I knew they came up with this while drinking. Just look at all those bottles in the background.
Come on, their Russian, they were born drunk!Stingray24 wrote:
I knew they came up with this while drinking. Just look at all those bottles in the background.
the very reason why the soviets lost the cold war. quantity over quality.
cluster bombs would be more effective
cluster bombs would be more effective
Last edited by God Save the Queen (2008-10-21 15:17:32)
Yeah I really don't see how those little teeny weeny pistol rounds that the PPSH fired would do any sort of damage at the sort of ranges that airtcraft tend to ingage in. They're, literally, using a pistol as some sort of aircraft cannon.
And as for metal storm, that's just some crazy australian doo hicky. Besides, fair enough, the bullets are stored in the barrel. But won't that mean the first bullet will behave totally different from the last (which is at the back of the barrel)
Think, guise, think
And as for metal storm, that's just some crazy australian doo hicky. Besides, fair enough, the bullets are stored in the barrel. But won't that mean the first bullet will behave totally different from the last (which is at the back of the barrel)
Think, guise, think
It's the same basic theory as rail guns afaik.Mek-Stizzle wrote:
Yeah I really don't see how those little teeny weeny pistol rounds that the PPSH fired would do any sort of damage at the sort of ranges that airtcraft tend to ingage in. They're, literally, using a pistol as some sort of aircraft cannon.
And as for metal storm, that's just some crazy australian doo hicky. Besides, fair enough, the bullets are stored in the barrel. But won't that mean the first bullet will behave totally different from the last (which is at the back of the barrel)
Think, guise, think
Besides, if MetalStorm is so awsm...... Why aren't we using it?
Whoa... Can't believe these forums are still kicking.
Exchange ppshs with .50 cal M2sMek-Stizzle wrote:
Yeah I really don't see how those little teeny weeny pistol rounds that the PPSH fired would do any sort of damage at the sort of ranges that airtcraft tend to ingage in. They're, literally, using a pistol as some sort of aircraft cannon.
And as for metal storm, that's just some crazy australian doo hicky. Besides, fair enough, the bullets are stored in the barrel. But won't that mean the first bullet will behave totally different from the last (which is at the back of the barrel)
Think, guise, think
Mounted on B52s, holy motherfucking shit bitch.Sydney wrote:
Exchange ppshs with .50 cal M2sMek-Stizzle wrote:
Yeah I really don't see how those little teeny weeny pistol rounds that the PPSH fired would do any sort of damage at the sort of ranges that airtcraft tend to ingage in. They're, literally, using a pistol as some sort of aircraft cannon.
And as for metal storm, that's just some crazy australian doo hicky. Besides, fair enough, the bullets are stored in the barrel. But won't that mean the first bullet will behave totally different from the last (which is at the back of the barrel)
Think, guise, think
Who needs fucking nukes?seymorebutts443 wrote:
Mounted on B52s, holy motherfucking shit bitch.Sydney wrote:
Exchange ppshs with .50 cal M2sMek-Stizzle wrote:
Yeah I really don't see how those little teeny weeny pistol rounds that the PPSH fired would do any sort of damage at the sort of ranges that airtcraft tend to ingage in. They're, literally, using a pistol as some sort of aircraft cannon.
And as for metal storm, that's just some crazy australian doo hicky. Besides, fair enough, the bullets are stored in the barrel. But won't that mean the first bullet will behave totally different from the last (which is at the back of the barrel)
Think, guise, think
the PPSH would be a bitch to relaod and take a long time + it only shoots 9x18xx pistol bullets(ithink)
7.62x25mm TokarevGR34 wrote:
the PPSH would be a bitch to relaod and take a long time + it only shoots 9x18xx pistol bullets(ithink)
I have a better solution.
A bomb.
A bomb.
@ the nubs who don't know about metal storm, it's a essentially a tube with bullets in it that fire themselves. For this very reason the reliability is very high (because as Parker said, anything with moving parts will fail eventually...so reduce the moving parts to 1 and you're good to go) but there are other downsides. The two biggest being weight and capacity. The capacity is only as many bullets as the barrel can hold, and even then the ones towards the end are going to be relatively inaccurate. Reloading is basically replacing the barrel, and when you have an array of them as is shown in the videos then you have quite the job on your hands.
Biggest uses that it is being looked into for are security and close anti-air defense I believe.
Biggest uses that it is being looked into for are security and close anti-air defense I believe.
yes was about to correct it, I Wikipedia'd it. I think the Russians have a thing for 7.62mm bulletsParker wrote:
7.62x25mm TokarevGR34 wrote:
the PPSH would be a bitch to relaod and take a long time + it only shoots 9x18xx pistol bullets(ithink)
As an anti infantry weapon, employed vs. columns of troops on the move, this weapon has the potential to be devastating. I dont see more than 1 or 2 passes being available, given the ammo/reload constraints. If these weapons were loaded with a slap round, they would also be be more than capable of tearing up trucks and towed guns.
Think about the germans march back from moscow, or stalingrad...this weapon could have been evil tbh.
Still, its a crazy russian concept...strange folks they be hehe.
Think about the germans march back from moscow, or stalingrad...this weapon could have been evil tbh.
Still, its a crazy russian concept...strange folks they be hehe.
and sadly, most are inferior rounds.GR34 wrote:
yes was about to correct it, I Wikipedia'd it. I think the Russians have a thing for 7.62mm bulletsParker wrote:
7.62x25mm TokarevGR34 wrote:
the PPSH would be a bitch to relaod and take a long time + it only shoots 9x18xx pistol bullets(ithink)
Meh. There used to be a 75mm cannon in the front of the B24... Drinking can be a amazing thing.
B-25G, Germans did the same with the JU-88P mounted a Pak40 cannon, Brits did the same with a Mosquito FB Mk XVIII, mounted a 6 pounder with an auto loader. They werent too effective though, the americans sometimes stripped the B-25 of its 75mm gun in place of 2 more M2s, bringing 10 .50 cals to bear on a target.Commie Killer wrote:
Meh. There used to be a 75mm cannon in the front of the B24... Drinking can be a amazing thing.
Last edited by seymorebutts443 (2008-10-21 17:09:21)
88 .50 cals? That's a lot of weight...Sydney wrote:
Who needs fucking nukes?seymorebutts443 wrote:
Mounted on B52s, holy motherfucking shit bitch.Sydney wrote:
Exchange ppshs with .50 cal M2s
meh, according to my math a B-52 can carry roughly 833 M2s, but for sake of argument the B52 is more than capable of carrying 84 M2s mounted for strafing runs, epic mother fucking win right there.firebolt5 wrote:
88 .50 cals? That's a lot of weight...Sydney wrote:
Who needs fucking nukes?seymorebutts443 wrote:
Mounted on B52s, holy motherfucking shit bitch.
bombs that hit the ground and explode up are more effective than metal raining downward.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
@ the nubs who don't know about metal storm, it's a essentially a tube with bullets in it that fire themselves. For this very reason the reliability is very high (because as Parker said, anything with moving parts will fail eventually...so reduce the moving parts to 1 and you're good to go) but there are other downsides. The two biggest being weight and capacity. The capacity is only as many bullets as the barrel can hold, and even then the ones towards the end are going to be relatively inaccurate. Reloading is basically replacing the barrel, and when you have an array of them as is shown in the videos then you have quite the job on your hands.
Biggest uses that it is being looked into for are security and close anti-air defense I believe.
Last edited by God Save the Queen (2008-10-21 18:20:40)
I'm not talking about the OP, just what the metal storm is in general since there seemed to be some ignorance on the issue.God Save the Queen wrote:
bombs that hit the ground and explode up are more effective than metal raining downward.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
@ the nubs who don't know about metal storm, it's a essentially a tube with bullets in it that fire themselves. For this very reason the reliability is very high (because as Parker said, anything with moving parts will fail eventually...so reduce the moving parts to 1 and you're good to go) but there are other downsides. The two biggest being weight and capacity. The capacity is only as many bullets as the barrel can hold, and even then the ones towards the end are going to be relatively inaccurate. Reloading is basically replacing the barrel, and when you have an array of them as is shown in the videos then you have quite the job on your hands.
Biggest uses that it is being looked into for are security and close anti-air defense I believe.
dropping mines is a really nasty and probably the best way to deny an enemy terrain.
Wont mines explode when hitting the ground? Or we are talking about like magnetic mine, if Anti personal mine can be magnetic.God Save the Queen wrote:
dropping mines is a really nasty and probably the best way to deny an enemy terrain.
Yeh, and deny innocent people the terrain years later.God Save the Queen wrote:
dropping mines is a really nasty and probably the best way to deny an enemy terrain.
a la 4 engineers in the back of the blackhawkGod Save the Queen wrote:
dropping mines is a really nasty and probably the best way to deny an enemy terrain.
good times, good times
