Hey don't make fun of Old Reliable - that tank is their deck gun.
NonCredibleDefense
A community for your defence shitposting needs
Rules
1. Be nice
Do not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.
2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes
If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.
3. Content must be relevant
Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.
4. No racism / hatespeech
No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.
5. No politics
We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.
6. No seriousposting
We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.
7. No classified material
Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.
8. Source artwork
If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.
9. No low-effort posts
No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.
10. Don't get us banned
No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.
11. No misinformation
NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.
Other communities you may be interested in
Banner made by u/Fertility18
After reading that I'm convinced I would love a reaction video series where some military expert just eviscerates G.I Joe episodes.
I watched an episode just last night where the U.S.S. Flagg got it's shit slapped by a handful of Cobra aircraft. It basically looked like the picture above.
Note the 6th bubble: not only is this the first carrier with a deck mounted 16" turret, it's got a ro-ro ramp for the tank!
it’s got a ro-ro ramp for the tank!
I just laughing at the implications of this.
Sir, we have to abandon the mission. The enemy has closed their deep sea port - we cannot possibly launch an amphibious assault.
Now, now. It looks like the ramp is coming off the flight deck. Maybe it's for boarding actions.
Good point. Now the tank makes sense.
Sir, the Americans have boarded the ship!
How many, lieutenant?
Five, sir.
Just 5?
tread rumbling and canon fire intensifies
not only is this the first carrier with a deck mounted 16" turret
The HMS Furious in 1917 had both a rear 18" turret and a flight deck at the same time, though it might be questionable as to whether-or-not it'd qualify as an aircraft carrier (though the concept of an "aircraft carrier" was pretty embryonic in 1917, so some allowance probably has to be made). And while the turret was on a deck, it wasn't on the flight deck.
Not to be confused with its bigger, angrier American counterpart, USS Really Fucking Pissed Off.
that is furiously non credible, great find!
18"!?
I thought the "18" was a typo, but the Royal Navy really did put the heaviest gun they ever fielded on a carrier.
Well the Japanese navy had to get the idea from some where and the British did build a few ships for them......
They had a 12" casemate gun on a class of submarines in the same war.
I have a strange fascination with non credible defense post. Military people are like academic nerds when it comes to hyper specific vocabulary and in-the-know references. So many post and comments are like half ciphers where its a puzzle to piece together what is being talked about ad what the joke is.
I can't get a bunch of 'em, wish that there was spoiler text with context, especially on current events, where often the first I see of the event is the NCD reference.
I usually try to hyperlink or provide some context when I comment myself.
This is what you get, when you put the army in charge of a carrier, instead of the boat people.
Why do you want the army in charge of the boat people?
Hardie,har har.
That's actually pretty good.
Napoleon: The navy is just an army on boats
Cao Cao: agreed, how hard can it be?
Basically the entire plot to the ExFor series. Buck Army Colonel finds himself in command of an alien starship somehow. The series is one extremely non credible event after another and aware of itself.
This plot point sounds vaguely Macross/Robotech derived, and I love that. I might have to check that out.
If you like cheesy military sci-fi that makes fun of itself, blended with pretty unique wargame and battle concepts you'll love it. The audiobooks are a must, RC Bray is brilliant.
Amen, fellow monkey.
Yeah, give it to the Coat Guard where it belongs.
Littoral carrier groups when? Blue water is dead. Long live the shallows!
a deranged lunatic has parked an Abrams on the flight deck
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convoy_PQ_17
On receiving the third order to scatter on 4 July 1942, Lieutenant Leo Gradwell RNVR, commanding the anti-submarine trawler HMS Ayrshire, did not want to head for Archangelsk and led his convoy of Ayrshire and Troubador, Ironclad and Silver Sword north. On reaching the Arctic ice, the convoy pushed into it, then stopped engines and banked their fires. The crews used white paint from Troubador, covered the decks with white linen and arranged the Sherman tanks on the merchant vessels decks into a defensive formation, with loaded main guns. After a period of waiting and having evaded Luftwaffe reconnaissance aircraft, finding themselves unstuck, they proceeded to the Matochkin Strait.
Now, you might say that the USS Enterprise isn't a merchant ship desperate for some kind of defensive armament, but on the other hand, it appears to be firing battleship guns at a MiG still flying low right above the ship, and I have to believe that a tank's main gun, to say nothing of the machine guns, are probably more-suitable as short-range antiaircraft weapons than a battleship gun for that.
Frankly, I think that given the scenario, pre-positioning a tank in that situation probably demonstrates a considerable amount of foresight.
Frankly, I think that given the scenario, pre-positioning a tank in that situation probably demonstrates a considerable amount of foresight.
That sounds SUSPICIOUSLY like something a JAG defense lawyer might say
The Brits awarded Gradwell the DSC for putting tanks on his decks.
There's been recent doctrinal hotness with the Marines working on the concept of sticking a HIMARS unit on the flight decks of their amphibious assault ships.
https://taskandpurpose.com/news/himars-marine-corps-ship-deck/
...chaining the vehicle-mounted system to the vessel’s flight deck before firing off a 227mm GPS-guided M31 Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GLMRS) rocket at a mock target floating in the waters near a Pacific island some 70 kilometers away.
The results were, well, explosive:
Sure, parking a rocket truck on the flight deck of a vessel on the open ocean seems simple enough, but Marine officials are overjoyed with the success of the Oct. 22 exercise. “The ability to project power from and at sea is critical,” 1st Marine Expeditionary Brigade ops officer Lt. Col. Tom Savage told the U.S. Naval Institute from aboard the Dawn Blitz flagship USS Essex. “It’s a significant capability.”
The test has been in the works since at least September, when Marine Commandant Gen. Neller dropped a public hint. “We know we can shoot HIMARS [High Mobility Artillery Rocket System] off the flight deck of a ship,” Neller said during remarks at the at the Marine Corps League’s annual Modern Day Marine expo in Quantico, Virginia, on Sept. 21, according to Defense News. “You’re going to see precision fire delivered off amphib ships, whether it comes out of tube guns or rockets or delivered from unmanned systems.”
I think that the real question here isn't "should we be court-martialing the captain", but "what award should the captain receive for use of innovative tactics?"
I thought the F117a doesn't have a2a capabilities. It acts like a hole in the sky, drops a couple of bombs and then the distant AWACS plane laughs maniacally.
a2a bombs, silly
you fly over them and drop your ordnance
https://www.sandboxx.us/news/how-an-f-15e-shot-down-an-iraqi-gunship-with-a-bomb/
The full story of how an F-15E scored its only air-to-air kill… with a bomb
Because they were moving so fast through the sky to close with the team in trouble, the unpowered bomb actually had a greater range than the Sidewinder missile. Bennett released the bomb 4 miles out from the Hind-24, with Bakke carefully keeping his laser sighted on the helicopter.
All you need is a steady hand and a laser designator!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F-117_Nighthawk
For this reason, it is equipped with integrated sophisticated digital navigation and attack systems, targeting being achieved via a thermal imaging infrared system and a laser rangefinder/laser designator.
It's got the designator, so...
Ah, that makes sense. A laser-guided bomb is just a really lazy missile.