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

Catalog (/Guns, weapons and the art of war./)

[ Create new thread ]
Password (For file deletion.)
Sort by: Image size:

R: 10 / I: 1

Electronic weapons

What do we do about e guns, e cannons, drones and other electronic based weapons in future wars? How will these machines respond to tech like EMPs and multilayered radars?
R: 28 / I: 6
What's the most pointless war in recent history?
R: 1 / I: 0

UK-Poland-Ukraine Trilateral

If AUKUS was tragedy, then this is farce
R: 0 / I: 0

Soviet Sniper Describes Hunting Enemy on Eastern Front (1941) // Memoir of Yevgeni Nikolaev

>Soviet Sniper Describes Hunting Enemy on Eastern Front (1941) // Memoir of Yevgeni Nikolaev
R: 6 / I: 3

T-34 Historical Revisionism

I’ve noticed a new movement recently with the revision of a lot of military equipment during WW2. Especially in regards to the T-34 tank. There’s probably hundreds of people half assed military enthusiasts that tried to do this as if equipment quality has that much matter in anyway if you cannot put it in production.
Do these claims hold up to scrutiny or it’s another new wave of porky historiography like the last time they did this to play up lend lease to inflate the US egos?
R: 61 / I: 44

Post Awesome Looking Guns

You read the title. Post guns that look awesome.
R: 25 / I: 2

Training, Equipment, and Mindset

Alright, so I won't go too much into it, but as I'm sure you've all noticed, there is a distinct lack of competent organizations and combat readiness in the left. While it may just be a stereotype, the idea of the skinny and weak anarchist can sum up most of the left that wishes to engage in direct action, mostly by using outdated manuals and romanticized ideas of war. As such, I had, a few years ago, taken it upon myself to release training videos to some of you in order to get you up to speed on the basics of the basics. That, unfortunately, seems to have fallen through on the account of my job, which often has me traveling and doing other things that I won't go into because they are totally uninteresting and unrelated to the topic at hand. As such, we will go into a few key steps you should be taking in order to prepare yourself for introductory training, should it ever be offered to you. Yes, you read that correctly, you must train yourself to be trained. You do not have the luxury of being part of an organized military force, though I would not critique you if that is the route you are wanting to take, as it would be hypocritical. I will limit the topic to individual training, equipment, and self-selection because the whole of military science is a broad topic that is not wholly known by any one individual. Please understand this so that my limitations do not become a hindrance to your growth as a potential combat soldier. Seek training from experienced individuals, even if you have to hide your power level. Consider me just another voice on the internet. I do not intend to use credentials or authority on the subject to get you to do as I say, but I would appreciate it if you thought about a few things. Thank you for reading.
R: 22 / I: 63

/milspo/ thread

Post pics related to war and the military - outfits, equipment, weapons, vehicles, doesn't necessarily have to be leftist
R: 424 / I: 127

/k/ - Guns in general

Just don't talk about gun control
R: 35 / I: 16

/GQTDDTOT/ Gun questions that don't deserve their own thread

Got any questions about guns, equipment or combat? Have some knowledge you can share? Ask and answer away
R: 4 / I: 0


excavating tunnels, trenches, ditches, ramparts, moats, holes, any kind of defensive earthwork where industrial machinery isn't viable

you can get most stuff off of amazon or any hardware or milsurp store
R: 13 / I: 0

Guns changed warfare

The design of guns isn’t what matters but the idea of long distance combat with the potential to kill an enemy soldier in a matter of a single to few hits in the right areas.

This revolution of war to be centered around staying as far away as possible from enemy troops made large scale battles pretty much obsolete in most wars today as being seen can often come with worse consequences than simply being executed with the potential for entire squads and bases to become doxed, along with the fact that more troops and weapons != to more success in combat especially when both or more armed groups in modern wars possess weapons that pretty much instakill with dozens to hundreds of these weapons like armour piercing bullets available per troop.

Coupled with the introduction of the radar briefly during the pacific battles against imperial Japan really began to amplify the importance of staying away from conflict in order to spare the lives of soldiers, equipment and weapons and to this day most of the real combat in wars is done via trying to collect as much information on what a states security threats have and are planning.
R: 15 / I: 1

Battleship Construction

How are battleships made?
what would a country need for it to have domestic ship construction?
what does a nation need these days to be a naval power?

Anybody know where to start with learning about modern naval warfare production and tactics?
R: 2 / I: 0


What in this world will ever be as powerful as a good old fashioned cannon? ARRRRRRRRRD!
R: 10 / I: 1
>Can't do military service or join a militia because I'm deaf from one ear.
R: 7 / I: 0

Next USA civil war

The talk of a new civil war has been going on for a long while now that it almost sounds like a worn out trope.
But how does leftypol feel about it? How could it start, run and end?
R: 17 / I: 13
armoured vehicles aircraft and ships
>here you can post military vehicles
>This thread is dedicated to military vehicle enthusiasts
>Here you can post all sorts of things to do with military vehicle's
R: 2 / I: 0


Aesthetic gun sounds.
R: 32 / I: 8
What do people think the consequences of the FGC-9 and the advent of 3D printed guns and weapons more broadly will be?

How will this affect revolutionary as well as reactionary violence? Will be see a rise in paramilitary organisations on the left capable of enforcing political demands, or is this just a going to lead to more fascist lone wolf attacks.

link to a documentary below
R: 9 / I: 0

How do people land this fucking thing

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
R: 23 / I: 3


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.
R: 2 / I: 2
This thread is for appreciating this board's namesake by posting AKs in all their many forms.
R: 1 / I: 0

The major contradiction of WMDs

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.
R: 2 / I: 0
how much of BUD/S is pointless masturbation?
how were spetsnaz chosen and trained?
R: 29 / I: 4

Military traning

People talks a lot about having guns and being armed but I don't see anyone talking about training, organizing and acquiring equipment other than guns and ammo.
Why don't we go camping and pretend to be soldiers in campaign? That has to be better than just shooting at cans.
R: 6 / I: 0
Should this board be renamed to lowercase?
R: 8 / I: 4
I wanted to share this for a while, these are two articles from a magazine/newspaper local to medellín, the first article is a memoir from a FARC commander from the time they took down an army base and took down a plane with a high ranking officer and the second is how statelessness in urabá helped to bloom the paramilitaries in that area.
Now I really wish somebody could translate these
R: 23 / I: 2

Pistol-calibre carbines

These seem like the way to go for cheap, widely available personal rifles.

Share advice on models, ammo, magazines etc.
R: 1 / I: 0
cursed weapons and guilty pleasures

post 'em

i want 'em
R: 6 / I: 0
>wants a gun to “defend himself” from the American government and libruls
>buys guns and ammo exclusively from American govt corporations like the NRA and liberal economies
R: 34 / I: 35

Meme Thread

Meme thread for /AK/
Post memes, stories, funny shit and /k/ screencaps.
R: 5 / I: 0

Low-effort Lounge

I don't have guns because it's illegal and family are anti-gun, but I did shoot an AK-47 and a Mosin Nagant when overseas. Shit was fun. (yes it was before becoming a socialist im not a lifestylist lmao) Bolt actions are just plain fun, more involved.

Pic unrelated; I have no guns
R: 11 / I: 8


-Personal Armour
-Vehicle Armour
-Structural armour

Instructions, specifications, theory.
R: 2 / I: 0

The Early Years of Accuracy

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.
R: 22 / I: 9

Photon blinding weapons

A reminder that cheap cnc, cutting, welding, and 3d printing lasers can be used to instantly and irrevocably blind people at 1000s of feet.

If you combine frequencies it becomes extremely difficult to block with convention eyeprotection.

Combined with a firearm this allows a 1-2 knockout punch, as the blinding weapon will Temporarily dispell adrenaline from the target, allowing the firearm to do more damage
R: 14 / I: 3
Please dump all your guerilla warfare/ resistance/weapon manuals/psyop tactics PDFs you have. Im finally making a collection. If therers already a collection somewhere on the site point me to it. It can be CIA stay behind shit, homemade weapons shiut, vietnam shit,guerilla warfare from brazil whatever is practically useful and can be printed and disseminated among people in a revolutionary situation. things that give you some rudimentary education
R: 2 / I: 1


<From focal +‎ -ism.


<focalism (uncountable)
<<(psychology) Synonym of anchoring
<<A revolutionary strategy which posited that military vanguardism could lead to general rebellion.


