# Saving Private Ryan - Tank Busters



## DAVIDICUS (May 14, 2005)

Those (probably all of you) who have seen Saving Private Ryan will recall that at the end, a German Tiger is bearing down on Tom Hanks character when suddenly, the tank is destroyed by a P-51. Matt Danon's character exclaims, "They're tank busters, P-51's" or something to that effect. 

P-51's as tank busters?


----------



## mosquitoman (May 14, 2005)

Stranger things have happened...


----------



## Soren (May 14, 2005)

Well P-51's could carry Rockets, so maby the grunts on the ground referred to these as "Tankbusters".


----------



## KraziKanuK (May 14, 2005)

Don't forget the claim that P-47s could take out Tigers with their 50s by bouncing the bullets off the ground into the belly of the Tiger.


----------



## Soren (May 14, 2005)




----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 14, 2005)

I got the impression that it was a bomb that was dropped on the Tiger in the movie. Shouldn't the plane have been a Typhoon or Thunderbolt though?

What do you mean .50's can't bounce off the ground under a tank and put it out of commission? It happened all the time.


----------



## Nonskimmer (May 14, 2005)

KraziKanuK said:


> Don't forget the claim that P-47s could take out Tigers with their 50s by bouncing the bullets off the ground into the belly of the Tiger.


Uh-huh.


----------



## mosquitoman (May 14, 2005)

Lucky shot if they did, a 500 pounder waqs probably the way that tiger was taken out


----------



## lesofprimus (May 14, 2005)

I've never regarded the P-51D as a "Tank Buster"... 

Escort Fighter???? 

Yup.........

Oh, and BTW, Matt Damon is a little girlish Queer-boy, who wears a garter belt every other Sunday....


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 15, 2005)

Please don't tell us how you know this.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 15, 2005)

Perhaps they were actually A-36's, the ground attack version of the P-51?


----------



## lesofprimus (May 15, 2005)

Dave,
Ben Afleck told me, through his agent of course......... He and Matt have had a "Falling Out..."

They even returned their Promise Rings........


----------



## plan_D (May 15, 2005)

It's quite amazing [and ing] that they tried to pass Matt Damon off as being in the 506th PIR of 101st Airborne. As if that wuss could do what those lads did. 

.50s would hardly be able to destroy a Tiger, even with deflection shots to the under-side. That happened to lighter tanks such as the Pz.IV and below. 
20 mm would probably do considerable damage to the underside of a Tiger and Panther though.


----------



## Soren (May 15, 2005)

lesofprimus said:


> I've never regarded the P-51D as a "Tank Buster"...
> 
> Escort Fighter????
> 
> Yup.........



Me neither, but the grunts on the ground back then would call all planes coming in with rockets blazing "Tankbusters". (Especially if they actually busted some tanks  )


----------



## lesofprimus (May 15, 2005)

Agreed on all fronts....


----------



## KraziKanuK (May 15, 2005)

cheddar cheese said:


> Perhaps they were actually A-36's, the ground attack version of the P-51?



The A-36s were in the MTO with the 27th and 86th FBG. Also with the 311th FBG in India.

A-36s flew 23,373 combat sorties, dropping some 8000t of bombs, shooting down 84 EAs for the loss of 177 a/c to enemy action. That is 132 sorties per loss. Who says the P-51 was susceptable to ground fire?

It is wishful thinking if one thinks a 20mm wil do damage to the bottom of a Tiger/Panther with at least 25mm of armour to penetrate.


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 15, 2005)

In the movie, it was clearly an American P-51D.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 15, 2005)

> Who says the P-51 was susceptable to ground fire?


Me........


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (May 15, 2005)

cheddar cheese said:


> Perhaps they were actually A-36's, the ground attack version of the P-51?




No, they had the bubble canopy, not the "cage"/Malcolm hood.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 15, 2005)

GrG, ur avatar is Kaputz.....


----------



## plan_D (May 15, 2005)

You're kidding me, KK. The under-armour of a Tiger or Panther would fall easily to the bombardment of several 20 mm rounds. This isn't one round we're talking about, this is a mass of high velocity 20 mm rounds. 

The A-10 only carries a 30mm cannon under it's nose but it makes up for it with the mass amount of lead those 8 barrels can throw out in a short space of time. 

The amount of 20mm rounds makes up for their lack of penertration. The rpm wasn't enough to penertrate the top armour of the Tiger or Panther but the weak underside would be punched through in no time. 

Remember, armour gets weaker with each hit! It's like standing on an undamaged can then tapping it, what could hold you before crumples away because the structure has been weakened.


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 15, 2005)

I agree with KK.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 15, 2005)

Unfortunatly, ue agreeing with the wrong guy... There are gun camera footages showing this very thing happening... U can see the ricochettes bouncing off and around the tank, and then boom!!!!

Rounds penetrated the soft under armor and combusted the rounds stored inside..... Not a very nice way to go.........

There are several other members here in good standing who will verify these claims, including PlanD...


----------



## Soren (May 15, 2005)

Eeerrr, what are we talking about here ?

How would rounds from an aircraft 'directly' hit the underside of a tank ? 

If the tank is standing on a brick or cement road, the rounds 'could' bounce off the road and up onto the tanks underbelly. But by striking the road the rounds loose well over 60-70% of their energy, making it impossible for them to penetrate the underbelly, even if there are multiple hits.

The Gun-cam footage of tanks exploding in a shower of sparks are not "Tigers" being pounded, but smaller and thinner armored Panzers who are being hit directly on their weak top armor by high-power 20mm AP rounds.


----------



## plan_D (May 15, 2005)

It is well known throughout the armoured forces from World War 2 and the Allied air forces that rounds could be bounced up underneath the enemy tank. 

I will admit that .50 cal had no chance of destroying a Tiger, even from underneath. A barrage of 20mm however would, a constant battering received to a small area would eventually collapse the armour because with each hit the armour would weaken, then eventually it would cave in. 

That was often how tanks were destroyed by anything, very rarely were German tanks destroyed in one hit by anything. It was the constant battering from enemy shells that eventually collapsed the armour.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 15, 2005)

> I will admit that .50 cal had no chance of destroying a Tiger, even from underneath. A barrage of 20mm however would


Yup.......


----------



## Maestro (May 15, 2005)

I'm not an expert in tanks, but I agree with Plan_D. What he said sounds logical.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 15, 2005)

> The Gun-cam footage of tanks exploding in a shower of sparks are not "Tigers" being pounded, but smaller and thinner armored Panzers who are being hit directly on their weak top armor by high-power 20mm AP rounds.


Two completely different footages......... I know the difference between 20mm and .50 cal impacts on armor, and can readily tell the difference between a panzer and a tiger.... But pointing it out was the correct thing to do....


----------



## Soren (May 15, 2005)

Plan_D a 20mm Hispano AP shell could accounting for the extra momentum of the plane, penetrate the Tigers top-armor with a direct hit, but never the bellly ! As for reaching the belly of the tank, the projectile would have to hit hard pavement first wich takes off almost all the energy of the pojectile, reducing its penetrative effectiveness to that of a normal .30 cal AP round. And I think we can agree that nomatter how many .30 cal rounds you fire at a Tiger, it won't penetrate ! 

Fact is the guns from an aircraft can't hit the belly of a tank 'directly', wich is what is needed if you ever want to penetrate 25mm of armor with a 20mm gun.


----------



## plan_D (May 15, 2005)

I'm not saying this happened often, Soren. The AP 20mm shell could never be brought down to the effectiveness of a .30 cal. The sheer weight alone makes it a more lethal. 

It would take a barrage of 20s to collapse the underbelly of a Tiger. That is the only way it would, a constant barrage of heavy lumps of lead shattering against the same small spot. The steel is weakened and, eventually it collapses. 

I imagine a few passes would need to be made but it was done.


----------



## Soren (May 15, 2005)

> I'm not saying this happened often, Soren. The AP 20mm shell could never be brought down to the effectiveness of a .30 cal. The sheer weight alone makes it a more lethal.



Plan_D a .30 cal AP round would penetrate approx. 9mm of 0 degree armor at 200y, wich is more than what a 20mm Hispano round will after bouncing off hard pavement !  

Plus no'one here will be foolish enough to tell me that after hitting hard pavement at a 45 degree angle (More or less), the round would bounce up a hit the belly of the tank at a 0 degree angle. No it would hit the belly like a round hitting sloped armor, thus further reducing the penetrative ability of the round.



> It would take a barrage of 20s to collapse the underbelly of a Tiger. That is the only way it would, a constant barrage of heavy lumps of lead shattering against the same small spot. The steel is weakened and, eventually it collapses.



Im sorry but I disagree, only the penetration of the Tigers 25mm top armor was possible, not the belly. And how would rounds hit the same spot again and again ? Every gun has dispersion, and when put on a propeller-driven plane the dispersion becomes even bigger, making it impossible to hit the exact same spot again and again.


----------



## KraziKanuK (May 15, 2005)

That is some shooting to have 20mm hit in a very small area. Hitting at an acute angle, even the top armour, the armour would be equivelent to 3-4" thick.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 15, 2005)

I see that u are trying to argument the point, but the reality of it is that it has happened before, and pilots have purposely tried to do it, Allied AND Axis.... Maybe statisically it doesnt add up, but the fact of the matter is that in after action reports, pliots have claimed ground tank kills in this very manner...... We as older members have discussed this situation in the past.....


----------



## Soren (May 15, 2005)

In wartime, pilots say and do crazy things sometimes, but that doesnt necessarily make them true or feasible.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 15, 2005)

So i guess all 22 times that i have read an actual report of this happening, all those guys were making up the same thing, all at different times throughout the war???????

Gimme a fuck 'in break dude....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 15, 2005)

i must say this is a very interesting discussion.........

and sorry i aint been on for the last two nights, been out doing ten tors, 40 miles over dartmoor in two days.............


----------



## Soren (May 15, 2005)

lesofprimus said:


> So i guess all 22 times that i have read an actual report of this happening, all those guys were making up the same thing, all at different times throughout the war???????



22 times ? can you show me the documented claims ? as I would find them highly interesting.



> Gimme a f**k break dude....



There's no need to get aggressive.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 15, 2005)

Im always aggressive......... ALWAYS..........

And i cannot show u the docs, as they were on microfiche, in an Achive at the Smithsonian in Washington DC... And yes, they were extremely interesting... I did take notes off them though... 

But please dont infer that I come on here making stuff up either, as that constitutes a slap in the face, and I dont react real well to that kind of criticism, as my record with my compatriots here will validate....

And besides, other members here also have this same info I do.... We arent conspiring against u buddy........ Its a fact....

Although rare, it did happen....


----------



## Soren (May 15, 2005)

lesofprimus said:


> Im always aggressive......... ALWAYS..........
> 
> And i cannot show u the docs, as they were on microfiche, in an Achive at the Smithsonian in Washington DC... And yes, they were extremely interesting... I did take notes off them though...
> 
> ...



Im not denying it happened against smaller panzers with their much thinner armor, but I am denying it happened to Tigers. (Btw very few Tiger's fell victim to air-attacks)


----------



## lesofprimus (May 15, 2005)

The only real way to stop a Tiger from the air was with a rocket into the engine compartment....... 

I do recall one specific report in which a Major or Lt. Col (Not sure which now) claimed to have shot up 3 Tigers with 2 large explosions for a total of 2 tanks claimed... 

He made 4 passes before his ammo was expended... He used the words "ricochetted" and "bounced" in this report and reported it as being the reason for the destruction of the 2 Tiger Tanks...

Sorry I cannot give more details, but my memory is alittle fogged after all these years.


----------



## KraziKanuK (May 15, 2005)

plan_D,

the belly of the Tiger was *25mm* thick. A richoche would make the 25mm 3 to 4 times that thick.

Step back and look very carefully at what you are saying. The 20mm would be spread all over the place after richocheing off the ground. Don't forget about convergence from the wing mounted cannons.

If what you say is true, then why give pilots 1/2" back armour?

This is worth reading, http://web.telia.com/~u18313395/normandy/articles/airpower.html


----------



## lesofprimus (May 15, 2005)

Sorry to report disagreeable information, but it is what I recall readin previously... 

I do agree tho, knocking out a Tiger with richocetteing 20mm rounds off the ground is a ridiculous way of killing a tank......


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 15, 2005)

Like they say, seeing is believing. I would like to see that footage myself. Nothing anyone says here is going to convince me given what I know (however little that may be) on the subject.

For most effective penetration, a projectile must impact at the angle that projects the most energy onto the smallest area. A round, any round, after striking the ground will have lost much of its velocity. Then on the upward strike on the belly of the tank, the round, now deformed from the impact with the ground and knocked off its axis, would strike in such a way as to concentrate the remaining energy across a much larger surface area and at an angle.

It would be helpful, at least to me, if someone could post some gun camera footage showing the success of this technique.


----------



## KraziKanuK (May 15, 2005)

lesofprimus said:


> Sorry to report disagreeable information, but it is what I recall readin previously...



_Occasionally attacks on German combat units in the battle zone are emphasized. Often the attacks on German tanks by allied fighter-bombers that are put forward as examples on the great effectiveness of allied air power. This is actually quite strange, since weapons carried by aircraft were unsuitable for attacking tanks. The image of allied fighter-bombers as effective tank killers is probably the result of claims by the pilots themselves. However, it is hard to conceive a less reliable source for information on the effectiveness of the attacks. Such claims are notoriously exaggerated.

Often the German attack at Mortain is used as an example to show the effectiveness of the fighter-bombers as tank killers. But in fact this engagement is rather an example of vastly exaggerated claims. The British 2nd TAF claimed to have destroyed or damaged 140 German tanks in the Mortain area 7 - 10 August, while 9th US Air Force claimed 112. This actually exceeded the number of German tanks employed in the operation. In fact no more than 46 tanks were lost in the operation and of these only nine had been hit by air weapons.

Actually it seems that very few German tank were lost due to hits from weapons carried by aircraft. Probably no more than about 100 tanks were lost due to hits from air weapons during the entire campaign. Rather it seems that air attacks on tank formation protected by AA units were more dangerous to the aircraft than to the tanks. Allied losses of aircraft were considerable, the 2nd TAF (including elements of Air Defence of Britain that took part in the Normandy campaign) lost 829 aircraft, while US 9th Air Force lost 897._

from the link


----------



## Soren (May 15, 2005)

One thing worth remembering is that VERY often Allied pilots mistaked PzIV's as being Tiger's(Like U.S. tankcrews aswell), and claimed them as Tigers aswell.

Infact IIRC, a total of only *9-10* Tiger's fell victim to Allied airstrikes, *under the intire war *! (Not much  )


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (May 15, 2005)

lesofprimus said:


> GrG, ur avatar is Kaputz.....



Thanks for the heads-up. 

New one now put in. 8)


----------



## GermansRGeniuses (May 15, 2005)

...Or not.

The server is being strange and not letting me use the image.






That one, to be exact. 8)


----------



## lesofprimus (May 15, 2005)

Maybe too big in size or dimensions... Ive had that problem before...

Guys, I will not rule out that there could be indentification problems... That happened.... Not always, but it did... And sometimes, armor plating that was defective and not up to manufactures specifications was installed into new and battle damaged repairs...

Sometimes there were flaws in the armor plating... Imperfections... A carbide deposit where there shouldnt be one... Maybe even alittle espionage took place in Bracktoven, or wherever... Maybe a workers sister was rpaed by the regimental commandant and he was getting his revenge by weaking the armor consistency......

Maybe some guys were smart enough to try and skip 20mm shells under the bellies of Tigers hoping that these special few tanks had some of these flaws........

We'll never know for sure, but some pilots believe that they did destroy a Tiger by using this method....


----------



## plan_D (May 15, 2005)

A ricocheted round is extremely unpredictable, it could have bounced up at a 0 degree angle. Everyone knows when a round ricochets you cannot predict which direction it is going to reflect at. 

If the rounds are landing just behind the tank though the law of physics are obvious enough to say that it will bounce forward or up, if landing just below the tank (possible because the aircraft is shooting down at the tank), the rounds will bounce up into the confines of the space under the tank. The small area made by the surrounding tracks and low ground clearance of the tank (I'm not talking actually low but you get what I mean) would mean that the rounds would be hitting in basically the same place when hitting the tank. They were be diverted by the small area into the tank. 

This barrage would make the tanks armour collapse after the armour has been weakened enough. 

Now, I will not try and deny that Pz.IVs were often mistaken for Tigers. Allied air and tank crews would rather state they destroyed a Tiger than a Pz.IV along with honest misidentification (from a distance they do look mildly alike). I am not talking just Tigers though, I am refering to Panthers, Jagdpanthers, Jagdpanzers, King Tigers, Jagdtigers as well. 

It was well known that rounds could be bounced up underneath enemy armour and cause considerable damage.

I would like to see the source of that, only 9 - 10 Tigers lost to Allied air power? First the source and also, is it talking about Western Allied only or the Soviets included in that too?


----------



## KraziKanuK (May 15, 2005)

plan_D said:


> A ricocheted round is extremely unpredictable, it could have bounced up at a 0 degree angle. Everyone knows when a round ricochets you cannot predict which direction it is going to reflect at.
> 
> If the rounds are landing just behind the tank though the law of physics are obvious enough to say that it will bounce forward or up, if landing just below the tank (possible because the aircraft is shooting down at the tank), the rounds will bounce up into the confines of the space under the tank. The small area made by the surrounding tracks and low ground clearance of the tank (I'm not talking actually low but you get what I mean) would mean that the rounds would be hitting in basically the same place when hitting the tank. They were be diverted by the small area into the tank.
> 
> ...



Yup, just get the ol' Ma Duece out and hammer away at the late war German tanks. No need for heavy calibre AT rounds since the multiple hits from those .50" would soon punch a hole through the armour. Better yet, use the H-S. Should be easier to get multiple hits in one small area from a ground mount than from an a/c, and at a better impact angle.


----------



## Soren (May 15, 2005)

I'll respond to the rest of your post later Plan_D.



> I would like to see the source of that, only 9 - 10 Tigers lost to Allied air power? First the source and also, is it talking about Western Allied only or the Soviets included in that too?



Sure, however I havent found anything yet mentioning the "Tiger-I's" losses *alone *due to allied air attacks, although I clearly remember reading it. 

Thomas L. Jentz. describes that the Total amount of Tigers (both types) known to have been lost due to Allied air attack is *30*. (USSR included)

I'll try and see if I can find the losses for the Tiger-I alone, but it is sure to be around the 9-10 maby 13 at the most. TigerII losses to air attacks were a little higher because of some only just making it out of the German assembly-lines before being pounded by allied bombers. (1945 was a cruel period for the Germans !)


