FA+
Shop
4254
Views
Views
307
Favorites
Favorites
Category
Artwork (Digital) / Miscellaneous
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 1200 x 960
File Size 183.6 kB
Report this content
More from iPoke
So lately I've been working on several cutaway cross sections of things...this was something I worked out yesterday after taking a break from the one big cross section I'm working on.
I'll be working on that one again today, but it wont be done until ~maybe a week or two from now... after which I'll get back to work on another one of those super-secret projects of mine X3
Al’ethp Mark V Magnetic Accelerator Assault Rifle
Designer and Manufacturer: Saimatii Armories (Virus; under License)
Unit Cost: 2000 Anri (not including accessories)
Weight: 5.6 kg (unloaded)
Overall Length: 1040mm (standard configuration)
Barrel Length: 740mm (standard configuration)
Caliber: (dependent on type of ammunition)
Plasma Ovaloids: 20mm
Plasma Flechettes: 12mm dart
Magazines: Crescent pattern box magazines (rounds dependent on type of ammunition)
Plasma Ovaloids: 80
Plasma Flechettes: 24
Rate of Fire: (dependent on type of ammunition)
Plasma Ovaloids: 800 rounds per minute (1600 rpm on burst mode)
Plasma Flechettes: 400 rounds per minute (800 rpm on burst mode)
Effective Range: (dependent on type of ammunition)
Plasma Ovaloids: 600 meters (self destruct at impact/ dud deactivation after 10 seconds)
Plasma Flechettes: 1600 meters (self destruct at impact/ dud deactivation after 10 seconds)
Background and Functionality
The Saimatii Mark V MAAR is the fifth in the Al’ethp series to have passed the Si’itian guard weapons trials for the standard issue assault rifle and has been fielded for the last 20 years.
Although rather boxy in it’s design, the high customizability and relative practicality to it’s predecessor model have made it a reliable companion for Si’itian guardsmen around the galaxy. As is customary with Saimatii, the loading mechanism and exchanging system are held mostly mechanical to avoid jamming issues in case of a complete system failure. The firing mechanism itself does not rely on the weapon interface node anymore, so even in the event of a such a failure the weapon will still fire reliably, even if slightly less accurate at a distance.
The ammunition and power for the firing mechanism are introduced simultaneously with the magazine, while the weapon interface node is supplied with a separate power source. Optionally the handler can introduce a back up powerpack into the lower portion of the stock, though due to balancing issues this is not included in the standard variant. Other options include any previously available accessories and upgrading technology for older generation Al’ethp rifles, as well as the usual specialized modifications, like cut down receivers or lengthened barrels.
Disassembling and cleaning the weapon is tied to a vastly simple mechanical press and lock system, just as all parts are easily interchangeable with new ones. Counting the magazine, the rifle consists of 9 main parts which can be disassembled without the aid of tools.
In standard configuration, the weapon fires plasma ovaloids from 80 round sickle box magazines and is equipped with telescope sights with varying magnification levels up to 8x, a visual threat detection system and range finder.
Guardsmen have a generally positive opinion about the rifle, although one of the minor issues that have been pointed out are the problem of having to order left and right handed loading mechanisms separately, while the general handling is actually held ambiguous. The most common option applied for upon delivery is the inclusion of back up iron sights. In its many configurations it has been fielded in almost any environment by today, but by general opinion its true homeland territory is urban warfare.
Due to its immense stopping power the Al’ethp series was never available on the civilian market, including to PMC corporations and only in very limited numbers to law enforcement, though Saimatii has been considering to downgrade the general weapons design to something that could be made legally available on the market.
Design, art and si'itians are © to iPoke
I'll be working on that one again today, but it wont be done until ~maybe a week or two from now... after which I'll get back to work on another one of those super-secret projects of mine X3
Al’ethp Mark V Magnetic Accelerator Assault Rifle
Designer and Manufacturer: Saimatii Armories (Virus; under License)
Unit Cost: 2000 Anri (not including accessories)
Weight: 5.6 kg (unloaded)
Overall Length: 1040mm (standard configuration)
Barrel Length: 740mm (standard configuration)
Caliber: (dependent on type of ammunition)
Plasma Ovaloids: 20mm
Plasma Flechettes: 12mm dart
Magazines: Crescent pattern box magazines (rounds dependent on type of ammunition)
Plasma Ovaloids: 80
Plasma Flechettes: 24
Rate of Fire: (dependent on type of ammunition)
Plasma Ovaloids: 800 rounds per minute (1600 rpm on burst mode)
Plasma Flechettes: 400 rounds per minute (800 rpm on burst mode)
Effective Range: (dependent on type of ammunition)
Plasma Ovaloids: 600 meters (self destruct at impact/ dud deactivation after 10 seconds)
Plasma Flechettes: 1600 meters (self destruct at impact/ dud deactivation after 10 seconds)
Background and Functionality
The Saimatii Mark V MAAR is the fifth in the Al’ethp series to have passed the Si’itian guard weapons trials for the standard issue assault rifle and has been fielded for the last 20 years.
Although rather boxy in it’s design, the high customizability and relative practicality to it’s predecessor model have made it a reliable companion for Si’itian guardsmen around the galaxy. As is customary with Saimatii, the loading mechanism and exchanging system are held mostly mechanical to avoid jamming issues in case of a complete system failure. The firing mechanism itself does not rely on the weapon interface node anymore, so even in the event of a such a failure the weapon will still fire reliably, even if slightly less accurate at a distance.
The ammunition and power for the firing mechanism are introduced simultaneously with the magazine, while the weapon interface node is supplied with a separate power source. Optionally the handler can introduce a back up powerpack into the lower portion of the stock, though due to balancing issues this is not included in the standard variant. Other options include any previously available accessories and upgrading technology for older generation Al’ethp rifles, as well as the usual specialized modifications, like cut down receivers or lengthened barrels.
Disassembling and cleaning the weapon is tied to a vastly simple mechanical press and lock system, just as all parts are easily interchangeable with new ones. Counting the magazine, the rifle consists of 9 main parts which can be disassembled without the aid of tools.
In standard configuration, the weapon fires plasma ovaloids from 80 round sickle box magazines and is equipped with telescope sights with varying magnification levels up to 8x, a visual threat detection system and range finder.
Guardsmen have a generally positive opinion about the rifle, although one of the minor issues that have been pointed out are the problem of having to order left and right handed loading mechanisms separately, while the general handling is actually held ambiguous. The most common option applied for upon delivery is the inclusion of back up iron sights. In its many configurations it has been fielded in almost any environment by today, but by general opinion its true homeland territory is urban warfare.
Due to its immense stopping power the Al’ethp series was never available on the civilian market, including to PMC corporations and only in very limited numbers to law enforcement, though Saimatii has been considering to downgrade the general weapons design to something that could be made legally available on the market.
Design, art and si'itians are © to iPoke
Category Artwork (Digital) / Miscellaneous
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 1200 x 960px
File Size 183.6 kB
all depends on the battlefield and the battle, in a good open ground a AR is good, but force a soldier into close spaces and his AR is for nothing, while a revolver is a nice, sturdy, easy to manoeuvre.
plus modern AR look like plastic toys for boys, a good old revolver is a hand crafted work of art, made by skilled, proud hands.
plus modern AR look like plastic toys for boys, a good old revolver is a hand crafted work of art, made by skilled, proud hands.
Because the look of a gun is relevant during combat right?
Modern design with polymer make lighter guns that are just as durable, I would have my money on them. Also, SMG's and Shotguns will tear down any revolver in close quarters.
You're gonna be blushing when the boy's toy leaves your "piece of art" dead in a ditch.
Modern design with polymer make lighter guns that are just as durable, I would have my money on them. Also, SMG's and Shotguns will tear down any revolver in close quarters.
You're gonna be blushing when the boy's toy leaves your "piece of art" dead in a ditch.
Unless you're dealing with one of those bloody magnum hand-cannons a pistol is just a backup weapon. However, he had a point regarding the AR. The AR's ancestor, the M-16, was one of the most awful rifles ever created. It was flimsy, it lacked stopping power, it was expensive to manufacture and complicated to maintain. These things jammed if you so much as whispered the word "dirt" at them. It was so bad the Vietnamese refused to loot them during the Vietnam War. Things haven't improved much since then. The modern AR is even more expensive and complicated, remaining a poor weapon even if it has been improved in other ways. Arguably, if I had to choose between the two I would probably be better off with the pistol.
Goodness that last sentence makes me want to kill babies. First off. The M16 has much more power than a pistol. An M16 will fire if you keep it maintained. The troops never were taught correctly on how to clean it and that's why it jammed like crazy. Just to get that through. Secondly. Do more research, go fire these yourselves. Modern assault rifles take a SHIT TON to get to jam. Almost any thing with the short stroke gas piston will be reliable as hell. Things do not go back in time. They go forward. On top of that. No, you're NEVER in a better scenario with a pistol and they have an AR. You are in every sense of the word screwed. Retreat is the only thing you should be thinking about. A great example is the bank shootout that lasted 44 min in california. The reasoning, they had assault rifles and cops had glocks.
"A great example is the bank shootout that lasted 44 min in california. The reasoning, they had assault rifles and cops had glocks"
This times a thousand. The cops had to break into gun stores and use their weapons. Now cops usually have ASSAULT RIFLES on hand at all times. At least in California.
This times a thousand. The cops had to break into gun stores and use their weapons. Now cops usually have ASSAULT RIFLES on hand at all times. At least in California.
Actually, most the problems you are thinking of were particular to the XM16E1 using Olin propellant rather than DuPont propellant.
As for stopping power: Early use of Air Force M-16s[1] by US special forces saw great praise for how good the stopping power was.
You also missed the other common complaint: The poor penetration of the M193 round, which has long been replaced.
There is a reason why, in 1968, a survey of 2100 US servicemen found only 38 who wanted to swap their M16 for another weapon. Including 35 who wanted the shorter CAR-15, (an M16 variant). Since then, the design has only gotten better with the more modern M16A2/A4 and C7A1/A2.
[1] Which actually lacked the jamming problems of the later XM16E1, as those problems were caused by a combination of cost reducing design changes and the lower quality propellant.
As for stopping power: Early use of Air Force M-16s[1] by US special forces saw great praise for how good the stopping power was.
You also missed the other common complaint: The poor penetration of the M193 round, which has long been replaced.
There is a reason why, in 1968, a survey of 2100 US servicemen found only 38 who wanted to swap their M16 for another weapon. Including 35 who wanted the shorter CAR-15, (an M16 variant). Since then, the design has only gotten better with the more modern M16A2/A4 and C7A1/A2.
[1] Which actually lacked the jamming problems of the later XM16E1, as those problems were caused by a combination of cost reducing design changes and the lower quality propellant.
simple, it takes longer to turn a long, bulky rifle then a handgun like a revolver, so as a AR user enters a room a flanking revolver user can get in quite a good shot before even the AR guy can turn his rifle and get a clean shot.
anyway lets end this goofy debate, I like revolvers you like AR, it´s just as important as a debate about why I like pears and you like apples.
anyway lets end this goofy debate, I like revolvers you like AR, it´s just as important as a debate about why I like pears and you like apples.
*facepalm* Again, I hate to inform you of this, but semi autos can be A LOT more reliable than revolvers. Examples, AKs, FAL, G3, M14, ANY rifle using the short stroke gas piston, all are more reliable than a revolver and over all most are incredibly simple to clean. More simple than a revolver. Reliability depends on the weapon, not the type of weapon.
*chuckles* more simple then a revolver? slingshots are the only thing more simple then a revolver, and with very few moving parts it´s as sturdy as a rock, not without problems of course, no gun is spot on perfect, but at least I don´t have to fiddle around if my gun don´t fire, just pull the trigger again and keep on firing.
LOL, good god no. You're going to blow your hand off. If you get a bullet jammed in the cylinder or barrel and you go to fire another round. Goodbye revolver and goodbye hand. Also, assault rifles are made to not jam. Even M16s won't jam if you clean them and that's a soldiers first thought. Clean your rifle. You'll never see a soldiers rifle dirty. Ever.
mistype, I ment cock the hammer, plus something stuck in a barrel blows up any gun ^^
true, but say a bullet fails to fire, in gas operated you have to break aim, do a quick inspect, chamber a new round and regain your aim, with say a level action or a revolver you just pull the level or cock the hammer again never breaking aim.
true, but say a bullet fails to fire, in gas operated you have to break aim, do a quick inspect, chamber a new round and regain your aim, with say a level action or a revolver you just pull the level or cock the hammer again never breaking aim.
Not to add to the drama, but I believe he meant: if a revolver fails to fire (in case of say, a dud bullet), pulling the trigger again rolls that chamber aside and immediately fires the next round. If the same happens to an M16, you have to break aim, cycle the bolt to remove the dud round, and retake aim. In that time the Revolver-man could empty the entire shot cylinder into you.
Also the revolver has one upside to the M16 (and other AR's), and that's stopping power. Nothing hits quite as hard and stops you in your tracks like getting hit in the chest with a .44 Magnum. Even if it doesn't punch through a Kevlar vest, any person who doesn't stop to seriously evaluate their next move after getting hit with one of those should probably get into therapy.
Anyways that's just my input because this conversation is turning into an inverted pyramid.
Also the revolver has one upside to the M16 (and other AR's), and that's stopping power. Nothing hits quite as hard and stops you in your tracks like getting hit in the chest with a .44 Magnum. Even if it doesn't punch through a Kevlar vest, any person who doesn't stop to seriously evaluate their next move after getting hit with one of those should probably get into therapy.
Anyways that's just my input because this conversation is turning into an inverted pyramid.
*headgun* No, just pure NO. A RIFLE ROUND has far more power than a magnum round. People highly underestimate the 5.56. It's NOT a weak round. One shot is one kill. People use the 223, in short a 5.56, to hunt for a reason. A magnum round in a revolver also kicks like nothing else. Not an advantage in any way.
Like I said before. Just pulling the trigger again is a very bad idea. You don't know if it's a low loaded round and the barrel is jammed or if it's a dud. Better to check even in combat because having a gun opposed to a gun blown into pieces, you get my point.
Like I said before. Just pulling the trigger again is a very bad idea. You don't know if it's a low loaded round and the barrel is jammed or if it's a dud. Better to check even in combat because having a gun opposed to a gun blown into pieces, you get my point.
If I'm presented with a situation where I'm face to face with a would be assassin, and both of our weapons jam at the same time, thanks, I'll take the risk of pulling the trigger again.
I'd rather a 5% chance (or in the case of a dud round, 50/50) of killing the bastard than a 0% chance.
Also, I never said the 5.56 is weak. It's just got nowhere near the mass and punch of a .44
The 5.56 is small and fast, the .44 is large and fast (if we're talking magnum, which I am), Mass X Speed = Force... so, mathematically, the 44 has much more psi of pressure than a 5.56, therefore, at 10 feet away, if shot in the exact same spot by the .44 and the 5.56, you're far more likely to die by the .44, not because the 5.56 is weak, but because it simply doesn't deliver the same amount of force that the magnum round can/does, and in the event that neither bullet causes a fatality, the residual shock from a .44 round will knock down the poor bastard at the wrong end of the barrel, and give you the chance to shoot him again. With something small like a 5.56, the round could pass right through (doing relatively little damage, for a bullet) and then this assassin could lift his AK (or revolver) and end you.
Anyways, Like I said the first goddamn time, I'm not here to start drama. What is it with furries and drama...
It's like drummers and heroine...
I'd rather a 5% chance (or in the case of a dud round, 50/50) of killing the bastard than a 0% chance.
Also, I never said the 5.56 is weak. It's just got nowhere near the mass and punch of a .44
The 5.56 is small and fast, the .44 is large and fast (if we're talking magnum, which I am), Mass X Speed = Force... so, mathematically, the 44 has much more psi of pressure than a 5.56, therefore, at 10 feet away, if shot in the exact same spot by the .44 and the 5.56, you're far more likely to die by the .44, not because the 5.56 is weak, but because it simply doesn't deliver the same amount of force that the magnum round can/does, and in the event that neither bullet causes a fatality, the residual shock from a .44 round will knock down the poor bastard at the wrong end of the barrel, and give you the chance to shoot him again. With something small like a 5.56, the round could pass right through (doing relatively little damage, for a bullet) and then this assassin could lift his AK (or revolver) and end you.
Anyways, Like I said the first goddamn time, I'm not here to start drama. What is it with furries and drama...
It's like drummers and heroine...
First off. You're the one causing drama here smart one. I'm just debating. The internet is not serious business.
Secondly, no, no and no. A bullet knocking your opponent down is the very last thing you want. He won't feel good, cracked ribs possibly, but he'll shoot back. Secondly, the amount of propulsion in the 5.56 is MUCH MUCH more than a .44. The bullet travels faster and tumbles. It's going through your heart. If not, it's tumbling through your body. Up close it can over penetrate, but that's why you're trained to aim for the heart. There's a good reason numerous militaries around the world use the 5.56 and why most hunters use the .223 to hunt deer. I can tell you this. A deer is far harder to kill than a human. The 5.56 is not weak.
Secondly, no, no and no. A bullet knocking your opponent down is the very last thing you want. He won't feel good, cracked ribs possibly, but he'll shoot back. Secondly, the amount of propulsion in the 5.56 is MUCH MUCH more than a .44. The bullet travels faster and tumbles. It's going through your heart. If not, it's tumbling through your body. Up close it can over penetrate, but that's why you're trained to aim for the heart. There's a good reason numerous militaries around the world use the 5.56 and why most hunters use the .223 to hunt deer. I can tell you this. A deer is far harder to kill than a human. The 5.56 is not weak.
>You're the one causing drama here smart one
Drama detected.
Obviously you don't understand what knockdown power is. If the M16 is so perfect, why does the AK still beat it in most engagements?
Bigger bullets are heavier, hit with more force, penetrate further (through walls, vehicles etc.), and generally kill faster. Knockdown power is better known as Stopping power.
When someone is running at you, taking aim to kill you, the .44 has a better chance of "stopping" them (hence stopping power), whereas the M16 will slip right through the body and the end result will be a dead you. They both kill, the 5.56 is not weak, but the .44 simply has the advantage of significantly faster death, thus protecting you from getting shot.
Drama detected.
Obviously you don't understand what knockdown power is. If the M16 is so perfect, why does the AK still beat it in most engagements?
Bigger bullets are heavier, hit with more force, penetrate further (through walls, vehicles etc.), and generally kill faster. Knockdown power is better known as Stopping power.
When someone is running at you, taking aim to kill you, the .44 has a better chance of "stopping" them (hence stopping power), whereas the M16 will slip right through the body and the end result will be a dead you. They both kill, the 5.56 is not weak, but the .44 simply has the advantage of significantly faster death, thus protecting you from getting shot.
Actually. I was just debating and you started ranting about furry drama.
The .44 is blunter dispersing more impact force and less armor piercing but it is not stronger nor faster. There's a difference between that and pure stopping power. On top of that it will not kill faster. You have the giant disadvantage of using a magnum. Aiming an AR is going to be a much faster and much more natural motion than aiming your magnum.
Secondly, no. Plain no. The AK does not beat out the M16 in most engagements. Especially when most engagements between the two are between trained soldiers and the taliban. Now frankly the army needs to get a new gun. The M16 family is 40 years old BUT it works perfectly since a soldiers first worry is to keep his gun clean. Next, a large bullet means it drops faster. The AK's biggest problem is its accuracy. Any thing over 200 yards is a hard shot which is no where near out of engagement ranges. This depends a lot on the certain gun though. The other problem is that the larger the round, the less you can carry and the more it weighs you down.
The .44 is blunter dispersing more impact force and less armor piercing but it is not stronger nor faster. There's a difference between that and pure stopping power. On top of that it will not kill faster. You have the giant disadvantage of using a magnum. Aiming an AR is going to be a much faster and much more natural motion than aiming your magnum.
