nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

I bet you didnt know that

Cartouche

As people here work in various jobs / professions they might know things from work or study no one here knows yet. this is what this topic is about.

what do you know that we have never heard of?

Eg: you don't need to be great at maths to be an architect

this is obvious to me but everyone says to me "i wanted to be an architect but i was bad at math,i can barely add"

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

There are currently no battleships in use by any navy anywhere in the world. The US navy decomissioned its last battleships in 2006.

The 'dreadnought' style battleships which began to be built in 1906 generally did very little in any of the wars they were around for. In WW1, there was only one major confrontation between battleships (Jutland, 1916, which was indecisive) and in WW2 aircraft carriers quickly overtook them as the ships of importance.

Chancer3001

Duffy the Vampire Slayer wrote: »

There are currently no battleships in use by any navy anywhere in the world. The US navy decomissioned its last battleships in 2006.

The 'dreadnought' style battleships which began to be built in 1906 generally did very little in any of the wars they were around for. In WW1, there was only one major confrontation between battleships (Jutland, 1916, which was 2indecisive) and in WW2 aircraft carriers quickly overtook them as the ships of importance.

To be fair, this is pedantic about definition of a battleship.

They still have numerous "types of that ship" like cruisers and destroyers

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

Chancer3001 wrote: »

To be fair, this is pedantic about definition of a battleship.

They still have numerous "types of that ship" like cruisers and destroyers

That's the definition. Any other usage is incorrect.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Chancer3001 wrote: »

To be fair, this is pedantic about definition of a battleship.

They still have numerous "types of that ship" like cruisers and destroyers

You are thinking of 'warships'. Battleships are a distinct class.

lmimmfn

Snotaul Goodman wrote: »

Natalie Imbruglias Torn is actually a cover. It was originally released by a Danish group called Ednaswap in 1995.

Wasnt it also a Eurovision entry?

Skylinehead

Duffy the Vampire Slayer wrote: »

There are currently no battleships in use by any navy anywhere in the world. The US navy decomissioned its last battleships in 2006.

The 'dreadnought' style battleships which began to be built in 1906 generally did very little in any of the wars they were around for. In WW1, there was only one major confrontation between battleships (Jutland, 1916, which was indecisive) and in WW2 aircraft carriers quickly overtook them as the ships of importance.

They didn't see much action, bit like nuclear weapons actually. Just having a "fleet in being" was enough to deter other nations.

There weren't many battleship duels in WW2, but I entirely disagree with the idea that they did little in that war. They were fantastic anti-air escorts for carrier fleets, and they were so good at naval gunfire support that the US Navy has never replaced them. You just can't replace 11 tonnes of shells being fired every 30 seconds with missiles.

Fun fact: In the Gulf War (the Iowa class battleships last war), a load of Iraqi troops surrendered to a drone launched by the USS Wisconsin (used for spotting targets). The first ever surrender to a robot, such was the intensity of the firepower by the Wisconsin and Missouri.

Capt'n Midnight

Skylinehead wrote: »

They didn't see much action, bit like nuclear weapons actually. Just having a "fleet in being" was enough to deter other nations.

To sink the Bismark the Royal Navy used six battleships and battlecruisers, two aircraft carriers, thirteen cruisers, and twenty-one destroyers in addition to land based aircraft.

Tirpitz tied up a lot of Allied battleships. Ships that could have been sent to the Pacific were escorting North Atlantic and Arctic convoys.

There weren't many battleship duels in WW2, but I entirely disagree with the idea that they did little in that war. They were fantastic anti-air escorts for carrier fleets, and they were so good at naval gunfire support that the US Navy has never replaced them.

The problem was that while battleships took a huge step forward in effectiveness when they got radar but armour became worthless once better weapons like atomic bombs appeared.

Before effective radar, in February 1942 destroyer USS Edsall had 1,335 shells fired at her from two IJN battleships and two cruisers before aircraft were called in. Less than 20 months later in September 1943 Roma was sunk by a radio controlled glide bomb.

The Battle off Samar was an example of how impotent battleships could be without proper fire control.

You just can't replace 11 tonnes of shells being fired every 30 seconds with missiles.

Actually as far back as D-Day ships with thousands of rockets were used. Not as accurate as battleship or as long a range.

Wibbs

Skylinehead wrote: »

They were fantastic anti-air escorts for carrier fleets, and they were so good at naval gunfire support that the US Navy has never replaced them. You just can't replace 11 tonnes of shells being fired every 30 seconds with missiles.

