/k/ - Weapons, Combat, Outdoorsmanship


SAVE THIS FILE: Anon.cafe Fallback File v1.1 (updated 2021-12-13)

Want your event posted here? Requests accepted in this /meta/ thread.

Max message length: 20000

Drag files to upload or
click here to select them

Maximum 5 files / Maximum size: 20.00 MB

Board Rules

(used to delete files and postings)

what's a war board without a conflict?

QTDDTOT Strelok 01/15/2022 (Sat) 13:08:31 No.21645
Questions That Don't Deserve Their Own Thread We got to the point where the previous one is autosaging!
Open file (92.38 KB 923x1136 1911_tiers.jpg)
Open file (143.02 KB 1542x678 ak-47 ;^).jpg)
>>32981 From what I was able to find, IJ Ponies are okayish 1911s to get into & from Lucky Gunner's testing on .380 ammo with a Glock 42, roughly close to the IJ's 3" vs the 42's 3.25" barrel length, many failed to penetrate or expand & the only ones that came close to meeting FBI standards, though still having a round or two failed, was Hornady's XTP or FTX Crit. Def. 90gr & Sig Sauer V-Crown 90gr. At best, you got a cheap collector's piece to start off a collection of old C&R stuff, at worst, a range toy if you keep it clean & shoot some mild loads through it. There is nothing wrong if you were a noguns who bought your first gun since you'll learn quick of buy once cry once, especially me who thought I was hot shit for buying a 22LR rifle, only instead of buying a 10/22 like I should've, I bought a garbage Mossberg 704 that I still haven't shot because fuck reassembling it after cleaning it. On another note, outside of import AKs with the cream of the crop being East German, Bulgarian, or Polish stuff, any good American AK manufacturers here that you guys know of, I only got down Rifle Dynamics for custom shit & Kalashnikov USA for clone shit.
Open file (3.10 MB 2282x2100 ClipboardImage.png)
>>33040 >go to your cunt's gubbmint site >do basic research >find out what process and exams you might need to take to get a loicense if applicable >acquire monis
>>33040 Ive been wondering lately how can one push for more gun rights.
Open file (9.57 MB 1280x720 Swiss Gun Laws.webm)
>>33040 be swiss
>>33062 That at aleast gives me a bit more confidence in the FTX ammo as thats the only one i;ve ever CC with but I ought to diy a ballistic test. I eat a lost of grapefruit already. Meat would be the more expensive component without using homeless people as a cadaver because fresher is better but more costly. As far as buy once cry once I was dry firing the damn thing and the rear of the firing pin broke. Fortunately gunpartscorp has new reproduction parts for a lot of out of old guns.
>>33279 how fucked is Romanian gun laws? I am burger but my mom moved to the US when she was 8 or so. My grandparents passed so some of the property at some small village belongs to her, she is planning to use it as a Casa de vacanță or Dacha in summer.
>>33337 Romanian gun laws are similar to Canadian gun laws. So bolt action/single-fire long guns are legal for rural areas as are shotguns, but everything else is banned outside of farming and specific security professions.
>>33342 We're still allowed NR semi-autos, but the fun stuff's been banned like two years ago. >t.leaf 18.6" Bren 2's are supposed to arrive somewhere around in autumn.
Best place in europe for gun laws? I want to own some guns for fun and self protection. In the UKuckdom only NI has self defence laws and you need to be under real danger before you are even considered to own a gun and all the cool shit is banned. I want to own some cool pistols and rifles. >>33219 I've been thinking the only way for gun rights to get better is if we all get into politics and make the change >>33279 >be swiss How to get swiss citizenship? Can I join their military/police or something?
>>33551 >How to get swiss citizenship? be a nuclear physicist with a postdoc and work at CERN. it's the only way.
Open file (227.97 KB 1010x1024 CC in Europe.png)
Open file (9.74 KB 1251x62 ClipboardImage.png)
>>33551 The following is for Conceal Carry permits. Overall if I remember correctly Serbia, Austria, Switzerland, the Czech Republic, and Finland all have fairly loose gun laws so long as you are a citizen and take up "sport" shooting or hunting as a hobby. Germany's laws are fairly relaxed for registered hunters even though they're anal on average from what boomers who have gone hunting in Germany told me. In general don't expect to get a gun in the Southern parts of Europe while the Central parts don't mind so long as you are purchasing one for hunting or recreational (sport) use. Self Defense with a firearm is virtually illegal in all of Europe.
Russia also has very relaxed gun laws, but as you are a Bong I wouldn't bother for the next decade.
