Search results for query: *

Well, now we know what the fight with the Mauss in GuP was inspired by.

And from what I have heard they are: 1) More complex and brittle. 2) Massive gas guzzlers. 3) Take more time to start and stop, and consume more fuel in idle. Wankel engine - Wikipedia This, a lot more successful than the X type engine.

Since we already started the topic of propulsion. What is the benefit of using a turbine vs. a regular piston engine, exactly? The Russians have allegedly started producing T-80s again, the Abrams already uses that thing. Also, related question, was anyone dumb enough to try sticking a Vankel...

If that was the case, then why didn't anyone develop the tech further. For tanks, as is this case, but decades earlier. For civilian naval needs and civilian aircraft. Hell, for frigging minidozers and tractors. And it is not like every single country on the planet switched to nuclear...

If a piece of equipment is somehow better than another the new one will push out the old one. This thing failed to work well in everything from aircraft to formula one cars. X engine - Wikipedia

As I said, the wiki article leaves me with the impression that it is an unreliable, overly-complicated piece of tech that has been around for 80+ years without seeing any mass adoption.

First time hearing of an X type engine, but from what I read on the wiki it sounds like one of those pie in the sky projects. It looks like the Vankel engine's mirror opposite, much more complex, but still not usable.

GuP but why the hell are the waifus missing!!!

Yeah, a persistent folly is still a folly. Might I remind you that the Germans lost WWII and the USA lost in Vietnam? Whatever tactical advantage was there to be gained from using tanks for policing actions did not have an impact sufficient to justify the cost. The best way to use tanks is...

Oh, really, so anti-tank weapons were not a thing? But, you don't seem to get the bigger picture, either. The one where throwing tanks against peasant armies of insurgents is a stupid idea. Tanks consume lots of fuel, are relatively slow, require lots of maintenance and are overall very...

And I am sure that the math whereupon you threw the lives of a tank crew and tank to potentially take out a few poor peasants with makeshift weapons made sense.

Closest to a tank I've been was in a museum, and even around here we don't let people climb in and play around. So I have no idea of the benefits of being outside vs. inside, but I would assume that staying out of the tank in a war zone is an open invite to snipers or mortars to get a few easy...

I always assumed that tanks had some form of cooling, I mean, armored warfare was a thing in North Africa during WWII. In any case, that umbrella is probably loved by any tank hunters and artillery spotters. 😂

:censored: Seriously, what insane colonial conflict was this from?

Azn tank be like. Flatter, wider and with a bigger ass.

Yeah, as I said, it looks like an armored dumptruck. Frankly I would be OK buying them if these guys can peddle them to other EU countries and build them here, so that we can recoup some of the costs and get more jobs, that would mean that there would be more demand outside of Bulgaria than...

Maybe but the big carrot here is allegedly the company planning to start production for EU customers in Bulgaria.

Like?

So, some Bulgarian Expat in Canada's armored vehicle company is apparently building up its production capabilities here and is trying to sell us some armored dumptruck: