Jump to content
Sturgeon's House


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 07/08/2015 in all areas

  1. 8 points
  2. 3 points
  3. 3 points
    i kinda have a personal hate for the type 14 and most Japanese weapons ive fired The type 14 i fired, i think a 1928 production, had similar malfunctions and feeding errors, though not nearly as much. Still a shitty pistol. Easy to fire when it isnt jamming, it damn better be because of that squirrel hunting round you gonna wanna be aiming for particularity painful area's of the body. The type 38 has pretty awful sights, and a weak cartigde aswell, not a complete pile of japcrap but it still dosent feel nearly as sturdy as a mosin, enfeild, or even mauser The 99 has some impovments in that regard, the sights are better (as in not as suicdial as the type 38's are for nightfight/shooting) and the cartrigde is actually sutiable for killing a human being. The only Japanese rifle i wouldnt mind bringing into battle, i enjoyed shooting it more than the M1903 but would rather have a garand, mosin or enfeild any day The type99 light machine gun is also a blast to shoot, other than the issue of perferale vision being butched (yes, i know, not that important, but i was trained on the RPK and are forever instilled with the peripheralboo curse) its an extremely easy machine gun to shoot, recoild feel's very well managed, rather have a bren just for the ability to fire it unmounted but its still a nice litle machine gun The type-100 submachine is painfully average, i was extremely lucky to fire one of the both the original (Type 100/40) and third edition (Type 100/44). The Type 100/44 is your painfully average submachine gun, pretty much did anything any other submachine gun could do. It feel's very fragil despite having a decent rate of fire and manageable recoil. I had a couple of stoppages, nothing truly horrendous but i can imagen having dirt and sand thrown into this in the field could make it hell to use. I can appricate that it had an actual wooden stock becuase i have a feeling any other configuration would be massively fucked up by japcrap design. You would think this being the late war version was some watered-down version of the Type-100, made for mass production as the Japanese army crumbles almost as fast as its industry the truth is far more horrible The orginal had more complex sights. They just dont feel at home on a submachine gun, they kinda remind me of a butched garand clone, it cuts down on peripheral vision and dosent suite this sort of weapons firing pattern. There is a mounting for both a bayonet and a bipod. I guess the Japs really couldnt make up their mind whether it was best to be plicking away at whatever you managed to find with those awful sights from a distance, or just lunching into your enemy after you expericne feed error number 525824. I got about 12 feed errors per magazine at one event, at another it was significantly less. But this thing must of been the definite been hell to use in any environment with dirt or sand. The fire rate was noticeably lower. Alot of people consider the early war version easier to shoot for this, but i can say with great confidence this is nothing but a downside in an actual combat situation The 100/44 (late war version) inst remarkable in any way other than it can put more rounds into an enemy at a great convinence than any other Japanese small arm. Its improved fire rate is more than managalbe with the puny nambu round, infact its probably the only thing that made the cartridge deadly was the abilty to get as many as possible into one target. Its sights also offer better perphipal visison, i have to praise the desingers for not stickign with the older sights, it would be a nightmare keeping them alined with a even higher fire rate. Both feel pretty fragile/unrealibe. The late war version is really superior in every way imaginable. It has a better rate of fire, better sights, its more realible (not saying alot but its something) and dosent have that unessary mount. If your taking time to actually set up the bipod on this thing, your better off just picking up an Arisaka. I could kinda see the bayonet being useful as counterweight for the recoil, but it sometimes tends to glime in the sun giving away your position. Maybe it was a particularly sunny day and maybe the owner just toke really good care of the blade, but i dont really find it all that necessary. The magazines in all cases seem to be truly, truly awful. I often bitch and whine about western 'plastic' mags but these really feel like they can fall apart at any moment Overall though i cant really think of any reason to use one over your average world war 2 submachine gun. The Mp-40, ppsh, tompson and even your average European piece just seem to be bettter in alot of ways. The late war version is probably better then a Sten (i enjoyed firing it more, and i doubt the sten is more realible). Worst is a harsh word if nothing else for the sheer amount of crap that many nations probably peddled out of desperation, and the late war version seems okay. I would chalk the early war version up for a grand stinker of ww2 compedition, it does nothing right and feels like a shitty Japcrap knockoff of a mp-28 thats had a rough week. I hope you enjoyed my alcohol and read meat fueled ramblings of firearms which i had too much beer in my system when firing to truly be objective about
  4. 3 points
    IFV Armata
  5. 2 points


    I typed "Armata pictures" in Google and i saw this thread in first page of Google search.
  6. 2 points
    BTR K-17 VPK-7829(Bumerang).
  7. 2 points
    IFV Armata Full size: https://img-fotki.yandex.ru/get/4507/8955119.d/0_9d07c_b3cb7b9d_orig
  8. 2 points
    Maybe. Like I said, I found mention of it possibly being something for India (which wouldn't surprise me given India's military being a hodgepodge of almost everything), but I also found something on it possibly being a proposal by GIAT in France of upgrading older tanks with T-72 turrets. Hell, I don't even know if it's real or anything. EDIT: Now I've found something about it possibly being for Malaysia. Seriously, this is getting ridiculous. EDIT 2: Found slightly more about it possibly being Malaysian, apparently Malaysia trialled the Leopard 1A5 but ended up going with the Polish PT-91. In a last ditch effort, the Germans tried changing their minds by giving them the best of both worlds. (cue Van Halen). Of course whether this is actually true or internet hearsay, is beyond me. I've found three different stories at this point.
  9. 2 points

    WoT v WT effort-thread

    Resurrected the grapefruit wars have been... End well it will not.
  10. 2 points
    This thread needs more Corsair!
  11. 2 points
  12. 2 points
    Actually, the rifle variant was based upon the Ruger Super Redhawk. The GP100 variant was a handgun only. The ammunition for the KAC suppressed revolvers used a captive sabot. The large caliber sabot stopped against the forcing cone of the small caliber barrel to seal the cylinder gap. The propellant gases were then left to flow into the suppressor. In articles that I've seen, the project was credited to Reed Knight and John Anderson. However, the cartridge concept is derived from an earlier design by Charles R. (Bob) Olsen. He saw it as the basis for a high velocity revolver cartridge without the need to use a bottlenecked case with its setback problems. He called it the Invicta. The models he showed to the shooting press back in the early/mid-80s were built on Dan Wesson revolvers. I suspect that no one wanted to market it due to the possibility that some idiot would slip a standard cartridge into the cylinder and try to shoot it out of the smaller diameter bore. Olsen's US Patents can be seen online: http://www.google.com/patents/US4393782 http://www.google.com/patents/US4457093
  13. 1 point

    Swedish Plan to Invade Denmark

    In 1945, no less. If this page is legit, it looks like planning was pretty detailed. http://histomil.com/viewtopic.php?f=95&p=44873
  14. 1 point

    Explosive Reactive Armor

    http://www.i-mash.ru/materials/technology/57490-dinamicheskaja-zashhita-nozh-mify-i-realnost.html Picture shows HEAT "knife" form: Variant 1. AP projectile hitting Nozh ERA block, this model is trying to create situation when ERA block starts to "explode" in the moment of AP projectile is hitting external plate of ERA module. HEAT charges cut trough external ERA module plate after 49 microseconds. If ERA block explodes in the moment of AP round hitting external ERA plate, HEAT "knives" just cuts that plate creating many small 'plates' that are propelled against AP round by almost 2-2.5 kg of explosives detonation. Those cut out parts of external plate work in the same way as Kontakt-5 plate. HEAT jets themselves don't do serious damage to incoming projectile. Variant 2. Nozh ERA block explodes when incoming projectile penetrated external plate, which means that HEAT warheads inside of ERA module affect projectile body directly. Computer model showed that in this case APFSDS round, after penetration of external plate and subsequent detonation of ERA, will not be damaged enough to be destroyed. ERA also will not significantly reduce its penetration ability, or change angle of impact. HEAT jet is "smeared" over the body of moving projectile. In statics, HEAT jets would damage this round more than in situation when it is moving at high velocity. Nozh offers slightly higher protection than Kontakt-5 against some warheads simply because K-5 module have 0.5 kg of explosives, while one block of Nozh is filled with ~2 kg of explosives. Relikt also have about same amount of explosive filler, but Nozh is mounted directly on tank armor, while Relkit is mounted at some distance, with second inner plate and damper mounted on armor plate to protect it from damage by ERA detonation. Relikt:
  15. 1 point

    Explosive Reactive Armor

    Image from a patent, showing how M829A3 (likely) deals with heavy ERA:
  16. 1 point
    Having thought about it earlier, who on earth is such a conversion trying to appeal to? To my knowledge, nobody ever operated both the Leopard 1 and the T-72, and anybody who had access to one of those certainly didn't need the other one. I think this can be chalked up to "Germany" again. EDIT: I found something that it may have been a German project for India back in the '90s, but as to whether that's true or not I haven't a clue either. We do have color now though! Oh, and on a related note, Colli will be happy to know that Romania did indeed develop a stretched T-72 because reasons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TR-125
  17. 1 point
    Not sure how many have seen this, but I found it a good watch.
  18. 1 point

    WoT v WT effort-thread

    I dont see how building schools in Afghanastan and letting women read was a big kick in the nuts for geopolitcal stablity The same could be said for the middle east in general, if Socailism really toke off and those states were 1/56 as good at warfare as the USSR was we wouldnt see all these Islamist holy war muderfests popping up every couple of years As for South America, it probably has more to do with it being in the number 1 enemy of communism's back yard Africa is a cesspool of diesease, murder, and incompendence, it was like that before the Soviet Union and was like that when the Berlin wall was coming down and my fat ass was on a ural heading back to Minsk. If anything, i point the figure more at colonialism than any other ism for Africa's current state All the Soviet Union contributed was the fact that your average child soldier's weapon wouldn't jam after he tosses it in the mud and i think if you want to bring up the whole "well maybe if the USSR didnt give out weapons so much the world would be a better place" argument than you can fuck off back to your grass eating hippie commun. African warlords would be raping an pillaging with Muasers if they had to, and then probably a long stick or their bare hands. People with no other option than violence arent gonna stay peaceful becuase there tank isnt as capable of advanced combined arms maunever warfare as your average T-72 They are gonna be violent because it can still turn on and 100mm HE makes things go boom and most importantly, they dont feel like starving to death, and if they were stuck with panzer 4s they would do the same thing.
  19. 1 point


    IFV Armata
  20. 1 point
  21. 1 point
    I believe the comet is just an egg for a cyclopean creature, like the ones who built the Pyramids in Egypt, Mexico, and on the Moon. I know this is true. Don't argue with my beliefs you bigots. Microbial "life" might be fairly common, but I doubt it is on every comet or rocky body. Abiogenesis is a complex process and might be impossible in many environments.
  22. 1 point

    How To Kill The Army's Next Round

    Something a bit more... gimmicky to add. One way of compressing a debate is to personify the relevant trends involved. In this case, you could draw an analogy by using fictional avatars to represent the real-life camps and cliques which will weigh in on the matter: Gen. Metraje - represents the Afghanistan/range overmatch camp. Is very concerned that infantry have a rifle which can outrange the enemy and still deliver a lethal blow. Gen. Voet - represents the weight-savings camp. Is very concerned about soldier injury rates and wants to 'lighten the load' by tweaking equipment instead of doctrine. Gen. Comptable - represents the bean counters. Is convinced that rationalising supply lines by minimising the number of ammunition types will make everything run better. Gen Glänzend - represents the whiz-bang crowd. Wants every bullet design to be barrier-blind, capable of accommodating tracer and incendiary, accuratised and Geneva-compliant. Gen. Powers - represents the big rock brigade. Is convinced that knock-down power and one-stop shots, rather than casualties, should be the primary focus of development. Gen. Greene - represents the lead-free camp. Is determined to prevent training ranges from turning into superfund sites while polishing armed forces PR with an 'increasingly environmentally aware' public.