Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
paranoid randroid
Mar 4, 2007


Dr. Benway posted:

The granddaddy of insanely bad ideas has to go to Project Pluto.


"Death form above" would be putting it mildly.

I can only imagine someone getting to the part in the design document that talks about dumping spent nuclear material over inhabited areas, after flattening them with a month of constant sonic booms, and looking around the room at everyone else before going "hang on a minute fellas... are we sure we're the good guys here?"

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

blunt for century
Jul 4, 2008

I've got a bone to pick.



Hey, you see that poo poo? Yeah, that poo poo aaaaaallll the way over there. It would be great if it was on fire.

The Flamethrower

wikipedia posted:

A flamethrower is a mechanical incendiary device designed to project a long, controllable stream of fire. They were first used during World War I, and widely used in World War II.

Some flamethrowers project a stream of ignited flammable liquid; some project a long gas flame. Most military flamethrowers use liquids, but commercial flamethrowers tend to use high-pressure propane and natural gas, which is considered safer. They are used by the military and by people needing controlled burning capacity, such as in agriculture (e.g., sugar cane plantations) or other such land management tasks. They can be designed to be either carried by the operator or mounted on a vehicle.
...
The man-portable flamethrower consists of two elements: a backpack and the gun. The backpack element usually consists of two or three cylinders. In a two-cylinder system, one cylinder holds compressed, inert propellant gas (usually nitrogen), and the other holds flammable liquid—typically petrol with some form of fuel thickener added to it. A three-cylinder system often has two outer cylinders of flammable liquid and a central cylinder of propellant gas to maintain the balance of the soldier carrying it. The gas propels the liquid fuel out of the cylinder through a flexible pipe and then into the gun element of the flamethrower system.
...
The flamethrower is a potent weapon with great psychological impact upon unprepared soldiers, inflicting a particularly horrific death. This has led to some calls for the weapon to be banned.
...
Flamethrowers pose many risks to the operator.

-The first disadvantage was the weapon's weight, which impairs the soldier's mobility.
-The weapon is limited to only a few seconds of burn time since it uses fuel very quickly, requiring the operator to be precise and conservative.
-The weapon was very visible on the battlefield, which caused operators to become immediately singled out as prominent targets, especially for snipers.
-Flamethrower operators were rarely taken prisoner, especially when their target survived an attack by the weapon; captured flamethrower users were in some cases summarily executed.[1]
-Finally, the flamethrower's effective range was short in comparison with that of other battlefield weapons of similar size. To be effective, flamethrower soldiers must approach their target, risking exposure to enemy fire. Vehicular flamethrowers also have this problem; they may have considerably greater range than a man-portable flamethrower, but their range is still short compared with that of other infantry weapons.







https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmvvEbedHr4

Dandywalken
Feb 11, 2014

I will not shut up about the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers. I talk about them all the time and work them into every conversation. I actually named my daughter after the Pink ranger and will provide proof if challenged.


Here's a pretty simple one in terms of weird design intentions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_bomb

Why blow em up, when you can just radiate em instead? A very situational weaon with varying degrees of effectiveness depending on where it hit and environmental conditions, it could also be used for great purposes on the homefront:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgpa7wEAz7I

Also, Springfield once

DumbparameciuM
Feb 23, 2015

TOASTIN CONES AND BLASTIN FOES
LOWER HOUSE | LOWER SIXTH


cheese-cube posted:

Throw money at Rosoboronexport and get a 3M-54E Club-K system: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mbUU_9bOcnM

Includes terminal-phase supersonic sprint in the ASM variant (Shown at 6:45 in the video). Apparently even the new US carriers couldn't defend against >1 missiles at once.

I want to see this system vs the Spyder (in it's defensive anti-guided-munitions role)

wikipedia posted:

The SPYDER (Surface-to-air PYthon and DERby) is an Israeli short and medium range mobile air defence system developed by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems with assistance from Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI). Rafael is the prime contractor and IAI is the major subcontractor for the SPYDER program. This system achieved a notable milestone in 2005 when missiles were fired against test targets in Shdema, Israel and scored direct hits...

...The SPYDER is a low-level, quick-reaction surface-to-air missile system capable of engaging aircraft, helicopters, unmanned air vehicles, drones, and precision-guided munitions. It provides air defence for fixed assets and for point and area defence for mobile forces in combat areas. The system is fitted atop a Tatra truck, a Mercedes-Benz Actros truck, or a MAN TGS truck. It implements the Python-5 and Derby missiles of the same company. The SPYDER launcher is designed to fire Python-5 and Derby surface-to-air missiles which share full commonality with the air-to-air missiles.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1is-gYc7Jeo
Appologies for the bad quality footage and the bad quality presenter, but it does display the concept pretty well.

Aleph Null
Jun 10, 2008

You look very stressed


Tortured By Flan

blunt for century posted:

To redeem my stupid, stupid, very stupid self:

Tsar Bomba

The largest nuke ever built at 50mt, and it was only half the size of one they wanted to make.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwlNPhn64TA

The detonation site:


The fireball 5 miles in diameter:


Didn't they decide that 100 mt wasn't worth it because an aerial blast (to maximize damage) would have lost a significant amount of its force to space due to the explosion being too freaking large?

3
Aug 26, 2006

The Magic Number




College Slice

Aleph Null posted:

Didn't they decide that 100 mt wasn't worth it because an aerial blast (to maximize damage) would have lost a significant amount of its force to space due to the explosion being too freaking large?

The device was too heavy to be delivered by rocket and had to be dropped by plane, and 50-ish megatons was already cutting it a bit close for comfort in terms of not vaporizing flightcrew.

Pile Of Garbage
May 28, 2007





DumbparameciuM posted:

I want to see this system vs the Spyder (in it's defensive anti-guided-munitions role)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1is-gYc7Jeo
Appologies for the bad quality footage and the bad quality presenter, but it does display the concept pretty well.

I don't think the SPYDER is designed to intercept surface-skimming cruise missiles. It's flight altitude is listed as 20-9,000m whereas the 3M-54 is 10-15m. Still you never know what Rafael has up their sleeves.

DumbparameciuM
Feb 23, 2015

TOASTIN CONES AND BLASTIN FOES
LOWER HOUSE | LOWER SIXTH


cheese-cube posted:

I don't think the SPYDER is designed to intercept surface-skimming cruise missiles. It's flight altitude is listed as 20-9,000m whereas the 3M-54 is 10-15m. Still you never know what Rafael has up their sleeves.

Hmm! Excellent point there. I got a bit ahead of myself. Also, the terminal phase of that thing is no loving joke.

Also I think it might be the best pitch video I've seen since the first MetalStorm videos.

Man with Hat
Dec 26, 2007

Open up your Dethday present
It's a box of fucking nothing


Exciting Lemon

3 posted:

The device was too heavy to be delivered by rocket and had to be dropped by plane, and 50-ish megatons was already cutting it a bit close for comfort in terms of not vaporizing flightcrew.

It also had to be dropped by a specially modified bomber because it was so drat big and dumb.

The whole point of the bomb was just to show they could do it. I'm pretty sure the soviet knew from day one that flying a slow rear end plane with a giant bomb somewhere it'd be useful to drop it was never going to work. It was just to show the world they built the coolest bomb and that america could suck it. The whole project just seems to be a giant "Why? Because it's cool".

And it was so loving cool

wikipedia posted:

The fireball reached nearly as high as the altitude of the release plane and was visible at almost 1,000 kilometres (620 mi) away from where it ascended. The subsequent mushroom cloud was about 64 kilometres (40 mi) high (over seven times the height of Mount Everest), which meant that the cloud was above the stratosphere and well inside the mesosphere when it peaked. The cap of the mushroom cloud had a peak width of 95 kilometres (59 mi). The base of the cloud was 40 kilometres (25 mi) wide. All buildings in the village of Severny (both wooden and brick), located 55 kilometres (34 mi) from ground zero within the Sukhoy Nos test range, were destroyed. In districts hundreds of kilometers from ground zero wooden houses were destroyed, stone ones lost their roofs, windows and doors; and radio communications were interrupted for almost one hour. One participant in the test saw a bright flash through dark goggles and felt the effects of a thermal pulse even at a distance of 270 kilometres (170 mi). The heat from the explosion could have caused third-degree burns 100 km (62 mi) away from ground zero. A shock wave was observed in the air at Dikson settlement 700 kilometres (430 mi) away; windowpanes were partially broken to distances of 900 kilometres (560 mi).[11] Atmospheric focusing caused blast damage at even greater distances, breaking windows in Norway and Finland. The seismic shock[verification needed] created by the detonation was measurable even on its third passage around the Earth.[12] Its seismic body wave magnitude was about 5 to 5.25.[10] The energy yield was around 8.1 on the Richter scale but, since the bomb was detonated in the air rather than underground, most of the energy was not converted to seismic waves. The TNT equivalent of the 50 Mt test could be represented by a cube of TNT 312 metres (1023 feet) on a side, approximately the height of the Eiffel Tower.

I was going to bold the really goddamned cool parts but I realized I'd have to bold the whole thing. It's absurd.

KozmoNaut
Apr 23, 2008

Happiness is a warm
Turbo Plasma Rifle


quote:

breaking windows in Norway and Finland

Rodatose
Jul 7, 2008

corn, corn, corn

Has anyone said anything about Wotjek the War Bear? Wotjek was Woot as gently caress, didn't afraid of anything



See, what happened was there was this little war one time called, oh, I don't know, WORLD WAR 2?! Lots of people got killed in it. The slavs were one of the nationalities fighting, and they were running out of men for fighting. So what they did is one night when they were depressed about their upcoming meaningless deaths is they did some rounds, went to a zoo and were like, "uh, pavlov could train dogs to do whatever, and bears are basically just big dogs so what if we got on of these things to like, hold guns? And shoot the other guys?" So they did that and named the bear wotjek after one of those barbarian legends the slavs have and long story short it didn't really do much but it made for good stories around the bar

Pile Of Garbage
May 28, 2007





DumbparameciuM posted:

Hmm! Excellent point there. I got a bit ahead of myself. Also, the terminal phase of that thing is no loving joke.

Also I think it might be the best pitch video I've seen since the first MetalStorm videos.

Concern Agat spend a ridiculous amount on their videos as the bulk of their profits are to countries other than Russia (Via Rosoboronexport of course).

Also their boothes at expos are weird and awkward, so much so that an E3 promoter would feel uncomfortable: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxJzl3Xt-m4

SirPhoebos
Dec 10, 2007

Horned Rat-Sempai Noticed Me!


cheese-cube posted:

Concern Agat spend a ridiculous amount on their videos as the bulk of their profits are to countries other than Russia (Via Rosoboronexport of course).

Also their boothes at expos are weird and awkward, so much so that an E3 promoter would feel uncomfortable: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxJzl3Xt-m4

Did Russia lay off all their orchestras or something? The soothing violin and techno-beat doesn't go at all with the weapons being shown off.

Thwomp
Apr 9, 2003

BA-DUHHH



Grimey Drawer

To shift gears a bit, let's look at an ancient (or maybe just really old) weapon system: Greek fire!

If you've heard of it, you probably have the impression it was some Byzantine (ROMAN) wonder weapon that was used to ignite enemy ships and the water around them. Some of this is true and what's also true is that the recipe was such a closely guarded secret that it's been lost to history. However, clues remain to its true origin.

Here's what the entire system is thought to have looked like:


Generally speaking, Greek fire is thought to be petroleum-based with some resins incorporated for increased stickyness and as a thickener. It may have also included other chemicals that allowed it to spontaneously catch fire upon contact with air.

