Search results

The difference between most of modern firearms (whether bullpup or classic) is not big and largely matter of taste. My personal favorite is AUG. Super compact and pleasant to fire.

Neither bullpup of convectional design have decisive advantage over another. So both have a future. I believe that standard infantry firearm should not be longer than M4 - 84 cm. Because modern combat is largely urban. This leaves you with 37 cm barrel which is close to minimum possible...

The red square is just bow sonar (bow sonar's shell more correctly).

Sea Breaker test.

Its called dorsal fin. Early P-51D had stability issues. Thats why they got it:

Yom Kippur war involved large tank to tank battles.

Compact layout allows Russian tanks to have good armor in small weight. The disadvantages are: 1) Low gun elevation and depression angles. That means tank can not use effectively terrain cover and often needs to expose itself. 2) fuel tanks and rounds around driver and in side turret ring. 3)...

I will debunk several myths, then will write more detalized: Myth #1. Russian tanks are lighter this less armored than Western. In fact usually Russian tanks had better armor despite their weight (that advantage was usually compensated by better Western guns and ammo though). Myth #2. Auto...

First pics of Challenger 3 with Trophy APS: Rear mount of radars is unusual:

Waterloo happened after long war on attrition, defeat in Spain and Russia. John Churchill and Spanish succession victories happened mostly together with Eugene Savoy who was one of the most brilliant commanders in history.

British navy was strongest from 16th to first half of 20th century. But in terms of army i don't see any wonders to be honest. Thanks to its location and navy advantage Britain was safe from invasion, it could control trade and supplies, could suprise land forces. British strategy was simple...

If your fighters are escorting UAV then UAV would be a burden for them. First u need to achieve air superiority, then send big drones. When you win on battlefield politics can only watch and do nothing. Lets briefly check what happened in 3 operations involving Turkish attack drones: 1) Syria...

Yeah i wish we had F-35 kill switch in Tel Aviv. :rolleyes:

I guess Greece has hudreds of AMRAAMs and Meteors. So how any jets you need to lose before they get depleted how much time it will take? On the other hand with F-35 you can drop thousands SDB-s on aircraft bunkers, runways, radars, command centers, SAMs without waiting for depletion.

I repeat. Erdogan publicly promised to reverse Assad advances in Idlib. Not only he failed to do so, Assad forces managed to retake Saraqib while Turkish drones were still in the air. Now check the map of Assad air defence: Do you see the slight difference between Idlib and Damascus area...

In order to hit plane in bunker u need a direct hit. And one missile per bunker. According to Janes Bora has 30-50 m CEP, thats not enough to achieve a direct bunker hit. With cheap and many SDBs you can destroy all bunkers, runways radars etc

Israel has operational Eitan UAVs (similar to Akinci) for over a decade. But they are very vulnerable even to old SAMs and fighters. Thats why we never use them in Syria. Greece has both Patriot and S-300PMU2 they have fighters with AMRAAMs and now Meteors. They can easily shot down slow and...

Ballistic missiles are too expensive to use them against airport bunkers. 1 F-35 on the other hand can drop 8 cheap SDBs. Bombs are cheap. Drones have many limitations. They are very vulnerable to air defence, they carry only small bombs. Surely they cant carry deep strikes at all. Thats...

Every complex weapon will became useless very fast without proper maintenance.