>>33551 >swiss citizenship Very hard. There are the federal requirements (see below), and then canton approval which is additional laws and a vote by your local area. So try not to piss off residents. Also need 10 years before you will be considers (ages 8-18 each year is 2x) >ability to speak and write the national language at B1 level and written to A2 level (So need two of Italian, German, French, Romash) >integration into Swiss society >clean criminal record >Swiss authorities assessing you as no threat to national security >the ability to support yourself without recourse to social welfare (If you take welfware you must pay back) IF you marry to Swiss citizen, need to be resident for 5 years and 12 mo before application instead of 10. But then you are married so...... I have a Swiss friend from Nidwalden and he basically said its very hard even as a rapefugee and your "job" needs to be a signifigant contributor to industry that also doesn't piss off the locals. You can also be denied for being a vegan an SJW (lol). https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2018/03/how-swiss-canton-voted-deny-vegan-citizenship-because-she-was-annoying >Voters in her village took an apparent dislike to her veganism and anti-cowbell campaigning, and she was deemed “too annoying” to be given her passport.
>>33588 >Woman denied from Switzerland for her rampant veganism being "too annoying" God bless you Swiss.
Open file (455.87 KB 976x827 2323432342.jpg)
>>33588 >You can also be denied for being a vegan an SJW I guess some countries are OK.
How to get US Citizenship via military service? Other european countries don't seem like an option with the whole 5-10 year wait to become an citizen, shits FUBAR! >>33587 Being an bongoloid hurts, no freedoms and no safety only pakis, muslims and knoife crime
>>33725 >How to get US Citizenship via military service? It's "easy" but hard. >Hold a greencard (easier said than done) >Go to a recruitment center and enlist >Meet all the requirements for enlistment >Choose one of the shit-shoveler jobs because they won't give you a security clearance as a foreigner >Serve in the military at least one year (your contract is minimum 8 years for foreigners) >Fill out the forms to be fast-tracked for citizenship The issue is if you are over 20, you will probably be too old to enlist by the time you get a green card, but good luck if you try, Bongfriend. https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-eligibility-categories
>>33586 In spain you can technically get access to pistols/revolvers, shotguns and, if youre a hunter, rifles, its just a huge hassle and you have to pay lots of taxes and do paperwork to get a permit. In any case, if somebody tries to attack you and you shoot him youre atleast partially responsible for murder because self-defence laws are retarded here.
>>33586 Looks like im moving to czechland, any tips for learning their weird language?
>>33740 >Any tips for learning their weird language? Nope. Allegedly a lot of Bongs live there. Try search engines? This popped up: https://www.alllanguageresources.com/czech-courses/
Open file (6.88 MB 780x438 fuckingcia.webm)
Open file (119.56 KB 840x1217 hirohito.jpg)
Was it necessary for the USA to drop the atomic bombs on Japan? I recall that Japan had actually offered terms of surrender but I forgot exactly what the terms were. What exactly did Japan request that made the allies reject their offer of surrender? I can't seem to find anything online about it besides that it was a myth that they offer terms of surrender.
>>33761 That's because Japan offering terms of surrender is a myth, they were considering the American demands of surrender. Similar, but largely different. The Japanese Diet (or whatever they were called at the time) had to meet to vote on it and as they were not all in Tokyo, they had to gather to meet in person, taking days. Unfortunately, mistranslation (actually a completely literal translation that missed the cultural sensitivity of the statement, so not really the fault of the translator) convinced the Americans that the Japanese were just stalling for time. So, MacArthur dropped the nukes to force Japan's hand. Unfortunately, the Japanese weren't stalling, they were actually considering the demand. The Nukes ultimately proved to be unnecessary, but the American commanders were acting with the best intentions (for their side) based on the limited information they had available. This is the reason why these days protocol is to have multiple translators on both sides communicate with each other on the scope and intent of the message, so it isn't repeated. Of course, said protocol is widely ignored.
>>33761 They requested the Emperor not be removed (the Allies official policy line required unconditional surrender) which MacArthur conceded anyway when they did surrender. When the war in Europe ended before the nukes could be deployed Japan was a convenient testbed to justify having made it and it was also demonstrated as show of force to Stalin about Western military capabilities.
>>33766 After looking deeper into it the part about the position of Hirohito appears to be a popular misconception that arose from the translation issues that >>33765 mentioned: https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/what-happened-to-emperor-hirohito
>>33761 Stalin broke the non-aggression pact with Japan in Manchukuo to give more territory to Communist China, whereas the Allies had promised it to the Nationalists. The first bomb was dropped to psychologically scar the Japanese into surrendering (which didn't work) but the second one was 100% to tell the Soviets that they would not allow another Russian occupation on clay the Americans had locked down.
How does an anti-ship missile work in terms of its terminal effects? I can understand how it gets to the target but what is it meant to do there? Are they just meant to blow a big hole in the side? Penetrate and then explode like with a bunker buster? I was reading before about the Henschel Hs 294 which would dive into the water and then strike the ship like a torpedo. It seems the modern ones just strike from the air. Why is this?
