Picture of the day

The prevailing small arms ammo on the battlefield is Russians=5.45x39, Ukrainians=7.62x39.
Rampant anecdotes describe Russians purposely shooting themselves in the leg with a "Ukrainian bullet" to get evacked out while still alive.
 
Bubba Yugga said:
The prevailing small arms ammo on the battlefield is Russians=5.45x39, Ukrainians=7.62x39.
Rampant anecdotes describe Russians purposely shooting themselves in the leg with a "Ukrainian bullet" to get evacked out while still alive.
Click to expand...

Most Ukranian field and battle footage I've seen posted I would say 90% have been 74's in 5.45x39, there's even viral tick tock videos of Ukrainian soldiers unloading a round from their mag and using the round with a Harry Potter sound, sounds silly I know but it's a thing.
 
Donny Fenn1 said:
Maybe they want to hit what they're aiming at?
Why would you carry an SKS when you could carry an AK?
Click to expand...

FMWmqSFWQAAw4T4


If it goes "bang" reliably, someone in Ukraine is using it, somewhere. It's just that kind of conflict.

I've seen SKS's, Mosins, SVt's, AK-47's, AK-74's, PPSH's, TT-38's, basically "anything Soviet made since 1935" in photos, in the hands of both pro-Ukrainian and pro-Russian militias over the past month and a half.

Heck, I've even seen pics of dudes checkpointing with sawed off TOZ double barreled shotguns.
 
Reply to "Rugerman" .... Tochka-U ballistic missile formerly used all over what used to be the Soviet Union. It is now only used by Ukraine.
 
RPG7 said:
Reply to "Rugerman" .... Tochka-U ballistic missile formerly used all over what used to be the Soviet Union. It is now only used by Ukraine.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. The Tochka-U (NATO SS-21 Scarab B) short range ballistic missile is still in use with Russian units, as not all of them have yet transitioned fully to Iskander (NATO SS-26 Stone).
 
The "jettiest" looking jets all came from that time. There were some pretty ones. Lotta delta wings. That wartime German research really hit its stride about then...

The Myasishev M-50:

robert-bonchune-m50-bomber-front-arctic-rb.jpg


The B-58 Hustler (no relation):

Convair_B-58_Bomber


The F-106:

x4d6b3opa0621.jpg


The A4 (a fave of mine - such a tight little package, the airplane equivalent of Ms. Vina Sky:

1-a-4-skyhawk-david-brown.jpg


The late 1950's and early '60's were brilliant times for military aviation. So many "nearly there" designs, so many airplanes that looked really right.
 
Dunno. Too specialized, maybe? They work like the dickens at high speeds, less so at slow speeds. Through the 60's and 70's we saw fewer specialized fighters and more "generalists". The F15, F16, and F18 can all fight and bomb. Could be the delta doesn't lend itself to universality like other designs.

Or I could be wrong. That happens now and again... :)
 
HuskyDude said:
Amazing something 71 yrs old could still look so elegant.
Click to expand...

Back in the day, they thought that if a plane looked like a beautiful woman its aerodynamics would probably be right too.

Nowadays they have computational flow dynamics and they're optimizing for minimal radar cross-section and marginal stability so you can dodge fast and the designs look like they came out of an unfeeling computer because they did.
 
Dark Alley Dan said:
Dunno. Too specialized, maybe? They work like the dickens at high speeds, less so at slow speeds. Through the 60's and 70's we saw fewer specialized fighters and more "generalists". The F15, F16, and F18 can all fight and bomb. Could be the delta doesn't lend itself to universality like other designs.

Or I could be wrong. That happens now and again... :)
Click to expand...

Yes the delta wing was great for high speed and poor at slow speed but the wide turning radius was an issue. Couldn’t turn quick worth a damn. The 104 had a poor turn radius as well. A lot of ground was covered returning to a previous spot. All the new machines can turn on a dime compared to the old “century” machines (101, 102, 106, etc) as they were referred to.

When Canada was looking at new fighters in the late 70’s we flew the Defence College staff to the US to look at the F-14 and the F-16 as both were in the running and the flight display of the F-16 was impressive. It could turn so fast, it appeared to tail slide backwards before going forward again. Truly impressive. Both companies said Canada wouldn’t be buying either though. They said the F-14 was the most expensive one on the list and Canada has never bought the most expensive military asset ever. I laughed but it’s true and they knew it. The F-16 was single engine so it was out as well.
 
HMS M1 - WWI submarine with a 12" deck gun from a battleship. Was meant to surface with just the gun above water and fire a single round at the target. It only had one shot since it had to be completely surfaced to reload.

Sank in 1925 with all hands lost when another ship collided with her while she was submerged. The deck gun was ripped off the sub and the water poured in.

f7LGcKm.jpg
 
The French thought the "Cruiser Class Submarine" was worth pursuing enough to build the Surcouf. Commissioned in 1934, it puttered about, with mild success, in practice and training runs. Got a refit in 1941, just in time for it to go off on it's first wartime patrol and... simply vanish, and become the source of countless conspiracy theories as to the cause of its loss.

Untitled-design-17.jpg
 
The B-58 Hustler (no relation):


I wouldn't be too sure of that, the Soviets had an extensive espionage net work, even their A bomb was based on the American developments.

Grizz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom