Ask anything Thread

[gelgoog]

The Chinese have had hemostatic agents for yonks.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[YES]

a noob question here: but do we have a website for tracking US equipment project development? or new abilities they just got? army, navy marine, anything is fine

PS: I know it's bit off topic so staff members might want to delete it

 

[YES]

or any material to study the US force systematically? as you probably see I'm pretty amateur so I'll go with anything right now

yeah, also delete this if you want to

 

[ahho]

So I was watching The Chieftain youtube channel on the KF51 and AbramX and he mentioned one point where the difference in current Turbine engine and Diesel engine on fuel consumption is negligible in an NATO assessment. what are the advatage of Diesel over Turbine in the current generation of engines.

 

[gelgoog]

Negligible my foot. If it was negligible why do large cargo ships all use diesels instead of turbines? Or trains for that matter.

 

[wssth0306]

Negligible my foot. If it was negligible why do large cargo ships all use diesels instead of turbines? Or trains for that matter.

Different use case , most destroyers , cruisers use turbine.
If you care about acceleration, and maintaining a high speed you would use turbine, in this case tanks do need it.

As you said , cargo ships and trains doesn't , for the exactly the reason they don't require high acceleration , only economy.
Different kind of work loads can drastically change the fuel consumption even with the exact same engine , you can try that with your own car, step on the gas paddle for the yellow light for a month , and waiting for the next light for a month , you will see a noticeable difference in the fuel economy.
It makes sense that for the work loads that is typical for a tank , diesel and turbine in these days are very similar.

 

[Staedler]

As far as I know the main difference has always been fuel consumption at low/idling speeds. If they think the tank will only be at low/idling speeds very infrequently it makes sense that they think fuel consumption differences are negligible.

I also have to wonder if said NATO assessment has been colored by their invasions into the Middle East rather than prospective near-peer wars. The former would be characterized by high speed advances and little to no threat on refueling formations. In such an environment, fuel consumption wouldn't be a concern as long as the economy could handle it.

 

[gongolongo]

Negligible my foot. If it was negligible why do large cargo ships all use diesels instead of turbines? Or trains for that matter.

System complexity and being optimized for cost/benefit. Tanks and military systems are very different.

 

[Chavez]

while big ticket item usually grap our attention,but it was small things such ic chip sensor ,communication equipment tell us the idea the current state of china technology.

 

[A potato]

Do you think there is a possiblity that the PLA will start recruiting pro Beijing Gurkhas in the it's ranks?