Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

The Small Arms Thread, Part 8: 2018; ICSR to be replaced by US Army with interim 15mm Revolver Cannon.


Recommended Posts

The Chinese can be a stubborn bunch. Doing business with them is an absolute nightmare, and they have an exceptional amount of national pride.

The Sino-Soviet split is certainly responsible for a lot of their unusual military decisions.

Reguardless of their route at the hands of the border guards, at some ppimt practicalities must come to the surface for the Chinese. And unlike the Czech they had no problem making plenty of money off of copies of Soviet AKM well after their betrayal of Soviet Union

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 10.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Let's all take a trip back to the late 1970s and early 1980s.  This was the time of punk.  This was the time of despair.   Punk was all about minimalism; strip everything down to a few chords, wear

Stechkin's Abakan (TKB-0146). https://www.kalashnikov.ru/abakan-stechkina-avtomat-stechkina-tkb-0146/        Bullpup, system of "recoil impulse shifted in time", 2-stage

So what, my 5.56 rounds are groundbreaking too if I shoot the dirt.

Nixon swaying Mao's favor to the USA when he learned about the USSR wanting to hinder the PRC's nuclear arms development at the time also did alot.

 

I mean, between the USA and the USSR/Russia always trying to win their favor, and yet never being full on allies, you can really see where exactly their distrust and stubbornness comes from considering how often they're caught in the middle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They didn't want to adpot the 5.45mm, they knew about it yeah, hell, they knew enough about it to help North Korea chamber new rifles in the design, they just chose not to use it themselves. (Those really odd helical mag AK 5.45 variants they use? you'll never guess who they got the technical information from.)

Relations with the USSR/WP at the time were.... complicated.

Huh, never knew they didnt devolope them on their own

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nixon swaying Mao's favor to the USA when he learned about the USSR wanting to hinder the PRC's nuclear arms development at the time also did alot.

I mean, between the USA and the USSR/Russia always trying to win their favor, and yet never being full on allies, you can really see where exactly their distrust and stubbornness comes from considering how often they're caught in the middle.

Bah, Soviet peoples did nothing to hinder their development it was Mao's prowding for a direct copy of the bomb that contributed to the split more than anything

Link to post
Share on other sites

No? Khrushchev basically did a flat out 180 on helping them after the great leap forward started and basically left them hanging when they initially agreed to help, leaving them to finish it alone, I'd be pretty pissed too.

 

The USA and USSR tended to do this alot during the cold war to more then just the PRC when the direction of a nation was going in a way they didn't find favorable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Either way, if you wish to continue this, alls I ask can we please do it somewhere else? I don't mind political discussions (sometimes at least), but, I'd rather it not be in my thread about small arms.

 

Contact me on Steam or, another thread or something.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, one thing I can say about this discussion is that it does disprove the bullshit theory that the DBP-87 and DBP-88 were designed as gerpersherrs like some internet demagogues like to claim, is that you can simply look at the 2 rounds they were examining and had access to to replace the 7.62x39mm and draw your own conclusions (well, that and the actual design requirements, but more on that in a second.)

 

They were looking at the 5.45x39mm (mostly 7N6 and small amounts of 7N6M later), to the point they knew enough about it to aid North Korea in designing arms chambered in it, and the other round they were looking at was, big surprise, the 5.56x45mm M193 and M855, the fact Alex C even has a Type-81 chambered in it shows they were at least aware of it (aswell as some AK variants that also got imported), yes, they were export models, but they had enough data on it.

 

They wanted a round similar to these 2 rounds, a small caliber round that was accurate with a high velocity and flat trajectory that was lighter then the 7.62x39mm (I'm sure this concept is starting to sound familiar right about now, it sure as hell went over the heads of gerpersherr fanatics though), but, they wanted their own proprietary caliber as opposed to these 2 existing ones that performed better on paper ballistics wise to actually make it worth it (The difference in power isn't really significant, but sometimes you just have to do something to appease those higher up then you), It wasn't until later that they thought that some, but not all arms chambered in 7.62x54mmR could also be replaced with this round, but this was an incidental after effect.

 

TLDR: People who claim the 5.8x42mm is a purpose built gerpersherr are full of shit and it annoys me when this is repeated as truth.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That Dremel is also handy if you want to give your rare imported rifle some authentic looking "battle damage" and then write a sob story about how the guy who carried it got hit by shrapnel.

No, because that implies that the other side is human. It'd be more like

 

"Pre-ban Vietnam bringback!!! RARE!!! NO PAYPAL"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

    • By LostCosmonaut
      There are many who feel that the 5.56 NATO is a superlative rifle round. Much has been said about larger alternatives to 5.56, such as various 6.5mm and 6.8mm rounds among others. Less has been said about smaller rounds. Off the top of my head, I can recall that there was a German 4.6x36mm round, used in the HK36, and the British 4.85x49mm round. Neither of these rounds managed to gain widespread acceptance. My knowledge of the voodoo that is ballistics is somewhat limited, so I'm uncertain as to whether these failures were caused by flaws with the rounds themselves, or because they were below some lower limit of effective bullet size, beyond which performance decreases rapidly. Could we see a resurgence of these concepts in the future, or do they represent an evolutionary dead-end?

×
×
  • Create New...