u/masterstrike88

Interesting how the turret pops without any fireworks, then a second later it goes supernova.

https://preview.redd.it/4e4uqf326ywh1.jpeg?width=1200&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0370b533e263454aea216ea03c8b65dd5ad72920

I would solve this with an IK rig, but that's because I would likely use it for an animation or interactive game.

You can use constraints to lock the bones from rotating and moving, except for the the Z axis. Then give each element a stretch bone between the top and bottom of the antenna element mesh. At the end, attach a IK control bone which will be your controller.

The basic idea being that when you lift your control bone, the outermost element will move up with it, and stretch the stretchbone until maximum, then when it no longer can extend, the next bone in line will being stretching, and so on.

There are other ways to do it, I'm sure. You coud likely also use a driver and math to solve it. Make all other elements driven by the motion of one, but drivers don't export to other applications.

I'm on the move right now, so I can't give an example, but perhaps a starting direction.

I hope this is helpful

How about cybersecurity in the sense of performing all the work off-site at some big corpo data center?

When world leaders, government officials, military industrial engineers etc start running their prompts, performing their analysis, designing their targeting algorithms... Who may piggyback off that? It's like those phone switchboard operators. They may not have interest in 99% of traffic, but VIP accounts or keywords surely can be flagged and intercepted.

I absolutely see the value in assisting us in performing tasks more efficiently, but what is the tradeoff?

I think they introduced it with one of the most recent patches.

Before, I couldn't seem to pierce armor with stabbing whatsoever. You could only find gaps in the helmet, neck, armpits etc...

But I think they added armor piercing mechanics at some point because now I can take down knights with a pollaxe stab in the chestplate. Which, to my limited knowledge, seems to be realistic.

I usually do alt+rmb to put the polearm into a thrusting two-hand stance, then charge my enemies and shove the mouse forward to thrust the polearm into my enemy.

I have a pole hammer with a spiked tip, and that bad boy will pierce even Stalinium armor.

Imho the "period accurate" thing is BS unless they use it to justify NOT programming a whole lot of extra systems into a jet.

Slapping new bombs on a jet may at best mean making a fixed profile for it in the ballistics computer, and at worst meaning writing code for modernized Western or retro-fit avionics.

But ultimately the weapon loads can be limited already by mission designer, and theoretically I guess they could to some degree be disabled by the historical mode in the editor as well. So if it's a trivial implementation, I don't see why they shouldn't include more "alternate period" load outs.

IKR? Imagine successfully climbing on top of the head of the apex predator for a selfie?

ScaleBook material, for sure.

T-72S (Soyuz)

God dag mann, økseskaft

Skids are overrated anyways.

All the normies brag about landing with skids, you just nailed it without.

Also, did they keep their cool while the rig was on fire? I think not.

You won this one homie.

Skids are overrated anyways.

All the normies brag about landing with skids, you just nailed it without.

Also, did they keep their cool while the rig was on fire? I think not.

You won this one homie.

Uten at jeg vet alt om forholdene rundt jobben og nettverket ditt der du er, så vil jeg på generelt grunnlag si at du bør være en mann/kvinne av ditt ord. Har du først tatt et valg å formelt takke ja til en jobb og si opp din gamle, bør det være SVÆRT tungtveiende grunner til å ombestemme seg. Det bør nesten være innlysende ovenfor den du snakker til at "ja, her skjønner jeg det blir utfordrende".

Du risikerer som sagt å brenne broer i begge leirer.

Og du? Det beste du kan gjøre er å utfordre deg selv ved å trø ut av komfortsonen. Da vokser du som person. Du får nye utfordringer og erfaringer. Selv dårlige erfaringer er verdifulle - de gir deg bredere forståelse å ta vurderinger/beslutninger på.

Gi det et ærlig forsøk, og så er det ingen skam å snu etter du har prøvd, da har du gått inn for noe og tar beslutningen basert på det som HAR skjedd, og ikke basert på frykten for hva som kunne ha skjedd.

Lykke til!

So basically an AI robot that listens to all her problems while giving a back massage to the point where she falls happily asleep and then it goes and makes plans for the weekend to all her favorite shopping stops? I think that is the equivalent of sex for a woman, right?

My car has them (Adaptive or LED matrix), and they work great.

Highbeams all night long but shadowed out cars and bikes - both oncoming and same lane traffic.

So besides physical destruction, we are looking at defeating the camera as a means of defending against the Shahed.

Well then, if you can't camouflage your assets in the visible and IR spectrum, then you can't hide from it.

If you can't hide from it, you have to blind or otherwise distract the seeker.

The first thing to come to mind, is smoke screens that block IR sensors. These may cause the Shahed to lose contrast lock, and start tracking the smoke instead of the target. Such errors may be corrected by human operators, but then again you are depending on the communication system which will eventually be jammed by EW domes.

Using a smoke screen near a static target is doable, but increasingly difficult on moving objects like trains.

Then comes IR lasers. A powerful laser could be enough to dazzle or damage the seekers, but you would need several of these, coupled with a good detection and tracking system to fend off a simultaneous multi-drone attack. Also, how long will you have this system, before the enemy develops a laser filter that can be engaged if it detects that its being lased?

The best countermeasure to these drones, may perhaps be interception drones that carry APKWS or similar air to air rockets, and shoot down the shaheds closer to the Russian border. A single interceptor drone may have enough missiles to shoot down several shaheds. If you need jet-powered kamikaze interceptors then the per-unit cost may be high enough to warrant developing fighter-drones that launch missiles instead of kamikaze attacks.

That's not a Liutyi, but an FP-1/2 drone.

The Liutyi also has an inverse-V shaped tail, but the body is more smooth and flat like the Bayraktar TB-2 drone.

The FP series have a more rectangular body shape, like the one in this footage. I also believe the Liutyi is much larger than the FP-1/2.

Just to enlighten on your reply, there are already examples of Ukrainians using GTA V mods to simulate FPV drone attacks.

There are a surprising amount of FPV mods for games that do not natively support FPV. For instance, ArmA series, and even DCS.

Considering most drones appear to use a shaped charge warhead (either Explosively Formed Jet, or Explosively Formed Penetrator), this construction will have very little effect.

Also, swapping the warhead for a thermite payload would mean that the drone wreckage, sitting on top of the nets, would just "leak" thermite through the mesh and directly onto the reservoirs.

But against HE-frag warheads, and the possibility of neutralizing the drone without setting off the warhead, this solution does have merit.

It is also likely highly efficient against FPV quadcopters, potentially launched by mothership drone or ala Operation Spiderweb.

The post is ambiguous.

In essence, there is no footage of strikes which could mean any and several of the following:

• Drones are being intercepted as Russia manages to adapt.
• Targets are not near civilian residence areas - thus there are less recordings from Russians.
• Russian EW is jamming video feeds from the drones, so there is no on-board footage to show.
• Ukraine is shifting tactics from striking well-guarded POIs, to general swarming and denial of Russian airspace.

But I have noted that some Ukrainian milbloggers complain that the immense amount of resources spent on deep strikes yield very little return on investment in terms of damage.

If you want to interpret the post in a solely optimistic way, you could say that the Ukrainians are shifting tactics and due to OPSEC they won't share any intel, but that doesn't explain the lack of Russian footage of Ukrainian strikes.

Shhhhhh

What the sidelobe?

It's called "culling" and is an optimization feature of many games.

For example, objects that are outside the player's field of view are not rendered to save performance.

Of course, shadows shouldn't be affected in this way, because it breaks immersion.

Could also be a problem with the specific building model, like flipped normals or non-manifold mesh, because it doesn't seem to affect all building shadows.

Just trying to clear up misconceptions and why the term doesn't mean the same in different contexts.

Agreed in the sense that "double tap" usually refers to striking a position once, then again after first-responders have a chance to arrive. So usually more like 5-10 + minutes difference.

But in infantry context, a double tap is pulling the trigger twice in rapid succession.