Huh. That...actually seems a bit bloody obvious, now. The more you know! Sort of like sabot rounds, right?
edited 15th Aug '11 4:41:34 PM by pagad
With cannon shot and gun blast smash the alien. With laser beam and searing plasma scatter the alien to the stars.The bigger shot like buck shot though has a wad. It is tightly packed lead being pushed down the barrel.
See this
◊ Smaller Shot in the cup.
edited 15th Aug '11 6:21:37 PM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?Hell yes!
If all goes well the RCAF and the RCN are coming back!
Eyeing changing military retirement again
They had better fucking not. They are owed that for a damn good reason.
That and every powerful nation that has shafted their military by dicking with promised bennies has gotten bitten in the ass by it sooner then later.
Who watches the watchmen?I used to think rather simplistically about the military; you had training and organisation, equipment and technology, and numerical superiority. Now obviously my views are more nuanced now, but which of those elements would you say are the most important, and to what extent would you say said element can compensate for a disadvantage in another?
The term "Great Man" is disturbingly interchangeable with "mass murderer" in history books.I wouldn't say any of them are more important, if you are lacking in any one of those categories you suffer greatly.
A balanced army with all of the above at a good standard if honestly more efficient than anyone who's well organized, but uses stone age technology, or an army with advanced technology, but a poor logistical system.
Because any opposition worth their salt will analyze you for weaknesses and then strategically exploit those weaknesses.
Good sniper Rifle Article on Wired
My current weapons of interest all of them are from Russia.
the DP-64 Over Under Double Barrel Grenade Launcher
Gp-25 or Gp-30 Grenade launcher depending on how you want to classify it, caseless grenade launcher
edited 18th Aug '11 4:34:09 PM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?^^^ I'm more intrigued by the AEK-999
.
Basically take a stock PKM and M it one more time, quick change barrel and all. None of this air-cooled but can't quick change barrel shit of the Pecheneg.
As an aside, both weapons are superior to the RPK in every way. (Why did the Soviets ditch the 100+ round RPD for the idiotic 40 round RPK? At least they learned their folly in Afghanistan it seems.)
edited 18th Aug '11 6:36:09 PM by MajorTom
pvtnum11. That would depend on where firing mech is on the weapon.
The OICW had a number of issues through out it's testing phases though. Amusingly when I was in Aberdeen Maryland and the Marines were testing the weapon for possible consideration. They set the test range on fire several times. Lol. The weapon was no where near robust enough for actual use though. The magazines had frequent jamming issues and the 25mm if it got thumped around would misfire, misfeed, or some other unpleasant surprise I have forgotten.
The Pecheng interestingly does not need to change it's barrel. The barrel is overall very robust and cools surprisingly very effectively. Think along the lines of the latest M-60 Machine Gun design. The whole reason for a quick change barrel was the cooling mechanism for the barrels was fairly ineffective and it was easier to change the barrel out between every few hundred rounds.
edited 18th Aug '11 7:12:02 PM by TuefelHundenIV
Who watches the watchmen?I'm interested in the Kord HMG
, on the grounds that it's light enough to potentially provide a platoon/company-level .50cal machine gun. The Soviets in Afghanistan tried attaching NSV machine guns to dismounted platoons, but that ran into problems.
Right now I'm RAEGing over the fact that none of the libraries I can access have a copy of Norman Friedman's books on amphibs. I was hoping to look up the exact differences and roles of the different LPDs/LSDs/LHDs and such. Under what circumstances would they use LCUs as opposed to LCACs? How would the helicopters, the landing craft, and the MEU's assets be distributed? Also, the role of the LCU-2000s: they look like they're too big to fit in the well dock of any of the existing 'phibs, but they can provide a hell of a lot of landing capacity.
...
...hold on, must check out Tom Clancy's Marine.
edited 18th Aug '11 7:11:37 PM by SabresEdge
Charlie Stross's cheerful, optimistic predictions for 2017, part one of three.Tom: Really now Tom? Suppressing fire enables fire and maneuver for killing flank. Kind of useful for a enemy holed up in solid cover. You could expend a shit load of ammo trying to kill them behind that cover. Expend the ammo to keep their heads down long enough for a couple troops to maneuver to get at them from a flank or to throw a grenade into their position.
Who watches the watchmen?Or I shoot 3 rounds and hit them before they get to cover. Or fire 3 rounds to get them to cover and immobile.
Smart usage of ammunition > More Dakka.
A Marine should value good marksmanship.
edited 18th Aug '11 7:19:46 PM by MajorTom

Well, the Revolutionary War folks did do the famous double load: three pieces of buckshot, one musket ball.
Charlie Stross's cheerful, optimistic predictions for 2017, part one of three.