----------



## lesofprimus (May 15, 2005)

KK, we are referring to 20mm cannon damage, not .50 cal, so no need to get snotty......

One minute its 9-10 kills, then it's 30...... Maybe some claims that destroyed a Panther or Panzer were actually Tiger Tanks that were falsely identified......

The door swings both ways u know....... Mistaken identification happened all the time....


----------



## KraziKanuK (May 15, 2005)

lesofprimus said:


> KK, we are referring to 20mm cannon damage, not .50 cal, so no need to get snotty......



*H-S* = 20mm Hispano cannon.

So why did the army not use 20mm automatic AT guns if it was so easy to punch through the armour of the Tiger, Tiger II, Panther, etc.....?


----------



## plan_D (May 16, 2005)

KK the front armour of Tiger Ausf E was 100mm, the side armour was 80mm. That is why the Army wasn't using automatic 20mm cannons to destroy them. If you can find a cannon that can depress enough to bounce rounds off the floor and, while it's at it shock the crew enough not to shoot back then fine. 

The aircraft doesn't have to worry about the Tiger shooting back, ground troops do.


----------



## KraziKanuK (May 16, 2005)

Plan_D

get your protractor and ruler out, draw some lines 25mm apart and tell me how thick that belly armour is now for different impact angles. You will find that that belly armour is as thick as that side and front armour which you're claiming a 20mm auto AT cannon could not penetrate.


----------



## plan_D (May 16, 2005)

KK, use your brain. 

Ricochet rounds can bounce straight up into the belly. A richochet is unpredictable, this isn't light we're talking about. It doesn't bounce out at the same angle it goes in.


----------



## KraziKanuK (May 16, 2005)

plan_D said:


> KK, use your brain.
> 
> Ricochet rounds can bounce straight up into the belly. A richochet is unpredictable, this isn't light we're talking about. It doesn't bounce out at the same angle it goes in.



   Sure a round that hits the ground at a 30* angle is going to bounce straight up to hit the belly perpendicular, never mind that it could be deflected to either side as well.    Not enough times, if ever, will this happen to do what you're claiming a 20mm will do to a tank's belly armour.

Yup, richochets are so predicatable that they will hit in that very small area enough times so that _"this barrage would make the tanks armour collapse after the armour has been weakened enough."_. 

Not me that needs to use their brain!


----------



## plan_D (May 16, 2005)

I think it is you. 

A ricochet round is unpredictable, it is not light. The rounds will not be going in at 30 degrees and coming out at 30 degrees. If you had any clue about guns you would know that a ricochet is unpredictable. 

The under-side of a tank is a small area. The tracks on either side of the area I am refering to make sure that all rounds will hit the tank in some place. 

Who ever stated that the round would always be hitting the ground at 30 degrees anyway. It depends on the angle the aircraft is coming in at and also that he is spraying as he goes down and pulls up. 
I never stated that it would happen in one single pass, armour doesn't heal itself. On the field of battle any damage sustained will be there until the end. 

Now, calm that red face down, straighten your ponytail and push up your glasses and use your grey matter.


----------



## Soren (May 16, 2005)

lesofprimus said:


> One minute its 9-10 kills, then it's 30....



As I said I clearly remember reading it, however I havent found the reference for the Tiger-I *alone* just yet. What I have found though, is that only 30 Tigers of both types (Wich means the TigerII included), have been destroyed by Allied air-attacks. 


-----------------------------------------------------------

Plan_D what your suggesting is impossible, simple as that. 

A 20mm H-S AP round hitting hard pavement and bouncing off would need atleast a 40-45 degree impact angle, or it will just dig itself in. Now considdering this, the projectile would hit the belly of the tank as a bullet hitting sloped armor, *a whole 25mm of it*, wich means in the case of the 20mm H-S that a penetration is impossible. 

Also take into considderation that after hitting the hard pavement, atleast 80% of the rounds KE has been used up, plus the fact that the shape of the projectile is now badly mangled= almost flat. (An AP round needs atleast some shape to be effective, and as we know, a 'flat' projectile wont do much good against armor  )

Even with a 'direct' hit against *0 degree *armor at 200y, the H-S AP round will only penetrate *27mm* of armor ! Now what do think its chances of penetration would be after bouncing off hard pavement and hitting 25mm of sloped armor is ?  (Now do you see how far out your claim is ?)


----------



## plan_D (May 16, 2005)

First off, 25mm isn't a lot of armour. The T-34 had 40mm angled at 60 degrees to make it equal to 75mm flat. 

Secondly, it doesn't lose 80% of it's energy. At most it loses around 50 - 60% of it's energy. 

Thirdly, depending on the angle the round has it, it wouldn't always be flat. 

Fourthly, both of you are basing your penertration values off one hit. You're both failing to realise that armour weakens with every hit. The RoF of a Hispano Mk.II is 600 rounds per minute. One pass would allow the plane to squeeze off around 20-30 rounds, hitting behind the tank would confine the rounds to bounce up and, no matter what, hit the tank. 

At 880 m/s with a 50% decrease in energy it would be around 400 m/s when hitting the tank. With around ten rounds weighing 130 grams a piece. By the third or fourth pass, with continuous damage in that small area the tanks belly armour, which isn't thick, is going to be sheared and dented. The structure of the armour is weakened, like a dented can, it would then start to fail. 

You both, obviously, believe that 25mm is thick. Even at an angle it's not very strong because it needs structure. You dent *anything* it weakens.


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 16, 2005)

I can see why there is such a misconception regarding this issue. Plan_D said, "_At 880 m/s with a 50% decrease in energy it would be around 400 m/s when hitting the tank._"

Nothing could be further from the truth. Lets go back to Ballistics 101.

If a round loses 50% of it's energy, that is not equivalent to losing 50% of its velocity. Remember this rule of thumb. Double the mass, double the energy. Double the velocity, quadruple the energy. A loss of 50% velocity is thus a much, much greater than 50% loss of energy.

As for the actual velocity of a round that has ricocheted up onto the surface of the belly of a tank, consider this:

The round will lose velocity as it travels en route to the ground. It will then lose an enormous amount more after striking the ground. The greater the angle upwards, the more velocity that will be lost. The round then, whether or not rendered flat *will* be deformed and no longer be flying true along its concentric axis. 

This same round, now slowed down quite a bit, and which is flattened to some degree will strike "sideways" to some degree. Thus, it's remaining energy will be transmitted over a much larger area than had it just struck the tank outright.

No, several slow rounds striking at different locations at different angles in various states deformity and in various states of "sideways" flight will not penetrate 25mm of hardened armor plate.


----------



## wmaxt (May 16, 2005)

The accounts I've read mention the rounds going into the intake and cooling systems. This was to cause fire/overheating resulting in the evacuation of the crew and allowing them to be shot at. Armor was never claimed to be penetrated.

wmaxt


----------



## plan_D (May 16, 2005)

No *one* round would. Go back to basics of engineering, you lose the structure, you lose your strength. Those lumps of lead will be denting the tank with every hit. The dents weaken the structure of the armour. Many dents across the whole under-side of the tank, when another aircraft comes by and does the same it happens again, the armour weakens, another aircraft passes over the same tank and does it again, the armour weakens. So on and so forth, eventually the armour is going to collapse. 

You could do it simple with a sheet of metal and get a screw driver, hold it loosely in your hand and bash the point against it. Eventually after many hits against the repeatedly dented metal will crunch. 

Also, what are we considering penertration? In Soviet reports 75% of splinters would determine penertration, in German it was 50%...I don't know what Allied was. 

Anyway, it's weakened....weakened....weakened....and eventually a hole appears...that hole has severely weakened the structure which will collapse after several more hits. I'm not saying this happened often, I imagine against one of Germanys Animal Tanks it would take a hell of a lot but it could happen.


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 16, 2005)

I assume that by "_Anyway, it's weakened....weakened....weakened...._" you are referring to your argument as this thread progresses.


----------



## plan_D (May 16, 2005)

You're hilarious, Davidicus.


----------



## Soren (May 16, 2005)

> Secondly, it doesn't lose 80% of it's energy. At most it loses around 50 - 60% of it's energy.



Plan_D I repeat myself; The energy lost upon striking the hard pavement is atleast around 80%. Note that the projectiles path is totally disturbed by striking the pavement, resulting in a massive energy loss.



> Thirdly, depending on the angle the round has it, it wouldn't always be flat.



Trust me, it will be virtually "flat" in shape ! Think about it, the round smashes into *hard pavement* with a force of around *50,000 *joules ! (If that doesn't leave a round mostly blunt, then what will ?  )



DAVIDICUS said:


> I can see why there is such a misconception regarding this issue. Plan_D said, "_At 880 m/s with a 50% decrease in energy it would be around 400 m/s when hitting the tank._"
> 
> Nothing could be further from the truth. Lets go back to Ballistics 101.
> 
> ...



DAVIDICUS, while your repeating my point, you are absolutely right !


----------



## KraziKanuK (May 16, 2005)

plan_D said:


> I think it is you.
> 
> A ricochet round is unpredictable, it is not light. The rounds will not be going in at 30 degrees and coming out at 30 degrees. If you had any clue about guns you would know that a ricochet is unpredictable.
> 
> ...



The only one that is doing what you describe is you p_D.

My dad has a steel plate ~8" square x 1" thick that has been pounded on for at least 40 years. Guess what? There is not one hole in it and not even any spalling.  Lots of very small indentations though. 

The underside of a Tiger is NOT a small area being ~91sqft.

If you had a clue, it was an example of an impact angle on the tank's belly.


----------



## Soren (May 16, 2005)

A simple illustration.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 17, 2005)

All ur graphs and stats and theorms and equations mean jack shiit to me... A pilots opinion/belief/action report means more to me than 30 of those damn graphs...

And BTW, that one above is the gayest thing ive seen in a long long time.... 45 degree angle of attack is a dive... Most of these guys werent diving into the tank.... Gliding was the attack profile more readily used....

And lets say for arguments sake that the shell did not bounce off the road, but off the inside of the track mechanism.... At a 12 degree angle....... 

Blah Blah Blah u guys just beat a topic to death.....


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 17, 2005)

Well, I happen to know Jack Shiit and he most certainly was not mean to you.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 17, 2005)

U werent there in his bedroom, so how would u know???????


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 17, 2005)

I know Jack Shiit because he sleeps with my wife. I sleep in his bedroom.


----------



## KraziKanuK (May 17, 2005)

lesofprimus said:


> All ur graphs and stats and theorms and equations mean jack shiit to me... A pilots opinion/belief/action report means more to me than 30 of those damn graphs...



Go read that report I link to earlier. So much for pilots opinion/belief/action reports.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 17, 2005)

Thats one freakin report.... Ive read 7 of em that dispute that.. And there are probably 12 more like the one u posted......

People have different opinions, and the handbook aint always right....... But u stat geeks will never understand that.........


----------



## KraziKanuK (May 17, 2005)

lesofprimus said:


> Ive read 7 of em that dispute that...



Got any links? Or are they more pilot reports of what they thought they seen flying by at 300 plus mph while dodging the flak.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 17, 2005)

lesofprimus said:


> And BTW, that one above is the gayest thing ive seen in a long long time.... 45 degree angle of attack is a dive... Most of these guys werent diving into the tank.... Gliding was the attack profile more readily used....



You are correct the only aircraft that would dive down on the target were dive bombers. The rest of them would sort of glide to the target. For instance a Fw-190 would come in and then climb just ever so slightly then glide down over the target and then fly away. It was more like a straf then a dive. I just got this from my book _Die Grosse Deutsche Luftschlachten des Zweiten Weltkriegs_ which covers the aircraft and tactics used in ground attack and dog fighting for the Luftwaffe in the 2nd World War.


----------



## KraziKanuK (May 17, 2005)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> You are correct the only aircraft that would dive down on the target were dive bombers. The rest of them would sort of glide to the target. For instance a Fw-190 would come in and then climb just ever so slightly then glide down over the target and then fly away. It was more like a straf then a dive. I just got this from my book _Die Grosse Deutsche Luftschlachten des Zweiten Weltkriegs_ which covers the aircraft and tactics used in ground attack and dog fighting for the Luftwaffe in the 2nd World War.



Spit IXs with the 2cdTAF would dive at angles up to 60 degrees.


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2005)

Spitfire Mk.IXs are not Typhoons. 

Your dad isn't just hitting the plate though, is he? He also isn't hitting it at a high velocity. Again, you seem to thick that deflected rounds come off at the exact same angle as they hit. 

Want to go shoot a round at some concrete and see how it ricochets, I can assure you it'll never go the same way twice.


----------



## KraziKanuK (May 17, 2005)

plan_D said:


> Spitfire Mk.IXs are not Typhoons.
> 
> Your dad isn't just hitting the plate though, is he? He also isn't hitting it at a high velocity. Again, you seem to thick that deflected rounds come off at the exact same angle as they hit.
> 
> Want to go shoot a round at some concrete and see how it ricochets, I can assure you it'll never go the same way twice.



Spit were dropping bombs on the tanks. 

You are the one claiming multiple hits in a *small* area does damage. The 1000s of accumalative hits from a 1lb ball pean.......

I do?

Thats correct and you want us to believe that the rounds would hit in a *small* area.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 17, 2005)

the tank's underside will not have a huge ground clearance, as such, even though all the rounds will not all go at the same angle and hit the same spot, due to this low cleance, the rounds will not have much of a chance to spread over anything larger than what could be described as a small area.............


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2005)

Does your dad sit there and just bash the piece of metal? It sounds to me he uses it as a rest so he doesn't damage what he is hitting. In that case it's hardly going to dent. 

High velocity chunks of metal will dent the armour though, making it weaker. The point at which it has been dented is weaker due to stress on the framework. 

And as lanc quite correctly stated the ground clearance on a tank isn't huge, it's not going to allow the rounds to go all over the places. Do you want to lay under a tank and see how confined it is?


----------



## lesofprimus (May 17, 2005)

I do not have links to those reports. Wish I did....... If I had known how important it would be nowadays, i would have figured a way to copy the microfiche...

But the fact is that i read them, and if ud like to call me a liar, I'd be pleased to discuss it with u over a beer and a punch in the mouth.....


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 17, 2005)

KraziKanuK said:


> DerAdlerIstGelandet said:
> 
> 
> > You are correct the only aircraft that would dive down on the target were dive bombers. The rest of them would sort of glide to the target. For instance a Fw-190 would come in and then climb just ever so slightly then glide down over the target and then fly away. It was more like a straf then a dive. I just got this from my book _Die Grosse Deutsche Luftschlachten des Zweiten Weltkriegs_ which covers the aircraft and tactics used in ground attack and dog fighting for the Luftwaffe in the 2nd World War.
> ...



Yes but wouldn't you think that it would more affective the other way? Just wondering your thoughts on this.


----------



## Soren (May 17, 2005)

Jesus christs ! You can't show a simple illustration without people running mad !

A Typhoon would also sometimes dive at 45 degree angles on its prey, but lets just say 30 degree's if that makes you guys happy, in any case the outcome is the same. If you decrase the angle of impact, the angle 'after' impact will only be sharper anyway, further decreasing the penetrative ability of the projectile.

Note I didnt write any angle on the projectile after impact, so I don't know what all this hype about the 'same angle after impact' is. The fact of the matter is, after impact the round is blunt and now tumbling, making its chances worse than that of a .30 cal AP round !

As a side note: lesofprimus your supposed to be an Admin, so stop being so aggressive ! Admin's are the ones who secure order on a forum, not the ones who try and brake it. Im sure we could have some interesting discussions here if the insults were kept back.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 17, 2005)

In Les's defense he just tries to get to the point, he does not like beating around the bush.


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2005)

You drew an illustration of a round bouncing in and coming out at the exact same angle. Why use an illustration if you know it's not accurate? You can't accurately illustrate a ricochet. 

If the round goes into the ground and dents the ground, it could even bounce back the way it came. There is always a possibility that the round would bounce up, straight from hitting the ground.


----------



## Soren (May 17, 2005)

> You drew an illustration of a round bouncing in and coming out at the exact same angle. Why use an illustration if you know it's not accurate? *You can't accurately illustrate a ricochet*.



Exactly ! The Illustration was to show an approximate to how the round shape and ballistics would be after impact. The angle after impact was left out for obvious reasons, "Its unpredictable" 



> If the round goes into the ground and dents the ground, it could even bounce back the way it came. There is always a possibility that the round would bounce up, straight from hitting the ground.



And how does this support your arguement about hitting the same spot again and again ?


----------



## plan_D (May 17, 2005)

That's not supporting the rounds hitting the same small area this is; the small confines and low profile of the under-belly of a tank would concentrate the rounds into a small area. 

The round can be bouncing at any angle at the tank but if it's hit something almost straight after it's bounced, it's hitting the same sort of area as another one that might bounce further out, or further up. The small confines of a tank don't allow the rounds to bounce all over the place.


----------



## Soren (May 17, 2005)

plan_D said:


> That's not supporting the rounds hitting the same small area this is; the small confines and low profile of the under-belly of a tank would concentrate the rounds into a small area.
> 
> The round can be bouncing at any angle at the tank but if it's hit something almost straight after it's bounced, it's hitting the same sort of area as another one that might bounce further out, or further up. The small confines of a tank don't allow the rounds to bounce all over the place.



Plan_D by the first impact atleast 80% of the rounds energy is gone, now how much energy do you think a round will have after bouncing off hard surfaces twice ? It is just not plausible against 25mm of armor.

As wmaxt said: "_The accounts I've read mention the rounds going into the intake and cooling systems. This was to cause fire/overheating resulting in the evacuation of the crew and allowing them to be shot at. Armor was never claimed to be penetrated. _"


----------



## lesofprimus (May 17, 2005)

80% loss of energy??? WTF are u smoking???

Regular ground strafing by aircraft was rarely done in a diving attitude....... A shallow glide was usually the attack profile of choice, although some aircraft did otherwise...

As i said earlier, a cannon shell that SKIPS rather than ricochettes or bounces off a surface, be it dirt or pavement, will not necessarily be blunt or tumble, and will not lose as much velocity as to what u are stating......

I have alittle experience with weapons, and can tell u that this is a fact...
Shooting a .50 cal at something large will usually demonstrate this quite quickly.......

As for ur other little attempt at trying to give this website and its Admins some advice on how to do our jobs and run this place, lemme let u in on a little secret...

Since the first day I came onto this site, I have carried the same aggressiveness, attitude, and insensitivity as I do today... 

And guess what......... I was invited to be an Admin... 

So why dont u just have a nice cup of shutdafukup and keep ur wise-ass comments to urself........ Or are u just trying to mimick MY attitude???


----------



## KraziKanuK (May 17, 2005)

lesofprimus said:


> So why dont u just have a nice cup of shutdafukup and keep ur wise-ass comments to urself........



Well the *senior* Admins should take a second look, for you being an Admin should be revoked with the crappy attitude you have.


----------



## Nonskimmer (May 17, 2005)

Ooooo, this ain't gonna be pretty!


----------



## lesofprimus (May 17, 2005)

If that was some sort of attempt at offending me, better try harder tough guy....

Its really quite amazing that u even realized that I have a crappy attitude...... U must really pay attention to me and my posts..... Most just ignore me.... 

Im so sorry that Im letting u down and not meeting ur expectations of what a PROPER Admin should be... Can I make it up to u??? Cook u breakfast??? Rub ur back??? Give u alittle lovin???

Oh, my bad........ Sorens already got u impaled on his.......

You know whats really funny...... The odds of u saying that to my face are so astronomical, ud have a better chance of seeing Osama light a fart.....

All u keyboard pussies crack me up......


----------



## Nonskimmer (May 17, 2005)

lesofprimus said:


> All u keyboard pussies crack me up......


Even me?


----------



## lesofprimus (May 17, 2005)

Dude u serve in uniform and protect the lives of innocents. There aint nothing pussyish about that mano.......


----------



## Nonskimmer (May 17, 2005)

Well, _I_ like to think so.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 17, 2005)

Anyone with half a brain, even these 2 dolts up above, can realize that......


----------



## Soren (May 17, 2005)

lesofprimus said:


> Dude u serve in uniform and protect the lives of innocents. There aint nothing pussyish about that mano.......



Well I'll let you know that I served aswell, and people with an attitude like you would quickly learn their lesson in the army ! 

You need to have a little respect for other individuals primus, or you'll get none yourself. Im confident that if you hold your insults back, some interesting could come out of this discussion, but your aggressiveness just pulls us all further and further off topic.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 17, 2005)

LOL..... The ARMY??????? 

HA!

I ran circles around those pussies at Benning......

In case u havent happen to notice, I served with distinction in the Special Warfare community.... Hence the Avatar to ur left..... Alittle breakdown of ur very calm, intelligent post........



> You need to have a little respect for other individuals


No, I don't......


> or you'll get none yourself.


Sure I will, not that it matters....


> but your aggressiveness


I guess I should change my attitude and posting style that I've had for the last 10 months just for special little ol' u......

Heres a clue Pal.... I get along with everyone here except for a couple turds in the bowl........ New turds I might add....... Ive been away awhile, and u missed my apparent uniqueness here........ Ur getting a pretty swift introduction......

Heres something pretty simple for u to understand...... Ur a noob here and u dont just come here with ur dicka swingin and try to just insult and combat the long standing members here.... U earn ur place, just like in ur precious little Army........ 

"I think U've been cheated...... The best part of u ran down the crack of ur Momma'a ass and ended up as a brown stain on the mattress......"
-Full Metal Jacket

I live for confrontations, and u and a few others make my day..... However, there are, of course, other alternatives for u to excercise......... One is to conform and be respectful of others opinions, as they are 2 urs...... Then theres the other way........ My favorite way......

Remember, again as a reminder, that I dont have problems with any of the other members here, (well....most of em hehe) and get along quite nicely if I do say so myself...

So maybe, just maybe, the problem isnt with me..........

Hmmmmmmmmm...


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 17, 2005)

Lesboprimus,

You said, "_As i said earlier, a cannon shell that SKIPS rather than ricochettes or bounces off a surface, be it dirt or pavement, will not necessarily be blunt or tumble, and will not lose as much velocity as to what u are stating......_"

You have been betrayed by your "little experience with weapons" which you no doubt obtained on line in your special warfare gaming community. Anyone who claims to have served in a combat role who makes ridiculous statements like you just did above is full of shit. 

If a round, hits the ground at ANY angle, it will be knocked off its concentric axis and begin to tumble. I don't care if we're talking about a 125 grain .357 Magnum or a round from a 20mm. All projectiles will behave the same upon striking the earth, ground, pavement, whatever at an angle and ricocheting, bouncing or skipping off that surface. Size does not matter. (I know this runs contrary to what your wife tells you.) They rely on the same principle of rotation for stability as a result of their similar shapes. 

In addition, a round that strikes the earth, ground, pavement, whatever at an angle and ricochets off that surface will suffer some deformity in the process. All things being equal, the deformity will generally be more severe at highet angles of strike.

All rounds will also lose velocity and thus energy as a result of a strike that redirects their flight path.

Velocity has an interesting relationship to the energy carried by a projectile. If you double the weight of a projectile at a given velocity, you double the energy. But if you double the velocity of the same projectile, you will quadruple the energy.

If you bleed just 30% of the velocity off of a projectile, it maintains only 55% of its original energy.

A 30% reduction of velocity as a result of traversing the distance from the weapon to the earth, ground, pavement, whatever and then striking said earth, ground, pavement, would easily result in a 30% reduction in velocity of the now redirected round. This redirected round, which only has 55% of its original energy, would strike the armor plate both at an angle and across a greater surface area since the projectile is no longer traveling along its concentric axis and is deformed. 

In addition, armor piercing rounds are not homogenous throughout their structure. They have jackets made of soft metal designed to be engaged by the rifling in the barrel which is made from very hard steel. This is how they develop rotational stability. 

They have tips that are hard steel. The tip is literally the exposed top of the core of the projectile. The projectile is designed that way for a reason. It isn't very effective at penetrating armor plate unless it strikes tip first perpendicular to its concentric axis in order to take advantage of its sectional density. (That's jibberish for "It strikes with the exposed hard tip in such a fashion as to concentrate its energy across the smallest area."

So, to recap my example, we have rounds with about half their energy (probably less as there would likely be a greater than 30% loss of velocity) that are deformed and strike at various angles and in various states of "sidewaysness." (Look, I invented a new word.)

*So, who still thinks that such rounds can penetrate an inch of hardened steel plate in light of the fact that a round from an armor piercing 20mm Hispano II at zero degrees angle can only penetrate less than an inch (24mm) of hardened armor plate at 400 yards to begin with?*


----------



## Maestro (May 17, 2005)

Les, forget about Soren. That guy only listen to himself. I know what I mean, I had a chat with him in the "Is Spitfire the BEST British fighter" thread. We (RG_Lunatic, DerAlder and I (I got a very small place in the chat)) had a hard time to convince him that the Spifire was not that crappy thing that he thought. In fact, I suspect that Soren and DJ_Dalton are the same guy.

But anyway, what I mean is : "Don't mind him." He thinks he's hot, that's all.


----------



## Soren (May 17, 2005)

> In case u havent happen to notice, I served with distinction in the Special Warfare community.... Hence the Avatar to ur left..... Alittle breakdown of ur very calm, intelligent post........



Oh so I see, i guess something went terribly wrong with your disciplinary training then ?!

My dad, two of my uncle's all served in the army, and one of them in the special forces. However none of them are as aggressive or disrespectful to other individuals as you primus ! hows that ?



> No, I don't......



Something definitely went wrong with your training ! Or your just steaming off cause you had a rough day with your peers screaming down your face. ?  



> Sure I will, not that it matters....



No you won't primus, atleast not from the ones you insult without reason.



> I guess I should change my attitude and posting style that I've had for the last 10 months just for special little ol' u......



Not at all, aggressiveness can be a good thing, but your abusing yours primus ! 



> Heres a clue Pal.... I get along with everyone here except for a couple turds in the bowl........ New turds I might add....... Ive been away awhile, and u missed my apparent uniqueness here........ Ur getting a pretty swift introduction......



Your lack of respect is astounding primus.



> Heres something pretty simple for u to understand...... Ur a noob here and u dont just come here with ur dicka swingin and try to just insult and combat the long standing members here.... U earn ur place, just like in ur precious little Army........



You know what, judging by those comments i would doubt you ever served ! And if you did, well sorry if this sounds rough, but god bless i didnt serve with you then ! 

Sure in the army you earn your place, but this is a "Public" forum buddy  



> "I think U've been cheated...... The best part of u ran down the crack of ur Momma'a ass and ended up as a brown stain on the mattress......"
> -Full Metal Jacket



Keep the insults going primus if it really amuzes you that much, but don't expect getting anything out of it.



> I live for confrontations, and u and a few others make my day..... However, there are, of course, other alternatives for u to excercise......... One is to conform and be respectful of others opinions, as they are 2 urs...... Then theres the other way........ My favorite way......



Your favorite way is confrontations ? Poor you primus, poor you.



> Remember, again as a reminder, that I dont have problems with any of the other members here, (well....most of em hehe) and get along quite nicely if I do say so myself...



Well I've been respectful for you and your opinion from the start primus, and I havent once tried to insult you. So what exactly did I do wrong ?



> So maybe, just maybe, the problem isnt with me..........
> 
> Hmmmmmmmmm...



So what your basicly trying to say here is that by me having another opinion than you, im the one thats causing the problem ? primus you really need to get out abit !

In any case being the man that I am, i hold no grudge after silly arguements like these, so you aint on my hated-list yet primus.


----------



## Soren (May 17, 2005)

> Les, forget about Soren. That guy only listen to himself. I know what I mean, I had a chat with him in the "Is Spitfire the BEST British fighter" thread. We (RG_Lunatic, DerAlder and I (I got a very small place in the chat)) had a hard time to convince him that the Spifire was not that crappy thing that he thought.



Meastro actually what i said in that thread, and many others, is that the Spit XIV was THE best Allied fighter of WW2, having only one Axis equal !  



> In fact, I suspect that Soren and DJ_Dalton are the same guy.



I think a quick comparison of our IP addresses will make you dump that idea !  



> But anyway, what I mean is : "Don't mind him." He thinks he's hot, that's all.



Oh dear.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 18, 2005)

See.... I dont even have to read ur comments to know that I got under ur skin, which was my intention....... To think that u actually wasted a whole 10 minutes of ur time on this is hilarious......

Thanks.....

And BTW, if u think for a second that I instigated anything with u, u definatly need to stop smokin the shiit ur sellin....... U had this comin a long time ago........ I just aint been here to pinch u off..........


----------



## Soren (May 18, 2005)

> See.... I dont even have to read ur comments to know that I got under ur skin, which was my intention....... To think that u actually wasted a whole 10 minutes of ur time on this is hilarious......
> 
> Thanks.....



primus i didnt use 10 minutes of my time on this at all, im just tending to other things aswell at the moment.



> And BTW, if u think for a second that I instigated anything with u, u definatly need to stop smokin the shiit ur sellin....... U had this comin a long time ago........ I just aint been here to pinch u off..........



I have no clue what your babbling about primus  How have I had 'what' coming for a long time ? Your insults ? And why ?


----------



## lesofprimus (May 18, 2005)

Now u try and play the naive part??? LMFAO dude.....

Call me when ur balls drop.......


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 18, 2005)

_Call me when ur balls drop....... _

I take it your dog won't let you lick his anymore?


----------



## lesofprimus (May 18, 2005)

That's a good one... Ur one funny guy....


----------



## Soren (May 18, 2005)

> Personnally, I doubt YOU ever served, Soren. Except may be in an army of idiots led by cowards. You don't talk like a guy who served and I know what I mean. At best, you may have served as a Blue Helmet... or as I call them : "piss-keepers".



No you don't know what you mean then Meastro, you definitely don't !

It takes man to respect others 'and' yourself, to admit your mistakes, to tell the truth, to be thoughtful of others, etc etc.. and without these qualities your shit out of luck in the military ! ( In the long run at least )

In the military you learn to co-operate with the meanest of bastards, and to look beyond personal differences, cause in the military the goal is to be a team ! And I don't think I need to tell any soldier in here what happens if you get into a fistfight with a fellow soldier.  

In the end you basically learn to get along with almost everyone. 



> My godfather and his two brothers all served in the French Airborne in the 60s-70s. My godfather himself fought in the War of Algeria. They all have a "crappy attitude", as you call it, like Les... May be a little less direct, but anyway...



No'one with a crappy attitude in my family, that includes me and all others who serves and have served in the army, express themselves so aggressively ! Why would they ?


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 18, 2005)

My dad served from '41 through '45 in the Army. He came home a Technical Sergeant (E-2) and was in five battles and the Invasion of Normandy.

He was a gentle man aka a gentlemen.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 18, 2005)

Aggressive = Non-Military

Gentle = Military

Ummmmmmmm...... Yea......

I suppose u guys think that this aggressiveness is my normal behavior huh???

If so, ur a couple of bigger morons than I thought.......


----------



## plan_D (May 18, 2005)

I see now that both of you are basing your argument on the case of one rounds penertration, I think you need to learn a little engineering. 

I'll leave the rest of this out of it. Personally, I never had a chance to serve in the military (hearing problems on my left ear, the bastard). However, my grandad served in the army from 1939 - 1946 and my dad served in the RAF from 1970 to 1994 so I have a BETTER understanding than most civvies of military personel...still a keyboard pussy though, eh, les? Don't answer that, I know it's going to be a yes.


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 18, 2005)

Plan_D,

You have already made it abundantly clear that you don't understand the relationship between velocity and energy or the terminal behavior of ballistics in general. 

Please read my post again. Even a 30% loss of velocity (it would be more) will result in a 45% loss of energy (assuming the projectile retains 100% of it's mass after the strike to the ground) and the round will be deformed and not strike perpendicular to its concentric axis (because it no longer has one) resulting in a hit that concentrates the sectional density over a much larger area. The armor piercing tip of the round, due the the loss of rotational stability in relation to the flight path, will not be the small point upon which the mass and velocity will concentrate energy. 

The implication (which I thought was quite clear) of my argument is that ten such hits in a one square meter area will not breach the armor. At 400 yards, a perfectly square hit of an armor piercing round from a 20mm Hispano II will not even penetrate 25mm of armor plate. 

I think we're going to have to chalk this one up to agreeing to disagree.


----------



## plan_D (May 18, 2005)

You have made it clear you don't understand engineering or structural weakness caused by a breach or dent in structure.

The penertration values of rounds is record by the amount of splinters inside the armour. In German value system it is 50% while in the Soviet system it was 75%. I doubt very much that the Allied system was 100% of splinters. 

A square hit from a Hispano Mk.II at 400 yards probably would cause a hole but it would not fully penertrate to be classed, in military values, as penertration. 
Even so, the structure of that area has weakened considerably. Another one or two hits to the same region, would cause even more damage and the armour would be on the brink of collapse if it hadn't already done so. 

When those 10 rounds (I was making clear it was only one pass that 10 rounds would be hitting and I also stated they'd be more than one pass required) strike the area, they will not just scratch the surface. The angle of the round striking will vary, it may well strike at a perfect 0 degree angle. 
The armour that is being hit is weakening with every hit. Eventually the structure will fail. 

It's obvious though that we're going to be repeating the same argument, time and time again. So, yes, we'll just have to leave it here.


----------



## Chocks away! (May 18, 2005)

DAVIDICUS said:


> Those (probably all of you) who have seen Saving Private Ryan will recall that at the end, a German Tiger is bearing down on Tom Hanks character when suddenly, the tank is destroyed by a P-51. Matt Danon's character exclaims, "They're tank busters, P-51's" or something to that effect.
> 
> P-51's as tank busters?


 I know I was thinking the same. P-47 s? typhoons? hello?


----------



## Medvedya (May 18, 2005)

You know something? After reading this lot I feel like that piece of metal. 

Anyway - this is how it is, and always will be here. One thing _I_ learnt in the army was 'If you can't take a joke, you shouldn't have joined.' 

None of the staff and major posters are really concerned about the finer points of nettiquette, and thats how we like it. 

You're acting as if all this exists in the real world - it doesn't.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 18, 2005)

Huh???? What??? OMG this isnt Real Life??????

Oh dear God.. Now what am I gonna do.......

<<<<<<< Sniffles......


----------



## Nonskimmer (May 18, 2005)

There, there, big fella.


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 18, 2005)

I am not bothered by any lack of "nettiquette" here as I can dish it out with the best of them but I'm not sure what you mean by, " _You're acting as if all this exists in the real world - it doesn't._"

Do the communications we transmit across the internet not exist in the real world? How about our voice communications transmitted via telephone lines or by satellite? 

I suspect this same point was once made in reference to communications transmitted by written letter over sea and/or land.

How about communications by smoke signals? Did they take place in the real world?

I don't fault Soren for expecting civility and polite exchange on this forum. I generally go out of my way to come across as polite even though its in my nature to rip people new a-holes. After all, that's why I am in the profession that I am. In fact, I'm preparing right now to rip someone a new one tomorrow morning at a deposition - and then I'll rub his counsel's face in it. 

At any rate, that garbage about not being in the real world is f-cking rubbish.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 18, 2005)

> even though its in my nature to rip people new a-holes. After all, that's why I am in the profession that I am.


And that profession wouldnt happen to be Proctology would it??
Can I ask u a question??? Does the smell EVER get off ur fingers, like a fisherman???


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 18, 2005)

Thwe smell goes half way up my arm and that's Mister Proctologist to you bubb.


----------



## Medvedya (May 18, 2005)

Well, let's put it this way Davidicus - do I know you? Do you know me? Nope. Do you see me around town, or work in the same office? Uh uh.

So, that being the case, who am I to you, and vice versa? Why worry about it?

The facetious comments you made about telephones and smoke signals don't really apply, because you usually know the people your sending them to in some kind of physical sense - even if it's just a business call.

To give an example, I wasn't exactly thrilled to read your post about how I wanted to 'meat' C.Cpl, but y'know, life's too short to get into a hissy fit about it. 

Outside of this forum - to me, you don't even exist! And that's not meant to be taken as an insult - just the way things are.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 18, 2005)

Been about 12 years since someone called me Bubb, and funny enough, that individual also smelled of shiit.....

BTW, if ur getting that deep into the anus, u may need to get some professional help.... Sounds like u may have some serious frustration issues.......


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 18, 2005)

Why did your mom call you Bubb?

You know what they say, the turd doesn't fall far from the dog.


BTW - You'll have to try harder than that if you want to match wits with me.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 18, 2005)

U actually made a Mom joke???? OMFG dude....... U just showed what a freakin retard u are... No one makes Mom jokes anymore..... LOLOLOLOL

Seriously, that is like soooooooooooooo 80's it aint even funny........ I coulda actually given u the benefit of the doubt, but u just blew it......... LMFAO........... Freakin nerd....


----------



## Medvedya (May 18, 2005)

However - keep this stuff up and the result will be as inevitable as 99 precedes 100. 

The thing is, where as I said that we don't really know each other - I and the major posters have been here for some time, which does make us all pen-pals in a sense, so we're obviously going to simply close ranks. 

On you, Davidicus.

Then again, maybe you don't care. (shrug)


----------



## lesofprimus (May 18, 2005)

I doubt he cares..... He'll just go another one of the 197 other WWII Aviation message boards after his banning..... 

And another.. 
And another..........
And another...................


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 18, 2005)

Uh oh, the ranks are closing in on me.  Good thing none of this exists in the real world.

Les doesn't need you to come to his rescue. Then again, as you say, you're pen pals so I defer to your judgement. 

Oh and Les, mom jokes are indeed freakin retarded ... as are butt-hole jokes like, "_And that profession wouldnt happen to be Proctology would it?? Can I ask u a question??? Does the smell EVER get off ur fingers, like a fisherman??? - BTW, if ur getting that deep into the anus, u may need to get some professional help.... Sounds like u may have some serious frustration issues......._"

However that may be, it is still a fact that the turd doesn't fall far from the dog. But you already knew that.

Oh, and I would wear being banned by you as a badge of honor Les. After all, we would both then know for sure who the sissy boy is.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 18, 2005)

> As are butt-hole jokes like, "And that profession wouldnt happen to be Proctology would it??
> Can I ask u a question??? Does the smell EVER get off ur fingers, like a fisherman??? - BTW, if ur getting that deep into the anus, u may need to get some professional help.... Sounds like u may have some serious frustration issues......."



Dude, are u insane or something??? That was some funny ass shiit buddy.... Soupy Sails was never any funnier..... I cracked myself up over it...... (U see I'm very vain.).......


> Oh and Les, mom jokes indeed freakin retarded.


Well thank u for confirming that u are in fact retarded.... Sorry for the inconvienience, but we dont have a retarded section here at WW2AIRCRAFT.NET.... 

Hey Med, u think u could create a special little retarded section for poopy lover over here??? Maybe title it Davidicus' Happy Room...........
Make him feel all nice and cuddly.........

Gimme a freakin break dude..... LOL


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 18, 2005)

Les, I think that last post was actually funny. Seriously, I actually chuckled.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 18, 2005)

Thank you. U finally found me amusing...... I tried to tell u I was a funny guy......


----------



## Medvedya (May 18, 2005)

DAVIDICUS said:


> Uh oh, the ranks are closing in on me.  Good thing none of this exists in the real world.



I'm not saving Les - just telling you what's gonna happen. Won't be by Les alone either, but by general agreement. 

You're right - it's hardly to be an Earth shattering event for you if that happens, but it seems to me like shooting yourself in the foot for no reason at all! 

Strange behaviour from a guy who sees himself as the embodiment of Atticus Finch.


----------



## Sal Monella (May 19, 2005)

Gentlemen - I just read through the last few pages of this thread and Les was asking for it. I agree with Soren.

Go ahead and tear me apart now.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 19, 2005)

U have the right to ur own opinion Sal....... U shall be spared from the hyenas for now......

But dont agree with a meatball... Stand on ur own 2 feet and shout proudly, "Les is an idiot!!"


----------



## evangilder (May 19, 2005)

Well, this has certainly been interesting... I think everyone needs to take a deep breath and calm down. What I saw was that Les made a comment that someone took exception to and a bunch of people jumped into the fray.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (May 19, 2005)

evangilder said:


> Well, this has certainly been interesting... I think everyone needs to take a deep breath and calm down. What I saw was that Les made a comment that someone took exception to and a bunch of people jumped into the fray.



Sounds like the start of WW1


----------



## plan_D (May 19, 2005)

Yes, who ever has their finger on the button...step away. 

As FB correctly said, the last time this kind of thing happened 125 countries were thrown into a war for no reason. (That's World War 1, yes there were 125 countries involved, and yes there are more than 125 countries in the world  )


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 19, 2005)

there's 208 i believe??


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 19, 2005)

Wow I missed a lot in the last 2 days! I think some people just need to learn not to take les too seriously with some of the things he says. I dont know I may be wrong but Ive found that if you take a lot of his remarks as funny comments as they are ment to be and you throw a good one back at him, youll get along with him just fine.

Oh and as was stated several times, from my on going military experience I have found that you have to be thick skinned.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 19, 2005)

i can take allot of stuff, but not CC dissing cornwall..........


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 19, 2005)

I cant take much, Im a pretty emotional guy.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 19, 2005)

Your gay!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 19, 2005)

And you have poor grammar!


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 19, 2005)

Well no 8) But I am very emotional.


----------



## plan_D (May 19, 2005)

Do you have any sisters, CC?


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 19, 2005)

Nope


----------



## plan_D (May 19, 2005)

Close female cousins? No ing inbreeding implied.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 19, 2005)

Nope. One female cousin who I never see, but no sisters (or borthers for that matter).

If youre wondering where I get my feminism from, its because I talk to girls on msn all the time.


----------



## plan_D (May 19, 2005)

That's not a reason.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 19, 2005)

yeah i speak to girls all the time and i'm not like you at all!!


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 19, 2005)

I talk to myself a lot too, does that have anything to do with it?


----------



## plan_D (May 19, 2005)

That could be something to do with it.


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 19, 2005)

I cry lots too


----------



## plan_D (May 19, 2005)

What? Really?


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 19, 2005)

Yeah. At least once a week.


----------



## plan_D (May 19, 2005)

Why?


----------



## cheddar cheese (May 19, 2005)

It makes me feel better


----------



## plan_D (May 19, 2005)

Oh...k...


----------



## Nonskimmer (May 19, 2005)

I usually cry for a bit when I catch myself in my zipper after a piss. You know, like when you zip up too fast? God, the pain!


----------



## FLYBOYJ (May 19, 2005)

Nonskimmer said:


> I usually cry for a bit when I catch myself in my zipper after a piss. You know, like when you zip up too fast? God, the pain!


----------



## evangilder (May 19, 2005)

That hurts like hell!


----------



## Nonskimmer (May 19, 2005)

It's one of those times when I'm not ashamed to cry.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 19, 2005)

Dont worry, you are not shamed!


----------



## Medvedya (May 19, 2005)

Thinking - agggh! 

I only came here for a slash - not a circumcision!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 19, 2005)

What?


----------



## Soren (May 19, 2005)

> My dad served from '41 through '45 in the Army. He came home a Technical Sergeant (E-2) and was in five battles and the Invasion of Normandy.
> 
> *He was a gentle man aka a gentlemen*.



Aka a 'Real' soldier  



lesofprimus said:


> U have the right to ur own opinion Sal....... U shall be spared from the hyenas for now......
> 
> But dont agree with a meatball... Stand on ur own 2 feet and shout proudly, "Les is an idiot!!"



Primus why don't you just quit it, huh ? This is boring and childish, and the more you insult people, the worse people will think of you. Especially if the person your insulting hasn't insulted you ! 

You'll have to remember YOU started the insults, so its up to YOU to stop them primus ! 

All I want, is to get on track with the original discussion again. (Without insults) 

But if what Adler is saying is true, and it was all just jokes, well...... then I'd just like to add; "You have a sick sense of humor pal !" 

-------------------------

And for Adler;

Sure you'll have to be thick skinned to be in the army, but you can easely be thick skinned and polite at the same time Adler. Infact that seems to be the rule rather than the exception in the army. (After some time in there atleast  ) 

All i served with were very polite people I'll have to add, and still is. (although some of them had a sick sense humor aswell )

Btw havent seen you crazly lashing out with insults yet Adler ! This is what i have to say to that....


----------



## plan_D (May 19, 2005)

NS, there's a way to solve that problem. Put your dick in your pants before zipping up.


----------



## Nonskimmer (May 19, 2005)

I do try.


----------



## Medvedya (May 19, 2005)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> What?



What I would say to myself if _that_ trouser incident happened to me!


----------



## trackend (May 19, 2005)

As I have been away for a while it seems quite weird to pick up this thread as when I left it had just started and everyone was talking about Mustangs tank busting ability or lack of. If you read the first page then this one it appears that you have a better chance of stopping a tank using a penis zip trap maneuver that with a Mustang as I know little about aviation I shall regale you with a penis story I used to do motor cycle trials riding, one day I am competing in a trial when going down a steep incline the front wheel falls into a rut the handlebars twisted at right angles and I slide up the tank and pranged me knob on the end of the bars  all the male on looks clutched at their gonads and went ooh all the females pissed themselves laughing while I rolled on the floor holding me vitals I still have a circular scar on me plonker 25 years later (I bled like a stuck pig). But it's proved an interesting talking point with me girlfriends.


----------



## Nonskimmer (May 19, 2005)

"Mustangs and the male parts: Can _you_ see the connection?"


----------



## trackend (May 19, 2005)

Oh of course what a steaming dip stick I am.  Sorry Skim its me age Im going through the male menopause its when you pause being a man and start turning into a gibbering prat


----------



## Nonskimmer (May 19, 2005)

It was a touching story though. I couldn't help but clutch myself after reading that one. Yeow!


----------



## evangilder (May 19, 2005)

Made my pods hurt just thinking about it!


----------



## lesofprimus (May 20, 2005)

Soren........ As in Sore In The Ass?????


> He was a gentle man aka a gentlemen.





