Do you have an astigmatism?What optics do you use, and what ones look good with your astigmatism?Picrel
>>64317126All of the Sig optics look like top left to me. It’s been said already but:Eotech EXPS2 - the hologram looks like it has static on it, but the reticle is cleanPrimary Arms SLX- cleanest and cheapestHolosun 507 - cleanest pistol dot for my eyes.
>buy a vortex 3x prism because all the astigmatism bros swear by it on k>the reticle is microscopicother than that yeah its great. the glass is good. but the fucking reticle is just so tiny. I could get it tattooed on my pinky nail 3 times thats how small it is.aim small miss small I guess.
>>64336379The Vortex Spitfire is the same. 5x reticle is small, 3x is tiny.I don't understand why PA or Vortex can't make a prism with just a simple crosshair reticle. We shouldn't have to pay for ACOG/ELCAN/Steiner to get a decent reticle.
>>64317137it's always a hoot to see an angry noguns teenaged poster get mad by even gun accessories they dont own, let alone the whole part where they've never shot or even held a gun before you should start posting with a tripcode if you're going to be this upset over nothing
>>64339582>>64336379I like the tiny reticles, I live in the woods up North and shit gets dark early. You already have to strain to see targets against the background, I can tell you from experience a big intrusive reticle is a liability in poor light.
post photos of 1935-1945 aviationcivilian and military from this eraNo 'warbirds' (<-post-war restorations), videogame screencaps or drawingHigh resolution photographs (not pictures for ants)
>>64328774God, I love the whirlwind. Such a nice and beautiful plane. It's a shame it's prime window only lasted a few months and it missed most of it.
>>64339226It was a nice idea and had potential, unfortunately its design powerplant didn't live up to that.
What does /k/ think of the Omega destroyer?
>>64339653>there is absolutely some kind of factor or synergy of factors causing itFucking Vorlons.
>>64339653>im mid way through watching s5 with my wife,Solid keeper. Keep her.
>>64330146Look man, every military ship classification is relative. If I wanted to be pedantic I'd say a "cruiser" is any habitable ship with a lot of delta-V compared to carriers and battleships, and a "destroyer" is basically the smallest habitable ship that still technically has enough firepower to incapacitate a battleship or carrier under the right circumstances. Carriers carry fighters or at least landing craft and battleships are too awesome to use. I did zero research to check any of this because I'm really making a point about how there's little point in caring about anything beyond trying to get a show to stick to its own rules, which is too much to ask for when they won't stick to sanity.
>>64330025No radiators and a spinny section on something that's expected to take damage = 0/10
>minbari tech is 10000 years more advanced>1st ones are millions of years more advanced and bio ships. always thought that was neat.
war hammers
>>64339886Over 20lbs of pussy and ass
>>64340028For only $600 plus tip!
>>64340034>fills a specific fetish>cheaper, cleaner, and safer than a whore>lives in the back of the closet, never talks back>will never flip out and break your shit>will never flip out and call the cops because they had a bad dream>doesn't talk back>always DTFI'm sorry you lack the vision to see how much of a bargain that is.
>>64340138I've had fleshlights before and I've put them between pillows and fucked them and all that but I don't really get the point since I can just use my hand and edge and it feels good either way. if only they could make it stink like a real girl
>>64339472Goblins are ok, but consider jewel stealing batsThe good matches the government doesn't want you to have for scale
Is this another Russian red line or are tomahawks an actual game changer for Ukraine?
>>64335340>AlaskaLmaoooo the National Guard could stop them alone
>>64334890The most recent ... should be replaced by "fly a dozen drones into NATO airspace which are promptly shot down and do nothing"
>>64339544why did the range go down so much from block II to block V? did they make it cheaper or lighter or something?
>>64340348The -N stands for "Nuclear", so I assume it was special in several ways
>>64334989Tomahawks have a long range, are more precise, and have a larger payload than what Ukraine is currently fielding. Send a 1000lb'er into the heart of every major Russian refinery followed by one with cluster bomblets, and cluster bomb major oil storage tanks, and you have more damage in a single strike with a few dozen missiles than Ukraine has managed to do with multiple hundreds of strikes. Ukraine is only managing to put refineries out of business for days. The longest was a month I believe. A Tomahawk can make that "years."
/msg/ - Military Surplus GeneralBORING GUNS EditionPost old stuff.Thread question: What's an obscure milsurp prototype/design that lives in your head rent free?Previous Thread: >>64240292
>>64338231It’s literally just oxidized brass mixed with oil. You’ll live
>>64337359does it wiggle back and forth in the stock?
