Would say its a con unless its changed France has very strict privacy rules & this would contravine them

Pretty sure rattler is right & yes it does smell
What a waste of money if they do it all that research then perhaps 5 actually wear them with a short production run. So in effect will probably cost 5,000 times more to produce than a helmet, yet again the UK goverment show a lack of economic sense.

My sisters husband is a micro biologist & both he & his friends are very cynical of the whole thing.
There view is its all a con, a giant billion dollar industry but science badly needs money to develop replacements for resources as many not just oil are running short.
Greenhouse gases are an effect caused mainly by cloud creation as the world tries to block out the heat from that radiator in the sky we call the sun which has been very active of recent.
Note effect not cause but if they are wrong consider this & I can't remember exact figures because talked about a while back.

Man produces considerably less than 5% of them (think2-3%) so even if we cut them in half we might buy ourselves 6 months.
Oceans produce the most.
Grazing animals next - going vegan & killing all the cows would make a bigger diffrence than banning the car.
Forest fires etc man is well down the list

There are problems caused by man however the daming of low lands to stop flooding being one as the worlds eco system is an amazing thing.
World gets hot needs more clouds to protect it from the sun, ice melts water levels rise land should have flooded giving greater area for cloud formation.
There are other things we have done but their view is the eco system is an amazing machine & will rectify the problems by going into overtime. Hence big storms etc.
If the tundra melts then we might have a big problem as highly volatile gases are released into the air & burn on a truely massive scale.
Until recently it was generaly accepted that in medieval times the world was a lot hotter though since global warming this has been challenged.
Come from England so if you want a none scientific rational for temperature change take London.
At the turn of the century ice fairs were held on the Thames. It froze over hard enough to allow horse & cart & the building of stalls on the river so it was colder. Early photographs prove this.
To go back further only documents exist to collabarate but the likes of Vine Street etc were called that because the area was a vineyard. In other words London had the climate of France & France was warmer to.
The eco system tries to maintain a balance & does a very good job it gets hot then heads towards cold then back to hot again as it reacts but all the time gets generally slightly warmer as we are still coming out of an ice age. When its had enough it will turn around & head back to another ice age
None of this is anywhere near life threatening though species will die, its called evolution.

As a last point battery or hydrogen cars are a nonsense as unless the power used is nuclear you have just moved the source. Batteries are in fact incredibly harmful as the stuff they are made of is hard to extract & the areas around where it is mined are uninhabbitable (think post nuclear)
Over 15 years ago mercedes Benz made a steam car, think supercar 200mph 4sec 0-60mph but it takes 2 minutes to build pressure before driving off.
Emmisions err steam runs on water but no one wanted to set up water stations because there is no money in it.
To be totaly correct it did use a 50cc petrol engine to start it but modern tech could replace this & probably get the waiting time down.
The thing is though like I said at the start most resources are running out science needs a huge cash injection to find replacements & times of crisis is when science leaps forward just look at the speed of advances made during wars vs peacetime

To Staff
Stoffel nice vid by the way & I think you might have access to some intresting ref sources from your posts.

a thought Bootie at the blitz does a forum 256 days of war it has petered out a bit as I think he has lost intrest thinking no one looks.
Started very well & might be worth asking him if you could copy & post them.
Gives a good idea of general strategic position & of course lists battles etc.

Would suggest you actualy try & recruit someone  to do it before approach & have not thought about the feasability of doing it  just thought it might be a nice starting point for WW2 & people with an intrest could expand it with extra info

Regards
John

I think it was the Mad R who said sometthing along the lines of if you want this site to be.... we need help

He is dead right & I ask members to think for a minute about the benefits they will get.
If 10% of you offered to help even an hour or so a week you would have a say in creating it & as you find the subject intresting probably enjoy doing it most of the time.
In fact some of you will find 3 years from now that you are doing far more than that & you will suddenly realise these guys you talk to on the internet are now some of your closest friends & you will jump on a plane to go meet them.
I virtualy guarantee it these arent guys you share work with they are guys you share an intrest with.

You all have a skill, good researcher, good language skills even just 1 finger typing tidying up or proof reading, games are your thing offer to run it & do tourneys. A Staff forum could be set up with a to do list & you could look at & say I could that.
If your good at finding data but say English is not your first language you could do the bit you like & ask for someone to type it up.

Our current society is a take one everybody wants a bit of the pie & no one wants to bake it has been my unfortunate experience.
Well guess what someone has to bake it & as I said the reward can be surprising As you get a whole circle of real freinds.
That might be worth an hour or 2 of your time without taking into account the intresting stuff you come across.
like I said worth thinking about?

Okay I am glad my post did not come across as negative

What you guys are aiming to do is indeed admirable & I think requires a good amount of commitment.

The main thing I think is some sort of thought on a structure & I was by no means saying mine is the correct one but feel you guys time could get consumed if you do not have one in place from the start.

I work in the financial sector so with the current climate have other things on my mind but I am not a bad "ideas man" so feel free to run any by me.
When things improve on the work front I will endeavour to give input to this site.

Of course if things go much worse on the work front I might have lots of spare time instead of none :'(

My intrest is WW2 to present but I am sure a format could be found that can encompass all timeframes.

In another post here mention is made of alternative reports on diffrent things (WW2 3 official versions)
As I see it this is not a problem if list events by battles.
It would have those interpritations listed under it perhaps if possible with the source.
The viewer is then free to make an informed guess based on all that infomation.
Both sides Propoganda machine may have tried to colour the outcome.

Sticking to my idea of diffrent linked Forums there would also one listing the historical outcome.
Perhaps then a miscelaneous one for photos etc stuff related to.

This also means if someone just wanted to waste some time looking at photos reading history or browsing OOBs its all in one forum

As a thought as you have nicely provided a forum for works in progress large posts the person posting might find it easier to post it in there & then cut & paste into the respective forums.

Respect guys

A second thought as did not visit for a long time because of.
When join get an registration needs approving email, you then need to send one confirming it has been

Firstly appologies had little time & will get round to posting eventualy. From a quick look finding stuff is not easy a suggestion

Forum1
Forces involved in a specific battle or army layout.
Example
Forces involved in current conflict so end in battle
Ukraine 92 OOB
NATO forces 70-75 OOB
These would list the forces names lets Say 1st Lancers possibly with type armour mech arty etc & would include links to forum2

Forum2
Detailed OOB so (not real)
1st Lancers
3 Tank Comp Challenger1s (56)
3 Mech Comp (39 Squads & 36FV432s 9 Milans 6 Spartans)
1 Recon Comp ( 4 Scimatar 2 etc
Attached Arty
HQ Company
etc.

If wanted could do a third link from above for further detail
So Squad 8 men armed with list equipment.

Again if wanted could do another forum on equipment capabilities .
Not suggesting need to go this far but giving options

All these forums should be for info posting only not chat & should be linked.

Now if you want to see if this site has info on a battle or regiment or formation type look in forum one to see if the battle or formation is listed.
If more detailed info is available you will know because there is a link to it.
This can be used for all eras not just modern & perhaps forum 1 should be split into timeframes modern,WW2, Napoleonic etc.

There should be a seperate forum for discussing these forums for errors & the moderator has the right to update & correct all posts in so as accurate as possible. That way they just contain the best info you have & only info.
Sorry creating a bit of a work load here but perhaps a sticky should be placed saying as such & giving an example of prefered order info is posted in & prefered info if like. Could add things like total number of men if you actualy thought it useful.

I am not trying to be a party pooper as the aim of collecting info into one source is a great one but it is a huge task & needs planning & consitency to be effective. As it stands from my quick look it is generaly faster to find stuff on the web than at this site.
For me to spend a considerable amount of time posting unit information I at least have to feel somebody might find it.

Note for general force listings like say NATO OOB most countries will have 2 possibly 3 varieties of the same formation say 28 & 56 tank. There may be some other variations but they are very minor or rare. If have listings for the variations on Armour Mech & Inf taking modern day the total of 6 varients would cover most forces available with a good degree of accuarcy.
Most nations do however tend to have a few oddball units with an independent make up. Recon & Arty formations come to mind as having a wide variety as does air. Get the odd one with a diffrent ratio of squads to other equipment & things like special ATGM vehicle Hunter Killer Units that are to be attached to other units in use

Also if done this way often the force composition does not change as often as the equipment so could say 56 tanks then in detailed report list dates that the type was available so 80-86 Challenger 1, 87 to present Challenger 2 Milans to (forgot the name) etc.

In fact for the modern era many nations use similar formations if talking about main part of it. The equipment changes but the ratios of say Tanks to squads to ATGM to arty stays the same. A German 40 tank armoured unit is similar to its French counterpart etc
Eastern Block very similar West more variety as some nations cannot afford many MBTs or task is to hold so generaly higher ATGM ratio. USMC is another example as has tanks but not predominantly an armoured force but a quick reaction force so some unusual formations as light vehices for easy transport important.
If anything varies it is again recon as some is fighting recon like some USA German & some quick look see like British & many nations seem to come up with there own idea of whats best.
The USA also seems to struggle to make its mind up changing formations more frequently than most if I remember correctly.

Sorry if this comes across as negative just trying to suggest things I think would improve as you asked. Realise its aking for input from you guys running it but if you do not have a formal structure & the info grows it will not be any easier to find it here as you will have a disorganised monster on your hands.
John