|
HEY GAIL posted:but they're difficult to fight with unless you know what you're doing, which is why it's downright offensive that everyone always goes to them as the first example for "quick and dirty weapons for our otherwise useless troops." If you are assuming they are going to form ranks and fight as a unit, using the pike to the best of its ability, then yeah, you're absolutely right. On the other hand, handing someone on garrison duty a sharp chunk of metal at the end of a pole works perfectly well for intimidating the local civilians or whatever else. After a certain point it's the mere fact of being armed that's the issue. From what I've seen most of the 19th-20th century use of "pikes" in that sense are mostly what you would probably consider spear length to boot. The pikes made in Georgia during the ACW, for example, were 6 feet long.
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2017 22:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 23:31 |
|
|
FishFood posted:I just finished The Hangman's Daughter, a historical mystery/thriller I think the thread, and HEY GAIL in particular would find interesting. It's set in 1659 Bavaria, and there's a lot in it about the aftermath of "The Great War", as they call it, as well as the superstitions and honor culture of Early Modern Germany. Two of the protagonists are in an executioner's family, and a lot is made about their status as outsiders and untouchables. Witches are also involved. The author is actually descended from the family depicted in the book, and it incorporates some of his old family lore. 4 out of 5 executioner's swords. There are a few sequels, I checked them out since they were free on Amazon Prime and made for good beach reading. Bog standard mystery novel structure but the setting livens things up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2017 22:13
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:So I was playing Playerunknown's Battlegrounds with an acquaintance from my teamspeak server, he's rather obnoxious so I don't usually play with him and this argument is one of those reasons why. The two guns don't even look the same. There are Canadians who spend hundreds of dollars to dress up their SKS to look like an AK, and it's still incredibly obvious that it's an SKS.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
HEY GAIL posted:he didn't steal it, the master of the torturers' guild gave Terminus Est to him when he was cast out to wander the dystopian future South America The landsknecht anagnost HEY GAIL stood on the bartizan, almost pavonine in pose, protected by a tight-fitting fuligin curirass, waxing in tyrian prose the lore of the carnifex at the quesitor mydad down in the par-tere. Alas, for jokes, that is the place of parting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:So I was playing Playerunknown's Battlegrounds with an acquaintance from my teamspeak server, he's rather obnoxious so I don't usually play with him and this argument is one of those reasons why. Wrong as it is, I can easily see how someone might come to that conclusion. From what I've seen, the best-known versions of the SKS are the commercial variants that accept AK mags (commonly designated SKS-D and SKS-M), resulting in a gun where the only signifigant difference in appearance (to the layman) is the lack of a pistol grip. Given that pistol grips are a feature that gun-control advocates often ardently attack, I can easily see how the SKS/AK relationship could look like the AR-15/M-16 one.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:The two guns don't even look the same. There are Canadians who spend hundreds of dollars to dress up their SKS to look like an AK, and it's still incredibly obvious that it's an SKS. To someone who knows about guns? Yeah. To your average dude who knows gently caress all (which includes know it all "experts" in most cases)? Not really. I mean, to you a Sherman and a T-34 couldn't look more different, but the vast majority of people couldn't tell them apart at a glance and unfortunately a significant percentage of those people are going to develop opinions on tanks based on the internet and movies and want to share their findings with you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2017 22:19
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:This is the reason why "if your only gun experience is Counterstrike you should probably lurk a whole lot first" used to be a rule in TFR. The baffling thing is this is someone who absolutely should know better or at least be interested in learning something he didn't before because this person was, to the best of my knowledge, a walking living NRA membership card from South Carolina; he hunts, owns several guns, goes to the range, etc. Instead he just kinda assumed I didn't know what I was talking about (not that I claimed to be an expert, but I had google to backup my recollection from this thread/tfr) while spouting easily disprovable assertions, like 'They had the same designer". At some point I mention how this isn't even as close as how some people think the AK47 evolved from the Stg 44 and then he links me some article that the only thing the Germans had to contribute was the stamped manufacturing process and acted like the article proved his point. e: Gnoman posted:Wrong as it is, I can easily see how someone might come to that conclusion. From what I've seen, the best-known versions of the SKS are the commercial variants that accept AK mags (commonly designated SKS-D and SKS-M), resulting in a gun where the only signifigant difference in appearance (to the layman) is the lack of a pistol grip. Given that pistol grips are a feature that gun-control advocates often ardently attack, I can easily see how the SKS/AK relationship could look like the AR-15/M-16 one. Now this might explain his confusion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
Gnoman posted:Wrong as it is, I can easily see how someone might come to that conclusion. From what I've seen, the best-known versions of the SKS are the commercial variants that accept AK mags (commonly designated SKS-D and SKS-M), resulting in a gun where the only signifigant difference in appearance (to the layman) is the lack of a pistol grip. Given that pistol grips are a feature that gun-control advocates often ardently attack, I can easily see how the SKS/AK relationship could look like the AR-15/M-16 one. This is doubly true when you factor in that a lot of people only have exposure to them from video games, and in the past 5 years or so the emphasis has been on modern shooters with the "tactical" dressed up versions of those guns. They're not looking at a wood stocked SKS and a Khruschev era AK-47, they're seeing poo poo like this: (and god I feel a little dirty for having "tactical SKS" in my GIS history now)   One is an SKS, one is an AK. Is it easy for me to tell them apart? Yeah, but then I'm a gun nut. Joe Random who plays video games but thinks that makes him a subject matter expert on the history of firearms probably thinks they work exactly the same. Now if you REALLY want to deep dive on the stupid, try being into German guns and having to hear from everyone about how the AK47 is a direct copy of the STG44.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2017 22:24
|
|
|
Who cares, they's all commie plastic anyway 
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2017 22:53
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Who cares, they's all commie plastic anyway The Mattel corporation would like a word. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2017 23:02
|
|
|
Hunterhr posted:The Mattel corporation would like a word. Nope.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2017 23:11
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
my dad posted:The landsknecht anagnost HEY GAIL stood on the bartizan, almost pavonine in pose, protected by a tight-fitting fuligin curirass, waxing in tyrian prose the lore of the carnifex at the quesitor mydad down in the par-tere. Alas, for jokes, that is the place of parting. You guys, this is a pretty strange crossing of the streams for me Wallenstien talks with a satan with two heads, then breaks his neck and hucks satan's body off of a cliff Nebakenezzer fucked around with this message at 01:48 on Jul 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 00:08
|
|
|
Wait, there are people who really think they were made by Mattel, and it's not just using the name of a famous plastic toy manufacturer as a joke?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 00:17
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Dumb observation- it's kind of a talking point that the average Union infantryman in the Civil War didn't care about slavery. Having listened to a ton of Civil War marching songs, a bunch refer to slavery (even if it comes across as less idealistic and more a convenient stick to beat the CSA with). How much were those widely disseminated among the troops and civilians at the time? It's probably more accurate to say that the average Union infantryman started the war not caring about slavery, and were instead mostly motivated by unionism in general. However, as the war went on and the Union began to push deeper into the South, many troops began to see the horrors of slavery firsthand, and many became staunch abolitionists as a result.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 00:26
|
|
|
GotLag posted:Wait, there are people who really think they were made by Mattel, and it's not just using the name of a famous plastic toy manufacturer as a joke? I was joking, but it's not super weird to believe if say your parents lived in a world where everyone from IBM to Jukebox companies were making guns for the big WWII.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 00:54
|
|
|
Hunterhr posted:I was joking, but it's not super weird to believe if say your parents lived in a world where everyone from IBM to Jukebox companies were making guns for the big WWII. Smith-Corona was a subcontractor for M1903 rifle barrels during World War Two.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
Hunterhr posted:I was joking, but it's not super weird to believe if say your parents lived in a world where everyone from IBM to Jukebox companies were making guns for the big WWII. Honestly, the idea of a massive manufacturer of plastic toys being contracted to make plastic parts for a rifle (in an era when gunmakers weren't using plastic) isn't that big a logical stretch.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
Is "fire-and-maneuver" still a concept that's practiced in contemporary infantry tactics, or has thinking (and technology) evolved since then?
