Advertisement
by Dayganistan » Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:37 am
by Crookfur » Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:19 am
by Free-Don » Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:48 am
Purpelia wrote:Free-Don wrote:I'd still suggest a falling block system. If you want a hammer to dock then you can mount a external hammer on the side.
Basically I am unsure if a falling block system would be safe to use with Chassepot style ammo. If you don't seat the round just right the block might rise and nudge the primer that's at the base and being held in by nothing rigid and than you have a round that can't fire. And it can't extract either because it's paper.
by Purpelia » Sat Apr 14, 2018 9:56 am
Free-Don wrote:Purpelia wrote:Basically I am unsure if a falling block system would be safe to use with Chassepot style ammo. If you don't seat the round just right the block might rise and nudge the primer that's at the base and being held in by nothing rigid and than you have a round that can't fire. And it can't extract either because it's paper.
Okay, I was thinking more along the lines of dreyse with the primer in the bullet. You might have extra problems with alignment when it comes to loading as you're pressing the cartridge in. You could rubberized the paper to make is stronger or standardize an extra batch of was around the cartridge but it would still be an issue. I can say you could extract them if you have a heavy hook attached to the lever. It will have to read slightly and the remove the cartridge.
In spite of all these issues the machining and other maintenance costs for making a bolt of similar read locking system might just be too much.
by Manokan Republic » Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:03 pm
The Manticoran Empire wrote:Manokan Republic wrote:Apparently gunshot wounds and bleed-out form shrapnel are all in your head and if you really believe in yourself, the physical effects of injuries will magically go away.
And no-one gets killed or injured in wars, despite like all of the German and Russian military, like 12 out of 13 million for the germans and 24 out of 34 million for the Russians.
Also sources and scientific papers don't matter.
90% of soldiers won't be hit by anything and, of the 10% who are, 90% will have survivable wounds. Armor only protects certain parts of the body and is there more as a placebo than to actually save your life (though it also fulfills that purpose). The most important thing is having people who can provide basic field medical aide, keeping casualties alive long enough to reach field hospitals.
by Manokan Republic » Sat Apr 14, 2018 7:04 pm
Purpelia wrote:Free-Don wrote:
Okay, I was thinking more along the lines of dreyse with the primer in the bullet. You might have extra problems with alignment when it comes to loading as you're pressing the cartridge in. You could rubberized the paper to make is stronger or standardize an extra batch of was around the cartridge but it would still be an issue. I can say you could extract them if you have a heavy hook attached to the lever. It will have to read slightly and the remove the cartridge.
In spite of all these issues the machining and other maintenance costs for making a bolt of similar read locking system might just be too much.
Lever actions with a bolt like the Winchesters don't have a locking system though. Well they do, it's called your arm. And that's basically what I'd do here as well. Just have a simple forward sliding bolt with no locking at all and pray to god that the cavalryman was pumping iron sufficiently. That and use a relatively mild cartridge (relatively).
by Purpelia » Sun Apr 15, 2018 6:24 am
Manokan Republic wrote:Most lever actions do have a locking mechanism, it's just actuated by your hand, and usually released when you pull the trigger. Some firearms like pump action shotguns are also released when you pull the trigger. You don't cling on to the weapon for dear life, it stays lock during firing. I own a lever action, and it uses a locking mechanism. You don't rely on superb grip strength to keep it locked.
by Gallia- » Sun Apr 15, 2018 8:49 am
by Theodosiya » Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:11 am
by Purpelia » Sun Apr 15, 2018 1:21 pm
Theodosiya wrote:I just remembered about my Mech Inf platoon arrangements. Can you guys tell me the best arrangement, while keeping the number of squad members above nine? For capability to absorb casualties
by Gallia- » Sun Apr 15, 2018 3:57 pm
by Austrasien » Sun Apr 15, 2018 5:00 pm
by Gallia- » Sun Apr 15, 2018 5:02 pm
by Tule » Sun Apr 15, 2018 6:38 pm
Gallia- wrote:>quadriad maneuver platoons
the brainyots of the infantry lieutenants will be overwhelmed by such hihg advanced think
you should rename one of them "platoon HQ" so you have a more accurate representation of the battlefield or maybe "lieutenant's escort retinue"
rly the most intuitive think is in thirds: one moving, one shooting, one flanking; two up, one back; etc.
e: so why would someone pick a rokit over a shell (like SMAW vs. Carl Gustav) asking for a friend? rokit is lighter (or rather, has a greater payload fraction)/shell is faster for a given diameter respectively?
by Manokan Republic » Sun Apr 15, 2018 6:49 pm
Purpelia wrote:Manokan Republic wrote:Most lever actions do have a locking mechanism, it's just actuated by your hand, and usually released when you pull the trigger. Some firearms like pump action shotguns are also released when you pull the trigger. You don't cling on to the weapon for dear life, it stays lock during firing. I own a lever action, and it uses a locking mechanism. You don't rely on superb grip strength to keep it locked.
I was under the impression that was the good ones. As in, stuff that wasn't from the 1830's or something. We are talking ultra early lever action here from before there were metallic cartridges.
by Manokan Republic » Sun Apr 15, 2018 6:55 pm
Gallia- wrote:>quadriad maneuver platoons
the brainyots of the infantry lieutenants will be overwhelmed by such hihg advanced think
you should rename one of them "platoon HQ" so you have a more accurate representation of the battlefield or maybe "lieutenant's escort retinue"
rly the most intuitive think is in thirds: one moving, one shooting, one flanking; two up, one back; etc.
e: so why would someone pick a rokit over a shell (like SMAW vs. Carl Gustav) asking for a friend? rokit is lighter (or rather, has a greater payload fraction)/shell is faster for a given diameter respectively?
by Manokan Republic » Sun Apr 15, 2018 7:14 pm
Theodosiya wrote:I just remembered about my Mech Inf platoon arrangements. Can you guys tell me the best arrangement, while keeping the number of squad members above nine? For capability to absorb casualties
by Gallia- » Sun Apr 15, 2018 7:18 pm
Tule wrote:Gallia- wrote:>quadriad maneuver platoons
the brainyots of the infantry lieutenants will be overwhelmed by such hihg advanced think
you should rename one of them "platoon HQ" so you have a more accurate representation of the battlefield or maybe "lieutenant's escort retinue"
rly the most intuitive think is in thirds: one moving, one shooting, one flanking; two up, one back; etc.
e: so why would someone pick a rokit over a shell (like SMAW vs. Carl Gustav) asking for a friend? rokit is lighter (or rather, has a greater payload fraction)/shell is faster for a given diameter respectively?
Speculation:
Spin stabilization isn't great for HEAT.
Manokan Republic wrote:Disposability and weight.
Manokan Republic wrote:Most soldiers can only carry so much ammunition in to combat, and for example a carl gustav is 22 pounds, and loaded is about 28-30 pounds loaded with one round, and that's the weight of two AT-4's which have similar payloads. Rocket launchers are simpler and smaller, and a recoilless rifle is not only usually heavier, but also more technically sophisticated as it needs to be more precisely tuned to release the propellant required to shoot the projectile. Typically they also have a bit bigger backblast too.
Manokan Republic wrote:stuff
by Austrasien » Sun Apr 15, 2018 7:21 pm
Gallia- wrote:>quadriad maneuver platoons
the brainyots of the infantry lieutenants will be overwhelmed by such hihg advanced think
you should rename one of them "platoon HQ" so you have a more accurate representation of the battlefield or maybe "lieutenant's escort retinue"
rly the most intuitive think is in thirds: one moving, one shooting, one flanking; two up, one back; etc.
Gallia- wrote:e: so why would someone pick a rokit over a shell (like SMAW vs. Carl Gustav) asking for a friend? rokit is lighter (or rather, has a greater payload fraction)/shell is faster for a given diameter respectively?
by Manokan Republic » Sun Apr 15, 2018 7:25 pm
Gallia- wrote:Manokan Republic wrote:stuff
AT-4 is a rocket launcher.
SMAW is a rocket launcher.
Carl Gustaf is a recoilless rifle.
Why are you comparing them?
They are completely different mechanisms and Grg m/48 gunners carried 4-6 rounds into combat alongside the RCLR anyway (the loader carried 6-8 rounds for a total of 12 rounds). I'm asking about the difference between the rocket and the shell, I don't actually care about the guns or whatever, and so why you mentioned SMAW and Carl Gustaf in the same breath is perplexing, because you sound like you don't actually understand what I'm asking. Par the course for Manokan though who apparently thinks "being partially correct" is better than being totally wrong.
by Gallia- » Sun Apr 15, 2018 7:28 pm
Austrasien wrote:Lighter overall because there is no reinforced barrel and because a rocket can burn longer at a lower pressure for the same burnout speed.
Manokan Republic wrote:It's better to be a little right than completely wrong,
by Austrasien » Sun Apr 15, 2018 7:32 pm
by Manokan Republic » Sun Apr 15, 2018 7:36 pm
by Manokan Republic » Sun Apr 15, 2018 7:40 pm
Gallia- wrote:Austrasien wrote:Lighter overall because there is no reinforced barrel and because a rocket can burn longer at a lower pressure for the same burnout speed.
ty sir
but then why is rpg29 so fatass? did the ussr just lag that far behind the USA/IMI/PRC in production of fiberglass? or is there sth special about rpg-29 that makes him need to be made of steel since he seems to have a fairly high MV?
by Hayo » Sun Apr 15, 2018 8:12 pm
Gallia- wrote:>quadriad maneuver platoons
the brainyots of the infantry lieutenants will be overwhelmed by such hihg advanced think
you should rename one of them "platoon HQ" so you have a more accurate representation of the battlefield or maybe "lieutenant's escort retinue"
rly the most intuitive think is in thirds: one moving, one shooting, one flanking; two up, one back; etc.
e: so why would someone pick a rokit over a shell (like SMAW vs. Carl Gustav) asking for a friend? rokit is lighter (or rather, has a greater payload fraction)/shell is faster for a given diameter respectively?
Advertisement
Return to Factbooks and National Information
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement