>>18346
I've been following it for a few years via Soldier Systems Daily. Oshkosh so far is the favorite to win.

>>18351
The oshkosh looks very similar to one of the failed designs for the LPPV program for the UK MoD.

>>18351
I'm looking into this now

So far I'm not terribly disappoint or excite about it, seems to be a lot of same old-same old

Oshkosh won. Middle design in OP pic is replacing the HMMWV in most positions within the Army.

http://fox11online.com/news/local/fox-cities/army-awards-tactical-vehicle-contract-to-wisconsin-firm

>>19246
Could be good news for me. The steel mill I'm working at produces a number of armor grades and we have Oshkosh as one of our customers already.

We already supplied a lot of the armor for the MRAPS and supply some of the armor for the underside of the Abrams

My buddy's latest project has been swapping a VW TDI into a Nissan Xterra, he's still fiddling with it but it seems like it will be pretty awesome.

Previous to that he built a Wrangler YJ and an 89 Comanche with Mercedes OM-617 I5 diesels.

>>19220
Not OP, but I've been pretty interested in your post. I have a 2010 Wrangler Sahara 4-door with a manual transmission. I opted for the removable hard-top/freedom top and have a soft top as well. I haven't really had the opportunity to do too many modifications to it as time, weather and money haven't lined up much in the past 5 years. I'm wanting to put rhino liner on the floor and once I have the money, I'm putting new mud tires on it. I'm still undecided if I want to put a 2.5" lift kit on it or leave it where it sits.

Are there any mods or nifty things you can think of that I would be able to do on the cheap?

  >>19224

I'm not totally sold on rhino lining, maybe if you're always going to be rolling doors off/roof down... but the carpet and padding does do quite a bit of sound deadening. Your call there.

jkforum.com is a squared away place for pure JK stuff (well, relatively pure) although there's some derps.

Things I have done:

Winch Bumper
http://www.extremeterrain.com/barricade-front-bumper-j20850.html

Engo winch (Tested as 2nd best overall 1st in price by I think a couple websites, can't remember which ones but I know it was beastmode)
http://www.extremeterrain.com/engo-12-volt-electric-winch-7709000s.html

20" flood/spot LED bar, bitch is bright as fuck and so far has proven weatherproof

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

>>19225
You're making me like the JK a little more.

Out of curiosity, I know it's still pretty new and probably hasn't required any maintenance beyond basic stuff, but how difficult do you reckon it'd be to work on the engine compared to your K5? Pretty much an old vs new comparison.

>>19236

While the engine bay is tight, but regular maintenance is easy. For one, for a record of maintenance I'm keeping receipts from where I take it for doing it and also annotation of inspection that yes, oil was full, caps on, drains plugged, etc... once it's off warranty, then I'll do the maintenance myself.

I did what was intended as a quick video... ended up being 30 min long detailing the shit I like, don't like, and aspects that it has that are of note. Haven't uploaded it yet, but if you want to have to turn your speakers up to hear me rambling about the fucking thing, I will. I can't really cut it since it's derpy key points with a whole lotta some stream of conciousness RE Jeep.

Pic 3:
- Berlin-class replenishment ship: A1411 "Berlin"
- Berlin-class replenishment ship: A1412 "Frankfurt am Main"

These guys are heavy lifters. Maintaining a fleet out at sea isn't easy, so they carry 9330 tonnes of fuel oil, aviation fuel and fresh water + 550 tonnes of mixed cargo.

They also have 2 helicopters (sea king or NH-90) for delivering stuff if direct contact at sea can't be made.

They're not huge by my standards, but they're certainly imposing.

PS: If you go full websleuth on me, you can find out what ship I was standing on when taking these pics.

>>19121
Neat! We in Canuckistan are getting a couple of our own in the near future. The FGS Frankfurt am Main & Bonn have visited Halifax in the past. They appear to dwarf most other things we have in harbour.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queenston-class_auxiliary_vessel

>>19121
>fresh water

German ships have no capability to produce fresh water themselves? I did not know that...

>>19191
They do have the capacity to make their own fresh water on board. Tanks of freshwater are useful for when you need a lot quickly (more than can be made on demand), or if you need to fill the tanks of a ship/some disaster area that doesn't have the capacity to make their own.

>>19213

Ah, good point! Thank you.

>>19104
It may be stupid, but I'm actually giving a Humvee heavy consideration.

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2015/06/29/surplus-military-humvees-heading-to-highway/

http://www.ironplanet.com/Humvees?ct=35#pstart=0&c=3468&sm=0&ct=35

They dirt cheap right now, come with a title and only need a little work to become street legal. They're easy to work on and are an absolute beast off road.

I'm aware of the drawbacks as well. I know they're uncomfortable, slow, wide as hell and difficult to navigate small streets with, and have no noise reduction

But, I can live with that because... well... Humvee.

I can have my dream Mad Max vehicle for around $7000, especially when they get an influx of them to sell.

>>19105
Not real familiar with the HMMV's, but those prices look nice. The real question is A) How hard is it to get parts, and B) How electronic are they? I love me some diesel, but god damn, fuck anything that's computerized at all. Shit sucks to work on.

>>19107
Pretty easy. They're cheap to maintain thanks to a shitload of surplus parts.

