Register here

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Various Messerschmitt projects
« Last post by sgeorges4 on Today at 09:22:50 pm »
ski jager 109:
2
Naval Projects / Re: Royal Navy Type 26 Frigate
« Last post by NeilChapman on Today at 07:40:05 pm »


Additional pitch to land Australian Future Frigate (SEA5000) Program.

http://www.janes.com/article/75901/bae-systems-proposes-unprecedented-technology-transfer-for-australia


3
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Unknown little flying boat
« Last post by Sherman Tank on Today at 07:10:34 pm »
Looks like an eBay watermark, or part of one. It looks like "PLERSCHU", whatever that means.
4
Naval Projects / Re: British and American advanced. sub designs c1945?
« Last post by DWG on Today at 06:28:48 pm »
There may be something about German engineering/procurement culture

I suspect more the political aspect at the top of the procurement tree. There were so many odd beliefs among the Nazi hierarchy that Speer stands out because he was so comparatively normal. And one man can only do so much. The factionalism amongst the Nazis that led to organizational bizarrities like Fallschirm Panzer Division Hermann Goering as a Luftwaffe unit, encouraged the party barons to develop parallel armaments capabilities, with vulnerabilities to being sold technical weirdness.

Essential question when looking at the weirder projects: who was it for, and who was backing it or would build it?
5
The Bar / Re: Nuclear Weapons - Discussion.
« Last post by sferrin on Today at 05:49:53 pm »
There's no end to the insanity, I'm afraid: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-nuclear-icbm-specialreport/special-report-nuclear-strategists-call-for-bold-move-scrap-icbm-arsenal-idUSKBN1DM1D2

Yep. "Insane" is the correct term to use here.  The US ought to just come right out and say, "look, we have to ability to VISUALLY confirm an attack. There is never going to be an accidental nuclear strike launched due to a damn glitch."  You'll note, they don't make any arguments for Russia and China getting rid of their ICBMs.  The solution to their imagined problem would be mobile ICBMs.  I'm sure they'd be onboard with that. 

"Skeptics of the modernization program also have cited the new U.S. president’s impulsiveness as further reason for opposing the hair-trigger ICBM fleet. The enormously consequential decision to launch, said Perry, requires a president with a cool and rational personality. “I’m particularly concerned if the person lacks experience, background, knowledge and temperament” to make the decision, he said.

This month, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing to discuss the president’s authority to launch a first-strike nuclear attack. Democratic Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts has called for that authority to be curbed, though such a break with decades of practice doesn’t have broad support.

“Donald Trump can launch nuclear codes just as easily as he can use his Twitter account,” said Markey. “I don’t think we should be trusting the generals to be a check on the president.” "


And there it is, the attempt to scare the gullible into thinking Trump has a red button installed on his smart phone next to his Twitter icon so he can launch a nuclear strike anytime somebody makes fun of his hair.  It was never about "ICBMs are risky" it was all an attempt to argue for neutering the President's authority because their guy didn't win.

I am not looking to get political on this point.
While I personally advocate the nuclear deterrent it critics and sceptics have a point in relation to quality and mindset of the individual who ultimately gets to make the decision to use/ not use it.
It’s the one part of the deterrent “system” most wrapped up with human nature and strengths and weaknesses of the one individual.
So, for example some people would have potentially justifiable concerns about one politician too readily using the deterrent while in an another scenario other people would have potentially justifiable concerns about another politician being too reticent to use the deterrent.
I very much hope concerns about the current US President in this regard prove to be incorrect.
It is unfair and inaccurate to assume alterrior motives for all such concerns; much of the world, including much of the US’s closest friends and allies, share them.

You should probably start a thread about politics and nuclear deterrence.  I don't know why you haven't yet, as that seems to be of interest to you. 
6
Avimimus- You hit the nail on the head.  German engineering was always "why use a sheet metal stamping when two precision machined pieces work just as well?"  The perfect is the enemy of the good enough.
7
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Potez pre-1945 projects
« Last post by blackkite on Today at 03:55:36 pm »
Ecellent three side view drawing as usual Justo-san. Thanks a lot. :D
I have a same question. Generator drive propeller?
8
Early Aircraft Projects / Re: Unknown little flying boat
« Last post by hesham on Today at 03:18:00 pm »
I will search about it my dear Richard,

but what was written on the picture ?.
9
Military / Re: Russia re-militarizing the Arctic? SHELF system
« Last post by fredymac on Today at 02:08:48 pm »
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20171121-why-russia-is-sending-robotic-submarines-to-the-arctic

The linked article uses the below image.  They credit the source but I wonder if they get permission first?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10