/k/ - Weapons » Thread #27667676

[74 / 11 / ?]

16KiB, 387x259, 12 years.jpg

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 08:55:34 No.27667676 View Reply Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27667888 >>27667900 >>27669010 >>27669941 >>27669955 >>27670377 >>27675165 >>27677866

>Zumwalt
>LCS
>America
>San Antonio
>F-35
>V-22
>the marines million dollar jeep
>Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle
>UCP
>OICW
da fuk is gone wrong with procurement in Murika?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 09:05:02 No.27667723 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27667739 >>27675084

Seems to mostly be Navy and Marines, army just fucked uniform and rifle

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 09:09:37 No.27667739 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27667723
Army had the RAH-66 and that carlyle group self propelled artillery
the ground combat vehicle will probably become a huge management clusterfuck blowout

Sebenza guy

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1417668031178-1-1.jpg, 158KiB, 788x531

Sebenza guy Fri 23 Oct 2015 09:35:30 No.27667888 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27667948

>>27667676
>tech demonstrator
>for fighting pirates and patrolling
>short sighted design flaw
>manufacturer dropped the ball(though there should have been some government oversight)
>not worth arguing about
>first gen tilt rotor(with a very good track record)
>stupid, a wrangler would have been a better choice since the industry to support and produce it already exists(starting production is the biggest expense)
>necessary unless you want to invade a hostile country by landing at one of their heavily defended ports
>corruption
>same reason every other replacement rifle/pistol contest ends in failure(not enough of a step up to warrant the cost of the switch)

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 09:36:54 No.27667900 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27667917 >>27667948

>>27667676
>Mommy, what is R&D?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 09:40:01 No.27667917 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27667933 >>27668495

>>27667900
Apparently it involves pumping money into projects that are late and over budget. Reward failure not success.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 09:42:50 No.27667933 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668002

>>27667917
The success of R&D is not measured by profit or even deployment, but the ground broken in research. If you had any modicum of science in you, you would know that "failures" are invaluable lessons that teach you how to do something better.

This "money wasted" is going towards research which will be transferred into all fields and better future projects.

!!D0LsLR7tCkm

!!D0LsLR7tCkm Fri 23 Oct 2015 09:44:57 No.27667948 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27667888
>>27667900
/thread

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 09:53:50 No.27668002 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668042

>>27667933
R&D consists of two things, as the two letters suggest. What you described is the R part. For the D part the critique of the other anon is perfectly fitting.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 10:01:00 No.27668041 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668413

Generals and Admirals wanting cushy defense contract jobs when they retire.

Sebenza guy

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1417668031178-1-1-1-1.jpg, 157KiB, 776x531

Sebenza guy Fri 23 Oct 2015 10:01:01 No.27668042 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668353

>>27668002
Don't make the mistake of thinking research and development are equal friend, there can be vast discrepancies between the two.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO KC46.jpg, 42KiB, 980x490

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 10:03:55 No.27668056 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668523 >>27668538 >>27668595 >>27668767 >>27668981

>Shorter range, smaller payload and less passengers than the MRTT
>Gets accepted anyway
At this rate it'll end up costing more too

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 10:54:04 No.27668353 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668433

>>27668042
umm wut?
read again what I wrote, bro

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:01:16 No.27668383 Report Delete

Quoted By:

Military Industrial Complex

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:05:02 No.27668413 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27668041
>high ranking officers entering the private defense sector after retirement
>not living off pension
If anything, that's what the boots do. They ride the GI bill through college and become engineers. I don't see many former military where I work (private defense contractor), but the ones I do see generally have that same story. The old guard (Korea and 'Nam vets) often don't even have higher education. If they do, it's from tech school or a 2-year degree.

Also, cushy engineering jobs come from a healthy defense budget. It doesn't matter where it's spent, so long as the cash keeps flowing. It's generally easier for budget increases to get approved than for new contracts to be won, so any milking takes place in the former scenario (though most of the time the customer in question is privvy to prevent budget milking, and usually takes preventative action in the wrong cases, when milking really isn't occuring).

When I say milking, I generally mean:
>asking for more budget than you need
>cutting costs internally even lower than you really should
>delivering a defective product
>asking for additional budget/hours
>rinse and repeat

Sebenza guy

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1424308744326-1.jpg, 697KiB, 2576x1941

Sebenza guy Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:07:46 No.27668433 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668495

>>27668353
I read it just fine friend, the other anons critique of development based on cost is unfounded.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:14:28 No.27668468 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668520

Does anyone think there's any chance of F35 project getting cut?

It's one thing to cancel F22 orders, because the only people who get shafted are Lockheed Martin & Airforce etc who wanted the original 700 planes (obviously these are two large entities, but Defense Contractors can fuck over the government but at the end of the day it's the Feds who have defense contractors who are on the short leash since they go under without contracts) and the Airforce is, well, the Airforce. Don't think they're gonna bomb DC over getting shorted their F22's.

