Ahem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IS_tank_family#IS-3

That bastard had a 122mm rifled cannon, and came as quite a shock to western tank generals when it showed up for the Victory Parade in Berlin in 1945.

But what is the fun of a 122 when you can have a 152mm >:D

Now we need tanks built with 203mm Baltimore-class cruiser guns. Nah, we need em built with 16 inch BATTLESHIP guns! Probably would only fit like 3 or 4 rounds in one tank but each HE round would blow the entire street intersection away so you wouldn't really need precision or lots of ammo, just hit em with the splash at least and that'll do em in.

edited 10th Dec '14 5:37:47 PM by MajorTom

Well, the Germans *did* have that outlandish plan to make a wheeled *Schwerer Gustav*-armed land battleship ...

What about those German Sturmtigers with the 380mm rocket launcher?◊

And frankly we probably do need to have an tanks & associated stuffs thread.

^^ "Is it cold or is your weapon really that short?"

edited 10th Dec '14 5:41:23 PM by MajorTom

I was in the pool!

Damn single word series titles. Took me entirely too many edits to make a Seinfeld joke.

edited 10th Dec '14 5:55:29 PM by LeGarcon

Bam done There is your Armored Vehicle thread. Have fun and crush small things.

edited 10th Dec '14 6:48:00 PM by TuefelHundenIV

You know, you don't need a bigger gun than your opponent, just one big enough to kill him.

That said, on the topic of land-based battleship guns, the US Navy operated 14" railway guns during the first world war. One car housed the gun, the rest of them housed the various support equipment and crew needed to load a gun (seriously, loading a BB grade gun is a team effort).

Gentlemen ID these weapons!

• [1]◊
• [2]◊
• [3]◊
• [4]◊
• [5]◊
• [6]◊
• [7]◊
• [8]◊
• [9]◊
• [10]◊
• [11]◊
• [12]◊
• [13]◊
• [14]◊
• [15]◊
• [16]◊
• [17]◊
• [18]◊

edited 14th Dec '14 8:07:34 AM by MajorTom

1 and 2 are the Chauchat, I'm recognize that ridiculous shape anywhere. There's also a Sten in the second picture. MK.II I'm guessing.

3-7 are some simply beautiful helmets.

8-13 are swords, bayonets, knives and various pokey things.

14 Are a bunch of rifles I can't quite make out, some look much more modern than others.

15 the middle two weapons look familiar. I'm tempted to say Kar98 but I can't quite put my finger on it. The topmost one in full view is some kind of muzzle load and I don't recognize the bottom on. Looks a bit older though

16 is a Panzerfaust

17 is a Lee Enfield

18 is a very damaged Mauser. Almost looks like it's been at the bottom of a lake for some time.

And the location of this display is simply beautiful. What cathedral is it?

Lol I like that. Ton of rifles and then PANZER FAUST!

Garcon: The top one in 15 is a Spencer lever-action rifle.

^^^ It's from this. A full list of stuff can be found here.

(It's all in French.)

edited 14th Dec '14 12:19:31 PM by MajorTom

And yes, that's an M320 under that M-4.

So the XM-25 WAS just proof of concept!

Naw, the XM-25 just wasn't panning out. Army sources say this 40mm grenade will be used "alongside" the M-25.

And if you believe that, Le Garcon has a Girl Friend In Canada and she's hawt.

I suspect that this grenade, while a little harder to use, will replace the M-25.

I wonder why so many armies seem to have given up on rifle grenades? The French still use them, along with the Japanese. Seems a good enough way to improve an infantryman's reach.

France isn't the first nation to come to mind when I think of useful modern infantry weapons if I'm honest.

Nor is Japan really.

That's what I'm getting at. The XM-25 was proof you can make an airburst grenade. The SAGM is what will actually be done instead after the proof of concept that is the XM-25.

The biggest reasons are rifle grenades are...peculiar in their use. They require special blank cartridges to be fired in the main weapon itself and require you to set up the round on top of your rifle barrel. They also have somewhat bizarre and limited ballistics.

Lastly, the rounds themselves are somewhat heavy and awkward in shape so you can't carry as many even for the same weight.

Sure they were popular in WW 2 as an ad-hoc anti-armor weapon and anti-MG nest stuff and remained a standard issue weapon into the 1950s. But once UBGL's like the M203 got off the ground, it was over for the age of rifle grenades.

Seriously, an M203 or GP-30 has tons of advantages over any rifle grenade model.

Modern rifle grenades - or at least, the AC58 and APAV40 the French use - are of a bullet-trap type that do not require a special round. The French logic seems to be that everyone can carry a few rifle grenades, but but not everyone can be equipped with a UGL, so if you lose your grenadier or are separated from him you've still got some punch. Not sure if that's over-preparing, but they don't seem to have any intention of stopping doing it.

I can see why someone wouldn't bother with them though, thanks.

edited 15th Dec '14 4:42:27 PM by Achaemenid

I always thought it was because early FAMAS models couldn't mount an M203

Possible. Interestingly, it seems the Japanese rejected the M203 completely in favour of keeping rifle grenades in service.