<(revolutionary strategy): foquism
R: 11 / I: 15

Soviet deep battle/operations

Thoughts? There isn't much material over it on youtuber, but from what I gather, it's a materialist approach to warfare.
Instead of the classical Prussian doctrine of encirclement, deep operations focuses on breaking through to the back line and destroying communications and supply lines, which greatly help other areas of the line besides your own immediate victory, which the blitzkrieg focused on.
R: 8 / I: 4

Forbidden weapons

Do you partake in the forbidden
R: 16 / I: 8
>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
R: 4 / I: 1


itt we proposse meassures wich could improve the hypothetical shelling of an hypothetical "nation" by mostly using hypothetical rocket artilley
R: 10 / I: 0

QBZ-191/Type 191

Recent Norinco rifle for the PLA replacing the QBZ-95/Type 95 bullpup. Has normal assault rifle, carbine and DMR variants, more info in the attached video.
R: 5 / I: 0

Specialized Soviet Suppresed Weapons

As you (hopefully) know, a gun suppressor doesn’t completely eliminate the sound created by a firing gun. Instead, it suppresses the noise significantly by capturing and slowly releasing the rapidly expanding gases used to propel a bullet out of the gun barrel. When firing a gun, the gunpowder in the bullet casing ignites, creating an immense amount of pressure. This pressure propels the bullet down the barrel of the gun, pushing the round at incredible speeds. When the bullet exits the barrel, the pressure is released and an extremely loud noise is produced. What a suppressor does is provide a larger space for the pressure and hot gases to expand after exiting the barrel. The gases expand as they are heated when the gun fires, but the suppressor traps and slowly releases this gas, resulting in a much quieter shot. Other aspects of a suppressor that help to mute sound include the science of heat transfer and metallurgy.

But for the Soviet Union, the conventional form of suppressors bolted onto the gun was simply not enough. Some bright spark decided to reinvent the wheel. He looked at the usual barrel silencer and figured they're such crap because it doesn't make much sense to try to muffle the bang at the barrel's end, since it happens all the way back, as the compressed gunpowder explodes and the resulting gas violently expands. So he went and designed a fancy bullet case which trapped the gases inside itself, so it's actually more appropriate to say the technology is silent ammon rather than silent guns, the latter of which was designed after the former. They also were designed to minimize the secondary noise of that is the clang of moving parts, so it became inaudible beyond a few meters. Further, the third and last source of noise, case ejection, was wholly sidestepped by keeping the spent, gas-filled cases trapped in the gun itself, which further adds to the stealth. Add the complete lack of a muzzle flash, and it's as stealthy as it gets.

The downside is that it loses power and has lowered effective range, but with such a stealthy weapon, distance wasn't supposed to be a factor for the user. It's also, unsurprisingly, more expensive to manufacture than common ammo.

The prototype was named SP-1. That and SP-2 saw use only in Bond-style specialty guns, like the infamous cigarette case, the TKB-506 and TKB-506A. Later on, some different group ceated the PZ/PZA/PZAM round line, much bigger because they were intended to be used in a proper pistol, S4M, with higher ranges. To this, they added a clever detail: the projectile would resemble one fired by an AK-47 from at least a few hundred meters away, thus explaining the lack of a spent case and throwing off investigations. I don't know if this feature would be replicated later.

Still, the spooks at the KGB weren't satisfied with these weapons because of their size. So the original guy went back to the drawing board and made the SP-3, to pack a good punch while being small. But only with SP-4 and the PSS pistol designed for it would silent ammo become a class of gun on its own. All previous rounds left a spent casing actually longer than an unspent one. With that out of the way, they could use clips, whereas beforehand, they could only hold, at most, two single-loaded shots. The SP-4 was so successful that they further developed the SP-5 round for the AS assault rifle and its sister, VSS sniper rifle, and later on, made an armor-piercing version, SP-6. Those three guns have updated designs after the break-up, and are still in use by spec-ops, spooks and such.

Because of the lower power, the PSS, AL and VSS have effective ranges of only about 25, 300 and 400 meters, respectively.

Besides that trio, the egghead behind the silent ammo and some of its guns designed a SP-4-using revolver in 2001. In 1994, a sniper rifle capable of using some common ammo as well as SP-5 and SP-6 was designed to be a lower-cost alternative to the VSS, the VSK-94. I haven't found any information as how the two of them compare, but they seem to have the same effective range.

These seem to be the only truly silent guns used in anything approaching large scale. It surprises no one that none of these have been sold commercially, and they're extremely rare, especially in the West. Not to mention the specialized ammo is similarly restricted. Speaking of which, the SP denomination has still been used for a while but starting from SP-7, they aren't silent, so I dunno why bother using that naming.

