Archived threads in /k/ - Weapons - 3877. page

File: real.jpg (563KB, 1000x833px) Image search: [Google]

563KB, 1000x833px

>>30166355
80% sure that it's fake.

>>30164836
>give me pen

>inb4 mass autism

File: Estonian Purple Amoeba TTsKO Summer Trousers.jpg (1MB, 1728x2304px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1728x2304px

>>30164354

Enjoy keeping this alive until the Euros wake up

"Global war on..." stopped reading there.

The CIA sure does love using them to blow up cellphones, and whatever happens to be within 500 feet of said cellphone.

Watch a documentary called Spymasters: CIA in the cross hairs

File: 1452848482929.gif (999KB, 245x205px) Image search: [Google]

999KB, 245x205px

>>30161558
>Vaporwave guns
the fuck is that?

>>30161582
Ok, gramps. Back to the telegraph

File: moe moe kyun.jpg (107KB, 880x660px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 880x660px

>>30161558
> can't build MOE RAIFU

I was just thinking about vaporware

File: Super Sherman.jpg (159KB, 1115x788px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 1115x788px

This 35 ton mass of pure aesthetic.

File: 719680_900.jpg (73KB, 567x378px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 567x378px

>dat 140mm
>dat 40mm coax

Strv 2000 claimed.

File: 1449331029176.jpg (158KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1024x768px

>>30160056

T-80BV will always be mein.

>Dat Cold War menace

File: 1455253057480.png (564KB, 785x584px) Image search: [Google]

564KB, 785x584px

>>30159745
>GP100
>Sexy

oh lawdy...

File: 092511_6950a-1.jpg (338KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

338KB, 800x450px

>>30159754
U wot m8?

File: 20160121_092415.jpg (1MB, 2560x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1536px

>>30159780
It's no colt, Dan Wesson or S&W

Mine

How much does that thing weigh? It has to be over 20 pounds at least.

Around 15 pounds

>>30158569
Its looks like an XM 25 with a built in gun

File: Sailor-fuku_to_Juusensha_v2_0097_[AK].png (236KB, 1040x1514px) Image search: [Google]

236KB, 1040x1514px

/a/'s threads are a bit too fast right now because of the movie hype.

>>30157154
No, FALs are pretty bad and have shit accuracy because muh tokarev system

File: armstrong-whitworth-whitley-bomber-03.png (114KB, 1024x549px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 1024x549px

>>30156873
When the Air Ministry issued requirements in 1934 for a new night bomber, Armstrong Whitworth decided to adapt their failed A.W.23 bomber-transport. Retaining the wings and tail of the A.W.23, Armstrong Whitworth developed an all-new semi-monocoque fuselage. The distinct nose and tail turret remained as the bomber’s only defensive armament, but bomb bays were added in the fuselage and inner wing sections, providing provisions for a total payload capacity of 7,000lb. Because of the added weight, Armstrong Whitworth needed to compensate to allow takeoff and landing rolls to still be reasonable. As its engineers were uncomfortable working with flaps on such a large machine, they instead gave the wings an 8.5 degree angle of incidence. While it would improve low-speed performance, it made cruising flight inefficient, as the bomber was forced to fly with a noticeable nose-down attitude. The first prototype took flight in March 1936, but before the bomber had even flown an order for 80 had been placed owing to the urgent need to modernize the inventory

File: Armstrong Whitworth Whitley.jpg (200KB, 1024x706px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 1024x706px

>>30156895
The Whitley first entered service in March 1937, replacing the biplane Heyford. Seven squadrons would be operational by the outbreak of war in 1939, all of which were later mark variants that mounted the Rolls Royce Merlin engine. Even with the new engine, however, the Whitley was obsolete by the outbreak of war. They were called into action on the first night of the war, dropping propaganda leaflets over Germany. Together with Hampdens, they made the first bombing raid on German soil on the night of March 19, 1940, and in June, they made their first raids on Italy. Despite its obsolescence, the Whitley suffered far lower casualties than the Wellington and Hampden thanks to it being flown exclusively on night missions.

File: armstrong-whitworth-whitley-bomber-06.png (219KB, 1024x583px) Image search: [Google]

219KB, 1024x583px

>>30156910
Despite the obsolescence of the Whitley, it continued to fly in RAF service well into the war. Over 1,000 would be produced, with the bombers flying nearly 9,000 missions and dropping almost 10,000 tons of bombs for the loss of 269 aircraft. They were finally retired from frontline service at the end of 1942, with the bombers shifting over to transport and electronic warfare duties. In that role, the Whitley continued to fly over Europe, towing gliders and deploying paratroopers on various covert operations. RAF Coastal Command also operated the bomber, using it as an antisubmarine patrol platform in what would be its last combat use. In these secondary roles, the Whitley would persist until the end of the war.

File: Early_B.E.2c.jpg (366KB, 2124x1038px) Image search: [Google]

366KB, 2124x1038px

>>30155680
The Royal Aircraft Factory’s B.E.2c biplane would be the first domestically produced aircraft to serve as a bomber with the RFC. First flown in 1912, the B.E.2 was designed as a general-purpose aircraft. Large numbers were sent to France with the British Expeditionary Force in 1914, though these were primarily early variants that were rapidly replaced once more modern aircraft became available. By the end of 1914, the B.E.2c would begin reaching frontline units, providing the RFC with a robust and reliable aircraft to perform operations. The B.E.2c was a simple two-seat tractor biplane that was generally stable and easy to fly, making it a prime choice for combat roles. Initially, the B.E.2c was used for reconnaissance, carrying a camera off the side of the fuselage to be operated by the observer. However, it would gradually take on bomber roles as well.

File: Royal_Aircraft_Factory_BE2_captured.jpg (124KB, 940x557px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 940x557px

>>30155687
Though the B.E.2c would prove capable of carrying bombs, it was hardly a practical arrangement. To operate as a bomber, the aircraft had to fly without its observer, and endurance was limited. Unfortunately, the modest performance of the B.E.2c was quickly found to be a liability after the appearance of the first German fighters. Though the B.E.2c could be fitted with a defensive gun, the placement of the observer ahead of the pilot and under the wing limited its usefulness, and, unsurprisingly, losses mounted. Despite the heavy losses to German fighters, the B.E.2c persisted in frontline roles. The arrival of new fighters would allow the B.E.2 to fly in safer skies, and the newer B.E.2e variant promised to address some of the design’s shortcomings. This resurgence was short-lived, however. A new generation of German fighters arrived over the front in the Spring of 1917, leading to the highest losses yet experienced by B.E.2 crews. Though plans had called for the R.E.8 and F.K.8 to replace the B.E.2 on the front by early 1917, crews suffered in the obsolete aircraft until the middle of the year.

File: 32-Farman_MF11-2.jpg (58KB, 1077x530px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 1077x530px

>>30155698
One of the first bomber aircraft to operate with the Royal Flying Corps would be a pre-war design from the French manufacturer Farman. The MF.11 was a simple two-man sesquiplane pusher design, powered by a 100hp Renault engine and fitted with a single machinegun in the forward cockpit. Originally designed for reconnaissance, it would occasionally mount a small payload of eighteen 16lb bombs on underwing racks. In the first years of the war, the MF.11 saw considerable use, with an RNAS MF.11 making the first bombing raid of the war on December 21, 1914. Though the MF.11 was quickly made obsolete and withdrawn from the Western Front in 1915, it continued to serve on in tertiary theaters. 13 RFC squadrons would fly the MF.11, operating them over the Dardanelles, Africa, and Middle East. In these theaters, the MF.11 would persist until 1916, though, with its modest payload, their bombing missions were unsurprisingly not too decisive.

"let's tank"
How silly of me.
*talk

Rhino Tanks

>>30152430
Bolo is love, bolo is life.

RIP Nike ;^(

>>30151294
Yeah it'll stop a .44 mag but if you get hit in the face with that your neck is fucking broken

File: ushanka.jpg (137KB, 1182x906px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 1182x906px

>>30151294
ushanka so cozy even make gun cozy when shoot and give stock little hug ushanka best gear for head

>>30151319
>le broken neck maymay