Murgos posted:

How well surveyed is North Korea? Any rare earths? Oil? Other interesting resources?

Or, is the place really just rocks and peasants?

Cyrano4747 posted:

JFC that is really bad reenector levels of pathetic.

Warbadger posted:

It has dirty coal, magnesium, and iron.

inkjet_lakes posted:

The fear in those people's eyes, Jesus gently caress...

Kinda reminds me of old film of the Home Guard after they were given uniforms but before they got proper guns.

A.o.D. posted:

The Chauchat's problem is that the Americans quite reasonably asked for that system to use the US standard caliber for logistical reasons because getting a sufficient quantity of French ammo stateside for training purposes could prove problematic. The French manufacturers half-assed the conversion, resulting in a gun that got a shittier reputation than it deserved. It was less someone loving up procurement than it was someone not bothering to do the job right in the first place. Before you say "caliber changes are hard", remember that there was a Maxim in basically every military center-fire caliber in the world at that time.

Nebakenezzer posted:

This was my question too. I don't know enough about guns to identify the MGs, but...

Mazz posted:

Well the best possible choice would be deposing Kim and putting someone in there who would work with the US and South Korea on a demilitarized level so at least we don't have to waste so much effort on worrying about them nuking Seoul/Guam/whatever. We could easily increase US aid packages if it meant less risk and military expense on the peninsula. China would probably only go along with this if they got whatever it is they'd want out of the deal but at least it would descalate things and maybe improve the living conditions, even only slightly, of millions of mind hosed Koreans.

Unfortunately we probably have the least competent president for this kind of task in modern history so it's even more of a pipe dream than ever.

M_Gargantua posted:

30mm HE spam will only be good against drones at close range. The shells just don't have the muzzle velocity or gun elevation to knock out anything flying above them, and anything low to the ground at range will be nearly impossible to hit. That leaves a very narrow window where autocannons are an effective option, and I doubt it's operationally worth it to carry rounds designed to be birdshot flak that would be most effective against the kind of drones that would even bother engaging at those ranges.

B4Ctom1 posted:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYdNpU843Rs

DrAlexanderTobacco posted:

It's more of an argument for why you should keep your helicopters where they can fight best - The Karbala attack was akin to a cavalry charge when really you want the Apache several KM up in the air (in a permissive airspace) or several miles away popping up from behind trees.

MikeCrotch posted:

Fair enough, I couldn't remember the specifics.

Still seems like a pretty good argument for gun armed air defence if you're worried about helicopters, though.

brains posted:

honestly though, what the army needs is a high-low mix for SHORAD- high energy interceptor with BVR capabilities for attack threats (yes, i'm aware this is no simple feat) and laser for close range UAS/artillery defense (because interceptors are expensive) i can't believe i'm seriously advocating tactical lasers in TYOOL 2017 but here we are

Shooting Blanks posted:

China's response would almost certainly have the following priorities (assuming Kim were removed from power without an outright war):

1. Dismantle or disarm NK's nuclear arsenal and capabilities.
2. Strip the entire country like methheads in an unlocked apartment.
3. Divide the population into agricultural/manufacturing/sex trade slaves.
4. Claim that the territory was always theirs . . . 5000 years history. . . . only the west is imperialist.

Mortabis posted:

I'm going to Panama in late July/early August. Is there stuff related to the Canal Zone and/or the 1989 invasion that I should (and can) see?

Obviously all the standard tourist stuff is on my list but that sort of thing is more of a niche interest not appearing in guides.


VVVV phased array of shaped charges which use constructive interference of the blast waves to produce a particular pattern of penetration. Actually that probably exists already.

M_Gargantua posted:

We're not designing systems for use against ISIS. Every major power is exploring UACAV and UUVs, small and large. The military ability to manufacture 100k of plastic powered toys for $5 a pop mean you're going to start seeing smart grenades that fly in the direction you throw them until they arm and hit the nearest heat signature. $1000 drones far more maneuverable than a human capable of carrying 30rds of 7.62 or two 40mm grenades and manuvering in what I can best describe as sports plays to eliminate infantry in cover.

Those are the scale of threats an auto cannon can even hope to deal with and that means at best your expensive vehicles are barely capable of providing threat mitigation for infantry, and they're already underpowered for anything more than infantry support.

Big boy drones that can loiter above 10k ft mean you're utilizing MANPADs or SHORAD. And those threats can hit you back with standoff missiles of their own. A drone with two hellfires is a difficult target to even spot unless you have a real radar, which is itself a giant target for ARMs.

It's not caliber that's stopping anti drone capability, it's the expansion and escalation of what we're going to see drones do in combat. The counter is more tiny missiles, like that tiny VLS interceptor that got linked in this thread that I can't find right now.

B4Ctom1 posted:

All those specialty drones. But in my mind, the drones become the various bullets themselves, as long as the ability is within their envelope of flight. IE Flying kinetically or with a small charge at people and unarmored light armored vehicles, something faster or with a missile to hit fixed wing or rotor aircraft. Something like a Sensor Fused Weapon for armored vehicles.

Like 2:00 here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NGgHyfPGU0

B4Ctom1 posted:

All those specialty drones. But in my mind, the drones become the various bullets themselves, as long as the ability is within their envelope of flight. IE Flying kinetically or with a small charge at combatants in the open or cover and unarmored light armored vehicles, something faster or with a missile to hit fixed wing or rotor aircraft. Something like a Sensor Fused Weapon for armored vehicles.

Craptacular posted:

david_a posted:

That perspective is... weird. The Mustang is considerably closer to the camera, right?

M_Gargantua posted:

Yeah that video is great. Drone futures really depend on mission parameters of course. Only the smallest and cheapest drones will be the weapons systems themselves. [Nerf football with a propeller frag grenade]-ish. A kamikaze drone designed for anything heavier than anti-infantry role won't have the speed that a missile will have. When you get to things like camera drone sized they're benefit is that they can shoot down at infantry in defilade while being difficult to hit in return, if you look at the research Penn state is doing they can pull some insane evasive maneuvers. Then they return back for rearming. Quadcopters right now can fly around 4km, loiter for 20, and return. Anything longer ranged/higher altitude/larger payload and you're flying fixed wing drones.

B4Ctom1 posted:

Like 2:00 here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NGgHyfPGU0

Oh god the sound, I can't get it out of my head. This is the sound of death in future conflicts.

BIG HEADLINE posted:

It reminds me of a Deep Space Nine episode during the Dominion War where ground forces deal with these "subspace mines" that are everywhere around them, and you might walk right past/through one and it wouldn't explode, but then five minutes later someone *else* does and it turns them into paste, not only instilling fear that anyone could die at any time, but also fostering a constant "it should have been me, not them" feeling. These things don't even have to have explosives on them since the noise alone would constitute psychological warfare of the highest order. Arm maybe 5-10% of them with a shaped charge just large enough to blow a good sized hole in someone's head, and select targets at random intervals just to make them worry that *all* of them are similarly armed. There's not much glamour or glory in a death like that - and it's really hard to sell it as martyrdom, too.

Then do a leaflet drop: "We can target your manhood, too."

aphid_licker posted:

Wouldn't the North Korean population just basically collectively pack up and leave the country as soon as the regime weakens or opens up? That might be a problem for China and South Korea.

Don Gato posted:

Aren't there stories from the Cuban revolution where communist snipers would always aim at the second or third man in a formation instead of the first man, for that reason? Probably bullshit that maybe happened once and propaganda spread like wildfire, but something like that you probably don't have to do it many times before people start spreading rumors and doing your job for you before the battle even begins.

simplefish posted:

You also pick off the ones at the back first so the ones at the front don't realise what's happening - or so I read in a quote from a D-Day soldier who had a line of Germans coming towards him, but who hadn't seen him. If I remember correctly, he used the phrase "turkey shoot"

Flikken posted:

You are off by about 30 years, I'm pretty sure that was a Sgt. York