[QUOTE=PrusseluskenV2;33099724]I'm sorry I have to burst your bubble, but the Abrams is really outdated.[/QUOTE]
That may be so but it still gets the job done.
[QUOTE=PrusseluskenV2;33099724]I'm sorry I have to burst your bubble, but the Abrams is really outdated.[/QUOTE]
That said, it is great at the role it was intended for: fighting off waves of Russian armor. It has very thick frontal armor, a good gun that can be reloaded quickly, a very good electronics package, plus great accuracy on the move and nice (but thirsty and hot) powerplant.
[QUOTE=Timebomb575;33100003]That said, it is great at the role it was intended for: fighting off waves of Russian armor. It has very thick frontal armor, a good gun that can be reloaded quickly, a very good electronics package, plus great accuracy on the move and nice (but thirsty and hot) powerplant.[/QUOTE]
To be honest, however, isn't the tank sort of misplaced in the modern battlefield? It's no match whatsoever to air power, which seems to dominate the warzone, and it's completely inefficient in the type of warfare we find ourselves stuck to in the Middle-East.
[QUOTE=ewitwins;33100864]To be honest, however, isn't the tank sort of misplaced in the modern battlefield? It's no match whatsoever to air power, which seems to dominate the warzone, and it's completely inefficient in the type of warfare we find ourselves stuck to in the Middle-East.[/QUOTE]
But what if the Taliban use tanks! :P
[QUOTE=ksenior;33101233]But what if the Taliban use tanks! :P[/QUOTE]
I think they had tanks at the start. I recall a story from a special forces guy embedded with the Northern Alliance. Those fighters had been trying to destroy the tanks for 20 years with no success.
He called in an airstrike.
On the subject, while tanks dont see a whole lot of use right now, they're still a part of warfare I dont see dissapearing.
[QUOTE=ewitwins;33100864]To be honest, however, isn't the tank sort of misplaced in the modern battlefield? It's no match whatsoever to air power, which seems to dominate the warzone, and it's completely inefficient in the type of warfare we find ourselves stuck to in the Middle-East.[/QUOTE]
Armour coupled with decent anti aircraft support can be devastating, it makes shit of defensive positions and men. We haven't seen a total war situation with two or more well equipped and armed nations having at it in a long time and hopefully we never will in our lifetime.
who needs a tank when you have an A-10?
[QUOTE=ksenior;33101233]But what if the Taliban use tanks! :P[/QUOTE]
It's more likely than the Taliban calling in an airstrike.
[QUOTE=capgun;33101829]I think they had tanks at the start. I recall a story from a special forces guy embedded with the Northern Alliance. Those fighters had been trying to destroy the tanks for 20 years with no success.
He called in an airstrike.
On the subject, while tanks dont see a whole lot of use right now, they're still a part of warfare I dont see dissapearing.[/QUOTE]
Something about that seems tragically hilarious.
Spend 20 years trying to destroy a group of tanks, and a single spec-ops guy comes in and wipes them all out with a single call :v:
Well there was no Tanker positions open :( so I went Infantry, I leave Sept. 04 2012 :)
Well, I've decided that when I get the cash I think I'll forgo a Nugget for a bit in favour of another one of Tula's finest rifles in the same calibre.
Probably banned here. Nyet, I look for rifle of tovarisch Fedor Tokarev, strong and powerful rifle of Tula Armoury, but shitty law here makes magazine have only 5 bullet for kill fascist paper at range.
Also, the Goddamn mags for it at $80 each. The gun (with 1 mag) is only $300, and each spare mag is fucking $80. And that's reproduction mags, with some bigass English electro-stamp on it.
Variant of the Dragunov, which itself was banned as a variant of the AK.
I kinda figured they're not really variants of each other, but the Dragunov was named in the AK prohibition order, and I think nobody's bothered to try to bring in the Molot because they figure it'll be banned as a variant of one or the other.
NRA's been following the Canada thing pretty tightly, just posted a link to this article
[url]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/defiant-quebec-digs-in-against-harpers-plan-to-destroy-long-gun-data/article2224891/[/url]
Not totally out of the woods yet, huh?
[QUOTE=PrusseluskenV2;33099724]I'm sorry I have to burst your bubble, but the Abrams is really outdated.[/QUOTE]Actually, it's not. Every single military that's worth it's salt upgrades the equipment in it's inventory to a better version. The M1A2 is expected to be in service well past 2020, but that's unlikely since they'll probably upgrade the A2's to something else by then.
Keeping the same chassis and merely upgrading it's equipment is far more cost effective without losing any mission capability. Why build a whole new vehicle, pissing away a hundred billion in research and development when you can put the advantages it has on an existing platform? There's no sense in it.
Just put down a purchase for a Nugget. 1935, hex receiver, matching serials, and some sexy wood. All lathered in a tasty cosmoline coat.
[QUOTE=capgun;33121976]NRA's been following the Canada thing pretty tightly, just posted a link to this article
[url]http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/defiant-quebec-digs-in-against-harpers-plan-to-destroy-long-gun-data/article2224891/[/url]
Not totally out of the woods yet, huh?[/QUOTE]
Yah, but it's Quebec, they hate the federal government, and especially Conservatives, with a passion. Most of this is probably just to paint Harper out as evil for the next election, but I think the only reason Quebec wants to keep a registry is because all the deadly school shootings keep happening there, and you know what, a fat fuckload of good the registry did stopping them. I hope the citizens of Quebec, like the citizens of every other province, and the governments of every other province, realize that if it didn't work once, it won't fucking work again on a different level. If the data does get destroyed, Quebec can't afford to make its own registry, and I think that's exactly what Harper wants, to make smaller registries prohibitively expensive.