But with the international cooperation and planning for this plane, cancelling it would be a big sticking point in relations with what, like 15 countries or more who are signed on to it?

Obviously, the US government still has the biggest dick in this situation and could just say get fucked yuropoor faggots get your own plane. And most would probably do so without too much outcry... But rage silently inside. But you can only piss is someone's coffee so many times before they tell you to get fucked and never help you out again

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:19:35 No.27668495 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668556

>>27668433
How so? Wouldn't that imply that OP's list is just science projects that were never aimed to produce actual hardware for troop use? I hold the critique of that anon here >>27667917 as valid and the statement of R&D success being measured by ground broken in research as a red herring /wrt to the list. Hence my pointing to the D of R&D.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:25:32 No.27668520 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27668468
>Does anyone think there's any chance of F35 project getting cut?

No.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:25:36 No.27668523 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668531 >>27673812

>>27668056
Except it has global reach with the ability to be refuelled in flight.

We actually have dedicated strategic airlift aircraft, unlike incompetent Eurotrash and there's literally no way the government would ever buy a fleet of Airbus aircraft.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:27:38 No.27668531 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668544 >>27668545 >>27668553

>>27668523
>We have to refuel our tankers in flight to get them to work

That's not a good thing.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:28:20 No.27668538 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27668056
The KC-46 will be built in numbers several times that of the A330 MRTT. So it will absolutely end up being cheaper per unit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:29:37 No.27668544 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27668531
>a tanker that can be mid air refueling while getting mid air refuel

Guinness book of word records for tanker human centipede chain when?

>I heard you liked mid air refueling bro so we have a tanker filling a tanker filling a tanker filling a tanker

Etc

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:29:51 No.27668545 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668583

>>27668531
That's not the case you fucking retard. You're comparing a dedicated tanker to an aircraft that is always in a multimission configuration.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:31:02 No.27668553 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668583

>>27668531
You must really hate operational flexibility. Not sure why.

Sebenza guy

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1417671860656-2.jpg, 86KiB, 755x553

Sebenza guy Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:31:29 No.27668556 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668640 >>27668642

>>27668495
But it isn't rewarding failure friend, it's finishing a project so the money used for it isn't wasted. If a project's budget is $1.2 billion and it has run into development walls the options then are to either cancel the project and more or less say goodbye to all that money or spend another $500 million on further development and complete the project. 8/10 projects will involve the latter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:35:10 No.27668583 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668602 >>27668612

>>27668545
>>27668553
I think you're missing the fact that the dedicated tanker is worse than the multirole aircraft.

"It has to refuel" isn't a bonus considering they can both refuel in flight, it's just the KC-46 HAS to refuel in flight to offset its small payload.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:37:16 No.27668595 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27673812

>>27668056
It is notably cheaper than the A330 MRTT and can be refuelled in flight. Yes, it carries less fuel and has shorter unrefuelled range, but there are also going to be hundreds more of them than the A330 MRTT and they are actually tankers instead of multirole transports.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:38:36 No.27668602 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668634 >>27673812

>>27668583
No, it doesn't have to refuel you fucking illiterate. It just has the option to, which gives it vastly more flexibility, range, and time on station that the A330 when needed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:40:00 No.27668612 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27668583
Are you done making shit up or no?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:43:12 No.27668634 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668736 >>27668743 >>27668800

>>27668602
> It just has the option to, which gives it vastly more flexibility, range, and time on station that the A330 when needed.

No, since the A330 can be refuelled in flight too, so it has utterly no more flexibility, range, and time on station.

How are you not getting this?

Sebenza guy

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1437182856229.jpg, 116KiB, 799x531

Sebenza guy Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:43:48 No.27668640 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27668556
To add to this the government requires contractors to draft a budget for a rough cost estimate. Contractors then draft two budgets, a high and a low. The low is the estimate for completing a project on time with minimal problems, the high is the opposite. Typically a budget closer to the low will be submitted as the lower cost is more attractive and has a greater chance of being approved. Once a project reaches the halfway point it's much harder to cancel it as that would be a waste.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:43:56 No.27668642 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668686

>>27668556
Well, the economy knows the phrase "throwing good money after bad". That can be seen as a variant of rewarding failure.

Sebenza guy

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Sebenza21tumbresize_860-1.jpg, 25KiB, 856x573

Sebenza guy Fri 23 Oct 2015 11:51:46 No.27668686 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668749

>>27668642
It isn't rewarding failure, it's keeping the project from being a complete failure. Functioning plane + gigantic bill>nonfunctional plane + slightly smaller(but still massive) bill.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 12:02:03 No.27668736 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27668634
Why the nigger fuck would the US military use a hybrid role aircraft when it already has the world's largest tanker fleet and the largest transport aircraft fleet?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 12:04:37 No.27668743 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27668800

>>27668634
You should be making the argument that the 777 should have been made into a tanker then.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 12:05:31 No.27668749 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27668686
The motivation why people do this is well understood. So no news there. The question in the economy is how to determine the point at which money already spent becomes bad and how to stop executives from falling into the trap of throwing good money after bad.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 12:09:16 No.27668767 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27673596

>>27668056
I don't think you understand military procurement or industry. There was never any real chance the military was going to buy hundreds of aircraft from a foreign entity or allow said aircraft to be manufactured and assembled in Europe. Not to mention, they would have been able to buy significantly fewer aircraft if they went with Airbus and they would not have been able to control the build rate or schedule.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 12:14:29 No.27668800 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27668634
With what? Countries buying it only have (or will have) a small handful of the aircraft, not enough to have a constant rotation and presence.

>>27668743
A KC-777 is actually still on the table. The tanker replacement is occurring in two phases with the second phase likely being a larger tanker.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 12:47:10 No.27668981 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27679104

>>27668056
And the KC-10 has way more range and way more fuel capacity than either. So what's your point?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 12:51:46 No.27669010 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27667676
Problem is sometimes the Gov really likes a design and they order a few... then the company realizes that there is no way that they can keep up with the repair parts demand and they decide to go belly up and leave the Gov to find another company that can recreate the original parts or overhaul the systems with their own crap.The problem then becomes that the overhaul is faulty or not up to spec and the machinery ends up in the same state of disrepair that it was in. Never ending cycle.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 14:48:35 No.27669843 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27669932

Failed project=R&D apparently

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 15:02:22 No.27669932 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27670016

>>27669843
How fucking stupid are you? Many, many, many programs that were cancelled or cut short on production developed technologies and processes that were used more successfully in later programs.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 15:03:30 No.27669941 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27669968 >>27670124

>>27667676
>Zumwalt
extremely specific purpose vessel; does exactly what they want it to do. Just more expensively than the 25-year old Arleigh Burkes
>LCS
They don't know what they want to do with it; flight II will be used as Oliver Hazard Perry repalcements with better armor and weapons
>America
pretty awesome. Not sure what the problem is, the Tarawas are old as shit.
>San Antonio
You got me, I have no idea why they exist.
>F-35
Yeah, starting to get really suspect
>V-22
Apart from crashing early (which the F-16, F/A-18 did in spades, as well as the UH-60 and even UH-1) there's nothing wrong with it. Replacing C-2 greyhound for COD, future airborne tanker.
>million dollar jeep
I though that got cancelled
>EFV
Cancelled
>UCP
what is lobbying?
>OICW
Frigging badass, just cost way too much for the individual soldier.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 15:04:52 No.27669955 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27667676
>the marines million dollar jeep
?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 15:06:53 No.27669968 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27669941
The Zumwalt is also the Seawolf of surface combatants. A ton of the technology implemented on the will go into the next generation of surface ships.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 15:12:06 No.27670016 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27670026

>>27669932
you are the idiot

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 15:13:00 No.27670026 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27670056

>>27670016
I like how you completely ignore facts. By your definition the F-22 and B-2 are complete failures.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 15:16:50 No.27670056 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27670097

>>27670026
kys

mom i wanted to take a bath in petrol while smokinggggg and i got burned

in your definition its R&D and succesfull

Mom i took a bath in petrol while smoking and wore that fire resistant clothing what i did and i didnt get burned

you say this is failure

kys

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 15:23:41 No.27670097 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27670056
Learn fucking English, Vakidis.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 15:28:07 No.27670124 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27670158

>>27669941
LCS are already more heavily armed than the couple OHP's we have left.

The only thing suspect about the F-35 is motivations of the bloggers trying to sensationalize fucking nothings while not mentioning the constant stream of good news.

Fuck the OICW, the XM25 is the new hotness and scheduled for its final trials in early 2016.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 15:33:20 No.27670158 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27670436 >>27671650

>>27670124
>LCS are already more heavily armed than the couple OHP's we have left.

The OHP's are retired, but they still outgunned the LCS, and they're a forty year old ship. There's zero excuse for the LCS to be as shit as it is.

57mm main gun and two malfunctioning 30mm modules vs a 76mm deck gun, six torpedo tubes, and two 25mm autocannons

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 16:07:01 No.27670377 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27670521

>>27667676
The US military procurement system may be corrupt, but it has nothing on Brazil. They spend $ 31.7 B, Italy is the next closest to it at $ 30.9 B.

For the air force....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_Brazilian_military_aircraft
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_Italian_military_aircraft

Italy has the better of the two, especially in fighters.

For the Navy...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ships_of_the_Brazilian_Navy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_Italian_Navy_ships

The São Paulo uses A-4KU Skyhawks still, the Cavour uses AV-8B Harrier IIs. The Italians also more, bigger, and newer frigates.

For the army...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_equipment_of_the_Brazilian_Army#Armored_vehicles
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equipment_of_the_Italian_Army#Combat_vehicles

The Brazilian army has a better tank core, I do not know about the IFV in question to say anything about that, far worst artillery, and almost no air defense.

So were does so much of their money go? Probably into having personal then they need by far. Thus making into a welfare system. They do have 1,340,000 reserve personnel for some reason.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 16:14:02 No.27670436 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27670451 >>27670461 >>27673652

>>27670158
Conveniently forgetting that LCS can spam Hellfires and is compatible with seaRAM.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 16:16:22 No.27670451 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27671650

>>27670436
You mean that the LCS might be able to spam hellfires in the future when the people making it have been paid even more money to fix their broken design.

RAM is defensive only, it's nothing helpful or special.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 16:17:24 No.27670461 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27671650

>>27670436
>Conveniently forgetting that LCS can spam Hellfires

No, they can't.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 16:24:59 No.27670521 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27670377
The military in Brazil are literally welfare queens. Most of the budget goes to pensions and paychecks.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 16:26:55 No.27670538 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27670553

Add huge expensive aircraft carries that won't be carrying a full complement of the latest fighters.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 16:28:38 No.27670553 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27670538
No carrier has ever carried only the latest fighters.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 18:24:22 No.27671650 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27677858

>>27670451
>>27670461
I see we are pretending the Hellfire missiles have not been test fired yet

.>>27670158
>not mentioning aviation facilities, RAM or MCM
>not mentioning that OHP's were more expensive

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 21:42:34 No.27673596 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27668767
You obviously don't, EADS specifically partnered with Northrop Grumman so they could build airframes at plants in the USA

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 21:47:37 No.27673652 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27670436
>Semi active missile with half the range of a main gun
Wew lad

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO image.jpg, 53KiB, 500x349

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 22:00:57 No.27673812 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27668602
>>27668595
>>27668523
Please do some extremely basic research before you spout this shit guys. It obviously has a UARRSI, just look at any photo of it on google.

There is literally nothing the KC-46 does better except for being cheaper

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO USMC_Growler.jpg, 77KiB, 800x601

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 23:48:57 No.27675056 Report Delete

Quoted By:

ONE MILLION DOLLARS

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 23:50:58 No.27675084 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27667723
next generation tanker, but the kc-10 is still pretty solid. not enough.

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 23 Oct 2015 23:56:33 No.27675165 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27667676

The M16 was adopted by order of the Secretary of Defense without completing testing or trials.

The M4 was adopted because the lawyers said it was like an M16, not quite, but also yes... so no trials or testing. If that soundsconfusing, the army also made it so if any other company besides.Colt makes the M4, that company has to pay a 5% royalty to Colt and the machinery for it cannot be used to produce weapons for civilian sale.

What has gone wrong with american procurement is:
1) Lawyers
2) Browning isn't alive anymore
3) Defense Dept and Private Industry have become inseparable and corrupt. Inspector General is also corrupted so no one's left to fix it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 24 Oct 2015 02:32:46 No.27676496 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27677472

>San Antonio
>Giving contractors the keys and they fucking lock you out
Top kex

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 24 Oct 2015 05:36:00 No.27677472 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27677827 >>27679386

>>27676496
I don't know much about the San Antonio, what is everyone's problem with these ships? From wikipedia they look like they do their job

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 24 Oct 2015 07:24:08 No.27677827 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27677472

Try again. You didn't actually read the article on the ship itself.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 24 Oct 2015 07:38:25 No.27677858 Report Delete

Quoted By: >>27679360

>>27671650
>I see we are pretending the Hellfire missiles have not been test fired yet

Tell me what ships they're installed on.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1445500885272.gif, 1001KiB, 280x203

Anonymous Sat 24 Oct 2015 07:40:26 No.27677866 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27667676
You can count Ford class in
EMALS and AAG are humongous failures so far

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 24 Oct 2015 11:59:08 No.27679104 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27668981
KC-10
>7032km range
>197,800 fuel

MRTT
>12,500km range
>250,000 fuel

Top lel, the A330 wrecks everything in the USAF fleet

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 24 Oct 2015 12:29:01 No.27679360 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27677858
Tell us again how the mission module does not already exist and just had its first live fire.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 24 Oct 2015 12:33:51 No.27679386 Report Delete

Quoted By:

>>27677472
The first two ships required big overhauls to fix various issues, this is construed as an issue with the class despite the following 7 ships being fine (because honesty and narratives do not go hand in hand).

Subject

Name

E-mail

Password

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these boards

Your latest searches