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 02:57
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Is "fire-and-maneuver" still a concept that's practiced in contemporary infantry tactics, or has thinking (and technology) evolved since then? From Army FM 3.21-8 The Infantry Rifle Platoon and Squad, which dates from 2007. A quick skim at USMC manuals suggests they're pretty similar at this level quote:7-10. An attack is an offensive operation that destroys enemy forces, seizes, or secures terrain. An attack I'd hazard that modern technology means that fires is deadlier, both in terms of everyone having an automatic weapon and more soldiers having grenade launchers or light rocket launchers, and a better chance that artillery, mechanized armor, or airpower is available to add to the "fires" component of fire and maneuver. What counts as "good cover" and "effective range" changes with technology, but the basics of "shoot at them so they can't shoot you, then move up to hit them from a better angle" seem pretty fundamental to this level of weaponry.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 07:51
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Is "fire-and-maneuver" still a concept that's practiced in contemporary infantry tactics, or has thinking (and technology) evolved since then? Technology has likely raised the prominence of that tactic since suppressive fire is more portable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 07:52
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:This is doubly true when you factor in that a lot of people only have exposure to them from video games, and in the past 5 years or so the emphasis has been on modern shooters with the "tactical" dressed up versions of those guns. They're not looking at a wood stocked SKS and a Khruschev era AK-47, they're seeing poo poo like this: I still can't for the life of me understand people who take nice wood furniture and tarnished steel and think "I need to coat this entire thing in the most 1980's looking plastic I can find, because that makes it look way cooler"
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 08:59
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:Smith-Corona was a subcontractor for M1903 rifle barrels during World War Two. Coors made ceramic fuel elements for Project Pluto
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 09:17
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:This is doubly true when you factor in that a lot of people only have exposure to them from video games, and in the past 5 years or so the emphasis has been on modern shooters with the "tactical" dressed up versions of those guns. Why would you tacticalise an SKS or AKM? Aren't they obsolete from a functional perspective? (that is to say, everything they can do a modern gun can do better)
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 09:51
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:Why would you tacticalise an SKS or AKM? Aren't they obsolete from a functional perspective? (that is to say, everything they can do a modern gun can do better) 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 09:54
|
|
|
That scope is going to be ruined 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 09:56
|
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:Why would you tacticalise an SKS or AKM? Aren't they obsolete from a functional perspective? (that is to say, everything they can do a modern gun can do better)
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 10:59
|
|
|
assault pikes
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 11:48
|
|
|
I've probably played too much 40K, but honestly, I woulda stuck a couple braziers or some other burning poo poo on my pike - burn while you churn!
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 12:37
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I still can't for the life of me understand people who take nice wood furniture and tarnished steel and think "I need to coat this entire thing in the most 1980's looking plastic I can find, because that makes it look way cooler" Well, you can't look like a badass Tactical Stealth Assault Elite Strike Operator if you carrying something made of wood, can you? What do you think this is, the 20th century? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 12:50
|
|
|
Tias posted:I've probably played too much 40K, but honestly, I woulda stuck a couple braziers or some other burning poo poo on my pike - burn while you churn! Wasn't that an actual thing? I seem to remember reading something about pikes with explosives or incendiaries attached to the end to try and clear breaches during sieges.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 13:01
|
|
|
ive always wished mad max thunderspears were a thing though at this rate they could be
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 13:32
|
|
|
Perestroika posted:Wasn't that an actual thing? I seem to remember reading something about pikes with explosives or incendiaries attached to the end to try and clear breaches during sieges. The fire lance was a thing. Sort of a one-shot flamethrower mounted under your spear.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 13:39
|
|
|
Phobophilia posted:ive always wished mad max thunderspears were a thing Strap grenade to end of stick -> Put contact fuze on top of grenade Pull pin and throw. 
Jobbo_Fett fucked around with this message at 13:53 on Jul 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 13:50
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Dumb observation- it's kind of a talking point that the average Union infantryman in the Civil War didn't care about slavery. Having listened to a ton of Civil War marching songs, a bunch refer to slavery (even if it comes across as less idealistic and more a convenient stick to beat the CSA with). How much were those widely disseminated among the troops and civilians at the time? Caveat: THIS IS COMPLICATED First, it really isn't accurate to say "the average Union infantryman in the Civil War didn't care about slavery" as a blanket statement. It changed pretty dramatically as the war progressed. Early on the biggest political concern for most soldiers was keeping the union together. As the war went on, the political motivation shifted pretty significantly...the Emancipation Proclamation was a big driver of this of course; so was Union soldiers actually seeing plantations, interacting with black soldiers, messaging efforts of abolitionists, and so on. By the middle part of the war, there were a good deal of anti-slavery freedom crusaders in the ranks. However, as the casualties got super extreme towards the end and they started rounding up the lower quintile of society, a pretty nasty strain of anti-black racism crept back into the army, particularly in the shittier (read: filled with European immigrants and criminals) corps. That being said, for most soldiers on both sides, the political drivers of the war really weren't all that important to them. This wasn't unique to the ACW of course, despite the fact it was an intensely political war.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 14:19
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Is "fire-and-maneuver" still a concept that's practiced in contemporary infantry tactics, or has thinking (and technology) evolved since then? Yes, very much so. Pretty much everything is done that way, regardless of terrain/threat/etc.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 14:21
|
|
|
bewbies posted:That being said, for most soldiers on both sides, the political drivers of the war really weren't all that important to them. This wasn't unique to the ACW of course, despite the fact it was an intensely political war. edit: before you mention that 19th century people are more literate than 17th century, i am aware of that, but you do start to see the beginnings of a "press" at this time. some diarists are pretty well-informed about the things going on in the war. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 14:32 on Jul 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 14:25
|
|
|
HEY GAIL posted:you see the same thing in the 30yw, when the people calling the shots are deeply invested in the religious and political issues that brought them to that point, but at least in the saxon army the soldiers almost never mention religion. i think it was a gentlemens' agreement because of saxony's unique political position, and wonder what happened in armies working for less...internally conflicted...polities like bavaria For a counterpoint, look at the New Model Army. Like, they literally form the 17th century equivalent of Soldiers' and Peasants' Soviets and elect Agitators to represent them politically. You've got the army rank and file demanding one-man-one-vote representative democracy and all sorts, something that didn't end up actually occurring in the UK until about a quarter of a millennium later - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Putney_Debates 17th century ordinary soldiers could definitely be political AF in the right milieu.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 14:58
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:17th century ordinary soldiers could definitely be political AF in the right milieu. edit: although i have seen a saxon flag with a caltrop on it and the motto QVOCVMQVE FEROR which means "wherever i am carried" (caltrops land one point up no matter how you throw them) so at least one dude had a sense of humor about the whole thing HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 15:15 on Jul 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 15:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 23:31 |
|
|
The Lone Badger posted:Why would you tacticalise an SKS or AKM? Aren't they obsolete from a functional perspective? (that is to say, everything they can do a modern gun can do better) The AKM issue has already been mentioned, but it should be noted that it takes a LOT to make a centerfire gun obsolete. If you take the SKS as an example the only thing really holding it back is the lack of a detachable magazine. The chinese have variants that take AK mags, which makes those guns as fully capable as just about any other major semi-automatic rifle. Full auto is nice, but it's not the deal breaker that a lot of people consider it to be. That's not to say that there aren't other issues with the SKS. The ergonomics aren't fully modern (although pistol grips, while great, aren't super necessary) and attaching any kind of optic to them is a royal bitch and a half. Many of them mount directly to the dust cover which makes holding a zero impossible, and many others require the optic to be removed in order to take the dust cover off, so zero is hosed when you clean it. As to the why? Because they were once really cheap surplus rifles and a great way for someone who is either cheap or doesn't have a ton of money to put together a modern-ish rifle. In the world of 2017, where a Yugo SKS costs $400 and a decent AR-15 can be had for $500, yeah, it's kind of pointless. In the bygone days of 2007, however, when that same SKS could be had for $80 and a decent AR was $800 the math changes very, very quickly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 15:12
|
|