That_Baka

It is in Russian, but man, footage speaks for itself. Video titled "The worst self-defence shotgun".
 
Magazine loading can be done with at least 3 hands  Rounds can move in magazine so they are needed to be hold in place Before loading magazine a special catch should be moved out of the way Follower inside of this mag can also move around and it is made out of wood material When magazine is inserted, shooter must press special pedal during operation in order to engage catch on a magazine with specail hook inside of this wonderful shotgun and same pedal is used for mag release All rounds left inside of mag will drop out if magazine will be pulled out/released During shooting a wooden button on pistol grip should be pressed Very long leight of pull on a trigger In videos made by creator of this weapon all people that were given his rifle to shoot were swearing  Gun can self-disasemble during shooting Can jam in "forward" and "rear" positions Stock will unfold anyway when you run the action, and there is no way to fix stock in folded position during shooting 50 made, number 14 on the video.  
 

That is good old anime maker that gone, comrade Donward, making current animea more shity.

And you know this because...
 
HmmmmmmmmmmmmMMMMMMMMMMMMM

AAAAAAAUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH

why is anime legal
 
 

How to deal with Animea Soviet style:
"Death to samurais!"

 

@Collimatrix
@T___A

The sorrow when you see that nearly a half million people have played this, which is comparable to the US combat deaths in World War 2.
 
If only there were a way to trade.

The 64 has narrower knife wheels, which remained intact and effectively 'cut' the track. The 219 has wider wheels, the outer one of which got wrecked. The wider wheels support the track more against uneven loading, and the energy spent on breaking the wheel prevented it from breaking the track.
 
Again, this is just informed conjecture.

Single-pin tracks are much harder to break by torsional forces on the track, thanks to the large number and size of points where the pin is subjected to shear forces under such a loading.

Double-pin tracks are easier to break by loading like this as they only have the center guide connector and end connectors.

That in my opinion is the case. I Don't have any hard evidence to back it up right now.
This is also in my opinion why single-pin tracks are preferred for hard, broken ground where the track is liable to ride on large rocks unevenly, applying torsion to the track.

Merry Christmas everyone!
 
Regarding polish T-72 reliability... Was there any difference between domestic and export models? Just asking this because according to old hungarian tankists, there were problems with polish built tanks. One example, a hungarian colonel's memoirs:
 
"A szovjet gyártmányú T-72-esekkel elmentünk több mint kétezer km-t, mire elkezdtek beégni a porlasztócsúcsok, 3-4 ezer km után pedig a turbófeltöltő csapágyai kibuktak a 25 ezres fordulattól. Utána elhasználódtak a bolygóműves kihajtás átömlő furatai, melyek a sok tengelykapcsolót meg egyebeket működtetik. Szóval összességében megbízhatóak voltak. Viszont a lengyel gyártmányú T-72-esek, melyekkel Tatán a negyedik zászlóaljam volt felszerelve, pocsék módon voltak szerelve, 50 kilométert sem mentek el, ha a gyári szerelőbrigád nem végzett rajtuk javítást."
....
"Használtunk csehszlovák gyártmányú T-72-ket is. Végszerelésükben lényegesen jobbak voltak, mint a lengyelek, de gyengébb minőségűek, mint az eredeti szovjet. A csehszlovák kocsik ugyanis hibridek voltak - az előmelegítő román, az üzemanyagtartály magyar, a Gödöllői Gépgyárból, az optika keletnémet, Jena-Zeiss, a motor lengyel."
 
Translation:
Soviet built T-72s ran more than 2000km, when the injector heads began to seize, after 3-4 thousand kilometers the bearings of the turbocharger (obviously not turbo - my correction) began to fail due to 25.000 rpm. Later, the planetary transmission's (oil) outlets began to wear out, which controlled the clutches and other devices. All in all, they were reliable. On the other hand, the polish built T-72s, my 4th battalion on Tata was equipped with,  were terribly badly built, they didnt even ran 50 kilometres unless the factory's mechanics didnt perform repairs on them.
...
"We used czechslovak built T-72s too. They were remarkably better built than polish, but still weaker than the original soviet. Czechslovak tanks were hybrids - pre heater romanian, fuel tanks hungarian from Gödöllő Machine Factory, optics east german, Jena-Zeiss, engine polish."

