Your choice: Which topic shall I cover next week?
(1) A text about MRL (multiple rocket launcher) history similar to the recent rifle calibre summary, with some more emphasis on the current situation and near future?
(2) Finally finish the drone theory part about naval drones?
(3) A text about personnel affairs, with a healthy dose of military history?
(4) "The great irony of imperialism" (my lazy option; it's almost done anyway)?
(5) A run-of-the-mill text about an AFV?
(6) A text about reaction to strategic crisis situations, partially inspired by the Crimea crisis?
(7) A text combining a couple threads from this blog to draw conclusions for one scenario of how infantry armament may (or should) evolve in the future?
(8) Finally some more on the civil liberties / civil rights front?
(9) None. Just STFU for a week?
Most if not all losers (by majority vote) won't be done for quite some time...
I expect few votes in the comments, so feel empowered!
S O
.
(3) or (1)
ReplyDelete(6)
ReplyDeleteI would very much like something on personnel affairs - in general, I appreciate your input on the 'soft' side more than the 'hard' hardware side...
ReplyDelete6, please
ReplyDelete2 would also be tasty
ReplyDelete(4) please, since it's almost done; and (6) would be nice. I'm a great fan of your blog by the way.
ReplyDeleteI go with (7)
ReplyDeleteWell, you have your own prioritys, but (1) or (7) would certainly be interesting. If you go for the latter, a brief section on the most optimal design for a GPMG would be wise.
ReplyDeleteJim storr considers the L86 to be far superior to the belt fed M249, at least in regards to suppressing fire. The UKs emphasis on very accurate precision fire has been a consistent pattern dating back to the bren guns adoption. http://www.rusi.org/downloads/assets/Real_Role_of_Small_Arms_RDS_Summer_09.pdf
(1), (6) or (7)
ReplyDelete1, 3 and/or 6. Possible 5 with the glowing praise you already have for that article :)
ReplyDelete7. classic mil-porn stuff and something I usually don't come here for.
ReplyDelete(6)
ReplyDelete4, 6.
ReplyDelete(5) or (6) please. Although I think all topics are interesting and looking at the diverse answers you might reconsider pushing all loosing topics to the back of your queue. :)
ReplyDelete#6 seems to lead. I wrote a first draft; it's a rather long text and it feels as if I forgot something which I meant to include.
ReplyDeleteI'm surprised so few were interested in #1. I thought the text from 2009/11/02 could use a more comprehensive successor, including some more on the history and the "why". I understand it's more interesting for Europeans than Americans, though.
Feel free to keep voting till Friday.
As an American, I think #1 sounds pretty cool.
ReplyDeleteCan we vote down posts? nobody around here but Fishbreath cares about rockets! naval drones, now there is something we can all sink our teeth into!
ReplyDelete(1) sound interesting too. Wondering for example how useful such systems actually are without sub-munitions (related to the ban on cluster bombs).
ReplyDeleteSigh. I stand corrected.
ReplyDelete7 sounds interesting. Well, they all sound interesting but particularly 7.
ReplyDeleteI was wondering about (2). Can drones replace cruise missiles to some degree as returning cruise missiles and parasite bombers?
ReplyDeleteA parasite bomber would require higher speed than the motheraircraft to deliver the load and return with a docking maneuver (that is still dangerous or complicated).
Returning cruise missiles would be the definition for the current long range UAV bomber projects that in my opinion blurr the line between missile armed ship and aircraft carrier.
That was actually already covered in part 1.
DeleteThe naval drones will be about the swimming and submersible ones.
And regarding an intermediate platform for munitions delivery; KISS.