(L) Girls und Panzer

[LoweGear]

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

Probably swiveling door/hatch.

If it's in the style of something like the driver's hatches on modern day tanks, or something like a Lamborghini Diablo, then it's not exactly what I would describe as "pivot around the center".

The only kind of hatch/door that I can imagine with that description would be something akin to some salt & pepper dispensers, or some cheese containers. Said design isn't exactly the kind you'd see in large-scale designs though, and certainly not on vehicles.

[Sumeragi]

Originally Posted by LoweGear

And there were also a good portion of the crews that drowned though, so it's not quite as easy as it sounds.

Almost all drownings happened because the escape happened after the time of no return (as in sinking quite deeply due to sticking to the mission) or being entangled in the cage of supports welded to the tank deck to secure the canvas wraparound.

[RX-78GP04G Gerbera]

Haven't seen every little detail, so I can only go on what the anime has showed me from the flashbacks, so unless they say otherwise, I can only assume that the rescue was warranted, so trying to debate whether a hatch could open or not or any technical aspects would be pointless as it's never said one way or the other in the series or some other source itself. (That I know of.)

Basically, many a time in anime/manga, all we can do, until we're told otherwise, is believe what we're actually shown. I mean, we can think about it, discuss it, and offer as many "outside" details as we want, but it won't change anything so long as the in-universe world maintains the image of it happening/working a certain way until something else comes along and shows, without a doubt, otherwise.

Like this whole discussion on whether Miho's rescue was "needless"; no one can really say it was needless, regardless of real world technical aspects or anything, unless we're shown everything else that was going on, like exactly what was going on inside the troubled tank, what other people were doing outside the match, what everyone was precisely thinking, and so on.

Now I'm not saying it's wrong to think otherwise, but there's no way to establish it as any sort of "fact" unless it's actually shown to be otherwise in the material itself or something.

We also can't forget the plain fact that, regardless of how realistic they may try to be, this is still an anime with an exaggerated concept already, so there more than likely have been/are/will be times where physics, technical aspects, etc may be skewed or even outright ignored solely for the sake of drama, coolness, etc, thus throwing all of that out the window in terms of discussion and really lead nowhere. (Like I see many heated debates on Strike Witches and how things can/can't work and such, many seeming to forget that "real world" was lost from the beginning when things like magic and the Neuroi are thrown in.)

This all goes back to arguing about Shiho's beliefs which, I do agree that they do come off as at least ruthless, but not "bloodthirsty".

[Wild Goose]

I think I mentioned earlier that both Hammond (Top Gear) and Jamie (Mythbusters) were able to escape once pressure had equalised, but it took so long to do so that they had to resort to emergency oxygen carried by the safety divers sitting in the back seat.

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by LoweGear

Not sure where on the article disagrees with my statement exactly. In any case, the best way to get out of a car is still by breaking a window as mentioned in said article.

You're not supposed to wait until pressure has equalized. Break the window and go.

AFAIK the only way to make a car door that can open underwater is to make it a powered door. I'm not sure what you mean by "pivot around its center" though? Can't imagine a door being like that.

Like that: ( | ) .

It pivots around the |, making two openings, left and right of the |. The water weighing on one side will balance the water weighing on the other, so it doesn't matter if it's underwater. One of the cons is that it takes up space inside the vehicle to open.

edit: examples for house doors. Especially the last one, it looks balanced.

[Wild Goose]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

You're not supposed to wait until pressure has equalized. Break the window and go.

IIRC, that's if you don't have anything to break the window with, since opening your door is the only option to exit - which is hardly ideal and you'll probably drown if you don't have a safety diver carrying a buddy tank with you.

[LoweGear]

Ah, those kinds of doors. It still wouldn't be a good idea for cars given that as already mentioned, you'd need space inside the car to open it, and many cars are designed to be as compact as possible. Having such a door on a car actually reduces your exit space by nearly half. It also adds volume inside the vehicle that could actually bar your escape.

[Sumeragi]

Originally Posted by RX-78GP04G Gerbera

This all goes back to arguing about Shiho's beliefs which, I do agree that they do come off as at least ruthless, but not "bloodthirsty".

That is where things should have ended.

[Wild Goose]

With regard to the difference in priorities between victory and life, I post some comments on this issue from a poster on Spacebattles, which I am quoting here, with regards to earlier disputes on fieldex safety:

Originally Posted by WildGoose

So I wanted to get the opinions on SB on this. How safe are field excercises?

Originally Posted by WildGoose

Where is the line drawn between realistic training and safety?

Originally Posted by WildGoose

And lastly, thoughts on the above scenario - who's right and who's wrong?

Well, that's the Canadian perspective. I should note that IXJac has served in the Canadian army, and was an intel NCO. I've bolded the last bit for emphasis. I believe that settles things on whether Miho was right to act as she did.

[Sumeragi]

I find the emphasis on "western" military to be amusing.

And no, I don't give particular care for the Canadian Armed Forces.

[Wild Goose]

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

I find the emphasis on "western" military to be amusing.

And no, I don't give particular care for the Canadian Armed Forces.

I find your insistence on some utterly biazarre, overly strict and rigid interpretation of martial arts to be equally amusing. And while you may not care about the Canadian Army, this is someone who's done this shit for real, so you might want to care more. *shrug*

In that case, there's nothing more to say. You've made up your mind, as childish as your position may be, and refuse to budge. Fair enough.

Just don't expect us to agree with you quietly, towards an opinion that breaches practically every bit of common sense.

I hope to God you're not in some position of command or authority over subordinates.

Also, one last real life anecdote on the subject of the crew rescuing themselves:

Originally Posted by IXJac

Assuming they weren't incapacitated in the fall into the river; or that opening the hatch wouldn't require effort from both sides; or that the hatch was damaged in some way that would preclude ANYONE from opening it, and someone from the outside would need to confirm that so that further assistance could be QUICKLY requested before the vehicle flooded. . .

We had an instance in Afghanistan where one of our tanks struck a massive IED. The vehicle was wrecked, and the driver badly wounded. He was able to unlock the hatch from the inside before he passed out. The rest of the crew were then able to wrestle the hatch open from the outside. Because of the damage to the tank the whole hull was warped, with the turret jammed in such a way that had the driver not been able to unlock the hatch they would have had no way of getting him out before he bled to death. There were enemy around during the rescue effort, and had the crew decided "The driver can open the hatch himself, we have to fight Taliban!" he would have died.

You do all you reasonably can to render assistance and worry about whether the assisted could have made it out safely under their own power AFTERWARDS, when everyone is safe.

[LoweGear]

Doesn't really matter whether it's from the Canadian Military though: many modern military institutions observe similar codes during field exercises. Including the Japanese.

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by LoweGear

Ah, those kinds of doors. It still wouldn't be a good idea for cars given that as already mentioned, you'd need space inside the car to open it, and many cars are designed to be as compact as possible. Having such a door on a car actually reduces your exit space by nearly half. It also adds volume inside the vehicle that could actually bar your escape.

Yeah, just pack a hammer and you're good. Better yet, don't fall in bodies of water.

[Sumeragi]

Originally Posted by Wild Goose

In that case, there's nothing more to say. You've made up your mind, as childish as your position may be, and refuse to budge. Fair enough.

I hope to God you're not in some position of command or authority over subordinates.

I actually am in such a position, and loved for it. Sorry if reality is not as soft as some people think it to be, which is indeed true childishness.

Still, thank you for the civil discussion. I wish others would be up to that standard.

Originally Posted by LoweGear

Doesn't really matter whether it's from the Canadian Military though: many modern military institutions observe similar codes during field exercises. Including the Japanese.

If only people knew what JGSDF and ROKA exercises (especially the ROKA ones) are like.

[Wild Goose]

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

I actually am in such a position, and loved for it. Sorry if reality is not as soft as some people think it to be.

So, if you're an actual military officer (infantry, armor?), I just want to be clear on this: You are perfectly alright with risking the lives of your troops in distress during a field exercise, when there is a chance their deaths are preventable?

Also you might want to look up at that other anecdote.

[Sumeragi]

Not in the military, obviously. My occupation merges ruthlessness with situation awareness, and I've always been one to pick up the burden. That's why the those working for me follow my lead.



Thank you for the civil discussion. I wish others would be up to that standard.

[Ithekro]

Oddly, I like this discussion.

It gets past some of the heated debates with some facts and ideology that than just bluster and opinions.

[Wild Goose]

Black Hawk Down really captures my sentiments perfectly: "It's about the men next to you, and that's it. That's all it is."

Or in another's words: "Bros before Training Objectives."

In this case, Miho's practicing "Bros before Trophies."

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

Not in the military, obviously. My occupation merges ruthlessness with situation awareness, and I've always been one to pick up the burden. That's why the those working for me follow my lead.

In that case, might I just point out how childish you appear, dismissing the opinions and experiences of someone who has actually done this shit for real?

With all due respect, when considering the opinions of an ojousama vs a professional soldier, on the subject matter of soldiering, I'll give more credence to the professional soldier.

I'll note that you haven't clarified my question, but if you wish to leave it be, that's your prerogative. I should also note that every time I and arkhangelsk have confronted you on your stance, you've ignored the confrontation.

Thank you for the civil discussion. I wish others would be up to that standard.

I don't need to throw a temper tantrum to argue my case, or to be right.

(In the British system, presenting one's case in court is called arguing. )

Originally Posted by Ithekro

Oddly, I like this discussion.

It gets past some of the heated debates with some facts and ideology that than just bluster and opinions.

I studied British Law as my undergrad degree. The British take on the adversarial system is to argue with facts, precedent and reasoned words first, and only fall back on bluster, opinion and emotion once you're losing. First one to resort to the latter three loses, more or less.

(Albeit there's a difference between opinion and legal opinion, which is an alternate term for a Judge's decision. "It was the opinion of the learned Judge in the case of So-and-so...")

Part of this is also because prior discussions on this subject were emotionally based, while I interpret this issue as a clash of ideologies. Once you step back and get the knee-jerk emotional reactions out of the way, it's possible to see things from a different angle.

[Random Wanderer]

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

I find the emphasis on "western" military to be amusing.

And no, I don't give particular care for the Canadian Armed Forces.

So you dismiss every bit of evidence presented to you, no matter what. You have obviously encased your opinion on this in concrete, and there is no point in bothering with reasoned debates. I think I may have to put you on my ignore list just so I can keep coming into this thread.

[arkhangelsk]

Originally Posted by Sumeragi

@ arkhangelsk: You're forgetting the most important aspect of all "submerged vehicle" problems. Basically, modern cars/tanks seal the doors/hatches, causing a vacuum which helps water pressure be an effective barrier to escaping.

I never had trouble fighting that "seal" in a car - it is not very significant compared to the water pressure.

Also, what gyration and disorientation? Checked Episode 7 again, and it was one of the more smoother slide into a river I've seen. It was certainly a situation where any adequately trained tank crew could have escaped without too much a fuss.

I meant when it was in the river and it rolled close to 90 degrees. The slide part looks long, but in fact was only ~7 seconds. If they IMMEDIATELY decided to escape despite the fact there is a chance (from their viewpoint) they can ride it out and the tank can arrest its descent, the commander would probably have made it out, maybe the second can maneuver in the cramped space and get out before the tank rolls over too much in the river, but that would be it.

As for your scenario: If things went to that extreme, obviously the match itself would have been halted.

It already happened except I slowed it up to let you get over your assumption they can easily get out. It wasn't.

If it wasn't, I would be the one to go and attempt a rescue.

Even if that meant throwing the match? I think this is the first time you said it. Concession accepted.