If a nation like America, Britain, the Soviet Union, or France made this jet, it would have sold to dozens of nations worldwide in the thousands.
It would have seen seen in every clime, on every inhabited continent. The world would laud its power, and would have served in large numbers for a long time.
But alas, it was made by Sweden, who did a fine job making it. Probably better than any other nation who could have made it. But because it was made by Sweden, it never fired a shot in anger. It served a few air forces, and even made its way to America as a test pilot training aircraft. In every service it was well regarded by its users.
While it served for a very long time, it never fired a shot in anger. Such is the wasted potential of an excellent design, but there you go.
The M16 assault rifle can reliably hit targets at distances up to 550m. The average combat distance is 300m.
Studies from virtually every conflict point to the fact that for the average infantryman, the main determinant of who wins a firefight is who can put more lead down a two-way firing range.
Thus, full-power rifles were simply excessively powerful and bulky for the role. The only people who can take advantage of the greater power and range are machine guns and sniper rifles.
Frankly, the M16 is superior to this regard versus this thing in most combat situations. @KillShot86
@TemDesBur In Soviet doctrine, the commander remains buttoned up. This is why the hatch opens forward instead of backwards like on other tanks I designed. A forward-opening commander's hatch would double as a shield when open, useful if bailing out of a burning vehicle.
Seeing over it would mean the commander would be excessively exposed to fire. However, doing so would usually be done in a non-combat environment, where getting shot at is a non-issue.
The only purpose for the commander's MG would be for anti-aircraft purposes. Even so, such a weapon's presence in this role would largely be psychological; modern attack helicopters can engage tanks at distances much farther than a 12.7mm machine gun, and are generally protected against such weaponry.
Its only use would be against tactical observation aircraft, although such is generally not done since firing simply reveals your position for them to bring something that will make your day pretty bad.
@MemeKingIndustriesAndMegaCorporation @Alix451 We found this issue redundant since (a) the gunner's sight is a periscopic variable magnification (1.5x-2x-6x) sight on the right side of the turret for gunner ergonomics, (b) the gun mantlet is off-center to the centered mantlet on the M1 Abrams and Leopard 2, so such is not an issue IRL, and should not be an issue here, and (3) gun mantlet is a cover for a hole in the front armor to stick the gun out of. Smaller mantlet = smaller hole in the front armor = stronger turret.
@TemDesBur @YuukaNeko Here's the shortlist
1) Some optic. Iron sights are for peasants.
2) Mounting rails. All of them. Not a surface on the forend or top of the receiver should lack a Picatinny rail.
3) Magazines with capacity greater than 10 shots. The more, the better.
4) Forend attachment of some sort. Full-length, stubby, angled, integrated bipod-foregrip, bipod, grenade launcher, shotgun, whatever. The bottom of the forend cannot be bare. Swing swivels do not count.
5) Laser sight/flashlights. Improves hip-firing and blinds the target. Because since you are tacticool, you have NVG, and don't need flashlight to see.
6) Muzzle attachment. Something like a flash hider, compensator, muzzle brake, or suppressor. No bayonets, because this isn't the Napoleonic Wars. Rifle grenade launchers are not allowed because this isn't a World War. Unless they are integrated into the flash hider, such as an M16 or M4 flash hider.
7) Plastic and metal only. There should not be a single splinter of wood on the gun.
@Flash0of0green It's more known for its innovative design and defense of Israeli gains from 1947 than liberating Israel.
That task went to the motley collection of WWII guns. Featuring:
Mauser K98
MP40 SMG
Lee-Enfield No. 4
Pattern 1913 Enfield
Vickers Medium Machine Gun
Bren LMG
Sten SMG
Thompson SMG (M1928, M1928A1, M1, M1A1)
Johnston M1944 Automatic Rifle
FN Model D Browning Automatic Rifle
M1919 Browning Medium Machine Gun
Way too many more to list.
Yeah. Above is why Israel went off and made the Uzi. You know, standardization.
We have an RPG.
A rocket launcher. With a HEAT round that makes steel flow like mud. @KillShot86
@Halphas Okay. Sounds good!
Nice ship! Although I think it is best you start from scratch with the North Point.
If a nation like America, Britain, the Soviet Union, or France made this jet, it would have sold to dozens of nations worldwide in the thousands.
It would have seen seen in every clime, on every inhabited continent. The world would laud its power, and would have served in large numbers for a long time.
But alas, it was made by Sweden, who did a fine job making it. Probably better than any other nation who could have made it. But because it was made by Sweden, it never fired a shot in anger. It served a few air forces, and even made its way to America as a test pilot training aircraft. In every service it was well regarded by its users.
While it served for a very long time, it never fired a shot in anger. Such is the wasted potential of an excellent design, but there you go.
We have better weapons against tanks. @KillShot86
The M16 assault rifle can reliably hit targets at distances up to 550m. The average combat distance is 300m.
Studies from virtually every conflict point to the fact that for the average infantryman, the main determinant of who wins a firefight is who can put more lead down a two-way firing range.
Thus, full-power rifles were simply excessively powerful and bulky for the role. The only people who can take advantage of the greater power and range are machine guns and sniper rifles.
Frankly, the M16 is superior to this regard versus this thing in most combat situations. @KillShot86
It's okay.
But a single-shot rifle versus an M16? Yeah.
@TemDesBur In Soviet doctrine, the commander remains buttoned up. This is why the hatch opens forward instead of backwards like on other tanks I designed. A forward-opening commander's hatch would double as a shield when open, useful if bailing out of a burning vehicle.
Seeing over it would mean the commander would be excessively exposed to fire. However, doing so would usually be done in a non-combat environment, where getting shot at is a non-issue.
The only purpose for the commander's MG would be for anti-aircraft purposes. Even so, such a weapon's presence in this role would largely be psychological; modern attack helicopters can engage tanks at distances much farther than a 12.7mm machine gun, and are generally protected against such weaponry.
Its only use would be against tactical observation aircraft, although such is generally not done since firing simply reveals your position for them to bring something that will make your day pretty bad.
@DankDorito Thanks!
@Botfinder The T32 was an American prototype heavy tank based off the M26 Pershing.
@Baldeagle086 Nice gun.
Wait, is that a revolver?
I might just refine this.
@Dllama4 It is good, but the magazine could use some work.
@MemeKingIndustriesAndMegaCorporation @Alix451 We found this issue redundant since (a) the gunner's sight is a periscopic variable magnification (1.5x-2x-6x) sight on the right side of the turret for gunner ergonomics, (b) the gun mantlet is off-center to the centered mantlet on the M1 Abrams and Leopard 2, so such is not an issue IRL, and should not be an issue here, and (3) gun mantlet is a cover for a hole in the front armor to stick the gun out of. Smaller mantlet = smaller hole in the front armor = stronger turret.
It was so that I can fit the main gun and the coaxial on that mantlet without making it larger. @MemeKingIndustriesAndMegaCorporation
I was working on your T-90.
Why was the first one deleted?
True. @PhantomBladeCorp
Actually, it's turret could rotate fully. However, it could only do so on the move.
Yep. @MemeKingIndustriesAndMegaCorporation
I can make an elevation system for it.
Imma go make this look ten times better.
On second thought, I might as well make a Tokarev or Makarov for you.
@MemeKingIndustriesAndMegaCorporation Elaborate.
@Flash0of0green No. I need iOS peasants to be able to download it.
@Lizarddragon @saturn28 @MemeKingIndustriesAndMegaCorporation Thanks!
@Flash0of0green I try not to use mods whenever possible, so that iOS peasants can download my builds. Theoretically.
And the turret was inspired by the Leopard 2A5, with the hull loosely inspired by the PL-01.
I forgot to mention how much I like this gun.
It's a very good replica.
Np! @deusalgor
Pop flares, pop smoke, pop open houses. @PyrusEnderhunter
Isn't that an aircraft carrier?
@TemDesBur @YuukaNeko Here's the shortlist
1) Some optic. Iron sights are for peasants.
2) Mounting rails. All of them. Not a surface on the forend or top of the receiver should lack a Picatinny rail.
3) Magazines with capacity greater than 10 shots. The more, the better.
4) Forend attachment of some sort. Full-length, stubby, angled, integrated bipod-foregrip, bipod, grenade launcher, shotgun, whatever. The bottom of the forend cannot be bare. Swing swivels do not count.
5) Laser sight/flashlights. Improves hip-firing and blinds the target. Because since you are tacticool, you have NVG, and don't need flashlight to see.
6) Muzzle attachment. Something like a flash hider, compensator, muzzle brake, or suppressor. No bayonets, because this isn't the Napoleonic Wars. Rifle grenade launchers are not allowed because this isn't a World War. Unless they are integrated into the flash hider, such as an M16 or M4 flash hider.
7) Plastic and metal only. There should not be a single splinter of wood on the gun.
@YuukaNeko Where are the red dot sights? The foregrips? Flashlights and laser sights?
I mean, it has a suppressor, but that's it?
Where's the red dot sights?
The T92 Mobile Nuclear Missile Launcher.
I would hate it more if there wasn't the Conqueror Orbital Laser Cannon.
Who knows? @Supercraft888
@Supercraft888 Maybe.
I have the Artemis tank.
They all looked so familiar...
Yes. This is the Victoria tank. Very difficult to kill. @Supercraft888
@Flash0of0green It's more known for its innovative design and defense of Israeli gains from 1947 than liberating Israel.
That task went to the motley collection of WWII guns. Featuring:
Mauser K98
MP40 SMG
Lee-Enfield No. 4
Pattern 1913 Enfield
Vickers Medium Machine Gun
Bren LMG
Sten SMG
Thompson SMG (M1928, M1928A1, M1, M1A1)
Johnston M1944 Automatic Rifle
FN Model D Browning Automatic Rifle
M1919 Browning Medium Machine Gun
Way too many more to list.
Yeah. Above is why Israel went off and made the Uzi. You know, standardization.
Nice gun! But why is there a telescoping stock on a bullpup?
@AccipitrisEnterprises "I am the way and the light. Except sometimes that light is muzzle flash."
@AccipitrisEnterprises Ah, yes Ian.
I remember when he read the Gospel of Browning.
@MemeKingIndustriesAndMegaCorporation Understood. Alix does employ plenty of Paternian ordnance in order to improve logistics between our forces.
@Dllama4 I was unaware of that.
@MemeKingIndustriesAndMegaCorporation @TemDesBur No... not at all.
Wait, I'm gun god?
You can ask him. @MemeKingIndustriesAndMegaCorporation
Who got it from me. @MemeKingIndustriesAndMegaCorporation
I actually got to see one of these things (this variant, in Hawaii).
Lovely jet, really. Love you featured the coolest part about the jet.
Speaking of which, may I create a variant which incorporates a weapons bay?
@Flash0of0green It's okay.