/AKM/ - Guns, weapons and the art of war.

It's become widely reported as of April 25th (2024) that the Abrams tanks sent to Ukraine have been withdrawn from the front-lines after several have been taken out in a row. The Ukrainian soldiers have been very unfavorable of the vehicle, despite how lauded it was in their propaganda videos, months before deployment.

https://southfront.press/ukraine-withdrew-american-made-abrams-tanks-from-front-report/

>>4824
>>3900
>All this is without even mentioning Ukrainian criticisms of Western tech being either inferior to Soviet contemporaries/equivalents or being ill-suited to the Ukrainian environment, with the best tech having little difference to Soviet tech, only with Ukrainians have to train to readjust to NATO standard equipment as opposed to Soviet standard. >3900
Also see >>4692 and >>4634 as further examples of this, vid rel.

>>4870
More detail and criticism of the GLSDB. Apparently Russian Electronic Warfare has rendered the main point of the weapon moot, as it neutralizes the guidance systems of the GBU-39 and so, the purpose of GLSDB. Besides the USA, even Poland has tossed in its 2 cents.

https://southfront.press/u-s-admits-glsdb-wunderwaffe-was-rendered-ineffective-by-russian-electronic-warfare/

https://topwar.ru/241450-polskoe-smi-amerikanskie-bomby-glsdb-pokazali-svoju-bespoleznost-na-ukraine-iz-za-raboty-rjeb-vs-rf.html

>>4823
>>4824
>From 1914 to 1918, Germany and Austria-Hungary produced up to 680 million shells and the industries of the Allies France, Britain, Russia (to October 1917), Italy, the U.S. and Canada, produced up to 790 million shells (the statistics vary greatly). The U.S. produced between 30 million and 50 million of these shells.
<[2023] - European Commissioner for the Internal Market Thierry Breton suggested that Europe could now make some 400,000 rounds annually. Estonia’s Pevkur, speaking at a November media roundtable, put the figure between 600,000 and 700,000—and said it would reach one million rounds in 2024.

So what happened? Even France, who had much of its industrial regions occupied by the Germans, were producing 200,000 shells A DAY by the end of WWI. That's half of current European annual output in a single day. Why are Europeans today struggling to mass-produce something as simple as an artillery shell, despite managing just fine 100+ years ago, let alone during the WW-2 period?

The answer is relatively simple. Besides NATO's strategy of warfare shifting into non-mass combat tactics, the Neo-libs off-shored a lot of heavy industry to China. Basically unbolting the smelters and accompanying industrial factories, and shipped them away. A technical factor may also play a role. Metal production changed energy inputs from coal to electricity. That enabled more sophisticated metallurgy but also induced a decline in quantity, do to insufficient electricity production. The colossal error of refusing to build out nuclear power is on display once again. Note that this is another reason why the USSR took longer to produce super-high quality commodity products and so on, as they focused on raising productive capabilities along with technological improvement, because mass-production of high-quality products without existing infrastructure could not be done without otherwise exploiting other countries or the people, something that the Imperialist West had no problem doing. A big part is also that military industry was state-run or directed 100 years ago. The privatized weapons industry has different goals, capitalists do not want to produce more shells, they want increased military spending Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>4897
>Basically unbolting the smelters
One 155mm M107 shell weighs about 38 kg of steel and 7 kg of TNT.
One million shells weigh 38.000 tons, which is 12 hours of the yearly German steel smelting.
One million shells contain 7.000 tons of TNT, which is days or weeks worth of what Dyno Nobel or Orica release on the civilian markets.
The only reason why the west can't and won't churn out millions of shells a year is lack of revenue and reinvestment once the war is over. The actual industrial basis needed to make one, five or even 10 millilon shells is not an issue at all. They just don't do it because shell factories would collect dust without more wars and you can't heckin' do that to the investors.

>>4899
>One 155mm M107 shell weighs about 38 kg of steel and 7 kg of TNT.
Yes and where are you going to get the TNT and Steel? How much is available. Steel used for shells is different than steel used for civilian production, the composition, the methods, etc. That's a lot of infrastructure to restore or replace and civilian production lacks military capability, unlike Russia, where many civilian Soviet factories were constructed SPECIFICALLY to double as military production lines in times of war (For example Russian cigarette production facilities from the USSR, were made that they could be easily converted to making ammunition for infantry weapons).

>>4688
porky are not people

>>4689
>Dehumanizing the enemy is good lol
No anon. I have no sympathy for Porky but to say this shit is equivalent to those /pol/fags that cite that Polish Nazi about "I've never killed people, only communists"
Socialists seek to rise above their ideological enemies and not stoop to their level, that is a path to fascism and Populism. Even in WW2 and the height of the Cold War, the Soviet government never damned the people under fascist regime, but the fascists themselves, it's why Nazi and CIA propaganda tried so hard to propagate the image of "sub-human Easterners coming to rape and pillage!"
Mao, Stalin and Che among others talked about this.

50J starts being enough for hunting the kind of small game you can with a .22, from a legal perspective (rabbits, pigeons etc). but because the bolts are so heavy, I expect it might also work for things as big as roe deer. an added benefit of crossbows is that they're silent
he should make one with a motor for cocking

>>4694
also I recently learned that in Finland trappers would hunt squirrels using blunt bolts so as to not damage their fur. the name for money in Finnish also stems from the name for squirrels

>>4857
That's just a slightly upgraded M4! I want my fish gun!

>>4856 >>4859 >>4857 >>4858
As OP This belongs in the AR thread.
That being said: the Marines' replacement is just a modern H&K, not significantly different. The XM-8 and others looked cool, but it has severe overheating issues when firing and it doesn't appear to be very modular, meaning any jamming or need to clean the weapon is going to be problematic. Electronic sights are also pretty temperamental at the moment.

An article on the (re)formation of the Dnepr Flotilla. The USSR had some pretty rad Mad Max type river gun-boats, I've got to make a post about it sometime.

https://topwar.ru/241349-istochnik-osnovu-vozrozhdaemoj-dneprovskoj-flotilii-sostavjat-katera-proektov-1204-shmel-i-1206-kalmar.html

https://flot.com/history/patriotwar/gunboats_river.htm

The Russian Navy is slowly modernizing its fleet of Oscar and Oscar II class submarines into the Project-949AM standard. The modernization replaces some electronics, overhauls the structure and most importantly re-arms the submarine with newer cruise missiles such as the hypersonic Zirkon. Most importantly it also raises the number of such missiles carried to 72 per vessel, meaning that a single Oscar-III (presumed new NATO name) would be powerful enough to rain hell on an entire Carrier Taskforce and now, also have the capability to singlehandedly launch a massive barrage on a land target, all while under-water, which means that counter-measures will have a much harder time taking it out and countering the suddenly appearing missiles, as their lack of time in the air (by comparison to surface or air-launched versions) means they're on RADAR for much less.

So far one has been completed, another is in the process and the plan is to make at least 6 of these, with the possibility of decommissioned ones also being put back into service. Pic rel is the Oscar-II which is already a formidable SSGN in its own right.

https://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-769.html
https://ria.ru/20220111/podlodki-1767257506.html
https://topwar.ru/240753-the-national-interest-rossijskie-apl-proekta-949a-antej-do-sih-por-pugajut-vms-ssha.html
https://www.alternathistory.ru/proekt-949am-samaya-vooruzhyonnaya-submarina-rossii/

>>3080
>Russian / USSR Naval sites:
Found another old one that was replaced by http://otvaga2004.ru/atrina/
https://web.archive.org/web/20080123200608/http://www.atrinaflot.narod.ru/2_mainclassships/06_skr_50/0_50.htm

>>4864
A new super-low drone detecting RADAR was released in Russia, we'll see how effective it'll be. Paired with specialized anti-drone MANPADS could make this a viable defense, comparable to current infantry anti-air against helicopters and CAS attack aircraft.
https://topwar.ru/241337-rossijskij-holding-rosjelektronika-nachal-postavki-portativnoj-rls-dlja-obnaruzhenija-dronov-na-sverhmalyh-vysotah.html

https://topwar.ru/241123-specializirovannye-zrk-i-zur-dlja-borby-s-bpla.html

>>4814
To add on, while this is true, it's not a permanent measure, as drones are developing rapidly, so Helicopters will probably need to adapt with specialized anti-drone weapons or attack measures, as well as defenses.
https://topwar.ru/240973-vertolety-protiv-ukrainskih-bezjekipazhnyh-katerov-i-bplakamikadze-vremennoe-reshenie-s-vysokimi-riskami.html

The Mini-gun armed Mojave drone has been successfully tested in CAS trials recently. It kinda reminded me of the Hunter-Killer drones from Terminator (yes that's been brought up before ITT, it's relevant given the advent of AI). The drone aspect is the only new part of this, despite the hype about the Mini-gun equipped DAP-6 system, it's not new either. The USA had such mini-gun pods on UH-1 attack modifications in Vietnam and the USSR had special pods for the Mi-24 and for attack aircraft that had THREE rotary-barrel machine-guns.

https://topwar.ru/241226-amerikanskij-dron-mojave-s-minigun-smog-porazit-celi-so-skorostju-6000-vystrelov-v-minutu.html

https://topwar.ru/241231-bpla-mojave-stal-nositelem-pulemetnyh-kontejnerov-gap-6.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_pod?useskin=vector

A drone mounted flame-thrower… looks like something out of a B-grade sci-fi movie about machines taking over.

https://topwar.ru/241311-ognemetnyj-robot-sobaka-thowflame-thermonator.html

>>4867
>>4838
An analysis of the X-62A and how it's still far from true AI vs Human combat (simulation). The AI is essentially using existing commands for the basis of its responses and actions, which means its reactive and not creative.

https://topwar.ru/241315-protiv-russkih-poka-rano.html

>>4677
An analysis of ground-based drones in future conflicts, in light of the fight in Berdychi.

https://topwar.ru/240948-shturm-v-berdychah-nazemnye-robotizirovannye-platformy-vstupajut-v-boj.html

>>4832
I don't know who claimed they were hypersonic, the Iranians didn't. The missiles are definitely fast, but they rely on small, hypersonic warheads as you said, not a hypersonic rocket.
https://southfront.press/israel-used-secret-missiles-in-attack-on-irans-isfahan-air-base-photos/

>>4831
The funniest thing about this missile is that by making it an external mount for the F-35 (because it's probably too large for internal mounting, or if not, will only fit one such missile) it completely negates the F-35's stealth, because of just how much pylons fuck with that.
https://topwar.ru/241043-giperzvuk-mako-ot-lockheed-martin-i-coaspire-dlja-f-35.html

>>2785
Why would it be any harder for a faster missile to correct course? It still takes 1 second for it to travel the distance it travels in 1 second. If anything it means you can make smaller adjustments because the extra distance you are moving per second will magnify how much that changes your final destination. Potentially it would be harder to calculate corrections on the fly, but given the payload these things carry that shouldn't be that big of a deal.

>>4888
>888
Checked for another F-35 'L' moment

>>2831
>Says this
>Posts a MiG-25 and Belenko's defection
What did he mean by this?

>>4661
>This is cope. It is impossible to stop a nuclear warhead once fired, because not only do you have to hit tens of thousands of decoys
Don't exaggerate, at most a couple thousand, see >>3401
>Hypersonics are a fucking meme unless you're fighting an asymmetrical war against a target unwilling to open pandora's nuke box.
Its a weapon that both helps guarantee MAD in terms of a retaliatory strike and as a conventional missile capable of hitting well defended targets.

>>3920
NTA but
>The plasma blackout that >>2817 is talking about also prevents the missile from receiving incoming communications
Is incorrect. Plasma makes it HARDER to receive or send signals but not impossible. Furthermore, the plasma effect also masks the missile from RADAR, meaning that the missile will be hard to target, let alone actually intercept, as demonstrated when Patriot missiles failed to shoot down Kinzhal's and got taken out by them.

Spain is planning on sending its retired M60A3 TTS tanks to Ukraine. Even the Spanish media think the tanks are too old to be useful for Ukraine.

https://topwar.ru/240848-vsu-mogut-byt-peredany-ispanskie-tanki-m-60.html

For some context the M-60 is the contemporary of the T-62 and fulfilled the same stop-gap role that the T-62 did for the Soviet Army, in providing a more modern tank to replace the M-48 (and T-55 in the T-62's case) until the next generation of tanks could be fully developed. While the T-62 was replaced by the T-72 and T-64 a few years later, the MBT-70 program was a resounding failure, and the M-60 remained the USA's primary tank into the 80s, with the Abrams only replacing it by the mid-late 80s.

The M-60 was upgraded several times (not always successfully, as seen in the M-60A2) but generally managed to improve itself. However the base tank remains mostly unchanged and it's honestly weak as fuck. Despite efforts, the M-60 lacks ANY composite armor, it's pure RHA steel and fairly thin and mediocrely angled, the Soviets, who actually captured a M60A1 found the mantlet (the thickest armor on the entire fucking tank) to be badly armored. In the same time-period, despite the T-72 completely replacing theM-60 very early, the USSR still upgraded the tanks as a reserve force into the T-62M and T-62AM variants and other upgrades. besides side-skirts, a large layer of composite armor was placed on the frontal glacis, creating an effective thickness of over 400mm for the T-62, over double the effective thickness prior and immune to the M60's 105mm ammunition, the same applied to the Turret, and on top of that Kontakt-1 ERA which made the T-62 upgrades have the effective protection level comparable to the T-72A.
The T-62s 115mm canon could penetrate almost every part of the M-60 from a larger distance than the M-60 could penetrate the T-62, in part due to the effective APFSDS and later the cannon-fired ATGMs which had no problem penetrating the M-60s RHA, and the T-55s later 100mm anti-tank ammunition managed to equalize damage output with the M-60, despite being older. The HESH ammo of the M68 gun was useless against any composite armor tanks and barely useful even against the T-55 since the thick internal CBRN lining of Soviet tanks acted as a spall liner too.
The only real upgrade to the M-Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>4179
>People have been 'burying' the concept of tanks since the days of the RPG-7
To continue this relative to drones:
>it's no exaggeration to say MBT doctrine was killed by drones
This untrue: Drones aren't very much different from CAS and artillery; raining explosives from above and tanks were still relevant even with them around since the beginning. This idea the MBT doctrine is killed comes from some strange concept that tanks only work when unbeatable or something, when a tank is essentially a jack of all trades AFV meant for several roles, at least Soviet MBTs, American ones today lack the ammunition types for it.
- Self-Propelled Artillery: 125mm HE-F flies up to 12km and new optics make it extremely accurate, a T-80BVM hit an AFV with indirect fire using guidance from a drone. >>4540
- Anti-armor: 125mm HEAT, APFSDS and TGM's will take out any armor up to an equivalent tank opponent.
- Infantry Fire Support: Close range, mobile artillery, such as firing at enemy forces in a bunker or building.
And so on. It's not invincible but it can take more hits than anything else and has some of the hardest hitting weapons at the moment. We see a lot of footage of tanks getting blown up, but the fact is, most unsuccessful hits aren't published, it takes more than one hit to take out most tanks unless you get lucky or the tank is shit. The Leopard-II has garbage roof armor, which is how a non-HEAT drone fucking demolished one by caving in the turret's top. A T-72's turret getting the same impact would survive without significant damage.

Western MBTs are much less suited for this, they're too large and unmodular. More importantly they lack proper HE-Frag. HESH is only good against light armor and bunkers and as a much slower shell, is not the best for accurate hits at range, on the move, against a moving target like an APC. The canister rounds like the M1028 is a deadly anti-infantry round, but only at close ranges and is useless against targets hiding behind even a decently thick wall, or in a trench. The M-PT which is derived from HEAT warheads are not meant for HE-Frag use. The M908 and its equivalents are similarly ill-suited for the role.

>Drones Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

M-18 Hellcat manual
https://m18hellcat.com/TM_9_755_M18_Hellcat.pdf

>>4875
One of these tanks has been recovered from the frontlines after Russia shifted the front-line forward. The damaged American M1A1 Abrams tank is a unit from "Magura" the 47th Mechanized Infantry Brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces (47-й ОМБр ВСУ) near Berdychi.

https://southfront.press/russian-army-captures-first-american-made-abrams-tank-videos/

The T-55 gets slept on a lot because its so old by now and obviously not up to modern MBT standards. I think people forget just how groundbreakingly scary this tank was when it was introduced. Even in the T-54 variant that lacked CBRN protection and stabilizers, it was a formidable weapon capable of penetrating almost every Western tank at ranges far exceeding their own and having frontal armor specifically designed to be basically immune to 88mm Pak-43 guns even at close range, which meant that the 90mm tank guns of the Patton tanks and any caliber below it was useless. It's why the 105mm gun was introduced. That's just the T-54. The T-55 CBRN defended, had gun stabilizers and so on, and this is in spite of the fact that the T-55 is a Medium tank, not an Main Battle Tank. So it punched above its weight.

Even if it is no longer capable as a front-line tank, it still retains the roles of a tank, capable of smoking any other armored vehicle frontally and even being able to penetrate a more modern tank from the side with an ambush, as Iraqi export models did to American tanks. The 100mm gun has decent HE-Frag ammunition and it's high velocity means it has good range with it. The sturdy platform also makes it excellent for being a platform for just about anything else such as autocannon mounts.

The T-55M modifications in the 70s also boosted the protection and sight-systems of these tanks, resulting in a fairly well protected artillery vehicle. They're used as secondary attack forces by both sides, such as recently at Rabotyno

To this end, despite mockery in the media, even the Ukrainians are well aware of how useful it really is. It's why they accepted the M-55S and were trying to make modernizations of the T-55 prior to the war like the T-55ABM

https://topwar.ru/241286-jeto-kruto-ukrainskij-oficer-vysoko-ocenil-primenenie-vs-rf-sovetskih-tankov-t-55.html
https://topcor.ru/33720-ukrainskie-analitiki-schitajut-chto-ne-stoit-nedoocenivat-tanki-t-55.html

>>4662
>>4660
>>4656
>>4655
Hehe
https://lefty.booru.org/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=22884

>>4658
File version

>>4656
Full shell for pic 1

you vs the cartridge she tells you not to worry about

>>2793
>>235
>Embedding error.
File Version here

Also just realized the OP I made 3 years ago has 222 GETS… for a MEME thread lol

>>4878
Also similar vibe.
>Self-defense: Point-blank Shot Dodge + Submission
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQTeeNX7VME

>>4625
Ah yes, just like they 'coordinated' their F-35s to cause AD to hit an Il-20M instead of them because they only let the Russian military know about their strikes on Latakia a minute before? Fuck off. And that's not to mention several other strikes that were done without giving Russia proper notice.

Finally I repeat - that's Russia's military, not Syria's, while they may be allied and linked, they are not one and the same, nor dow the latter control the former.

>US Navy ordering 17 more F/A-18 Super Hornets even though they has earlier stated to stop their orders
https://topwar.ru/239837-vms-ssha-zakazali-17-samoletov-fa-18-super-hornet-hotja-ranee-sobiralis-ot-nih-otkazyvatsja.html
Seems the carrier variant of the F-35 is so unreliable that the 4th generation of fighers will continue to be the backbone of the US air forces.

You just can’t make this shit up. Lmao.
An F-35B Accidentally Shot Itself With A Gatling Gun
https://wonderfulengineering.com/an-f-35b-accidentally-shot-itself-with-a-gatling-gun/
>March didn’t start well for the U.S air force when a much costly air incident took place. F-35B stealth, the most expensive fighter jet ever built to date, accidentally shot itself while flying over Arizona’s skies.
>A single unit of an F-35B costs around $135.8 million, so at first, an aircraft’s accident doesn’t sound appealing at all. The aircraft had an externally mounted Gatling gun discharge a 25mm armor cutting explosive round into itself, leaving the aircraft with damage of approximately $2.5 million, as confirmed by the military officials.
<The Marine Corps’ F-35B carries the GAU-22 differently differently than the Air Force’s -A version. Unlike the -A aircraft, which mounts the GAU-22 inside the aircraft at the base of the left side wing root, the -B mounts the gun in a separate gun pod mounted to the airplane’s belly. This design change was due to a weight issue caused by the need to make the -B version capable of vertical takeoffs and landings. The Marines can leave the gun off the aircraft to reduce weight when necessary.
LMAO, this is literally a repetition of the F-4 Phantom not having integrated guns like in Vietnam, and using gun-pods to make up for it until the newer models came in.
>The F-35B stealth aircraft was performing a nigh time air support mission, while during its flight, the aircraft exploded a round of fire in a self-attack scenario. Fortunately, the pilot managed to land the super-costly aircraft to the ground, but the damage done isn’t at low either.
>It was a Class-A accident, as termed by the officials, directing towards a minimum of $2.5 million of loss or the aircraft’s complete inability to make it to the skies ever again.
Such superior American engineering. Just imagine a scenario of these scrap heaps doing an air attack on Iran or The DPRK and just get their Gatling guns hacked to shoot itself.

A lot of sources talk about how the F-22 and F-35 have 0.001 or 0.0001 or even 0.00001 m2 RCS (RADAR Cross Section). This is misleading at best, and straight up false at most. I'm going to write an effort-post on this particular myth of stealth-aircraft, one that Russia itself acknowledges, which is why it doesn't claim absurd RCS numbers like this.

LMAO even the Poles, who suck the US DoD like it's a milky teat are talking about how bad and expensive the F-35 is.
https://topwar.ru/234617-stoimost-obsluzhivanija-rastet-lavinoobrazno-v-polskoj-presse-raskritikovali-istrebiteli-f-35.html

Considering the increasing Iran-Israel relations (or rather, lack thereof) throughout Spring of 2024, there's a possibility that the Su-35SE (export Su-35S's) of Iran will face off against the F-35i of the Israelie Air-Force. The Israeli's have some advantages, but only stealth is something the F-35 is superior in. Armament, flight-characteristics and so on are on the side of the Sukhoi, and the F-35's stealth is not invisibility, and Iran hasn't been idly standing by ignoring those capabilities. The only REAL difference is that Israeli pilots have more experience, but even then, it's been decades since the IAF has had a proper air to air opponent and striking ground targets is not the same as a dogfight, and BVR is by no means a guaranteed hit.
https://topwar.ru/241104-f-35-vs-su-35-vstrecha-budet-v-nebe-sirii.html

Soviet LASER pistol for astronauts. It's only powerful enough to overload cameras but it looks cool. It actually has single use battery cartridges like bullets in the magazine. The idea was for the astronauts on space stations to shoot this out the window at approaching ships.

>>4596
There was a laser revolver version of this too. It reminds me of the laser pistol from the original Alien (1979) film.

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Лазерный_пистолет?useskin=vector

https://en.topwar.ru/38339-sdelano-v-sssr-lazernyy-pistolet-kosmonavta.html

>>4597
The laser pistol actually looks cool. The revolver has to be the ugliest looking firearm I've ever seen.

Laser deforestation demonstrated in Russia
>Specialists from the Troitsk Institute of Innovation and Thermonuclear Research tested a mobile laser complex produced by Rosatom. The laser was used to cut down forests and speed up the laying of power lines. Using a laser complex, it was possible to cut a tree trunk 200 mm thick in six minutes; by simulating a laser beam, this time can be halved. The laser installation has no analogues in Russia and is capable of cutting even metal structures whose thickness reaches 260 mm, at a distance of no more than 300 meters. Previously, a sunken ship located 50 meters from the shore was cut with a laser on Sakhalin. There are no technical details released yet; the laser complex can be installed on an all-terrain vehicle of median size or larger.
An interesting use of a laser. Perhaps its not so fantastical in the future to have laser cannons.

How do I achieve their level of swag? Homemade armor ideas?




>heckin flood detected!!!

>>4758
You can get really good bullet proof vests for less than $700. Also are helmets even worth it? They look really lame in my opinion but can they actually protect you from a bullet?

>>4763
Against the common shitty hollow points used by random cops, yeah possibly, especially when they don't hit it in the middle.
Against the average militarized units, absolutely not, but it might make it safer to lob grenades around still.

See >>2099
But since I know (You) won't listen - How To Make AMAZING Body Armor For $30?! on youtube. Guy uses fiberglass resin to create a fairly durable Level III plate.
https://files.catbox.moe/saoovh.mp4

sage for potential glowies

Anyone have these old 'future' military stuff? I remember there being a site for it, but it's gone or something.