Mega Rad Gun Thread

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Pocket Dragoon said:
Power-assisted exoskeletons (partial or otherwise) should be a thing soon, to help hump all that fancy armor & ammo; especially as servos, circuits, and batteries become smaller & more efficient, along with rapid 3D printed prototyping & advanced polymer/composite armatures.

Not holding much hope for seeing actual battlemechs before I die, though, considering how prevalent ATGMs are now.
Click to expand...
Exoskeletons seem like one of those pieces of tech that everyone assumes are coming due to have prevalent they are in media, but are likely either technologically or practically infeasible.

Either way, if exoskeletons/mech are coming, they're going to be developed by the US first, an inferior version will be developed and under-utilized by Russia 10 years later, and a version suspiciously similar to the original Russian one will be stolen developed by China after 50 years
 
I remember seeing this system 5-6 years ago, but considering most recent video on their channel is a promo at 2018 R6 Siege invitational, I assume it's going nowhere.
1650590633961.png
 
1Tonka_Truck said:
I remember seeing this system 5-6 years ago, but considering most recent video on their channel is a promo at 2018 R6 Siege invitational, I assume it's going nowhere.
Click to expand...
A variant was being tested by the Singaporean Army fairly recently and examples were present at Bastille Day 2019.
 

Attachments

  • 1650594981728.png
    1650594981728.png
    242.1 KB · Views: 46
Last edited:
My shot in the dark for the powered exoskeleton combat armor prediction goes something like this:

There are two main problems holding back these power armor concepts.

1. power storage or generation. The power density problem is even worse for power armor than it is for traditional electric vehicles. Power armor needs to be able to operate for the duration of whatever mission it is going on, traditional infantry missions can last days before they get back to a FOB.

The weight of the battery/generator cannot be unbalancing. And similarly it must be ergonomic for movement in confined spaces such as armored transports or urban environments. So that means you can't have a big fuck-off crate hanging off of it's back.

and lastly for point 1, the storage solution can't severely compromise the safety of the user. The entire purpose of this exercise is defeated if a non-penetrating hit to the armor still sets off a nasty battery fire.

2. The man-machine interface. Traditional control schemes just don't seem to allow for the dexterity required for combat operations. Until we get a decent brain or muscle impulse control system worked up, and a fly by wire computer system able to determine the operator's true intentions, the power armor suits just aren't going to be viable.

_
So, the power armor revolution isn't going to happen until we have two other revolutions, in power storage, and man-machine interface technology.

20 years ago, I laughed at predictions from the 70s that the 2000s would have power armor. I said "but maybe in 20 years." I was obviously wrong. But hey, maybe 20 years from now we might have it.
 
Looks like the American and Russian arrive at the same conclusion. Make sure to keep weapons away from water and the AK does still hold up.



1Tonka_Truck said:
I remember seeing this system 5-6 years ago, but considering most recent video on their channel is a promo at 2018 R6 Siege invitational, I assume it's going nowhere.
View attachment 3204089
https://youtube.com/watch?v=rLtbDRu7R0Y
Click to expand...
Cpl. Long Dong Silver said:
Isaac Clarke, my nigga!
Click to expand...
@Thatguywholikesdeadspace and @Isaac Clarke looks like they about to make your dreams into reality.
 
Looks like someone has accused Biden's new ATF nominee, Steve Dettelbach, of malicious prosecution.

This document serves to explain and describe the unjust, unethical and criminal behavior of certain federal employees in their effort to investigate and wrongfully prosecute Benjamin Suarez and Suarez Corporation Industries (SCI). The Obama administration, Obama Justice Department officials and other federal employees from 2010 and on diverse dates thereafter engaged in an unlawful concerted effort to bring false charges and against Benjamin Suarez and SCI; for the simple reason that Suarez lawfully exercised his First Amendment right to speak. Since 2008 Suarez organized the funding of Republican congressional candidates; spoke out against Democratic congressional candidates; spoke out and disagreed with the Democratic Party, and actively criticized the Obama administration and its policies. For this, Suarez and many other innocent parties suffered at the hands of a corrupt and vindictive federal prosecution brought by the Obama Justice Department. Suarez, SCI and the other victims of this conspiracy will seek redress and justice against the many parties who participated in this travesty of justice. The history of this sad tale of a government run amok is set forth below.
…
Click to expand...
8. In 2009, the US Citizens Association ran a newspaper advertising campaign to support Republican congressional challenger Jim Renacci which is credited for helping defeat the Democratic incumbent who was also a friend of U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown, who was in turn a friend of than United States Attorney for the District of Northern Ohio Steven Dettelbach.
Click to expand...
…
10. Using the fact that the donors received bonuses from SCI as a pretext for alleging violations of federal elections laws, the United States Attorney Steven Dettelbach by and through his Assistant United States Attorney Carole Rendon launched a massive investigation of Benjamin D. Suarez and SCI which resulted in an unsuccessful election law prosecution which tarnished the reputation of SCI and its founder Suarez, caused massive economic loss to SCI, the loss of jobs, and the wrongful imprisonment of Suarez on a relatively minor obstruction charge. This was done entirely as a Democratic political vendetta against Suarez and SCI.
Click to expand...
11. Both Rendon and Dettelbach knew that the charges against the Complainant were baseless. They knew the donors were affluent persons who did not need or require reimbursement for their donations and that SCI’s bookkeeping supported their defense that they were entitled to profit sharing distributions.
Click to expand...
 
