On the subject of Matebas, does anyone know how the new production ones compare to the originals?

>>194 Are they already out in the market in significant quantity? Because I strongly suspect that a few richfags bought them as safequeens, and now the Italian factory is surely closed for a while. It might have been enough to ruin the company.

>>241 I know kommandostore had their preorder slots filled pretty quick. It was a limited-run import deal with the factory (import ~2000 units and we'll see how they sell, then maybe import more), so corona-chan scare probably didn't hurt them as badly as it might have otherwise.

>>184 am I retarded if I want to get a rock island M206 and then strip off the parkerizing and get it blued since I won't be able to afford a Detective special?

>>2001 Methinks you should use the appropriate thread.

>>1962 Really? I thought the problem with battleships was that they're too easy to destroy relative to the cost of production and destroyers could basically do their job with missiles while remaining cheaper while the range of naval combat increased beyond the range of 16in guns. Battleships armed SLRCs would pretty much solve all of those problems with just their range alone.

>>1969 You should read this whole thread: >>503

>>1969 Strelok, 50nmi sabot shells for the 16in guns were invented in 1945. By 1965, that had extended to ~85nmi, and by the early '80s ~100nmi (that one was actually test fired from the USS Wisconsin and achieved those results in the real world - all 9 shots landed within 9 yards of the target at that range, too). The Navy considered it pointless back in the 40s/50s because they basically didn't believe a surface ship was capable of natively targeting at those ranges and were very hesitant to rely on then fledgling rotary-wing Air Observers. By the 60's New Jersey reactivation, they were putting a lot of serious work into it before politics pulled the New Jersey back into mothballs. Again in the 80s, a lot of work went into them, resulting in the ~100nmi sabot shell, and then some absolute genius at Pratt and Whitney realized that 11in sub-caliber shell was the perfect size and shape to have a scramjet put in it and the range spiked to 480nmi - with the same precision guidance as the non-powered version and while keeping an appreciable (if small) warhead. See the second and third images in >>271 for more on scaling that system up. I'd guess the old thread would still be up on julay if you want to go read that before it dies, too. With 24in cannon (designs for which exist), you don't even need a sabot.

>>1974 >they basically didn't believe a surface ship was capable of natively targeting at those ranges and were very hesitant to rely on then fledgling rotary-wing Air Observers. What changed since then? I mean, is it a specific technology, or just radars, drones and everything else advanced so much that it's not a problem any more?

>>1975 Basically everything advanced enough and they got enough experience with fire support that they decided it was practical again. They actually still think a ship's native combat range cannot be any greater than 58nmi, even if they counted shipborne aircraft as 'native', they've just come to begrudgingly accept 'hand-off' guidance as something that just has to be.

>>1754 >stay concealed and in cover That's the prime truth, but the problem is when the patrols came around to loot and you were inside a house; Jihadis, both foreign and bosniaks, and albanians were particularly famous for duct taping people concealed and in cover. And then you have the whole Croat vs. Serb village parties when they searched for opponents or previously outspoken citizens. >waiting for the opportunity to retreat. But all gets invalidated by this, that's the prime act to follow. And very well mentioned, a good house foundation is mandatory, or at least a cheap basement hole that will not get buried.

>>1773 So generally you will have waves as a war progresses. First you get troops moving through on their way to the front Then you have looting parties as supplies dwindle Then you have the retreating side trying to hide among the civilian population Then you have massacres against civilian populations who are perceived to be partisan. Rape is initially only carried out by enemy forces who aren't engaged in anything more urgent or serious, but quickly foreign fighters, boredom and social isolation will see both sides committing mass rapes and abductions. I have seen villages that were destroyed 20 times over the course of a war to deny insurgents supplies. Some general advice: Identify and clear out of places that troops are likely to occupy, especially as artillery positions. Don't be in proximity to troop corridors like highways or mountain trails, as these tend to suffer repeated looting and random acts of violence by twitchy soldiers. Use shitty cover to conceal serious fortifications, if you sandbag window frames then throw a chair in front of the sandbags- by concealing your defenses people are more likely to target strong points and less likely to decide your house is a good defensive position. a hedge conceals a earth berm, a plaster wall conceals a brick wall. You might be surprised how many bullets someone will fire at something that looks like it's being damaged. Expect reprisals against anyone armed you deny food, shelter or medical aid to. To avoid being robbed I would make as though I had already been robbed- walk with plastic bags over your shoes because partisans always steal fucking shoes, bruise your cheek and rip the front pockets of your pants- hopefully they will be angry at the last guy who robbed you and not at your for already having been robbed.

