Report Kaeis's Profile

Pretty much, minus it wasn't for shell craters, tracked AFVs can do that on there own. Look at some film from WW1, you'll see those landship bastards bobbing around.

Its more used to get out of mud and soft ground.

Largely that differs across ages and tacitics of those that used it. But primairly the sword was always a sidearm. Rarely a primary weapon. The Roman Legions uses Spears as projectiles before even starting a melee, and for knights pole arms were in wide use.

In most situations the spear is superior because of its reach and leverage. In most cases barring an exceptional swords man, it will win because of this and the fact a skilled spearman can attack rapidly.

On the flipside peasant or leve units given the weapons were mostly used against calvary. There are many other factors to consider as well. A swordsman also would need three strikes in most cases to break a poleblade that is plane wood withough some form of metal runner. Its partly because of this training with military bayonets is often on the tips of rifles with exercises the Spearman would know. Rather than gripping it in one hand and forming a melee. The further away you can hit a target lethally, the better.

I'll do it tomorrow tired, forgot about this too. "Please look forward to it" Yoshi P.

What material are the weapons made of? And whats the level of skill?

I mean both sides being equal isn't saying much if both are recruits. Spears however have always been the bulk of old armies. Even Roman legions squaring off are even on paper. Saddly history in action is blood and iron.

hmm kk.

Its just a thermal sleeve. Its mostly meant to prevent the gun barrel from being thermally distorted from environmental conditions, especially when the barrel is already hot due to frequent firing.

So basically its a giant gun sock to keep the barrle from warping.

Ahh, there is no real text book thing on it. Minus sidenotes in gun glosseries or instruction manuals. Then again short of books designed around it, you tend to not read in average books the kill rate of a MG-42, or that the AK-47 can punch through most hardwoods of 10-20 cm's. I would imagine some medical books that deal with gunshots make note of it.

Most of the knowladge in reguards of it are found in ballistic studies or combat reports and testing, but boat tail designes being know to tumble upon contact or being fired has been known for some time.

As to where I learned it, above glosseries, field instructors, and in pratical use. Fire enough rounds and of various mix and variations you learn whats good for what, etc.

Sources? As in who came up with the idea? It wasn't purposeful. Least at first, and it was originally used for Air-to-ground machineguns. As to how it developed Ballistic Coefficient. Well trial and error. How the first cannon balls were crude rocks, then to polished balls.

Or are you asking something else? If its on the AK, its rounds tumble by nature of the weapon. Or do you mean the wounded, or what? I'm not sure I follow what you are asking.

Pretty much all rounds tumble at a point, rule of mass namely. Plus the power behind it. Even some slower moving rounds have longer range and lethality. Plus you have the effects of gravity and the like.

Now if you mean a weapon like say, the .303, stability doesn't have to be maintained to reach the speeds of some rounds. Course this changes the range. But anyways back on topic, the .303 when fired from the Enfield rifle was designed both by the back end being heavy and the rifling being somewhat "lose" per see, to tumble shortly after being fired to cause greater wounds to a target.

You could call it the boat tail effect, some bullets have a slimmet profile to better enhance accuracy (which can be done with tighter rifeling regardless). Or by making a round that once its out the chamber is a bit boat shaped, just physics will make sure it tumbles while keeping some accuracy. The AK-47 in principle was designed to do this. Most military weapons are designed purposely to injury more than to kill. Its not out of a "humanitarian" need either. A Dead man stays where he is, a man who's lung or spleen has been fucked up will need one or two others to carry him off.

Depends on the Grenade, the old stick grenades can be thrown the furthest, but were in some manner not as lethal.

Well that depends, the newer modles like the M67 is pretty light and can only inflict mortal wounds at 5 meters from the blast, and wounds at 15 meters. Some older ones like the Pineapple or a stick grenade with an explosive sleeve can do much more, but they weighed more. the M67 and the Russian GP and GPU series weight about the same, and the average male soldier can throw them about 30 meters. The older and more explosive modles were more or less 20/20. And so gernaders were specialists. Today they still are, albit for different reasons.

Hmm..any sort of WW1 Trenchgun. They were made to last and are still in use, the AKM rifle, as it doesn't need much in the way of care, a Crossbow of the type used to hunt big game, and a good combat knife. If cleaning and parts weren't an issue a MP5, as to sniper, I'm not picky, as long as its bolt-action, and is 7.62x54r, or US .308. As both rounds can be found in large supply, and bolt-actions tend to overall be better.

Hmm...

The average hand grenade has a greater lethal radius than the average soldier can throw it.

Cold air is typically dry, and thus much more dense than warm or humid air. Higher humidity means less dense air.

Denser air means higher drag, which means the bullet slows sooner, or in less distance which in turn means it drops more.

The cold air will not appreciably affect drop due to gravity as the distance it has to drop doesn't allow it to reach or even get near terminal velocity in that axis. It's forward motion is far more susceptible to the higher drag effects of denser air.

Bullets entering the transonic speed range encounter a rapid shift of the CP forward which can destabilize a bullet. This shift and the effect are much more pronounced in dense air.

The combined effect of the denser air means the bullet slows sooner, reaches transonic speed sooner and if the bullet tumbles in the transition that spikes dynamic drag and really shortens it's range.

To add to that, temperature affects pressures. Barrel temp and powder temp are separate variables, but barrel temp is the most prominent.

However, the first shot from a cold gun and cold ammo will see a fair drop in chamber pressure, which can translate in lower muzzle velocity, which will further compound the drop issue in cold air. Keep this in mind when assassinating a target.

Sorry for taking so long to reply to your Scrapped Princess comment for the last episode. I just saw it.

Haha no I trust your judgement. I'll check it out sometime.

Kill la Kill? I've heard of it. I haven't thought of picking it up though. I've been caught up in an anime called C: Money, Possibility and Control.

Haruhi? What's that?

Joining myself? I've had survival and weapons training, but no, I've had no thought of joining. I'm more of an intellectual, more of an academic than my brothers. Though not to say they weren't equally intelligent--they just chose to fight.

Actually, the recoil was understandable. The girl was practically a stick, her arms were tiny and her shoulder probably couldn't fully stomach the recoil of an Uzi.

Also, the instructor was slightly bent over, holding the girl's hand and somewhat stabilizing the gun--apparently not enough though. You watch in horror (ABC News has the video) as the gun swings up, in a northwestern arc...where the instructor stands. A horrid case. Yes, the girl did as she was told. The instructor made the mistake of having an extremely young girl fire at full auto a gun without having considered whether she would have the ability to tank the recoil.