History AwesomeButImpractical / Military

17th Jan '17 1:25:10 AM Alceister
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** The Soviet [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-28 T-28 tank]], with Finnish nickname ''Postivaunu'' (Stagecoach). Three turrets, one cannon, and up to five machine guns, but horribly unmaneuverable and slow, and easily defeated with improvised anti-tank weaponry. Finnish troops captured seven of these monsters during the war. In the vehicle's defense, it had first been deployed in 1931, at which time it totally out-classed any other extant design. It was simply kept in service well-beyond its effective life.

to:

** The Soviet [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-28 T-28 tank]], with Finnish nickname ''Postivaunu'' (Stagecoach). Three turrets, one cannon, and up to five machine guns, but horribly unmaneuverable unmaneuverable, poorly-armoured, and slow, and easily defeated with improvised anti-tank weaponry.a huge target. Finnish troops captured seven of these monsters during the war. In the vehicle's defense, it had first been deployed in 1931, at which time it totally out-classed any other extant design. It was simply kept in service well-beyond its effective life.
17th Jan '17 1:22:53 AM Alceister
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** The Soviet [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-28 T-28 tank]], with Finnish nickname ''Postivaunu'' (Stagecoach). Three turrets, three cannons and up to five machine guns, but horribly unmaneuverable and slow, and easily defeated with improvised anti-tank weaponry. Finnish troops captured seven of these monsters during the war. In the vehicle's defense, it had first been deployed in 1931, at which time it totally out-classed any other extant design. It was simply kept in service well-beyond its effective life.

to:

** The Soviet [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-28 T-28 tank]], with Finnish nickname ''Postivaunu'' (Stagecoach). Three turrets, three cannons one cannon, and up to five machine guns, but horribly unmaneuverable and slow, and easily defeated with improvised anti-tank weaponry. Finnish troops captured seven of these monsters during the war. In the vehicle's defense, it had first been deployed in 1931, at which time it totally out-classed any other extant design. It was simply kept in service well-beyond its effective life.
14th Jan '17 2:17:33 AM Alceister
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* [[ItsRainingMen Paratroops]] in general. True, they are the cream of the crop in each and every army, provide a potentially unexpected avenue of attack, and jumping off a perfectly good plane mid-air is just plain CrazyAwesome. However, paratroops suffer from a number of downsides. First, unless the drop zone is secured, the jump planes are easy to shoot down and the descending paratroopers are similarly vulnerable to ground fire. Second, paratroops are generally unsupported by heavy weapons such as artillery and armored vehicles, which cannot be easily carried and are ''very difficult'' to safely drop by parachute. Third, parachute operations are heavily dependent on the element of surprise: once lost, the paratroop is at a disadvantage, as their opponent can call for more firepower and reinforcements. Fourth and finally, if the paratroop cannot link up with friendly forces in a timely manner, then it will eventually run out of supplies, at which point surrender is the only option. The experience of WWII paradrop operations was that large scale paradrops usually fail and even successful ones are costly, but small scale operations (up to company level) usually succeed. Helicopters have more or less superseded both gliders and paratroops in most armies around the world.

to:

* [[ItsRainingMen Paratroops]] in general. True, they are the cream of the crop in each and every army, provide a potentially unexpected avenue of attack, and jumping off a perfectly good plane mid-air is just plain CrazyAwesome. However, paratroops suffer from a number of downsides. First, unless the drop zone is secured, the jump planes are easy to shoot down and the descending paratroopers are similarly vulnerable to ground fire. Second, paratroops are generally unsupported by heavy weapons such as artillery and armored vehicles, which cannot be easily carried by planes and are ''very difficult'' to safely drop by parachute. Third, parachute operations are heavily dependent on the element of surprise: once lost, the paratroop is at a disadvantage, as their opponent can call for more firepower and reinforcements. Fourth and finally, if the paratroop cannot link up with friendly forces in a timely manner, then it will eventually run out of supplies, at which point surrender is the only option. The experience of WWII paradrop operations was that large scale paradrops usually fail and even successful ones are costly, but small scale operations (up to company level) usually succeed. Helicopters have more or less superseded both gliders and paratroops in most armies around the world.
14th Jan '17 2:17:02 AM Alceister
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* [[ItsRainingMen Paratroops]] in general. True, they are the cream of the crop in each and every army, they can be delivered exactly where they are needed, and jumping off a perfectly good plane mid-air constitutes itself CrazyAwesome. But paratroops are light infantry, it is all too impractical to haul heavy weapons such as artillery pieces on airplanes (and outright impossible to ''paradrop'' them), and the capacity of cargo planes suitable for combat jumps is restricted. Moreover, unless the drop zone is secured and the attacker has complete surprise on his side, the jump planes are easy to shoot down, usually resulting in the loss of the whole stick. Likewise, descending paratroopers are extremely vulnerable to ground fire and their own weapon and gear carry capability is severly restricted. The experience of WWII paradrop operations was that large scale paradrops usually fail and even the successful have horrendous losses, but small scale operations (up to company level) usually succeed. Helicopters have more or less superceded both gliders and paratroops in all armies around the world.

to:

* [[ItsRainingMen Paratroops]] in general. True, they are the cream of the crop in each and every army, they can be delivered exactly where they are needed, provide a potentially unexpected avenue of attack, and jumping off a perfectly good plane mid-air constitutes itself is just plain CrazyAwesome. But However, paratroops are light infantry, it is all too impractical to haul heavy weapons such as artillery pieces on airplanes (and outright impossible to ''paradrop'' them), and the capacity suffer from a number of cargo planes suitable for combat jumps is restricted. Moreover, downsides. First, unless the drop zone is secured and the attacker has complete surprise on his side, secured, the jump planes are easy to shoot down, usually resulting in down and the loss of the whole stick. Likewise, descending paratroopers are extremely similarly vulnerable to ground fire fire. Second, paratroops are generally unsupported by heavy weapons such as artillery and armored vehicles, which cannot be easily carried and are ''very difficult'' to safely drop by parachute. Third, parachute operations are heavily dependent on the element of surprise: once lost, the paratroop is at a disadvantage, as their own weapon opponent can call for more firepower and gear carry capability reinforcements. Fourth and finally, if the paratroop cannot link up with friendly forces in a timely manner, then it will eventually run out of supplies, at which point surrender is severly restricted. the only option. The experience of WWII paradrop operations was that large scale paradrops usually fail and even the successful have horrendous losses, ones are costly, but small scale operations (up to company level) usually succeed. Helicopters have more or less superceded superseded both gliders and paratroops in all most armies around the world.world.



** This has only really been the case because of the one thing that Airborne Troops lacked that Regular Troops did not: armor. Armored vehicles have, since WorldWarTwo, become lighter, stronger, and faster. A modern armored vehicle weighing 15 tons today has better protection, mobility, and firepower then any vehicle of the same weight class designed for airborne operations in Second World War. This ultimately means, that assuming that enemy air defense can be adequately suppressed, the carrier can make the drop, and the vehicle itself can survive being air-dropped, the airborne troops can have sufficient firepower exactly where they need it, as well as the armor to survive the battle from most expected threats. Even if the adversary sends their own tanks to respond, it means that there will be less tanks for the ground pounders to face.
13th Jan '17 6:53:09 PM Alceister
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** This has only really been the case because of the one thing that Airborne Troops lacked that Regular Troops did not: Armor. Armored Vehicles have, since WorldWarTwo, become lighter, stronger, and faster. A Armored Vehicle weighing 15tons today has better protection, mobility, and firepower then any vehicle of the same weight class designed for Airborne Operations in Second World War. This ultimately means, that assuming that enemy air defense can be adequately suppressed, the carrier can make the drop, and the vehicle itself can survive being air-dropped, the Airborne Troops can have sufficient firepower exactly where they need it, as well as the armor to survive the battle from most expected threats. Even if the adversary sends their own tanks to respond, it means that there will be less tanks for the ground pounders to face.

to:

** This has only really been the case because of the one thing that Airborne Troops lacked that Regular Troops did not: Armor. armor. Armored Vehicles vehicles have, since WorldWarTwo, become lighter, stronger, and faster. A Armored Vehicle modern armored vehicle weighing 15tons 15 tons today has better protection, mobility, and firepower then any vehicle of the same weight class designed for Airborne Operations airborne operations in Second World War. This ultimately means, that assuming that enemy air defense can be adequately suppressed, the carrier can make the drop, and the vehicle itself can survive being air-dropped, the Airborne Troops airborne troops can have sufficient firepower exactly where they need it, as well as the armor to survive the battle from most expected threats. Even if the adversary sends their own tanks to respond, it means that there will be less tanks for the ground pounders to face.
7th Jan '17 4:21:41 AM EDP
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villar-Perosa_aircraft_submachine_gun Fiat Modello 1915]]: AKA the Villar Perosa or, to the soldiers, the Raspberry, TropeCodifier of the [[MoreDakka submachine gun]] (and the TropeMaker alongside the German [=MP18=]. It was awesome also for other reasons: it was a combination of ''two'' independent submachineguns, each gun had an awesome rate of fire of ''[[MoreDakka 1,500 rounds per minute]]'' (enough it was also used as an aircraft gun), and, firing the underpowered 9mm Glisenti, the recoil was easily manageable. On the impractical side, the magazine for each gun contained a measly 25 rounds (AKA ''less than one second of fire''. That's why the soldiers called it Raspberry), the weak round made it ineffective as an aircraft weapon, and the ergonomy was so bad that you have to wonder ''how'' the soldiers managed to fire it while moving (Italian soldiers were very good at improvising).

to:

** [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villar-Perosa_aircraft_submachine_gun Fiat Modello 1915]]: AKA the Villar Perosa or, to the soldiers, the Raspberry, TropeCodifier of the [[MoreDakka submachine gun]] (and the TropeMaker alongside the German [=MP18=].[=MP18=]). It was awesome also for other reasons: it was a combination of ''two'' independent submachineguns, each gun had an awesome rate of fire of ''[[MoreDakka 1,500 rounds per minute]]'' (enough it was also used as an aircraft gun), and, firing the underpowered 9mm Glisenti, the recoil was easily manageable. On the impractical side, the magazine for each gun contained a measly 25 rounds (AKA ''less than one second of fire''. That's why the soldiers called it Raspberry), the weak round made it ineffective as an aircraft weapon, and the ergonomy was so bad that you have to wonder ''how'' the soldiers managed to fire it while moving (Italian soldiers were very good at improvising).
7th Jan '17 4:11:25 AM EDP
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* The [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_CR.42 FIAT CR.42]]. The best biplane fighter ever built, it was very manouverable (even for a biplane), and was remarkably fast and tought, for a biplane. It entered service in 1939, when monoplane fighters had got much faster, tougher and better armed, and once their RAF opponents adapted to them all they could was to fight on as a ''monoplane'' replacement was put into production.
** The experimental [=CR.42DB=] variant, fitted with a Daimler-Benz DB [=601A=] 1,200 hp engine, could reach the speed of 525 kph, making it the fastest biplane ever flown to this day. It was still an open-cockpit biplane, and ''still'' slower, frailer, and less armed than its monoplane opponents, resulting in it remaining a one-shot prototype.
11th Dec '16 8:03:39 AM ElSquibbonator
Is there an issue? Send a Message


[[folder:Landcraft]]

to:

[[folder:Landcraft]][[folder:Land Vehicles]]
27th Nov '16 9:50:43 PM Tank50us
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** This has only really been the case because of the one thing that Airborne Troops lacked that Regular Troops did not: Armor. Armored Vehicles have, since WorldWarTwo, become lighter, stronger, and faster. A Armored Vehicle weighing 15tons today has better protection, mobility, and firepower then any vehicle of the same weight class designed for Airborne Operations in Second World War. This ultimately means, that assuming that enemy air defense can be adequately suppressed, the carrier can make the drop, and the vehicle itself can survive being air-dropped, the Airborne Troops can have sufficient firepower exactly where they need it, as well as the armor to survive the battle from most expected threats. Even if the adversary sends their own tanks to respond, it means that there will be less tanks for the ground pounders to face.
7th Nov '16 9:34:40 PM TheWildWestPyro
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* The Luger P08 is absolutely gorgeous for a handgun, and is superbly machined and precisely fitted. That's why it was a ''terrible'' combat pistol. The toggle action is notoriously finicky and fails to cycle without the proper ammunition, and the tight tolerances means even a tiny amount of grit quickly jams it up. In both World Wars, the Luger worked fine as an officer's sidearm for shooting prisoners and deserters, but it didn't take long for the German army to notice how poorly suited the gun was for infantrymen and it was eventually replaced as standard issue by the boxier-looking but far more reliable Walther [=P38=], which was also quickly adopted by officers as a replacement for the Luger.
This list shows the last 10 events of 624. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=AwesomeButImpractical.Military