>>33781 Don't know about missiles but torpedoes are about 50/50 between penetrating the ship, or using the pressure wave from the explosion to crack the ship like an egg. For above-water strikes I imagine it would have to penetrate first to do any real damage due to the distribution of force and giant shock absorber directly beneath it.
>>33781 Wanna try the naval thread for the naval question? Mostly said in jest. To answer your primary question, though, it depends on the payload or warhead of the missile in question. They can and do run the gamut of penetration types, from airburst HE to contact-fused HE to Fragmentation to Shaped Charges to even SAP, and each have different expectations placed on them. The most general and broad-brush overview I can give is to split all of them into three major types: Explosive, Penetration, and Fragmentation. 'Explosive' type generally are intended to blow massive holes in the ship, wherever they are aimed, to cause the maximal amount of devastation possible. Frankly, the simplest and easiest way to sink a ship is to blow giant gaping holes in one of its sides, after all. The missile penetrating the ship's hull before the warhead explodes is not required, punching a hole inwards with the raw blast effect is still completely viable and was in fact how the Anti-Ship Tomahawk was expected to work. Against unarmored targets, which is most ships anymore (warships or no), the missiles usually have enough terminal speed for the warhead to penetrate all the way through the ship when in top-attack mode and detonate on or just about to the keel, if you were wondering how top-attack profile was supposed to sink a ship. 'Penetration' type generally are designed to damage (or even detonate) vitals such as the power plants, magazines, or fuel storage of either armored ships (such as a Battleship) or very large ships (such as Aircraft Carriers). It's important to point out that almost all modern 'Penetration' type AShMs were designed as 'Carrier-Killers', and this is where most of their purposes lie. They are overkill against most ship types today except Carriers, Superfreighters, and Supertankers. and 'Fragmentation' type, which includes Fragmentation warheads, Shrapnel-based warheads, as well as explosive sub-munition payloads, are usually intended to make an absolute mess of a ship's superstructure, exposed/unarmored weapons systems, and electronics (read: radar), as well as making gory compost of the ship's crew. Conceptually they are designed around getting mission-kills rather than sinking ships as most of their damage profile is superficial in nature beyond the systems mentioned. Most, but not all, major AShMs fall under one of those categories. That being said, my memory can be a bit rusty at times and my information is old, so I could be wrong. Take that all with a grain of salt. >It seems the modern ones just strike from the air. Why is this? Because, ironically, torpedo-profile missiles cause much less damage than sea-skimming, side-attack missiles. The most devastating place for a ship to have a large, gaping hole blown into it at is where the center of the hole is just above the waterline, ideally with a yard or two of hole below water. Reason being, although underwater holes can and do cause serious damage, most underwater sections of ships (ironically including post-WW2 commercial ships that actually meet code) are heavily compartmentalized specifically to deal with potential underwater flooding, which drastically limits the extent of damage that underwater explosions can cause. They basically have to cause enough damage to sink the ship in one go or they're not really effective, and that's nearly impossible to do with side-hit torpedo profiles, and the guidance system required to make it hit the belly of the ship is unlikely to survive a high-speed impact with the water. The ideal above-water hit, however, continually increases its influence as the ship continues to take on more water, making adjusting for the flooding a continual nightmare and in effect eventually impossible unless damage control can get on it undisturbed. This is because as the ship takes on more water, the submerged section of the hole gets larger and larger, meaning the surface area making contact with the water increases exponentially, which drags that section of the ship further into the water, increasing the rate of flooding, and so on in a self-feeding cycle. One inattentive moment or stress-induced overreaction and the ship capsizes and goes under right then and there.
>>33792 > Because, ironically, torpedo-profile missiles cause much less damage than sea-skimming, side-attack missiles This for the reason anon described. Pressure-wave torpedos like the Mk48 can sink a ship if left unattended, but usually they focus on broad superstructural damage (cracking an egg analogy) so that the enemy is forced to surrender to focus on repairs or else get cracked in half by a followup missile strike. It's more about weakening the entire ship into being inoperable rather than destroying it outright. The crew might turn to meat paste or die of blunt force trauma anyways from the pressure wave if they are close to the impact site though.
Any good military/police uniforms for cold weather/rain/snow?
