kikuyu1:


Everyone else,this battle was the turning point of the Pacific campaign. The Japs lost 20k and the US 7k during the August 1942 battle with 600 planes each destroyed. Until today the rusting hulls of sunken transports,destroyers and battleships (70 in all were sunk) litter the surrounding seas.

well i dont know about the presence of INA troops in the solomons campaign, INA became active in august 1942 , solomons campaign started in january 1942 . INA campaign is well documented , u can cross reference it. Japanese also did not trust the INA too much or had too much confidence on them, so reason why they were used in the indo burmese theater mainly becz the japanese knew their and the INA interests converged there, and not elsewhere.

INA fought in heavy numbers AFAIK in Burma and Malaysian theater only (in asia) , so i am confused here , japs agreement with INA was that , INA will contribute to their war efforts which directly involve attacking british india. they will not participate in other Japanese campaigns elsewhere

getting classified info on INA is hard , it is still a taboo in India due to possible domestic political and foreign geo political upheavals , also many classified/de-classified INA related docs r heavily redacted , it would be impossible to make any sense out of them.

plus if INA operated in solomons campaign , that info or any related info would be part of Japanese govt. archive

i have heard of solomon island giants.
hope someday we can get more concrete info on this.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rvgU3GdjjM


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVy7vdekVLc


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eI1b-YyrlWM

FGFA / Su-54 tactical bomber

very early 90s drdo AWACS attempts on the avro platform , unfortunately the platform crashed which led to closure of the program

nemesis2u:


well i dont know about the presence of INA troops in the solomons campaign, INA became active in august 1942 , solomons campaign started in january 1942 . INA campaign is well documented , u can cross reference it. Japanese also did not trust the INA too much or had too much confidence on them, so reason why they were used in the indo burmese theater mainly becz the japanese knew their and the INA interests converged there, and not elsewhere.

INA fought in heavy numbers AFAIK in Burma and Malaysian theater only (in asia) , so i am confused here , japs agreement with INA was that , INA will contribute to their war efforts which directly involve attacking british india. they will not participate in other Japanese campaigns elsewhere

getting classified info on INA is hard , it is still a taboo in India due to possible domestic political and foreign geo political upheavals , also many classified/de-classified INA related docs r heavily redacted , it would be impossible to make any sense out of them.

plus if INA operated in solomons campaign , that info or any related info would be part of Japanese govt. archive

i have heard of solomon island giants.
hope someday we can get more concrete info on this.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rvgU3GdjjM


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVy7vdekVLc


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eI1b-YyrlWM

My own sources swear that is the real fate of the INA boys in the Solomons. I always say this world isn't the way it seems;if people knew the reality they'd be mass cognitive shutdowns. When you actually think about it certain facts stand out:
-there are Giants in and around the Solomons
-many credible foreigners also vouch for this
-even in N America,the giant Sasquatch is believed to be a relict Hominoid
-unknown species including higher primates are still being found like the giant leopard eating chimp in the DRC

What he found was intriguing - a population of extremely large chimpanzees with their own distinct 'culture' and, indeed, a liking for the meat of big cats.
One was seen scavenging on the carcass of a leopard, although it is not known if the ape had killed the cat.
"The adult males do appear to be larger than the average chimpanzee male,"

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-468644/From-myth-reality--meet-chimps-eat-lions.html#ixzz4e7FOgflE
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Ideally,a back end,unofficial source to IJA war archives would clear the matter up. Imo,though I don't 'believe' in ideologies,faiths,doctrines or dogmas the INA,Imperial Japanese Army Giants story is as fascinating as it is true.

kikuyu1:


I've said it before-the world needs a twin turboprop attack craft like the old Pucara.



or OV 10.



The first one company to develop an iteration of these turbo props will make billions! Nemesis2u,any such development on your end on this matter?

u know i had a terrorist fuuking solution

what the countries fighting highly mobile terrorist scums, needs today is a low cost albeit innovation out of the box solution.

traditional thinking will only play into the hands of the terrorists.

the greatest casualty of war against terrorism is not the men/women but the economy of a country. terrorism is a long draw game , and the fuukers know it. as the costs rise countries r forced to negotiate one way or the other.

even if u a have a good turboprop , these come with highly expensive munitions and rockets, the foreign OEMs parade them as a means to earn ur hard earned money citing their efficiency, even though they themselves know that most of these r overkill's and outrageously expensive.

why should u pay pay more than a 1 dollar for sending a fuuking terrorist to hell , he does not even deserve 1 dollar to be spend on him.

my inspiration is the wart hog A-10

but we r going to be innovative ,

what i am proposing is a good high endurance turboprop , which good flight handling qualities and enough mass to absorb recoil among others.

now we take a turret ( 360 degree traversing) and fix it below the fuselage at the center-point. the aircraft fuselage will need to be be modified at the attachment points of the turret with necessary recoil dampers and such.

fix a dual feed 20mm caliber auto-cannon or even higher calibers if possible to the turret (within the limitations of the aircraft) which will pivot 180 degree in the vertical plane (imagine it in the minus Y axis)

fix a EO pod to the nose of the turboprop and slave it to the gun

for greatest efficiency a 2 seater will be best, the pilot , copilot/gunner will receive the same feed from the EO pod

the pilot will concentrate on flying above the reach of the ground based guns and circle the target area while the gunner will use the EO pod to scan for target , once located he will free the gun which will automatically aim/fix for the target as it is slaved to the EO POD , and will have the necessary ballistic calculations done simultaneously to achieve near 100 kill probability.

crucial role will be paid by the ammo selection , what i propose is one feeder with HE incendiary rounds with 1 tracer after every 5 rounds and the 2nd feeder with air burst type sub-munition releasing a cloud of tungsten cubes (much like AHEAD rounds but without the programmable fuze , it will come with ground proximity fuze) with 1 tracer round after every 5 rounds.

the beauty of this solution is that the aircraft will rarely loose the target since the turret is 360 degree rotating and the gun is pivoting 180 degrees vertically, any change in direction by the aircraft will be compensated by the counter rotation of the turret and pivoting of the gun, which means the gunner will always be able to maintain lock on his target/targets and keeping on engaging them a long as they r in range undeterred by the what the aircraft is doing in flight.

additionally 2 EO pods can be fitted , one for the pilot to help him search and locate targets and another slaved to the turret ( or installed on the turret itself).

and target selected by the pilot could be automatically feed to the turret EO pod , once the gunner finishes his current target he gets the location of his next target updated automatically.

on the pylons the turboprop will carry only the fuels tanks to maximize loiter time / endurance , and the addition weight saved will be used to carry extra ammo for the dual feed auto cannons.

turboprops firing PGMs is very expensive proposition

even dump rockets r not so accurate

if there r 10 technicals running about, do u think PGMs / rockets will the best option both economically and from the point of kill probability.

fixed guns/autocannons r available for turboprops but they require skilled and experienced pilots to conduct strafing runs, once u climb up u loose the targets (if u missed them) , also dives for strafing runs requires u to get in line with the target and lower ur altitude and which also reduces reaction time considerably , this jeopardizes safety, hampers situational awareness and decreases kill probability .

for my solution even if there r 10 technicals running about the aircraft simply needs to maintain the appropriate constant altitude while doing the necessary maneuvers like circling over the general target area, while the gunner with the 360 degree traversing turret together with the vertically 180 degree pivoting (downwards) gun will have all the necessary freedom of movement to maintain lock and engage his targets one by one.

also no technicals will be able to resist hit of a HE round 20mm onwards.

also groups of terrorists will be put down much more effectively by clouds of sub-munition from air burst rounds

or a combination of the 2 types.

so i give u ( theoretically ) a turboprop inspired from A10 warthog but without the fixed gun, but replaced by a gun system with 360 degree horizontal x 180 degree vertical freedom of movement to allow persistent, accurate and low cost target elimination.

no need to bother about expensive PGMs and even rockets, dumb or guided

i hope u all got the idea
is it good or wasted like the porn babes ?

nemesis2u:
FGFA / Su-54 tactical bomber

my first time of hearing about this aircraft.
any spec

kikuyu1:


Imo,you're the best poster here! You have real doable proposals and simple solutions-but then again you know your poo! Others would've lectured on a combi of Mwaris and 20 mn$ gunships. Ideally,it'd be a twin turbo;but can the Pucara/OV10 handle a 23mm 2 barrel or even a 30mm?

