-  [WT]  [Home] [Manage]

Subject   (new thread)
File URL
Embed   Help
Password  (for post and file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG
  • Maximum file size allowed is 5120 KB.
  • Images greater than 300x300 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 685 unique user posts.

  • Blotter updated: 2017-02-04 Show/Hide Show All

Patches and Stickers for sale here

No. 12861 ID: abf330 hide watch expand quickreply [Reply] [Last 50 posts]
92 posts and 7 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 21682 ID: f8d8b4
  The FV433 Abbot SPG is powered by the Rolls-Royce K60 opposed-piston 2-stroke diesel engine and it sounds like this:
>> No. 21683 ID: f8d8b4
  The Chieftain tank has the bigger, but similarly-designed Leyland L60 multifuel 2-stroke opposed-piston compression-ignition engine. 750 hp (560 kW) 6 Cyl, 19 litres.
>> No. 21772 ID: bc78c2
  sneaks up
>> No. 21922 ID: 2fe2ad
>> No. 21924 ID: 2fe2ad
  this thread is almost six years old

File 145053193269.jpg - (58.29KB , 600x357 , RenaultFT-17TankInternalLayoutDiagram.jpg )
19599 No. 19599 ID: 008237 hide watch expand quickreply [Reply]
Hey fellas, I'm coming from another Chan, and have been recommended to you guys when in need of technical documents regarding military vehicles. It has been my life-long dream to construct a 1:1 functional Renault FT-17 and I will do it in before I leave this earth. Before I can begin acquiring any materials or even estimating costs, I need blueprints. I've searched all over the web for legitimate historical documents on the materials used in creating the FT-17 and come up with very little. Even my local libraries have little on the subject.

What I'm looking for are documents and blueprints that specify exact measurements of the materials used in the construction of the Renault FT-17, of any model. Even a picture of the outer hull with dimensions would be helpful. If you have any sort of material, it would greatly appreciated and you'd be helping someone fulfill their life's dream.

I'll post FT-17s for a while to keep the thread appropriate
11 posts and 8 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 19612 ID: f013be
>If you're just being sarcastic, totally, I'm throwing in a V8 and nitro booster.
I actually want to see this

Also put spikes on the tracks

Then it can probably climb trees and shit like a tank squirrel

bat guano stay away
>> No. 19614 ID: 4e346f
File 14508828369.jpg - (67.75KB , 800x586 , FT17_takom_model_kit_interior.jpg )

I have a feeling getting ahold of the actual blueprints may be problematic... just age and wars inbetween have a way of making those things disappear. Buuut it is likely someone tried to reverse-engineer those dimensions since then, so that might be a place to start. Modeler's forums might be a good place to check for accurate scale drawings; some of the higher-end model kit makers have full detailed/scaled interiors as well.

World of Tanks forums might be another place to check, funny enough. Especially for details of interior spaces, armor thickness, etc.

Good luck! My own loooooong-term dream project is to build a StuG III for shits and giggles and a place to hang my relatives' mementos of being a StuG gunner. Sure it'll probably never happen in my case but it never hurts to dream rite?
>> No. 19690 ID: 50cd85

"Hayes Otoupalik".
Get in touch with him, he owns one. Or rather the U.S. version, the 1917 Six ton .

Also, I saw this same thread in WoT, and I gave the same reply.
>> No. 21921 ID: d1c8eb
Perdón la ignorancia y no se si el hilo sigue activo.
Pero una buena oportunidad para poder conocer las dimensiones del tanque podría ser buscar modelos 3d ya realizados sobre el mismo.

En esta pagina esta a la venta un modelo del mismo donde encontrando algunas medidas se pueda llevar a escala y obtener en detalle los planos.

Es una sugerencia que tal vez funcione.


Es un hermoso tanque y yo también me enamore de el, pero en mi país es casi utópico poder imaginar en construir uno de esos

>> No. 21923 ID: 61e76a

Forgive ignorance and I do not know if the thread is still active.
But a good opportunity to know the dimensions of the tank could be to look for 3d models already made on it.

On this page is for sale a model of the same where finding some measures can be scaled and get in detail the plans.

It's a suggestion that might work.

Link: https: //www.cgtrader.com/3d-models/vehicle/military/renault-ft17-french-light-tank

It is a beautiful tank and I also fall in love with it, but in my country it is almost utopian to be able to imagine building one of those

Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

File 153595139875.jpg - (1.73MB , 2560x1440 , P_20180219_155202.jpg )
21906 No. 21906 ID: 99d212 hide watch expand quickreply [Reply]
temporary image hosting for reasons.
2 posts and 2 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 21910 ID: 99d212
File 153595179958.jpg - (1.31MB , 2560x1440 , P_20180219_155341.jpg )
>> No. 21911 ID: 99d212
File 153595188214.jpg - (1.34MB , 2560x1440 , P_20180219_155253.jpg )
>> No. 21916 ID: 95e1b4
yep that's a Z
>> No. 21918 ID: 09c7e0
was that a late model 280 or an early 300? i forgot how to tell the difference.
>> No. 21919 ID: 99d212
was a 300ZX, first gen. was hosting images to sell it, and its sold.

File 153470156692.jpg - (3.70MB , 3712x2088 , P1050335.jpg )
21901 No. 21901 ID: fdb2f5 hide watch quickreply [Reply]
Some photos from a world war 1 event at Beamish earlier this year:
Starting with... a "tin turtle" Simplex armoured locomotive.
>> No. 21902 ID: fdb2f5
File 153470163160.jpg - (3.38MB , 3712x2088 , P1050342.jpg )
War Department-liveried Foden steam wagon.
>> No. 21903 ID: fdb2f5
File 153470179899.jpg - (3.95MB , 3456x2592 , P1050355.jpg )
Can't remember what make this truck was. Unfortunately you can't make out the badge in the photo.
>> No. 21904 ID: fdb2f5
File 153470187992.jpg - (3.60MB , 3456x2592 , P1050392.jpg )
And finally a Latil four wheel drive truck.

No. 21899 ID: ad93cb hide watch quickreply [Reply]
  World war 1 convoy from Bovington tank museum to Great Dorset Steam Fair.
>> No. 21900 ID: ad93cb
  Last post seems to be just a slideshow of stills. Here's some video:

File 153372476161.jpg - (21.22KB , 480x319 , OK5UPHSN6II6NJBCQOVUT3K6NI.jpg )
21897 No. 21897 ID: 907967 hide watch quickreply [Reply]
ASPEN, Colo.

Will the Pentagon, with its 30-year planning cycle for building ships, still be launching aircraft carriers in 2048 — even though they’re highly vulnerable to attack today?

That’s an example of the military-modernization questions that kept nagging participants at last weekend’s gathering of the Aspen Strategy Group, which annually brings together top-level current and former national security officials, along with a few journalists, to discuss defense and foreign policy. This year’s focus was on “Maintaining America’s Edge” in the dawning era of high-tech combat, and the big takeaway was this: The future of warfare is now, and China is poised to dominate it.

Speakers at the conference described a new generation of combat systems, powered by artificial intelligence, cyberweapons and robots that can operate on land, sea and air. But America is still largely wedded to legacy weapons of the past — superbly engineered (but super-expensive) aircraft carriers, bombers, fighter jets and submarines.

“We have a small number of exquisite, expensive, manned, hard-to-replace systems that would have been familiar to Dwight D. Eisenhower. They are being overtaken by advanced technology,” argued Christian Brose, staff director of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Instead, he said, the Pentagon needs a large number of inexpensive, unmanned, expendable, autonomous systems that can survive in the new electronic battlespace and overwhelm any potential adversary.

“It is not that we lack money. It is that we are playing a losing game,” Brose contended in a paper presented to the group. “Our competitors are now using advanced technologies to erode our military edge. This situation is becoming increasingly dire.”

Future needs are being drowned out by past practices, because of what Brose’s boss, Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.), has called the “military-industrial-congressional complex.” Brose calculates that in the Pentagon’s initial request for $74 billion in new defense spending in fiscal 2019, only 0.006 percent was targeted for science and technology. The National Science Foundation estimates that in fiscal 2015, only 18 percent of the Pentagon’s research and development budget went to basic, applied and advanced research. Major systems claimed 81 percent.

Even when the Pentagon tries to push innovation, it often stumbles. When Ashton B. Carter was defense secretary under President Barack Obama, he created the Defense Innovation Unit Experimental, or DIUx, with offices in Silicon Valley, Boston and Austin. That operation thrived initially, negotiating 60 defense contracts with start-ups. The program has slowed under the Trump administration, despite support from Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, because it lacks funds and bureaucratic support, warned Christopher Kirchhoff, a former DIUx partner. If Ma
Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

No. 21228 ID: d4c8ee hide watch expand quickreply [Reply]
  Hello airplanes? It's blimps, you win.
6 posts and 1 image omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 21870 ID: f0fb5d
  Saw this neat video recently by an engineer who wrote a book on the R101. It explains why helium isn't/wasn't really viable as well as the...uh, interesting...gas bag technology the British used.

While every airship from their glory days seems to have ended in disaster, I still feel like modern technology and controls could rectify the problems. It wouldn't be cheap but it could be better.
>> No. 21871 ID: f0fb5d
I'll also say that I think the aspirational design characteristics of many of these grand, intercontinental airships contributed to their grand failure.

If you design an airship that doesn't try to take over cargo ships' market share over the oceans, eliminate the need to go from London to Cairo to Karachi to Melbourne and back or even cross the Atlantic without refueling inbetween, equip it with carbon fiber, rubber, plastic and aluminum where appropriate, don't try to power it with locomotive engines, set it up with 4G, radio and/or satellite links to modern weather radar feeds and match that with historical meteorological maps of graded wind-risk areas, you could do a lot of good without leaving any given continent or going too far beyond the shore.

Instead of thinking it's a cargo ship or luxury ocean liner in the sky like they did in the 1920s and 1930s, think of it as an 18 wheeler (or RV) that doesn't need a road.
>> No. 21872 ID: df12a0
I'd love it if they designed one to be an extremely-high-altitude, super-long-endurance "Spooky"-style gunship
>> No. 21885 ID: 947d3d

As if that isn't already above our heads RIGHT NOW!

I'm also a member of the "retire to an airship" club. They definitely could be repurposed into an RV of the sky. Just a small ship big enough to house 3 people in relative comfort.
>> No. 21893 ID: f0fb5d
So, I'm doing a little research and I wanted to check with /v/ to see if there's any input here.

I'm looking at metropolitan areas that are not far apart as the crow flies but nevertheless isolated due to geography, whether that's mountains or impassable swamp. Two examples might be Rio De Janeiro and Sao Paolo, Brazil as well as Yaziva, Panama and Turbo, Colombia.

Both Rio and Sao Paolo are huge metropolitan areas and they're only 270 miles apart on the same coastline but it takes 7.5 or 8 hours to drive from one to the other thanks to the mountainous terrain and impossibility of a convenient coastal highway.

Yaviza and Turbo are the ends of the Darien Gap, the only break in the Pan-American highway. The distance between them is only 60 miles but it's proven impossible to build roads due to expense and environmental concerns.

What other examples can you think of?

File 152944236698.jpg - (38.71KB , 480x694 , 2C2W47TTEAI6RPNBDDSTUREKCQ.jpg )
21890 No. 21890 ID: 482fe2 hide watch quickreply [Reply]

By Harrison Smith
June 18 at 6:36 PM
Email the author
In the early weeks of January 1942, relying on an old World’s Fair guidebook to find his way, Reinhard Hardegen brought his German U-boat near the mouth of New York Harbor. A Kapitänleutnant at the time, holding the equivalent rank of a lieutenant in the U.S. Navy, he was close enough to shore that, standing on his submarine’s bridge in the dark of night, he could watch the Ferris wheel turn above Coney Island, spot the headlights of cars and see the distant glow of skyscrapers in Manhattan.

“I cannot describe the feeling with words,” he later wrote in a memoir, “but it was unbelievably beautiful and great. . . . We were the first to be here, and for the first time in this war a German soldier looked out upon the coast of the U.S.A.”

That same night — by then, the morning of Jan. 15, 1942 — Lt. Hardegen and his crew fired torpedoes at the Coimbra, a British tanker ship carrying oil off the coast of Long Island. Thirty-six crew members were killed as the ship sank into the sea, its bow pointing out of the water like a buoy that, Lt. Hardegen declared, marked the way to New York City.

In two patrols along the East Coast, Lt. Hardegen — who went on to achieve the rank of lieutenant commander — sank about two dozen merchant ships, part of a German military campaign to sever the supply chain between the United States and Britain.

He became a hero in Germany, where Adolf Hitler personally awarded him the country’s highest military honor, but later disavowed any support for the Nazi party, became involved in German state politics and returned to the United States to speak with veterans groups and meet with the families of his wartime victims.

Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

File 151086585469.jpg - (69.57KB , 499x363 , p-61-black-widow-500-2.jpg )
21840 No. 21840 ID: 09c7e0 hide watch expand quickreply [Reply]
The P-61 "Black Widow" all weather fighter-bomber-interceptor is not only the single most accomplished fighter aircraft of all time with respect to combat ratio, its also the single greatest military aircraft of any type ever put into service as it achieved it's combat ratio while also supplying both daylight and nighttime air to ground ordinance delivery with divebomber pickle barrel precision and delivering as much payload per sortie as aircraft twice as large.

prove me wrong
4 posts and 2 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 21846 ID: ebb4ba
t. sergei
let me guess, your next post is going to be "muh export models"
>> No. 21852 ID: 80dc83
well it looks like this argument is settled
the P-61 black widow is the single greatest combat aircraft ever produced!
>> No. 21858 ID: 05d612
File 15152175009.jpg - (35.00KB , 260x334 , 51rj5VSU1sL__SX258_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg )
The argument settled without anyone mentioning that the P-61 could outmaneuver every other combat of it's time, that it could outturn a zero and outroll a 190 because of the P-61 unique control surface arrangement even thought the zero was half the size and the the 190 even smaller?
Damn the Black Widow didn't even have to work hard to win this thread. It outgunned pretty much everything too. Deicing gear, the best all weather radar ever invented, approach radar, bulletproof radial engines…

just damn, if u could datass a plane without seeming like some who wants to do sexual stuff to them then i would datass a P-61 24/7 for years on end without even thinking about other aircraft
>> No. 21883 ID: 18a9d9
I read a book by a Radar Operator who was in Beaufighters and Mosquitoes and he had some funny stories about changing the magazines in an aircraft with G forces and all that. Allan White was his name I think…
>> No. 21884 ID: 18a9d9
OK google fixed up my brain a bit. I read the book when I was helping out on Aces High and Warbirds, two old ww2 combat flight sims from the turn of the century.
This guy's autobiography and every other one that I've read by R/Os of the era are some of my favorite books, pioneers of seeing in the dark at high velocity

File 152159681611.png - (1.45MB , 1890x1036 , 6yw31c4vc7f01.png )
21873 No. 21873 ID: 858cd5 hide watch expand quickreply [Reply]
Post some plates
2 posts and 2 images omitted. Click Reply to view.
>> No. 21876 ID: 858cd5
File 152160134145.png - (666.49KB , 800x388 , az-centennial.png )
>> No. 21877 ID: 858cd5
File 152177475516.jpg - (34.98KB , 726x542 , 0_jpg_pagespeed_ce_wvtNBUXU2O.jpg )
>> No. 21878 ID: 858cd5
File 152237333593.jpg - (23.09KB , 726x367 , 0.jpg )
>> No. 21879 ID: 858cd5
File 152237337134.jpg - (158.90KB , 1292x662 , nc2008smokies.jpg )
>> No. 21882 ID: 4af7e3
File 152332836633.jpg - (146.90KB , 1272x636 , md1.jpg )

Delete post []
Report post
[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]