Infantry Discussion Thread 10: Shovel Edition [NO FWORDS]

[Aethal]

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

that just sounds like a solution looking for an unnecessary problem.

[Fordorsia]

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.

What's wrong with that?

[Crookfur]

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

that just sounds like a solution looking for an unnecessary problem.

But it's so gloriously interbellum.

IIRC was also done IRL. I think the justification was to allow the topping up of your expensive mags during Luls without having to stick each one in the gun.

[Sediczja]

IIRC was also done IRL.

I think the mEMe-2 did it, but I forget where I saw it. I want to say Forgotten Weapons, but the site seems to be down so I can't quite check.

E: EM-1, apparently. Dunno about the -2.

[Theodosiya]

Weapons, check. Armor, check. Transports, check. Comms...
Any good communication and/or BMS system that could feature WP and NATO gear?

[Purpelia]

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

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

Basically what C said. The idea here is that ideally you'd just want to ship pre-loaded disposable magazines to the front lines. If you could do that and just not worry about reloading that would be grand. But you can't for budgetary reasons. So this is a budget friendly alternative that still lets your troops reload quickly in a pinch. Plus it's glorious retro cool in a modern tactical way.

As to why not just stick it into the rifle that would be technically superior, somewhat. But my rifles since the 1980's have been bullpups and those don't eject vertically up so you can't stick a stripper clip in them.

[Aethal]

> Disposable

> Magazine

Pick one

[Purpelia]

> Disposable

> Magazine

Pick one

That's what my budget consultant said as well.

[Puzikas]

.280 is garbage

.276 Pedersen best round.

I love that we've come full circle
Thankfully

You'll never change my mind.

I can change how alive you are tho
.276 a shit
.280 a shit
All meme calibers a shit
5.56, 5.45, 7.62x51 and 7.62x54R a best

I love that we've come full circle
Thankfully

I NEVER liked .280.

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

This is why your my favorite fruiting body

We multiracial now!

Mistakes were made

Are the projectors in "optional for gunner" disposable launchers, or individual packed munitions w/attached CLUs?

soonpunk

This is the greatest contribution to this threads in months

[Gallia-]

TBF for a while I thought 6.8mm SPC was cool. Before that I was pro 7.62x45mm.

I still think SPC is cool.

It's like a fat 5.56mm.

But if I were doing it again I'd have Galla use M16s in 6.5x45mm i.e. .265-223, i.e. 6.5mm Swedish bullets in a necked up 5.56mm case because it means you only need one bullet instead of two bullets get owned.

[Fordorsia]

Isn't there that ballistics calculator graph thing that compares bullet drop and accuracy and shit with other real and fictional cartridges? I can't remember it. Anyone want to do that for everyone here's cartridges? We can make fun of or ban the worst performer.

[Aethal]

This is the greatest contribution to this threads in months

SoonpunkTM is here, it's gearqueer & it's not shaking in fear at the notion of subsequent budget cuts.

[Laritaia]

tbh all rounds should be 6.25mm just with different case sizes

This is actually a terrible idea

[Gallia-]

tbh all rounds should be 6.25mm just with different case sizes

This is actually a terrible idea

*7.62mm.

[Puzikas]

TBF for a while I thought 6.8mm SPC was cool. Before that I was pro 7.62x45mm.

I still think SPC is cool.

It's like a fat 5.56mm.

But if I were doing it again I'd have Galla use M16s in 6.5x45mm i.e. .265-223, i.e. 6.5mm Swedish bullets in a necked up 5.56mm case because it means you only need one bullet instead of two bullets get owned.

>6.8 Special Needs
Galla whyyyy
6 5 grundle is better :<

Also Sweden definitely did that in tests
It's what my G3s in 197X-198X shot, a 6 gram 6.5x55mm projectile at like 3200ft/s

[Gallia-]

grundle is a dum boolit for hollow points

6.8 Sperglord is a lot cuddlier and tolerates-enjoys pillow talk about mbt-70s and rail gauges

[The Akasha Colony]

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.

My first choice was LMG11 but muh caseless and all that. A backpack ammo feed seemed rather superfluous and drawing the belt feed would have been a pain.

Mistakes were made

Are the projectors in "optional for gunner" disposable launchers, or individual packed munitions w/attached CLUs?

The first one is disposable (Spike-SR) and the second one is a CLU + missile canister unit. The missile canister should be canted but I'm to lazy to redraw it at an angle because it'll get blurred if I rotate it. All of the vehicles in the platoon carry a CLU + a few canisters.

[Aethal]

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.

My first choice was LMG11 but muh caseless and all that. A backpack ammo feed seemed rather superfluous and drawing the belt feed would have been a pain.

Roger brochacho; I understand your reasoning, but you lose some coolduduebro-milrealspergster points for it.

[Dostanuot Loj]

Humm...

Sumer jumps onto the GPC bandwagon.
Jumps off later for mounted weapons and crew served.

2.4x18sh round.

Sumerian measurments.
AKA 6.5x48mm Grasslands to plebs.

y/y?

Assault rifle barrel 1 kush (cubit) long.

Suck it 3-line rifle.

[Padnak]

I think I've asked this before in the days of yonder, but is simply issuing soldiers with flack jackets to protect them from shrapnel sufficient? This question is for both Padnak and a significantly more developed puppet; given that shrapnel is responsible for the bulk of battlefield deaths and flack jackets are considerable cheaper than bullet proof vests to produce, generally speaking anyways, would they worth issuing or is it better to, if troops are going to be incombered with protective equipment anyways, to make the jump up to proper bullet proof stuff?

Obviously keeping soldiers alive is a good thing, but for a military that has to outfit a very large number of troops or which lacks allot of money are flack jackets worth pursuing?

[Gallia-]

A shrapnel protective vest probably costs $1,000 or so. Plates will be another $2-300. Add in profit margins for another $100-200, maybe. So a total cost difference of maybe $1,100-$1,200 vs. $1,400-$1,500. The difference in cost is very slight. Certainly ~$300 per man is enough to ensure that he isn't killed instantly by being shot in the back or something. It wouldn't take too many prevented deaths to make that profitable. Soldiers cost a few hundred thousand to make. You could equip a battalion of dudes with bullet resistant vests with each corpse. Bullet resistant plates will probably stop more than a couple of deaths.

The only reason you wouldn't use bullet resistant vests is production bottleneck. This was a thing in the dark ages aka the 1990s when the US Army was using PASGT for its mechanized troops (you have a carrier to protect you!) and crash ordered Ranger Body Armor and Interceptor to fill the gap for contingency stockpiles for the XVIII Airborne Corps. The same thing happened with M141 Bunker Defeat Munition/SMAW-D, too, but M141 never got picked up again.

I parody it with Galla which seemingly has a perpetual production bottleneck because it's still using RBAs, Combat Vehicle Crewman Vests, and PASGTs, while it has IOTVs. The real reason is that I like how RBA and PASGT look over IOTV fatness.

[Schwere Panzer Abteilung 502]

How would the M1955 flak jacket fare in 1972? It seems better body armor wouldn't be available for a while but something is better than nothing.

[DnalweN acilbupeR]

REPOST

So this would imply physically swapping something out for something else or smth like that or simply pushing a button or pulling a level or something like that on the rifle?

I'm talking about actually having to change a major components of the rifle, like the bolt, barrel, lower/upper receiver.

I don't want to be rude but are you not contradicting yourself here?

Only recently as there been strides in allowing the same rifle, with the same magazine, to use cartridges with significantly different COALs without the change of major systems.

Well for one it's supposed to eliminate rimlock

I know what it is
You know semiautomaticlly rifles have existed and have been reliable with rimmed cartridges, right? It's not like Saiga or Vepr magazines are unreliable, nor SVT or SVD rifles and magazines. There's been ways to remove rimlock for a long time. The biggest issue with rimmed cartridges in magazines is the taper imparted as a result of the rim.

Yes I know about those and e.g. 7.52 rimmed and whatnot but you said that it's like a normal magazine and I pointed out why it's not. Also I do not understand the taper bit.

and then it's supposed to somehow reliably feed differing OAL cartridges by physically feeding the cartridges in the same position I think

Two very different things to do this with a shotgun and a rifle.

Like?

It's not different from anything else really.

Why is there a patent for it then? Obviously with a single stack you can simply both remove rimlock and make it feed from the same position with rim channels/groves like the top down illustration shows (and which I noted) but I had the impression the innovative bit was about making it a double stack/double stack that tapers to single. Also I wasn't sure if the "being able to correctly feed differing COALs" was about feeding from the same position or if it was something else.

Why would it not headspace?

Difference in shape. This is why modern rifles in modern bottle necked cartridges don't like different length cartridges.

Again, I don't quite follow. Don't mistake me for being combative though, I really just want to learn. If you have a barrel that has a chamber which is designed to fit a certain cartridge, if it is bottlenecked it will probably be made to headspace on the shoulder, if it's straightwalled it will probably be made to headspace on the case mouth or possibly the rim or both for a rimmed straightwall cartridge. In any case the headspacing only has to do with the case itself (whether on the shoulder or on the case mouth) so with the same case you should theoretically have identical headspacing even with different length bullets because the bullet length does not impact on the size or shape of the chamber, right? You could theoretically for the sake of the argument have a bullet that runs the entire length of the barrel or is even longer and it would still headspace the same if the case remains the same shape and size, no? In my mind the chamber stops where the case stops and after that you enter the "barrel proper", or am I wrong?

[Dostanuot Loj]

How would the M1955 flak jacket fare in 1972? It seems better body armor wouldn't be available for a while but something is better than nothing.

Well, it was still widely issued in 1972, so that should say. As good as can be expected in 1972 would probably be best way to describe it.

[Gallia-]

How would the M1955 flak jacket fare in 1972? It seems better body armor wouldn't be available for a while but something is better than nothing.

About as good as it did in 1955.

It was worse than its Vietnam replacement though. Cost more and probably weaker stitching. M1969 is the epitome of ballistic nylon.