probably not the board for this, but my brother is getting chickens (in a suburbia-ish place... like it's suburbia, but our yard is fenced in and lush as hell). as far as i know it's perfectly okay to do, but one thing i'm scared of is some asshat trying to say it's got that avian flu and getting officials involved. now should this paranoia of mine come true, what can i do to keep the chickens from getting put down?
>>33930 Bird flu can have a gestation period of three weeks. If his chickens have been quarantined for about a month before coming into contact with other chickens, and do not further come into contact with other people's chickens, they are 100% guaranteed avian flu-free. Bird flu is only an issue on mass scales or in Asian countries (China/Vietnam/Philippines) where safety protocols are not followed.
>>33784 >>33792 >>33795 Thank you for your responses. I really appreciate them. The point about sea-skimming missiles is unexpected but quite sensible.
I need to read up on training regimens for rescue-based military/guard units. rescue swimmers, pararescue etc. Do they have the info on their literal websites for anybody to see? >also are there any military-unit descent cavers or cave divers?
Open file (63.05 KB 600x397 34.jpeg)
Can you legally destroy an entire city as long as you've issued an evacuation order and the civilians ignored it? If not, what's required to bypass international laws and kill every OPFOR?(including, of course, civilians)
Could EFPs be used in a Claymore type weapon?
>>34256 Ofcourse you can. If there are military presence in a city then you can turn the city into Dresden. Ofcourse, if you lose the war then it's a different matter entirely.
>>34322 >Ofcourse, if you lose the war then it's a different matter entirely. I don't think the US got punished for razing several Vietnamese cities other than widespread infamy.
Will a Geiger counter react to an atomic clock based watch or is the shielding sufficient to make not noticeable?
>>34325 The US didn't really lose Vietnam though it was more like the hippies at home were bitching too much about it so the US packed up and said fuck it.
>>34478 Your "atomic" watch is just a quartz clock with a radio receiver. Even if it was a real atomic clock, the isotopes they use aren't detectably radioactive. >>34495 The US's strategic objective was to keep the commies from taking over. The commies took over. There's really no way to spin that as anything but a defeat.
>>34504 >The US's strategic objective was to keep the commies from taking over. The commies took over. And in many more ways than just SE Asia. As evidenced by Usuper-in-Chief and his (((handlers))), the Commies 'took over' in a big way. McCarthy was right all along. The very fact Jewish corporate-controlled media and education so vilified dear John is strong evidence that he was in fact baste. Hitler did nothing wrong and the US definitely fought on the wrong side of WWII. They're still doing it wrong today.
>>34322 >Ofcourse you can. If there are military presence in a city then you can turn the city into Dresden. Then why didn't the Americans obliterate every village in Afghanistan? Wasn't that the whole reason they lost the war?
Open file (178.61 KB 604x391 1924739187851112.png)
Also why was the Russian navy such a stronghold of Bolshevism and source of pride for the reds during the civil war? Was it because the sailors were treated like shit more than any other branch of the military or something else?
>>34645 Peter the Great turned the Russian navy from a ragtag excuse by nobles to fuck around into a full-fledged force and he was also well known for employing the citizenry in work primarily passed down by heredity. I imagine this tradition continued through the Russian navy.
>>34649 To specify the navy was subject to strict discipline and rules more than the army and being in the navy you need some relatively high standard of IQ but that doesn't seem like a good enough reason for this (projected) image of the navy being Soviet hardliners, or maybe Battleship Potemkin did it for them.
>>34632 Because 'hearts and minds'. The US' handling of both Afghanistan and Iraq were case studies on how NOT to win a war. I lost count of the generals and colonels who were given the boot for pushing for genghis khan style strategies in the sandbox. Literally the only way to actually win over there once you've put boots on the ground.
Has any plane mounted its guns above the fuselage?
>>34673 That's generally a bad idea. That being said you sometimes see it in air-to-ground style planes as a retrofit for air attack defenses. I guess there's also Foster Mounting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foster_mounting
>>34632 >Then why didn't the Americans obliterate every village in Afghanistan? I mean at first they did. That was basically the pre-2007 phase of the war was razing everything to the ground and treating every able bodied adult and boy over 6 or 7 as an enemy combatant. It's half of why >>34652 failed as badly as it did. The other half being the rampant uncontrolled contractor spending and logistical losses either due to our allies wanting a cut or the local kid-fucking warlords we employed to overthrow the "bad guys" causing the entire village to radicalize when he got too frisky with the wrong guy's son.

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms

no cookies?