Infantry Discussion Thread, Mk. 8 Mod. 0 [No Kaiju]

[Fordorsia]

A single Abrams is dropped into WWI. Can WWI kill it.

[Gallia-]

yes easily

[Fordorsia]

yes easily

Yeah but it can shoot on the move and futr tech and other shit that won't help it

[Gallia-]

yes easily

Yeah but it can shoot on the move and futr tech and other shit that won't help it

not useful really

[Eclixia]

A single Abrams is dropped into WWI. Can WWI kill it.

There was so much artillery guns and mortar cannons in World War 1 that even if the accuracy of these support guns is World War 1 level (a.k.a. trash) they would eventually hit it enough times to kill it. That and hundreds of grenades and jam tins packed with explosives.

[Fordorsia]

A single Abrams is dropped into WWI. Can WWI kill it.

There was so much artillery guns and mortar cannons in World War 1 that even if the accuracy of these support guns is World War 1 level (a.k.a. trash) they would eventually hit it enough times to kill it. That and hundreds of grenades and jam tins packed with explosives.

The accuracy of artillery was far from bad.

[Eclixia]

There was so much artillery guns and mortar cannons in World War 1 that even if the accuracy of these support guns is World War 1 level (a.k.a. trash) they would eventually hit it enough times to kill it. That and hundreds of grenades and jam tins packed with explosives.

The accuracy of artillery was far from bad.

The Abrams can travel at around 48km/h off-road. Surely if the tank crew changed directions frequently the artillery would have no idea where to aim for a direct hit.

[New Nirvash]

Are there any cases of a force rallying after losing a push of pike and winning the battle?

[Gallia-]

The accuracy of artillery was far from bad.

The Abrams can travel at around 48km/h off-road. Surely if the tank crew changed directions frequently the artillery would have no idea where to aim for a direct hit.

the combined refining capabilities of the entente would be insufficient to fuel such a monstrous appetite/drink addiction

[Yukonastan]

How horrid.

Just tell me what it would do to a people

I imagine it would turn said people into a pile of chunks and a red spot, or something similarly destructive.

[Kassaran]

The accuracy of artillery was far from bad.

The Abrams can travel at around 48km/h off-road. Surely if the tank crew changed directions frequently the artillery would have no idea where to aim for a direct hit.

In the end, such an argument belongs in the MBT's and Vehicles of your nation thread... oh wait.

[Kazarogkai]

A single Abrams is dropped into WWI. Can WWI kill it.

Sure it may take a bit but eventually it will run out of gas and bullets and then it will be vulnerable. That or they could simply just keep shooting at it with wave after wave of artillery which I am pretty sure it won't survive.

[Fordorsia]

Hey now

Actually how thick should the barrel wall be? Right now it's 6.2mm at the chamber and 4.3 at the muzzle. The fatness of the barrel really bothers me, even though it's a 25mm bullet.

pls

[Dostanuot Loj]

I'll just say this. I can add more later (WW1 my favorite war).

Bloody Verdun was the German campaign to "bleed the french white".

There's not a family in France from the time period who's blood did not soak that ground.

Why is it your favorite? I'd think WWII is what really defined what a big war would really be like to this day. (of course, in the interwar period, everybody thought the next war would be like WWI)

You're not the first person to be surprised to learn I have more interest in WW1 then WW2, especially when people consider my life-long obsession with tanks.
Really, everything today comes from or because of WW1. It is the root of our modern world.

Unfortunately, the common idea of WW1 is often wrong, sometimes grossly so. There was more muddy-trench into the jaws of machine guns and artillery for no gain in WW2 then in WW1, to be honest. Very little of WW1, even in the West, took place in muddy pits. Trenches dominated the strategic, and in some places everything, but not completely. And most attacks at any point in the war were successful.

Yep, I know, your mind just got blown.

The biggest problem the entente faced when trying to break German lines was their own artillery. The tank was invented to rectify this, to bring artillery forward so it can support the infantry. The problem was you needed so many guns to suppress the enemy to attack and take a trench, and it worked pretty often. But artillery could only be so close to the front lines, and once the infantry moved too far to be effectively covered by their friendly artillery they could go no further. This was hampered by two things.

1: Effective artillery range, on average, in this period was pretty short. If you've made it into the enemy trench network, you're probably close to the limit of friendly artillery, and in a position where the enemy artillery can shell you while being outside the range of your artillery. You have no real artillery cover at this point.
2: Once you stop firing to move forward, you remove guns from the firefight. The enemy doesn't remove guns, and therefore he wins the firefight by sheer mass of fire.

WW1 needed the tank to exist to be won in any way that was not a stalemate. The French and British developed the tank separately for the same reason, to bring guns forward to provide close fires to the infantry so you could move the heavy guns forward to keep your steel umbrella working. WW1 is simply fascinating, there is so much to it, so many sides and details. It's one of the most complex events in human history.

[Azurg]

I think so. Sabots are usually closer to 1mm thick.

I'm rather curious. Why wouldn't a half-millimeter polymer jacket work?

[Dostanuot Loj]

I'm caught in a pickle.

I can't decide between HK33, FAMAS, and Type 97-1.

HK33

And this is where my pickle comes from.

Option 1: HK33 + HK79 + HK13 + HK23 = All bases covered.

For various reasons I am preferential to squad automatics being magazine fed automatic rifles, not belt feds, which means HK13 has an advantage.

But I love FAMAS, so Option 2: FAMAS + Ultimax + ??? = FAMAS <3 but needs to flesh it out.
That's a lot of work.

I also don't mind the Type 97. Type 95 has too much magazine curve for a non-TKB-408 bullpup for me. So Option 3: QBZ97 + QBB97 + QBU-88 + ??? = Most bases covered.

Rule of cool and awesomeness keeps dragging me back to FAMAS, also <3.
Then practicality comes in and I think about the Type 97.
Then practicality takes over and I'm stuck with HK.

It's a dilly of a pickle.

[New Nirvash]

Kind of shocked you're even considering chinashit. You might as well just toss your billions of dollars in the can and empty your landfills out into your rivers.


Because that's basically what you'd be doing.

[Roski]

yes easily

Yeah but it can shoot on the move and futr tech and other shit that won't help it

biplanes were a betch

[Aqizithiuda]

I think so. Sabots are usually closer to 1mm thick.

I'm rather curious. Why wouldn't a half-millimeter polymer jacket work?

At a guess, I'd say that the stress would be too great.

/not a materials engineer

#wingingit

[EsToVnIa]

HK33

And this is where my pickle comes from.

Option 1: HK33 + HK79 + HK13 + HK23 = All bases covered.

For various reasons I am preferential to squad automatics being magazine fed automatic rifles, not belt feds, which means HK13 has an advantage.

But I love FAMAS, so Option 2: FAMAS + Ultimax + ??? = FAMAS <3 but needs to flesh it out.
That's a lot of work.

I also don't mind the Type 97. Type 95 has too much magazine curve for a non-TKB-408 bullpup for me. So Option 3: QBZ97 + QBB97 + QBU-88 + ??? = Most bases covered.

Rule of cool and awesomeness keeps dragging me back to FAMAS, also <3.
Then practicality comes in and I think about the Type 97.
Then practicality takes over and I'm stuck with HK.

It's a dilly of a pickle.

FAMAS + MG34 + SAFN + M203 ???

of course in lieu of france ditching famas i decided to adopt AK-74Ms in like 2002 as a replacement >.>

[Puzikas]

You're not the first person to be surprised to learn I have more interest in WW1 then WW2, especially when people consider my life-long obsession with tanks.

Tbh I find a lot of WWI and the interbellum era to be more interesting.

I've been working my ass off today/yesterday so I'll get around to that stupid post I promised you guys tomorrow evening on Machine Guns and their employment.

[Aqizithiuda]

Here's some 14th century wisdom on war, written by Geoffroi de Charny:

"In this profession one has to endure heat, hunger and hard work, to sleep little and often to keep watch. And to be exhausted and to sleep uncomfortably on the ground only to be abruptly awakened. And you will be powerless to change the situation. You will often be afraid when you see your enemies coming towards you with lowered lances to run you through and with drawn swords to cut you down. Bolts and arrows come at you and you do not know how best to protect yourself. You see people killing each other, fleeing, dying and being taken prisoner and you see the bodies of your dead friends lying before you. But your horse is not dead, and by its vigorous speed you can escape in dishonour. But if you stay, you will win eternal honour. Is he not a great martyr, who puts himself to such work?"

Not much changes.

[Azurg]

At a guess, I'd say that the stress would be too great.

/not a materials engineer

#wingingit

That can very well be. Still going for it though. Largely failed 80s weapons programs are full of all sorts of wacky ideas, after all.

It occurs to me that you could probably make a fairly formidable ball round by replacing the copper 'core' with one of lead.

[Purpelia]

You're not the first person to be surprised to learn I have more interest in WW1 then WW2, especially when people consider my life-long obsession with tanks.

Wow. We have something in common.

[Puzikas]

And just like that I changed my mind.