• Coolest/Ugliest Weapons v7 - SHOTGUNS
    5,001 replies, posted
I do have to wonder, for a time did Soviet engineers forget that people had to drive those things... like those prototype pancake tanks are all the same in that the tank is 2 feet thick and the crew sits 4 feet high
I can imagine it would be loud as fuck because it's a hovercraft, and very lightly armored to be able to function properly. Not a great combination for any kind of fighting vehicle.
So how 'bout some photos from TheFirearmBlog? [t]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/13226816_10156865674225024_6695119646950511130_n-660x495.jpg[/t][t]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/13220975_10156865674325024_2127361150140991107_n.jpg[/t] Supposedly a company is going about making modifications to guns to give them "scifi" looks with LEDs. I like it personally, reminds me of Blacklight Retribution. Also HMG has been showcasing their modified STG-44 designs at ShotShow. [t]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/0520161737c-660x371.jpg[/t][t]http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/0521161007.jpg[/t] I seriously need this thing in my life. Having a STG-44 which can be fed 5.56 and 7.62x39 from AR-15 magazines and I believe AK magazines as well is such a fucking useful firearm. It's almost like the perfect SHTF gun, considering you can change out so much on it.
[QUOTE=FloaterTWO;50455321]I can imagine it would be loud as fuck because it's a hovercraft, and very lightly armored to be able to function properly. Not a great combination for any kind of fighting vehicle.[/QUOTE] its a "scout" ""tank"" but hey, what i could find suggested that it had such a light footprint when in operation that pressure mines of the day wouldn't detonate. also the gun is just for show, it never was fitted with anything and the project never got past the first prototype
Regardless, the entire concept is kind of flawed just from how loud it would be. Plenty of scouting vehicles have armor, so it's not an unreasonable requirement. I mean, the Bradley is technically a scout, but look at it.
I gotta wonder how well the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1117_Armored_Security_Vehicle"]M1117 ASV[/URL] would do in a Recon role. [img]http://images.military.com/media/equipment/military-vehicles/m1117-armored-security-vehicle-asv/m1117-001-ts600.jpg[/img]
I was speaking with someone who's in a recon type role within the US army and they claimed they'd been testing something that looked sort of like an M117, but with a turret "like a bradley's" on top. I have to wonder what exactly it was. V-150 V2 when [t]http://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/north_america/united_states/wheeled_armoured/v-150/pictures/Cadillac_Gage_V150_USA_10.jpg[/t]
Honestly, recon roles are more then likely going to be taken up by small "animal" drones. [t]http://imagescdn.tweaktown.com/news/4/1/41318_01_army_working_on_small_aerial_drone_that_weighs_just_0_5_grams_full.jpg[/t] Stuff like this little fella would be useful for doing recon of towns and such. If they gave them small solar-panels of some sort, you probably could also have them act indefinitely as miniature spies. As for combat roles, I'd imagine that eventually someone is going to create a UAV "mothership" or carrier which carries several tiny drones that act as miniature bombs. All you would need to do is have the main mothership send out two to four recon drones, and those would pick up enemy combatant positions, and then rain hell with 1kg to 2kg explosive charges. The fact this hasn't been done already is a very big surprise to me, tbh.
Well first you'll need whatever automation unless controlled by actual operators behind the "recon drones" to be able to recognise enemy combatants from civilians, otherwise you're gonna have quite the "Oopsie" when you send in those drone bombs.
Yeah, recon seems to be more and more air-based as time goes on. Dunno about tiny drones like Skylynx says due to a lack of proper optics and range. Far as 'why hasn't this been made yet?', most stuff like that don't exist because someone who knows their shit also knows that it's stupid for one reason or another.
[QUOTE=FloaterTWO;50455598]Regardless, the entire concept is kind of flawed just from how loud it would be. Plenty of scouting vehicles have armor, so it's not an unreasonable requirement. I mean, the Bradley is technically a scout, but look at it.[/QUOTE] well i can't find a date, but i'm going to guess this and object pancake (775) were probably developed around the same time so late 50s early 60s when they were transitioning between cannon and cannon launched missiles. the idea was flat tank = lower profile = less likely to get hit it didn't obviously work out since today's tanks are tall and covered in armor [editline]4th June 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;50455860]Honestly, recon roles are more then likely going to be taken up by small "animal" drones. [t]http://imagescdn.tweaktown.com/news/4/1/41318_01_army_working_on_small_aerial_drone_that_weighs_just_0_5_grams_full.jpg[/t] Stuff like this little fella would be useful for doing recon of towns and such. If they gave them small solar-panels of some sort, you probably could also have them act indefinitely as miniature spies. [/QUOTE] i can't believe those reportedly cost 6 figures each. like talk about ripping off the military there, thats probably MAYBE a couple hundred in components, tack on 1000$ for high powered transmitters and another for software, but fuck they won't even list the price as its probably embarrassing the only reason why its known to be so expensive is that the US army said they were too expensive. here's about the best article i can find on it [url]http://gizmodo.com/5981975/black-hornet-the-195000-spy-plane-that-fits-in-the-palm-of-your-hand[/url] [url]http://www.personal-drones.net/black-hornet-pd-100-prs-nano-uav-the-perfect-personal-drone-for-military-applications/[/url]
Trouble with UAVs and other remote-automated recon platforms is that they rely on communication between the operator on the ground and the vehicle in the air. Russia's got some fancy new Electronic Warfare equipment that can kill pretty much anything we have, which means UAVs and the like are a no-go when fighting them. Also, you can't get as detailed a perspective from the air as you can from a Cav Scout on the ground.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;50457288]Trouble with UAVs and other remote-automated recon platforms is that they rely on communication between the operator on the ground and the vehicle in the air. Russia's got some fancy new Electronic Warfare equipment that can kill pretty much anything we have, which means UAVs and the like are a no-go when fighting them. Also, you can't get as detailed a perspective from the air as you can from a Cav Scout on the ground.[/QUOTE] autonomous guidance systems mean that you only need to get video signal back not full control. even if they jammed GPS/Glonas these types of drones also have inertial guidance on them US soldiers carry giant jammers with them anyways so its not like russia is doing anything special
[vid]https://my.mixtape.moe/qualsi.webm[/vid]
That fucking exposed trigger spring. It's making me giggle like a small child on a sugar high. Also: [t]http://www.petercliffordonline.com/wp-content/uploads/Syria-Advanced-Homemade-Weapons.jpg[/t] Ahmed! We need to shoot rockets!
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;50462020]That fucking exposed trigger spring. It's making me giggle like a small child on a sugar high. Also: [t]http://www.petercliffordonline.com/wp-content/uploads/Syria-Advanced-Homemade-Weapons.jpg[/t] Ahmed! We need to shoot rockets![/QUOTE] "um guys, are you sure the instructions said for me to stand here? i really think i can just sit in the cab" "no no, that plug has to be held in place"
[img]http://67.media.tumblr.com/3b33ac949a0aba215324999051fde26b/tumblr_o3ymnsy9r51u8wbhro1_1280.jpg[/img]
[video=youtube;Msy1ueUT0o8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Msy1ueUT0o8[/video] rotating breach shotguns are interesting [editline]6th June 2016[/editline] [video=youtube;VEYO7PK8dSg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEYO7PK8dSg[/video] here's that other one he was talking about, its kind of interesting that it almost works like a bolt-action for a shotgun
You guys ever seen one of these? It's a Bullpup Unlimited Kit for a Mossberg 500. I'm actually thinking about buying one because my Kel-Tec KSG was such a horrible failure of a firearm and this literally takes a perfectly good, reliable shotgun and makes it shorter for people of smaller stature and doesn't violate any federal laws. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvZt8QdrkHA[/media] [t]https://i.gyazo.com/0476e5a572fff4405f9c4ac10300dac4.png[/t] I don't know if I love the look of it or hate it. But functionality always beats up aesthetics when it comes to a tool that may save my life.
Here's an idea for a ridiculous videogame shotgun. Take that sliding breach shotgun from before and add a magazine to it. Now you've got a double barrel bolt action shotgun. Its better than the usual worn out pump shotguns everybody else does
[QUOTE=CodeMonkey3;50469761]You guys ever seen one of these? It's a Bullpup Unlimited Kit for a Mossberg 500. I'm actually thinking about buying one because my Kel-Tec KSG was such a horrible failure of a firearm and this literally takes a perfectly good, reliable shotgun and makes it shorter for people of smaller stature and doesn't violate any federal laws. [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pvZt8QdrkHA[/media] [t]https://i.gyazo.com/0476e5a572fff4405f9c4ac10300dac4.png[/t] I don't know if I love the look of it or hate it. But functionality always beats up aesthetics when it comes to a tool that may save my life.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't do that. In order to to do basic field strip on it, you have to remove the gun from the bullpup shell. Also, all that extra unneeded weight you add to the gun.
most likely repost but [img]https://www.impactguns.com/Data/Default/Images/uploads/NFA/fnp45de-silencerco-package1-2.JPG[/img] I love the design so goddamn much, and the silencer HNNNG
Offset suppressors are the shit.
[t]https://66.media.tumblr.com/70fe2bcee7490be56d17cb3d3f8112c2/tumblr_o8f1nxSU0B1r9khx4o4_1280.jpg[/t] [t]https://66.media.tumblr.com/e224ce01b90cdf6d196d485481b44f79/tumblr_o8f1nxSU0B1r9khx4o1_1280.jpg[/t] :v: [URL="http://gunrunnerhell.tumblr.com/post/145570324539"]Desert Eagle L5[/URL]
Is that for sawing through your enemy's tendons after you miss every shot?
It's a rail for mounting optics on so you can not use them like a true pro. It isn't a no-scope if you don't have a scope to not use.
It's probably to strap on a really heavy counterweight so that it doesn't flies backwards.
[QUOTE=Lone_Star94;50471526]I wouldn't do that. In order to to do basic field strip on it, you have to remove the gun from the bullpup shell. Also, all that extra unneeded weight you add to the gun.[/QUOTE] I don't think the bullpup shell would weigh much more and I'm confident it will help balance it out. Right now all the weight is in the barrel and magazine, the Mossberg 500 I own is long as fuck too. So that makes it a pain in the ass to haul around and shoulder. My KSG is much, much, much more ergonomic because of how compact it is and the balance is good (it's just an unreliable piece of shit) As for field stripping, I'm not worried about it. The parts to disassemble it are always stored in the buttpad but even so as it currently stands if my M500 malfunctions without the kit on I still need tools to take it apart. Compared to the KSG which is held together by pins the M500 I own requires screwdrivers and stuff. So if I have a malfunction I can't clear through the chamber or something with the kit on I'm not much worse than I would be ordinarily. My Mossberg 500 has never malfunctioned anyway, so I'm not deadly afraid of it. Unlike my KSG which can't cycle a whole magazine without crippling malfunctions.
[t]http://i.imgur.com/kwkSpvH.jpg[/t] Chambered in 7.62x25
Took me a good minute of looking at the magazine to realize the feed lips on the bottom was due to taping two together.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.