Jump to content
tanknet.org

Inhapi

Members
  • Content Count

    684
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Inhapi

  • Rank
    Wielder of the Unicorn Hat

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    Belgium
  1. yes in Belgium we got deliveries, with much Chinese propanganda, of mouth masks (we paid for them ofc), which after testing in labo's proved to be less than useless .... so much for that So your Gov have bought some goods from China that on arrival turned out low-quality and dangerous. Was some testing done prior to the deal? Was some kind of investigation started? I do not mean to accuse your officials, but here in Russia we got plenty of cases of officials buying something from China that turned up to be of extremely low quality - and following investigation indicating them deliberatel
  2. Yes they did. I don't know about the Dunquerques main turrets, but the secondary quads were unsuccesful (overcomplicated, ROF far below expected, fragile), which caused the switch to 152 mm triples in the Richelieus,altough because these had to be DP guns , the 130 mm calibre was intially preferred, when it became clear that the quads of the Dunquerques were not expected to be fully debugged in the forseeable future (if ever). OFC a lot of the problems with the quad 130 mm turrets could also be due to the design for a DP turret ( a first in France), which was another step up in design problems
  3. yes in Belgium we got deliveries, with much Chinese propanganda, of mouth masks (we paid for them ofc), which after testing in labo's proved to be less than useless .... so much for that
  4. Corinthian: depending on the size of telescope you use, If you want to go to a remote location for photographin, the HEQ 5 might be the coice for you. sure the EQ 6 will give you more payload capacity and you can never have a mount that is to high in capacity for your telescope, but the HEQ5 is much more manageable than an EQ 6 and its capacity is not that much lower. Also the HEQ 5 is generally very popular, so you sould get a good price for it on the used market (at least here in Europe) if you ever want to upgrade. The general rule is that id you want to do photgraphy, your rig has to stay
  5. I had the same issues with my el cheapo reflector. I recently (as in just a few days ago) read that adding a Barlow might help in the focus. I certainly did that using a 2x Barlow and my setup focused more-or-less. Try adding a Barlow. Apparently, reflectors do have issues with focusing when using a camera. One other way is to move the mirror inside to shorten the focal length but that would mean doing surgery to the telescope. JamesR: my new telescope is about to be shipped from the UK. I ordered it from FLO. I also ordered the ASIAir Pro from Optcorp.com. So excited to get both! Add
  6. Imho the thing that would have made most difference (especially later on the Eastern front) would to Equip Italian (and Romanian and Bulgarian divisions for that matter) with sufficient good AT guns. But then the German army was short on these too. At least they could have given the Italians the designs for these things and assist in starting up production. but the Germans were always overprotective when it came to sharing their own military tech with its allies, and when it did so, it charged ludicrous prices.... I wonder what could be made out of the Italian mediums in a sort of Marder li
  7. Mounting guns in the same cradle has far more disadvantages than simply the "elevation issue". The thing is that you can only: either fire at the rate when all the guns are reloaded, even if one gun has mechanical problems and fires slower or fire salvos at the rate of the (say two out of three properly working guns) but with partial salvoes. As an aside of the latter solution, you will not have a good chance of getting a malfunctioning gun into action in reasonable time, since it is elevating and depressing with the others all the time. On top of that, one hit on the common cradle is far more
  8. re quads: I guess it is multiple causes: 1. up to that time nobody had built a quad and so the first generation (and only the French had advanced designs of them but then for capital ships) of treaty cruisers did not get them because they were needed fast, even if someone really did want quad turrets. 2. After the first generation, we see designs evolving but not jumping in a revolutionary way, seems like every nation was "refining their initial 8" 10k tons design. (the largest juump was made by the US by going from real tinclads to heavier armourd ones, but the basic layout of the ship st
  9. yes, this is often the sad thing that happens to private collections after the death of the owner :-(
  10. Wow, is Cable television over there always presented so nerve wraking....that voice, that tone, the intonation.....aaaaarg :-) It really freaks you out after a while. Every word must be made to sound world shocking. :-)
  11. Why did they let it balloon into the medium class ? I always thought the original (?) concept (better armour than existing lights and a capable 6pdr gun) was rather good. Not really sure, all that Hunnicutt says in "Stuart" is that the hull castings ended up being thicker than specified, so production errors were part of the problem. I guess adding the cost of its long development and frequent redesigns + building a large factory to turn them out like hot buns results in the few vehicles that were actually built being perhaps the most expensive tanks ever.... I guess if they had st
×
×
  • Create New...