StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Who said you can’t airdrop an IFV? The M2A1 Bradley could be air dropped combat loaded; abet not with the parachute rigs we had in the 1980s when it was the standard model. The Russians have a whole series of air dropped IFVs meanwhile. The downside is armor sucks, though the Bradley is still far better then a stock M113, but that also means they all retain amphibious capability.

War Nerd Gary Bretcher thinks USN carrier groups are obsolete, but has a more grounded explanation that they're big targets for smaller surface ships and planes that have increasingly better anti-ship weaponry.

Big Orange wrote:War Nerd Gary Bretcher thinks USN carrier groups are obsolete, but has a more grounded explanation that they're big targets for smaller surface ships and planes that have increasingly better anti-ship weaponry.

You mean his article where carriers are useless because of almighty terrorists speedboats of doom ?

Big Orange wrote:War Nerd Gary Bretcher thinks USN carrier groups are obsolete, but has a more grounded explanation that they're big targets for smaller surface ships and planes that have increasingly better anti-ship weaponry.

Erm.. that's why an aircraft carrier has escorts? They have always been fairly vulnerable?

Sarevok wrote:You mean his article where carriers are useless because of almighty terrorists speedboats of doom ?

Yes, that was the one: He cited the results of the Millennium Challenge '02 exercise, in which the OPFOR managed to sink the entire US fleet with exploding speedboats. Trouble is, the OPFOR cheated by basically teleporting these speedboats right next to their targets (the fleet combat phase of the exercise was handled electronically).

http://www.exile.ru/articles/detail.php ... LOCK_ID=35

War Nerd is nowhere near as bad as Sparky, but he's still a moron.

Well, that was a short-lived hobby. Sparky never answered me.

Sidewinder wrote:

Coyote wrote:Iron Chariots, I guess.

I'm sorry if this is nitpicking, but the M113 is made of aluminum alloys, not iron or steel...

I know. It's the thought that counts.

But I didn't see his AeroTank chapter before. That was fucking hilarious. I was searching for a portion where he advocated strapping RATO or JATO pods to the sides of GAVINS ( ) for those times when you need a little extra push.

Sea Skimmer wrote:Single torpedo hits were withstood a few times; but a single torpedo damn well shouldn’t be a sinking risk to a warship bigger then a heavy cruiser, and yet I have already pointed out several carriers sunk, and at least two that got outright exploded, by single torpedoes.

So Kurita was a moron, because you say so. Okay...

Sea Skimmer wrote:What the fuck does the economic state of Britain do with the vulnerability of carriers and battleships? In case you forgot the British kept building battleships, more laid down between the wars then any other nation in fact, and the British also came up with the idea of heavily armoring carriers at the expense of air group because they thought they’d be highly vulnerable in wartime!

So winning the war irrelevant, because your dick wagging contests is supremely relevant? Nevermind your white lies and cherry picking giving one of the big naval events in WW1 was the same skipper the got rammed by HMS Dreadnought killing three Battleships in a row.

Sea Skimmer wrote:I said no US carrier survived more then 1 torpedo and it is completely true. I don’t fucking care how long a ship takes to sink, if its fucking lost then its lost and the fact that it took a long time to do down does not matter. Shit happens in war. A ship with more protection could have avoided the loss of power and gotten away.

Fine prove any battleship, or other ship for that matter, survived more then one torpedo under your own criterion. Yeah, didn't think so.

Sea Skimmer wrote:Now prove that a Japanese battleship was crippled for the rest of the war at Samar or shut the fuck up about it.

Look up the history of the IJN Nagato. She was effectively out of service after returning to repair dock from Leyte Gulf, exactly like I said. Unlike you I don't split hairs with Dreadnought vs Battleship and Torpedo vs mine without admitting to it in order to try to stack my argument.

The only one of the Japanese Battleships of Center Force not damaged was IJN Yamato and that was because Kurita was bracketed by a pair of torpedoes and chose to steam until they ran out of fuel instead of getting hit by one. Kind of a disadvantageous thing to do as it makes your course predictable, and removes the Commanding Officer of the fleet from the battle. But hey, clearly it must have been a light decision, because that pair of torpedoes couldn't possibly of hurt him. The fact you basically shove your fingers in your ears and dance around going "I can't hear you, battleships roxors" about that is telling.

Seems as how you count getting picked off by subs afterwards, IJN Kongo counts too I suppose as it was taken down by two torpedoes. Funny thing is torpedoes kill mechanism is flooding the ship like happened with Kongo in about 2 hours. Flooding the powerplant too, amazingly enough. Wow I thought you just said that couldn't happen to a Battleship. My, my, my who to believe?

A ship slowly burning to death isn't exactly what torpedoes are for like happened to the various carriers. Yet you count the torpedoes instead of the bombs or just issues with fire, like you know destroyed Yamato.

Sea Skimmer wrote:How about no. Your ignorance is not my problem, if you don’t know what you’re talking about then go research it; nothing being talked about here is hard to find information on.

Mhmm, right.

Battle of Tsushima was basically responsible for the concept of the Battleship as we know it. The fact the Japanese decided to deliver the coup de Grace by Battleship however was entirely arbitrary on their part given the condition of the Russian vessels, the incompetence of their commanders, and the nature of the rounds the Japanese actually used to do the deed. WW1 and WW2 are the only major naval engagements after Tsushima in which the whole Battleship concept can be considered to have been tested.

WW1's naval side was all about countering the subs which Dreadnoughts were worthless for, and had sucked up so much resources in their construction the Grand didn't even have a safe harbor. Let alone enough Destroyers to escort conveys until the Americans basically gave them some, because their Dreadnoughts were sucking up so many to insure subs wouldn't pick them off. WW2's Atlantic side was also all about countering the subs, with the Pacific's naval side being effectively won by the Yorktown-class Aircraft Carrier with the follow up reinforcements serving the role more of clean up.

While battleships fought in both world wars and even against other battleships occasionally they only marked in strategic relevance as markstones with their destruction. WW1's major naval surface battle merely shifted the Germans to subs instead of dick wagging contests with surface ships. Despite Britain winning said battle it never was able to use said advantage. Despite the Japanese destroying most of the US's battleships at Pearl Harbor, and even the utterly unreasonable scenario that was the Battle of Samar the Japanese were unable to use their apparent advantage. To be fair the Japanese had other things to worry about, but as the Battle of Samar lasted for hours they had plenty of time if it was remotely as easy as Battleship nuts think it is. Especially as Taffy 3 wasn't even kitted out to fight surface ships at the time.

You've yet to actually even make a real argument instead of attempting to win through white lies, and trying to force things into a dick wagging contest of no real relevance. The IJN Ryukaku was delivered to the bottom by 15 bombs and ten torpedoes, if your tonnage concept was legitimate the IJN Yamato would have taken a lot more then it did. Of course as is the Yamato was sunk by a pair of bombs starting an unchecked fire that detonated the magazine and sending her to the bottom two hours later. The point of bringing up the carriers is not to prove they're tough it's to show that the "toughness" of battleships was in practice not particularly relevant, unlike the usual claims of near invulnerability, because Carriers in practice were not and still aren't that heavily armored which incidentally means that the original Hornet did take more of a beating then Yamato without as you put it "coming apart" as you note it had to be put down by Japanese 24" torpedoes after taking all that beating with no active damage control.

You actually have anything or is genuflecting and use of white lies in sophist arguments all you can do?

FOG3 wrote:Nevermind your white lies and cherry picking giving one of the big naval events in WW1 was the same skipper the got rammed by HMS Dreadnought killing three Battleships in a row.

Armoured cruisers, actually, and he only got them thanks to some absolutely pitiful deployment choices by the Admiralty; the Bacchantes should never have even been there, certainly not unescorted.

And it was hardly particularly big compared to Jutland, Coronel or the Falklands; a shock, but ultimately not one unexpected.

Ma Deuce wrote:Trouble is, the OPFOR cheated by basically teleporting these speedboats right next to their targets (the fleet combat phase of the exercise was handled electronically).

Wasn't that the exercise that Lt. Gen. Paul Van Piper (USMC, ret.) basically showed that "network-centric warfare" at least as practiced under Rumsfeld and Cebrowski was bullshit?

P.S. Incidentally, David Crane of DefenseReview.com (I checked to make sure) seems to have the same idea, albeit he specifically cites the "Klub-S 3M-54E / SS-N-27B Sizzler" ASM. (Note: He's cool re: small arms, but dear God do not read anything by him about Dragon Skin.)

I got not one, but two messages on my youtube account from Sparky.

Sparky wrote:Do you even know how many ships and men we lost in WW2?

Suggest you read up:

www.geocities.com/usnavyindanger/midwaymyth.htm
www.combatreform.com/midwaymyth.htm

Do you even know how many aircraft carriers we had plus seaplanes to cover the skies in WW2?

These conditions will not be duplicated in the next war and guided weapons are several orders of magnitude more lethal in speed, range and destructive power.

Suggest you sign up and be an enlisted victim on a bloated 5, 000 man and woman stuporcarrier or a tin can under 10, 000 ton surface ship we have today and back up your American triumphalist craptalk with your walk.

When will you be going to the Navy recruiting station?

Mike

And in response to my invitation to have him debate here:

Where is the M113 Gavin thread on your BBS?
Where are we going to debate the M113 Gavin on your designated sci-fi bulleting board? Not under "Education and Sex" I hope, LOL.

Bulleting Board?

HE MUST BE AFRAID.

