Senate The Weekly Discussion of Military Technology

I would agree with the .50cal M2.. effective service, but could be lacking in overall social impact..

Good to see the 'ol Kentucky on the list, although it has more importance to Americans.. (The KLR was used by the revolutionary fighters, and allowed the smaller, less trained colonists to out-shoot the English soliders, effectively negating the English advantage)

The "British musket" is probably the Brown Bess, which was the firearm equivalent of the English longbow..

Massed formations of English soldiers could delivery withering fire with close-order drill precision..

I'm not sure about the Browning Machine gun..Do you mean the Thompson SMG?

The "tommy gun" was used by gangsters and the FBI (not to mention Sgt Rock), but wasn't developed for WWI

Otherwise, there is the BAR (Browning automatic rifle) I don't know if gangsters regularly used BAR's though, maybe they did?

 

Mr44-Brown Bess-yes I remember the name.

The browning wasn´t the Thompson "tommy" gun.It was a gun that looked like the old G3-probably the BAR,yes.

 

Here is a picture of the BAR:

HERE

Maybe this weapon deserves more historical credit than it has been getting..

 

changijng of subject

does anyone know s of the Old Russian Attack Sub

The Alpha class

 

I know of them. Not much about them, but I know of them.

 

They were one of the subs that participated in The Hunt for the Red October(IMHO the best sub movie ever-yes better than Das Boot).I think that the Akula-class submarines derivated from it.They are mainly attack subs smaller than the Typhoon class.

 

Here is a great site for comparison of Russian military equipment..

EQUIPMENT HERE

The overall site is rather Russio-centric, meaning there are alot of references to "great patriotic wars" and "our heroic equipment is the best," etc..

However, they have baseline specifications(that I would double check elsewhere) and great pictures..

It seems like the offical designation for the sub is the Russian 705 attack submarine (called the Alfa, or "Alpha" in English)

It seems quite capable, but then I don't know much about Navy equipment..

 

Say, on an only barely related note, do we yet know anything about the AN94 rifle that the Russians were planning on using to replace the AK74?

Last I read, its overall weight, length, barrel length, and other things were still unknown quantities... Then there was its operating system which, to quote the book I was just reading the other night, "defies rational (or at least concise) description".

 

What I know about the Alfa class subs derives from sources like Janes reference books on naval vessels. The Alfa is, IIRC, a fairly small sub by most standards, and has, uniquely for naval warfare, a cast titanium hull. That feature allows it to dive far deeper (3x that of most other subs), and it is apparently harder to kill than any other Russian sub except perhaps the Typhoon FBMS. The weaknesses of the Alfa are primarily that it's reactors are apparently among the noisiest nuclear powerplants ever put on a sub, and extremely unstable due to the brilliant idea of using liquid sodium to cool the reactor.

On the other hand, the Akula (AS-971 class) - well, I don't know too much about it, but I have heard it described as being comparable in all-round performance to SSN-631(?) attack submarines (the class immediately preceding the Los Angeles class) or even SSN-688-I attack boats. But, as with everything else military, overall performance depends highly on the skills and training of the crews. Put a poor crew on an SSN-21 Seawolf II boat, and a top-flight crew sailing diesel boat could have a chance at kicking ass.

 

General:

But, as with everything else military...

Technically, everything else naval in this sense.


Sorry, I was feeling a sudden urge to be overly symantic.

 

Anyone knows of good site about military ships and subs?It´s hard to find one,since most of military naval sites cover aircarft carriers and SEALS-type stuff.

 

Right here.

 

Well, Brett, I tossed that in because I was contemplating adding an anecdote about Chuck Yeager test flying the MiG-15 and comparing it to the Sabre, but I couldn't remember all the details. It's been quite some time since I read his autobiography.

 

No prob. I wasn't trying to be a dick or anything. As stated, just feeling overwhelmed by symantics at the time. Why? No idea.

 

Don't worry about it. I wish I could remember all of that little tale - I remember it was quite fascinating. The bare essence of it was that two pilots (Yeager and another test pilot) skirmished in both jets, and swapped around - the end result was that the skill of the pilot was the decisive factor.

 

Fair 'nuff.

On a similar note, with a different moral altogether, the last production P51 Mustang and the last production F4U Corsair wound up on opposite sides of a war in Mesoamerica (I think). Long story short; the Corsair downed the Mustang.

 

I'd love to start talking about airplanes.

I think the battles between a Corsair and a Mustang would definitely come down to the pilot. This is pretty much the case in any match up giving all outside factors equal. Since dogfighting began til today using radar. Whoever sees their enemy first is at a huge advantage.
Both the Corsair and Mustang were both great airplanes. I think the Mustang is generally regarded as the best fighter of WWII.

 

Bah, the Mustang let him win.. It was a little known fact that the P51 pilot was a defector...


Speaking of last production examples..

Israel announced that IMI had stopped production of the world famous Uzi SMG for its armed forces, ending the "era of Usiel"

Appearently, the military had stopped training new soldiers on the Uzi some time ago, when it adopted the Colt Commando/and later M4..

The Uzi will still be produced for export and existing contracts will be honored(the US Secret Service still uses the Uzi as standard issue)

The Tavor is suppose to begin adoption as the standard IDF assault rifle, but it probably won't replace the M4 series..

I'm not too familiar with the Tavor though..

EDIT: Sure, airplanes would be a great topic to switch to..

Regarding the best plane of WWII, the Spitfire might be the most highly regarded, but again, that might be the result of the RAF's determination..

My favorite plane of the era was the P-38 Lightning, hands down...

 

Quick aside...

The Tavor appears to have a number of decent features, but I still cannot imagine how any sane person would want to fire a short-barreled bullpup with any degree of regularity! The muzzle blast from the M4 is fairly surprising because of its short barrel... To have the Tavor's muzzle, like, eight inches from the shooter's face seems crazy to me!


But then again, Israel was attacked by six nations (or was it seven...) simultaneously, and not only won, but expanded their borders... I think a degree of craziness is allowed for them.

As for WWII fighters, in case you hadn't guessed, it's all about the F4U for me. Yarr. Although I must admit a certain degree of appeal toward the lines of the old Me109.

 

To have the Tavor's muzzle, like, eight inches from the shooter's face seems crazy to me!

Haven't you ever watched Raid at Entebbe?

Israeli troops don't aim their rifles "cheek to stock," they instinctively fire them from the hip, "John Wayne" style..

 

^^^^^^

What the israelis don´t take aim?Or perhaps they take aim from the hip,not bothering to use sights.

Still,it´s a well-known fact,the israeli arrogance and gung-ho.For example in IDF the snipers have a bad reputation because they stay back and don´t get exposed.The Sayeret Matkal soldiers refuse to take advice of anyone(a thing that led to several unsucessful missions).The Shayetet 13(naval commandos)are physically the best,but they screw up most of their missions.

 

Not to interrupt your guy's discussion on your puny guns, but I just got back from a presentation on the Joint Strike Fighter (F-35) at my Air Force ROTC Detachment.

The JSF will be deployed by 2010 for the Marines and by 2011 and 2012 for the Air Force and Navy.

One of the coolest things about it is the helmet the pilots wear. There six digital cameras on the top and the bottom of the plane and when the pilot activates the system, he can look through the plane. For example, if he is in the Marine version with its vertical takeoff and landing, he can look between his knees and see the ground! This works in all directions.

Another cool thing about the helmet is the sound system. Incoming transmissions will sound like they came from a certain direction. For example, if your wingman to your left and rear calls up, it will sound like he is at 7:00. The same goes for a unit on the ground calling for air support. The pilot will be able to tell where they are without even looking at any displays.

Speaking of displays, there are no knobs, buttons, or switches in the aircraft. The only mechanical thing is the landing gear (there solely so the pilots remember to put it down). Everything is controlled by a computer screen in front and many of the functions are voice activated.

Another interesting thing is the maintance time. The B-2 bomber had about a 200 hour maintance time to 1 hour flight time ratio because of the stealth composites. The F-117 was slightly better, but the F-35 has a 1 hour maintance to 1 hour flight time ratio.

Speaking of maintance, the plane will also tell the maintainers what needs to be done. For example, during flight, the computer will sense what needs work on it, and send the details back to the base, where the crew can have everything ready by the time the plane gets back.

Those are just some of the interstesting things about the plane, and thats not even getting into the classified stuff (which we didn't get to hear, of course).

For all you gun obsessed Army folks, you may be glad to hear that one of these developments might effect you. The 360 degree view I talked about is probably going to be applied to tanks. Instead of looking through that narrow slit or sticking your head out the top so you can be shot at, you will be able to wear this helmet and see through your tank!

 

Whoa. Panoramic cockpit. Like in Gundam

 

That's some badassed info on the JSF. If nothing else, it sure as hell looks cool! hopefully all of the high-tech bells and whistles will work properly.

In other news, I just watched 0083 last night, Saint. Points awarded for Mobile Suit Gundam reference.

 

The P-51 Mustang was an excellent escort fighter, but was completely unsuited for ground support missions, lacking some protective measures necessary to engage ground forces.

The Me-109 was not bad, but the mass-production E and G (and the intermediate F) models were outclassed by contemporary models of Spitfire. Overall, the Me-109 had weak protection/durability, and adequate firepower (2x 20mm, 2x7.92mm in the E, 1x 30mm, 2x 13mm in the G). The best aspects were speed and maneuverability, and even in those areas, it was outdone by the Spitfire. The K model improved on some of these deficiencies, but saw service only in small numbers. Also, due to the idiotic design philosophy of the Luftwaffe under Hermann Goering, the Me-109 was designed around the mission profile of ground-support operations, giving it inadequate mission range for escorting bombers. Thus, many Luftwaffe fighter pilots in 1940 were defeated by their own small fuel tanks, rather than by the RAF alone.

Now the FW-190D9, there's a really good German fighter. The Ta-152 also might have proved its worth, if it had been finalized and produced in quantity.

In WWII planes, though, as with submarines, the quality of the operator is the most decisive factor.