How about a no-clog or reduced-clog toilet global?
gali:
May I brag a little bit? The Israeli Merckava Tank is the best in the world for now...:).
DuckSpeak:
Quote from: gali on 2005 August 10, 13:12:30
May I brag a little bit? The Israeli Merckava Tank is the best in the world for now...:).
Nooo, it is definitly the Leopard 2 A6. ;) Canada (where I live) uses the outdated version of this tank - the Leopard 1. It will soon become used as they are scrapping them - and not replacing with any other tank either.
Though I might add most modern nations are working on new tank designs, except for Russia, where tank design develops YOU!
Quote from: J. M. Pescado on 2005 August 10, 06:18:44
Quote from: DuckSpeak on 2005 August 10, 04:39:30
American tanks were quite efficient IMO but they had no respect for them at all.
I wouldn't say they were EFFICIENT. Cheap, maybe. Buck for buck, they were certainly a match, but there's only one problem: Every time a tank gets destroyed in the process of matching them buck for buck, PEOPLE DIE. This is not something that is good for morale.
The Shermans did die in hordes due to their pathetic armor but I believe they had quite impressive armour penetration due to the new types of ammunitions used such as the fin stabilized armour piercers - and reliability. If I remember correctly around 200-400 out of 1300 Koenigstigers made were abandoned due to mechanical failure.
SimsHost:
Well, this will teach me the hazards of snooping around More Awesome Than You while I have Solidworks running on my other machine.
Is this the sort of shape you have in mind, JM?
Now, the bad news is that this is a CAD model and I don't know how to get it from a Solidworks part file into a .obj file that MilkShape can read. If there's a Milkshaper around who knows how to import an IGES file, we might even have an electronic path. If not, it's just a reference drawing. :)
Oddysey:
Quote from: J. M. Pescado on 2005 August 10, 06:18:44
Quote from: DuckSpeak on 2005 August 10, 04:39:30
American tanks were quite efficient IMO but they had no respect for them at all.
I wouldn't say they were EFFICIENT. Cheap, maybe. Buck for buck, they were certainly a match, but there's only one problem: Every time a tank gets destroyed in the process of matching them buck for buck, PEOPLE DIE. This is not something that is good for morale.
Ah, the almighty dollar. Seems the army hasn't really learned that lesson, eh? What with that business of the humvees armored with salvage scrap metal and all. Reminds me of Catch-22, and Milo Minderbinder/bender whatever his name was. Business + Military = bad. As in, chocolate covered egyptian cotton and attacking your own base bad.
American's are great at blowing stuff up, and great at doing it from great distances with fancy equipment, but very bad at keeping stuff from being blown up. This is the Navy's fault, but that's another rant.
Oh, yeah. I've got some sort of insane format conversion program. "3D Object Converter" I think it is? Anyway, it converts Hash AM ".mdl" files to ".obj" files, as well as about 200 other things. There's a lot of shareware and freeware that does similiar stuff. Probably something out there that'll do it. I'm thinking about having a crack at it, but I have no idea what to do with the file to get it into the game. Work on that, maybe.
J. M. Pescado:
Quote from: DuckSpeak on 2005 August 10, 14:18:03
The Shermans did die in hordes due to their pathetic armor but I believe they had quite impressive armour penetration due to the new types of ammunitions used such as the fin stabilized armour piercers - and reliability. If I remember correctly around 200-400 out of 1300 Koenigstigers made were abandoned due to mechanical failure.
As I recall, no, this isn't really true either. Shermans had a puny gun that was consistently incapable of penetrating the armor of enemy tanks, and crews could routinely fire at point blank range only to have the shot bounce off and then get wasted. Stories abound of a single German tank taking on a half dozen Shermans and annihilating all of them.
Quote from: SimsHost on 2005 August 10, 15:00:04
Now, the bad news is that this is a CAD model and I don't know how to get it from a Solidworks part file into a .obj file that MilkShape can read. If there's a Milkshaper around who knows how to import an IGES file, we might even have an electronic path. If not, it's just a reference drawing. :)
Not quite. The bowl is more round, about 14", the blocky tank on the back is thinner on the sides, even with the bowl instead of thicker than it, and fatter, and the bowl rim itself is somewhat thicker and more solid as well. This one looks kinda thin.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page