(no subject)
May. 31st, 2009 03:00 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
geebsI'm glad ABC is showing the remaining eps of "Pushing Daisies", its too bad they didn't advertise it worth crap. Like if it still wasn't on the DVR as a show to record (and if ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
clevemire hadn't mentioned it), I wouldn't have known it was on. In any case, how I've missed this show. I forgot how clever and witty the dialogue was, well how great the cast and the overall feel of the show was. Its a shame that just wasn't good enough to keep it alive.
Heh, they sure are fans of having Kristen Chenoweth sing though. I mean, they've had Ellen Greene sing once (or was it twice? I just remember the time when Vivian and Olive did "Birdhouse in Your Soul), but it seems they've had Olive sing several times ("Hopelessly Devoted to You", "Eternal Flame", and now Lionel Richie's "Hello", all of which are awesome songs).
So every now and then I'll be flicking through the channels and catch an ep of "Deadliest Warrior". While it is an interesting show concept, I think a lot of the comparisons are faulty. I think one ep was "Spartan vs Ninja". I didn't actually watch that ep, but shouldn't it come down to the situation?! I think if a Spartan went face to face with a ninja, he'd eviscerate the guy. But a ninja isn't gonna take a Spartan face to face, he'll sneak in and cut his throat in his sleep.
The ep I was just watching was Samurai vs Viking. They compare the weapons used on straight power, and again, I think that's a faulty test of which is better. I do find it weird they put the great axe and katana in the same category, but put the naginata up against the long sword. I would think you would flip that and compare the swords and the shaft weapons against each other. And then they compare the Viking long spear against the Japanese long bow? Its not like the Vikings didn't use bows, and the spear has utility as a melee weapon in addition to being thrown. How can you say one is better than the other? You wouldn't use them in the same situation!
I'm amused how at the end they plug the data they collected into a "sophisticated computer simulation" program and that determines the winner. Like how does it do this? Particularly if its just based on the straight "stats" of the weapon. Its not the weapon, its how you use it! The samurai ended up winning, which is what I suspect would happen, because I think skill beats out brute force any day. Well, overall. I think on a one on one fight, its anybody's game, but a better comparison would be the Vikings raiding a Samurai protected village, and I think in that situation, the Samurai would be able to repel the attack, so in that way I agree with their final assessment.
There was another one the other day, Green Beret vs Spetsnaz. That was fraught with faulty comparisons. For one, even though they're both "Special Forces" they have different roles. Spetsnaz are mostly raiders- spearheading assaults or getting behind enemy lines and personally cause as much havoc as possible. The green berets do some of that, though in a force multiplier kinda way- advising and training the forces of friendly governments in the case of helping them defend against insurgents. Or on the other side of things, training resistance forces and developing alliances with the oppressed peoples by using the Green Berets' engineering and medical skills to improve their quality of life. And by nature of the US taking all sorts of "peacekeeping" roles, I think the Green Berets are more well rounded. I guess this is "Deadliest Warrior", not "Best Warrior", its just even though the Spetsnaz are extremely tough bad-asses and in a knock down drag out melee, would win more often than not, I don't think you can boil it down to who's better on who would win in a one on one match up.
But there were a lot of holes in that ep overall. I think the Green Berets are better equipped in general, because our stuff is better. I mean, weapons like the Kalashnikov are extremely reliable, but they're better suited in the hands of poorly trained rank and file. The M4 is a precision weapon, and way more adaptable with the various things you can mount on the picatinny rails. Plus, I think they compared a normal M4 chambered in 5.56mm, when Special Forces has a little more leeway in their weapons, and have weapons chambered in more powerful calibers like 6.8mm SPC and 6.5mm Grendel.
And the rest of the comparisons were just as ridiculous. For "special weapons" they compared the Special Forces "sharpened entrenching tool" vs the Spetsnaz ballistic knife. Which is silly, because the sharpened entrenching tool is a Russian invention. If they were wanting to compare esoteric weapons, they would have been better off comparing the ballistic knife to the Special Forces tomahawk, because that's an actual American invention (and not just US American, given its an Injun weapon, its truly "American") But even more ridiculous, they compared the Mossberg 590 to the Saiga 12 and the m24 to the Dragunov! You don't even need to do a test to say which is better. Obviously, the Saiga 12 over the Mossberg and the m24 over the Dragunov. Its like common knowledge, only a moron would say otherwise!
For the first part, the Saiga 12 is semi-auto, so of course its going to outshoot a pump action mossberg. Plus its based on the AK, so its reliability is undeniable, so the issue of a pump action being more reliable than a semi auto is moot. And you'd have to be a retard to think that a Dragunov will outshoot an M24. Yeah, its semi-auto, but unlike Western semi-automatic sniper rifles like the PSG-1 or the SR-25 (whether in its MK11 Mod 0 incarnation for the SEALs or the M110 SASS for the army), its not a true precision weapon. As I've said countless times before, its a "sharpshooter's" rifle, meant to make up for the inherent inaccuracy of the AK compared to our M16s, used to deliver precision fire on the squad level to reach out beyond the range of the AKs. Its not an actual weapon a real sniper would use for actual sniping missions.
And all of this stuff is moot anyways! They're comparing the warriors on their equipment, but given the nature of their missions, they would use whatever they get their hands on. Sure, spearheading a Russian assault, Spetsnaz would use Russian weapons, but on deep raid missions, far away from their own lines, it makes more sense to use whatever weapons their enemy is using, where ammo and parts or more readily available. This is even more so for the Green Berets, who are either working with friendly militaries and thus from a logistical standpoint, it makes sense for them to use weapons in common with their allies. Or, when they're fostering insurrection, would use whatever the nascent rebels could get their hands on. Not only because of availability, but sometimes we don't want the enemy to know the Americans are helping the insurrectionists. And if the enemy finds bodies with bullet holes of Western and NATO calibers, they're gonna be pretty suspicious!
And I've babbled way to long on this, but all the holes in the show just annoyed me.
clevemire hadn't mentioned it), I wouldn't have known it was on. In any case, how I've missed this show. I forgot how clever and witty the dialogue was, well how great the cast and the overall feel of the show was. Its a shame that just wasn't good enough to keep it alive.Heh, they sure are fans of having Kristen Chenoweth sing though. I mean, they've had Ellen Greene sing once (or was it twice? I just remember the time when Vivian and Olive did "Birdhouse in Your Soul), but it seems they've had Olive sing several times ("Hopelessly Devoted to You", "Eternal Flame", and now Lionel Richie's "Hello", all of which are awesome songs).
So every now and then I'll be flicking through the channels and catch an ep of "Deadliest Warrior". While it is an interesting show concept, I think a lot of the comparisons are faulty. I think one ep was "Spartan vs Ninja". I didn't actually watch that ep, but shouldn't it come down to the situation?! I think if a Spartan went face to face with a ninja, he'd eviscerate the guy. But a ninja isn't gonna take a Spartan face to face, he'll sneak in and cut his throat in his sleep.
The ep I was just watching was Samurai vs Viking. They compare the weapons used on straight power, and again, I think that's a faulty test of which is better. I do find it weird they put the great axe and katana in the same category, but put the naginata up against the long sword. I would think you would flip that and compare the swords and the shaft weapons against each other. And then they compare the Viking long spear against the Japanese long bow? Its not like the Vikings didn't use bows, and the spear has utility as a melee weapon in addition to being thrown. How can you say one is better than the other? You wouldn't use them in the same situation!
I'm amused how at the end they plug the data they collected into a "sophisticated computer simulation" program and that determines the winner. Like how does it do this? Particularly if its just based on the straight "stats" of the weapon. Its not the weapon, its how you use it! The samurai ended up winning, which is what I suspect would happen, because I think skill beats out brute force any day. Well, overall. I think on a one on one fight, its anybody's game, but a better comparison would be the Vikings raiding a Samurai protected village, and I think in that situation, the Samurai would be able to repel the attack, so in that way I agree with their final assessment.
There was another one the other day, Green Beret vs Spetsnaz. That was fraught with faulty comparisons. For one, even though they're both "Special Forces" they have different roles. Spetsnaz are mostly raiders- spearheading assaults or getting behind enemy lines and personally cause as much havoc as possible. The green berets do some of that, though in a force multiplier kinda way- advising and training the forces of friendly governments in the case of helping them defend against insurgents. Or on the other side of things, training resistance forces and developing alliances with the oppressed peoples by using the Green Berets' engineering and medical skills to improve their quality of life. And by nature of the US taking all sorts of "peacekeeping" roles, I think the Green Berets are more well rounded. I guess this is "Deadliest Warrior", not "Best Warrior", its just even though the Spetsnaz are extremely tough bad-asses and in a knock down drag out melee, would win more often than not, I don't think you can boil it down to who's better on who would win in a one on one match up.
But there were a lot of holes in that ep overall. I think the Green Berets are better equipped in general, because our stuff is better. I mean, weapons like the Kalashnikov are extremely reliable, but they're better suited in the hands of poorly trained rank and file. The M4 is a precision weapon, and way more adaptable with the various things you can mount on the picatinny rails. Plus, I think they compared a normal M4 chambered in 5.56mm, when Special Forces has a little more leeway in their weapons, and have weapons chambered in more powerful calibers like 6.8mm SPC and 6.5mm Grendel.
And the rest of the comparisons were just as ridiculous. For "special weapons" they compared the Special Forces "sharpened entrenching tool" vs the Spetsnaz ballistic knife. Which is silly, because the sharpened entrenching tool is a Russian invention. If they were wanting to compare esoteric weapons, they would have been better off comparing the ballistic knife to the Special Forces tomahawk, because that's an actual American invention (and not just US American, given its an Injun weapon, its truly "American") But even more ridiculous, they compared the Mossberg 590 to the Saiga 12 and the m24 to the Dragunov! You don't even need to do a test to say which is better. Obviously, the Saiga 12 over the Mossberg and the m24 over the Dragunov. Its like common knowledge, only a moron would say otherwise!
For the first part, the Saiga 12 is semi-auto, so of course its going to outshoot a pump action mossberg. Plus its based on the AK, so its reliability is undeniable, so the issue of a pump action being more reliable than a semi auto is moot. And you'd have to be a retard to think that a Dragunov will outshoot an M24. Yeah, its semi-auto, but unlike Western semi-automatic sniper rifles like the PSG-1 or the SR-25 (whether in its MK11 Mod 0 incarnation for the SEALs or the M110 SASS for the army), its not a true precision weapon. As I've said countless times before, its a "sharpshooter's" rifle, meant to make up for the inherent inaccuracy of the AK compared to our M16s, used to deliver precision fire on the squad level to reach out beyond the range of the AKs. Its not an actual weapon a real sniper would use for actual sniping missions.
And all of this stuff is moot anyways! They're comparing the warriors on their equipment, but given the nature of their missions, they would use whatever they get their hands on. Sure, spearheading a Russian assault, Spetsnaz would use Russian weapons, but on deep raid missions, far away from their own lines, it makes more sense to use whatever weapons their enemy is using, where ammo and parts or more readily available. This is even more so for the Green Berets, who are either working with friendly militaries and thus from a logistical standpoint, it makes sense for them to use weapons in common with their allies. Or, when they're fostering insurrection, would use whatever the nascent rebels could get their hands on. Not only because of availability, but sometimes we don't want the enemy to know the Americans are helping the insurrectionists. And if the enemy finds bodies with bullet holes of Western and NATO calibers, they're gonna be pretty suspicious!
And I've babbled way to long on this, but all the holes in the show just annoyed me.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-05-31 10:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-06-01 12:57 am (UTC)