Archived threads in /k/ - Weapons - 2407. page

>>32483868
>The only drawback is that the crew has to reload the arm after each shot

answered your own question.

Its not a small drawback, nor is it any more versatile than a simple MK41 VLS

>>32483868
>The only drawback is that the crew has to reload the arm after each shot.

Reloading was automated.

The problem with arms is that it drastically limited rate of fire.

>>32483868
VLS is simpler, more reliable, and faster.

File: IMG_1318.png (89KB, 632x492px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 632x492px

>tfw you realize "the black market" IS an actual place like you thought as a kid

File: confused anime girl.png (129KB, 314x278px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 314x278px

Would this then be the brown market?

75 dollar MP5 clones.

:c

File: big_Kysa_11227950.jpg (115KB, 800x534px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 800x534px

>>32483626
Room clearing, though carbines are better. Really depends on if your enemies are fielding body armor, in which case you really don't want to be fighting with something that weak.

My guess is no, carbines are king of today's battlefield.

Considering SMGs are not issued to military combat personnel by any first world country... No.

A shotgun perhaps?

>>32483491
Training and a knife of my own if needed

>>32483493
so, you are going to carry your shotgun that you are only allowed to have for hunting(and only if you belong to a club, and get a bunch of references) around town?

>>32483459

I use it after I press check the chamber

I've used it twice. Both times were on an undergassed 7.5" AR pistol.

Some supressor owners use it

>>32483447

> Why did so many have to die in these before they realized how fucked up they were

It was made with ease of production in mind, not ease of operation. In that it succeded very well. 4 Russian farmers were worth much less than the tank itself. Now it's the opposite. I guess.

> and made the T-44 and T-54?

Confirmed for not knowing jack shit. T-44 and it's developped form, the T-54 were not medium tanks but early forms of MBts, since they had to operate without heavy tank support (T-44 did, but too few in the numbers to really matter. It was a proof of concept).

>The allies didn't lose anywhere near as many tankers as the Soviets

They also didn't saw 1/10th of the fights the Soviets did. Also Soviets were part of "the allies" so your statement is even stupider.

Are you honestly comparing Normandy or El-Alamein to the scale, intensity and significance of Kursk or Bagration? Kursk battle alone dwarfs the entire western front of WW2.

>>32483447
Troll thread, of course. But in the event that it isn't:

Arguments can be made for the superiority of the M4 Medium over the T-34, and vice versa, every day for the next hundred years. What cannot be argued, however, is that the Soviets were quicker to introduce an alternative to the T-34. This was in the form of heavy tanks to operate along side it. This is something that the Western Allies never accomplished (outside of the Churchill Infantry Tank, and the M26 Pershing; which wasn't really a heavy tank.)

The Western Allies saw great tactical success in North Africa, employing a Churchill/Sherman combat team. The effectiveness of this arrangement was not truly appreciated, though, and no dedicated heavy design was produced to service along side the M4. The American attempt to round out its tank family, the M6 Heavy, is one of the great what-ifs of the Allied tank world. In contrast, the Soviet Union had the mostly inadequate KV-series, followed by the successful Iosif Stalin series which hit its stride in 1944.

Both the Western Allies and the Soviet Union took similar approaches to the design of their medium tanks; one which emphasized the outright volume of production over the sort of overhauls that their respective medium tanks might have needed in order to remain competitive with the absolute latest German developments. They were good enough, however. The difference is that the Soviet Union understood what kind of vehicles were needed, sooner. Or, in any case, were in a better position to field them first and therefor did so.

You can't actually hold them like rifles because otherwise the gases from the cylinder gap will burn the fuck out of your forward hand and forearm.

>>32483370
How the dicking hell do you hold a rifle?

>>32483370
how has no one made a gas seal?
how fucking hard is it to make a gas seal on a revolver

File: why12cal.jpg (47KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 1600x1200px

sure

>>32483201
Wtf is that crimped brass???

File: aa trac.jpg (191KB, 960x698px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 960x698px

>>32483202
yes

I'll take cylinder gap for $300, Alex.

nagat revolver style cylinder which seals?

>>32483003
Because that system is complicated, requires special ammo, results in a BITCH of a trigger pull, and is very unreliable.

>>32482692
1) no

2) not their current goverment or their current military structure.

To extrapolate on the 2nd point, they MIGHT be able to prolong such a conflict to where the US leaves after a decade, but it wont be the current goverment prolonging, nor the current force, so idk how that could be considered a victory for the north korea of right now.

You cannot successfully invade a country without proper logistics, which North Korea pretty much has none.

As for the second question, the best way to minimize troop losses and prolong the war against North Korea. Most of their soldiers are also farmers, and keeping the war going will pretty much just starve the entire fucking country.

>>32482692
>1) Successfully invade South Korea
No

>2) Successfully defeat an invasion from South Korea/NATO
No, but it would be one hell of a bloody invasion even if they were bombed back to the stone age before ground troops went in

>>32482589
>wants to build a revolver because theres nothing better out there
>considers modeling it off S&W wheel gats

just buy an old model 19 you fucking cunt.

>>32482589
Go watch a bunch of C&Rsenal and Forgotten Weapons videos for mechanical inspo. Looking at old patents might help too.

The big thing you'll have to learn is how to do proper heat treating. You can make the shape of a revolver with CNC but it won't be strong enough unless it's made from proper materials and heat treated right. You'll also have to figure out how to do rifling, I'm not sure if that's practical to do on a normal CNC or if you need specialized equipment. (It might be easier to design around an existing barrel intended for a revolver with interchangeable ones.)

>>32482605
I watch alot of forgotten weapons and love his takedowns. I'll do some research on heat treatment and proper materials. Really don't want it to blow up in my hand. Also yeah I'll rifle through the patents out there

File: kneecap.jpg (43KB, 500x367px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 500x367px

too obvious.

handguns were invented for a reason.

>>32482305
I think it's stupid

File: 306370202.jpg (27KB, 334x336px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 334x336px

>>32482305
look it's good, IF they can make it look less sus.

disguise to look EXACTLY like a hiking hiking backpack. otherwise it stands out like a saw thumb.

>>32482051
It's almost as if people who are neutered from school to think violence is the worst thing possible and are given the most restrictive gun laws on the earth don't want to hunt.

Funny that.

Does this mean the jappos are gonna pay howaito piggus to come and shoot their pests for them?

>>32482051
>>32482243
It's just the weeb government letting huge monsters take over so they can play out their anime fantasies

>>32481837
FUCK YOU AND THIS HORRIBLE FLASHBACK

>>32481837
What ever happened to the fat taco?

File: ar15 slidefire.jpg (209KB, 1328x747px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 1328x747px

Woops didn't notice there was a new thread.
This slidefire stock is pretty nice. But I never had anything more than those basic Magpul ones.

Speed and mobility

>>32481768
If I could sum it up for you quickly, this wouldn't be a question.

However, some base points are French doctrine, the Dyle plan to move up through Belgium and into the Netherlands, shitty intelligence, lack of coordination between the Allies and Belgium, good traffic control during the invasion of Luxembourg and Belgium, Grossdeutschland's performance at Sedan, and so many other things. It has almost nothing to do with the quality of the tanks.

Try Robert A. Doughty's "The Seeds of Disaster" and "The Breaking Point" if you want to delve deeper. They take a particularly French perspective, but let's be honest: Victory is less about how the winners did well, but more about how the losers fucked up.

>>32481768
"Tactics"

Use fast vehicles to push deep into enemy lines, encircle enemy forces before they know what's going on, cut off enemy supply lines, then let the infantry deal with the cut off pockets of army, while you move on and cut off the next portion.

Also French tanks were largely single man turret - 1 man has to command, load, find targets, line up the gun, fire the gun, find the next target, all at the same time.

Most German tanks had 3 guys in the turret - 1 guy commanding and not doing anything else, 1 guy gunning, and nothing else, 1 guy loading.

This way the commander can keep calling targets and maintaining situational awareness, while the gunner keeps sighting targets and firing at them, while the loader just keeps loading.

You have very low situational awareness in a 1 man french tank when you're loading and trying to find a target down the narrow FOV sight. You wouldn't see the 2 tanks coming from your flanks, while a german commander in the same position would, and could call the next target and bearing for the gunner, and prioritize targets etc.