JoeSchmuckatelli

Members
  • Content Count

    332
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

134 Excellent

About JoeSchmuckatelli

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Was that your unpopular opinion ( ;D) ? Okay - here's mine: combat games that turn off Friendly Fire are bad. The solution to griefers is not to dumb the game down - but to remove those players
  2. Admit it - we're all waiting for CyberPunk (just to see if it lives up to the hype) and looking for the next thing. KSP2 of course being a moving target, atm. I played through the RDR2 single-player campaign and really enjoyed it (at times was blown away by it... at times depressed by it). I've picked up WOT again - they're about to change everything, and the community is in an uprawr! (spelling intentional). Satisfactory was a pleasant, if short diversion. Frankly - I keep seeing a bunch of stuff that's just 'been there done that, yawn' or sequels of sequels. Its really hard to find a gem in all the chaff that's out there.
  3. I started out as one of those guys who refused to give up my high-end CRT until flat panels actually exceeded performance. For a relatively short while - I was also the guy with the bleeding edge GPU. I started out gaming LOVING good graphics. That was before things got really ridiculous. Lately I've been a price-performance 'sweet spot' guy vis GPUs and running a high-quality HP 16:10 24inch HD panel (and yes, that additional vertical space is fantastic)... The other thing I've done in the last decade is wait for technology to mature just enough for content to be filling out the space before leaping. IMO we're finally getting there with 4k. As you pointed out, absent a good GPU, a 4k monitor is a heavy, costly disappointment. Yet the power of last gen's upper tier GPUs is there for 4k, and the next gen is coming out in the next 4 months or so... where even the mid-tier should provide solid 4k performance. The problem I have with a 27, is that all the new monitors are 16:9 and the vertical real-estate is literally 0.3 of an inch bigger than my current monitor with the 16:10 aspect ratio.. with only an inch and a half more space on either side of the bezel edge - thus, a 27" just doesn't excite. Anyway - thanks for the link to NewEgg.
  4. I've been gaming for years on a 24 inch HP IPS panel and have been looking at upgrading to 4k at some point. I ran some numbers, did some comparison shopping and decided that at the distance I sit from my screen, a 32 inch monitor would be ideal. CC Card ready, I went looking for the perfect monitor: a 4k IPS panel with decent input lag, refresh rate, inputs and HDR. Oddly - I can find all of those things in a 27 inch panel... but not in a 32. (The actual screen real-estate of going from a 24 to a 27 isn't that great, so I'm not all that interested in paying the squeeze without getting the juice) Anyone know why 32 is apparently not a 'target' size by the industry? (As an aside, and FWIW - I'm not interested in curved, ultrawide or VA panels... In the first part, curved are a neat idea but very limiting if you don't stay within the 'optimal distance', while ultrawide lose the vertical real-estate that matters for work / production (even if they look good for movies / games)... and VA panels are just gross.)
  5. Three observations 1. I'm stunned the Army is still using M4A1s - my experience with Iraq showed that the shorter barrel adversely impacted muzzle velocity, terminal ballistics and mission accomplishment. 2. As a former tanker: the US style of 4-vehicle platoons (two sections of two tanks able to support one another and move independently) has always seemed far superior to the 3-tank platoon model (Soviet). I know what it is like to be a single tank sitting by yourself out in the open: you feel all the limitations of the platform. With your wingman next to you, you're ready for offensive action, and each platoon can do two things at once. Flexibility is power. 3. As a former Marine Infantry officer, I agree with all of the critiques listed above. We had a real advantage in our Vietnam-era vehicles (that the AF failed to identify). Our AAVs offer 18 troop spaces. Given the average Marine Rifle Squad is 13 men, the remaining 5 (well 7-9) spaces in the vehicle were used successfully to keep the squad's attachments (machine-gun teams or assault/rocket teams) with their squads. I can only imagine how frustrating it must be for an Army LT to try to do Combined Arms mission planning with vehicles that don't let him keep his mission-tailored squad assignments together. There's a real risk of losing Tempo if the squad leaders and other NCOs have to spend the first moments after deployment finding people, rather than attacking the objective. We almost had a replacement with the AAAV - but trying to build a ground-combat capable vehicle that protects the Navy by being over-the-horizon deployable and self-ship-to-shore capable proved... expensive. Which reminds me: a 4th observation - Starship Troopers' individual ablating eggs for dropping into the battlespace (an analog of paratroops) was always interesting to me. Cook did some interesting things in his Sci-Fi books, but a whole lot of authors regularly fail to spend much time on how the Navy (space battle cruiser, whatever you call it) gets the infantry on the ground. If we're gonna have a good space war... I really want the author to spend some thought on how they're going to deploy the 'boots on the ground' aspect of combat.
  6. Southern tragectory for an Argentine mission? Maybe they want to watch the launch themselves? Other answer - because the AF opened up the opportunity? I'm curious about the dogleg over Cuba... What is that all about?
  7. As a kid who grew up watching the moon landings and shuttle flights - where rocket parts fell away and dropped into the ocean... this is amazing. I can't express how cool it is that we now have the technology to do this. Watching this thing go from making sonic booms to landing softly on a relatively tiny pad is pretty... damn... awesome. https://www.space.com/spacex-falcon-9-rocket-breaks-sound-barrier-crs-18-video.html?jwsource=cl I'm certain its already been posted - but with nearly a thousand pages to scroll through... I'll risk a repeat.
  8. Barycenter - that's the word I could not remember! Does that also ring true for satellites inside the moon's orbit?
  9. Is there a reason why they can't get the telescope deployed and operating in LEO (to be close enough to work on if need be) ... And then later boost it to the Lagrange point for its mission? Edit - we really need a functioning space truck!
  10. Time for a new question: If we were to put a satellite in a circular orbit outside of the moon's orbit... To be stable and circular - would the satellite actually orbit the earth, or would the center of the orbit be the axis of the earth /moon co-orbit?
  11. So... In case anyone is interested or has a similar problem... Mine can't be resolved. At least not the way I want it to be. The problem is that MS links Xbox live with windows live and anything that you do while signed in to a given profile is subject to the privacy controls that you set, globally, for your profile. So despite the fact that I've had a Hotmail account for 25 years and enjoyed anonymity in my pc gaming and thought of Xbox as a separate universe... Win 10 changed that. Once I 'upgraded to' and linked my email to Win 10, my previous linking of the Xbox to the same email resulted in entangling what I thought was separate into a permanent 'profile'. MS will NOT untangle this. So when I went to 'my' Xbox profile (I've never played Xbox - but I have my email there to assist and assert control over my kid's gaming) and let him let his friends see that he's online and what games he's playing... That choice had the unintended result of letting them see what I'm doing on Win 10. The only option is to create a new profile for him... But doing that erases any progress (read purchased skins, saves etc) that he's achieved while on my account. I honestly hate living in a universe where profile data is a commodity. I miss virtual anonymity
  12. There's a real peace in those moments when the mind isn't constantly racing. Rare and precious.
  13. I've never heard modern mortars make any sound before they impact. In the old days, starting with the Germans in WWII some combatants put whistles on their bombs (and perhaps mortars) as a psychological weapon. https://www.scienceabc.com/eyeopeners/why-do-bombs-make-a-whistling-sound-when-they-fall.html But all of the mortars (small and large) and artillery that I've fired or had land near me in the modern era don't have this 'feature'. I spent one highly intense day getting shelled by a variety of mortars and artillery from dawn to dusk, followed by several days of intermittent shelling. We never heard them 'coming in' until they were exploding around us. That's being close enough to feel the heat and concussion, taste and smell the mud and explosives and smoke and get mud in the face. In other words close enough that pure luck is the only reason I'm around to write this. So... today... the whistling sound? it's just a movie trope.
  14. I had a completely different experience during my first jump - a seminal memory that I will never forget. Standing in the door of a C-141, wearing the cotton camouflaged uniform of the day, combat boots and a regulation issued kevlar helmet, I marveled at how loud a plane is. The constant whine of the engines combined with the massive white-noise of the wind rushing past the door at 130 kts to create an almost physical sensation of sound felt in the bones as much as heard. The shouts of the jump master and mutters of novice jumpers cracking wise or praying to whatever deity might be listening was a completely secondary event. You literally had to force the mind to focus on applying meaning to words. The physical reality of a heart beating in your chest and the wall of wind begging you to step into the void was much more visceral. I had my hands on the bulkheads forming the hatch, my boot toe in the wind and I kept leaning into the doorway to look forward in anticipation of seeing the drop zone from 2500 feet. Having only ever seen the ground from the tiny windows of commercial aircraft, standing in an open a door to the world at that altitude was a heady experience. I never knew, until that moment, that planes don't turn... they slide through the air. It's not at all like how your hands move when you're mimicking Mav and Goose: the wings tilt and the momentum carries the plane forward as the wings bite the wind and the plane slides into its turn. The jump master roughly pulled me back twice, afraid the wind would snatch me from the door over the woods I wasn't trained or ready to land in. I kept grinning toothily at her; a tough little staff sergeant easily a foot shorter and 100 pounds lighter than my 230 six-foot-seven twenty-one year old self. She had no fear of the goofy, over eager corporal whose life she was trying to save. She'd yell something at me that I couldn't hear - but which needed no words to understand: quit being a dumbass. Until that light turned green, she was in charge. After that... I was on my own. Unlike civilian jumpers - especially those going for tandem jumps - we'd had weeks of training to get to this point. I'd trained on what to do in the seconds after leaping from the plane to create a muscle memory I can still do step-by-step thirty years later. I knew everything I was supposed to do from the moment I strapped on the bag, through waiting for the command to GO! and to not move when someone commanded us to "Check Can Of Peas!" The only thing I hadn't done was actually do it for real. I felt her slap my shoulder and was out the door before she felt the sting on her palm. Silence. It was strikingly peaceful staring past my toes at the tail of the plane as it eased itself out of my view. Another insight; when I stepped from the plane, it and I were going 130 kts together. It, however was still accelerating and I wasn't. There was no movie-like snatch of air and fast-fade. The tail just calmly left the frame of view I had locked on my hands and tightly clamped knees and polished black boots. The only 'sound' was my counting in my head and waiting for the risers to snatch me back to reality. I had time to realize that if I could see the tail of the plane past my boots that I was upside down. It was a curious realization. The physical relief of the risers snapping past my ear and my feet being flipped earthward was a ripping sound that only briefly interrupted the silence. The chute foomped and flapped a bit as it filled, and then everything was quiet again. I could hear conversations on the ground below me - much like balloonists report about flying over golf courses. I had this amazing, overwhelming sense of freedom, peace and control. Far from merely falling, I was flying. I played with climbing the risers of the T-10 Charlie to make the chute go where I wanted to. It worked! And then, all too soon, the trees stopped being weird shrub-like top-down and unreal; they took on an abrupt reality as I passed into an altitude that my monkey brain recognized as dangerously high (before that, the brain doesn't ascribe much meaning to what you're seeing - its too foreign). The moment the trees 'become real' is also visceral; you've got mere seconds to get your head out of the clouds and remember everything you need to do to not break yourself as you slam into the ground like a sack of potatoes. Feet and knees together, eyes on the horizon and WHUMP and FLAP and... You're alive! ... So this opus aside: what you hear when you watch civilian jumpers is a product of their using 'flappy' suits to help slow and control their free-fall descent. It's not always a feature of jumping. I'll never forget the abrupt silence and the freedom and control you feel when its just you, a nylon bag and the world. Hope you get a chance to jump! It's something you will never forget.
  15. I forget - was it the Honor Harrington or Moties books that had the more impressive space weaponry?