>>64338231>he got cursed by the potion of an ethiopian witchnice knowing you
>>64338182yeh the average person never checks inside the bolt they just wipe the outside obvoius shit but inside is where all the hot cosmo flooded when the whole rifle was dunked in. and when the rifle heats up from use it will melt and ooze out then dry or get sticky and fuck up your pin in the forward position and youll have a super cool time at the range
>>64340375No, it's completely solid. I'm glad I got it for "only" $1500. I know the syrup drinkers can (or could) get them for cheaper, but still.
I saw a video saying the F-4J/F-4E were the best air to air fighters in the world in 1973. This true?The Viggen was worse in what way? Was it at least the definitive #2?
>>64337129Might have thought he could save it at first, and by the time she stops quaking I'd probably follow his lead and try and sneak out instead of ejecting over a massive fuel fire
>>64337369On top of the "where the fuck am I going to land" question>I think I can squeak out of here with some minor burns>Guaranteed turn my spine into an accordionI think I'm taking the same choice
>>64337481Bump
>>64337481Especially when you consider flightsuits are flame retardant, though ngl I would've panicked and pulled the ejector seat the second a fire burst out
>>64336642>Yes but again how did fighter Viggen compare to best Phantoms?More agile, worse electronics and armaments, especially in the then new airframes compared to very mature and fleshed out Phantoms by that point. I doubt Viggens benefitted from US Riven Joint research on IFF and cockpit ergonomics at that time ether.
Hypothetically speaking, let's just say I'm the new leader of a politically unstable, resource-rich, third-world country. My nation is being plagued by terrorists who are funded by a neighboring power, and local security forces are not up to snuff to deal with the threat. How feasible of an idea is it to hire a PMC and integrate them into the military or security services and allow them to execute operations against the enemy?
>>64340358Retarded thread, not enough specifics to actually answer your question. The resources in question, are they actively being exploited and providing you with cash flow or are they merely theoretical avenues of income? Is this "neighboring power" a peer adversary to you or will they absolutely fuck your shit if you attack them directly? Are you a pariah state that's actively being sanctioned by the civilized world or are you on good terms with the major powers?Speaking generally though, you'd be better off hiring PMCs to train and advise your own local security forces and spend the extra money you'd pour into paying the PMCs to actually fight on better equipping your own soldiers. When I hear "politically unstable" I think "you want a competent military on your side".
https://x.com/NavyLookout/status/1973302498564653283
>>64339875>Every Navy has its fuck ups.This isnt a fuck up you retard, these dickheads were doing shit too close to shore, in a very confined space (with onlookers btw). If this wasn't sanctioned some fuckers need to get shot.
>>64340058I hear the costal defence batteries in Sonora need a new XO.
>>64339708Didn't they also hit a bridge in NYC a few months ago?
>>64339708Very Chinese. Pro Tip: Boats don't have brakes, Pedro ;)
>>64339708Ramp that shit cabron!
Is this weird or is it just me, picrel?
>>64340302Yeah imagine
>>64340302You'd think that instead of all that 40mm ammo, you could just carry anti-personnel warheads for those RPGs and have the anti-tank gunners pull double duty as enti-emplacement gunners. Also, if we're assuming that fire & maneuver is the basis of their small unit tactics, what do you do with not one, but two guys ONLY carrying RPGs? Isn't the APC gunner supposed to provide the "fire" element in this scenario? If you encounter a dismounted infantry ambush along a jungle road, are they expected to charge the enemy positions, or just hang back and fire PG-7Vs wildly into the treeline?
>>64340334You can use the RPG-7 in CQC if you hold it backwards, baka
>>64340316i wish i had the folding stock saw instead of the shitty para carbine one.
>>64340316If both automatic riflemen have SAWs it's just one rifle caliber, and 2 grenade launchers and 1 AT launcher is a lot more of a reasonable logistical burden than 3 grenade launchers and 2 launchers
continuing from >>64297542
>>64337597>I presume the decks should be emptied of personnel?I wouldnt want to be in front of one of the SPY-1 (Aegis) panels when it radiates.Hell, the Navy gave the EA-6B crew gold plated canopies to protect them from harmful radiation.>EA-6B uses the AN/ALQ-99 pod, max power output of 11 kW >SPY-1 has 4,096 CFA (cross field amplifier, essentially a radiating element), each of which produces produces peak power of 132 kWSo, yeah, standing in front of a radiating SPY-1 sounds like great way to get dead. Or sterile.
>>64339401yeah but I was curious whether, for example, it's safe to stand on the flight deck of a Burke while it's scanning at lower power levelsI don't need to know specifics, just what the SOPs are
>>64338444checked
>>64337385neat pic>>64337568>tube mass/weightthanks anon
With the "Drone Age" quickly coming upon us, what is even the answer to them in warfare? I'd never want to be a soldier but even now, I'd want to be one even less. If all it is is just you waiting around to get dunked by some pencil neck playing with a controller, what is the point? I sometimes hate the turn that the evolution of warfare takes because it just ends up making things even more miserable for everyone. Granted, it is warfare sure. Anyway, what is the answer for drones in warfare and how do you expect things to sort of evolve around drones? Like when tanks first hit the battlefield, what options were made to address them? What about when planes become widely used in combat etc?