>>1444 The thing about torrenting is if you don't use a VPN it's extremely easy to tell exactly who's downloading exactly what. Try https://iknowwhatyoudownload.com/en/peer/ for example. Using a VPN through a proper protocol tends to solve both issues. >>1496 This type of tracking doesn't even rely on ISPs cooperating. It's inherent to the P2P nature of the system.

If you live in an American cardboard house I would consider A. remove floorboards and dig down to create a shelter/ storage space/septic pit, make a trapdoor if possible. If you have to break through a slab use wood from a wall to brace the hole, smash the cement you removed and re-set it over the brace to form a trapdoor B. use the earth in plastic bags, put them in curtains to create long sandbags you can lay inside the house C. if your house is on stilts dig a trench from your hole to the perimeter for escape and build an earth berm to seal the edges of the house. D. fire-proof the house by removing useless junk to a pile somewhere, remove internal plaster so you can stop the outside of your house burning from inside, drill out to your drainpipes to divert water inside the house you can drink or fight fires with E. carpets are amazing because if you soak them in something that will harden or just cover them with dirt they provide excellent protection, you might use one to make a roof over your hole- a good source of material is plaster cornice. F. bathtubs can be put in roof spaces as water tanks and to help fight fires in the roof space, you might also want to spray something fire retardant around up there or even remove the ceiling plaster- fires start on the walls and move up to the roof. G. garden hose is great also because you can use it to drag supplies to/from neighboring structures, to provide water, for firefighting etc. take it inside and keep it intact. You are also likely to need it during tunneling H. your front door is a natural killzone, instead of fortifying it block up the doorways leading out of the hall and sandbag a pill box behind it- you want people to break in and end up stuck in a hallway with a pillbox at one end I. roof tiles create tons of shrapnel- however they work great to pave trenches cut into the ground and stop flooding, and if buried in medium/large earth berms effectively stop penetration. You have tone of them and if you remove a section of roof it's better to remove the top because it carries less water and plastic can be secured with the line of tiles on the ridges. If anything above two meters looks like an elevated fire position (because you removed low roof tiles or actually tried to build one) you are begging for snipers to move in and/or artillery to directly hit your house. J. destroying roads is very unwise, troops will dismount and clear houses expecting an ambush and likely kill anyone they suspect destroyed the road- if you try to tunnel under a road overweight trucks and armored vehicles are likely to collapse it- again the troops will suspect a IED or ambush and will just shoot at everything nearby

Some thoughts on tunneling Tunneling into colditz is a great book on this, and there are a lot of notes on narco tunnels in mexico, Afghanistan and vietnam. Illegal/wildcat mining also can teach you a lot, this is done in Africa, south east Asia Design: If you are tunneling it's safer to dig deeper and have the tunnel run uphill, simply use set lengths of string hanging from the roof to maintain direction/angle- better still a lazer. you need two kinds of support for a roof, one for weight and one to stop erosion- bed slats and floor boards are the gold standard, line them with plastic. cupboard doors, large kitchen tiles and the insulation from your roof can all be put behind supports to hold back more earth. try to make an arch shape as you dig through clay, but straight walls and complete boarding may be required in soft soil. If you make an exit ensure there is a large bend- ideally vertically. This stops blasts being channeled down the tunnel and allows the entrance/exit to be collapsed or defended. Something to consider is changing the angle of the tunnel entirely at the point of exit to mislead anyone who finds is as to where it originated- if it's in a straight line to your house it's likely troops will just guess where you are. Of course the best option is simply not to dig an exit, just close to the surface where you can break through later- although time is a key consideration. If you dig a side/branch for storing things you can collapse/dig it out again as required- cacheing things underground is enormously difficult and an artform in itself- the US army has some decent guides and you will quickly realize there are all kinds of unexpected issues. How to dig: Find a digging tool and some way to cart earth. Hammers and axes make good picks, plant pots make good buckets but so do lamp shades and the shells of electrical appliances. To remove earth use a bucket on a rope, rope can be made from twisting strips of bed sheets. Metal edging/guttering is invaluable to make a chute your bucket can travel down. You can use a hose to wet the face you are digging through but be very aware water invites collapse. Clay is a total motherfucker to dig through, I had to dig through several meters in a crawlspace and I pulled half the muscles in my body- the clayline is also where water flows underground and if you make a hole in the clay expect your tunnel to become an aquifer- to avoid this you can take the clay and actually line the outside of the tunnel in the meters preceding the clayline so water flows around your tunnel- it also means you can dig some more nice soft earth and avoid carting the clay to the end of the tunnel- but definitely line the shaft with clay because otherwise it will become a well. Where to put the removed earth:

>>2008 So what did 100 million people die for, /k/?

>>1996 >Wait, wouldnt that mean all the niggers and wetbacks are going to loot US? Oh yes! Most certainly.

>>1982 >George Foreman’s body viewing Don’t scare me with typos like that.

>/dup/ was oddly enough one of the better places to watch the riots >tvch is now being deliberately shat up >specifically the riot threads They probably won't show up here but just a heads up anyway.

Made the next thread since this ones falling off the page now. >>2030 >>2030 >>2030 >>2030 >>2030

>>1135 >board Now that sounds scary. On the other hand, it would be hard to find something on an enemy super-battleship that doesn't belong to the enemy, so it might be actually perfect for autonomous robots guided by a simple ˝AI˝ that just shoot at literally anything that moves. On the other hand, I can't even possibly fathom how hard it would be to actually take over one that was designed not to be taken over in a boarding action. >They are one ship and can only exert influence on one area. That assumes you are playing catch in all seven seas of the world. But it wouldn't be hard to e.g. patrol the North Sea with one, the Bay of Biscay with a second one, and the Levant with a third one. Now you could try to sneak around them with a few ships, but I doubt that sending a Reforger convoy straight to the shores of Europe is a good idea in this case.

And it hit me after posting: what about attacking the weapons and propulsion system? Welding the barrels shut would make the main guns useless, and I don't know if such a battleship would have propellers, waterjets, or something out of this comic, but I imagine it would be easier to just take out those. Then ˝just˝ tow the enemy ship into a friendly port and wait a few decades for the crew to starve to death or give up.

>>1197 >Welding the barrels shut >tfw future ship to ship sea battles will be conducted between robo-paratroopers trying to disable deck armaments to force capital ships back into harbor and T-doll crews defending their boat Though shouldn't future BBBs with enough armor to make at-sea destruction by another BBB unfeasible still be vulnerable to giant anti-capital fuck you coastal rail/coilgun installations? What about unmanned submersible drones with hyperbaric welding tools?

>>1199 First of all read this post: >>780 Second, railguns are retarded, read the posts linked in these posts to see something better: >>776 >>777

>>1200 I mean this: >>781

>>476 Pretty close. Good enough I suppose. Thanks.

>>328 Can you post version 1.8?

Here you go strelok.

>>817 thats quite the book my guy

Figured someone should upload this condidering the chimpouts in Minneapolis and elsewhere.

>>384 I thought the risk was eating the liver because it's overdose you with a ton of vitamins? Or was that seals?

>>395 Polar Bear liver is an overdose of Vitamin A waiting to happen.

>>395 >>425 Dog liver has the same vitamin A toxicity problem as polar bear liver. The standard Arctic survival stories are as follows. >Dwindling food supplies leaves nothing but the sled dogs for food. >Attempts to eat only a few of the dogs fails to satisfy. >Out of sheer desperation try eating liver(bear or sled dog), die.

>>427 >>425 Right I knew it was something like that.

I've recently heard a recommendation from a hunting buddy: >Take a can of Oxtailsoup >Take a can of Hunter's soup (soup with mushrooms, onion, sherry, parsley, thickened with flour, butter, and cream) >Mix them together, warm Jägerschwanzsuppe. It tastes of the forest and deeply of beef and red wine.

>>828 If you can get a deal on Vortex go for it, the warranty is great.