[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / wiki / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]

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

"War can only be abolished through war, and in order to get rid of the gun it is necessary to take up the gun." - Chairman Mao
Password (For file deletion.)
Required: 2 + 2 =

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon

| Catalog | Home

File: 1640757983061.png (46.5 KB, 700x550, ClipboardImage.png)


These weapons are made for the purpose of harming a large number of people, the contradiction they have as useful weapons of war is their purpose.
In most wars an army can be expected to deploy the lowest amount of troops and supplies possible as to ensure the lives of its soldiers are safe and the government it works for has surplus army supplies it can use to maintain its security over a state and the potential success of coming out victorious n future armed conflicts. WMDs contradict this basic behaviour by their own nature, if any armed conflict ever breaks out so violent that weapons that need to kill hundreds of thousands to millions need to be mass produced that represents a problem with how 2 or more armies are fundamentally approaching war and are said armies will have their governments invest in better infrastructure and machinery that can counter the effects of WMDs along with tools to make war less lethal as to ensure surplus troops. Evidence of this can be seen in the Cold War which saw an arms race to develop tech that could detect and down a nuke before it hits or launches like the internet and satellites, hazmat suits to counter radiation damage, or ww1 which saw the development of gas masks by garret morgan as a means to counter the effects of mustard gas and bio agents etc.
In conclusion WMDs are useless in warfare as the concept of a WMD itself contradicts the policies any properly maintained army would make to ensure its longevity and security in fulfilling its tasks, for every hypersonic ICBM developed there are radars made of reflective material detecting and sending missiles towards it before it can hit its target.


>for every hypersonic ICBM developed there are radars made of reflective material detecting and sending missiles towards it before it can hit its target.

Problem N°1 anti missile defense systems don't work. The data about performance in real world condition (actual combat) suggests that they even struggle against low speed, low altitude, low range unguided missiles. Expect that the 50% interception rate from synthetic tests will drop dramatically in an actual conflict.
Problem N°2 If they worked you'd need too many.
If your opponent has one ICBM you need a missile shield for every potential target. The more ICBMs your opponent has the larger the list of potential targets gets.
Problem N°3 war-heads that can subdivide into many small bombs.
Nukes can be made very small, and you can fit potentially hundreds or thousands of small nukes on a single ICBM, at this point statistics of large numbers take over, and getting a high interception rate is very unlikely, even if you had tons of effective missile defenses. Decoys will make this even harder.
Problem N°4 newer intercontinental missile systems that are already in service are not flying on ballistic trajectories, and it's not realistic to think that those can be intercepted by another missile, because without a predictable predetermined flight path, it's not likely that you can catch up to something going above Mach 5.

Once you can make lasers or directed particle stream weapon of sufficient power, this will change and anti missile defenses will become plausible, but not before.


highly recommend that anyone worrying about nuclear war watch this film:


Why isn't the invasion of manchuria ever talked about?
It's easily in the running for one of the greatest feats of warfare ever executed as it was instrumental in the Japanese surrender, yet overshadowed by the enola gay.
3 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


The WW2 /edu/ thread contains good stuff, but to be honest the only complete picture of the Red Army Tactics of the war are going to be in Russian (soviet) literature.


Embedding error.
>Why isn't the invasion of manchuria ever talked about in the West?
FTFY, Manchuria and its conflicts are not forgotten in the former USSR
>overshadowed by the enola gay
You've answered your query; it isn't politically expedient for the American people to know that Japan's surrender (and in fact the reason they never attacked the USSR at all) is due to numerous defeats at Soviet hands, specifically Khalkin Gol and "Operation August Storm". On the latter I have a pdf on it that I'll post later.


Glantz wrote a good book on Manchuria


File: 1645438804872.pdf (9 MB, 184x255, Glantz-lp8.pdf)

Looks pretty good, thanks dude
Posting for everyone else


I mean, yea, that was quite an impressive feat of the red army, and the reason why the japanese surrendered.
But the Enola gay and the other nuke were fucking nukes, the literal two times were nuclear weapons were used. Like, I know it isn't that fair, but the nukes is possibly the more destructive thing ever made and they were dropped unto the civilian population destroying an entire city with just one bomb.
I mean, you could talk about how the dinosaurs became extinc because of their monstrous size requiring tons of food and so on and that we're destined to become extinct sooner or later, but people talk about the meteorite because it was a fucking meteorite.

Also it might be the reason why there aren't any alien civilizations out there, since the earliest space opera technology bullshit available to civilizations are literally nukes with the power to destroy civilization.

File: 1640804088353.png (2.52 MB, 3700x2512, ClipboardImage.png)


It’s too fast, so fast to the point where if you were driving a car you would need to be hours away from your destination to properly land this fucking thing when it’s zipping around at hundreds to thousands of kilometres an hour l
8 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


Aren automatic weapoms even real at this point? Haven't seen one, except for the murican soldiers that "claim" they use them.
Maybe it's all a conspiracy to prevent the working mases from arasing. Rise workers, with your flintlock muskets!


File: 1643337923467.gif (1.23 MB, 427x240, lgw9Igd.gif)



Clippy has attained sentience and is accessing your plane, oh no.


Nah its only a couple dummies


>Chinese jet pilots: Meow over the radio
<US media: Chinese pilots threatened innocent US plane!

File: 1643993144276-0.jpg (1.65 MB, 1094x2238, 1643890110364.jpg)

File: 1643993144276-1.png (704.72 KB, 1080x958, 4db.png)


The US tried to capture a "terrorist" in Idlib, the helicopter the special forces were using ended up getting shot down.


Who were they going after? That Golani HTS commander? Also did the crewmen of the heli die?


I couldn't find anything about the fate of the Crewman. Apparently it was ISIS commander, though we don't know this for sure. It is known that this happened in Afrin.


they did kill him and he was the new isis leader

File: 1636904375138.jpg (120.82 KB, 690x807, 20211111_182511.jpg)


>ammo prices still too fucking high
>try making nitrocellulose with nitric acid and ping pong balls
>buy 500 ping pong balls
>they're all made of plastic
>now I just have a bunch of nitric acid and ping pong balls
help a poor uyghur out
12 posts and 6 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


That a golden boy? I’ve been meaning to get a lever-action, how do you like it?


>get attacked
>release the ping pong balls
>attacker trips over ping pong balls
>attacker breaks neck


File: 1637402026025.jpg (33.87 KB, 566x540, 1552769233415.jpg)

speaking of chemistry: >>>/edu/5724

it's not my picture, I found it on /r/socialistra I think. also https://johnbrownprints.com/


I am fairly certain you can do it with just plain cotton as well.
Nitrocellulose was developed from a cotton rag being used to clean up a nitric acid spill, no?




As is known, the earliest example of guns, your matchlocks and percussion cap rifles were not really the most accurate things in the world, so aiming was seen as more "point in the general direction and hope for the best" more than a tool to increase accuracy. This would carry over into WW1, while the rifles were indeed much more accurate, to the point of aiming allowing soldiers to hit targets from great distances with great, well, accuracy, the military high commands of that era were sluggish to realize just how industrialization had changed warfare - it was not until the interwar period that there was serious experimentation on how to perfect the new mode of war, and to discard the old Napoleonic era of tactics in favor of what we generally recognize as modern warfare.

This stance in pic 1 being used is an old school sport shooting stance. It's actually a very accurate stance, as it puts the fulcrum of the rifle in line with the shooters center or mass. But, it's an impractical position for warfare, as it requires to be both standing upright as well as fully still. Though, at the time nations started to field snipers, the majority of them were trained by or just were hunters and sport shooters - many of the USSR's snipers were just country boys who enjoyed hunting turning their skills into tools to destroy fascism.

Another adaptation of the era was pistols - though they had existed prior, their mass utilization by infantry was entirely new, and there was very little standardization of shooting stances for accuracy. What ended up getting adopted by most nations was largely their "officer's stances", which was a position that was once used for holding aloft officer's swords, before pistols became the status symbol of the office. Pic 2 is the American army, pic 3 the Germans, and pic 4 the English. The only concern of this stance is getting the shot on target, it was popular with dueling and target shooting. If you've seen videos of people shooting like this, you'll know there's very little recoil control - making it impractical for warfare due to difficulty of follow up shots. You can see an example of these kinds of hold-over firing positions in this video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jP7J-JNSUu4
A lot of these old stances have no modern equivalents in warfare, but others are the ancestors to our modern forms.


>This would carry over into WW1
t. doesn't know about the invention and use of the rifle


very interesting thanks OP


>your matchlocks and percussion cap rifles were not really the most accurate things in the world, so aiming was seen as more "point in the general direction and hope for the best"

This isn't true. There were sorts of snipers in the 18th century and you would be expected to aim and hit a target from at least 100 metres away. People just didn't like actually killing each other.


What in this world will ever be as powerful as a good old fashioned cannon? ARRRRRRRRRD!


this is genius


a modern building made in the past 50 years would be completely and instantaneously rendered to dust the moment a cannon ball would hit it

File: 1640819282624.png (355.1 KB, 500x378, 1455340634363.png)


>Can't do military service or join a militia because I'm deaf from one ear.
5 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


Lmao that didn't take long at all. I guess that description accurately describes many countries here.


File: 1640960756875.png (56.63 KB, 255x162, ClipboardImage.png)

From one latamfag to another, camarada.


probably a good idea, could you get connections from it for work as well?


I would need to investigate more to know that, but honestly I'm only guessing here but probably not, I think for that I'd probably need a more extensive military career to get to that level.


During the vietnam war the US army had several battalions with lower qualifications from their standard, lower IQ requirements are the most infamous ones and the wikipedia article doesn't mention hearing difficulties but I bet they had some and that they also were part of the higher killed in action rate and the higher poverty and divorce rate veterans had.

File: 1640367058314.png (391.08 KB, 1400x1400, ClipboardImage.png)


8 posts omitted. Click reply to view.


Also, where is the FOSS robot dog with a gun?


Just strapping it on to an already existing product. The only other commercial robot Ive seen uses two wheel legs and a balancing system but it would be too shaky for a gun.


drones are much more effective for the police state than these


I can't wait for the passive aggressive responses blaming the machine
>Ooopsie, it was an automatic response, you must have done something that indicated to the killbot that you were a threat. A team of experts has been assigned to investigate this incident. You may be prompted for additional information <citizen>. In the meantime you can review our killbot policies and terms of service in this page <link explaining how basically nobody is responsible for the robot's actions , under impossible standards of proof>.

Imagine social media algorithm/copyright/smear fuckery but it's bullets instead of bans lol. On the plus side "Dogged" or "Botted" sound more casual than than "Swatted".


These battle dog bots are not realistic, because the opportunity cost, you can get a Toyota hilux that has a 50cal cannon mounted to it for the same money, or equip 10 guys with but loads of infantry weapons. If you buy 10 battledogs and your opponent buys 5 cars with light canons and equips 50 infantry guys, you're going to loose very badly.


A thread for the extremely versatile rifle, produced by Soviets/Russians (Tula/Izhevsk), Chinese (Norinco), Yugo/Serbs (Zastava) to this day and available as (relatively) cheap surplus pretty much anywhere.

Thinking of converting a Type 56 for hunting and range shooting.
18 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


>bruh just regularly clean it
I have heard some cheap 7.62 is considerably corrosive and the steel jacket damages softer barrels.
>bruh just add straps and keep it slung
Still less heavy than desirable. And if you are going to war or even just hiking and hunting you want the cheapest equipment possible.


yeah, the older and military surplus ones should be more corrosive, and i wouldn't put it past norinco to put them in with the fresh retail ones just to meet supply, but again, you can just clean regularly. the barrel is strong, it should be fine


>cheapest equipment possible
>the barrel is strong, it should be fine
Yes, depends on the rifle, a chrome lined SKS would probably be fine.


Polymer is also more resistant to temperature and moisture changes than wood. It also does not require treating with oil and polish.


>not wanting to scare your enemy shitless and destroy his morale by emitting deafening gun fire sounds

Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / wiki / git ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru / zine ]
[ 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 9 / 10 / 11 / 12 / 13 / 14 ]
| Catalog | Home