setsneedtofeed

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 2 points 16 minutes ago (1 children)

He has a vertical grip mounted, but it is very far to the rear. It is a strange place for it. The photo caused such a stir that the Captain in it was relieved for a loss of confidence.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 1 points 21 minutes ago (3 children)
9
submitted 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) by setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world to c/historyart@piefed.social
 
 
 

The above photo was found with this caption:

National Liberation Front irregulars (Viet Cong, or VC) training with a variety of rifles in a likely staged photo, reportedly taken in the Southeast Region, March 1967 (note that M14). Unknown photo provenance. Access to North Vietnamese documents and scholarship subsequent to the war has blurred the distinction between the two organizations, as most VC were, in fact, NVA. Though particularly true after the Tet Offensive, the blurring was already underway in 1966.

The M14E2 came out of the US Army Infantry board's dissatisfaction with the M14 with a bipod's performance as an automatic rifle by early 1962, and by that time the M15 had been canceled.

The board had a prototype made by modifying a standard M14, which came to be known as the USIAB rifle. The handgrip, stock, and sling were redesigned. The stock was meant to provide in-line recoil. A muzzle device to stabilize the rifle in full automatic fire was fitted.

After all the changes had been finalized, the new design was fielded as the M14E2, and the designation for adoption was changed to M14A1 in 1966.

 
 
 
 

Forgotten Weapons video on HAC-7.

TFB article.

Excerpts from article:

Bob Holloway, then of Fort Worth, Texas, in the 1980s built on his experiences in Southeast Asia and Rhodesia to design a .308 caliber military rifle, what eventually became the HAC-7. His rifle was an amalgamation of Armalite, FN, and Kalashnikov designs, with a considerable amount of his own ingenuity thrown in. The result is now one of the most interesting “might-have-beens” of the 20th Century: A lightweight .308 infantry rifle two decades older than the FN SCAR-H.

In the 1980s, 5.56mm rifles were the hot item, and Holloway’s decision to use the more powerful 7.62mm round probably had a major effect on his ability to sell the weapon, and Holloway Arms Company closed in 1985.

 
 

The Bismarck knows where it is at all times.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The Van Halen radiation belts rock too hard though.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Generally speaking, the idea of using infantry fire against planes very quickly became outdated. It was a drill developed against the slower, less armored WW1/ early inter-war era planes. WW2 era plane models quickly advanced to become too fast and armored.

If I recognize this bridge correctly, I believe above the top of the photo on the right.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Realistically most people don't shoot beyond 200m and even fewer are doing it on a gun that has a 1x purpose. A 3-9x scope for dedicated long(er) range gun, and then 1-4x type optics for other guns makes sense.

But some people are outliers or just want the options I suppose.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago (3 children)

It looks very Goosebump-y.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I've heard by way of anecdote some of the connotation was strengthened by the Mattel toy guns being bought and used as training aids by individual units in stateside training. That could strengthen a baseless, but not absurd, rumor that Mattel had anything to do with the polymer on M16s.

Anyways in the movie 'The Green Berets' (1968) John Wayne smashes a Mattel gun on a tree. It isn't a good movie, but it has weirdly memorable scenes.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Atlantis was, if I recall correctly, intended for a while to be the successor. The plan was for the SG-1 show to end with the Atlantis mission beginning, and then the Atlantis show to be the next stage of the Stargate franchise. What ended up happening was the Atlantis mission kicking off but then also TV people in charge wanted to keep the SG-1 show going so you had the shows airing at the same time. That is partially why SG-1 mildly turned into a zombie version of itself. Certainly not as bad as other shows, but I could still feel it.

[–] setsneedtofeed@lemmy.world 0 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

This thread was made in good fun, as I had run across this picture being wildly misinterpreted by a bunch of people. I thought it would be fun to share under the assumption people subscribed to NCD for the most part would understand what's happening.

My question is why it made you so mad that you decided to go on a downvote spree on a bunch of unrelated posts and comments of mine. Not like this place has account karma or anything, but it just seems like a strange reaction.

view more: next ›