Personally, I blame the end of the Cold War - many 'western' governments more or less convinced themselves that they had no major threats likely and that existing equipment was 'sufficient'... so procurement has often been the first thing on the chopping block to save funds. The IDF & Israeli government crucially has a different view. The issues are pretty simple when you take into account the governments don't care.

Not the best quality picture, but proof that Santa traded his sled for a M46 Patton.
 

Now that's how you design an oppression tower. Just needs some more spikes and barbed wire, an ominous smoke generator, and hidden speakers for playing theme appropriate music and it's good to go.

If Poland indeed buys M1, Damian will be the happiest man on earth!

@UP
no, definetly not - late 2A4 haven't this problem as I know, but still suspension  limited weight to circa 60,5t.  The next problem that not exatly all Loeben users can had problem whit "old" 2A4 chassis - many depend on how is used tanks. And this polish ones have hard life couse they are used a lot - sevral are send to Germany between 2006-2015 to welded again the bottol of the hull sides couse it was cracing - but it's mostly cased by stupid-estern cowboys jumping whole tank style. But there where some problems whit cracking - old hulls, "tired", used a lot. And now whole problem blow up during Leopard 2PL program - weight limits,  $ limits, etc.  
Intresting case are Indonesian and Singapour tanks - maybe they armour is mucht lighter then we think or they have upgreaded suspension. Or finall user doesnt care about microcracking chassis mounts. No idea.
 
Oh, the last but not least - almoust all informations about problems whit Leopard 2PL or doubfull balistic test are rumors from OBRUM and HSW factories - co competitors of Bumar - Łabędy SA. Polish Rheinmettal of course doesen't coment, WITU too.  There are some rumors from army side but they are rather suport IBD/Rheinemttal then blame them. And all is theory OPSPEC so I would be very cerfull whit some "hard" statsments.
 

https://zen.yandex.ru/media/id/5c154835b2d87b00acb731f7/unificirovannye-tipovye-shassi-okr-odnotomnik-5c1bda1855f3da00aa81a727?from=channel
GurKhan artice about pre-Armata work on unified chassis vehicles.
 
 
 
 

 
 

I had heard anecdotally that some STG-armed units in the Ardennes offensive were measurably more effective, but I have no idea what the source is for that.
 
There simply were never that many STG-armed units in a meaningful sense, and not for the reason most people think.  About half a million were produced, so the guns themselves were relatively plentiful.  The same could not be said for the unique ammunition, however, and the magazines were also always in short supply.  I have a memoir from an SS member on the Eastern Front who mentions being issued an STG late in the war... and no ammo.  Full Circle mentions Albert Speer inspecting units with new STGs and no ammo, and complaining that this was occurring semi-routinely.

Also, a news for me - Zlobin got kicked out of Kalashnikov some time ago. Zlobin/Zlobyn was chief designer for AK-12, BTW.

Ah, I guess I misheard that. Anyhow, as far as I know, the Schienfurt raids did not do much to actually cause a ball bearing shortage in German industry.  I'll have to double check, but I have never heard that Tiger tanks were excessively loud due to failing bushings.  I could be wrong, I haven't spent much time reading about Tiger tanks lately.  Now, lack of rubber certainly lead to louder tanks, that was an issue the Germans had to deal with.
 
To be honest, I don't have a strong enough opinion regarding the Stg44 to have much of an opinion either way.  I enjoy Ian's forgotten weapons videos and assume his opinions have merit, as I do Sturgeon's.  

alright heres my official write-up, im drunk on cheeseburgers and liquor so excuse the spelling
 
1. "Mp-44 was fielded in large enough numbers to change combat doctrine"
 
- in what way other than having sub-machine gun armed troops having more accurate fire did it change jack. Now ian and fuckface are coming at this from a tatical standpoint, and i would agree that a German infantry squad quibbled with stg-44s does have a noticably large increase in volume of fire.
 
But the problem is that infantry on the modern battlefield are so fucking unimaginably fragile that unless millions of said infantrymen have this amount of volume of fire increased, its not going to change shit
Unlike the Americans who could issue the M1-garand in the millions, and the Russians who could issue far larger numbers of sub-machine guns than the Germans
 
You just have to think of this in strategic terms, not tactical
 
Lets say your assaulting a town, you infantry have to attack from outside of a forest about say 600 meters away from the first lines of defense for the town. How many of those infantrymen are going to be dieing from machine-gun fire alone
How many from rifle fire?
 
How many from any support assets (tanks, mortars, planes) 
 
How many infantrymen will fall before they even get a chance open fire at their enemies at any range where it matters
 
Infantry are useful when it comes to creating and occupying territory
 
A joke among me and my friends is that "Infantry create the lines, everything else is made to break them"
 
So when you get into ranges that it matters, if you exclude all other factors, the side with the greater volume of fire usually wins out
 
Think of it like this
 
Its a AH civil war battle, where one side, is predominately fielding muskets, with some level action repeating rifles spread in-between them here and there
 
And the other side is fielding bolt action rifles
Fact is, the side that is stacked full of soldiers with more rifles that can fire faster is usually going to beat the side with a few rifles that can fire extremely fast mixed in with a bunch of sluggers
 
But non of this matters if one side has such an advantage in artillery, positioning, tanks, machine guns or any other factors that chew infrantry up much, much faster than rifle rounds
 
So unless every other grunt who would be stuck with a Mauser gets his hands on a STG, its not going to matter. Because chances are the bloke with the STG is going to die to shrapnel or machine gun fire or the fact that the rest of his squad is still armed with mausers that just cant put out a large enough volume of fire
 
And even if every nazi under the sun had an stg, its still not going to guarantee them jack 
 
Look at Korea, where the US army learned the hard way that having lots of submachine guns is really useful, and having every rifleman trying to be some type sharpshooter isnt
 
The chinese still toke many, many more casualties. They had less artillery, less tanks, less aircraft and they never could compensate
 
It dosent matter if your high volume of fire ambush whips out a whole platoon, if the other guy can call artillery down to wipe out 5 platoons of your own, and you cant do jack
 
2. he said it was situational, which its is 
 
Though im a proud member of the full auto master race, thats with shooting groups of soda cans with 5.45, the round the STG-44 fires kicks up a hell of a lot more recoil. 
So the idea that your going to be doing anything but suppressible fire and door kicking with this is crazy
 
3. the 5 guys with garands vs 1 guy with an STG
 
Thats just not how wars are fought son, i dont know who told you otherwise
 
they are fought by the 3,000 guys with garands versus the 60 odd guys with STGs, and the rest with Kar-98s (this is excluding machine guns and submachine guns)
 
 
and since both sides are going to be losing alot of those guys before they infrantry even get in small arms range, i rather be on the side of the freedom 
 
And sure, i would choose the Stg over the Garand in a heartbeat
 
I would also choose the Panther over the Sherman
 
But this is for a 1v1 fantast fight
 
in real wars, you have other people behind you
 
and the side that wins is the side with the 10 or so garands for every STG and the side of 20 or so Shermans for every panther
 
and since i dont like the idea of surrending, sign me up for the m1 
 
4. "if you look at any other assualt rifle afterwords"
 
ah yes
 
The old "the Germans invented everything because post war arms look like them" line
 
Well there fuckface, i assume you would agree with the fact the germans invented the main battle tank
Because like the panther, future MBTs have slopped armor and torision bar suspension
 
But the fact is, much, much more goes into design than that
 
Just like though an AK looks like an STG, its the parts inside of it that count
 
5. "Russians cant stamp anything"
 
 
go fuck yourself
 
 
6. "Russians only use human wave attacks"
 
Its at this point i was embarrassed to learn i had missed the ten gallon hick hat fuckface was wearing, and i was still attempting to be objective with this video 
 
7. Would be useful today   Expect you would have the recoil of the commie with the AKM but you lack the realibality, you have the fragility of the guy with the m16 but lack the accuracy, and you lack the accuracy, recoil control, and satan approved wound profile of the commie with the AK-74   oh ya, totally close 

Lets just say ian and fuckface mcweridbeard are damn lucky they live in a different country than i do, or else i would be making some very drunk, very angry call ins during their show 

You would be suprised how many American actors got their big break in Warsaw Pact reserve infrantry

 
Matt damon and the Soviet border guard from flags
 

 
No introduction needed 

LoooSeR.