David Steel / LazerPig / Ricewynd / Malquistion - Pathological Liar, Reddit Historian, Femboy Thirster, and Vore Connoisseur

He probably scrapped it because he had fuck all the work with to push his narrative.
It would have been a repeat of the Tiger I video with less material. That video was just taking accepted view points of the Tiger and trying to conclude how shit it was, despite the basis of the argument being reiteration of what other people like the Cheiftain said but with a different and stretched conclusion(Cheiftain: Tiger had it's flaws and you can argue about the Strategic need for such a Machine but it was capable of achieving the design goals and was an effective tool. Pig: Tiger bad because of the flaws already discussed and because Germans didn't need heavy tanks)
He also probably tried to make it about Russia and either realized he had nothing to work with or realized he would be called out. The Avtomat program was started before mass contact of the Mkb, and while Mkbs42/StG-44s as well as other German projects and designers were folded into the program, the AK-47 is not an StG or derived of the StG.
If I was to guess his video was gonna go like this: Some statistic telling us most people don't get killed by infantry fire. Hitler didn't like the Mkb/StG. StG heavy. StGs had poor QA. StG manufacture had lots of failures for some parts. Western Allies didn't make an assault rifle till the 60s. Western Allies had the guns and factories and didn't do anything with them post war. Germans had better alternatives like the G43 in 8mm Kurz that was made in 1945. Russians copied the StG. StG bad so Russia bad.
 
Last edited:
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Elim Garak, Adamska, Vecr and 7 others
Smashed & Slamed said:
He probably scrapped it because he had fuck all the work with to push his narrative.
Click to expand...
Ian released a video a couple days ago about the M14 and made a point of bringing attention to the fact that the M14 and Garand gas systems looks a lot like an AK specifically because Kalashnikov took heavy inspiration from Garand's gas system, and that the FCG in an M14/Garand look a lot like the FCG in a French RSC1917 because Garand took heavy inspiration from the French RSC1917. And then made a further effort to specifically point out that this isn't plagiarism and is in fact quite common in weapon design.

I couldn't help but chuckle and go tinfoil hat while watching this thinking that this was Ian still miffed about how retarded Piggy is since Piggy likely would have reached out to Ian for his STG video.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Elim Garak, Adamska, Exterminatus and 16 others
Sleazy Car Salesman said:
Ian released a video a couple days ago about the M14 and made a point of bringing attention to the fact that the M14 and Garand gas systems looks a lot like an AK specifically because Kalashnikov took heavy inspiration from Garand's gas system, and that the FCG in an M14/Garand look a lot like the FCG in a French RSC1917 because Garand took heavy inspiration from the French RSC1917. And then made a further effort to specifically point out that this isn't plagiarism and is in fact quite common in weapon design.

I couldn't help but chuckle and go tinfoil hat while watching this thinking that this was Ian still miffed about how retarded Piggy is since Piggy likely would have reached out to Ian for his STG video.
Click to expand...
How bad do you think LP will get himself into once that StG video goes up?
 
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Vecr and Sleazy Car Salesman
Sleazy Car Salesman said:
Also a good point, wasn't aware that the thing was that difficult to make light.
Click to expand...
It was designed specifically to be heavy enough to control in full auto fired from the hip. 15 pounds in original configuration with an action that was strong (heavy) enough to survive a frankly unnecessary amount of sustained full retard firing. Also took forever to disassemble with a lot of little parts to lose. Would also have to be converted to closed bolt which I think would screw with the disconnector and yeah, just make a new gun.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Elim Garak, Adamska, Sleazy Car Salesman and 2 others
Trig.Point said:
Both of them were limited by the Magazines, the M1's were cheap and unreliable and for the STG there just weren't enough and they were also prone to damage.
Click to expand...
They were meant to be disposable and so they suffer from a lack of longevity but you can get better new manufactured magazines that are of a higher quality. Plus in regards to a wartime military it isn't hard to just throw out your old worn magazines and grab new ones, especially in the context of the United States in the second world war where the manufacturing power of the nation was frankly ridiculous.
MIC Shill said:
US Army try not to call like 20 different things the M1 challenge (IMPOSSIBLE)
Click to expand...
European try to standardize vehicle equipment challenge and not make a bajillion non interchangeable components challenge (IMPOSSIBLE)
Amerikaner Teddybär said:
How bad do you think LP will get himself into once that StG video goes up?
Click to expand...
It's never happening, he's way too scared of push back at this point to take controversial stands. He got his peepee slapped once and he knows he can't handle it.
AeroGavin Rossdale said:
It was designed specifically to be heavy enough to control in full auto fired from the hip. 15 pounds in original configuration with an action that was strong (heavy) enough to survive a frankly unnecessary amount of sustained full retard firing. Also took forever to disassemble with a lot of little parts to lose. Would also have to be converted to closed bolt which I think would screw with the disconnector and yeah, just make a new gun.
Click to expand...
Makes perfect sense, I never looked at the nitty gritty of the rifle's action and figured that if you removed the select fire, modified the magazine release, made it closed bolt, and then lightened it up a bit a la the Colt Monitor you'd basically have an M1A in .30-06. But obviously from what everyone here has said that's not how it works.

I appreciate the info.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Elim Garak and Vecr
MIC Shill said:
US Army try not to call like 20 different things the M1 challenge (IMPOSSIBLE)
Click to expand...
I'm gonna sperg for fun.
Screenshot 2024-04-17 at 21-00-08 List of British weapon L numbers - Wikipedia.png
Do NOT confuse the L1A1 Small Arms Cleaning Rod with the L1A1 Small Arms Bore Brush. Or the L1 Training Fuze with the L1 Detcord. And remember, L2 Sterling magazines are designated L1A1 if manufactured by Sterling. L1A2 if made elsewhere. Why even have a designation system if it's nearly impossible to use as short hand? On the other side of the fence, we have American airplane mounted guns. You may be familiar that the most common ones are the .30 Cal (AN/M2), .50 Cal (AN/M2), and the 20mm (AN/M2). They all stand for Army-Navy Model 2. Wasn't the .50 the M2 also used by the Army and Navy? Yes. Fuck your record keeping.
 
  • Feels
  • Like
  • Lunacy
Reactions: Elim Garak, Adamska, Blasterisk and 10 others
Mi
AeroGavin Rossdale said:
I'm gonna sperg for fun.
View attachment 5916453
Do NOT confuse the L1A1 Small Arms Cleaning Rod with the L1A1 Small Arms Bore Brush. Or the L1 Training Fuze with the L1 Detcord. And remember, L2 Sterling magazines are designated L1A1 if manufactured by Sterling. L1A2 if made elsewhere. Why even have a designation system if it's nearly impossible to use as short hand? On the other side of the fence, we have American airplane mounted guns. You may be familiar that the most common ones are the .30 Cal (AN/M2), .50 Cal (AN/M2), and the 20mm (AN/M2). They all stand for Army-Navy Model 2. Wasn't the .50 the M2 also used by the Army and Navy? Yes. Fuck your record keeping.
Click to expand...
Militaries are supremely autistic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Elim Garak, Vecr, not william stenchever and 1 other person
AeroGavin Rossdale said:
I'm gonna sperg for fun.
View attachment 5916453
Do NOT confuse the L1A1 Small Arms Cleaning Rod with the L1A1 Small Arms Bore Brush. Or the L1 Training Fuze with the L1 Detcord. And remember, L2 Sterling magazines are designated L1A1 if manufactured by Sterling. L1A2 if made elsewhere. Why even have a designation system if it's nearly impossible to use as short hand? On the other side of the fence, we have American airplane mounted guns. You may be familiar that the most common ones are the .30 Cal (AN/M2), .50 Cal (AN/M2), and the 20mm (AN/M2). They all stand for Army-Navy Model 2. Wasn't the .50 the M2 also used by the Army and Navy? Yes. Fuck your record keeping.
Click to expand...
Yugoslavia had the M-84 MBT, M84 GPMG, M84 SMG, and M84 Howitzer
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Elim Garak, Adamska, Vecr and 3 others
AeroGavin Rossdale said:
This is an improvement on the system that gave us the Rifle, Short, Magazine, Lee-Enfield, Number 1, Mark Three, Star.
Click to expand...
I'm an English gun owner and even I am not willing to step up to defend the abomination that is Enfield variant naming. I just call them all SMLEs, gets the right sort of people properly agitated.
 
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: Elim Garak, Blasterisk, Nigger Cobson and 10 others
Sleazy Car Salesman said:
Speaking of the Garand can anyone give me any insight as to why the BAR was never developed into an infantry rifle?
Click to expand...
Tangental to this, but Ian can see the future of this thread apparently and took a repo BAR to a two gun match.

tl;dr: Doesn't really go into specifics beyond 'It's too heavy to move/shoot offhand effectively, I wish I had a normal rifle, the rear sight is kinda bad, but it functions'.
 
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: Adamska, Vecr, Sleazy Car Salesman and 4 others
SaidNoOneEver said:
Now do carbine.
Click to expand...
The UK received about 30,000 M1 Garands and an unknown but large number of M1 Carbines, they never issued them during WWII even though they had enough to equip the entire Airborne corps, instead they issued Bolt action rifles and sten guns... because of ... reasons.

The US apparently wrote the rifles off under lend lease, however in the 1950's the UK remembered they had them in storage and issued them to British settlers first in Malaysia and then in Kenya.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Elim Garak, Adamska, HumptiDouji and 11 others
Trig.Point said:
The UK received about 30,000 M1 Garands and an unknown but large number of M1 Carbines, they never issued them during WWII even though they had enough to equip the entire Airborne corps, instead they issued Bolt action rifles and sten guns... because of ... reasons.

The US apparently wrote the rifles off under lend lease, however in the 1950's the UK remembered they had them in storage and issued them to British settlers first in Malaysia and then in Kenya.
Click to expand...
What the hell? Look, I'm not saying having a Garand instead of a bolt action would have made a huge difference, Arnhem couldn't have held anyway, but the paras would have appreciated it.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Adamska, Falcos_Commisar, Super Kami Guru and 3 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back