let me guess, you 'need' more

let me guess, you 'need' more

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >gets hit by thermobaric weapon
    >everyone inside liquified
    you might want a pressurized cabin, at least

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Does it really matter what you're in if you get hit by one of these? It seems pretty nasty. Not that they could ever get close enough.

  2. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    True soul

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Holy shit, they named a vehicle after your wiener

  3. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    A T-34-85 would be nice.

  4. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes.

  5. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    I need less

  6. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >turret
    bloat

  7. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    You won't get far with a barrel like that. These days 120 mm is a minimum and we will probably be looking at 140 mm soon.

  8. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >no FCS
    >no gun stabilization
    >unreliable drivetrain
    >polished steel """"optics""""
    >no spall lining
    >zero man portable AT weapon protection
    >ultra brittle armor and weak welds
    >barely functional radio if you even have one
    i would take a AT field gun over this thing any day of the week anon what is this weak shit

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Polished steel optics? Sounds like some alt history bullshit

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >alt history bullshit
        Up until at least1942 the already very shitty optical devices onboard of T-34 tanks were using polished steel instead of actual mirrors because cheap and available.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Where can I read up on that?

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            if you speak russian or at least any eastern euro language, seek out panoramic sights PT/ПT-6, ПT-7, and ПT-4-7
            And I mean seek out the specific devices and their construction because there's lots of outright lying around the subject, for example soviet ***claims that the british said*** that those are the best in the world, totally.

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              Thanks a bunch anon!

  9. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Russian mass death tractor

  10. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    bloat

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      the first thing i thought about when seeing this picture is Linux. wtf.

  11. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    if you want better than a 1:12 K/D ratio to the Germans, then yes, you need more. Unless of course you don't mind "excess death"

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >true story bro

  12. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    one t-34
    LMAO

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous
      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        joy

  13. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    back in that day, tanks often had a fifth crew member, the radio operator and hull machine gunner. The position is now gone, but they have kept the loader position.

  14. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    how the frick am i supposed to interface with the link16 network and pull real-time imagery from the rq-170 connected to the orbiting b-2 acting as a standoff network node linking my platoon?

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      OK; what tanks are provided with Link-16?

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        It's classified...

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Ah yes, a fresh take from the sigmoid then.

          This thread screams "DOD bot that fricked up and accidentally made a post on PrepHole instead of /k/"

          Apparently officers in the US Air Force have been posting on /k/, which is mindblowing. I can only assume they did it from the toilet while working out a bad constipation.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            I wouldn't be surprised if it's a full-fledged psyop operation, /k/ has been unusable since the gay slav war started

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              Oh it has been useless for far longer than that. I had a look and left in disgust, too many basement generals extolling virtues they will never achieve. Then again it makes it easy to spot the real military people. And there are not many of them. I can only assume they are there to poke the crazy zoo.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                I won't deny that it has always been a shitty board, but the mood has definitely shifted from "poltards who have no idea what they're talking about with the occasional good post" to "actual information warfare by both the west and Russia to try and sway public opinion"

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              /k/ has always been one of the worst boards

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              bump

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Apparently officers in the US Air Force have been posting on /k/, which is mindblowing. I can only assume they did it from the toilet while working out a bad constipation.
            /k/ has some screencap I saw once of some dude in Iraq who got extraordinarily backed up from living off MREs. I can't find it but it ends "and that's how I shit on myself and seven officers".

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              i remember something similar, but it ends with the anon farting so much while shitting out rabbit sized turds.
              then he collapses onto the floor, apparently he didn't even need to wipe?

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Apparently officers in the US Air Force have been posting on /k/, which is mindblowing.

            Why is that mind blowing? Do you think Air Force officers are some rare breed of person? I've talked to countless helicopter pilots here, and I'm an Army officer myself.

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              >and I'm an Army officer myself.
              Thank you for your cervix.

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Apparently officers in the US Air Force have been posting on /k/, which is mindblowing.

            There is nothing exotic in that post unless you're a tourist, nothing remotely indicating professional connection to those systems at all. That's ordinary stuff any (real) military aviation enthusiast would know. That it impressed anyone as more than that is bizarre on a WEAPONS fricking board.

            What is wrong with you people? Why do supposed weapons enthusiasts have less knowledge than an average gamer?

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      don't need those to fight like real heroes, brother

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Your Baofeng with the latest BDSM firmware.

  15. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Immediately become priority target number one for B-17/24 wings
      nmgi bro

  16. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      Probably drove right to a rail station were it can be used (lost) in Ukraine.

  17. 11 months ago
    Anonymous
    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      When is this from?

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        Like 2018, not that a specific date makes puccians look any more competent.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Thought so. Just wanted to confirm it's not the same t-34 before I show people. Shame, would have been perfect.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      you know maybe we should have suspected the Russians weren't exactly up to the hype before the special operation, cause the warning signs were there

  18. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    This thread screams "DOD bot that fricked up and accidentally made a post on PrepHole instead of /k/"

  19. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    ITT /chug/ tards laughed out of /k/ try astroturfing here instead

  20. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    believe it or not but you just need some functioning nukes to win ANY war. I wish putler wasnt a moron and nuked the israelites instead

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      why would putin nuke his handlers?

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      using nukes is a paradox, if the country is too small, then its pointless, and if its too big, chances are they have nukes of their own, and will attack back.

      in russia's case, since all their tech is old soviet shit, and they haven't developed much since then, they would have more deaths if they tried to nuke.

  21. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >you 'need' more

    Well, I'm not saying no

  22. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >all these landcels
    waterchads, check in

  23. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Let me guess...you need mo-ACK

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      russians are basically white chinks when it comes to any form of vehicle

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >"I wanted to film the T-34 and here he goes and blocks it... And so I filmed it, frick... It survived the war and died here..."
        The sound makes it a lot better.

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      daaaaaaaang there goes their tank!
      who will "defend" Crimea now???

  24. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >rolling-coffin
    no thx pal

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      But that isn't a Sherman death trap

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        russians statistics from 1944 list a casualty rate of 27% across a sample of a little over a hundred tanks in the summer of 1944, all tanks being burn outs
        in the same time period, US shermans had a casualty rate of 24.5% across a comparably large sample size for burned out tanks

        so shermans are slightly safer in the event of a ammo cook-off
        and neither the T-34 nor the sherman were particularly dangerous in any case, 2X% means 1-2 people lost per tank per burn out which is consistent with anecdotes across all countries

        at least until you remember that by 1944, wet shermans were introduced into service and ended up making up about half of all shermans
        and wet shermans only burned out 15% of the time instead of 60-80% of the time for most tanks

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          >wet stowage
          This is brilliant, why don't all tanks do this?

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            every tank built after 1945 implemented it to some degree
            even russian iron coffins have the decency to put the ammo rack at the bottom of the hull instead of the tank side walls, though this is also for mechanical reasons like having an autoloader
            the centurion also has ammo in the floor rather than the side walls, though strangely has an auxiliary ammo rack next to the driver

            wet ammo racks have beed succeeded by blowout panels, having a specific section of the ammo container open up and vent excess pressure into the outside rather than allowing it to expand into the crew compartment

            • 11 months ago
              Anonymous

              >blowout panels
              That makes sense, but in the specific case of the T-series autoloader it would seem some kind of wet jacket might have reduced the use of the turret as the blowout panel.

              Maybe this technique isn't effective against HEAT.

              • 11 months ago
                Anonymous

                >That makes sense, but in the specific case of the T-series autoloader it would seem some kind of wet jacket might have reduced the use of the turret as the blowout panel.
                most "wet" ammo racks dont actually have wetness in them

                they found out that the water was mostly unnecessary, positioning the ammo in a metal box at the lowest point in the tank was what actually worked
                the protective walls stopped hot fragments from getting in and the position in the tank was unlikely to be hit in the first place

                the only safer place was the rear of the turret, which is where modern tanks like the M1 place their ammo
                though this does mean that the turret can only turn left or right so far before exposing the turret bustle, but most of the time its hit even less than the lower hull

          • 11 months ago
            Anonymous

            Because it doesn't actually work except vs lowest energy fragments (which have a low probability of ignition anyway)
            Sherman and Chaffee had technical directives to drain wet stowage tanks in 1948 and none of the post war generation of US tanks of Patton's/Walker Bulldog/M103 had it.
            Chieftain/Challenger had wet stowage, but after battle damage assessment of Chieftain tanks being held in Iraq, concluded they needed to be changed. Challenger 1 mk3 and Challenger 2 removed wet stowage for dry armoured charge bins.
            If you want an example of wet stowage still in use look at Soviet tanks, where a good amount of the ammunition outside the carousel is held in fuel tanks, and you can see how effective it is (hint, it isn't)

  25. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, 10,000 more.

  26. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    let me guess, you dont have more

  27. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    The T-34-85 is widely regarded as the best tank of WW2. In one incident, an entire company of Tiger 2's attempted to destroy a lone advancing T-34-85 only to have all their rounds bounced by the T-34's superior angled armor. Said T-34 dispatched all the Tiger 2's with a single shot to their frontal armor that was constructed of pig iron. Wartime records indicate that the T-34-85 had a K/D ratio of 50,000,000:1. The single lost vehicle due to the crew drinking too much in celebrating their 1000th Tiger kill, and then driving their tank into a 20-feet deep river of Aryan blood. Fear of the T-34 was so great, that Germans would immediately surrender upon sight of them. The prisoners were then forced to lie down, and promptly run over by T-34's to avenge the 6 million israelites. Many historians contend that the Allies only won WW2 because of the T-34-85, and by extension, the T-34 series as a whole.

  28. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    I would like the modernization package

  29. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    >let me guess, you 'need' more
    No, but Russia does

  30. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, I need the dog

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      >no Olgierd
      >Czeresniak hidden somewhere in the back
      AND FRICKING MOST IMPORTANT
      >no Marusia
      You are one gigantic homosexual, kurwa

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Marusia
        Lidka was the white man's choice.

        • 11 months ago
          Anonymous

          Niemirska was cute, but Pola Raksa was the sexiest chick in history of polish cinematography.

  31. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    Decadent Westoid needing a whole large tank! You need less

  32. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    since we have a tank thread, i have a question about sloped armor: would a part of armor sloped inwards be worse, better or neither than a flat face? disregard the "why"s, this is not about a boob armor tank.

  33. 11 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Assuming you mean something like a W-shaped hull
    It would make a complex shape that would be difficult to manufacture and lead to more areas for stress to build up
    It would also be an inefficient use of space

    • 11 months ago
      Anonymous

      yeah, a W-shaped hull.
      no, i don't care about lack of efficiency, only about theoretical pen protection characteristics.

      • 11 months ago
        Anonymous

        >nly about theoretical pen protection characteristics.
        here are some crude drawings to visualize their angle of protection

        when facing towards your enemy, it provides the same protection as a pike-nose hull with hing angles
        also like a pike-nose, it loses a lot of protection from even slight angling

        though there are a few angles where a shot will only go through the "prongs" and potentially avoid hitting anything important

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *