URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       NeoConfederate States fo AMerica
  HTML https://ncsa.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Factbooks and National Information
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 253--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Military Realism Thread, MK-1: The dummy stage
       By: Caos Date: May 8, 2015, 5:18 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Are you taking an attitude here?
       A tidal wave, moving at extreme speeds, much taller than the
       reactor would douse it, and shortcirctuit it. Not to mention the
       earthquake. How can you compare a missile with maybe +/- 50
       meters accuracy to a massive tidal wave? Shall I mock Tokyo for
       burning down to mere bombs when Hiroshima was wiped out by a
       nuclear weapon? Or shall I compare NORAD to Hiroshima?
       #Post#: 257--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Military Realism Thread, MK-1: The dummy stage
       By: Tarfu Date: May 8, 2015, 5:42 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       My point being, that the reactors didn't care about the water.
       Why would I target the hardened structure when I can just shread
       the unprotected support equipment and get the same effect?
       #Post#: 258--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Military Realism Thread, MK-1: The dummy stage
       By: Caos Date: May 8, 2015, 5:52 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Because there is no such thing as unprotected support equipment.
       #Post#: 261--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Military Realism Thread, MK-1: The dummy stage
       By: david090366 Date: May 9, 2015, 12:32 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Don't forget Three Mile Island
  HTML http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_accident.
       ;)
       People are afraid of nuclear reactors for a variety of reasons.
       These accidents are just one of them. The next is what to do
       with nuclear waste? Right now we just put it in drums and bury
       it, more or less. The stuff won't quit being radioactive until
       well after everybody that disposed of it is long dead. It's like
       being afraid of flying because planes crash.
       #Post#: 411--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Military Realism Thread, MK-1: The dummy stage
       By: david090366 Date: May 14, 2015, 4:17 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I found a good article for why mecha are actually a ridiculous
       idea for future reference.  ;)
  HTML http://z4.invisionfree.com/NSDraftroom/index.php?showtopic=5347
       #Post#: 412--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Military Realism Thread, MK-1: The dummy stage
       By: david090366 Date: May 14, 2015, 4:54 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Here's something else I found that may be helpful if you want to
       make your own tanks.
       #Post#: 3130--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Military Realism Thread, MK-1: The dummy stage
       By: Amerikanisches Reich Date: July 3, 2015, 1:10 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       That article is debatable when it comes to "spider" tanks. They
       would distribute weight pretty well, and though slow, would have
       the advantage of nearly the same strategic mobility as infantry.
       They would also need advanced robotics to maintain balance and
       walk, but would have far fewer problems than any two-legged
       thing.
       As support for light infantry they could be useful (because they
       would match them closely in strategic mobility, whilst no other
       kind of vehicle really can except a few very specialized things
       with independent articulated suspensions, that are also quite
       slow). They would probably always be "light" tanks because that
       article is quite right that they couldn't be as heavily armored
       as "normal" tanks, but they could carry plenty of heavy weapons
       that light infantry otherwise couldn't.
       It should also be noted that the treads of tanks have always
       been a point of severe vulnerability much as short legs would
       be, though admittedly to a lesser extent.
       #Post#: 3253--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Military Realism Thread, MK-1: The dummy stage
       By: david090366 Date: July 5, 2015, 3:30 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
  HTML http://io9.com/chinas-next-tank-could-be-this-weaponzied-robotic-spide-1638514955
       #Post#: 5298--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Military Realism Thread, MK-1: The dummy stage
       By: Confederacy of Turkducken Date: July 29, 2015, 10:45 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I know this says military but I wish to fact check with the
       community before I seriously begin investment in this. The
       Aeroscraft design
  HTML http://gizmodo.com/the-aluminum-airship-of-the-future-has-finally-flown-1301320903
       Let me know opinions.
       #Post#: 5300--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Military Realism Thread, MK-1: The dummy stage
       By: Caos Date: July 29, 2015, 10:51 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I like.
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page