The WW2 Airacobra had a massive 37mm gun but it was fixed

I still see a need for dumb bombs and/or fixed gun/rockets;occasionally even these 5$ 'tards do dig in.

we must always try to learn from others mistakes rather than commit one ourselves and then learn were we went wrong, look at the F35 or the LCA even they tried to make these platforms fit every every possible role which ended up being the bane of these projects.

it is always best to make a specific purpose system to deal with a specific task , it is always handy to have a secondary role if possible , provided it is feasible especially if it is a expensive system.

but here we r dealing with a low cost system, so we can afford to have a specific role variant in addition to the normal variants.

both of them can then operated in tandem in light of the operational needs.

if u need to take out entrenched terrorists or blast fortified encampments then send in the normal variants loaded with PGMs and rockets etc.

but if u need to take out roving technicals and groups of mobile terrorists or relieve besieged defenders then send in ur customized variants.

or even send a combination of the two as per operational needs.

yes i agree with u that twin turboprops would be a better solution , in terms of safety, load and power needs.

however here i must mention the turret system and the gun combo has to be selected /designed first so that all the parameters like load bearing , recoil forces, stress and shear break points, undercarriage clearance , vibration levels etc r available first hand , and then based on these parameter the best suited turboprop be selected , which then will need to undergo strengthening of the fuselage and other necessary changes to allow installation of the turret gun combo and its operation with the desired performance.

much like how the A10 was designed around the main gun, similarly here the aircraft will be selected on the basis of suitability for the turret gun combo.

i dont see the need for a twin barrel / or a 37 mm caliber gun, IMO a single barrel 20 , 23 , 25mm dual feed auto cannon will be sufficient, the primary requirement in todays age is effects based warfare , u need to put shells accurately on the target, not all over the target. the concept of heavy overwhelming firepower is a thing of the past.

OODA loop is what we require ,
observe (through EO pods)
orient (maneuver into best firing position)
decide (get a fix, confirm , select weapon of engagement and prioritize the targets )
act (engage for kill/kills for one shot one kill at the minimum)

these is something 2 or more african countries can pool their resources together to modify a system to their specific needs.

giles14:
my first time of hearing about this aircraft.

any spec

this is my first too , so no info

drdo armored ambulance tracked vehicle

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhAEWjGS61g

proposed Ukrainian addons etc for their upgrade of arjun MBT for the IA. it was offered in 2014

nemesis2u:


u know i had a terrorist fuuking solution

what the countries fighting highly mobile terrorist scums, needs today is a low cost albeit innovation out of the box solution.

traditional thinking will only play into the hands of the terrorists.

the greatest casualty of war against terrorism is not the men/women but the economy of a country. terrorism is a long draw game , and the fuukers know it. as the costs rise countries r forced to negotiate one way or the other.

even if u a have a good turboprop , these come with highly expensive munitions and rockets, the foreign OEMs parade them as a means to earn ur hard earned money citing their efficiency, even though they themselves know that most of these r overkill's and outrageously expensive.

why should u pay pay more than a 1 dollar for sending a fuuking terrorist to hell , he does not even deserve 1 dollar to be spend on him.

my inspiration is the wart hog A-10

but we r going to be innovative ,

what i am proposing is a good high endurance turboprop , which good flight handling qualities and enough mass to absorb recoil among others.

now we take a turret ( 360 degree traversing) and fix it below the fuselage at the center-point. the aircraft fuselage will need to be be modified at the attachment points of the turret with necessary recoil dampers and such.

fix a dual feed 20mm caliber auto-cannon or even higher calibers if possible to the turret (within the limitations of the aircraft) which will pivot 180 degree in the vertical plane (imagine it in the minus Y axis)

fix a EO pod to the nose of the turboprop and slave it to the gun

for greatest efficiency a 2 seater will be best, the pilot , copilot/gunner will receive the same feed from the EO pod

the pilot will concentrate on flying above the reach of the ground based guns and circle the target area while the gunner will use the EO pod to scan for target , once located he will free the gun which will automatically aim/fix for the target as it is slaved to the EO POD , and will have the necessary ballistic calculations done simultaneously to achieve near 100 kill probability.

crucial role will be paid by the ammo selection , what i propose is one feeder with HE incendiary rounds with 1 tracer after every 5 rounds and the 2nd feeder with air burst type sub-munition releasing a cloud of tungsten cubes (much like AHEAD rounds but without the programmable fuze , it will come with ground proximity fuze) with 1 tracer round after every 5 rounds.

the beauty of this solution is that the aircraft will rarely loose the target since the turret is 360 degree rotating and the gun is pivoting 180 degrees vertically, any change in direction by the aircraft will be compensated by the counter rotation of the turret and pivoting of the gun, which means the gunner will always be able to maintain lock on his target/targets and keeping on engaging them a long as they r in range undeterred by the what the aircraft is doing in flight.

additionally 2 EO pods can be fitted , one for the pilot to help him search and locate targets and another slaved to the turret ( or installed on the turret itself).

and target selected by the pilot could be automatically feed to the turret EO pod , once the gunner finishes his current target he gets the location of his next target updated automatically.

on the pylons the turboprop will carry only the fuels tanks to maximize loiter time / endurance , and the addition weight saved will be used to carry extra ammo for the dual feed auto cannons.

turboprops firing PGMs is very expensive proposition

even dump rockets r not so accurate

if there r 10 technicals running about, do u think PGMs / rockets will the best option both economically and from the point of kill probability.

fixed guns/autocannons r available for turboprops but they require skilled and experienced pilots to conduct strafing runs, once u climb up u loose the targets (if u missed them) , also dives for strafing runs requires u to get in line with the target and lower ur altitude and which also reduces reaction time considerably , this jeopardizes safety, hampers situational awareness and decreases kill probability .

for my solution even if there r 10 technicals running about the aircraft simply needs to maintain the appropriate constant altitude while doing the necessary maneuvers like circling over the general target area, while the gunner with the 360 degree traversing turret together with the vertically 180 degree pivoting (downwards) gun will have all the necessary freedom of movement to maintain lock and engage his targets one by one.

also no technicals will be able to resist hit of a HE round 20mm onwards.

also groups of terrorists will be put down much more effectively by clouds of sub-munition from air burst rounds

or a combination of the 2 types.

so i give u ( theoretically ) a turboprop inspired from A10 warthog but without the fixed gun, but replaced by a gun system with 360 degree horizontal x 180 degree vertical freedom of movement to allow persistent, accurate and low cost target elimination.

no need to bother about expensive PGMs and even rockets, dumb or guided

i hope u all got the idea
is it good or wasted like the porn babes ?

No bombs? Nemesis? Worst fire support platform.


Looks like someone has been reading Rhodesian stuff.

I THINK THIS IS THE BEST PLACE FOR THIS. Black Nazis! Yes,there were quite a number,in the hundreds,max,maybe 1500-200 in the triservices but not to my knowledge in the SS.



[img]http://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQGk_HW1txJgnu2k5RPK2l2RuAntH08gZ00ckTDsoL1f4GVOfwk[/img]



Many volunteered from defeated French forces,though I suspect quite a few were survivors of the Original Black Catholics,(a long story!)

N Asians and Indians also wore the German uniform

[img]http://1.bp..com/_YYMeAu4i7gA/SxOD7xTMUxI/AAAAAAAAHIE/QAEMcSDXc3Q/s1600/foreign-soldiers-german-nazi-army-wehrmacht-ww2-second-world-war-amazing-incredible-dramtic-pics-pictures-photos-image-japanese-fighters.jpg[/img]

[img]http://3.bp..com/_YYMeAu4i7gA/SxOEHXCkb3I/AAAAAAAAHIU/x5kWio882SY/s1600/foreign-soldiers-german-nazi-army-wehrmacht-ww2-second-world-war-amazing-incredible-dramtic-pics-pictures-photos-image-koreans.jpg[/img]

[img]http://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSwAqxYwDo0nFxsOc2LKAFZ-fJKKRE3KKkE9irzI_ekYhVcPN8Gew[/img]

But then at least 150k Jews fought for Germany.

More than four million people received the decoration. But there was one fact about him that makes the recommendation remarkable: he was Jewish

ALL COMMONLY ACCEPTED NARRATIVES ARE BS!! Investigate everything-never believe anything!

MikeCZA:
No bombs? Nemesis? Worst fire support platform.


Looks like someone has been reading Rhodesian stuff.

i can assure u no Rhodesian inspiration , but if u still consider it to be so , i would consider it as an honor , Rhodesian politically were on the wrong side but their military prowess / exploits r legendary.

