Boring but Practical/Real Life: Difference between revisions
m
Some tweaks
Jason taylor (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
m (Some tweaks) |
||
| (11 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{trope}}
== Subpages ==
{{subpages}}
== Other Examples ==
* Humans are often praised for their high intelligence compared to any other animals. However, this is only the second best superpower humans possess. Even more important and providing humans with an advantage over almost any other animals of the plain was the ability... to walk! And keep walking for hours. Many animals are a lot faster than humans but also tire much faster. Humans can travel over very long distances with relatively short amounts of rest and their ability to carry water with them extended this even more. To capture a horse alive, you just had to follow them until they were too exhausted to take a single more step.
** One of the few other animals with a similar ability to travel over long distances is the trusty dog. The beginning of a wonderful partnership.
Line 8 ⟶ 10:
* Regular, comfortable clothes. Spend a few months rehearsing/acting in a corset, hoop-skirt and high heels if you don't believe me.
* The humble spear. Basically the next step of weapons development after inventing the knife (or sharpened rock), and has been in use for thousands of years by almost every single culture that has ever existed. It has equipped entire armies, and even now exists in the form of a bayonet attachment for guns.
** So practical, that it coined the name of an entire nation. The
*** The spear not only evolved into the bayoneted musket or rifle, but into stakes which are universally used as a "spice" to fortifications. Not to mention such elaborations as the abattis (interlaced and sharpened branches) and Cheval de Frise (stakes pounded into a single log as a spine).
* Roman equipment:
** The humble short sword and shield of the Roman legions. Compared to the massive swords and axes of their opponents, these seemed sadly undersized but, combined with Roman tactics, it easily carried the day in thousands of engagements. There's a reason it's known as "the sword that conquered the world".
Line 31 ⟶ 34:
*** The mighty ''Bismarck''. Sank the ''H.M.S Hood'' in only a few minutes with nearly every hand aboard. One of the most high tech, powerful naval vessels around. Brought down by a torpedo launched from a Swordfish.
*** Swordfishes were later fitted with radar and used for anti-submarine warfare. Once that happened, the North Atlantic wasn't safe for any German ship or submarine.
** [https://web.archive.org/web/20140703085610/http://www.wwiivehicles.com/ussr/aircraft/fighter/polikarpov-i-16.asp I-16] by Polikarpov, aka "Fly" (for the Spanish Republicans) aka "Rat" (for the Spanish Nationalists) aka "Donkey" (for the Russian-speaking). When introduced, it was the first low wing cantilever monoplane with a retractable undercarriage used by any military in the world - and thus quite "hot stuff", yes. And the only thing that gave a serious trouble to SM.79 over Spain. But: it wasn't written off until 1943, and there were good reasons for this.
*** It had two rivals falling under the same description - [http://i16fighter.ru/description/competitors.htm compare photo]. I-14 (ANT-31) was actually more maneuverable and did beat I-16 in mock fights, though was inconvenient for production and had even worse mechanization. IP-1 had better mechanization (raising ski undercarriage, not only wheel variant) and better cockpit, among other things, and actually got into small series. How I-16 won? In spin behavior. I-14 was much worse at this, and IP-1 actually crashed in one test when the pilot failed to stop spinning. I-16 failed to enter some spin modes and stabilized easily. When others finally worked out the kinks, I-16 got already mass-produced and polished, and it was the time to develop the next generation.
*** When the more powerful fighters appeared, it was clear that I-16 is hard to boost much even with better engines. But its relatively large wing area still meant good maneuverability - and ability to carry a better loadout, so it was used as a fighter-bomber. I-16 wasn't such a cutting edge as a plane in 1939, but that's when it got [[Macross Missile Massacre|air-to-air rockets]] and fought like this against the Japanese, with convincing results. Later it was used in "[[Airborne Aircraft Carrier|Project Zveno]]" where it carried 2x 250 kg bombs - it couldn't lift off with this weight on its own - for precise bombing, again with spectacular results.
Line 41 ⟶ 44:
**** It also came as standard with a 76 mm main gun (later upgraded to 85mm), an aluminium engine block, and tracks that didn't bog down so badly in rough Russian terrain.
*** The Sherman also fit this category. Against a Tiger or a Panther one on one a Sherman would get its turret handed to it. But the allies used its superior speed and production to overwhelm the enemy in large groups. While they shot at one or two Shermans the rest got behind and started blasting away at the weaker backside.
*** In any case tanks aren't mainly for fighting other tanks as if they were battleships. Tanks are for digging a hole through the enemy lines, and getting through and destroying supply lines. Do the math. A good tank is only worth two or three poor tanks at best. It is worth any amount of trucks. That is what people forget when they compare
** General Dwight D. Eisenhower once said that the "equipment ... most vital to our success in Africa and Europe were the bulldozer, the jeep, the 2 1/2 ton truck, and the C-47 airplane. Curiously enough, none of these is designed for combat." The point being that the preparations prior to battle are just as important as actually fighting them. Even though the Germans' best weapons were technologically far better than that of the Americans, Brits, and arguably the Soviets, they 1) couldn't get enough of them to the front, and 2) couldn't keep them fueled and maintained for long enough for them to be useful.
*** There is a school of thought that says the C-47 cargo plane was the single most important vehicle that helped win the war for the allies.
Line 47 ⟶ 50:
*** While the U.S. provided the Soviet Union with a number of tanks, bazookas and planes as part of the lend-lease act, many Soviet commanders were most grateful for the thousands of Jeeps that came with the deal since the Soviet union's main method of having its infantry keep up with the tanks was riding them (and you can only fit so many guys on top of a T-34 [[We Have Reserves|before the first AT shell blows them to pieces]]). Tens of thousands local copies of the Jeep would be made during and after the war and were much beloved by their owners.
***trucks were also exceedingly popular with the Red Army. They were satisfied with their own tanks, they just needed more of them. With someone else making their trucks there was more space at the factory. And Russia is a big place and needs [[Captain Obvious|lots of trucks.]]
***One more quirky but interesting item on the Russian order list was landlines. Russians never liked the fear of eavesdropers and wanted to keep radio silence as often as possible. Certainly the vanguard would have to cut loose as you can't fight a maneuver war without doing so. But the main body can be coming at a deliberate enough pace to rig landlines. Russians however didn't make good ones and they had to be flawlessly protected to stand the weather as one leak is equiv to cutting it. The Western Allies could
*** "Amateurs study tactics. Professionals study ''logistics''."
* Late in WWII the US stopped painting their aircraft. Why? Several reasons: The Americans were building aircraft faster than they could be shot down; The Axis couldn't keep up with the losses the Allies were inflicting; radar made camoflage useless; and the Americans didn't care if they were intercepted.
Line 126 ⟶ 129:
* The Infantry. As noted by Robert Heinlein, while technology may evolve to include incredibly dangerous tanks, bombs, aircraft carriers, missiles, nuclear weapons, and everything else that can conceivably kill a thousand people inside a nanosecond, there has only ever been one branch of Armed Forces remarkable in it's consistency; a man, trained or untrained, between fourteen and fifty years of age, and a weapon in his hand. This man, or in recent times this woman, has endured the scorching jungles of Tenochtitlan, and the unbearable hell of Stalingrad. When a Tank rolls across his path, he puts a bit of fuel in a bottle, sets a light, and throws it underneath. When a plane flies overhead, he finds a ridge and hides under it. When poison gas lands near him, he pisses on his handkerchief and covers his mouth. He can fight in damn near any conditions, run on, in comparison to other forms of warfare, miniscule amounts of fuel, cross any terrain, in time, and defeat any foe given enough of him. He is the Duckfoot, the Mehmet, the Tommy, the average infantry soldier. He is the most boring arm of any Armed Force, to the point that many of it's members are forced to be there. But, boy, is he the most practical
** "You can bomb it, you can strafe it, you can cover it with poison, you can turn it into glass, but you don't own it unless your infantry's on it and the other guy's isn't."
