Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Entry 30586
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2025/05/29 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
5/29    

2004/6/3-4 [Reference/History/WW2/Germany, Reference/Military] UID:30586 Activity:very high
6/3     How many Panzers can the M1 Abram take out? How many ME109s can the
        F22 raptor take out? Just want to see how much we have advanced in
        the past 60 years...
        \_ F22 will take out as many as it is possible to take out
           with the amount of missiles it can carry, then go back to
           its home base unharmed, refuel, rearm, repeat.. For that
           matter, an F16 would probably do the same, and any older
           generation fighter armed with missiles and radars.
           \_ Actually, I've only heard one story of a prop plane
              successfully taking out at jet after WWII.  Something about
              a patrol plane in 'nam where he strapped a missle to his
              landing gear, and used it to shoot down a MiG that had been
              harrassing him.
        \_ M1a3 vs panzers: all of them until it runs out of shells.  The
           panzer can't penetrate the M1's hull at any reasonable range.
           F22 vs ME109: all of them until the F22 runs out of ammo.  The
           ME109 can't see it, can't catch it, can't target it, and will go
           down in flames while the F22 is still miles away.
           \_ Furthermore, on the tank front, a lot of people don't
              realize that WWII tanks couldn't shoot with any accuracy
              while moving, and would have a pretty hard time hitting a
              moving target.  An M1a3, on the other hand, can hit a rat
              from a mile away while going 60mph.  So even if the pazers
              got close enough, they'd still be toast.
           \_ This poster is just right.  Recall the two wars in Iraq.
              They conclusively demonstrated that the side with the
              better weapons, not the side with more, will win in open
              warfare.  Sadly, our gov't is buying more weapons rather
              than investing in next-generation better weapons.  Consider
              a nation with effective battlefield lasers.  Aircraft will
              suddenly have to fly below the horizon or they'll be shot
              down at the speed of light.  Same with missiles.  Shells.
              Would you rather it be us with the lasers first, or China?
              Write your congressperson.
              \_ The US Navy is investing heavily in laser platforms for ships.
                 China has a long way to go to catch up to the US, I would say
                 20 years would be enough if the US stood still.  America
                 learned the "R&D >>> production" lesson in WWII, when the
                 Tigers were pulling the "kill all Shermans until out of ammo"
                 trick on the Americans.  The flip side of the coin is the
                 Russians, who lost 3 tanks for every 2 german tanks, but
                 were outproducing the Germans 10 to 1. -- ilyas
              \_ The U.S. wants anti-cruise-missile tech.  Whether it's laser
                 or not, we don't care, as long as it works.  Heck, if we
                 could zap Osama from a Predator, I'm sure the military
                 guys would love that too.
              \_ Training and professionalism also played a critical role.
                 T-72s and Mig-29s that Iraq possessed were considered to
                 be quiet formidable tanks and fighter planes respectively
                 when operated by well-trained crews (granted, most of Iraqi
                 weapons were much older than that). I read somewhere that
                 during the Iran-Iraq war the troops on both sides did no make
                 an effective use of the technology that they posessed. For
                 example, the Iraqis didn't use the advanced sights/targeting
                 on their Soviet-made tanks, reducing their effectiveness to
                 WWII era.  Also, both sides tended to hole up their tanks and
                 use them as individual artilery pieces.
        \_ Why do I feel like the Command & Conquer / Rise of Nations /
           Empire Earth forum has suddenly moved here?
           \_ Paradox forums >> all.  Those guys know their history. -- ilyas
        \_ Tank vs tank is measure of RHA.
2025/05/29 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
5/29    

You may also be interested in these entries...
2009/8/17-9/1 [Reference/History/WW2/Germany] UID:53272 Activity:nil
8/14    Entertaining Sand Animation. Story of Germans conquering Ukraine in WW2.
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=518XP8prwZo
        \_ I just watched The Great Raid, it was good; surprisingly.
	...
2012/2/29-3/26 [Reference/Military] UID:54320 Activity:nil
2/29    "New Navy Railgun Tests Leading to Ship Superweapon by 2020"
        http://www.csua.org/u/vmd
        - Why are there fire and smoke when the bullet is propelled by EM
          force?
        - "The railgun could hit the same distant targets that Navy missiles
          strike today, he said."  Then what's the point of inventing this new
	...
2012/1/8-2/6 [Reference/Military] UID:54283 Activity:nil
1/8     "Amid tensions, U.S. Navy rescues Iranians from Somali pirates"
        http://www.csua.org/u/v5i (news.yahoo.com)
        "... the rescue operation was carried out by a ship belonging to the
        very U.S. Navy aircraft carrier strike group that Iranian army
        officials had earlier boasted of evicting from Gulf waters.
        \_ "U.S. ship rescues Iranian fishermen - again"
	...