We all know about the fedora sword meme, people who like to say Japanese swords are the very best, and how that's not true.
But the opposite also happens, people who then say Katanas are shit swords and don't measure up.
So /k/, whats the truth?
Historically accurate katanas are not made from a homogenous piece of quality steel.
They have a soft steel or iron core, or backing, and a high quality steel used for the tip and edge.
This means if you bend it, it might not spring back.
How bad did I fuck up /k?
340 $ for a Sccy cpx-2 9mm
Where were you the day based Ian confirmed that the AK is actually less reliable than the AR?
So these are actually pretty shitty?
For a 12 year COIN operation, sure. Thats kinda moot though, because they were created to fight a "hot" cold war. Its like spending the better part of 50 years building a stock car in your garage and then getting upset that it under performs when you enter it in the WRC.
Whats your carry ammo?
What requirements do you consider when choosing an ammo
Federal hollow points (45 auto)
nothing special about them really, got some cheap enough at a local gun store and they feed just fine
ATTN: Oppenheimer, or any other anon knowledgeable about this subject.
I was watching this video: https://youtu.be/zVhQOhxb1Mc
This guy repeatedly hints at the existence of implosion-type weapons that do not require complex explosive lenses, but says that the information is classified before going any further. He also makes reference to a design that could be potentially used by terrorists that could be brought into a nuclear material facility, loaded with material in-situ, and detonated while still in the building.
I know that this stuff is probably either...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
My personal suspicion is that the thin-shell and slapper plate combination negates the need for lenses. We know haw large a modern nuclear weapon core is with its stainless shell and we know the outside diameter of the weapon. Once you include the airgap there just isn't enough space for proper lenses. Maybe it has a very small amount of lensing but not enough for a true sperical implosion wave.
This matches the only known leaked diagram of a nuclear weapon (pic related, diagram of W80 150kt warhead or possibly a W84).
>the thin-shell and slapper plate combination negates the need for lenses
Could you elaborate on these terms:
My understanding of this subject is pretty crappy so I don't know all the terms yet.
Wondering what the best self defense weapon for a felon is?
Colder state if that helps.
Turned on Obama's no fun allowed rant while I cleaned my guns for a good kek. Let's see em /k/
my handguns minus my glock 19, I don't have enough room or energy to pull out all my long guns
/k/ shit you can find on Amazon thread
Would you operate with this French qt to clean up the Paris?
>clean up Paris
Let me know how that works out. Having fun bringing the war to your own neighborhood, just because you wanted progressive brownie points.
Nah! Paris can only be cleaned up with nuclear fire at this point. This shitty action scifi flick is pretty much reality Paris lives in:
Cool intro. Shitty movie.
Nope, I'd never trust my life with a women in a shootout/fight with a criminal. I know it sounds sexist and shit but seriously, military and police work is more for men.
Why aren't Korea buying F-35? Do they *want* to lose to China?
what does /k/ think about the desert eagle?
>build like a brick shit house
>fun as fuck to shoot
>expensive as fuck to shoot
/k/ humor thread
>tfw the seaplane tender concept is dead and buried
I know that it probably wouldn't be terribly cost-effective, but the idea of resurrecting the concept is very appealing to me. Convert a bunch of Tucanos into seaplanes and have a few tender ships to keep them supplied and maintained.
Are kamikaze attacks viable in modern warfare due to the lack of armor on modern ships?
It seems a small country with an ideologically indoctrinated population (North Korea?) could buy cheap fast jets like old MiG variations and pack them with explosives.
Would modern warships be able to deal with massed kamikaze attacks? Would they be able to absorb a hit the way American battleships did during the Pacific campaign?
Pic is HMS Sussex after a kamikaze attack.
And yes, I'd say they would. Because there would be intel that the said country had such plans and so the navy would be able to plan around that.
This question is almost exactly the same as the swarm of missile boats.
[Millennium Challenge intensifies]