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

>>1800
I was considering learning martial arts since guns for self defence are illegal in my cunt but I reckon a knife would do the trick, thoughts?

>>2066
Yeah

Can I suck your dick?

>>1800
dfkgjdflkgdfkgdf holy shit pls top me

I have a dagger-like one with a T- shape. A lot smaller but equally as stabby and probably easier to use. Can't show it as I gave it to my sister for rape prevention.
Fun fact: I procured a similar one for a british gang member that I met in an institution. In minecraft, of course.













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

>>3638
There were more

Skinwalker hunting kit
The knife is for fun and the gun is also for fun but also to shoot myself

Ancapistan loadout

I serve the Soviet Union.

>>4682
Does this gun kills people? I dont wanna kill people man

>>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

There's a guy on fosscad who made his own with more power than ones sold over the counter
https://www.reddit.com/user/Proof1447/submitted/
Free download I think

I just have a break action air rifle. I've mounted a red dot on it, will give that a try soonish

>>1770
I see one of the comments mentions Caselman's air machine gun. I found the plans for it at https://thehomegunsmith.com/CaselmanAPMG.shtml . attached pdf related for posterity
here's another build of it: https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/05/02/32-cal-caselman-air-powered-machine-gun/
another build: https://www.airmachinegun.com/caselman_build.htm

vid and gif related are someone who built a more compact design that fires round BBs. relevant forum post: https://www.spudfiles.com/viewtopic.php?p=386263#p386263

I have the pellet gun in the op, american classic. it is the only pellet gun i own at the moment (but i've used others).


that thing on a full pump will hurt. close enough it'll puncture the skin. a point blank shot to the skull will penetrate it. i don't think it'll go in far and i'm 100% positive they will live.

so defensive i would say the site of a pistol or w/e might deter some people, offensively i would say you better be a good aim and hit them in the eye

story time


i got my dogs thanksgiving dinner one nov that way. they cornered a possum and i grabbed the American Classic and put one in its skull point blank. it lived. did it again. and it continued with its living… i felt bad, don't get me wrong. who woulda thought it would have lived a point blank shot to the head.

>>4573
Thats why you keep some cheap 22. by your side for the purposes of pest control. The cheapest option in the US would probably be some single shot "daughters first gun" bolt action but i cant speak from expeeience as im a nogunz at the moment

>>1769
They aren't that strong but I've heard that competitive shooters use airsoft replicas of guns they have so they can practice handling indoors since they're basically silent. Also it's good for iron sights training.

And back to physics. There is a reason that fucking geckos and spiders and bugs can walk on ceilings, goats can climb nearly verticle and elks and fucking elephants can't. Once again basic physics. You can't just size things up.

like, what's the point of bait if you have to write this much

>>4476
>I doubt there is much wasted space on the inside of the armor.
<tanks are the same as BMPs!
If you're just going to argue bad-faith nonsense like this then you may as well just stop.
>To balance it on two legs and have armored limbs would by neccesity make the armor thinner.
No, that's not how weight distribution works, look at any bipedal robot currently doing fucking backflips and running like a human, while being even more top-heavy. Hell look at HUMANS our upper halves are equivalent-heavier than our legs.
>the same HP it takes to move a wheel barrow is much less than the HP it takes to physically carry it.
Shit analogy that doesn't actually make sense, but lets play ball for a moment. When that Wheelbarrow reaches a wall, are you rolling it over the wall? No. When that wheelbarrow needs to scale a mountain, can it? No. If you need to move on a narrow path with little room to move, are you going to roll the wheelbarrow through it comfortably? No. You're going to be carrying it over the wall, through the narrow area, or up the mountain.
>the material of the armor is irrelevant
No it is not. Armor is not all the same, neither over time nor over different vehicle types.
>Wheeled vehicles can climb steeper inclines than tracked vehicles
HAHAHAHAHAHA No. Tracks possess far greater ground contact area and so traction, than wheels, which is why they can climb inclines better.
>you have yet to show legs would offer any advantage
More burden of proof fallacy, and this coming from a guy posting a light buggy climbing sideways up a slope while almost falling. I don't have to demonstrate what is obvious fact, but to prove it anyway I will proceed to use "basic" Kinesiology with the concept of Center of Gravity. Walking motion requires moving the center of gravity up and down, which means on a level, uninterrupted surface wheels would be more advantageous (i.e. a road or flat plain) but if terrain is rough, (large rocks, variable ground softness (sandy/swampy terrain etc.) and/or steep, the upward motion of center of gravity is advantageous.
Additionally on a steep incline people change how they Post too long. Click here to view the full text.

Honestly since you're just repeating the same shit over and over again I'm just going to ask a few simple questions with a Yes or No answer.
Can a tank, car or ANY rolling vehicle climb a roadless mountain? Y/N
Can a tank, car or ANY rolling vehicle drive over a meter thick, 2 meter-tall wall? Y/N
Can a tank, car or ANY rolling vehicle step/jump over/across a row of mines or barbed wire? Y/N
Can a tank, car or ANY non-amphibious rolling vehicle drive through a deep river without stopping and preparing tubes and other equipment? Y/N
Can a tank, car or ANY large rolling vehicle traverse jungle without having to crush and smash through dozens of trees at high pace? Y/N
Can a tank, car or ANY rolling vehicle turn on a 1-2 meter radius?
Can a tank, car or ANY rolling vehicle manipulate objects with fine control without a manipulator arm?
Can a tank, car or ANY rolling vehicles re-arm and refuel without any crew or logistics crew stepping/being outside the vehicle, in CBRN conditions?

>>4454
>>4452
Kalashnikov Concern demo'd a mecha walker in 2018 called Игорёк. It's for civilian use, with a multi-person cockpit, with manipulators resembling that of a Deep-Sea submersible and leg structure reminiscent of the ED-209 or Star Wars AT-ST.

I've got too much on my plate rn
Sorry comrade :(

>>2594
Sounds very interesting to me. I may wish to join in a few months time. Thank you for the offer anon.

>>2594
I dunno about a reading group, but is there a list/archive of MODERN(so at least ww2) military literature? Specifically military, not guerilla/terror stuff. Some youtube channels about military would also be appreciated.

>>4664
And I'm not talking about stuff like "how to treat your wounds and handle your ak", but preferably stuff like "how to be an infantry squad leader".

>>4603
>plenty of revolutionaries have had to do this through history to survive
they always had support from local communities. You most importantly need a support system

See https://100r.co/site/off_the_grid.html
It's the comprehensive guide that everyone seems to forget.

Build a bunker to survive WW3 nuclear shit. It can't be that hard

LARP preppers, which dominate SEO on the subject because their conception of prepping is largely based in consumption rather than sustainability, have main character syndrome and want to Minecraft Steve their way to survival while mowing down all the poors for any excuse they can get.

Real prepping would require a cooperative of some sort, and involve permaculture farming.

The way you take it from LARP to Contingency is writing it down with quantities.

Yeah I heard about this. Though to be fair that training jet isn't exactly a slouch either.

The magic word is "dogfight".
The F-22 is a fifth gen jet designed for long range and beyond visual range attacks using missiles.
In a regualr combat scenario, the F-22 can fire missiles at the FA-50, before even getting detected by radar.
Fifth gen jets regularly lose gun dogfights to fourth gen jets because stealth design and general considerations for BVR engagements reduce the ability to turn fight while being subsonic.
And this is totally irrelevant for combat as the last two decades have seen virtually zero dogfights in jet to jet engagements. The future of jet fighting is slinging missiles at each other over more than 100 km range.

>>4615
This is retarded. Dogfights absolutely still happen and is both proven in previous wars -from Vietnam to Lebanon - and in modern simulations of a US air-battle with Chinese and Russian air forces
>the last two decades have seen virtually zero dogfights in jet to jet engagements.
The last 2 decades have barely HAD any jet to jet engagements because most air-force activities have been ground attack against under-armed guerillas and terrorists or civilians. However dogfights do occur.
- In Syria an F/A-18 shot down a Su-22
- In India a MiG-21 modernization shot down a Pakistani F-16 and more than one skirmish of this kind has occurred between them.
- During the late 90s Yugoslav and Serbian wars dogfights happened quite often, with MiG-29s and MiG-21s engaging F-16s, Panavia Tornados and other aircraft in close-range combat.
- Russian fighter jets, primarily the Su-35, have shot down drones with auto-cannon fire over Ukraine

Dogfighting was declared dead in the 1960s and Vietnam disproved that, which is why all fighter-jets today still mount autocannons. Dogfights would continue into every conflict of every war after. The first Gulf War had an F-15 engage two MiG-29s and there were a few more close range engagements in that war.

The idea that BVR will end dogfighting is retarded because counter-measures against such missiles will improve with the missiles and never guarantee a hit. This was proven in Iraq when F-15s with AIM-120s failed to shoot down MiG-25s because they simply avoided, out-maneuvered and out speeded the missiles, with the F-15s likewise avoiding the R-40s fired back at them. DFRM and other countermeasures mean Active RADAR seekers are vulnerable to spoofing, Semi-Active missiles force the firing aircraft to reveal its position by actively using RADAR and IR-guidance is primarily used for close range engagements and is vulnerable to flares and decoys.

Finally the F-22 was built specifically to outperform the F-15 Eagle, including in maneuverability and IS more maneuverable than it, so no the excuse of "stealth design and general considerations for BVR engagements reduce the ability to turn fight while being subsonic." is absolutely untrue.

>>4619
Most of what you listed from the last two decades weren't dogfights and all of them are irrelevant border skirmishes.
Dogfights are just beyond irrelevant in real wars like Ukraine, as ground based air defence utterly denies enemy jets ever meeting within visual range. And yes, the F-22 and F-35 regularly lose mock gun fights against F-16 because it is not the role they were designed for.

>>4620
Yes those were dogfights - close range shoot-outs within visual range, the same applies to Cope Thunder and other previous F-22 involved exercises.
>ground based air defence utterly denies enemy jets ever meeting within visual range
And yet they have, because air-defense is not perfect and counter-measures exist. The primary reason we don't see many air-air battles in Ukraine is because the Ukrainian air-force is operating older units, in much smaller numbers and most of them were destroyed on the ground, along with bases that were close to Russia. In turn the VKS doesn't push deep into Ukrainian territory because there is no need for long range aerial operations against a nearly non existent air-force and the primary target are ground-based, not aerial.
>the F-22 and F-35 regularly lose mock gun fights against F-16 because it is not the role they were designed for.
Excuses. The F-22 is extremely maneuverable as a design and has thrust-vectoring. Both it and the F-35 are supposed to outperform the F-16 and F-15 in aerodynamic capabilities as well as BVR and stealth. The F-22 achieved this, being more maneuverable than any of its 4th Generation predecessors, the F-35 failed and this is part of the reason the F-35 is criticized as a replacement to the F-16 and F-18. The F-22's main problem aside from technical issues is the lack of an IR targeting system and its prohibitive expensive and complicated production per unit, which is why the program never reached 200 planes. And just because the F-22 is supermaneuverable, and superior to its predecessors does not mean other air-craft are incapable of shooting it down in WVR and BVR combat.

TL;DR: Any turning aircraft bleeds off energy. Some more than others. The F-16 is one of the best fighters for holding energy through transonic turns, better at that even than an F-15C but not nearly as good as F-22 with its thrust vectoring.
Dog-fighting may be a reduced quality, but it absolutely still exists and the F-22 was absolutely designed with being superior to the F-16's, F-18's and F-15's capabilities in mind.

>>2428
These are literally my costudents

t. I was there too a few times. years ago.

>>2437
very interesting idea
>>2392
it's extremely easy to make a good suppressor by cnc milling a cylinder of aluminum and stuffing the holes with steel wool for baffles. There is also 3d printed suppressors now but I still need to research them before I can comment. They are probably the best option today, in fact the new line of rifles the American military is rolling out right now all come equipped with a 3d printed suppressor.

For an extemely low tech solution you can simply use a plastic (PET) water bottle from the recycling as a suppressor. In fact that is what the chechen seperatists used to great effect during the first battle of Grozyny. A plastic PET bottle taped to the barrel of a bolt action .22 rifle firing subsonic ammunition will be completely silent aside from noise made from crunching the bottle etc. You could even stick one to the end of a .22 pistol and if it doesn't cycle the action then no one in the room with you will hear it fire. Just the sound of a body hitting the floor if you don't catch it.

Dump massive buckets of HRT into the water supply of the Pentagon covertly.

https://topwar.ru/236854-tureckaja-kompanija-razrabotala-nazemnyj-bespilotnik-so-zvukovoj-pushkoj.html
Turkey has developed the AVAZ, a drone-mounted sound-cannon which can at minimum burst ear-drums and cause Nausea, and its dB can hit 184, rupturing the liver and other organs.

On the topic of Sound Guns - https://armystandard.ru/news/20216151111-7AjCF.html

>>4579
Probably either a false flag operation to sow fear in the country or it's genuinely some rogue Ukrainian terror cell

>>4580

time for american terror