this post was submitted on 23 Jul 2023
177 points (94.5% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

3539 readers
214 users here now

Rules:

  1. Posts must abide by lemmy.world terms and conditions
  2. No spam or soliciting for money.
  3. No racism or other bigotry allowed.
  4. Obviously nothing illegal.

If you see these please report them.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 23 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Blamemeta 109 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

For those who don't know, A 5 inch gun refers to the bore. Its shoots a projectile 5 inches in diameter. Its fucking massive.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yeah a shell the width of a *toothbrush-stood-on-end will make some big holes.

Edit: for the people.

[–] Yawweee877h444 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Still poorly worded lol. When you say the width of a toothbrush, I think the width of it, not the length

[–] Screwthehole 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's extremely poorly worded, as the word weapon is not the same as the word shell or ammunition. In fact, that's why we have separate words for both. I'd have thought people with English degrees (journalists still need education right?) would know these things.

But I'm not a journalist, so I guess they know best right? 😅

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I mean, certainly that can't be an intentional choice. That would violate the entire oath of journalism. The people rely on them.

[–] Dellyjonut 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How is it poorly worded? You refer to guns by their bore size.

[–] Vorticity 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If it confused a bunch of people, I'd say it's poorly worded. "A gun the length of a toothbrush" made me think of a small pistol not a cannon.

[–] starman2112 3 points 1 year ago

That's because british journalists are incredibly stupid. Industry standard is to refer to weapons by their bore–you don't call a Glock 19 a 185mm handgun, after all.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

Well that's not length then is it. That's poor journalism

[–] Ilovethebomb 9 points 1 year ago

And in the context of naval guns, 5in isn't even that big.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago

The Daily Heil with their usual level of journalism here

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago

@gkanor
How the fuck are we supposed to compete in non credibility with the daily mail around ?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is utter bullshit.

No toothbrush is five inches.

Only penises.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They're supposed to be.... five.... inches....? :(

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Don't worry, I'm sure they meant five centimeters.... right?

[–] starman2112 16 points 1 year ago

Wow, a british news org fucking up the most basic fact checking? Who would have ever expected that?

[–] soviettaters 16 points 1 year ago

I'm glad to see NCD on lemmy

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

Easily concealable size is an excellent choice for a stealthy ship.

[–] ThePyroPython 10 points 1 year ago

Yeah I wouldn't trust the publication that sided with Oswold Fucking Mosley to have journalistic integrity.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Gunz ain't important it'z about the dakkah!

[–] jrs100000 3 points 1 year ago

I just measured it on my screen with a ruler and it turns out its only 5mm long, not 5 inches. This sort of blatant military industrial fraud is why only freedom units are suitable for weapon design!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

If you apply physics/math knowledge, you can understand why these 5-inch guns are more deadly. Higher velocity, longer range and more accurate are what makes these a better fit for modern warfare. Relatively speaking, these smaller ships can be produced and deployed faster. Although the costs seem high, they are comparatively cheap.

As for inches, it's not a d*** contest.

[–] RakumAzuri 1 points 1 year ago

That's some poor phrasing

load more comments
view more: next ›