* While we are at that, the musket. Bows are a product of years of craftsmanship used by archers who spend just as long learning it. While not as effective one for one, you can "mass produce" musketeers because any poor dude miserable enough to take the job can load and fire twice a minute which means there are as many soldiers as there are people and money to pay them. If one side has ten thousand archers that can get off six rounds a minute it has the equiv of sixty thousand men teleporting in and departing. If however the other side has thirty thousand musketeers getting off two a minute the effect is the same. Except there will always be more musketeers.
* This is one of the reasons why Western martial arts have been downplayed or ignored in most media compared to Eastern martial arts. The latter is known for being exotic, with often thematic naming of forms and styles and some level of mysticism fused with the styles themselves—making them excellent for flashy media depictions. European martial arts, however, had more straightforward names of both schools and techniques, and as such don't seem quite as impressive-sounding for media depictions.
** Some Eastern Martial Arts get the same treatment as well. About ten or fifteen years ago, people were more likely to have heard of Karate and Kung-Fu (which are often used as umbrella terms for a variety of Japanese and Chinese Martial Arts) than Judo or Muay Thai. However, with the popularity of positional battles or the attacks, counters, etc. being used; so while one combatant may be dangerously close to getting their arm broken or being choked unconscious, most of the audience sits there wondering when the action is going to start. Watch a match or two on [[YouTube]] and you'll see what I mean.
Line 139 ⟶ 143:
** Maintenance workers are almost the exact same thing, except that they take care of the grounds on which we earn our living.
* [[The Lab Rat]].
* Rope. Yup, it's almost as old as a stick - and it's funny how many jobs friction (and occasionally gravity) can do for you. Tying many common knots is ''simpler'' than the proverbial ability of fastening shoelaces. Remember, with little practice most of these can be - and were - used efficiently despite bad lighting and severe rocking, by [[The Drunken Sailor]] who pays more attention to not being blown overboard. [http://global.britannica.com/EBchecked/media/6263/Several-types-of-knots?topicId=68612 Blackwall hitch]{{Dead link}} is barely enough to be called a knot at all, yet has its uses - e.g. to hold a sack closed tight under its own weight, yet accessible immediately by lifting off the hook. Bowline can be tied in a few seconds with one hand. Constrictor (holding so well that people used to simply cut it), [http://www.netknots.com/rope_knots/transom-knot transom knot], [
* A large part of tactics and operational art is essentially traffic direction. The general who most efficiently makes large columns of men move about the way he wants them
* While long
* The Mosin-Nagant rifle: A design over a hundred years old (and you might get a rifle that physically ''is'') and outdated for a large portion of its service life, but it's cheap, built to withstand the Russian winter, simple enough for a conscript to use, takes cheap ammo (As not only was enough made for the rifles, it is still in common use today), has all the power of a full power cartridge, and is fairly accurate.
* There's no shortage of fancy muzzle devices for sale for the AR15 platform with cool spikes or dragons attached to them, yet it turns out [https://web.archive.org/web/20160511220850/http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/06/jeremy-s/ar-15-flash-hider-shootout/ the best for hiding flash]<ref>the ones that perform marginally better vent gas downward, which work poorly with prone firing as it defeats the point by kicking up a cloud of dust which is ''worse'' than muzzle flash</ref> is the plain looking, dirt cheap (often free with barrels), standard issue for US rifles A2 Birdcage. While the A2 is a poor compensator (it was never intended to be one) one of the best devices [https://web.archive.org/web/20160427185520/http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/11/jeremy-s/556-muzzle-device-shootout/ for all around performance] in all areas for judging a muzzle device (recoil, muzzle climb, flash hiding) is ''also'' a cheap, standard issue, simple looking muzzle device.
* The club. It is one of the simplest weapons and anyone can acquire one. Some like a police nightstick have more subtle uses like thrusting or neckholds, or as a belaying pin in a tourniquet (or ad hoc handcuffs).
* Fast food will win no culinary awards or the approval of any dates, but its standardised taste and usually certain level of hygiene can be very welcome after a week or more of camping rations or exotic street food made with questionable handling and hygiene practices.
{{tropesubpagefooter}}
| |||