Posted: 2005-10-16 04:55
Does your friend have a photograph?Mad Max wrote:How about a friend of mine (who is well up on military stuff so he won't be wrong) actually seeing him land in one in Chicago a year or so ago?
Does your friend have a photograph?Mad Max wrote:How about a friend of mine (who is well up on military stuff so he won't be wrong) actually seeing him land in one in Chicago a year or so ago?
Which doesn't make any sense. The QBZ-97 is the export version of the QBZ-95. The weapon that, in-game, is called QBZ-97 should be renamed CAR-95, the actual name of the carbine version of the QBZ-95.'[R-DEV wrote:Eddie Baker']The Type 95 is pretty much already in-game; the Type 97 used in the Chinese special operations class is just a 5.56mm version of the Type 95.
The Type 91 (as stated earlier) is a riot-control GR, and doesn't really have any munitions that would be useful in a combat zone. The QBZ-95 can actually use the M203, or the Chinese copy of it, but I don't know what its designation is.Jantteri wrote:How about Type95 rifle with Type91 grenade launcher for the chinese assault class?
Stranger still is that the gun in-game actually is the AK-47. The Chinese Type 56 Assault Rifle (the Type 56 Carbine is the SKS rifle, the Type 56 RPG is the RPG-2, and the Type 56 AAMG is the ZPU-4) has a fixed spike bayonette that can only be folded backwards, making it impossible to mount the GP-25. The other two versions of the Type 56 Assault Rifle that don't have the spike bayonette, the Type 56-1 and Type 56-2, both have folding stocks.Jantteri wrote:Funny to see AK-47s used, as the chinese designation is Type56. And it hasn't been issued to the front line troops for the last 15 years...
There is a new 'Black Hawk' version that is being developed for the Navy, Army, Air Force and Marines. It combines the Army's baseline Black Hawk configuration with Naval Hawk engines, rotor system and dynamics, including the Seahawk's automatic rotor blade folding system, folding tail pylon, improved durability gearbox, rotor brake and automatic flight control computer. Because it is a hybrid of the Black Hawk and the Seahawk, the CH-60 presents a quandary for Sikorsky’s marketing strategy: what does one call the CH-60? A possibility being considered, partly in tribute to the H-46 Sea Knight that the CH-60 will replace, is Knighthawk. The Navy still has not assigned a type/model/series designation to the CH-60; the next letter available in the H-60 series is “S.” If used, the aircraft’s official designation would be CH-60S.'[R-DEV wrote:Blackhawks (USMC only uses them for presidential/VIP transport).
But if those nations banded together and pooled their money (including oil money) to improve their equipment, what would they have as a result? That's kinda wha the whole MEC thing is. What I don't get is why, when they have so many rounds of 7.64x39mm ammo lying around, they'd switch to the RPK-74 and AKS-74U, which fire a smaller 5.45x39mm round, and the AK-101, which fires the 5.56 NATO round. Why not use the original RPK, the AKSMU and AK-103?asiLLasiTgets wrote:As far as firearms go in the middle east it is a grab bag..
For assualt rifles Syria, Oman, jordan, Egypt, Iraq, and yemen use the AK47. Iran uses the Ak47 and the Fn Fal. Saudi Arabia uses the Hk G3. Kuwait, Lebanon, UAE use the M16. Pakistani militia use the AK47 while the Army uses the HK G3.
Light Machine guns commonly seen in this region are the Rpk, Rpd,Pkm,FN Mag,MG42/MG34,MG3. As hard as it is to believe, the MG42 is widespread, especially in pakistan.
As far as accurized rifles you need not go further than the Dragunov and the Mosin nagant.
The M/CH-60S "Knighthawk" will only be in Navy service. The Army will be phasing in the UH-60M and the USAF is looking to replace its HH-60Gs with an as-yet undetermined aircraft. The Marines HMX-1 will be phasing in US101 (license-built EH101 Merlin) helicopters to replace the aging VH-3D Sea King and possibly some of their VH-60Ns. In the utility role the Marines have already settled on the UH-1Y; they've made it very clear they don't want the H-60 for anything other than "Special Air Mission."Xeno426 wrote:There is a new 'Black Hawk' version that is being developed for the Navy, Army, Air Force and Marines.
You're correct that the Middle East Russian client-states that license-produced the Kalashnikov family of weapons (and their ammunition) have not made (and most likely would never make) the switch to 5.45mm M1974 cartridge.Xeno426 wrote:Support - The RPK-74 is inappropriate, since it fires a 5.45x39mm round. The Middle East would have a much larger stockpile of 7.62x39mm ammo, so a better choice would be the older Kalashnikov RPK, which fired the old AK-47 7.62x30mm round. Iraq produced a licenced-built copy of the RPK known as the Al-Quds. It is a select fire weapon that usually fires a 30 round box magazine, but can obviously use a drum or quad-style clip.
From what I've read, soldiers prefer the 60-round double-stacked (quad style) box magazine, since it isn't at bulky as the drum and doesn't make as much noise when you move.'[R-DEV wrote:Eddie Baker']
The Al Quds actually does not use the drum magazines of the RPK; Jane's even classifies it as a "machine-rifle." However, the Iraqis (and many other states) have the regular RPK in their inventory.
Too much 7.62 ammo around and ... well... they don't care about civilian and such stuff... so even in urban fights why not use 7.62? It is not about human rights ( if we can talk about them in war).. it is about firepower and ammo supply....have not made (and most likely would never make) the switch to 5.45mm M1974 cartridge.
Those weren't the primary reasons for switching to smaller-caliber rounds. It was discovered during WWII that most infantry engagements occurred between 100 to 200 yards, well below the maximum effective range of rounds like the 30-06 that the Garands used and the 7.62x54mmR rounds that the Mosin-Nagat used. By making the caliber smaller, they reduced recoil (making full auto much more controllable) without significantly affecting infantry combat performance. In addition, the 5.56 (and the Russian 5.45) round was made primarily to wound, not to kill. This, also, was not for humanitarian reasons. In the kind of conflict we were expecting with the Soviet Union, a long and drawn out war like the one we just had with the Germans, a wounded soldier consumes more resources than a dead one. Basic ghastly arithmetic.Rifleman wrote:Too much 7.62 ammo around and ... well... they don't care about civilian and such stuff... so even in urban fights why not use 7.62? It is not about human rights ( if we can talk about them in war).. it is about firepower and ammo supply....
I love RPK btw ;]
Russian army and arithmetic? eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee?Basic ghastly arithmetic.
It wouldn't be the grunts doing the math. Besides, the VietCong used this tactic on us quite successfully. Most of their booby traps maimed and wounded, not killed. Heck, punji sticks were designed for that.Rifleman wrote:Russian army and arithmetic? eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee?
Well my country was under russian occupation for over 40 years... i doubt that they were good at it...but it is my opinion of course...
Why to hurt some1 when u can fall on him with 99999999999 tanks and 999999999 artillery rounds ;]]]]]Heck, punji sticks were designed for that.