this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2025
321 points (99.1% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

6903 readers
517 users here now

A community for your defence shitposting needs

Rules

1. Be niceDo 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.


Join our Matrix chatroom


Other communities you may be interested in


Banner made by u/Fertility18

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Han (The Preble) shot first.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago

Medusa rules apply - just grab a shiny shield.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Damn, I thought only Yamato class could carry wave motion guns

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

Considering that they're gonna give infantry shotguns to shoot down drones , I like where this universe is going

[–] [email protected] 108 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Who would win?

New Navy with line of sight laser weapon (3 mile range to horizon), or this smokey boy throwing 2,000 lbs of steel over the horizon.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I don't know. Can the laser shoot artillery shells out of the air?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Nope. It can only melt them.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

That does not make any sense at all. If you can melt through an artillery shell's wall, you trigger the explosives inside it. The shells end up exploding miles away from your ship's hull. Maybe you'll end up with some inert metal fragments falling down on your ship's deck, but it's not going to do any damage except maybe minor injuries to unarmored personnel standing on the deck.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

It can't melt through such a large mass of steel in the short time it has before it hits. The lasers are meant for missiles which have very thin metal walls. Also, the AP rounds aren't explosive. They're a solid mass of steel.

https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history-magazine/2015/february/armaments-innovations-navys-supershells

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

Huh. Learn something new every day.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not if they are cannon balls. Checkmate lasers.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

I mean...I don't think any naval ship manufactured after 1870 has much to fear from cannon balls.

[–] [email protected] 61 points 2 days ago (3 children)

That picture is the closest representation of what hellfire must be without entering nuclear territory. For sheer display of power, that is that, in my opinion.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 2 days ago (5 children)

They are sending so much hate that the entire ship was pushed sideways, look at the wake off the bow.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 13 hours ago

There's very minimal lateral movement. Almost all of the recoil goes downward. It would be very bad if the recoil moved the ship laterally, because then you lose your fire control solution.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Quick, someone remind me which ship it was that was starting to sink so they just shoveled water to one side do they could extend the range of their weapons and effectively become an extra artillery team during WWII (was that the siege of Normandy?)

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (15 children)

Man the US was so much cooler when it stood for something

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Man the US was so much cooler when it stood ~~for~~ against something

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago

That's only minimaly due to sideways movement. Much more important is that the shockwaves are pushing water down creating a terracing effect.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Fun fact: The US ha a Hellfire missile that doesn't even explode. It's meant to hit one person and kill them while limiting casualties in the proximity.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/agm-114r9x.htm

[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago

Knife MISSILE, CIVVIE

[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

So it's essentially a rocket propelled ~~rock~~ knife block?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago

It is like a rocket propelled slap chop to one person that shouldn't exist meaningfully to the horror of the person sitting next to them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (2 children)

If you don't need accuracy, the Age of Sail beats this easily. This boy has 12 cannons, the Santísima Trinidad had 140.

A broadside must have been spectacular.

[–] [email protected] 38 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

All of Trinidad's throw weight is less than a single 16".

Trinidad Total throw. 1510lbs.

Missouri single barrel single shot weight. HE 1900lbs AP 2700lbs.

Total throw weight. HE 17,100lbs AP 24,300lbs and that's ignoring all secondaries and AA and later added missiles. Missouri could throw the total weight all of Trinidads cannons themselves in a single broadside. Oh and that's throwing it 24mi....

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

I get it, though your calculations are a bit off, the Trinidad's total throw comes off as a bit more, around 1150 kg, not 684 kg as you suggested.

That said, I was going by spectacular explosions, or amount of boom. If it's about how much shit you can throw at an enemy, the recently sunk Moskva could launch 76000 kg of explosives and steel at you in a single volley (if operated by someone not as completely inept as the Russian Navy). In fact, rocket artillery is so OP from this perspective that a single old Katyusha could throw more than 500 kg at you, so the Missouri is worth around 1.2 shitty technical trucks with MLRS batteries strapped to them per cannon.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

All of the Trinidad's iron cannon balls would bounce off the 12" steel armor of the Iowa battleship.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago

Yeah and the Iowa would be powerless against a sustained modern ASM volley. But still, it would look cool.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 2 days ago (2 children)

The laser is for drones or missiles. Missiles are used for ships, which outrange battleships by a large margin, hence why they've been phased out of service. One jet can sink a ship hundreds of miles from its carrier.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (4 children)

It has been suggested before that we might one day see a return of the battleships. The one technology that might allow it is truly effective rail gun technology. I remember seeing a story years ago speculating that such a ship parked of the coast of North Korea might be able to lodge shells anywhere onto the Korean Peninsula from well offshore.

Missiles are always likely to have their advantages, including range and maneuverability. But the potential advantage of railguns is a very cheap cost per shot. And instead of a ship's hold full of explosive-stuffed missiles, your ship has a reactor, a bank of capacitors, and a whole bunch of shells that are little more than big slugs of inert metal.

This article for example suggests a potential railgun range of 200 km.

Us truly mastering railguns is one of the few scenarios that we might actually see a return of the old battleships. Except instead of artillery shells, they'll be lobbing railgun slugs. And instead of being protected by foot-thick steel armor, they'll be protected by a porcupine lattice of laser defense systems.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

*If funded by the USA.

The US took out a third of Iran's navy during Operation Praying Mantis and we tried not to while giving them ample opportunity to not get fucking wrecked with minimal effort.

We won't fund healthcare, but our unhealthcare is second to nobody because we spend 9x more than the 2nd place loser, Russia. We account for 40% of total world military spending. If you think we can't kill you, it is only because we don't want to prove how wrong you are. If you want to die, we can put a warhead on your forehead without a rounding error of our defense budget.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

Unhealthcare... wow.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

Everyone knows these lasers can't hit anything on this flat earth. It needs to aim so far down the water will refract it unless you're within like 20 feet.

[–] [email protected] 35 points 2 days ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›