this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2026
351 points (99.4% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

8237 readers
11 users here now

A community for your defence shitposting needs

Rules

1. Be niceDo not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.

2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes

If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.

3. Content must be relevant

Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.

4. No racism / hatespeech

No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.

5. No politics

We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.

6. No seriousposting

We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.

7. No classified material

Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.

8. Source artwork

If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.

9. No low-effort posts

No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.

10. Don't get us banned

No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.

11. No misinformation

NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.


Join our Matrix chatroom


Other communities you may be interested in


Banner made by u/Fertility18

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Didn't the russians do this to? The GSh-6-30 was in theory catastrophically powerful being essentially a gargantuan flak cannon minnigun but had the unfortunate tendency to hit the firing aircraft with its own shrapnel... assuming the vibration from the gun didn't literally shake the plan apart first.

[–] JordanZ@lemmy.world 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I came across this years ago and I still love this section from the Wikipedia article.

The gun was noted for its high (often uncomfortable) vibration and extreme noise. The airframe vibration led to fatigue cracks in fuel tanks, numerous radio and avionics failures, the necessity of using runways with floodlights for night flights (as the landing lights on the plane would often be destroyed), tearing or jamming of the forward landing gear doors (leading to at least three crash landings), cracking of the reflector gunsight, an accidental jettisoning of the cockpit canopy and at least one case of the instrument panel falling off in flight. The weapons also dealt extensive collateral damage, as the sheer numbers of fragments from detonating shells was sufficient to damage aircraft flying within a 200-meter radius from the impact center, including the aircraft firing.

[–] BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

My god that is a prize

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Different thing - shrapnel from exploding rounds vs hitting the actual bullets. Headline implies the plane ran into its own bullets by flying faster than them, but what happened was a single incident where a pilot fired a burst, did an high speed loop, and on the way down flew through the cloud of bullets - which had slowed down due to air friction, but the speeding plane flew through them faster than a bullet.