Coolest/Ugliest Weapons V5 - Bullpup AKs are the best - General

[QUOTE=MAC21500;42539641]M27 IAR says differently...and the RPK, RPD, and many other SAWs with non quick change barrels or belts. Open bolt makes a big difference, but the RPK seems to do just fine. Would you want to volunteer to stand downrange and intercept some 62gr MK 318 Mod 0 at 600yds? I guarantee it has enough force at that range to ruin your day. is 7.62x51 more effective at range and in general? Yes, but don't think 5.56 isn't accurate enough to kill at 500+ yds. .22lr will kill you farther than you can shoot it accurately.[/QUOTE] Accuracy isn't the issue, it's overall stopping power. Snipers and DMRs aren't typically going to aim for headshots, especially not at that range. They're going to aim for center mass because thats much more likely to land a hit, and with that kind of mentality you're going to want a beefier round with more oomph to it, and 7.62x51 fills that role pretty damn well.

[QUOTE=MAC21500;42539641]M27 IAR says differently...and the RPK, RPD, and many other SAWs with non quick change barrels or belts. Open bolt makes a big difference, but the RPK seems to do just fine. Would you want to volunteer to stand downrange and intercept some 62gr MK 318 Mod 0 at 600yds? I guarantee it has enough force at that range to ruin your day. is 7.62x51 more effective at range and in general? Yes, but don't think 5.56 isn't accurate enough to kill at 500+ yds. .22lr will kill you farther than you can shoot it accurately.[/QUOTE] The M27 was just an excuse to field the HK416, sustained fire with it is only going to be marginally better than with your standard M4A1. The RPK is pretty much the same, they perform better than their assault rifle counterparts because of the heavier barrels but aren't anywhere near as capable as weapons like the Minimi, M240, PKM, and the like. For weapons like them the Brits came up with a good name, LSW, which better reflects their nature. The RPD has the advantage of being belt fed but is still not as capable. And yes, your average 5.56 can still kill something at 500 yards+, but at those ranges, anything it can do the 7.62 Nato can do significantly better. The strength of the 5.56 is how much ammunition you can carry put downrange compared the the 7.62, and as such sacrifices a lot of it's effectiveness per shot making it less suitable to be used for something like a DMR.

~name that bullpup~ [img]http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/sniper/sn66/tci_m89.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;42539856]~name that bullpup~ [img]http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/sniper/sn66/tci_m89.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] It's that one weird Israeli bullpup M14

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;42539662]Accuracy isn't the issue, it's overall stopping power. Snipers and DMRs aren't typically going to aim for headshots, especially not at that range. They're going to aim for center mass because thats much more likely to land a hit, and with that kind of mentality you're going to want a beefier round with more oomph to it, and 7.62x51 fills that role pretty damn well.[/QUOTE] 5.56 will kill with a center mass hit at 500-600yds, but yea, I wholeheartedly agree, 7.62x51 is more effective; IMHO we should be using a caliber more substantial than 5.56 that is optimized for shorter barrel use and better accuracy and terminal performance at range. We're pushing the effective limits of 5.56; .308 can bring you out to 1000yds, but thats why they came up with .338 Lapua before .50 BMG sniper rifles were mainstream. They keep looking for a jack-of-all-trades cartridge and will never find it. [editline]16th October 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=MegaChalupa;42539723]The M27 was just an excuse to field the HK416, sustained fire with it is only going to be marginally better than with your standard M4A1.[/QUOTE] Wholeheartedly agree, the M27 is a waste of money, its really a niche weapon better suited to a highly mobile force that trades volume of fire for weight.

Anyone seen this disgusting piece of shit? The AR57 [t]http://stickman.rainierarms.com/galleries/Magpul%20III/0O2P1771-A-1028-Stick.jpg[/t] Although, I have to say, the way the bullets eject through the magwell is pretty clever.

[QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;42540080]Anyone seen this disgusting piece of shit? The AR57 [t]http://stickman.rainierarms.com/galleries/Magpul%20III/0O2P1771-A-1028-Stick.jpg[/t] Although, I have to say, the way the bullets eject through the magwell is pretty clever.[/QUOTE] Disgusting? It's fucking sexy

[QUOTE=MAC21500;42540046]5.56 will kill with a center mass hit at 500-600yds, but yea, I wholeheartedly agree, 7.62x51 is more effective; IMHO we should be using a caliber more substantial than 5.56 that is optimized for shorter barrel use and better accuracy and terminal performance at range. We're pushing the effective limits of 5.56; .308 can bring you out to 1000yds, but thats why they came up with .338 Lapua before .50 BMG sniper rifles were mainstream. They keep looking for a jack-of-all-trades cartridge and will never find it. [editline]16th October 2013[/editline] Wholeheartedly agree, the M27 is a waste of money, its really a niche weapon better suited to a highly mobile force that trades volume of fire for weight.[/QUOTE] The British found it back in the 1950's, but NATO through america pushed for a larger calibre rifle and effectively blocked all further progress. We then had to adopt the FAL. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.280_British[/url] [quote] Despite its success as an intermediate cartridge, the .280 British was not considered powerful enough by the U.S. Army and several variants of the .280 British were created in an attempt to appease the U.S. Army. However, the U.S. Army continued to reject these variants, ultimately adopting the 7.62×51mm NATO. [/quote] [quote]Recoil of the .280 cartridge was calculated to be a little under half of the .303. Long range performance actually surpassed that of the .303, and shooters reported that it was much more comfortable to fire with the reduced recoil and reduced blast.[/quote] [editline]16th October 2013[/editline] [video=youtube;wtjVf724G7w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtjVf724G7w[/video] [editline]16th October 2013[/editline] Pictures of the EM2 Rifle and the .280 FAL. [img]http://www.forgottenweapons.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Shorty-EM2-with-EM2-and-FAL.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=PrusseLusken;42540728].280/.30 confirmed for best intermediate cartridge[/QUOTE] It's a really interesting read on the .280. For example, when nato was set up, america called for complete transparency so that a round could be chosen for everyone to use. Britain had been developing the EM1 and EM2 firing the .280 openly, sharing information with everyone. The belgians then fitted the FAL around the .280. Then the it was discovered that Col Studler was running a secret Springfield Armory light rifle project called the T25, and Frankford Arsenal was developing an equally secret .30 calibre cartridge, code-name T65 under his direction. Needless the say America would only accept a rifle and round made and developed in the US so blocked all requests from europe. It was only when churchill got voted and decided to uphold the "special" relationship with america that the EM2 was shelved, just when it was ready to be put into production. Shame really, because the 7.62 was to powerful for automatic fire and the downfalls of the 5.56 mean that we are looking for that round in between. We could have had it 40 years ago. [URL]http://www.targetsportsmagazine.com/features/view/10163/modern-military-masterpieces-the-british-28030/[/URL]

[QUOTE=cherry gmod;42542829]It's a really interesting read on the .280. For example, when nato was set up, america called for complete transparency so that a round could be chosen for everyone to use. Britain had been developing the EM1 and EM2 firing the .280 openly, sharing information with everyone. The belgians then fitted the FAL around the .280. Then the it was discovered that Col Studler was running a secret Springfield Armory light rifle project called the T25, and Frankford Arsenal was developing an equally secret .30 calibre cartridge, code-name T65 under his direction. Needless the say America would only accept a rifle and round made and developed in the US so blocked all requests from europe. It was only when churchill got voted and decided to uphold the "special" relationship with america that the EM2 was shelved, just when it was ready to be put into production. Shame really, because the 7.62 was to powerful for automatic fire and the downfalls of the 5.56 mean that we are looking for that round in between. We could have had it 40 years ago. [URL]http://www.targetsportsmagazine.com/features/view/10163/modern-military-masterpieces-the-british-28030/[/URL][/QUOTE] Yes, it is quite interesting, especially on the opposite side looking at the development and trials for the replacement of the M1 Garand and later the twin barreled FAL for the SALVO project. We could have had bullpups 40 years ago as well, though probably not, considering the thinking of the time; it probably would have been FALs and M14s in .280 How cool would it be if they made a new production EM-2 clone in 6.5 Grendel? Bullpup counterpart to the EM-2, the T-31, another Garand invention. A gas-trap rifle (bad idea) later modified to conventional gas piston. "Ultimately, the T31 was too radical in appearance to be considered for military use by the very conservative military bureaucracy in the post-WWII era, even without taking its functional problems into account. Garand had made an audacious attempt to tackle the problems of muzzle blast and recoil in a .30-caliber light rifle, but the administrative willpower did not exist to support virtually anything beyond a product-improved M1 at the time (as evidenced by the termination of the much-more-conventional T25)." [img]http://www.forgottenweapons.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/t31.jpg[/img]

It's fascinating reading up on technology that was shelved because of conservative views. Take frank whittle's jet engine, he invented it, patented the idea in 1930. Built and tested it in 1937! But the RAF throughout said no it will never work and didn't fund him, so the first fighter jet put into production was made by the Germans in 1944, the ME-262 (the prototype flew in 1942), borrowing heavily the research from whittle's patent. Politics gets in the way of progress more often than it should.

[QUOTE=cherry gmod;42544209]It's fascinating reading up on technology that was shelved because of conservative views. Take frank whittle's jet engine, he invented it, patented the idea in 1930. Built and tested it in 1937! But the RAF throughout said no it will never work and didn't fund him, so the first fighter jet put into production was made by the Germans in 1944, the ME-262 (the prototype flew in 1942), from whittle's patent. Politics gets in the way of progress more often than it should.[/QUOTE] Bureaucracy, popularity and money do it too... look at what happened to Melvin Johnson, he wasn't popular with the Army so he got shafted. Georg Luger withdrew from the service pistol competition because he knew they US Army was predisposed to choose an American made pistol (of course there were issues with the luger as a service pistol anyways, and taking into account the limited production capability of Luger's facilities). Edit: Almost forgot, Hitler being a dumbass about Machinepistols slowing development and production of the StG-44 and countless other more effective and economical/sensible things...

[QUOTE=cherry gmod;42544209]It's fascinating reading up on technology that was shelved because of conservative views. Take frank whittle's jet engine, he invented it, patented the idea in 1930. Built and tested it in 1937! But the RAF throughout said no it will never work and didn't fund him, so the first fighter jet put into production was made by the Germans in 1944, the ME-262 (the prototype flew in 1942), borrowing heavily the research from whittle's patent. Politics gets in the way of progress more often than it should.[/QUOTE] The first radar system devised by Tesla was more or less shot down because of Edison's influence with the US armed forces. If it hadn't, radar would have started to be issued on US ships and maybe aircraft by the end of WWI and effective radar would have been available by the time the second world war started. Goering, head of the Luftwaffe during WWII, halted early production on jet engines and jet engine based fighters because he thought the war would be over by like 1942 or 43. Later in the ME-262's production, Hitler changed the designation of the fighter from a fighter-bomber to just a bomber, and wanted it tested with a 50mm anti tank gun, pretty much destroying the aircrafts production and not letting any of it's major flaws get worked out. The German E-100 super heavy tank being built during WWII had it's production pretty much canceled because they saw medium tanks being the future, but they left a few men working on the project. By the end of the war they had pretty much completed the tanks chassis, and if they had finished a few they would have been game changers to wherever they were deployed. They could have been equipped with cannons as large as 17cm's with anti infantry cannons as large as 75 mms. If Hitler weren't the leader of the German armed forces during WWII, things may have ended up much much differently.

Speaking of Tesla, if it weren't for Westinghouse and their damned AC power system megalomania dreams things, we could all have free ground-transmission electricity by now. I mean jesus christ, poor Tesla. Westinghouse and his cronies basically ruined his life because they wanted the monopoly on power.

Hope you guys don't mind some solid artwork.. [t]http://www.nicolastrudgian.com/uploads/collections/135.jpg[/t] Click for fullsize.

[QUOTE=arthuro12;42545702]Hope you guys don't mind some solid artwork.. [t]http://www.nicolastrudgian.com/uploads/collections/135.jpg[/t] Click for fullsize.[/QUOTE] Thats a rendition of Eric Hartman's BF109 with his black-lily paint job on the nose. The man flew over 1,400 combat missions and was forced to crash land his plane 14 times, but it was [b]never[/b] due to enemy fire. The Soviets called him the "Black Devil", mostly because he shot down 352 aircraft during his career, and even shot down a Yak-9 on the final day of the war. He's the highest scoring ace of all time. After the war the Soviets pinned false war crime charges on him to try and get him to fly for the East German airforce. He toldem to fuck off and got sent to a gulag to do 10 years of hard labor. He was released about a decade later during a prisoner exchange and then started flying for the West German airforce flying F-86's. [img]upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f9/Canadair_Sabre_Berlin_Luftwaffen_Museum.JPG/800px-Canadair_Sabre_Berlin_Luftwaffen_Museum.JPG[/img] They were nice enough to let him keep his nose's paint job to instill some fear into the Soviets and remind them what happens when they fuck with the Luftwaffe.

And then due to politics related to the F-104, he gets shit on and forced into retirement.

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;42545909]Thats a rendition of Eric Hartman's BF109 with his black-lily paint job on the nose. The man flew over 1,400 combat missions and was forced to crash land his plane 14 times, but it was [B]never[/B] due to enemy fire. The Soviets called him the "Black Devil", mostly because he shot down 352 aircraft during his career, and even shot down a Yak-9 on the final day of the war. He's the highest scoring ace of all time. After the war the Soviets pinned false war crime charges on him to try and get him to fly for the East German airforce. He toldem to fuck off and got sent to a gulag to do 10 years of hard labor. He was released about a decade later during a prisoner exchange and then started flying for the West German airforce flying F-86's. [img]upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f9/Canadair_Sabre_Berlin_Luftwaffen_Museum.JPG/800px-Canadair_Sabre_Berlin_Luftwaffen_Museum.JPG[/img] They were nice enough to let him keep his nose's paint job to instill some fear into the Soviets and remind them what happens when they fuck with the Luftwaffe.[/QUOTE] Not to forget.. he had that paintjob at the nose removed because the Russian fighter pilots would rtb as soon as they saw it.. The Black [I]Tulip[/I].. [t]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ERkV7rRO_Yc/UTT1M5SkWRI/AAAAAAAAKSo/6QwDR6THl-0/s1600/Hartmanncid_89636c64_5fc7_4f6a_9687_edited-1_zpsa7152dd6+(1).jpg[/t] Might do some more posts about Luftwaffe aces or planes later today.. expect some rare pictures soon!

[QUOTE][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/2aQzECX.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE] Bushmaster ARM Pistol

I went to a gunshow not to long ago, and I saw one of these motherfuckers for 8,500 [t]http://www.rockislandauction.com/photos/55/p_standard/DCW141-G-F1C-H.jpg[/t] They're actual artillery lugers, not reproductions. They've got fucking gold engravings and [B]DIAMONDS[/B] on them.

[QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;42561963]I went to a gunshow not to long ago, and I saw one of these motherfuckers for 8,500 [t]http://www.rockislandauction.com/photos/55/p_standard/DCW141-G-F1C-H.jpg[/t] They're actual artillery lugers, not reproductions. They've got fucking gold engravings and [B]DIAMONDS[/B] on them.[/QUOTE] GNNNHHHHH

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/UQQXErd.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/h0MDRkK.jpg[/IMG] Swedish Fm/Kjellman [editline]18th October 2013[/editline] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/9LaQHHY.jpg[/IMG] Beltfed BAR with a quick change barrel called the kg m/37.

[QUOTE=Xombi;42562681][t]http://i.imgur.com/UQQXErd.jpg[/t][/QUOTE] i need this

[QUOTE=Sir_takeslot;42561963]I went to a gunshow not to long ago, and I saw one of these motherfuckers for 8,500 [t]http://www.rockislandauction.com/photos/55/p_standard/DCW141-G-F1C-H.jpg[/t] They're actual artillery lugers, not reproductions. They've got fucking gold engravings and [B]DIAMONDS[/B] on them.[/QUOTE] If i had 8,500, that's not too bad for such a work of art. I just have to remember wipe it down after fapping on it every night.

[QUOTE=Xombi;42562681] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/9LaQHHY.jpg[/IMG] Beltfed BAR with a quick change barrel called the kg m/37.[/QUOTE] As you can obviously see with the magazine, it's not beltfed. There was a beltfed prototype but it never made it off paper.

[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;42564988]As you can obviously see with the magazine, it's not beltfed. There was a beltfed prototype but it never made it off paper.[/QUOTE] Oh i am sorry about that. This is the correct one xD [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/5RWS2T8.jpg[/IMG] the first picture was the actual issued one. Well the one witch saw most use anyway.

Somebody Posted a Picture in some Thread of Hartmann about to jump into his 109 looked pretty badass [editline]18th October 2013[/editline] German BF-109 F-4/trop In Africa [IMG]http://www.wwiivehicles.com/germany/aircraft/fighters/messerschmitt-bf-109-fighter/bf-109-f/messerschmitt-bf-109-f4-fighter-marseilles-north-africa-01.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=fishyfish777;40596622][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/WvTeTWK.jpg[/IMG] mmm. (TKB-09)[/QUOTE] late but [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/65/Gooby_pls_trying_to_cheat_me.png[/t] ?

yo real talk, Jeromoy had the coolest paint jobs on their aircraft [img]http://www.wwiiaircraftphotos.com/LCBW/FW190-A3-21.jpg[/img] who wouldn't piss themselves if they saw that comin at them? [img]http://www.wwiiaircraftphotos.com/LCBW15/Me110G-NJG33-(D5+L-)-86af+s.jpg[/img] Better run B-17! This 110 is going to pry you open like a can of sardines! [img]http://www.wwiiaircraftphotos.com/LCBW/Me110-G2-15.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.wwiiaircraftphotos.com/LCBW12/Ju87-005f+s.jpg[/img] What poor bastard wants to hear a Jericho siren go off and then see this mean fucker diving on him?

I always liked the Luftwaffe's Paintjobs like the spiral marking on the Prop housing and the Shark Mouths too. [IMG]http://hsfeatures.com/images/fw190d9bigtailrf_4.jpg[/IMG] example of what i mean.