins

beauf · 03-05-2017 05:06PM

Sobering.

Stars and Stripes · 03-05-2017 05:55PM

Reggie. wrote: »

Is it just me or do the soldiers just look like mannequins

Good spot Reggie.

Reggie. · 03-05-2017 07:40PM

Stars and Stripes wrote: »

Good spot Reggie.

Fake news?

AbusesToilets · 04-05-2017 12:34AM

Reggie. wrote: »

Fake news?

Sadly, no.

http://time.com/4764127/afghanistan-army-combat-photographer/

Stars and Stripes · 04-05-2017 10:59AM

Reggie. wrote: »

Fake news?

Sounds a bit like the Jessica Lynch fairytale in Iraq

Rambo image was based on lie, says US war hero Jessica Lynch
A female US soldier who came to personify the US invasion of Iraq yesterday appeared before a Congressional hearing to reject the Pentagon's portrayal of her as "Rambo from West Virginia", shot down in a blaze of glory.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/apr/25/iraq.usa1

Stars and Stripes · 05-05-2017 02:17PM

The Panjandrum, a WW2 weapon that in could have worked well in theory but sometimes the planned and drawn upon paper doesn't quite live up to in real life. Designed for D-Day, the idea sounds quite feasible to create something that will break a tank-sized hole in the German defenses. Basically two large wooden spiked wheels with rocket propulsion, held together by a bomb in a central drum. Even though it was supported with modifications the weapon spun erratically around sometimes on one wheel, other times on two. Rockets fell off and sped away, so at its final trial, it managed to scare one dog and nearly ran over the cameraman.

Stars and Stripes · 05-05-2017 02:33PM

The launching of the USS Robalo at Wisconsin, USA, 9 May 1943.

Alkers · 05-05-2017 02:40PM

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

You can see the cooling intakes at the start of the wing & the two radar reflectors towards the rear.
(needed so that it will appear on radar).

Can you highlight these?:o

Jawgap · 05-05-2017 02:40PM

Stars and Stripes wrote: »

Unusual pic with the launching of the USS Robalo at Wisconsin, USA, 9 May 1943.

.....

not seeing what's unusual about it?

sparky42 · 05-05-2017 02:51PM

Stars and Stripes wrote: »

Unusual pic with the launching of the USS Robalo at Wisconsin, USA, 9 May 1943.

That was from memory a standard launching practice for Subs, with warships being slid down the slip stern first. A lot different to the modern style of launching ships.

BoJack Horseman · 06-05-2017 10:33AM

Simona1986 wrote: »

Can you highlight these?:o

Red are the air intakes, green are the radar reflectors.

Cool air goes in & chills the fuel, this fuel is pumped around the engine to keep things cool and reduce the infa-red signature of the aircraft.
So there is less dependence on a separate hydraulic cooling system.

The reflectors are worn when in civilian air space so that it will appear on long range radar.
They are small but they have some sort of glass like stuff in them which greatly amplifies radar return.

BoJack Horseman · 06-05-2017 10:37AM

Stars and Stripes wrote: »

The launching of the USS Robalo at Wisconsin, USA, 9 May 1943.

They are still launching them like that in Wisconsin....

Military Photos

Comments