FYI for any worthy ************ Rhodesian ops etc r always part of study

anyways what i wrote is based indirectly on a study which is officially under wraps. (something to do with economics of war)
no money no war
u run out of money u lose war

any ways did u read my post completely ?
or get to what i was aiming for ?

i proposed a cost effective precision kill platform not a fire support platform.

i was seeking to address

1.economics of scale (spend the least amount per terrorists killed) for the said weapon system

2.EFFECTS BASED approach that is use minimum force via precision kill rather than rely on overwhelming power which leads to high costs, slowdown in operational tempo, ties down valuable resources, wastes valuable time etc

3.the OODA LOOP where a single weapon system can be much easily integrated into the loop with regard to the said carrier platform without much hassle and maximum efficiency.

4.targets (terrorists/technicals) in concern and optimal and cheapest weapons to deal with same. u must be aware that the kinetic effect of a high velocity HE 20mm round or any higher caliber precisely striking its target will achieve the same effect in comparison to that of say a 100lb or a 250 lb guided bomb bursting 50m away from the target (most guided bombs have CEP around 50 or so) so using a 50,000-100,000 $ bomb versus a a few rounds costing 50$ each , does it make sense?

5.again if u have to eliminate 10 or more technicals who r widely dispersed , do u think bombs/rocket loadout of a turboprop will be sufficient, u need to have specialized laser designation pods plus the bombs will need to have the capability to hit moving targets, otherwise ur kill ratio will be poor vis a vis the cost incurred. but if u have the turret gun combo precision kill system ur not restricted by load out or lack of precision.

6.a turboprop with bombs and rockets will need to strafe its targets which has its disadvantages which i mentioned in my previous post , but with my 360 degree horizontal x 180 degree vertical freedom of movement turret gun combo precision kill system , the aircraft need not engage in any strafing runs or any combat maneuver , all it needs is to hold the optimal altitude and keep circling the designated target area ie i have proposed a loitering weapon system which is advantageous to kill mobile and dispersed targets. plus it will be able to fire at its targets for far longer than in a conventional strafing attack.


come on now , i am thinking it would have been best to post pics of chicks instead of this

a new out of the loop idea or a repacked/innovative old idea always brings in doubt/naysayers , but then south africans / Rhodesian were masters of these out of the box thinking/ideas in the first place, for out of the box trying situations.

ru really a southie?

kikuyu1:
I THINK THIS IS THE BEST PLACE FOR THIS. Black Nazis! Yes,there were quite a number,in the hundreds,max,maybe 1500-200 in the triservices but not to my knowledge in the SS.

ALL COMMONLY ACCEPTED NARRATIVES ARE BS!! Investigate everything-never believe anything!

be it for the axis or the allies the sad fact is people from africa , asia etc laid down their lives for a war that had nothing to do with them.(atleast directly)

if u look at it from a different perspective , it will strike us hard that if hitler did not start WW2, most probably africa and asia would have still be slaving under the Europeans

in the best case scenarios our independence efforts would have been bloodier mostly on our sides.

Lockheed AC-130 gunship

some local bmp derivatives

pic 1 105mm light tank

pic 2 ATGM based tank destroyer

pic 3 mortar carrier

pic 4 105mm self propelled howitzer

nemesis2u:
Lockheed AC-130 gunship

White House down. Olympus has fallen.

some local bmp derivatives

pic 1 bmp modified for airborne operations

pic 2 armored engineering reconnaissance vehicle

pic 3 armored amphibious dozer

pic 4 armored ambulance tracked vehicle

tdayof:

White House down. Olympus has fallen.

lol

more like

pants down , the testicles has fallen

tdayof:

White House down. Olympus has fallen.

AC-130 Spooky

I will forgive the Turcano if we get just one of those...BHT Game Over.

nemesis2u:


lol

more like

pants down , the testicles has fallen

What are your favorite military/intelligence movies?

unclezuma:


AC-130 Spooky

I will forgive the Turcano if we get just one of those...BHT Game Over.

They'll need to fly low to engage BHT. They're more vulnerable to AA fire which means we will need them to fly night missions more.

Punchline : Uncle Sam won't sell.

nemesis2u:


i can assure u no Rhodesian inspiration , but if u still consider it to be so , i would consider it as an honor , Rhodesian politically were on the wrong side but their military prowess / exploits r legendary.

FYI for any worthy ************ Rhodesian ops etc r always part of study

anyways what i wrote is based indirectly on a study which is officially under wraps. (something to do with economics of war)
no money no war
u run out of money u lose war

any ways did u read my post completely ?
or get to what i was aiming for ?

i proposed a cost effective precision kill platform not a fire support platform.

i was seeking to address

1.economics of scale (spend the least amount per terrorists killed) for the said weapon system

2.EFFECTS BASED approach that is use minimum force via precision kill rather than rely on overwhelming power which leads to high costs, slowdown in operational tempo, ties down valuable resources, wastes valuable time etc

3.the OODA LOOP where a single weapon system can be much easily integrated into the loop with regard to the said carrier platform without much hassle and maximum efficiency.

4.targets (terrorists/technicals) in concern and optimal and cheapest weapons to deal with same. u must be aware that the kinetic effect of a high velocity HE 20mm round or any higher caliber precisely striking its target will achieve the same effect in comparison to that of say a 100lb or a 250 lb guided bomb bursting 50m away from the target (most guided bombs have CEP around 50 or so) so using a 50,000-100,000 $ bomb versus a a few rounds costing 50$ each , does it make sense?

5.again if u have to eliminate 10 or more technicals who r widely dispersed , do u think bombs/rocket loadout of a turboprop will be sufficient, u need to have specialized laser designation pods plus the bombs will need to have the capability to hit moving targets, otherwise ur kill ratio will be poor vis a vis the cost incurred. but if u have the turret gun combo precision kill system ur not restricted by load out or lack of precision.

6.a turboprop with bombs and rockets will need to strafe its targets which has its disadvantages which i mentioned in my previous post , but with my 360 degree horizontal x 180 degree vertical freedom of movement turret gun combo precision kill system , the aircraft need not engage in any strafing runs or any combat maneuver , all it needs is to hold the optimal altitude and keep circling the designated target area ie i have proposed a loitering weapon system which is advantageous to kill mobile and dispersed targets. plus it will be able to fire at its targets for far longer than in a conventional strafing attack.


come on now , i am thinking it would have been best to post pics of chicks instead of this

a new out of the loop idea or a repacked/innovative old idea always brings in doubt/naysayers , but then south africans / Rhodesian were masters of these out of the box thinking/ideas in the first place, for out of the box trying situations.

ru really a southie?

1. Two words: The Bush.

Here's an exciting read: http://www.jrtwood.com/article_fireforce.asp

tdayof:


They'll need to fly low to engage BHT. They're more vulnerable to AA fire which means we will need them to fly night missions more.

Punchline : Uncle Sam won't sell.

One day they will bro... You seen how they light up battlefields plus they come heavily armoured like they are the A-10 Warthog's older brother.

Long dream though, a combo of the two will be any Frontline commanders wet dreams.

tdayof:


What are your favorite military/intelligence movies?

believe me from what i know in real life most of time intelligence work is about scratching ur backs , unintended dozing , eating very very slowly , examining you finger nails , showing unwarranted interest in the immediate local animal life from cockroaches to ants .
same for military but a bit more exciting depending of the scale of mission and profile, mostly towards the end but minus the heroics.

so i dont watch these , but my favorites r

my wife is a gangster 1 2 3
my tutor friend 1 2
the terminal
kung fu panda
Madagascar ------ its time to move it ! move it! its time to moveeeee itttttt !
Constantine
van Helsinke
ant man this one is a military movie
clover
diary of june
gangster lover
hitman this one is an intelligence movie
jane got a gun
innocent steps
kiss me kill me
no mercy for the rude (i was sorely tempted today)
old boy
pain
shield of straw
the plan man
the devine move
the man from nowhere the last hand to hand action sequence will give an insight , watch this
etc
etc
many names i am not able to recollect

some local bmp derivatives

pic 1 Armour recovery vehicle

pic 2 command and control vehicle

pic 3 akash sam carrier

pic 4 rajendra radar carrier

MikeCZA:


1. Two words: The Bush.

Here's an exciting read: http://www.jrtwood.com/article_fireforce.asp

thanks for the link, a really interesting read

infact after the hasty quick read i recognized a tactic we use/used to get the terrorists hiding in forests/hill , surprisingly the Rhodesian used it previously , who knows maybe they inspired it or maybe not.

lets say early morning is a good time to catch some fish

damn the RRAF heli pilots had iron nerves , Americans gave substance to the word air cavalry , but these fellows sort of ripped it apart and wrote their own rules .

edit : lol i read it 3 times

do post more links if u know of it

thank u again

nemesis2u:


thanks for the link, a really interesting read

infact after the hasty quick read i recognized a tactic we use/used to get the terrorists hiding in forests/hill , surprisingly the Rhodesian used it previously , who knows maybe they inspired it or maybe not.

lets say early morning is a good time to catch some fish

damn the RRAF heli pilots had iron nerves , Americans gave substance to the word air cavalry , but these fellows sort of ripped it apart and wrote their own rules .

edit : lol i read it 3 times

do post more links if u know of it

thank u again

Now can we add bombs and rockets to your design?

I'll share some in the future.

Russia Tests its own Tomahawks Kalibr-NK Cruise Missile





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjiuJx6jMLY

MikeCZA:
Now can we add bombs and rockets to your design?

I'll share some in the future.

lol u still dont get it

i read u the whole Lliad , and u still ask me who helen was

the point being , did u yourself read the link u provided or grasp the significance of what i proposed and the effort of the rhodnesians towards the same (of course limited by meager options available to them )

let me quote some text to jog ur memory

"Under Rhodesian conditions, when loaded with troops, the Alouette would fly at 65 knots (or 75 mph) and, with a light load, at 84 knots (or 97 mph). At 84 knots, its range was 242 miles (210 nautical miles). The Alouette III SA316B 'K-Car' gunship, armed with a 20mm cannon and ammunition, and a crew of three, would have an endurance of an hour and a quarter to an hour and a half when loaded with 600 lbs of fuel."

"In February 1974 a dedicated Alouette III gunship, the K-Car, was ready for trials. Its rear seats had been replaced with an armoured seat for the gunner positioned to fire a Matra MG 151 20mm cannon out of the rear port doorway. The cannon was mounted on a French manufactured special floor fitting to cater for its weight and recoil."

"To solve the problem of soft ground and trees, other guns were tried. Twin Browning .5-inch heavy machine-guns were fitted but were abandoned because of their weight and because the .5 bullet was not a cannon shell so a direct hit had to be scored to kill or wound, which could be achieved with the lighter .303 round. Later, 1979, some K-Cars were equipped with four Mk 2 .303 Browning machine-guns, which were slaved to a remote hand operated sighting and hydraulic driver system code-named of 'Kat-oog' [Cat's eye]. Out of this project would come a highly successful helmet sight."

"The four-gun fit was mostly used in the role of a second K-Car. The Dalmatian K-Cars achieved devastating results in 1979, flying at tree top height and, with .303 ammunition freely available and with each gun firing at a cyclic rate of 1,150 rounds a minute. The Dalmatian K-Cars were used to drive the enemy into the open where they became targets for the 20mm."


"The arming of the G-Car went back to September-October 1965 when investigations began into the feasibility of mounting the FN 7.62mm MAG. This was done and the weapon was evaluated in early November. Modifications to the standard Army weapon were minimal. The bipod and the wooden butt were removed. The rear buffer spring housing was padded and a short wooden handle projecting to the left of the weapon was added. The normal aperture sight was retained. The results of the trials were not spectacular. Modifications to the sighting system progressed to a wire ring and bead sight to the GM2 Reflector Gunsight, and finally to the Collimateur Lightweight Reflector Sight which was used thereafter. The MAG mounting progressed from a simple post to a fitting which accommodated the spent cartridge cases and ammunition belts and which limited the weapon's travel to prevent accidental damage to the aircraft. The weapon was fitted with a padded chest plate and twin handgrips to improve the handling and steadiness of aim."

"Because the drag on the belts reduced the cyclic rate of fire of the MAGs to 400 rounds a minute, the Rhodesian G-Cars were re-armed with the faster firing Mk2 .303 Brownings on twin mountings in 1976. The G-Cars carried 500 rounds per gun. When the South African Pumas were deployed, they were armed with twin side-firing .5 or .303 inch Brownings. "

etc

now tell me rhodesians with their limited resources put so much time and effort for what, trying to integrate cannons and higher caliber MGs?

i have done the same, but mine provides a better , more compact, easy to use , precise and effective solution, a integrated ALL IN ONE solution with unmatched capabilities contrary to fixed, limited firing arc MGs/cannons (either on the doorways or pylons)

as i said to to kikuyu1, other normal variants armed with bombs and rockets will also accompany my version in fire support role as per operational needs , something which the Rhodesians also did .

