• [VIDEO] Ian Reacts to Salty Comments About Obsolete Bolt Action Rifles
    24 replies, posted
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM2zPe_D4io
Ian was on fire in this video. He swears so rarely, it catches me off guard when he does.
"we have someone here with a crying japanese girlfriend avatar" I looked in the original video and its this avatar lmao https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/242/314/824.jpg
bolt actions are the most aesthetically pleasing firearms tbh
armchair generals always have the strangest obsession with outdated tech you don't really see it with tanks for some reason, mostly rifles (bolts and old AKs) and aircraft (A-10 and F-14)
i think muzzle loaders take the win for aesthetics honestly. especially asian ones like the jezail
I find German tanks to be aesthetically pleasing even though they largely ranged from obsolete in the beginning of the war to engineering disasters in the end. I can't speak to the F-14 as I am much more of an F/A-18 fan but I'm sure a big part of the appeal to the A-10 is how utterly unique it is. Absolutely no modernish planes look anywhere close to it. Plus that sound.
Right, but no one that likes old AK's, F-14s or Tiger tanks is going to claim they aren't obsolete. They have been replaced and are worse in every aspect than modern alternatives. The A-10 isn't obsolete though, as it hasn't been replaced nor are there better alternative. The F-35 is planned to replace a bunch of them, but it doesn't improve on it. It's simply different. It's a lot harder to be detected, but has less hardpoints for carrying missiles. It has a 25mm gun on it, but it isn't nearly as potent as the A-10's, and it only has 150 rounds in it. The A-10 is easier to detect, but it is heavily armed and armoured. A 30mm AP round has twice the energy of a 25mm while being heavier as well, allowing it to fire from a much longer range without losing effectiveness. It also fires at a higher rate of fire than the 25mm. Armoured vehicles like APC's are vulnerable to this gun. It doesn't penetrate a modern tank's armour, but it will majorly fuck up it's tracks and sensors if it doesn't just fire a missile instead. That's all very cool, but not the main reason why it isn't obsolete. The main reason is it's loiter time. There is no military aircraft that can challenge it. It can provide air support up to 460km away from it's runway and loiter around the area for almost 2 hours looking for other targets before it has to fly back to base. A pair of A-10's working in shifts can provide 24/7 close air support.
i bet i could beat an a-10 with a bolt-action rifle
Antique lever-actions are the ones that do it for me.
bolt action rifles are objectively the most lethal and accurate weapons around, ask any game designer
Early 20th century weapons in general are very aesthetically pleasing as they're all essentially big metal pipes with the occasional wooden curve here and there. The wacky WW1 prototype MGs, SMGs and SLRs all look quirky as hell and I gotta love some of the convoluted operating mechanisms some of them have. WW2 had more refined and standard weapons, but some still stick out as being aesthetic as fuck like the BAR, the German MGs and the various SLRs.
https://my.mixtape.moe/vuyenl.webm Apologize.
Is the A-10 actually out of date?
Very, but there's really no reason to change it because it fits its role very well. Some of those airframes are over 34 years old, which is pretty damn old by aviation standards, with the last rolling off the line in 84'.
Oh, I though they meant role wise. I'm surprised we're not making replacement frames, even if in small numbers to refurbish till we get a better plane to fit the role.
Small numbers don't make sense. They would be expensive as hell to set up all the tooling and equipment just to pump out a handful. The only thing that would be economical would be to make a few hundred more, which does not make sense given the advances in aviation over the last 4 decades.
Yeah but do we have anything that can do the same job?
Not really, at least not in the same capacity. There was some hubub about F-35's taking the role, but that always try and throw that in when the next jet comes out. There's been talks about replacing them with things such as the OV-10 Bronco, which while an old design they would be much easier to put back into production and allow for loiter times similar to the A-10. It would be able to fulfill the A-10's original goal as a tank killer being able to mount plenty of anti-tank missiles, however it would be lacking in the department of ground support for which the A-10 has been used for the most in the last decade. Unless the airforce decides to design a new aircraft around a gun, as was the case with the A-10, you're going to be hard pressed to beat something that launches a projectile that's just about a pound at 3,300fps at roughly 4000rpm.
Wouldn't the bronco be even slower and easier to shoot down with heavy machine guns or even rifles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAXL5iP1YWA crying shame this hasn't been posted yet Today we look at a highly modified Mosin-Nagant action and how even very old technology can be augmented with modern force multiplication capabilities.
joost1120 posted: Right, but no one that likes old AK's, F-14s or Tiger tanks is going to claim they aren't obsolete. They have been replaced and are worse in every aspect than modern alternatives. The A-10 isn't obsolete though, as it hasn't been replaced nor are there better alternative. The F-35 is planned to replace a bunch of them, but it doesn't improve on it. It's simply different. It's a lot harder to be detected, but has less hardpoints for carrying missiles. It has a 25mm gun on it, but it isn't nearly as potent as the A-10's, and it only has 150 rounds in it. The A-10 is easier to detect, but it is heavily armed and armoured. A 30mm AP round has twice the energy of a 25mm while being heavier as well, allowing it to fire from a much longer range without losing effectiveness. It also fires at a higher rate of fire than the 25mm. Armoured vehicles like APC's are vulnerable to this gun. It doesn't penetrate a modern tank's armour, but it will majorly fuck up it's tracks and sensors if it doesn't just fire a missile instead. That's all very cool, but not the main reason why it isn't obsolete. The main reason is it's loiter time. There is no military aircraft that can challenge it. It can provide air support up to 460km away from it's runway and loiter around the area for almost 2 hours looking for other targets before it has to fly back to base. A pair of A-10's working in shifts can provide 24/7 close air support. Look, I'm a A-10 fetishist as well. It failed it's original design intention almost immediately and was kept in service by being a good-enough platform to keep putting on ground-pounding ordinance on due to loiter time and survivablity to hand-me-down slav tech. The only reason it hasn't been replaced is because of the costs involved and that what it's evolved into doesn't have as much of a place in a standoff with a superpower and not random oil countries.
Wait, when does he swear? I missed it.
0:34 if timecode doesn't work https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM2zPe_D4io&feature=youtu.be&t=34
BLUF the A-10 is a meme plane grunts and keyboard warriors don't have to worry about nerd shit like maintenance costs, parts procurement, and role feasibility in modern political climates if you want a COIN plane get a COIN plane. 30mm is overkill for farmers and toyotas
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.