It was heated below the deck of special ships and kept under pressure. When the valve was opened it was sprayed out of a spout at the bow of the ship (usually on a swivel). But it wasn't used to burn down ships, just their crews. There's also the aforementioned lighting the water on fire (it's an oil-mixture after all) so it'z either burning on deck or burning overboard! The only known way to put out the flame was sand (good old oxygen deprivation), strong vinegar (like that's common on board a warship), or old urine (also not really common because ).

In essence, it's a flame thrower but who the gently caress had a flamethrower in 7th century BCE? It's noted to have saved Constantinople from the Arabs several times and from the Rus at least once. Eventually, the Arabs learned to just stay out of range and upwind of the Greek fire ships. If you had to engage them, do as the Arabs did and hide behind vinegar soaked felt or hides. Mmmmm, manly.

Dr. Benway
Dec 9, 2005

We can't stop here! This is bat country!

Not a weapon per se, but check out the WASP injection knife. The bane of sharks, deflated basket balls, & ah.. apparently vicious watermelons.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sa_NC-_fvKs

Powerful Two-Hander
Mar 9, 2004

Mods please change my name to "Tooter Skeleton" TIA.



Man with Hat posted:

The subsequent mushroom butt was about 64 kilometres (40 mi) high (over seven times the height of Mount Everest), which meant that my butt was above the stratosphere and well inside the mesosphere when it peaked. The cap of the mushroom butt had a peak width of 95 kilometres (59 mi). The base of my butt was 40 kilometres (25 mi) wide.

[/quote]

Cloud to Butt extension delivers again.

Stupid_Sexy_Flander
Mar 14, 2007

Is a man not entitled to the haw of his maw?


Grimey Drawer

Dr. Benway posted:

Not a weapon per se, but check out the WASP injection knife. The bane of sharks, deflated basket balls, & ah.. apparently vicious watermelons.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sa_NC-_fvKs

Always loved this video of it : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMvpmGb0Fcs

Grandma Panic!
Nov 4, 2006


who needs runways?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-length_launch

(it turns out you need runways to land)

blunt for century
Jul 4, 2008

I've got a bone to pick.



Dear god that would be an uncomfortable takeoff

Why's it only have one bomb/fuel tank? I would think that would noticeably change the handling and aerodynamics.

overeager overeater
Oct 16, 2011

"The cosmonauts were transfixed with wonderment as the sun set - over the Earth - there lucklessly, untethered Comrade Todd on fire."





The TP-82, AKA the Soviet Space Shotgun:





War is Boring posted:

There was a time when Russian cosmonauts regularly traveled to space with the gun in tow. But calling it a pistol is slightly misleading—the TP-82 more like a small shotgun.

The Soviet Union included the weapon in Granat-6 survival kits stashed inside Soyuz capsules between 1982 and 2006.

[...]

Shooting this combination pistol took more effort than most firearms. The gun had three barrels and two hammers.

The right hammer fired a 12.5 x 70-millimeter shotgun shell out of a smoothbore barrel. A vertical thumb-switch shifted the left hammer between the second smoothbore barrel and a rifle barrel underneath. This last barrel fired 5.45 x 39-millimeter rifle cartridges.

For the shotgun barrels, the Soviet designers gave the cosmonauts 10 cartridges each of SP-D bird shot and SP-S red signal flare. This meant a crashed pilot could hunt small game and call for help.

DumbparameciuM
Feb 23, 2015

TOASTIN CONES AND BLASTIN FOES
LOWER HOUSE | LOWER SIXTH


blunt for century posted:

Dear god that would be an uncomfortable takeoff

Why's it only have one bomb/fuel tank? I would think that would noticeably change the handling and aerodynamics.

I think maybe there's a lot about that design they didn't think all the way through

EDIT: Might've been possible to counter it with enough Trim, I have no idea how that poo poo would be manageable without a Fly By Wire system.

DumbparameciuM has a new favorite as of 01:39 on Apr 11, 2015

3
Aug 26, 2006

The Magic Number




College Slice

Vlad the Retailer posted:

The TP-82, AKA the Soviet Space Shotgun:





You forgot to mention why the USSR felt the need to keep their Cosmonauts strapped in the first place: as all Russian space capsules were designed to land on... well, land, rather than water, there was a nonzero chance that a mishap in reentry could lead to a couple of shivering Cosmonauts fending off wolves in the wastes of Siberia. This wasn't a theoretical concern, by the way.

Wild T
Dec 15, 2008

The point I'm trying to make is that the only way to come out on top is to kick the Air Force in the nuts, beart it savagely with a weight and take a dump on it's face.

One simple, obvious idea that ended up being the most fun you can have with a bruised shoulder. Izhmash, the manufacturer of the AK rifles used by the Russian Army, took a look at the best and worst features of the venerable design. Loose tolerances, reliable function, easily manufactured and scaled? Check. A reputation for inaccuracy past a few hundred meters, awful ergonomics and a round whose terminal ballistics were found lacking? Also check.

The solution? Take the design and turn it into a motherfucking Kalashnikov 12 gauge shotgun. Yes, the ergonomics are somehow made worse. Yes, the famous reliability goes out the window when using anything but high brass shot or slugs. But once you magdump ten 1 oz solid lead slugs at a target in one long, barking sequence your cock will be hard enough to shatter a marble bust of Lenin. To top it all off, a competing armory soon saw how everyone loved modifying the Saiga and introduced a factory tacticlol'd version, the Vepr-12, which is more betterer in every way except the obscene price tag.

Between Kalashnikov shotguns and the Russian idea of using clapped-out 23mm antitank gun barrels to make pump-action punt guns to put down prison riots it's pretty much understood that Russians have the market cornered in bizarre yet awesome scatterguns.

Pneub
Mar 12, 2007

I'M THE DEVIL, AND I WILL WASH OVER THE EARTH AND THE SEAS WILL RUN RED WITH THE BLOOD OF ALL THE SINNERS

I AM REBORN


The Loudener: suprisingly not a Simpsons joke

Gyro Zeppeli
Jul 18, 2012

sure hope no-one throws me off a bridge


The Obrez.



A WW2 invention by Russian troops. During city fighting, they realized their Mosin Nagant rifles were too long for the enclosed areas cityfighting takes place in. Their solution? Take a hacksaw to the Mosin Nagant and chop it into something you could use one handed.

The power was such that if you fired it within a few feet of the target, there was a decent chance you'd not only shoot them, but burn them with the muzzle flash too.

Chillbro Baggins
Oct 8, 2004
Bad Angus! Bad!


Pondex posted:

Not exactly. The airforce (I think) ordered that nuclear jet-engine as a way to keep their nuclear deterrent-bombers airborne for longer stretches of time without refueling. So they weren't entirely out of the loop.

No, the proposed bomber reactor was closed-loop and didn't spew radiation out the exhaust. It ran like a ship's reactor, with the steam turbine turning a jet engine instead of a propeller.

The Project Pluto engine was a straight-through ramjet with an unshielded nuclear reactor instead of a combustion chamber. And made it to the point of the engine being tested on the ground before ICBMs got good enough and it was cancelled. It wasn't a case of "wait, does this make us the bad guys?" it was "ICBMs are cheaper and easier to build and maintain while being just as effective".

Oh, and when you think "cruise missile" you think, like, Tomahawk-sized -- SLAM was to be about the size of an average diesel locomotive.

C.M. Kruger
Oct 28, 2013


Actually the Obrez was a Russian Civil War creation by bandits and partisans who needed more concealable weapons, because handguns weren't common in Russia.