nemesis2u:


lol u still dont get it

i read u the whole Lliad , and u still ask me who helen was

the point being , did u yourself read the link u provided or grasp the significance of what i proposed and the effort of the rhodnesians towards the same (of course limited by meager options available to them )

let me quote some text to jog ur memory

"Under Rhodesian conditions, when loaded with troops, the Alouette would fly at 65 knots (or 75 mph) and, with a light load, at 84 knots (or 97 mph). At 84 knots, its range was 242 miles (210 nautical miles). The Alouette III SA316B 'K-Car' gunship, armed with a 20mm cannon and ammunition, and a crew of three, would have an endurance of an hour and a quarter to an hour and a half when loaded with 600 lbs of fuel."

"In February 1974 a dedicated Alouette III gunship, the K-Car, was ready for trials. Its rear seats had been replaced with an armoured seat for the gunner positioned to fire a Matra MG 151 20mm cannon out of the rear port doorway. The cannon was mounted on a French manufactured special floor fitting to cater for its weight and recoil."

"To solve the problem of soft ground and trees, other guns were tried. Twin Browning .5-inch heavy machine-guns were fitted but were abandoned because of their weight and because the .5 bullet was not a cannon shell so a direct hit had to be scored to kill or wound, which could be achieved with the lighter .303 round. Later, 1979, some K-Cars were equipped with four Mk 2 .303 Browning machine-guns, which were slaved to a remote hand operated sighting and hydraulic driver system code-named of 'Kat-oog' [Cat's eye]. Out of this project would come a highly successful helmet sight."

"The four-gun fit was mostly used in the role of a second K-Car. The Dalmatian K-Cars achieved devastating results in 1979, flying at tree top height and, with .303 ammunition freely available and with each gun firing at a cyclic rate of 1,150 rounds a minute. The Dalmatian K-Cars were used to drive the enemy into the open where they became targets for the 20mm."


"The arming of the G-Car went back to September-October 1965 when investigations began into the feasibility of mounting the FN 7.62mm MAG. This was done and the weapon was evaluated in early November. Modifications to the standard Army weapon were minimal. The bipod and the wooden butt were removed. The rear buffer spring housing was padded and a short wooden handle projecting to the left of the weapon was added. The normal aperture sight was retained. The results of the trials were not spectacular. Modifications to the sighting system progressed to a wire ring and bead sight to the GM2 Reflector Gunsight, and finally to the Collimateur Lightweight Reflector Sight which was used thereafter. The MAG mounting progressed from a simple post to a fitting which accommodated the spent cartridge cases and ammunition belts and which limited the weapon's travel to prevent accidental damage to the aircraft. The weapon was fitted with a padded chest plate and twin handgrips to improve the handling and steadiness of aim."

"Because the drag on the belts reduced the cyclic rate of fire of the MAGs to 400 rounds a minute, the Rhodesian G-Cars were re-armed with the faster firing Mk2 .303 Brownings on twin mountings in 1976. The G-Cars carried 500 rounds per gun. When the South African Pumas were deployed, they were armed with twin side-firing .5 or .303 inch Brownings. "

etc

now tell me rhodesians with their limited resources put so much time and effort for what, trying to integrate cannons and higher caliber MGs?

i have done the same, but mine provides a better , more compact, easy to use , precise and effective solution, a integrated solution with unmatched capabilities contrary to fixed, limited firing arc MGs/cannons (either on the doorways or pylons)

as i said to to kikuyu1, other normal variants armed with bombs and rockets will also accompany my version in fire support role as per operational needs , something which the Rhodesians also did .

As you lack funds you approach me then we put rockets and bombs on that baby! MORE DAKKA!

Anyway! There's an Israeli system( Airborne Robotic Weapon System) for helicopters which is carried inside a utility helicopter it deploys a gatling gun when needed under the belly of the helicopter. The gun can traverse 360 degrees.

Say you take the Robotic Weapon System without the robotic arm and mount it on the belly of the Paramount's Mwari which has a remove-able belly pod.

Here you have system with a: Sensor ball, Counter measures, a gatling gun, hard points to carry fuel tanks, bombs, gun pods, missiles, rockets etc. MORE DAKKA!!

Now we call sell this system like hot cakes!

The Rhodesians were applying lessons and tactics learned/used by the Portuguese in Angola. I'll share a paper on special forces if I find it from the Portuguese in Angola, Rhodesians and later Safers.