Infantry Discussion Thread 10: Shovel Edition [NO FWORDS]

by **Democratic Gupta** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:41 am

Do you think that the AK-47/AKM still could serve in armies of several nations by 2027?

by **Gallia-** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:41 am

Puzikas wrote:I love that we've come full circle
Thankfully

I NEVER liked .280.

Though I did think EM-2 was kind of cute.

by **Spirit of Hope** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:51 am

Democratic Gupta wrote:Do you think that the AK-47/AKM still could serve in armies of several nations by 2027?

They almost certainly will still be in service with some nations in 2027. There are better rifles out there but the AKM will still be serviceable.

by **Democratic Gupta** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:58 am

Also, how effective is the PARM 1 mine?

by **Laritaia** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:02 am

Democratic Gupta wrote:Also, how effective is the PARM 1 mine?

Against what?

by **Democratic Gupta** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:03 am

Laritaia wrote:
Democratic Gupta wrote:Also, how effective is the PARM 1 mine?

Against what?

Let's say against modern MRAPs

by **Laritaia** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:13 am

Democratic Gupta wrote:
Laritaia wrote:
Against what?

Let's say against modern MRAPs

in that case sufficiently effective

by **Democratic Gupta** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:19 am

Laritaia wrote:
Democratic Gupta wrote:Let's say against modern MRAPs

in that case sufficiently effective

Modern MBTs?

by **Laritaia** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:29 am

Democratic Gupta wrote:
Laritaia wrote:
in that case sufficiently effective

Modern MBTs?

no

by **Democratic Gupta** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:32 am

Laritaia wrote:
Democratic Gupta wrote:Modern MBTs?

no

demnit

by **Fordorsia** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:54 am

Bury artillery shells if you want to destroy MBTs

by **EsToVnIa** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 11:34 am

Puzikas wrote:I love that we've come full circle
Thankfully

.280 British was the best cartridge ever devised

if the British had just stood up for themselves, NATO would be using .280 British instead of 7.62 NATO!!!!!!!!

by **Allanea** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 11:35 am

You don't need to destroy MBTs with landmines.

by **Gallia-** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 11:36 am

EsToVnIa wrote:
Puzikas wrote:I love that we've come full circle
Thankfully

.280 British was the best cartridge ever devised

if the British had just stood up for themselves, NATO would be using .280 British instead of 7.62 NATO!!!!!!!!

And we'd all suffer for it.

Allanea wrote:You don't need to destroy MBTs with landmines.

PARM 1/2 are more like remote Pzf 3s than "mines". They're pre-sighted (or in PARM 2's case, autonomous) rocket launchers on tripods that fire hollow charge rounds equivalent to a MILAN to the side of a AFV. Not like the dumb American "off route mines" that just are EFP bomblets that might defeat a truck.

They're more than adequate for defeating armour they are contemporary to. Which means they're probably inadequate for ultra-modern armour, but how many tanks these days can make the claim of being ultra-modern? Hardly a large number.

by **Laritaia** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 11:41 am

EsToVnIa wrote:
Puzikas wrote:I love that we've come full circle
Thankfully

.280 British was the best cartridge ever devised

if the British had just stood up for themselves, NATO would be using .280 British instead of 7.62 NATO!!!!!!!!

the problem with .280 was that it was a inadequate middle ground, not really good enough to properly fulfill either of the roles required of it.

so yes we may have been using it instead of 7.62mm NATO, but it would push back the development of SCHV rounds by decades.

by **Gallia-** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 11:44 am

NATO would need to start from scratch if it entered into a fight like Afghanistan where the .280 would be inadequate.

Or in the jungle, where .280 would also be inadequate for MARCHING FIRE.

.300 Norma Mag LMG!? .17 Remington Fireball assault rifles?!

Novus Cordus irl.

by **EsToVnIa** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 2:01 pm

not 100% sure how i feel about MKb 42 carbine other than it looks sorta cool?

by **Kazarogkai** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 2:19 pm

EsToVnIa wrote:(Image)

not 100% sure how i feel about MKb 42 carbine other than it looks sorta cool?

They both look pretty nice honestly. You're a good drawer, good work.

by **Fordorsia** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 6:28 pm

Hey look at this guy giving compliments in IDT. What a loser.

by **Kazarogkai** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:28 pm

Fordorsia wrote:Hey look at this guy giving compliments in IDT. What a loser.

You're just mad because your a bitch who takes it in the ass. Get bent.

by **Gallia-** » Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:29 pm

EsToVnIa wrote:(Image)

not 100% sure how i feel about MKb 42 carbine other than it looks sorta cool?

>cant load from stripper clips

by **The Akasha Colony** » Sun Feb 26, 2017 1:40 am

We multiracial now!

Based on feedback, created the two-man mortar team and added a platoon sniper. Will probably shorten his rifle. Ammo carrier for the mortar team now has a packboard too. Ninth man has been removed and will be platoon radioman.

Also slowly introducing variations per soldier.

by **Aethal** » Sun Feb 26, 2017 5:43 am

The Akasha Colony wrote:
We multiracial now!

Based on feedback, created the two-man mortar team and added a platoon sniper. Will probably shorten his rifle. Ammo carrier for the mortar team now has a packboard too. Ninth man has been removed and will be platoon radioman.

Also slowly introducing variations per soldier.

Huh, I never noticed your MG is an LSAT looking weapons platform, though I am surprised you haven't gone for a high-speed low-drag "Ironman" style ammo backpack or belt pouch for your machine gunner to merely fit your soonpunkTM looking unit.

by **Purpelia** » Sun Feb 26, 2017 6:09 am

Stripper clip guides built into the magazine? Y/N?

by **Laritaia** » Sun Feb 26, 2017 6:19 am

Purpelia wrote:Stripper clip guides built into the magazine? Y/N?

why? it just needlessly makes teh magazine more complicated and more expensive

Infantry Discussion Thread 10: Shovel Edition [NO FWORDS]

Who is online