I'm glad that even our fucktarded premier, McGuinty, a Liberal, said he wouldn't be making a provincial registry for Ontario, like may people thought. The main thing I'm worried about with this Quebec registry, if it happens, is will buying guns from TradeEx online be more annoying, considering they're based out of Quebec, and will it then be registered in my name in a different province, or will they de-register it bringing it out of province? Honestly, smaller registries seem like too much hassle and too much money, and literally nowhere else buy Quebec cares, though that's typical of Quebec to fight adamantly about some stupid bullshit with the feds just because they wish they were their own country and want to stir nationalistic bullshit by making the feds look evil.
[QUOTE=PrusseluskenV2;33099724]I'm sorry I have to burst your bubble, but the Abrams is really outdated.[/QUOTE] It's still one of the most powerful tanks in the world, it can still match the latest chinese and russian tanks, without the upgrades no, but with them it still kicks ass, and the M1A3 is going to replace the M1A2 by 2018 or 19, till then i'm sure we're fine.
[QUOTE=SpaceGhost;33127378]It's still one of the most powerful tanks in the world, it can still match the latest chinese and russian tanks, without the upgrades no, but with them it still kicks ass, and the M1A3 is going to replace the M1A2 by 2018 or 19, till then i'm sure we're fine.[/QUOTE]
So they're treating it like their assault rifles then? Taking an old design and adding a little here and there to "modernize" it?
They can still add new engines, armor, ect to it. No point in building them from scratch for a while, since their are so many of them.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33126582]Yah, but it's Quebec, they hate the federal government, and especially Conservatives, with a passion. Most of this is probably just to paint Harper out as evil for the next election, but I think the only reason Quebec wants to keep a registry is because all the deadly school shootings keep happening there, and you know what, a fat fuckload of good the registry did stopping them. I hope the citizens of Quebec, like the citizens of every other province, and the governments of every other province, realize that if it didn't work once, it won't fucking work again on a different level. If the data does get destroyed, Quebec can't afford to make its own registry, and I think that's exactly what Harper wants, to make smaller registries prohibitively expensive.
I'm glad that even our fucktarded premier, McGuinty, a Liberal, said he wouldn't be making a provincial registry for Ontario, like may people thought. The main thing I'm worried about with this Quebec registry, if it happens, is will buying guns from TradeEx online be more annoying, considering they're based out of Quebec, and will it then be registered in my name in a different province, or will they de-register it bringing it out of province? Honestly, smaller registries seem like too much hassle and too much money, and literally nowhere else buy Quebec cares, though that's typical of Quebec to fight adamantly about some stupid bullshit with the feds just because they wish they were their own country and want to stir nationalistic bullshit by making the feds look evil.[/QUOTE]
Quebec won't be able to.
All current LGR files are due for destruction, no way in hell will Quebec get all of its gun owners to re register all their firearms. Simply won't happen. So nice to see that the repeal is pretty set in stone.
[editline]5th November 2011[/editline]
That's assuming they aren't faggots and say "hurr we no destory data we no take orders from you"
I still would take an A-10 Thunderbolt II over a tank.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAU-8_Avenger[/url] Make your tanks go boom. With my Maverick missles, I make other tanks go boom. Then when the MiGs start chasing me, I'll Sidewinder a few. Not the best for air to air though.
[QUOTE=Aman VII;33131059]Quebec won't be able to.
All current LGR files are due for destruction, no way in hell will Quebec get all of its gun owners to re register all their firearms. Simply won't happen. So nice to see that the repeal is pretty set in stone.
[editline]5th November 2011[/editline]
That's assuming they aren't faggots and say "hurr we no destory data we no take orders from you"[/QUOTE]If you read the article I quoted, that's exactly what Quebec is doing, refusing to destroy the data.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33135418]If you read the article I quoted, that's exactly what Quebec is doing, refusing to destroy the data.[/QUOTE]
Want to participate in the Civil war of Quebec defiance?
We got a casus belli
[QUOTE=Aman VII;33135673]Want to participate in the Civil war of Quebec defiance?
We got a casus belli[/QUOTE]
Not until they separate completely, because then we have real justification, and then we can blow all their "special treatment" bullshit out the window.
Put some new grips on the Sig tonight. They are seriously ultra thin. Almost feels too thin, I think the slide is wider than the grips now :P
[IMG]http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b100/89Sunbird/IMAG0018.jpg[/IMG]
I like it, looks almost fuzzy.
Also, I did some digging, and found out the add-ons for the SVT are more expensive than the damn gun itself. The scope and mount, and authentic one, runs for $700, and repros are about $250, and that requires a specific top spring cover on the gun, one that most don't have, and I'm not sure if they make new ones with the right grooves. The bayonet alone is also between $150-$300, a Goddamn knife that goes on the end of a gun is $300! I'm still interested in all of it, though, I'll definitely be looking in to seeing if they make new top covers with the grooves for scopes in them.
I think the grips on the p226 are the most comfortable I have put my hands on yet. Doesn't stop me from being a 1911 guy though haha.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.