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

[QUOTE=Angua;45772985] 12.7 mm fiddies[/QUOTE] I'm sorry to be that guy but this bothers me quite a lot Also the Dauntless had the two fifties and then it also had two 7.62s. Better coverage, angle wise, of fire.

Franklin Armory F17-L chambered in 17 WSM Gas piston operated rimfire. [url]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2014/08/22/franklin-armory-f17-l/[/url] [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/F17-RIGHT.jpg[/img] [url]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2013/01/04/winchester-introduces-3000-fps-rimfire-cartridge/[/url] [img]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/17-Winchester-Super-Mag.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Angua;45772985]Superior firepower? Zeroes got 20mm cannons which last i looked are quite a bit more heavy weight than the 12.7 mm fiddies the dauntless has.[/QUOTE] 2 .50 cal machineguns > 1 20mm cannon (which often had only like 5 shots because japan wasn't able to supply them)

[QUOTE=Sableye;45773179]2 .50 cal machineguns > 1 20mm cannon (which often had only like 5 shots because japan wasn't able to supply them)[/QUOTE] Ech do i even want to do on with this. Please i'm just trying to say here that 20mm cannons have superior stopping power compared to the .50 cal. Also the zero did have 2 20mm cannons along with 2 7.7mm machine guns.

[QUOTE=Angua;45773295]Ech do i even want to do on with this. Please i'm just trying to say here that 20mm cannons have superior stopping power compared to the .50 cal. Also the zero did have 2 20mm cannons along with 2 7.7mm machine guns.[/QUOTE] In the case of dogfighting where you have very short engagement times, volume of fire is going to beat "stopping power" if you want to call it that. Also .50 BMG is going to be more than enough to disable pretty much anything it hits on a Zero.

[QUOTE=Sableye;45773179]2 .50 cal machineguns > 1 20mm cannon (which often had only like 5 shots because japan wasn't able to supply them)[/QUOTE] bull fucking shit anything with an explosive filling will always do better than a solid projectile when it comes to damaging an aircraft its literally the difference between blowing a small hole in something and [I]blowing something the fuck apart[/I]

[QUOTE=Sableye;45773179]2 .50 cal machineguns > 1 20mm cannon (which often had only like 5 shots because japan wasn't able to supply them)[/QUOTE] Club > Bow

[QUOTE=MegaChalupa;45773371]In the case of dogfighting where you have very short engagement times, volume of fire is going to beat "stopping power" if you want to call it that. Also .50 BMG is going to be more than enough to disable pretty much anything it hits on a Zero.[/QUOTE] Well if we have to go here a dive bomber that the dauntless is probably has no business dog fighting with anything in the first place unless someone has dropped the ball and even more so what matters is who is going to be hitting who first and where. Yes the .50 cal is going to be enough to wreck anything with relative ease but even more so is the 20mm and the 37mm and so forth. I myself am gonna go with cannons every time over heavy machine guns when it comes to world war two era aviation. There's a reason fiddies have not been used in aircraft armament since the Korean war and today's standard is 20mm rotary cannon.

[QUOTE=Angua;45773590]Well if we have to go here a dive bomber that the dauntless is probably has no business dog fighting with anything in the first place unless someone has dropped the ball and even more so what matters is who is going to be hitting who first and where. Yes the .50 cal is going to be enough to wreck anything with relative ease but even more so is the 20mm and the 37mm and so forth. I myself am gonna go with cannons every time over heavy machine guns when it comes to world war two era aviation. There's a reason fiddies have not been used in aircraft armament since the Korean war and today's standard is 20mm rotary cannon.[/QUOTE] Aircraft have also gotten significantly heavier, larger, and can carry significantly larger payloads. 50s were perfectly sufficient for dealing with pretty much anything they faced during WW2 and in a lot of cases superior to the 20mm and 37mm cannons because you had a significantly higher chance of actually hitting your target with them. The extra power you'd get from the larger cannons is completely wasted if you can't hit your target with them. The use of the 20mm rotary cannon on modern fighters follows the same philosophy as having 6 50s, you make up for the lack of power per shot with sheer volume of fire, additionally you're able to get more shots off in the short window you have to engage your target as well as being able to carry more ammunition overall.

[QUOTE=MegaChalupa;45773655]Aircraft have also gotten significantly heavier, larger, and can carry significantly larger payloads. 50s were perfectly sufficient for dealing with pretty much anything they faced during WW2 and in a lot of cases superior to the 20mm and 37mm cannons because you had a significantly higher chance of actually hitting your target with them. The extra power you'd get from the larger cannons is completely wasted if you can't hit your target with them. The use of the 20mm rotary cannon on modern fighters follows the same philosophy as having 6 50s, you make up for the lack of power per shot with sheer volume of fire, additionally you're able to get more shots off in the short window you have to engage your target as well as being able to carry more ammunition overall.[/QUOTE] That's what i've been trying to say from the start, this did start with a simple Dauntless vs A6M2 debate.

[QUOTE=Sableye;45772705][t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b6/Dauntless_bomb_drop.jpg[/t] true story, regarding the dauntless a pilot actually downed a zero by using his superior turning ability and his super-armored wings to slice through the anorexic zero after using his superior firepower to chew up 2 also while dogfighting like 3 of them, his tail gunner was pinned in the front of his harness unable to do anything[/QUOTE] P-40's have done the same thing, and they're around the same size as a zero. They were built insanely tough though, and have survived a bunch of shit that no plane should even be capable of surviving. It was also a P-40 pilot that shot down another plane with his sidearm. [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/33/Curtiss_P-40E_Warhawk_2_USAF.jpg[/t] Aint that a pretty thing? This fella have been hit by rockets and flown on. Have had more than half of one wing shot off, yet flown on like nothing happened. Collided with Zeroes and only taking minimal damage, while the zero was obliterated. And so on. [QUOTE=Angua;45772985]Superior firepower? Zeroes got 20mm cannons which last i looked are quite a bit more heavy weight than the 12.7 mm fiddies the dauntless has.[/QUOTE] You have obviously forgotten how shitty the japanese guns were.

[QUOTE=Sunkite;45775356]P-40's have done the same thing, and they're around the same size as a zero. They were built insanely tough though, and have survived a bunch of shit that no plane should even be capable of surviving. It was also a P-40 pilot that shot down another plane with his sidearm. Aint that a pretty thing? This fella have been hit by rockets and flown on. Have had more than half of one wing shot off, yet flown on like nothing happened. Collided with Zeroes and only taking minimal damage, while the zero was obliterated. And so on. You have obviously forgotten how shitty the japanese guns were.[/QUOTE] Ironically, most of the 20mm cannons used in WWII were derivatives of the Oerlikon FF [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oerlikon_FF[/url] The Type 99-1 20mm (20x72RB) cannons were pretty crappy in terms of velocity, at about 1970fps; anything using a Hispano (20x110)had a velocity of 2900fps. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_99_cannon[/url]

[QUOTE=MAC21500;45775495]Ironically, most of the 20mm cannons used in WWII were derivatives of the Oerlikon FF [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oerlikon_FF[/url] The Type 99-1 20mm (20x72RB) cannons were pretty crappy in terms of velocity, at about 1970fps; anything using a Hispano (20x110)had a velocity of 2900fps. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_99_cannon[/url][/QUOTE] They also suffered from excessive jam issues compared to other cannons, such as the Hispano.

[QUOTE=Sableye;45766607]not really, they never actually said where frostmourn came from before ner'zhul was bound to it, just that it was a rune-blade which means it was probably wielded by a knight at some time before it was turned into the most fan-loved weapon in the warcraft-verse [editline]22nd August 2014[/editline] like that hasn't happened before? people do dangerous shit like that on youtube all the time[/QUOTE] [I] When Ner'zhul was transformed into the Lich King by Kil'jaeden, his disembodied spirit was shackled to a magical suit of armor as well as the runeblade Frostmourne, and trapped within an icy tomb called the Frozen Throne. Both the armor and the blade were crafted by the Nathrezim for the purpose of containing and controlling the Lich King. [/I] -Wowpedia Frostmourne was made by the Nathrezim to shackle Ner'Zhul.

[QUOTE=Angua;45773295]Ech do i even want to do on with this. Please i'm just trying to say here that 20mm cannons have superior stopping power compared to the .50 cal. Also the zero did have 2 20mm cannons along with 2 7.7mm machine guns.[/QUOTE] remember, the zero had like no armor so .50BMG is decimating, in dogfights Rate of fire is far superior to stopping power, in europe though where fighters engaged against bombers, ya 20mm cannon is a force to be reckoned with because bombers could soak up .50BMG all day

[QUOTE=Sableye;45776371]remember, the zero had like no armor so .50BMG is decimating, in dogfights Rate of fire is far superior to stopping power, in europe though where fighters engaged against bombers, ya 20mm cannon is a force to be reckoned with because bombers could soak up .50BMG all day[/QUOTE] Bomber were also much larger making up for the lower rate of fire and ammo capacity of the 20mm. You need lots of bullets to hit a small, fast moving Zero.

Let's get more heavy fighters [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-669-7340-27%2C_Flugzeuge_Me_110_%C3%BCber_Budapest.jpg[/img] [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-360-2095-23%2C_Flugzeuge_Messerschmitt_Me_110.jpg[/img] [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5c/Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-377-2801-013%2C_Flugzeug_Messerschmitt_Me_110.jpg[/img] The Messerschmitt Bf 110 Zerstörer Armed with 2 x 20mm cannons, 4 x 7.92mm MG17 machine guns and a 7.92mm MG 15 in the rear for defence. The MG 15 could be replaced with an MG 81Z twin, instead Used as a heavy fighter, ground-attack, fighter-bomber, and a night fighter One of the many planes I like from Germany during WWII

Those things in Nightfighter paint schemes are so sexy. Well pretty much every German aircraft in that scheme looks good. [IMG]http://www.swannysmodels.com/images/Bf109E47/boxart.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Crash155;45778028]Let's get more heavy fighters [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-669-7340-27%2C_Flugzeuge_Me_110_%C3%BCber_Budapest.jpg[/img] The Messerschmitt Bf 110 Zerstörer Armed with 2 x 20mm cannons, 4 x 7.92mm MG17 machine guns and a 7.92mm MG 15 in the rear for defence. The MG 15 could be replaced with an MG 81Z twin, instead Used as a heavy fighter, ground-attack, fighter-bomber, and a night fighter One of the many planes I like from Germany during WWII[/QUOTE] not enough daka [t]http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/imgs/bristol-beaufighter.jpg[/t] needs more rockets

How have we been talking about sexy fighters and not posted the sexiest of all? [img]http://www.warbirdalley.com/images/P38-joltin.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.airpowerworld.info/ww2-fighter-planes/lockheed-p-38-lightning.jpg[/img] [img]http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acimages/p38_bystronski.jpg[/img]

Move aside bitches [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Bott4.jpg[/img]

The fuck are you guys going on about, man. Make room for [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/Curtiss_P-40_Warhawk_USAF.JPG[/IMG] The sexiest [t]http://broeder10.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/p-40_kittyhawk_wallpaper__yvt2.jpg[/t] [B]Of the god damn sexiests planes[/B] [IMG]https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8030/7924529656_9ed41591d9_z.jpg[/IMG] Those curves that fine ass structure And built tougher than most. P-40 is the beauty queen of planes. Simple, yet elegant. And it fucks shit up too.

[IMG]http://www.ijaafpics.com/JB&W2/Ki-109-5.jpg[/IMG] The Mitsubishi Ki-109. A variant of the Ki-67 Heavy bomber. The Ki-67 was a medium bomber by US standards, having a maximum bomb load of just a bit over 1000kg. It was way faster than any bomber produced by the US, being even faster than the A-20. It was designed to be manoeuvrable and fast. It could take hits and deliver them, with it's multiple turrets, including 20mm cannons. It was so manoeuvrable they made a night fighter variant, the Ki-109, which was later used as a daylight heavy fighter. See that barrel sticking out the front? That's a type 88 7.5cm anti-aircraft cannon. Now, I know the B-25 had a variant with a 75mm cannon, but that was a shitty M3 cannon. This is the real deal. And it wasn't just a prototype, it was actually produced. The Ki-67 also had a "Special Attack" variant, which was pretty much the standard Ki-67. Except it had 2900kg shaped charge thermite bomb behind it's crew cabin.

[IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/Goraszka_2010_Hawker_Hurricane_%282%29.jpg/800px-Goraszka_2010_Hawker_Hurricane_%282%29.jpg[/IMG] You guys [I]really[/I] suck at spelling Hurricane.

[QUOTE=Riller;45779376][IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/Goraszka_2010_Hawker_Hurricane_%282%29.jpg/800px-Goraszka_2010_Hawker_Hurricane_%282%29.jpg[/IMG] You guys [I]really[/I] suck at spelling Hurricane.[/QUOTE] Oh my god. I had almost forgotten the workhorse of the RAF. I feel ashamed.

Looks like it's time for some Bf 109: [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/Messerschmitt_Bf_109E_at_Thunder_Over_Michigan.jpg[/t] [editline]23rd August 2014[/editline] Exactly same pose (even the propellers) as in Riller's picture :v:

[QUOTE=Riller;45779376][IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/Goraszka_2010_Hawker_Hurricane_%282%29.jpg/800px-Goraszka_2010_Hawker_Hurricane_%282%29.jpg[/IMG] You guys [I]really[/I] suck at spelling Hurricane.[/QUOTE] Close, but just slightly off: [T]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/31/Ray_Flying_Legends_2005-1.jpg[/t] It's spelled S-P-I-T-F-I-R-E

[QUOTE=asteroidrules;45779496]Close, but just slightly off: [T]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/31/Ray_Flying_Legends_2005-1.jpg[/t] It's spelled S-P-I-T-F-I-R-E[/QUOTE] How could you be so wrong: [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Il2_sturmovik.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;45779277]Move aside bitches [img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Bott4.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] [t]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/F82_twin_mustang.jpg[/t] or just join up and form mustangtron?

[QUOTE=PrusseLusken;45779588][IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b4/Sukhoi_Su-47_Berkut_%28S-37%29_in_2001.jpg[/IMG] ww2 planes go catch fire and crash when your wooden fuselage snaps berkut 4ever[/QUOTE] except reversed wings will tend to make you crash more because they'll snap off