There are recent developments to replace the AL and VSS lines. In 2017, the Kalashnikov Concern (seriously, that's the company's name now, cyberpunk as fuck) showed a still-in-development assault rifle, AM-17, whose AMB-17 variant can use the same ammo as the VSK-94, and thus operate silently. More impressive is an unnammed sniper rifle shown in 2018 based on the MTs-116M, a rather redundant weapon, with a wholly separate design history from the rest mentioned here. This new one will use special, new ammo using the SP technique, but with a preposterous .50 caliber round, with an effective range of 700m. That's some serious shit. It's an investment in Russia's current, considerable advantage in sniper warfare, which will be particularly valuable in the coming decades, where the expected typical battle terrain will be urban centers. In one Russian New Generation Warfare Handbook, the suggested engegamenet when faced with a Russian sniper is: don't. "Any enemy marksman in an established position will create a minimum of two casualties per engagement with little to no repercussions", so the longer you take to leg it, the worse.
R: 20 / I: 1

Puting the Tank in Tanky

The engineers behind the t-34 understood the logistical struggles of maintaining entire battalions of tanks where before they only existed in handfuls. Such an exponential expansion of the deployment of tanks, in tandem with the increasing complexity of tank parts and intricacies of tank design, meant that the modern war effort would require logistical feats never before preformed by any army. Innovations of the t-34 would include everything from sloping armor to increase deflection and grazing rates from enemy shells without substantially increasing production cost to simplifying turret design while not stripping functionality to maintain the maximal performance and accessibility while cutting down on logistical profile. The general design ethos of the USSR was to think smarter so they could fight harder, and longer. One of the innovations was its tank treads - rather than being fully bolted on both sides, only one side was bolted, and a raised metal plate was installed to prevent these bolts from slipping out from their position, decreasing the work needed to replace tank tracks while still maintaining full functionality.

This industrious and pragmatic design philosophy is what drove the war machine of the Red Army, making its constituent components consistent and interchangeable, and to make such work easy to preform. Any man or woman, from Siberian tribespeople to West Russian urbanites, could fight with equal skill and capability under the red banner. Meanwhile every German vehicle or weapon required specially trained crews, specially trained engineers, specially trained gunsmiths, all required to jump through the hoops of different corporate designs and methods to keep their weapons of war functional. Where the Germans had tanks so finnicky that only 50% of spare parts would be accepted in any given German tank, you could disassemble 100 T-34s, mix up the parts, and assemble 100 of them again, and they'd all run equally well. In a war of logistics, this streamlining and accessibility is what allowed for the USSR's tanks to stand against the Germans even with numerical inferiority, because of shorter time out of action for logistical or repair work. As the number of T-34s increased, they started to geometrically outnumber them. then, exponentially outnumber them.

Simplified and streamlined designs with accessibility and consistency will win out against the most "advanced" and "complex" of designs, because war is not waged in a way that the individual statistics of the unit in question matters as much as its capacity for rapid and consistent deployment while proficiently preforming its field duties. All 20 of the T-34s ready for action were worth far more to the Soviets than the 20 tigers which were 4 miles behind the battle lines getting serviced by repair crews to the Germans, no matter how much advanced armor or big guns you slapped onto the tiger. The ubiquity of the ease of use of these machines of war allowed for the easy training and massed deployment of legions of specialized soldiers and vehicle crews for the USSR, while the Nazi's ranks endlessly squabbled to poach what few trained soldiers there were that could field the different vehicles of their service branches.

These are the logistical methods by which the USSR won out against the fascist menace - not by creating an insular and superficially "elite" corps of soldiers, but creating an army by and for the common man, dictated by practicality and ubiquity. The Red Army stood, and its legacy still stands, as that of the Army of the People.
R: 7 / I: 6

Military History

Most people interested in military history tend to be shallow, sensationalist, and/or implicitly or explicitly fascist or otherwise imperialist in nature. We can do better than that, right?

What does applying Marxist histography to war look like beyond Lenin's Imperialism and what can we learn from it?
Which wars /battles do you think deserve more attention or education?
Is there a particular leader or theorist who's impressed you with their military acumen?
What armed conflicts do you anticipate in the 2020s and 2030s?
What do you think is the future of war in an increasingly technologically advanced, post-nuclear world?
Ask questions. Share resources, pictures, or whatever's on your mind. Everything goes so long as it's on topic. +1 social credit for talking about something besides the world wars.