> Aka a 'Real' soldier


Yea I'm sure ALL the best soldiers were "Gentle".......... Try taking a bayonet and sticking it into someone 3 times...... That surely makes a man "Gentle"...... Or maybe being forced to shoot 13 year old kids with Ak-47's in Somolia............ That definatly will make u a "Gentle Man"..... Or how about witnessing an uncovered mass grave site in Bosnia, where each head had a bullet in it.......

Now THAT would surely make a man "Gentle", dont u agree Soren???



> Primus why don't you just quit it, huh ? This is boring and childish, and the more you insult people, the worse people will think of you. Especially if the person your insulting hasn't insulted you !


U havent gotten it through ur thick head yet??? I dont care about anyones opinion about me, especially some freakin Geek Squad Member who wears Birkenstocks, eats Tofu and Granola, and is saving up money for a Penial Implant....

Point is, if the dude wants to say that he agrees with ur comments, he is in fact saying the same thing, and is entitled to the same abuse/insults/slander that u would get.... And which u did...... And will continue to get unless u decide to mind ur own fruckin buisness and stop trying to tell the members here how to act....

And who said anything about stopping the insults??? If people act accordingly here, and respect the other members, there are no insults...... You and a few others feel that ur opinion is always right and that everyone else needs to be enlightend to ur truths.....



> But if what Adler is saying is true, and it was all just jokes, well...... then I'd just like to add; "You have a sick sense of humor pal !"


About 60% of the crap I said was in jest..... U can decide what was and what wasnt....... If all u Noob-ass members did ur homework before joining up and read all the posts and topics, LIKE I DID, u would have had a feel for how this place goes round, and the sick twisted sense of humor that the Admin known as lesofprimus has........



> All i served with were very polite people I'll have to add, and still is.


I guess I'll repeat this cause ur freakin deaf as a ground mole, but do u honestly think that I am this rude and crude all the time??? I hold doors open for old ladies and women and say "Bless You" to strangers when the sneeze.........
I actually have great discussions here, and I have quite a bit of information about WWII aircraft and the pilots that flew them......

But when some "Guys" (nice word just 4 u Soren) start messing around with other members, calling them names for simply stating their opinion, the gloves come off and the lesson gets taught...

It isnt hard to understand.... Be cool and everything is cool... Be a dick and get treated like one...... For ur information I didnt start this, I came to the aid of the board when some attitudes got out of shape, urs is one of them...

It can all end if u guys start acting cool... Theres no need to try and show ur smarter than the average bear here... We dont need to see a graph showing the turn radius of 4 different fighters, then hear people say that theres no way a -38 could outturn a Zero..... 

There is...... Not all Japanese pilots were great like Sakai or Nishizawa..... Not all American pilots were as useless as Elmer Fudge......

Ill still look at the graph, but use it accordingly, and make my own opinion of it, after I add in all the other info I have about a certain subject....

In summation, this can continue or it can end..... I excel at insults and bullying tactics........ Im the Bouncer of WWIIAIRCRAFT.NET ......

LOL Be cool and u can stay at the bar and drink all u want.........


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 20, 2005)

Les said, "_Yea I'm sure ALL the best soldiers were "Gentle".......... Try taking a bayonet and sticking it into someone 3 times...... That surely makes a man "Gentle"...... Or maybe being forced to shoot 13 year old kids with Ak-47's in Somolia............ That definatly will make u a "Gentle Man"..... Or how about witnessing an uncovered mass grave site in Bosnia, where each head had a bullet in it.......

Now THAT would surely make a man "Gentle", dont u agree Soren??? _"

What's your point Les? Are you saying that soldiers that go into battle and experience the horrors of war cannot comport themselves back home as gentlemen on an online forum concerning WWII aircraft? 

Tonight, between screams into your pillow, ask yourself if you might really be a dick because you love taking it up the ass so much. (I figure having one's a-hole stretched and rubbed raw would put anyone in a bad mood.)

Oh, and 60% of my posts on this thread are addressed to heterosexuals. The other 40% are addressed to you. If you think about it (probably not a good idea while your head is slamming against the headboard), you can figure out which ones are addressed to the homo.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 20, 2005)

I almost deleted that crap above, but I'll retort for some more amusement...

First of all Meatball, did i use the word gentleman?? No i said GENTLE....... 2 different words....


> Are you saying that soldiers that go into battle and experience the horrors of war cannot comport themselves back home as gentlemen on an online forum concerning WWII aircraft?


Comport??????????????????????????????

Who says that my conduct on an online forum has to be "gentlemanly"??? 

You??? 

Are u the "Politeness Patrol"??? Do u regulate Niceness on the internet for the Federal Govt???

No????

Then STFU and mind ur own damn business pussy...... Etiquette aint one of ur strong points, as seen on the below quote.......



> ask yourself if you might really be a dick because you love taking it up the ass so much. (I figure having one's a-hole stretched and rubbed raw would put anyone in a bad mood.)


BTW, the whole "Ur Gay and like Dick" thing wore itself out about 4 years ago..... Maybe u should get outta the house for alittle while... Get some sun...... Follow up on recent human events........ Get a cluew as to how the REAL world is... Get outta that fantasy, computer world u inhabit......

If u need some help, "Dad" jokes are in right now, along with the EVER so popular "Im Glad Ur Kid Died" jokes........

And for the record, if u go and read some of my past posts, ull see that I can be quite "gentlemanly" to posters who DESERVE to be treated that way........


----------



## evangilder (May 20, 2005)

Davidicus, why did you feel compelled to jump into this again? One more outburst like that with an accusation like that and I will give you a yellow card. Enough of those and you will be gone. If Les had not responded to that first, I WOULD have deleted that.


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 20, 2005)

That's it?

I thought you said, "_I excel at insults and bullying tactics........_" 

"_Who says that my conduct on an online forum has to be "gentlemanly"?_"

Well, who says mine does? Maybe most of the crap I said was in jest. Maybe I just have a sick and twisted sense of humor.  

Sound familiar? Maybe I'm just slapping you around for fun.

Come on Les. "_Get a clue as to how the REAL world is._" 

I know its late where you are Les. Way after midnight. Apologize for me to your boyfriend for keeping you up you twink.


----------



## DAVIDICUS (May 20, 2005)

evangilder,

Have you actually read through this thread? So my posts are out of line but Les' aren't? 

All of my "objectionable" posts have been reactions to Les'. Les can certainly dish it but as we all can see, he doesn't take it very well. 

Is the basis for my posts being objectionable merely because I'm not an admin? Les is the only admin on this board who rudely insults people. I got into the fray frankly because I didn't like the way he was treating Soren. I thought I'd give him a taste of his own medicine.


----------



## Nonskimmer (May 20, 2005)

DAV if there's one thing you should realize about this place by now, it's that abuse is usually met with abuse. It doesn't really matter who started it. It'll just keep going, and going, and going.


----------



## KraziKanuK (May 20, 2005)

evangilder said:


> Davidicus, why did you feel compelled to jump into this again? One more outburst like that with an accusation like that and I will give you a yellow card. Enough of those and you will be gone. If Les had not responded to that first, I WOULD have deleted that.




LOL, the one that should be shown a YELLOW card, and possibly the RED card, is *lesofprimous*.

Never seen such obnoxious and juvinile behavior from an Admin befor.

But what else would one expect from one that has the mental and emotion problems he has.


----------



## lesofprimus (May 20, 2005)

> I thought I'd give him a taste of his own medicine


HA! In ur freakin dreams... U aint got the skills to go with me pal.... Mom jokes and Faggot slinging are grade school taunts....... 


> Les can certainly dish it but as we all can see, he doesn't take it very well.


Ur kidding right??? I take it just fine, although i have to admit I've been insulted by 13 year olds better than I have here.... Most of u morons have the imagination of a 10 year old.....

The only ones that were any good at swappin em with me were Plan_D and GrG........

Now to the idiot known as KK...........



> LOL, the one that should be shown a YELLOW card, and possibly the RED card, is lesofprimous.


Glad to see that ur making the rules now...... We all feel so much more secure.... I serve a purpose here and thats to weed out the undesireables that think they are better than everyone else, and that theri opinion is the only way......



> Never seen such obnoxious and juvinile behavior from an Admin befor.


If u dont like the way it is here, leave......... Plain and simple....... We like things easy here, not confrontational...... Discussing a plane performance doesnt need to get to the "U dont know shiit" stage......... If it does, we as Admins usually try and stop it........

I have my tactic, Med has his........ Im pushy and arrogant, he's more polite and mediative... Both ways work...... 


> But what else would one expect from one that has the mental and emotion problems he has.


Yup........ I blame it all on my wife...... Damn, she's such a Nazi.........

Oh, and for jumpin in like that AGAIN KK, u just earned a yellow card....... Enjoy it, im sure it wont be ur last.......


----------



## evangilder (May 20, 2005)

Before anyone else accuses me of double standards, Les made a comment that Soren took offense to, and next thing I know, there are at least 3 other people that jump in. This has gotten way out of hand. I suggest yesterday that everyone take a deep breath and calm down. It fell on deaf ears. So I am locking this NOW. If it continues to get out of hand, I have no problems throwing yellow cards out to ANYONE.

If you have a serious problem with something someone said, TAKE IT TO PRIVATE MESSAGES. This has gone way too far.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 22, 2005)

Soren said:


> Btw havent seen you crazly lashing out with insults yet Adler ! This is what i have to say to that....



Why should I jump out with insults. Have I ever insulted you Soren? I only insult where I am insulted. And eye for an eye.


----------

