Jump to content

bojan

Members
  • Posts

    18,212
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About bojan

  • Birthday 01/14/1979

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Belgrade, Serbia
  • Interests
    Obscure tanks and guns.
    Obscure facts about well known tanks and guns.
    Obscure historical facts.

Recent Profile Visitors

16,285 profile views

bojan's Achievements

Hierophant Lord

Hierophant Lord (3/3)

0

Reputation

  1. Heard that RGW-90 is highly popular, including Russians liking captured ones while PzF3 is highly unpopular*, everything else somewhere between, but other than PzF3 no real stinkers. *Never found a reasonable explanation why.
  2. Steyr and Beretta also considers 7.62x51mm automatic rifles "assault rifle". European SIG is dead. Also, if we could adopt original military terminology and... vz.58 would be "SMG" (Samopal) since Czech call so any automatic weapons that is not a MG. So both vz.61 Skorpion and 7.62x51mm version of BREN-2 automatic rifle are "SMGs" Soviets/Russians have pretty well defined terminology that covers well their small arms. But issues start when you try to apply it to someone else weapons. Hence M16 is "автоматическая винтовка" - automatic rifle. M4 is however "автомат", which is another designation for "automatic carbine". Carbine is defined as having "barrel length of 500mm or shorter"... Even local terminology that defines rifles by their basic system of operation (repeating/semi-auto/automatic) has it's kinks, as it uses a role to define what is a LMG/SAW (puškomitraljez - literal translation of French "Fusil-mitrailleur"). So RPK, PKM, MG42, MG08/15 or any other MG are same category, as long as they are used from bipod, as they are used as squad MG. Adding additional civilian, US-centric terms to that hot mess... I really see no point in that. Especially as ill defined terms as "battle rifle". PS. As much as Ian is great source on mechanical part of firearms he mostly knows next to nothing about how those firearms are actually used in combat. Especially things other than rifles*. And as any civilian w/o any military experience does, he gives way to much importance to the rifle** compared to all other weapons, since again he does not know how all those weapons are used in symbiosis. *Look at his talk about AKs with Larry Vickers and his inability to comprehend that overall efficiency of US Army would not change one bit if they were issued bare-bones AKs, or any other rifle instead of guccied M4s. ** It is same syndrome with loads of medieval YT channels being obsessed with swords, when those were basically last ditch backup weapons.
  3. From what I have heard they are more open architecture so it is easier to change components in order to use different or multiple frequencies for control. Despite all that, very few drones succeed in more than one flight.
  4. FN thinks the same. So does Steyr. Ian thinks different. Why is his opinion more valid than their, or v/v?
  5. Equivalent would have been US and NATO bombing Israel and separating Palestinian state, then recognizing it (after Palestinians expelled majority of Jews living there) after 1st intifada in the '90s, then putting all kinds of pressure on Israel to recognize it also. While doing nothing while ethnic cleansing was going inside newly created Palestine. Hence, while I dislike methods used I will recognize that both Serbia in 1998-99 was and Israeli ATM is doing act of self defense. I also think that in both cases there is "overstepping of limits of necessarily self-defense", but I also recognize that is a sad reality of the wars, and while I personally might be appalled by it I am not naïve enough to think that is something extraordinary.
  6. Thing is, what he or anyone else calls something does not make it only term, or even correct one to be called. I prefer designations by most basic principle of operation - repeating, semi-automatic and automatic. Everything else tends to lead to cherrypicking cases to defend your side. So you either take French calling FAMAS "assault rifle" as proof, or you look at Austrians and Swiss who called what Ian calls "battle rifles" "assault rifle".
  7. Yes, long term planned, ~about 2030.
  8. Yes, but total production run was pretty small, due the small production capacity of forged casings.
  9. Rockets: 57mm S-5M (s) - fragmentation - 3.9kg - USSR 57mm S-5K - HEAT - 3.7kg - USSR - penetration - 140mm penetration 57mm BR-1-57 - 3.9kg - Yugoslavia 57mm BR-2-57 - 3.7kg - Yugoslavia - 150mm penetration 70mm Mk.4 - fragmentation - 9.3kg - USA 127mm Mk-6 - fragmentation - 61kg - USA - this weight is somewhat less than those given by US sources (138.49lb or 62.82kg) 127mm Mk-25 - HEAT - 61kg USA - 280mm penetration - this weight is somewhat less than those given by US sources (140.47lb or 63.72kg) 212mm S-21 - fragmentation - 120kg - USSR - Used only on MiG-21f-13, it had timed fuse and was intended for large bomber formations interception. Rocket launchers and multiple rocket adapters: L-57-12 - 12 x 57mm rockets - 55kg empty /102kg with S-5M or BR-1-57/99kg with S-5K or BR-2-57 rockets L-57-16 - 16 x 57mm rockets - 67kg/130kg/126kg L-70-7 - 7 x 70mm rockets - 30kg/95kg - Yugoslavia L-70-12 - 12 x 70mm rockets - 60kg/172kg - Yugoslavia L-70-24 - 24 x 70mm rockets - 80kg/192lg - USA - this was retractable belly launcher from F-86D Sabre that was experimentally mounted on some S-55 helicopters 127mm DN-2 - up the 2 x 127mm rockets - 25kg/147kg - USA* 127mm DN-5 - up the 4 x 127mm rockets - 41kg/285kg - USA* - In theory DN-5 could carry 5 x HVAR, but it seems it was never done in practice. * Those two could be combined, DN-2 being mounted under DN-5 to form 6 x 127mm rocket adapter - combined weight was 60kg/426kg (total combined weight is less as pylon adapter from DN-2 was removed).
  10. How do you confirm absence of damage to planes? Someone can always say "ah, but dastardly NATO Russians moved wrecks" etc.
  11. So far FB has been close to 100% accurate, so i will take his word over... well, almost anyone else in this war.
  12. No. That might have been in the technical books on fuses, while this is basically simple inventory list. Anyway, most fuses were changed and unified in the early - mid '60s in the large overhaul of ordnance. IIRC most ordnance at that point has standardized with US fuses and their local copies.
×
×
  • Create New...