UVB-76 said:
I have a different take, though. We should increase chamber pressures if the Sig case design is that good. Do some fancy EDM shit on barrels and create relief cuts that don't disturb the rifling to get sharp pressure drop close to the uncorking of the bullet at the muzzle. Short cans at the end. Fuck it, we 5.56 Magnum now.
Click to expand...
Fellas is it safe to fire 5.56 Magnum in my .223 rifle?
 
WhoBusTank69 said:
Fellas is it safe to fire 5.56 Magnum in my .223 rifle?
Click to expand...
the only two that come to mind that might be "5.56 Magnum" is 5,6x50mm DWM (which would not be safe in an unmodified .223 Rem Mag or 5.56x45mm NATO rifle) or .22 Nosler which is safe in a mostly stock AR-15, but would need a barrel swap and probably magazine follower swaps. if it's a carbine rifle, then a heavier recoil buffer or adjustable gas block is recommended.
 
UVB-76 said:
It seems everyone was doing weight redistribution systems in the 2010s.
Mystery Ranch BASE

Virtus DWD
View attachment 3214842
Click to expand...
Back around '05, I tested some prototype spinal armor when I was writing for a mountainbiking website, singletracks.com; and except for the size, this reminds me a lot of it. The rig I tested was semi-rigid with elastomers, and did help increase my power to the pedals/stamina, but it limited my overall flexibility and made getting behind the bike harder; which is important on drops, jumps, and tight/steep singletrack.

But even then I could see how it'd have been a lot more appropriate in a soldiering application, and I'd be lying if I didn't seriously consider trying to wear it to the field, on a mandatory ruck, or even just under my coveralls in the motorpool.... But there's just no way I could've gotten away with it, bulky as it was.
 
I have a stupid question, in my ongoing quest to learn about AR-15s. Look at this gun.

h8w8llr06h741.jpg
Okay, see the pop up sight on the back? Why would you put a pop-up sight under a scope where it doesn't have room to pop up? Now you might say, well, this guy is just retarded. Maybe. But this is like the third time I've seen something like this.

Why?
 
Lord of the Large Pants said:
I have a stupid question, in my ongoing quest to learn about AR-15s. Look at this gun.

View attachment 3217936
Okay, see the pop up sight on the back? Why would you put a pop-up sight under a scope where it doesn't have room to pop up? Now you might say, well, this guy is just retarded. Maybe. But this is like the third time I've seen something like this.

Why?
Click to expand...
Afaik its so that you have already zeroed irons when shtf and your optic breaks. Or just because you swap optics a bit and are too lazy to take em off every time.
 
Lord of the Large Pants said:
I have a stupid question, in my ongoing quest to learn about AR-15s. Look at this gun.

View attachment 3217936
Okay, see the pop up sight on the back? Why would you put a pop-up sight under a scope where it doesn't have room to pop up? Now you might say, well, this guy is just retarded. Maybe. But this is like the third time I've seen something like this.

Why?
Click to expand...
They're called back up iron sights. The idea is if your optic fails for whatever reason you have something to fall back on. I think people mainly use them for self-defense/SHTF guns, but don't quote me on that.
 
Jewthulhu said:
They're called back up iron sights. The idea is if your optic fails for whatever reason you have something to fall back on. I think people mainly use them for self-defense/SHTF guns, but don't quote me on that.
Click to expand...
Right, I get the idea of a pop-up sight. What I don't get is why on this gun they're positioned underneath the scope where, as far as I can tell, they can't be physically accessed.
 
Lord of the Large Pants said:
Right, I get the idea of a pop-up sight. What I don't get is why on this gun they're positioned underneath the scope where, as far as I can tell, they can't be physically accessed.
Click to expand...
The intent is that you can rip off the optic (if you have a QD Mount) if it is disabled and then you can flip up the BUIS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom