We enrolled 7868 women between the ages of 60 and 90 years who had a bone mineral density T score of less thanBasic Tempo Markings Tempo refers to the rate of speed at which a piece of music it to be played. Basic tempo markings. All of these markings are based on a few root words. By adding an - issimo ending the word is amplified/made louder, by adding an - ino ending the word is diminished/made softer, and by adding an - etto ending the word is endeared. The metronome marks are broad approximations. Note: Metronome markings are a guide only and depending on the time signature and the piece itself, these figures may not be appropriate in every circumstance. Larghissimo — very, very slow (2. Grave — slow and solemn (2. Lento — slowly (4. The Tanks, but No Tanks trope as used in popular culture. Writers often play fast and loose when it comes to vehicles. They are usually Just Plane Wrong, and. Per ipopituitarismo, in medicina, si intende la diminuzione (ipo) di secrezione di uno o più degli otto ormoni normalmente prodotti dalla ghiandola pituitaria. 04/16/91 ARGUS161.ZIP 34762 05-06-95 Argus v1.61: Logs DOS activities to a text file; works in the background. English and. Even more » Account Options. Sign in; Search settings. Largo — broadly (4. Larghetto — rather broadly (6. ![]() Adagio — slow and stately (literally, . Thus a more specific abbreviation is riten. Also sometimes ritenuto does not reflect a tempo change but a character change instead.)Rubato — free adjustment of tempo for expressive purposes. Stretto — in faster tempo, often near the conclusion of a section. Tanks, but No Tanks - TV Tropes. So which of these vehicles is a tank? Answer None of them. Clockwise from the top left: ZSU 2. Shilka self- propelled antiaircraft gun, designed to accompany tank forces as they advance and protect them from anti- tank aircraft; M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle, designed to carry troops to accompany tank forces as they advance and protect them from enemy infantry; Pz. H 2. 00. 0 self- propelled howitzer, designed to accompany tank forces as they advance and provide 'fire- support' (i. They are usually Just Plane Wrong, and use artistic license when it comes to ships. This applies to armored vehicles as much as anything else, either getting details wrong or using stand- ins. Armored cars, self- propelled guns, armored personnel carriers and several other types of armored fighting vehicles can be and frequently are misidentified as tanks, just as every warship is a . In real life all of these vehicle types and more are commonly lumped together under the catch- all term . Despite the common logic of . Of course, this makes tanks rather expensive to make and maintain compared to other armoured vehicles, which is why we're seeing fewer actual tanks portrayed by the media these days. The amount of effort that goes into this varies rather wildly. Firstly, most survivors are historical artifacts belonging to museums and obviously cannot be used recklessly or destroyed. Moreover, many types of antique armored vehicles are actually quite scarce, and some were quite rare in the first place - the WWII Axis were the worst offenders as they favoured shorter production runs and a far greater number of variants. Just 4. 92 King Tiger panzers were produced, as against 4. M4 Sherman tanks (all variants), and many contemporary Italian or Japanese vehicles were produced in even smaller numbers. In many cases surviving examples aren't available (e. Army equipment in the immediate postwar period. If a studio has running vehicles in their prop inventory that are available for filming without much hassle, then simple convenience means they'll get used, accurate or not. These days, most armored fighting vehicles that don't meet their end on the battlefield will probably be scrapped before anyone else can get their hands on them. Tanks have never been particularly attractive on the surplus market since they are huge, heavy, fuel- guzzling lumps of steel that can easily cost more to restore and preserve than recycle. After all, tanks tend to be just so flipping big and in part because military vehicle collectors are often understandably leery of renting their rare and often irreplaceable treasures to people who are just itching to crash them, burn them, blow them up or drive them off cliffs. Then there's the matter of Real Life politics, where vehicles you'd ideally want for realism simply can't be obtained at all since they're currently being used or held by an unfriendly power. It's easily forgotten today that prior to The Great Politics Mess- Up, getting realistic Soviet or Eastern Bloc military vehicles for filming many a Cold War thriller was darn near impossible unless you were an Eastern Bloc filmmaker. Whereas today, you can just phone the Russians and ask them nicely (and offer to pay cash up front). Just find something vaguely tank- like, add a coat of stereotypical (but historically inaccurate) panzer gray paint and a few crosses and voila! And—let's be honest here—aside from a few vehicle enthusiasts and history buffs, most viewers wouldn't even notice (or care), anyway. If it has tracks and a gun, it's a tank as far as they are concerned and it doesn't violate their Willing Suspension of Disbelief. To those who know what to look for, however, it can quite jarringly break it. One is to use surplus or 'backup tanks' from modern armies such as Russia or Spain: Most T- 3. Sherman tanks used in WWII films were not actually from the war but modernized vehicles from the immediate postwar period. Another is to take a more common modern or contemporary vehicle and give it a cosmetic makeover to give it the appearance of the correct historic vehicle; sometimes these conversions can be quite sophisticated with only a few detail differences such as turret location and suspension design that only dedicated military vehicle enthusiasts would likely notice (these folk are often called . Finally, there are always models of both the real and the Computer Generated variety, which naturally come with theirown sorts of problems. The rough equivalent term in English is . The crew of which lampshade it by pointing out that they don't have a turret. It is also lampshaded by Miho's loader Yukari who - correctly - calls it . The officiator of the match is called out on this when it appears. Especially if said movies are not Backed by the Pentagon. The American tanks were postwar M4. Walker- Bulldogs. On the bright side, this did make the US tanks look appropriately smaller than the German ones, as well as using World War II era Chaffees. In reality only two Chaffees saw battle in December 1. While the tanks look suitably . What's even more ridiculous: later in the movie, an M4 Sherman can be seen. Why the heck didn't they use it in the first place? A 2. 0mm flak gun deserves mention as well; often encountered during the war, never before seen in a movie. The half- tracks were mostly Czechoslovakian copies of the German Sdkf 2. British FV4. 32 chassis. The vehicles representing Marder IIIs were modified Czechoslovakian Panzer 3. Swedish licence- built model). This was in fact the vehicle that the Marder III was based on in the first place, for bonus recursive accuracy points. While the Marders may seem tactically out- of- place (poorly- armoured tank destroyers have no business taking on infantry units in urban settings, after all), tank destroyers and artillery vehicles were occasionally deployed in the infantry support role when more conventional tanks or dedicated Sturmgeschutz armoured vehicles were not available. All said, it is reasonably justifiable, especially considering that the Heer units just behind the beaches had an absolute parking lot of old armoured vehicles and a Marder (of any type) would be one of the BETTER ones available. Granted these were typical high school kids with no formal military knowledge. The film did have rather accurate T- 7. CIA demanded to know where the film- makers got them. The Tiger replicas were already available since they'd been made for an earlier government sponsored historical film Battle of Neretva. The most obvious giveaway is the location of the turret, which is much too far forward for a real Tiger, and the suspension, which lacks the Tiger's characteristic overlapping roadwheels. The scale is also off. Considering this movie was made in the same era when it was standard practice to call M4. Pattons . The movie also used Yugoslav army Shermans since they still had them in reserve in 1. Possibly also due in part to the scene being filmed on location, and anyone over the age of 4. German tanks rolling through the streets. Allied vehicles, on the other hand, were reasonably accurate. Backed by the Pentagon, in this case the Dutch Army. It's more or less acceptable when T- 3. Mid- Season Upgrade variants stand in for the earlier T- 3. Things fly off the handle when they are supported by IS- 3s, which hadn't arrived until May 1. The German armour is a semi- decent re- dress for close- ups, but for general shots they are supplemented by the same IS- 3s or post- war main battle tanks, painted grey. No amount of Backing by the Ministry of Defence can create armies of authentic vehicles that haven't survived the war. Not only were the tanks in one scene all real, but they were all sold right after filming completed. The scene actually had to be rushed because the arms dealer they were borrowing the tanks from had an unexpected buyer. The Pentagon, it is claimed, refused to lend more modern equipment because of its unhappiness with the military's ineffectiveness in the film.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |