Infantry Discussion Thread part 11: Gallas Razor edition.

[Manokan Republic]

Two questions. First, why are you so fascinated with marital and reproductive norms and their impacts on military effectiveness? Second, why would you assume that military effectiveness depends upon a hardy masculinity.

Demography is literal life and death of societies/population groups and because the latter is more or less true. Effective militaries are generally masculine organizations. Ineffective ones are feminine organizations.

Islam isn't exactly a winner in demography though (neither is the West, but c'est la vie) and despite being masculine it's only really effective at waging underground campaigns that involve a large amount of oblique attacks through political channels and craft produced ordnance, where Arab armies are highly effective at defeating Westerners consistently and decisively. The US Army somehow doesn't fear the Asiatic infantryman despite being consistently having its ass handed to it on a silver platter by everyone from Iraqis to Afghans to Vietnamese to Chinese tho.

Polyandry is a loser's strategy though. The only societies which were polyandrous were conquered by their neighbors (Nepal, Tibet, Inuit groups, a few Polynesian societies) or collapsed internally with no outside pressures. They have never really been effective at defeating neighboring empires, and this goes back to ancient pre-history.

Historically the most effective and socially capable (in terms of GDP growth, wealth creation, conquest of neighbors, protection of borders, scientific invention, birth rates, etc. etc.) societies have been monogamous, although monogamy is somewhat rare among societies absolutely it is dominant in terms of absolute population. Most people were sired by parents in monogamous relationships because monogamous societies from ancient China to medieval Europe to modern America have demolished their competitors for the most part.

Do polyandrous societies produce bad infantrymen?

>Tibet
>Eskimos
>Untouchables

Maybe.

Or maybe polyandrous societies are just weak men.

Well the U.S. absolutely dominated them militarily. There was like a 1 to 30 kill ratio in both conflicts, the only issue being we withdrew from Vietnam, and the Viet Cong didn't live up to their end of the peace agreement, which is to be expected, but under Carter he apparently equated ending the war to pulling out troops which, didn't really work when you consider the over 2.6 million killed, in the killing fields.

The reality as well is that they both had tremendous outside support, the Taliban with Pakistan and the Vietnam with Russia and China. That being said, we pretty much have squashed the Taliban so far so, unless we pull out it should be fine.

[Lamoni]

Do war brides love their husbands more than regular military wives on average?

*** Warning for Trolling ***

You have been told repeatedly NOT to talk about these types of subject.

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Do war brides love their husbands more than regular military wives on average?

*** Warning for Trolling ***

You have been told repeatedly NOT to talk about these types of subject.

I’m sorry I didn’t know what “these types of subjects” means.

[Lamoni]

*** Warning for Trolling ***

You have been told repeatedly NOT to talk about these types of subject.

I’m sorry I didn’t know what “these types of subjects” means.

You have been sent a GHR with that information. Now stop derailing the thread, before you get a warning for that, as well.

[Cisairse]

do dogs make better infantrymen than people

[Ormata]

do dogs make better infantrymen than people

I hear opposable thumbs are great for things. And intelligible speech. I suppose you can work around the whole "can't move and shoot" thing but seems to be a handicap.

In other news, here's a question for the more realistically minded. What will a tank look and act like fifty years from now, if it still exists?

[Gallia-]

do dogs make better infantrymen than people

I hear opposable thumbs are great for things. And intelligible speech. I suppose you can work around the whole "can't move and shoot" thing but seems to be a handicap.

In other news, here's a question for the more realistically minded. What will a tank look and act like fifty years from now, if it still exists?

[Ormata]

I hear opposable thumbs are great for things. And intelligible speech. I suppose you can work around the whole "can't move and shoot" thing but seems to be a handicap.

In other news, here's a question for the more realistically minded. What will a tank look and act like fifty years from now, if it still exists?

https://sites.breakingmedia.com/uploads/sites/3/2018/02/M1-Abrams-with-Trophy-APS-9ed777416ebc9fe34bed41b570f3b181.jpg

I hate how likely that is.

[Coltarin]

Got bored, made a police carbine.

[Central Prestonia]

Got bored, made a police carbine.
(Image)

Looks nice, aside from the Police stamp on it what makes it specifically a "police carbine" though, i.e. what features does it have that a civilian version wouldn't and what features does it lack that a mil issue one would have?

[Coltarin]

Got bored, made a police carbine.
(Image)

Looks nice, aside from the Police stamp on it what makes it specifically a "police carbine" though, i.e. what features does it have that a civilian version wouldn't and what features does it lack that a mil issue one would have?

Firstly it's blocked off to semi auto only, secondly it has an integrated optic as opposed to a standard RIS, finally it has a foregrip molded into the handguard instead of more RIS.

[Sevvania]

Barrel support is always aesthetic.

[Kazarogkai]

Going back to PT for a moment just wanted to present an interesting piece from 17th century India:

A repeating 4 shot matchlock musket

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNp7UkFJaVQ

Over the course of my readings and studies Ive seen a number of various different "repeating" designs of this nature from before the 19th century. Most were cool little novelty/noble pieces which while interesting never seemed all that practical to be honest and hence understandable why they never saw widespread adoption. Nonetheless this honestly seems probably the most practical design. Being a matchlock design that limits it's utility but nonetheless it is interesting and perchance could have some potential. Assuming scaling it up was possible the system in question could maybe see use in some type of Jingal/Abus gun esque capacity as a sort of relatively easily transported early infantry support gun of sorts mounted on a simple tripod. It's more expensive than a simple musket/Arquebus but on the otherhand it is cheaper than a cannon so while not a general purpose service weapon organized into maybe an independent battery assigned to support a regiment/brigade sized unit could definitively be in the cards. Just some thoughts and looking at the possibilities. What do you guys think; Just a cool novelty or could it have/have had a greater practical application?

[TPFII]

It would certainly be advantageous in certain situations, and it wouldn't have to be a matchlock either. My nation's early repeating black powder gun has a removable chamber, with the intent to then be stored in a waterproof pouch. At least that's the concept so far.

[Husseinarti]

sounds like something really expensive for mass production.

[Crookfur]

Going back to PT for a moment just wanted to present an interesting piece from 17th century India:

A repeating 4 shot matchlock musket

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNp7UkFJaVQ

Over the course of my readings and studies Ive seen a number of various different "repeating" designs of this nature from before the 19th century. Most were cool little novelty/noble pieces which while interesting never seemed all that practical to be honest and hence understandable why they never saw widespread adoption. Nonetheless this honestly seems probably the most practical design. Being a matchlock design that limits it's utility but nonetheless it is interesting and perchance could have some potential. Assuming scaling it up was possible the system in question could maybe see use in some type of Jingal/Abus gun esque capacity as a sort of relatively easily transported early infantry support gun of sorts mounted on a simple tripod. It's more expensive than a simple musket/Arquebus but on the otherhand it is cheaper than a cannon so while not a general purpose service weapon organized into maybe an independent battery assigned to support a regiment/brigade sized unit could definitively be in the cards. Just some thoughts and looking at the possibilities. What do you guys think; Just a cool novelty or could it have/have had a greater practical application?

Yeah they tried that, it turned put to be one pf the biggest investment scams of the South Sea bubble and was famed for hurting more people through the scam than by shooting anyone.
Have a look at the Puckle gun/defence it's deeply deeply beloved by alt history needs to the ecyent where it ended up in one of the total war games. If you see anything on it watch the forgotten weapons video to find out why it's not as cool as it first looks.

[TPFII]

The earliest select-fire rifles were intended to function as two different small arms for the infantry section/squad. Most of these blended a sub-machine gun or a light-machine gun along with the service rifle. What would a rifle look like intended to blend a sub-machine gun and fireteam-level marksman rifle? I was thinking some sort of locked breech blowback, though I understand that this isn't commonly done and I would assume that there's likely a reason why.

[Crookfur]

The earliest select-fire rifles were intended to function as two different small arms for the infantry section/squad. Most of these blended a sub-machine gun or a light-machine gun along with the service rifle. What would a rifle look like intended to blend a sub-machine gun and fireteam-level marksman rifle? I was thinking some sort of locked breech blowback, though I understand that this isn't commonly done and I would assume that there's likely a reason why.

Well if its locked breach it ain't blowback...

Why would you want to mix an SMG and precision weapon? LMGs that are accurate enough to function as a marksmans weapon make more sense as the features that are good for both tend to be complimentary.
The essential features of a short range automatic weapon and a longer ranged precision rifle really don't overlap.

Yes you can use a common platform to do all the roles, see the ak and ar families or at least use the same mechanism (looks at HK)

[TPFII]

Well if its locked breach it ain't blowback...

Why would you want to mix an SMG and precision weapon? LMGs that are accurate enough to function as a marksmans weapon make more sense as the features that are good for both tend to be complimentary.
The essential features of a short range automatic weapon and a longer ranged precision rifle really don't overlap.

Yes you can use a common platform to do all the roles, see the ak and ar families or at least use the same mechanism (looks at HK)

The concept is to have a gas-tube at the end of the barrel to unlock a tilting bolt vertically rather than unlocking it plus having to reciprocate the action. Another idea is to have the rotational forces exerted on a rifled barrel serving to unlock the bolt. This could potentially be timed, especially if the rifle could have a gain twist barrel.

It's a combination of a DMR and SMG because that's what my military would need the rifle to do. It's a mix of an IJA and Greco-Roman style military where ammunition supply is critical and everything gets a bayonet. This means that the DMR serves to provide accurate covering fire for bounding movement and bayonet charges; the SMG half coming from the fact that'd it'd be lighter, and thus easier to run with.

[Kassaran]

It's called a battle rifle. You're welcome.

[Dayganistan]

The earliest select-fire rifles were intended to function as two different small arms for the infantry section/squad. Most of these blended a sub-machine gun or a light-machine gun along with the service rifle. What would a rifle look like intended to blend a sub-machine gun and fireteam-level marksman rifle? I was thinking some sort of locked breech blowback, though I understand that this isn't commonly done and I would assume that there's likely a reason why.

It would look like an M4 with a 4x or 6x magnification optic. In fact that is exactly what it would be.

[TPFII]

Thank you both - that certainly steers me in the right direction. It'd need to be introduced alongside a proprietary intermediate cartridge that predates the adoption of 5.45 and 5.56, but the cartridge has to be optimized for weight and low recoil. I'm trying to limit myself to bore sizes that were actively fielded by IRL nations for the similar time period. Do you think a 6.35-MM/.251-In bore would be appropriate? That's a little smaller than 6.5 Arisaka, but it's a bore size already in popular civilian use as .25 ACP. Alternatively it could have the bore diameter chosen from a 5.5MM velo-dog facsimile, though it isn't supposed to be revolutionary.

[Crookfur]

Well if its locked breach it ain't blowback...

Why would you want to mix an SMG and precision weapon? LMGs that are accurate enough to function as a marksmans weapon make more sense as the features that are good for both tend to be complimentary.
The essential features of a short range automatic weapon and a longer ranged precision rifle really don't overlap.

Yes you can use a common platform to do all the roles, see the ak and ar families or at least use the same mechanism (looks at HK)

The concept is to have a gas-tube at the end of the barrel to unlock a tilting bolt vertically rather than unlocking it plus having to reciprocate the action. Another idea is to have the rotational forces exerted on a rifled barrel serving to unlock the bolt. This could potentially be timed, especially if the rifle could have a gain twist barrel.

It's a combination of a DMR and SMG because that's what my military would need the rifle to do. It's a mix of an IJA and Greco-Roman style military where ammunition supply is critical and everything gets a bayonet. This means that the DMR serves to provide accurate covering fire for bounding movement and bayonet charges; the SMG half coming from the fact that'd it'd be lighter, and thus easier to run with.

Hybrid linear/blowback actions have been popular for cannon but have never taken off for small arms. This is partly because by the time hispano popularised them straight gas operation was pretty much established as the way forward for small arms. Personally for small arms by the time you have a gas system you might aswell just use it to drive the carrier and bolt, it just makes balancing everything easier and probably allows a lighter bolt and spring.

IIRC all the successful rotary barrel locking systems use a recoil system and a cam to turn the barrel, getting the nessecary force into the barrel from the passage of a bullet would probably just result in barrels over heating, wearing out and straight up failing due to amount of friction involved.

If you really can't stomach following the way, the truth and the light that is a gas operated rotating bolt them some kind of delayed/retarded blowback would probably be best. Or you could go really far out and have a gas operated lee-navy action...

.25 calibre rifle rounds were certainly about at the turn of thec20th century and it seems that a good number of American rifle makers had their own take on the .25 varment round. None of them saw military use as far as I can see but 6mm Lee navy certainly did. Of course in NS history there certainly wasn't a huge nation in the Atlantic whose navy and marines used a .25 round in their rifles and totally not madsen guns.

[TPFII]

In character, it's supposed to "heavily draw inspiration" from an existing blowback rifle to save development time and cost. Why would it add additional heat to the barrel? It's capturing already present energy. Admittedly there'd be friction at the locking lugs, but that's not an issue that would likely shorten the life of the rifle with proper lubrication. A gas operated pump action conversion of a local rifle would be interesting. I think that 6mm lee navy gives me something to work with - a bit more powerful than my needs, but the 6mm bore is a good route. I assume that a gas unlocked blowback is a lot simpler to machine than an operating rod or direct impingement mechanism.

[Crookfur]

In character, it's supposed to "heavily draw inspiration" from an existing blowback rifle to save development time and cost. Why would it add additional heat to the barrel? It's capturing already present energy. Admittedly there'd be friction at the locking lugs, but that's not an issue that would likely shorten the life of the rifle with proper lubrication. A gas operated pump action conversion of a local rifle would be interesting. I think that 6mm lee navy gives me something to work with - a bit more powerful than my needs, but the 6mm bore is a good route. I assume that a gas unlocked blowback is a lot simpler to machine than an operating rod or direct impingement mechanism.

Basically to get enough torque to actually rotate a barrel you either need to use a very large and heavy bullet or get a much stronger mechanical "grip" between the bullet and the barrel which would naturally result in much more of the energy being converted into friction as the bullet travels down the barrel.

If you have an existing blowback system the easiest solution would be to add a lever delay.

As fir a gas locked system you still need most of a gas system ie gasport/regulator and piston or di tube. You then need a locking mechanism that's not going to be much simplier than what ever would be involved in a pure gas operated mechanism.