Mechanical Craziness!! Cold war preferred, anything nuts also gratefully accepted!
- Thread starter johnny
- Start date
I like Spanky's labcoat response the best......
I can see it being useful when attacking head to head. You'll be able to get onto your opponents 6 faster. Notice the piilot talk!!!!
But I guess the real reason would be showing off the planes airframe strenght and the planes agility.
wombat
Lives in a hole
Ah shit.
Johnny, I've got a shovel but someone else can carry the fucking lime this time.
AngoXC
Wheel size expert
N, there are alot of stories of aged Russian boats going down from their own causes.
The Yankee, K-219 went down near Bermuda after a missile hatch seal failed, letting sea water in which reacted with the rocket fuel, causing an explosion, and leaking nitric acid through the sub. The story is actually outlined in the book 'Hostile Waters' and the Russians claim that there was a collision with a Los Angeles Class sub, which was operating in the area, but all claims were denied. Either way, we once again saw a race for the K-219 by the Americans, as well as the Russians. (Infact, in Hostile Waters, a US Attack sub cut the tow line with its con tower!).
The sub ended upright on the bottom of the sea (6000m+), subject to a suspected scuttling by the captain though years later, a recovery operation found the warheads of many of the nuclear missiles carried, were already gone.
The Yankee, K-219 went down near Bermuda after a missile hatch seal failed, letting sea water in which reacted with the rocket fuel, causing an explosion, and leaking nitric acid through the sub. The story is actually outlined in the book 'Hostile Waters' and the Russians claim that there was a collision with a Los Angeles Class sub, which was operating in the area, but all claims were denied. Either way, we once again saw a race for the K-219 by the Americans, as well as the Russians. (Infact, in Hostile Waters, a US Attack sub cut the tow line with its con tower!).
The sub ended upright on the bottom of the sea (6000m+), subject to a suspected scuttling by the captain though years later, a recovery operation found the warheads of many of the nuclear missiles carried, were already gone.
W2ttsy
Likes Dirt
Great example of engineering there....
scblack
Leucocholic
Sometimes even the most perfect engineering qualities cannot compensate for the idiocy of the operators....
I do not know the reason for the failure though.
floody
Wheel size expert
W2ttsy
Likes Dirt
i would have thought that the engineer is at fault this time, considering they knew that they were developing weapons to be used at sea. One would hope that they would test things like rockets being immersed in sea water.
my_bike
Likes Dirt
So I'm guessing I have to run for my life now?
slip
Beefcake...BEEFCAKE!!!
The seal failed dude. It wasn't designed to just let water in because they didn't realise it'd be used underwater. Mechanical shit fails sometimes.
Depends if it was designed for Submarine use or not. For all we know it was designed to go on a ship or on dry land, then some war crazed Commissar demanded they be fitted to Submarines "to strike at the Capitalists homeland". The seal failure is the issue here, poor design perhaps, poor servicing perhaps, operated well in excess of its design parameters by gung ho skipper! Perhaps a combination of inadequate safety margins, inadequate servicing procedures and scheduling, and incompetent/excessive operation. Its a long draw of the bow from were we sit.
Last edited:
W2ttsy
Likes Dirt
i was simply astounded that they would use a missile that wasnt designed to be exposed to water inside a submarine. Thats where the fail is. Whether the seal failed or not is neither here nor there. The missile should have been submersible in water.
Oh wait this is russia, my argument is pointless....
nevot
Likes Bikes
In reality, you are in a submarine, where the normal state of affairs is that the missile is outside the sub by the time it comes in contact with water.
The other bit is that usually, when the water is getting in you are up shit creek anyway
brodie_rider
Likes Dirt
Bit of a dig here, but this thread is worthy of a bump.
anybody know what the weapons payload on the SU-27 is, one would think that carrying armament would limit its aerobatical capabilities.
anybody know what the weapons payload on the SU-27 is, one would think that carrying armament would limit its aerobatical capabilities.
Spanky_Ham
Porcinus Slappius
from wikipedia....
The Su-27 is armed with a single 30 mm Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-30-1 cannon in the starboard wingroot, and has up to 10 hardpoints for missiles and other weapons. Its standard missile armament for air-to-air combat is a mixture of Vympel R-73 (AA-11 Archer), Vympel R-27 (AA-10 'Alamo') weapons, the latter including extended range and IR guided models. More advanced Flanker variants (such as Su-30, -35, -37) may also carry Vympel R-77 (AA-12 Adder) missiles.
s
The Su-27 is armed with a single 30 mm Gryazev-Shipunov GSh-30-1 cannon in the starboard wingroot, and has up to 10 hardpoints for missiles and other weapons. Its standard missile armament for air-to-air combat is a mixture of Vympel R-73 (AA-11 Archer), Vympel R-27 (AA-10 'Alamo') weapons, the latter including extended range and IR guided models. More advanced Flanker variants (such as Su-30, -35, -37) may also carry Vympel R-77 (AA-12 Adder) missiles.
s
J@se
Breezeway Bandit
The M-388 Davy Crockett was a tactical nuclear recoilless rifle projectile that was deployed by the United States during the Cold War. It was named after American soldier, Congressman and folk hero Davy Crockett (1786-1836).
One of the smallest nuclear weapons ever built, the Davy Crockett was developed in the late 1950s for use against Soviet troops had war broken out in Europe. Small teams of the Atomic Battle Group (charged with operating the device) would be stationed every few kilometers to guard against Soviet attack, using the power of their nuclear artillery to kill or incapacitate advancing troop formations and irradiate the area so that it was uninhabitable for up to 48 hours, long enough to mobilize NATO forces.
The Davy Crockett could be launched from either of two launchers: the 4-inch (102 mm) M28, with a range of about 1.25 mi (2 km), or the 6-in (155 mm) M29, with a range of 2.5 mi (4 km). Both weapons used the same projectile, and could be mounted on a tripod launcher or carried by truck or armored personnel carrier. They were operated by a three-man crew.
Both recoilless guns proved to have poor accuracy in testing, so the shell's greatest effect would have been its extreme radiation hazard. Even at a low yield setting, the M-388 would produce an almost instantly lethal radiation dosage (in excess of 10,000 rem) within 500 feet (150 m), and a probably fatal dose (around 600 rem) within a quarter mile (400 m).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_(nuclear_device)
Any volunteers to fire the good O'l Davy Crockett?
thecat
NSWMTB, Central Tableland MBC
Nothing to do with cold war or air planes but coming for a coal mining background I thought I'd post a longwall.
The bigger ones are up to 400m long and 6meters high... I ones I've worked were a mere 250 meters wide and 2 meters high. But these things are driven underground in a hole that's only just wider than the wall... Made up of a bunch of different components and typically driven by a crew of 6
The bigger ones are up to 400m long and 6meters high... I ones I've worked were a mere 250 meters wide and 2 meters high. But these things are driven underground in a hole that's only just wider than the wall... Made up of a bunch of different components and typically driven by a crew of 6