IHC, you were praising Vulcans earlier. How do you feel about them in Rangers?

My understanding is that they don't have a lot of power and gas mileage isn't that good. But, considering the immortality of the engine, would it be a good trade off for the reliability?

Plenty of room, this car was a good idea.

I remember reading an article that the US military was excited over the developments of a new experimental liquid laser designed to destroy missiles and artillery but it proved herself to be a compact killer not needing the huge power and cooling systems of previous lasers. Weighing around 750 pounds and able to fire as long as the jet engines in the aircraft supply her with power, this was rushed into testing for new aerial drones.

- US Advanced Tactical Laser (ATL) on AC-130 gunship.
The Advanced Tactical Laser (ATL) program is a US military program to mount a high energy laser weapon on an aircraft, initially the AC-130 gunship, for use against ground targets in urban or other areas where minimizing collateral damage is important. The laser will be a 100 kilowatt-class chemical oxygen iodine laser (COIL). It is expected to have a tactical range of approximately twenty kilometers and weigh about 5,000–7,000 kg. This program is distinct from the Airborne Laser, which is a much larger system designed to destroy enemy missiles in the boost phase. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Tactical_Laser

>>18838
How the fuck do we ever lose the ability to manufacture fucking _anything_ at the government level? You'd think the first thing we'd do with any captured device that we had more than a handful of and considered using for anything would be to tear a few down, diagramming everything. For anything we actually purchase, full plans ought to be part of the deal.

I mean, I can see why some stuff wouldn't be made, but I can't imagine it'd be all that expensive to do a single production run of common parts for the Bofors 40mm once every half-century or so.

>>19097
Those Bofors guns were WW2 vintage and crew were land-loading the 4-round ammo clips into them in the Spectre gunships. This was probably seen as archaic and too manpower-intensive. I am sure somebody could make replicas of them, but the military probably wanted to phase such old weapons out in favor of chain-guns and Gatlings. But if those death rays work out...

Since the beginning of the 1970s Bofors L/60s are still used in the United States Air Force's AC-130 gunships in the air-to-ground role. There were plans to remove these and the Gatling guns on newer AC-130U variants and replace them with 30-mm autocannons. However, these plans did not come to fruition, and the Bofors and Gatlings are still in service.

When four additional AC-130Us were to be converted from 2002, the necessary 40 mm L/60 guns had to be salvaged from old M42 targets at the Nellis AFB range. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bofors_40_mm_gun

Master Sgt. Randy Scanian, 16th Special Operations Squadron (left), watches as the U.S. Marine Corps Gunnery Sgt. R. Lee Ermey (right), loads the 40mm gun of an AC-130H gunship.

>>18936
Better hope they don't bumrush you.

http://airheadsfly.com/2015/07/09/australia-drops-f-35b-jump-jet-plans/

Australia has dropped plans to buy Lockheed Martin F-35B Short Take Off and Vertical Landing (STOVL) fighter aircraft for its Landing Helicopter Ships HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide, various sources report on Thursday 9 July.

http://www.defenseone.com/management/2015/07/400-billion-f-35-no-longer-untouchable/117448/?oref=d-previouspost

Here come the cuts.

http://defensetech.org/2015/07/10/australian-navy-cancels-order-for-the-f-35b-joint-strike-fighter/

And aussies are dropping the suggestion of using the B variant on their ships (while still keeping the A for the air force).

>>18955
>>18966
How can they cancel it when they never ordered them? Australia has only purchased F-35As, and IIRC the idea that they'd buy Bs to fly off the Canberra class has only ever existed in the minds of Tony Abbot and a few former fixed-wing admirals.

Supposedly the ski jumps don't even have the internal reinforcing needed to operate aircraft because it was too expensive to have the Spaniards remove it entirely, but I think that's just a rumor.

Australian Air Force Must Make Careful F-35 Choices
February 15, 2016 http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2016-02-15/australian-air-force-must-make-careful-f-35-choices
To minimize costs and maximize the effectiveness of its new F-35A fleet, the RAAF will have to closely follow U.S. weapons and training decisions.
The Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) is preparing to receive its first squadron of 14 Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning IIs in-country in late 2018. They will be preceded by a squadron of 12 Boeing EF-18G Growlers that will arrive next year.

Like other air arms receiving advanced combat aircraft from the U.S., the RAAF must make careful choices about weapons and software commonality, and training, if costs are to be restrained. Air Commodore Mike Kitcher, the RAAF’s director general capability planning, provided some insight into the issues for delegates attending The International Fighter Conference in London last November.

  Only 50 years late to the party.

>>18825

That poor horse at 3:15

>>18826
>At least one animal was harmed in the making of this film.

  A Chrysler commercial from the 1960's depicts the testing of an unusual vehicle - the Marsh Screw Amphibian. https://youtu.be/H5NsmZcLAdM

Screwber alles

>>18746
>that butchery of the English language

>>18746
Even chatbots can produce language with better flow than that.

OP's pic is about 5 years old, it's a photoshopped image of what the Mustang, Challenger, and Camaro would look like as one car.

Looks like a pigfat Celica.

Gross.

>>18749
What? I don't see anything is wrong on it.