+1. D-Day would have been a lot more difficult for the Allies without the battleships pounding the German positions on the coast and inland. Their psychological effect can't be underestimated either. Even the thought that a ship like the Tirpitz had left port to hunt for a joint British/US supply convoy in the Arctic sea had the admiralty crap its pants and ordered the convoy to break up and run(in the end only a third made it). Again the thought of a ship like the Bismarck was ranging about worried the Allies no end and they spent a lot of time materiel and men on hunting it, assets they could have used elsewhere. Like you say they were often like a nuclear weapon with rudders.

Another small fact about WW2, in the Battle of Britain the Spitfire gets all the glory, but it was actually the Hurricane that shot down more German aircraft. Speaking of German aircraft: in the same battle the ME109 had nearly as many losses of machines and men from take off and landing accidents as were shot down(because of their undercarriage layout they were a thundering bitch on the ground and were a hard lesson for rookie pilots).

The subsequently much maligned Stuka dive bomber, while vulnerable to Allied fighter planes(as was any bomber) were one of the most effective weapon platforms of the entire war. Their tally of gun emplacements, fortresses, troop concentrations, buildings, tanks, trains and ships destroyed would be hard to match by any other aircraft of the conflict. Just the shout of "Stuka!!" heard by allied troops would have them diving for the ditches. And they were the first example in war where troops on the ground could call in a precision air strike in the heat of battle. Accuracy of about five metres(and often under that) in the hands of an expert. Most bombs in WW2 were general area "accurate". More carpet bombing. Interestingly, the very concept of dive bombing for accuracy was an American idea. One the Americans had limited success and got bored with.

More Russians were killed in the battle for Stalingrad than all of the allied deaths in WW2.

80% of those who served on German U Boats were killed.

One path to radar was a British scientist who was trying to build a radio wave based death ray.

Hitler's nephew served in the US army.

The German SS operated a brothel in Berlin and trained prostitutes to listen in on conversations with foreign diplomats.

The Nazi salute based on the Roman salute, wasn't a Roman salute at all. We don't know how Romans saluted each other. The salute attributed to them was a French painter of classical scenes invention.

One of Hitler's heroes was Henry Ford and one of Henry Ford's heroes was Hitler.

Wibbs

The commonest, most long lasting and most used tool in all of human history is the stone hand axe. They were in use from one and a half million years ago up to ten thousand years ago. How they were used is still a matter of conjecture and they appear to have had myriad uses, including one theory that reckons some were used as a sexual display. But it seems the best guess is that they were the Swiss Army knife of humanity for all that time. Except in prehistoric Australia, where oddly they don't show up.

I would say that if you ever wanted an object to hold in your hand that signified our journey of humanity, you'd be hard pressed to find something better than a hand axe. Or a cheap Bic lighter, or the rashers and eggs, or bowl of cereal you'll have for breakie in the morning.

Actually yeah, if you have a mind to, take out one flake of those cornflakes you may have tomorrow, hold it in your fingers and consider that is one of the greatest changes of humanity that led to all you see and experience around you. The domesticated grain.

Are Am Eye

Pilots sometimes lost consciousness in the Stuka from the intense g-force of the high speed dive and pull out. the automatic dive recovery system kicked in allowing the aircraft to safely climb back to altitude.

Capt'n Midnight

Wibbs wrote: »

Interestingly, the very concept of dive bombing for accuracy was an American idea. One the Americans had limited success and got bored with.

They had limited success at Midway

Conchir

The first man-made object to travel faster than sound (long before Concorde or other supersonic aircraft) was almost definitely the whip. The "crack" of a whip is actually a sonic boom created as parts of the whip travel faster than the speed of sound.

Wibbs

Me. Wittering on previously wrote: »

The domesticated grain.

Maybe I should attempt to explain that.

I say attempt...

The first civilisations congregated(in general) around rivers, just like our hunter gatherer ancestors. The big innovation was rather than going far and wide to hunt and gather, we started to bring the mountain to Mohammed by domesticating a few useful food items and gathered them in one place. River valleys being the obvious location. Water was and is life. To the degree that in ancient Egypt the different areas in the kingdom came to be known as "Water Counties".

Anyhoo... First off we seeded areas and that gave us consistent food and a consistent place. And a consistent future to think of. That gave us population growth, but that brought its own issues. We looked for more consistent and predictable yields from the land. Which gave us the plough. Then we had a lot of food.

And that led to a surplus in the harvest. Where do you store that harvest? That gives us pottery and baskets. How do you know whose surplus it is? That gives us the beginnings of writing. Some of the first examples of writing is "this is my sh1t and how much is contained within, feck off".

How do you know whose land it is after every seasonal flood? That gives us the notion of land ownership and more how we measure boundaries, which gives us measurement and measurement within the landscape.

The vagaries of nature and seasonal flooding then gives rise to irrigation. Which in turn gives us the ability to manipulate the landscape itself and the need to measure that manipulation. Which in turn with the boundary maths gives us geometry and accounting.

Add in the growing population and some reaching to control it, gives us government and timekeeping and calendars and bureaucracy and social classes and organised religion to make sure the inundations stay on the regular and the idea of nations and currency and organised war and social mobility on ideas or muscle and innovation.

All from a cornflake, or popcorn or weetabix we don't even give a second thought to.

mzungu

As a British soldier, you were more likely to die in the Crimean War than in World War One.

New Home

Wibbs

And first man to climb all peaks above 8000 metres. IIRC he also made the first trans Antarctic route on skis. As you do. And the first solo run on Everest again without oxygen. I also recall an interview with him and he noted one of the worst injuries he sustained climbing wasn't on some mountain, but when he was doing work on his home and fell off a ladder and broke his leg.

He also claimed to have seen the Yeti and was fascinated by it and was convinced it was an unknown species of bear.

Esel

From Wiki (emphasis mine)

"Reinhold Messner was the first man to climb all fourteen eight-thousanders in the world and without supplemental oxygen. "

New Home

He was also among the first to inspect the Ötzi mummy on site, he was called to the site to establish whether the mummy was found on Austrian or Italian soil (both countries claimed it, as it was near the border).

Wibbs

Are Am Eye wrote: »

Pilots sometimes lost consciousness in the Stuka from the intense g-force of the high speed dive and pull out. the automatic dive recovery system kicked in allowing the aircraft to safely climb back to altitude.

True and it was an early form of computer with it(also fitted to JU88's). However it was almost inevitably switched off, even disconnected in practice as the crews didn't like it. It couldn't be manually overridden once triggered and restricted their ability to manoeuvre on and especially away from a target. If all your machines are pulling up at the same altitude at the same time that's a field day for anti aircraft gunners.

Wibbs

New Home wrote: »

He was also among the first to inspect the zi mummy on site, he was called to the site to establish whether the mummy was found on Austrian or Italian soil (both countries claimed it, as it was near the border).

Otzi had over forty tattoos on his body. The earliest known example of such body art. Interestingly the same tattoos were on acupuncture points and predate the Chinese practice by many thousands of years. Even more interestingly the points chosen roughly correspond with where later Chinese practitioners would place needles for Otzi's different ailments(gall stones, bad teeth, arthritis of the joints). It was first thought he had frozen to death, but he suffered a blunt trauma to the head and there was a flint arrowhead deeply imbedded near his heart which would have caused his death pretty quickly(flint projectiles cause horrendous local trauma, worse than most metal types. A Neandertal flint headed stabbing spear has been compared to being hit by a 357 magnum). He was shot in the back.

Wibbs

The first production line wasn't the Ford(Hitler's blushing fan) Model T, nor was it in gun making. The first production line of the Industrial Age was in the manufacture of wooden block and tackle pulleys for the British navy. Though the concept had earlier tries. Chief among them was in the shipyards of Venice in the 13th century. They passed ships along the river through various outfitters that would build on extra bits and bobs as it passed through the channel. This for a time revolutionised the building of ships at much larger volumes than others of the time. It didn't get much wider traction.

Capt'n Midnight

Wibbs wrote: »

The first production line wasn't the Ford(Hitler's blushing fan) Model T, nor was it in gun making.

The gun making was special because it depended on precision parts that could be interchanged.

As late a WWII English tank workers kept a file at their benches so they could make parts fit. In the US they sent the parts back for quality control.

UK got tanks out the door quicker , but the US tank were far easier to repair in the filed because they didn't have to file down the parts to fit.

Wibbs

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

The gun making was special because it depended on precision parts that could be interchanged.

As could those block and tackle pulleys. Though that was in wood, gun manufacture increased the tolerances involved by a large margin. Tolerances innovated by the screw thread and the marking of scientific instruments and a little later on by innovations in pocket watch production by the Americans, who mass produced them for the first tim. But that's another story.

FanadMan

Wibbs wrote:

The first production line wasn't the Ford(Hitler's blushing fan) Model T, nor was it in gun making. The first production line of the Industrial Age was in the manufacture of wooden block and tackle pulleys for the British navy. Though the concept had earlier tries. Chief among them was in the shipyards of Venice in the 13th century. They passed ships along the river through various outfitters that would build on extra bits and bobs as it passed through the channel. This for a time revolutionised the building of ships at much larger volumes than others of the time. It didn't get much wider traction.

Someone needs to create a computer that can interface with Wibbs brain. Wikipedia use would be wiped out in seconds

Cookie_Monster

mzungu wrote: »

As a British soldier, you were more likely to die in the Crimean War than in World War One.

well if you did die in the Crimean War you certainly wouldn't die in WW1!

Wibbs

The term audit/auditing in accounting comes from the medieval where oral and aural tradition ruled. Even in the case of the written word. It refers to a time when you would listen to your accounts being spoken aloud. We a similar echo in other areas like the law. EG attending a "hearing".

Ted_YNWA

FanadMan wrote: »

Someone needs to create a computer that can interface with Wibbs brain. Wikipedia use would be wiped out in seconds

I propose calling it Wibbsipedia.

pickarooney

Ted_YNWA wrote: »

I propose calling it Wibbsipedia.

WorldWiseWibbs

Wibbs

The story of how sun came to seen as the centre of the solar system is an interesting one.

The Ancient Greeks, well a couple of them and some Arabs thrown in had mused on it, but it didn't really take. Certainly not in Europe. The Christian Church had relied on Aristotle's(and some biblical) reality on the matter and held that the Earth was the centre of things. Makes sense. I mean it sounds daft now, but if you didn't know any different the Earth being the centre of things is backed up by most general observation. What you know shapes reality.

Anyway this priest scientist, by the name of Copernicus on the back of the whole information revolution of the printed book where people were sharing theories like crazy has another look and decides that hang on, the Sun is the centre of things. And contrary to popular belief the Catholic Church were all for it. The dedication of his book is to the pope of the time and is printed by church printers. For a start his calculations helped them with setting the religious calendar which was of utmost import. Plus it was kept among themselves and other learned types, so nothing to rattle the great unwashed or their beliefs, so be grand.

Then along comes Galileo and with his new fangled telescope that he got from the Ducth (and improved) does more looking and thinking and adds to and solidifies the theory. Generally keeps it to himself and other learned types and again contrary to popular belief the Church doesn't really care. Cool and the gang. Until he receives a letter from the wife of some local bigwig prince who asks the question that shouldn't be asked. Namely; Yo G, the bible says the Earth stood still. Does this mean the bible is wrong? Galileo then goes and answers the question that shouldn't be asked and most certainly shouldn't be answered and says "yep, it means that part is wrong".

This letter makes its way to some local bishop and then to Rome and a collective "ah crap" is heard. And still the Church says, "jaysus Ted, what were you thinking, let's chill the hell out and say nothing more, it'll rattle the peasants. We'll release the info ourselves over time and we're all grand. Cool?". Galileo gets a bee in his bonnet and being in possession of more ego than sense(which was some trick for him) replies "ah feck off, I'll publish and bedamned". That's when the Church put him under house arrest. And took Copernicus' book off the library shelves. In public anyway...

This led to other scientists getting the fear about what the Church might do to them if they wanted to publish, so a load of them hotfooted it to northern Protestant Europe where they continued observations and conclusions from same. As did local guys in those areas. Including one lad named Kepler. He looked at all the data that had been gathered and worked out things like the planets moved in elliptical orbits and all sorts of other cool stuff. Then we had Newton who came up with a grand theory of everything.

And another lad by the name of Halley. He made all sorts of predictions including the comet that bears his name and what year it would come back. Meanwhile back in Catholic Europe the Jesuits had kept all the "secret" books in play and kept up correspondence with their northern Protestant scientists mates.

They looked at Halley's prediction and with Newtons new theory of gravity and all the other cool stuff reckoned that because of the position of Jupiter and its gravity Halley's Comet would be late by a year. And they were right. And the year it came back was the very same year our friend Copernicus' book was taken off the blacklist and officially went back on the Vatican's library shelves.