Edit: you know what I just dont care about this. Think whatever you want FOG3

Coiler wrote:And in response to my invitation to have him debate here:

Where is the M113 Gavin thread on your BBS?
Where are we going to debate the M113 Gavin on your designated sci-fi bulleting board? Not under "Education and Sex" I hope, LOL.

I say bring him on. Hell, let someone take him in the Coliseum; it'd be fun.

Oh boy, this new message is great. I gave him a link to this thread in response to his previous message, and here's what he had to say:

Sparky wrote:All I see on that thread is teenagers making envious (look up word envy) remarks--not any kind of serious professional debate of the facts. A bunch of people worried more about being politically/patriotically correct than getting results.

Why should they be concerned about military excellence if they are not in any danger of dying due to military incompetence?

I don't waste my time on academic debates over serious life and death issues.

Mike

Edit: And here is my response to that:

First of all, I know perfectly well what envious means.

And what makes you think that we're envying you? We're mocking you and speaking our opinions of your views-that we think they're crazy and would not work in actual war. We will back our opinions with evidence.

And finally, I think you're just a coward who doesn't want to hear anything that would run contrary to your fantasies. You've refused to debate on Stardestroyer.net. You have set up the comments system on your videos so that only the comments you approve get posted-that's not just cowardice, that's also censorship. Afraid that someone will post a logical rebuttal that runs contrary to your insane beliefs, Sparky? Afraid that someone will finally say that the emperor has no clothes?

Heh, I've served in Iraq on M-113's; in fact driven, serviced, and lived on and in and with them for years. He obviously didn't look around any at all.

I find it a bit ironic that he assumes that we all are teenagers. I mean, he is obviously not (not physically anyway) but he automatically assumes we all are?

From the looks of that comment, he only looked at the titles of the forums. I don't think that this guy has any idea what he's walking into.

Understanding a forum like this takes time, especially if one does not have an analytical mindset in the first place.

Coiler wrote:I got not one, but two messages on my youtube account from Sparky.

Sparky wrote:
www.geocities.com/usnavyindanger/midwaymyth.htm
www.combatreform.com/midwaymyth.htm
Mike

Does he really believe that Germany not only had atomic devices but detonated them as well, and had the ability to strike at New York City thereby undoing the combined Soviet/American destruction of Germany in one fell swoop and making them masters of the world?

The stupidity burns me...

Straha wrote:

Does he really believe that Germany not only had atomic devices but detonated them as well, and had the ability to strike at New York City thereby undoing the combined Soviet/American destruction of Germany in one fell swoop and making them masters of the world?

The stupidity burns me...

I think he saw that in My Tank is Fight!

Whoa whoa whoa, what?

Sparky wrote:A bunch of people worried more about being politically/patriotically correct than getting results.

Oh man, ha ha ha. That is just...I can't even think of a way to describe how funny I find that.

Straha wrote:

Coiler wrote:I got not one, but two messages on my youtube account from Sparky.

Sparky wrote:
www.geocities.com/usnavyindanger/midwaymyth.htm
www.combatreform.com/midwaymyth.htm
Mike

Does he really believe that Germany not only had atomic devices but detonated them as well, and had the ability to strike at New York City thereby undoing the combined Soviet/American destruction of Germany in one fell swoop and making them masters of the world?

The stupidity burns me...

Even skimming that crap of this Sparky person makes my eyes hurt. Clearly, he is quite insane.

Lonestar wrote:

Straha wrote:

Does he really believe that Germany not only had atomic devices but detonated them as well, and had the ability to strike at New York City thereby undoing the combined Soviet/American destruction of Germany in one fell swoop and making them masters of the world?

The stupidity burns me...

I think he saw that in My Tank is Fight!

At least the author of 'My Tank is Fight!' performed detailed research and had a realistic view of the "wonder weapons" showcased in his book, e.g., recognizing that Christie's idea for a flying tank is stupid because any tank that's light enough to fly without first getting into the cargo bay of a large transport aircraft, must sacrifice armor protection and effective (and heavy) armament to do so, becoming a deathtrap to its crew and a white elephant to the Army.

Straha wrote: Does he really believe that Germany not only had atomic devices but detonated them as well, and had the ability to strike at New York City thereby undoing the combined Soviet/American destruction of Germany in one fell swoop and making them masters of the world?

You're surprised? He also believes in alien abductions (but of course he's reasonable, so he doesn't believe in stupid shit like the aliens being actual aliens: no, they're demonic beings who want to invade the world and the only way the US can stop them is to use airdroppable M113 Gavins), a magical fleet of Air-Independent Propulsion German submarines who annihilated an ASW convoy somewhere (and no serious historian believes in this story because they're narcisstic carrier-worshippers) and other wacky stuff.

Really...I kinda expected a rant that included a super-secret 4th Reich Antarctica base