The Questions not worth their own thread thread VII

Status
Not open for further replies.
A photograph is not a movie. It is a still shot, and impossible to infer motion, or lack thereof, into any of the objects :hmm: :huh:
Ok then.

Are there any VIDEOS of the situation I describe? :p
 
I took this picture last Sunday. Is it any good? I thought it was but some people I showed it to said it was awful.

Spoiler :
005jhn.jpg
 
ugh, oh sweet jesus, put it away! My eyes, where's the soap? Oh god it's hideous...

Nah really, it's a picture of a horse, what's it supposed to be?
 
Cyclops horse! :run:

Seriously though I don't see how it's a bad pic.
 
lol it's supposed to be a picture of a horse. that's it. I was just wondering if it was any good.
 
What is the advantage to using a 5.56 bullet over a 7.62? The debate finally reached a head at work, and we can't think of any
 
What is the advantage to using a 5.56 bullet over a 7.62? The debate finally reached a head at work, and we can't think of any

You can carry a lot more ammo for a 5.56. And the rifle itself is lighter. The lethality debate is ongoing.

The articles just this week about so-called "failures" of the M4 in combat were absurd. If you read the report, the weapons overheated from extreme rates of fire. Any rifle will do that, as will any machine gun. So the "failure" was not a fault particular to the M4, but a problem that any weapon would have had under those conditions.

From memory:
M16 cyclic rate of fire: 700-800 rounds/minute
Maximum sustained rate of fire: 12-15 rounds/min

That's one round every 4 to 5 seconds. Fire faster than that and you will overheat your rifle. (Sorry, I know that wasn't asked, but those reports ticked me off.)
 
You can carry a lot more ammo for a 5.56. And the rifle itself is lighter. The lethality debate is ongoing.

The articles just this week about so-called "failures" of the M4 in combat were absurd. If you read the report, the weapons overheated from extreme rates of fire. Any rifle will do that, as will any machine gun. So the "failure" was not a fault particular to the M4, but a problem that any weapon would have had under those conditions.

From memory:
M16 cyclic rate of fire: 700-800 rounds/minute
Maximum sustained rate of fire: 12-15 rounds/min

That's one round every 4 to 5 seconds. Fire faster than that and you will overheat your rifle. (Sorry, I know that wasn't asked, but those reports ticked me off.)

That's it? Here comes the rant - if you ever saw the GIMPY fire with the old rounds it would knock a brick wall down, and you'd tear the enemy to little peices - none of this 'did I hit him?' that you get with the new one. On a rifle I've always favoured firing three shots in automatic at a time, since there's always the saws around. From using the M16 I know it doesn't break in almost any situation if used properly - you can literally swim a river with it
 
how strange i loved the odyssey, but was bored out of my mind with the illiad, i put it down half way through. maybe it has something to do with that i read the odyssey first?

I don't think I've read the entire Odyssey, but I did read the more popular sections of it and assuming those are better parts then I'd say the Iliad was more interesting.

The Aeneid was much better than either the Iliad or the Odyssey, but that might have had something to do with me reading it in the original Latin whereas I don't speak Greek so I read the other epics in English. Some critiques I've read said that Virgil's use of alliteration and ability to make the meter of a verse match its theme far exceeded Homer's, but that Homer's wrote better plots. That could just mean that Homer had access to better legends and that Virgil was a batter author but the work was based on less interesting folk tales and he was forced to follow a political agenda as the Emperor was his patron. Presumably the Aeneid would have lost more in translation. Of course, my personal translation for AP Latin used more alliteration that the original did.
 
What is the advantage to using a 5.56 bullet over a 7.62? The debate finally reached a head at work, and we can't think of any

As was said, more ammo. More rounds fired. But also, pretty much no man can control a 7.62 firing on auto without a mount of some sort. Now if you're just going to use an AK in fire hose mode, then you don't really care about controlling it. But the modern armies have been trying to get their soldiers to aim shots. But when bad stuff happens soldiers have a tendency to empty clips as fast as they can. So there's a balance between volume of fire and aim of fire. The 5.56 adds volume, and if the situation is too fluid or chaotic for substantial aimed fire, then volume adds a percentage chance for a hit.
 
As was said, more ammo. More rounds fired. But also, pretty much no man can control a 7.62 firing on auto without a mount of some sort. Now if you're just going to use an AK in fire hose mode, then you don't really care about controlling it. But the modern armies have been trying to get their soldiers to aim shots. But when bad stuff happens soldiers have a tendency to empty clips as fast as they can. So there's a balance between volume of fire and aim of fire. The 5.56 adds volume, and if the situation is too fluid or chaotic for substantial aimed fire, then volume adds a percentage chance for a hit.

Back in the day, we used the good old SLR (a squaddy-proof rifle if ever there was) and it only went into repitition (although pretty much everyone knew the matchstick trick to change that), so we would take three shots in about a second or two, then shoot only when we saw a target or needed to suppress - automatic fire or similar styles are a no-no. When you hit someone in the leg with the SLR, the back of the leg came out - with an SA80 they often keep running at you. Unfortunatly my work colleages are all old paras from SLR days, so 5.56 ammo isn't going far in our running debate.
 
Yesterday I went to the dentist who said I have two small cavities which need to get filled. How bad is the procedure? Does it hurt?

The only time I had fillings (or actually, crowns) is when I was 3 and I smashed all my teeth on the coffee table and they had to put me in an operation because there were so many.
 
Yesterday I went to the dentist who said I have two small cavities which need to get filled. How bad is the procedure? Does it hurt?

The only time I had fillings (or actually, crowns) is when I was 3 and I smashed all my teeth on the coffee table and they had to put me in an operation because there were so many.

The pain will be temporary. I'd worry more about the bill.
 
Back in the day, we used the good old SLR (a squaddy-proof rifle if ever there was) and it only went into repitition (although pretty much everyone knew the matchstick trick to change that), so we would take three shots in about a second or two, then shoot only when we saw a target or needed to suppress - automatic fire or similar styles are a no-no. When you hit someone in the leg with the SLR, the back of the leg came out - with an SA80 they often keep running at you. Unfortunatly my work colleages are all old paras from SLR days, so 5.56 ammo isn't going far in our running debate.

Ok. From what I've seen you say, you were part of a fairly elite unit. What about common soldiers and marines?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom