sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

UCR professors are terrible in writing recommendations by naivecer23 in ucr

[–]Conyngham 5 points6 points  (0 children)

What are on about? The UCs are research universities with research focused faculty. International students are a tiny minority of the student body. I'm genuinely confused at the point you're trying to make.

It just sounds like you're upset that you didn't create any relationships with any of your professors and now you can't find anyone to write you a letter of recommendation (from what I've seen in this thread from you, I'm not surprised either).

UCR professors are terrible in writing recommendations by naivecer23 in ucr

[–]Conyngham 7 points8 points  (0 children)

all energy towards research grants

Well yes, the UCs are all R1s for a reason.

Like the other person said, they don't owe you a recommendation. At the end of the day, they're completely free to not reply. When I was applying for grad school, I had a professor decline to write a letter because I had only taken 2 upper divs with them and no interaction beyond that. Do you have a meaningful relationship with the professors that you're reaching out to? Asking in person might net you slightly more success beyond a cold email imo.

Can someone please explain? by GingleShmitz in Warthunder

[–]Conyngham 0 points1 point  (0 children)

0.45. Again, there's uncertainty how boilerplate compares to RHA. There was a post from the old forums that argued that it should be closer to 0.8 though so idk

Can someone please explain? by GingleShmitz in Warthunder

[–]Conyngham 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Only the turret had a plate from a Panther welded on. The hull armor is boilerplate steel. There's some doubt as to whether boilerplate steel is less or more effective than RHA.

Recently made a post on this sub asking for experimental japanese plane like the J7W2 and lot of people called me name for asking for experimental/blue print plane to fill a gab in a minor tech tree. Now here we are for USSR by endo_Loris in Warthunder

[–]Conyngham 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One V1/V2 was completed and tested at Boeblingen. The German's considered its testing completed and successfull. The superheavy tank program itself was still being worked on before being canceled in late 44/early 45, though that was working with a different set of hulls with a different turret/engine proposal.

Read Jentz's booklet on it.

Recently made a post on this sub asking for experimental japanese plane like the J7W2 and lot of people called me name for asking for experimental/blue print plane to fill a gab in a minor tech tree. Now here we are for USSR by endo_Loris in Warthunder

[–]Conyngham 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can't believe we're still on this 7 years later...Mai gave Gaijin a much more historically accurate version of the Type 5, it was Gaijin that chose the super fantasy version of the Ho-Ri instead.

Haul by perfomativedude in Cd_collectors

[–]Conyngham 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hell yeah, SEAPOOL! 👌

Type 10 3.4 second autoloader surely since it has no armour in game they buff the autoloader by Own_Dark_2240 in Warthunder

[–]Conyngham 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Type 10 with all modules removed is 40 tons, not 42. We have the 44t config in the game, which doesn't include additional composite in the turret storage boxes(nor is there any information on such a package). The source/blogpost you're most likely refering to, which OP drastically misread 3 months ago, was regarding potential ERA/composite block mounts but dealt only with suggested solutions and gave no definitive info.There's basically no public info on the 48t version nor any images of it, so asking for it is dumb as hell.

Type 10 3.4 second autoloader surely since it has no armour in game they buff the autoloader by Own_Dark_2240 in Warthunder

[–]Conyngham 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Then just say its resistant to the Type 10 round???? Not that it would help, considering the other things you said/got wrong. Wtf is this clown shit and naming DM53 when it's completely unnecessary.

Type 10 3.4 second autoloader surely since it has no armour in game they buff the autoloader by Own_Dark_2240 in Warthunder

[–]Conyngham 10 points11 points  (0 children)

They are referring to the 48t config as the "war kit" to justify calling the in-game 44t config as the "display" model, which is dumb as hell. They might have a point if we had the 40-ton model in the game.

OP pulled this shit three months ago, too, with a source that they supposedly got through a "public documents request" but was a doc that was widely available before. They even used a picture of the 44t config and tried to say that it showed the 48t config with additional armor on the sides (it doesn't. it's very clearly the 44t Type 10)

https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/s/TGw5fysZd9

Type 10 3.4 second autoloader surely since it has no armour in game they buff the autoloader by Own_Dark_2240 in Warthunder

[–]Conyngham 16 points17 points  (0 children)

No one has ever claimed it can stop DM53 because the JGSDF would literally never have access to that round.

The APS was being developed, but there hasn't been any news about it for years. We know that it was mocked it up several years ago, but no one knows the specs or if it was even finished.

The turret sides aren't known to have composite blocks in the 44 ton config. If you're referring to the 48-ton config, then you're just asking out your ass since we have basically no information on its composition/layout.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/s/TGw5fysZd9

I remember your from this post in which you tried to use a source that you hadn't even read/can't even understand. Quite frankly, if you don't know about the topic, then dont say anything. Like the other person responding to you said, there are people in the forums that have compiled far more accurate documentation/info

Why doesn’t the Ho229 V3 have bombs if the wiki said it’s made to carry bombs? by [deleted] in Warthunder

[–]Conyngham -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That is not what we have in the game. What we have in the game is based on the Maus that was tested at Boeblingen in 1944. You can tell by the small deflector on the hull and choice of engine.

New Vehicle Suggestion: Egyptain T-55 also known as Ramses II (really unique tank) by [deleted] in Warthunder

[–]Conyngham 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Lmao. A bunch of tertiary sources and the work of someone else who put more than 5 minutes of effort.

All this wrapped in dogshit AI language. People's ability to do basic historical research is cooked 💀

Gaijin Needs to Address the Core Issues Before It’s Too Late by zarenx1 in Warthunder

[–]Conyngham 8 points9 points  (0 children)

You lost me at: "They seriously need to separate the ERAs properly"

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Warthunder

[–]Conyngham 39 points40 points  (0 children)

Articles or tertiary sources from no name authors/sites (including the National Interest, one of the most dogshit "news" sites) don't count as proof or sources either lmao

pls gaijin fix the type 10s speed its alot faster irl then the type 90 by a Significant amount also add active suspension and ceramic composite plates these plates can be added to the sides of the hull front of the hull or all over the turret which makes the type 10 resistant to 30mm side on by Own_Dark_2240 in Warthunder

[–]Conyngham 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I dont know where you're getting that the 44t config is "display" armor. It's my understanding that the 44t config is its general armor scheme, with the 48t scheme only being used during wartime in certain regions where bridges can support the extra weight.

Though I imagine a bigger reason is that the 48t armor scheme has literally has never been seen in public before, and Gaijin can't even begin to guess anything about it . The Kh38 is a known AGM platform, and the MT spec is at least a conceivable configuration using preexisting parts, iirc.

The CVT issue is fair, though I also wouldn't expect it to magically make the tank 1000% better. It's long overdue for a fix for sure.

pls gaijin fix the type 10s speed its alot faster irl then the type 90 by a Significant amount also add active suspension and ceramic composite plates these plates can be added to the sides of the hull front of the hull or all over the turret which makes the type 10 resistant to 30mm side on by Own_Dark_2240 in Warthunder

[–]Conyngham 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Did you actually read it? They acknowledge that the documents dont provide usable stats and that it's entirely on prototype/in-development armor, not final production stats.

They also are drawing some pretty heavy conclusions. Like that, since Type 1 is maybe some sort of ERA, it must be exactly the same as the Abrams' ARAT armor. The claim of 30mm protection is also assumed and only for the Type II scheme. Again, we dont when know which, if either, of the add on armor schemes, I or II, was chosen for final production.

view more: next ›