BF2S Forums Anyone up for a Military History Thread?

Well, we at least go into a tiny bit of detail...i.e. we describe what made it good/bad. 

Vernedead, where are you studying that has military history?

Vernedead wrote:

Kent

Great school, I'm hoping to get into Edinburgh or maybe even Cambridge for studying history. That'd be a dream. I think I'll have to settle for UCLA or something.

But yes, on a forum its a bit more shallow, we could write novels on the topic, but this thread is more for enjoyment and just showing off pictures. If you want to go into a more in-depth discussion with me or anyone on anything in this thread, feel free. What military history are you studying?

And now for some more Military Porn.
Someone asked about Soviet Weaponry earlier, and Mac's here to oblige.

The AK-47, invented in 1947 by an Armor Officer in the Soviet union, the AK-47 used a slight design reference from the Stg 44 (German Assault rifle), only the designer had accuracy and aim sights less in mind, and firepower and reliability more so. No rifle is self cleaning, but if a rifle ever came close to it, it was the Ak-47, and this is because of the loose tolerances the rifle has. A tolerance is the term for how closely "knit" (for lack of a better word) the pieces are together. Because accuracy was not a concern of the Russian, his tolerances for his gun were loose. The effect of this was that dirt would easily come in--but it would easily come out as well. This and, because everything was loose, the gun would be able to fire, and the dirt and crap wouldn't interfere with the firing process. This and the gun was wood and metal, which helped it avoid having the firing chamber get all fouled up and corroded, like what initially happened to the M16, due to lack of care.  The draw backs of the AK is that the recoil is not back and forth, but side to side. This can be both good and bad, depending on how well you aim and want the gun to aim. Thus, you're spraying out a huge amount of bullets, but at least its not turning into an anti aircraft gun. Another thing is that, and this depends on quality of metal, the barrel tends to warp from firing all those rounds.

The Soviets put an updated better quality Klashnikov out in 1974.

The Soviets lent out loads of weapons, and in Vietnam, one was felt especially hard by the NATO forces in the jungles. Used as much as the AK-47 was the RPG-7. The beast of a rocket launcher took out landing helicopters, tanks, and APCs converted for hospital duty. It was learned that the RED CROSS on the APC was a good cross hair for the Viet Cong and NVA to use for aiming on those APCs. The RPG-7 is still used today but all sorts of militia and terrorist organizations.

The Klashnikov system was flexible enough, so Klashnikov designed the LMG for the Russians to use. Of course, the Russians lent it out to other Communists, like the Viet Cong, and they used it as a heavy AK-47
Vehicle Wise, the Russians had some very impressive vehicles, the Migs wil be found on the previous pages.

The Mi-24D Hind was a unique Soviet helicopter that combined the tankbusting and anti personnel abilities of a gunship with the tansport abilities of...well a slick. The helicopter has not been attempted to have a duplicate in the United States, because the philosophy was to keep both branches of helis seperate. The Heli has a fixed chaingun in some models and invariably has missiles, whether hellfires or ballistic rocketpods.

In the United States, the Blackhawk is similar, in that door mounted m1314s or m240s can be applied, as well as rocket pods and straight pointing minis or m240s on special side mounted racks.

Carlos Hathcock: was a legendary United States Marine Corps sniper with a service record of 93 confirmed kills and at least 300 unconfirmed kills during the Vietnam War. Hathcock's record and the extraordinary details of the missions he undertook made him a legend in the Marine Corps. His fame as a sniper and his dedication to long distance shooting led him to become a major developer of the United States Marine Corps Sniper training program.

Hathcock started his deployment in Vietnam as a MP, and later became a sniper. During his time in Vietnam, Hathcock became recognized as the Marines' most proficient sniper; killing a confirmed 93 North Vietnamese Army and Viet-Cong. His actual total is believed to be well over 400, with at least an additional 300 being unconfirmed, which the official count does not reflect. Hathcock's career as a sniper came to a sudden end outside Khe Sanh in 1969, when the amphibious tractor he was riding on struck an anti-tank mine. Hathcock pulled seven Marines off the flame-engulfed vehicle before jumping to safety. He came out of the incident with severe burns over ninety percent of his body, 43% of which were third-degree burns [4]. He was evacuated to Brooke Army Medical Center in Texas, where he underwent 13 skin graft operations. His injuries left him unable to perform effectively in combat with a rifle. He was told he would be recommended for the Silver Star, but he stated that he had only done what anyone there would have if they were awake, so he rejected any commendation for his bravery. Nearly 30 years later he was awarded the Silver Star, the U.S. military's third highest award.
Chuck Mawhinney: Mawhinney, the son of a World War II Marine Corps veteran, was an avid hunter in his youth. Mawhinney joined the U.S. Marine Corps in 1967, spending sixteen months in Vietnam starting in 1968. Although less well known than his more famous counterpart, fellow Marine sniper and legend Carlos Hathcock, Mawhinney currently holds the record for confirmed kills for Marine snipers, with 103. (A US Army sergeant, Adelbert Waldron, holds the record for most confirmed kills by any American sniper at 109.) He had another 216 that are listed as "probables" by the U.S. Marine Corps.

Mawhinney left the Marine Corps in 1970, after being diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. He slipped into obscurity, and went without notice for his number of confirmed kills for more than two decades, which was his preference. He returned home to Oregon, married, and began working for the U.S. Forest Service, where he worked until his retirement in the late 1990s.

Mawhinney never spoke of his exploits as a sniper, and found himself exposed unwittingly in a book titled Dear Mom: A Sniper's Vietnam, written by fellow Marine sniper and author Joseph T. Ward.After the book recognized him as having 101 confirmed kills, many disputed the claim. However, research revealed that Mawhinney actually had 103 confirmed kills and 216 probable kills, which led to his replacing Carlos Hathcock, who had 93 confirmed kills, as the leading USMC sniper of all time.

these are just a few snipers who again, showed what snipers are capable of doing in a "modern war"

My wrist is a bit broke, so I can't contribute too much.
Here's a good vid of the M16, the Assault Rifle.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-3tnPdZha_w

There's a link to that. For some stupidass reason, the Youtube tag doesn't work.

Last edited by The_Mac (2007-05-11 16:53:59)

Heh, I am the OP(er), but yes, this thread isn't for posting pictures solely, but for discussing hardware.
To be frank, I think people got the wrong idea. I'm not lecturing you guys, or anything like it, or trying to show off my picture collection, or vice versa, but I'd like a discussion going.

For example, does anyone have any questions they want answered relating the topic etc?

daddyofdeath wrote:

Did the German Army (heer) really define modern warfare....ie the blitzkrieg.  Well much is said for the German army of the 2nd WW, and it is for certain many lessons were learnt from them, mainly Air power first, then mechanised armor, and infantry to mop up. Is the German Army responsible for mordern warfare as we know it?

Discuss.

I think the problem was, armies can only afford to be lightening in Urban and settled areas. And only with a buildup of troops. The Allies' strategies were slow moving, designed to crack nuts, and these strategies succeeded, although with a huge loss of life. Granted, due to the Allied Generals' skills, these losses were not as great as they could have been.
To answer the prompt, yes, I think a good deal of German doctrine went into US generals' tactics after Vietnam, when it became apparent that the old Slow moving tactics of WW2 could not be applied in modern warfare anymore.

Hrmm, interesting, I remember reading about all that, but overall, its difficult to mount surprise attacks or lightening attacks because of the order required and you're risking a plan that hinges on being totally surprising.

This is why medieval surprise attacks rarely worked if at all.
Although the Welsh and Scottish were reasonably good at it.

Here's a little did you know question: The Scots did not start wearing kilts at all until the late 16th century
Before, they wore loose pants, but not trousers, and brown or red shits. They all wore cloaks, the more wealthy, plaid, and some wealthy Scots wore their battle cloaks into the thick of it.

One major reason why the Luftwaffe planes weren't that great was that they were all designed in the mid-1930s, and were expected to be up to par with the newer designs of the Allied aircraft by the time the war happened. However, the Bf-109 and its variants did in fact stay pretty much at par with Allied aircraft as the war went on.

lol, a book called the blitzkrieg legend with the same stuff is sitting on my desk as we speak. have a +1.

Well, here's a bit about the gunship, and how it came about. As it was, the United States had been toying around with the concept of the gunship helicopter since the end of Korea. It'd seen what helicopters could do, and adding fire support to the grunts was thought up and retained in Marine and Army generals alike.
As it was, Vietnam encouraged the idea of a gunship because the helicopter was already a key tool of warfare in the jungles and mountainous areas of that country.
When Bell company made the Huey helicopter, it was originally designed solely for getting wounded people off, because the UH-34D Sea Horse and H-21 Shawnee (known as the flying banana) were quite capable of transporting troops.
However, the Huey was seen by the Army as having the capacity and speed of being Air Cavalry, as well as Air Assault. The Navy and Marine Corps also saw the opportunity, and shortly, all three made gunships out of the Huey. Whats interesting is that each branch used their own philosophy about firepower and how to use it.
The Navy believed in side door action, with m60s or miniguns (7.62mm Calibre), and rack mounted rocket pods, with miniguns attached. The Army had similar ideas, only their miniguns and rack mounted m60s were leveragable, about 45 degrees up and down. The Army also had door mounted miniguns or m60s, depending on Air Cavalry squadron. Because the war was so occurring over such diverse landscape, many different approaches to firepower and how much of it should be versatile, etc should be applied.
The USMC had fixed m60 rack mounted machine guns, along with the usual rocket pods and door mounted m60s.
Something very interesting, and not many people know this, but the Huey Gunships (a good deal of them anyway, especially in Gunship devoted squadrons) had nose mounted cannons, machine guns, or grenade launchers. The cool thing about the grenade launchers (40mm Calibre) is that they were automatic fire (Shown in the oil canvas painting), so their rate of fire was a little less than the 20mm cannon, or m60 turrets employed.

The Army employed the nose mounted grenade launcher the majority of the time (because, again, everything varied) while the Navy did not usually mount nose weapons. Marines had two nose variants besides the grenade launcher (which was not used extensively by the marine UH-1E Hueys, but was by the AH-1G and AH-1J Marine Cobras).

^Thats the TAT-101, two m60Cs modified for Huey use. The turret cap has been stripped away, to discontinue the jamming of all the dirt and bullet cases that were caught in the cap.

Thats the m197, also put on the UH-1E turrets of the USMC.
The Huey made a big target, and U.S. tacticians wanted to increase their firepower coming from their gunships, and yet minimize the size, and create  a more maneuverable and slimmer helicopter that could be just as, or more effective.
The US Army first fielded the AH-1G Cobra in '68, and the USMC borrowed 38 of them. The AH-1J then was fielded by the USMC, specifically for themselves, built upon the USMC doctrine of firepower. The USMC AH-1J could carry up to 38 rockets, have a 3 barreled 20mm Cannon in the nose, or a nose mounted grenade launcher (40mm) that was automatic, like the Hueys.
The Army, tried everything, and in the end, couldn't decide which one it liked better.
So the Army squadrons did both.

The Army also liked the extra lead spewing ideas, and as a result...

Those side canisters are filled not with gasoline, but with 6 barreled 7.62mm Gatling guns. The rocket carrying capacity dropped to around 24 rockets.

Thats a head on shot of the Cobra. Note how narrow it is, and how slim the fuselage is. The Cobras were able to avoid head on bullets a lot better than the Hueys. The Cobras also had copper plating for armor, which was very effective. The glass, however, was not bulletproof. This induced the Cobra pilots to keep turning, covering their flanks, so they didn't get bullets in the cockpit.

After Vietnam, the Army transferred from Cobras to Apaches, utilizing the tank buster philosophy, and using anti personnel helicopters, like the OH-A6 Little Bird with miniguns for mopping up and supporting ground troops.

^Apache

^Earlier model of the OH-6A, used in Vietnam, they now are used as mini gunships
The blackhawk also can be used as ground support, due to its utility on the battlefield. Blackhawks can have m240s or m1314s.
In the USMC, Apache purchase was thought of, but the USMC disliked the slowness and apparent clumsiness of the tank buster, and developed its Hueys (the Army discontinued Hueys in its branch) and Cobras to become the UH-1Y Huey “Venom” and the AH-1Z Zulu Cobra.


^ Zulu Cobras


^UH-1Y Venom Hueys

Yeah, but the French really didn't have the right ideas about warfare. They always believed in heavy = the best. Their tank was the heaviest tank in the war, (at the start, it was really only rivaled by the Tiger models).

Not to change the subject, but does anyone else find the C-22 Osprey interesting?
Its an amazing concept, and what interests me is that the CH-46, the predecessor of this bird was deemed obsolete in 1980, but they kept with it because they didn't really have a choice.  Then this aircraft becomes a reality, it goes faster, farther, and with heavier payloads.

USMC tacticians think the C-22 is the next step in their new tactics and all that good stuff. But its critics argue about its low armament--there's only one m240 on the rear ramp.
Solution for future aircraft? Stick a cobra m197 3 barreled 20mm gatling on a turret and stick it on the nose!

I doubt it. The Osprey just came in, but here's some more on the Huey Cobras (AH-1Gs)

Last edited by The_Mac (2007-05-12 21:13:20)