Can small drones be detected by current radars?Continuous, all-around surveillance using powerful radio waves poses the risk of the radar itself being detected and attacked.
>>64339397I think the most immediate and low-tech solution is AGLs with airburst munitions. I know Benelli was talking about an anti-drone shotgun but it sounds like a PR stunt. Shotguns can intercept drones but nowhere near reliably enough to warrant adding a whole extra guy to each squad who's just there to shoot quadcopters. From that point forward its an EW arms race until we can get lasers strong enough to at least blind a drone reliably mounted to anything bigger than a bicycle
>Turret using whatever long range rifle cartridge you want and ideally old surplus rifles>Tracks and shoots at anything it detects flying in it's range- except instead of just a camera, it has one of those extreme range microphones so before firing it does a simple check- does it go "bzzzzzzzzzz"?>If it sees something it THINKS is a drone but is silent, and said drone does not seem to be on a direct course to hit anything you designate as important, it sends a confirm request to some wagie>This prevents them from obliterating all birds in the area, but more importantly, not wasting ammo>Design system to be as dirt cheap as possible, use the classic Supcom tactic of "t1 AA creep" to achieve saturation in important areas>Also this would be one part of a greater network of drone defense, obviously this has flaws.
>>64339421people have been saying this for decades and yet literally not one nation on the planet has done this or even tried to
>>64339397Do your own homework Vlad.
Does /k/ have any more pictures like this?
Sherman herd
>>64339942imagine coming across a sherd in the wild
what happened to it?
>>64339898I know what you mean anon but we're talking about cartridges that can feasibly be used in a select fire infantry rifle. Also belted magnums aren't ideal for multi-small arm mil use (in machine guns for example)6.5 Creedmoor, 7 Rem Mag are too big for an "intermediate" <--hate the categorizations but here we are cartridge to be used in an infantry rifle, it needs to be sized comparable to the 5.56 OALAnyway the OP FN IWS .264 is the most advanced and optimal yet available.
>>64339766It's a bit smol264 gets similar BC with more charge volume
>>64340132The .264/6.5x43mm does seem interesting, but 6.5x39mm/6.5 Grendel has already been outclassed. Grendel belongs in a museum; it has the same BC as 6mm ARC, less flat shooting than 6mm ARC, slower than 6mm ARC, similar bullet weights (90 gr or 108 gr being common); it's just old news. It did do a great job of outperforming 6.8 SPC though.
>>64340204>outclassedNo, it hasn't. .30-06 hasn't been "outclassed"(You) can make an argument that cartridge X outperforms cartridge Y in certain metrics, but each cartridge also has its disadvantages. Barrel burning one of them, but there are others.6.8 was always a fucking joke. Solution to a 'problem' that never existed
>>64339777>why not just use the tech for 556?Because we've got nas3 for that already being fielded. SIGs case in the m250 and rebarreled 240 plus a dmr would be ideal.
Is the M249 SAW a bad gun
>>64334994Even a "sniper accurate" (let's say sub MOA) automatic rifle or machine gun would have a real-life cone of dispersion greater than the mechanical cone due to recoil and slight movement in the bipod. Purposefully making a gun pattern like shit when bolted to a rest and fed single rounds would only make real-life accuracy an actual impediment to the use.This shit's been studied, 5.56 rounds need to impact within a meter of the enemy to cause enough of a psychological demotivator to make him to to cover and 7.62 gives you a couple more meters but that's it. You don't have accurate information on a point target? Too fucking bad, your suppression effect is now based on real life RNG. If you're not hitting you're not suppressing.And automatic rifles/machine guns do have a very important role - cutting down the fuckers who run from cover to cover. A rifleman has to estimate holdover, lead and pull the trigger before the enemy can get back to cover. A gunner can cut him down.
>>64329829I was an armorer in a POG unit and every fucking time my battalion took these things out on a hike or field op they'd come back having shed a bunch of retaining pins and clips. They're fiddly hunks of pot metal.The M240 however was built like a fucking tank. I loved working on those.
>>64329829It’s an ok gun. There’s room for improvement.
>>64329829Yes. The SAW was always a bad gun. It always weighed way more than it should have and wasn't even accurate for it. The mag feed never worked, either. If it was like 12-13 lbs, then it'd be forgivable.
>>64339650>pot metalFN makes guns out of pot metal?they also manufacture the 240, btw>>64340085>always bad never workedMaybe the ones (You) got.