For close-range firepower in WW2, the Russians had the PPSh-41. Sometimes they equipped entire platoons or companies with it, instead of rifles.


quote:

A few hundred weapons were produced in November 1941 and another 155,000 were made during the next five months. By spring 1942, the PPSh factories were producing roughly 3,000 units a day.

quote:

Its parts (excluding the barrel) could be produced by a relatively unskilled workforce with simple equipment available in an auto repair garage or tin shop, freeing more skilled workers for other tasks. The PPSh-41 used 87 components compared to 95 for the PPD-40 and the PPSh could be manufactured with an estimated 5.6 machining hours (later revised to 7.3 hours) compared with 13.7 hours for the PPD.[9][10] Barrel production was often simplified by using barrels for the 7.62mm M1891 Mosin–Nagant rifle: the rifle barrel was cut in half and two PPSh barrels were made from it after machining the chamber for the 7.62mm Soviet submachine gun cartridge.


The PPS, which augmented and later replaced it, was even simpler, and was even produced inside Leningrad while the city was under siege.

quote:

During design, emphasis was placed on simplifying production and eliminating most machining operations; most of the weapon's parts were sheet-steel stamped. These measures reduced the number of machined components to a bare minimum, cutting down machining time by more than half, to 2.7 hours of machining instead of 7.3 hours for the PPSh-41. There were also savings of over 50% in raw steel usage, down to 6.2 kg instead of 13.9 kg, and fewer workers were required to manufacture and assemble the parts. Thanks to the improvements in production efficiency, the Soviet planners estimated that the new gun would have allowed an increase in monthly submachine gun output from 135,000 units to 350,000 weapons.

Crunkjuice
Apr 4, 2007

That could've gotten in my eye!
*launches teargas at unarmed protestors*

I THINK OAKLAND PD'S USE OF EXCESSIVE FORCE WAS JUSTIFIED!


You post all that about the PPSH and fail to post the best thing its ever done?

Screw bombs, lets just strap a shitload of submachine guns in the bomb bay.

Hell, they were cheap enough they could drop the whole payload on the second pass and hope one of them brained a german and still come out ahead costwise. not actually true but I wish it so

Crunkjuice has a new favorite as of 23:54 on Apr 11, 2015

Tiberius Thyben
Feb 7, 2013

Gone Phishing



C.M. Kruger posted:

Actually the Obrez was a Russian Civil War creation by bandits and partisans who needed more concealable weapons, because handguns weren't common in Russia.

For close-range firepower in WW2, the Russians had the PPSh-41. Sometimes they equipped entire platoons or companies with it, instead of rifles.







The PPS, which augmented and later replaced it, was even simpler, and was even produced inside Leningrad while the city was under siege.


You should also note that it was such a good gun, the Germans had a production run rechambering captured PPSh's for 9x19 parabellum.

Pound_Coin
Feb 5, 2004
£




C.M. Kruger posted:

Actually the Obrez was a Russian Civil War creation by bandits and partisans who needed more concealable weapons, because handguns weren't common in Russia.

For close-range firepower in WW2, the Russians had the PPSh-41.

it also came in airbourne varieties



Edit; gently caress serves me right for ending up reading wiki crap mid-post.

Pound_Coin has a new favorite as of 00:15 on Apr 12, 2015

Tiberius Thyben
Feb 7, 2013

Gone Phishing



Pound_Coin posted:

it also came in airbourne varieties



Two posts above yours.

C.M. Kruger
Oct 28, 2013


Tiberius Thyben posted:

You should also note that it was such a good gun, the Germans had a production run rechambering captured PPSh's for 9x19 parabellum.

They also just used them with 7.63x25mm Mauser ammo, which is dimensionally the same as 7.62x25mm Tokarev but loaded to lower pressures.

And that's another thing the PPSh/PPS had going for them, 7.62mm Tokarev was a relatively hot cartridge for it's time, as I recall it's more in the range of a magnum or .30 Carbine than a 9mm or .45 ACP, which would have given Soviet submachine gunners better killing ballistics at range.

Kazinsal
Dec 13, 2011






.45 ACP US Army Ball FMJ is around 477 joules at the muzzle out of a five inch barrel. Tokarev out of a similar length barrel averages between 500 and 700 (the Czechs were notorious for edging towards the latter -- google "tokarev czech load", you'll probably see some stories about Russian TT33s blowing the gently caress up because someone shoved Czech ammo in them).

I think .30 Carbine is ~1300 J. I could open a tab to wikipedia but

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

Hijo Del Helmsley posted:

The Obrez.



A WW2 invention by Russian troops. During city fighting, they realized their Mosin Nagant rifles were too long for the enclosed areas cityfighting takes place in. Their solution? Take a hacksaw to the Mosin Nagant and chop it into something you could use one handed.

The power was such that if you fired it within a few feet of the target, there was a decent chance you'd not only shoot them, but burn them with the muzzle flash too.

I have a Mosin. Shooting it one-handed would take some serious getting used to.

Bip Roberts
Mar 29, 2005





Zeroisanumber posted:

I have a Mosin. Shooting it one-handed would take some serious getting used to.

I would guess you get a significant decrease of muzzle velocity with a three inch barrel.

Kazinsal
Dec 13, 2011






Bip Roberts posted:

I would guess you get a significant decrease of muzzle velocity with a three inch barrel.

Still the same amount of gunpowder. Though a LOT of it would burn outside the barrel (hence the massive fireball).

juggalo baby coffin
Dec 2, 2007

How would the dog wear goggles and even more than that, who makes the goggles?



blunt for century posted:

To redeem my stupid, stupid, very stupid self:

Tsar Bomba

The largest nuke ever built at 50mt, and it was only half the size of one they wanted to make.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwlNPhn64TA

The detonation site:


The fireball 5 miles in diameter:


They actually made it at 100mt, but at the last minute swapped out half the uranium with lead tamper because of the likelihood of it potentially killing the crew of the plane that'd drop it.

Blue On Blue
Nov 14, 2012



Hijo Del Helmsley posted:

The Obrez.



A WW2 invention by Russian troops. During city fighting, they realized their Mosin Nagant rifles were too long for the enclosed areas cityfighting takes place in. Their solution? Take a hacksaw to the Mosin Nagant and chop it into something you could use one handed.

The power was such that if you fired it within a few feet of the target, there was a decent chance you'd not only shoot them, but burn them with the muzzle flash too.

I always wondered why they made the wrist-crippling stock instead of leaving the full shoulder stock on it... it would still be 90% better in close quarters.

Also the cute little front sight

Malleum
Aug 16, 2014

I just want to see you. I won't ask you any questions. I won't ask you about things you don't want to talk about.

Lain2020


Buglord

Sappo569 posted:

I always wondered why they made the wrist-crippling stock instead of leaving the full shoulder stock on it... it would still be 90% better in close quarters.

Also the cute little front sight

Because even when cut down it's still pretty huge. They made these things so they could hide them under coats, not just for close-quarters fighting.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Pile Of Garbage
May 28, 2007





Billmac posted:

who needs runways?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-length_launch

(it turns out you need runways to land)

This reminds me of Operation Credible Sport which was a plan to rescue hostages held in Iran during 1980:

quote:

The Credible Sport concept called for a modified C-130 Hercules cargo plane to land in the Amjadien Stadium across the street from the U.S. Embassy and airlift out Delta Force operators and the rescued hostages. The aircraft would then be flown to and landed on an aircraft carrier for immediate medical treatment of an expected 50 wounded.

They planned to do that by fitting rocket motors from missiles to a C-130's airframe:

quote:

The resulting XFC-130H aircraft were modified by the installation of 30 rockets in multiple sets: eight forward-pointed ASROC rocket motors mounted around the forward fuselage to stop the aircraft, eight downward-pointed Shrike rockets fuselage-mounted above the wheel wells to brake its descent, eight rearward-pointed MK-56 rockets (from the RIM-66 Standard missile) mounted on the lower rear fuselage for takeoff assist, two Shrikes mounted in pairs on wing pylons to correct yaw during takeoff transition, and two ASROCs mounted at the rear of the tail to prevent it from striking the ground from over-rotation.

However, it didn't work out quite so well in testing (It sure looked badass though):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSFjhWw4DNo

Pile Of Garbage has a new favorite as of 09:47 on Apr 12, 2015

  • Locked thread