Secondly, no. Plain no. The AK does not beat out the M16 in most engagements. Especially when most engagements between the two are between trained soldiers and the taliban. Now frankly the army needs to get a new gun. The M16 family is 40 years old BUT it works perfectly since a soldiers first worry is to keep his gun clean. Next, a large bullet means it drops faster. The AK's biggest problem is its accuracy. Any thing over 200 yards is a hard shot which is no where near out of engagement ranges. This depends a lot on the certain gun though. The other problem is that the larger the round, the less you can carry and the more it weighs you down.
But I'm calling back to the previous comment in this ever-growing pyramid.
In a close-range engagement, like in a tight, enclosed building, a revolver is easier to maneuver (because it's smaller and requires only a single-hand to use [if you're a manly man at least]), can fire successive shots even if it has jammed, and is more likely to kill with the first bullet than the M16 will.
In a tight combat space, a portable 'one-hit-kill' weapon is better than a larger assault rifle simply for ease of use, first-shot-power, and the fact that it's still usable immediately after it jams (and even if its totally fragged, you can still crack someone over the skull with a Colt Python and they will definitely feel it, whereas the composite stock on an M16 would likely break).
What I'm trying to say is: Hurr Durr, the revolver is not the God of all Guns, and cannot be used as a sniper rifle, shotgun, AR, and rocket launcher, but in certain combat situations, I'd definitely choose the deadly reliability of a revolver over the longer-bodied M16. Simply: For different situations, different weapons are necessary.
Say no and bury your head in the sand all you want, I don't care. My part in this conversation is over.
In a close-range engagement, like in a tight, enclosed building, a revolver is easier to maneuver (because it's smaller and requires only a single-hand to use [if you're a manly man at least]), can fire successive shots even if it has jammed, and is more likely to kill with the first bullet than the M16 will.
In a tight combat space, a portable 'one-hit-kill' weapon is better than a larger assault rifle simply for ease of use, first-shot-power, and the fact that it's still usable immediately after it jams (and even if its totally fragged, you can still crack someone over the skull with a Colt Python and they will definitely feel it, whereas the composite stock on an M16 would likely break).
What I'm trying to say is: Hurr Durr, the revolver is not the God of all Guns, and cannot be used as a sniper rifle, shotgun, AR, and rocket launcher, but in certain combat situations, I'd definitely choose the deadly reliability of a revolver over the longer-bodied M16. Simply: For different situations, different weapons are necessary.
Say no and bury your head in the sand all you want, I don't care. My part in this conversation is over.
God, no and I will tell you the exact same thing. First off, in combat you won't be one handing any thing. In CQB you'd only get one shot out and yes you can EASILY miss a shot with a pistol at 10 feet away in combat. Not knowing that alone shows how much experience you have with actual firearms out of games. Pistols are not the easiest things to aim. Especially with the higher recoil of a .44 magnum. With pistols, high power loads are less combat effective. I'm sorry. I don't care who you are. You get hit with a burst of 5.56 up close. You're dead. Also, I lol'd damn hard. Polymer isn't a cheap crappy plastic. It requires explosive force to even crack it. There's a reason all new firearms use it.
If you can miss a shot from ten feet away with a handgun you're a fucking moron. Also the fact that you made the assumption that I'm inexperienced with handguns and stated the fact that high recoil would make it harder to aim at 10 FOOT RANGE, it's pretty easy to conclude that you have even LESS experience with weapons than I do.
Hell, I've fired a single-shot handgun chambered to fire a .308 rifle round, that had violent, arm-snapping recoil (for a pistol), and could easily nail a 2x2 target at 30 feet.
Also, despite not being particularly hard to aim, they are also *faster* to aim. There's a reason the old west was the old west. If you can draw, aim, and fire a revolver in a split second, you can beat any soldier with an assault rifle because he has to shoulder the weapon, lean his head to look down the sight, aim, then fire. Whereas a pistol can be brought up to eye-level (and aimed at the same time), and fired.
The fact that you're too ignorant to accept the fact that your discount-made plastic-and-tinfoil M16 is not the most perfect gun in the world is also really starting to weigh heavily against your credibility. Also, composite material is still shitty plastic. I can step on an M16's stock and break it. You can drive a tank over a Colt Python and I can still pick it up and fire it.
In Long-range combat, the M16 is unbeatable as far as high-ROF accuracy, but it's nothing compared to the AK for penetration power, nothing compared to the .44 Magnum for up-close stopping power, and nothing compared to the Barrett M182 for extreme-range crushing power. Yes, the M16 is a good gun, and the 5.56 round is effective, but it's not perfect for fuck's sake.
There's a reason the .44 round still exists. If the 5.56 was perfect, every other round would be discontinued, but its NOT, and therefore, everything from .22 Shorts to .700 Nitros will continue exist, no matter what you say or think, because nobody cares what you say or think.
/discussion.
Hell, I've fired a single-shot handgun chambered to fire a .308 rifle round, that had violent, arm-snapping recoil (for a pistol), and could easily nail a 2x2 target at 30 feet.
Also, despite not being particularly hard to aim, they are also *faster* to aim. There's a reason the old west was the old west. If you can draw, aim, and fire a revolver in a split second, you can beat any soldier with an assault rifle because he has to shoulder the weapon, lean his head to look down the sight, aim, then fire. Whereas a pistol can be brought up to eye-level (and aimed at the same time), and fired.
The fact that you're too ignorant to accept the fact that your discount-made plastic-and-tinfoil M16 is not the most perfect gun in the world is also really starting to weigh heavily against your credibility. Also, composite material is still shitty plastic. I can step on an M16's stock and break it. You can drive a tank over a Colt Python and I can still pick it up and fire it.
In Long-range combat, the M16 is unbeatable as far as high-ROF accuracy, but it's nothing compared to the AK for penetration power, nothing compared to the .44 Magnum for up-close stopping power, and nothing compared to the Barrett M182 for extreme-range crushing power. Yes, the M16 is a good gun, and the 5.56 round is effective, but it's not perfect for fuck's sake.
There's a reason the .44 round still exists. If the 5.56 was perfect, every other round would be discontinued, but its NOT, and therefore, everything from .22 Shorts to .700 Nitros will continue exist, no matter what you say or think, because nobody cares what you say or think.
/discussion.
Does it scare you that I have conceal carry a P99 since I have so little experience? Firing a pistol isn't as easy as point and shoot. Not with trigger pull which gets worse with the higher the caliber. Add a combat scenario in there and it's much easier to miss the broad side of a barn than you think.
The fact that you even bring up the old west is laughable. They didn't have assault rifles in the old west. For the time it was mainly a choice between revolver or lever action. On top of that they didn't have body armor.
"Also, composite material is still shitty plastic. I can step on an M16's stock and break it." AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA. I'm sorry, let me catch my breath. You dare even say something about my credibility and point that out. There's a reason guns are made completely out of polymer now. For instance Glocks which are regarded as one of the most reliable pistols out there. Grip is made out of polymer. What about the G36 and the F2000? Yes, sure. Plastic. It's so weak and pathetic.
Now please tell me where I said the M16 is a perfect rifle and where I said the 5.56 is best used for every thing. In fact I remember saying the military needs to get rid of the 40 year old platform. The 47 is outdated too. They have new aks that easily beat the M16.
Certain calibers are best used for certain things. The .44 magnum is a great round, but out of a pistol it becomes much less effective as that's not a great platform for combat against RIFLES in any situation. This is 100% backed up by real combat proof.
Now quite getting butthurt and upset. The internet is serious business.
The fact that you even bring up the old west is laughable. They didn't have assault rifles in the old west. For the time it was mainly a choice between revolver or lever action. On top of that they didn't have body armor.
"Also, composite material is still shitty plastic. I can step on an M16's stock and break it." AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA. I'm sorry, let me catch my breath. You dare even say something about my credibility and point that out. There's a reason guns are made completely out of polymer now. For instance Glocks which are regarded as one of the most reliable pistols out there. Grip is made out of polymer. What about the G36 and the F2000? Yes, sure. Plastic. It's so weak and pathetic.
Now please tell me where I said the M16 is a perfect rifle and where I said the 5.56 is best used for every thing. In fact I remember saying the military needs to get rid of the 40 year old platform. The 47 is outdated too. They have new aks that easily beat the M16.
Certain calibers are best used for certain things. The .44 magnum is a great round, but out of a pistol it becomes much less effective as that's not a great platform for combat against RIFLES in any situation. This is 100% backed up by real combat proof.
Now quite getting butthurt and upset. The internet is serious business.
>guns are made completely out of polymer now.
Pfft.
With the exception of the slide, Barrel, firing mechanism, bolt, trigger, and frame, yeah. ALL plastic. Also, the Glock can be considered the most reliable pistol ever, but the GRIP being made of polymer literally has NO effect whatsoever on the rest of the weapon's reliability. It's not MORE reliable because the grip is made out of plastic, it's more reliable because it was designed well.
Also it scares me to think that someone who can't hit the broad side of a barn is conceal-carrying a Walther, considering he's probably more of a danger to the common public than he would be to any criminal if he can't aim for shit.
Also, I bring up the old west because that right there is case and point for the effectiveness, accuracy, reliability and sheer deadliness of a revolver. Considering the really good duelers (which there weren't many of in that day), could draw, aim and fire in less than 1 second, it could be concluded that in a close-range combat situation, a cowboy armed with a .44 could easily cap a YEW-ESS-ARMAY-SOLJURR before he could raise his M16.
Also, 100% real combat proof is laughable. Because nobody has ever given two trained people a .44 and 5.56 and told them "Go into that building and try to kill each other".
Besides, I've fired all sorts of guns, so you have no right to assume shit about how I know less than you, .22, .357, .44, .45 ACP, .300 Mag, 5.56, 7.62, 7mm, 9 mm, .308, and even .50 AE.
Who's REALLY being butthurt? I don't give a fuck about what you think, I know damn well in a real situation with real bullets, a .44 will end you long before you could get that M16 up. Even better is, you need a *burst* to kill, whereas I only need one shot.
ORLY, SRS BSNS?
Pfft.
With the exception of the slide, Barrel, firing mechanism, bolt, trigger, and frame, yeah. ALL plastic. Also, the Glock can be considered the most reliable pistol ever, but the GRIP being made of polymer literally has NO effect whatsoever on the rest of the weapon's reliability. It's not MORE reliable because the grip is made out of plastic, it's more reliable because it was designed well.
Also it scares me to think that someone who can't hit the broad side of a barn is conceal-carrying a Walther, considering he's probably more of a danger to the common public than he would be to any criminal if he can't aim for shit.
Also, I bring up the old west because that right there is case and point for the effectiveness, accuracy, reliability and sheer deadliness of a revolver. Considering the really good duelers (which there weren't many of in that day), could draw, aim and fire in less than 1 second, it could be concluded that in a close-range combat situation, a cowboy armed with a .44 could easily cap a YEW-ESS-ARMAY-SOLJURR before he could raise his M16.
Also, 100% real combat proof is laughable. Because nobody has ever given two trained people a .44 and 5.56 and told them "Go into that building and try to kill each other".
Besides, I've fired all sorts of guns, so you have no right to assume shit about how I know less than you, .22, .357, .44, .45 ACP, .300 Mag, 5.56, 7.62, 7mm, 9 mm, .308, and even .50 AE.
Who's REALLY being butthurt? I don't give a fuck about what you think, I know damn well in a real situation with real bullets, a .44 will end you long before you could get that M16 up. Even better is, you need a *burst* to kill, whereas I only need one shot.
ORLY, SRS BSNS?
"Who's REALLY being butthurt? I don't give a fuck about what you think." I lol'd at your hypocrisy.
That is not my point. My point was you said you can break an M16's stock by stepping on it. Then surely the Glock can break by just dropping it right? Why is it regarded as the most solid and reliable pistol.(Extra note. I'm not a glock fan, much prefer sigs and rugers.)
Yes, it scares you that someone that has been shooting his whole life and might dare say that it's easier to miss with a pistol than a Assault rifle in a high stress combat scenario owns a pistol. So scary.
Your points about the old west make me laugh even more. First off, quick drawing is completely different than room clearing. I'm not referring to the US army. I'm referring to any army. It's always a better decision to use a rifle. Does not matter the case. On top of that you don't need a burst to kill someone. That was brought up because rof is better to use up close. This isn't even any thing complicated. That's just common sense.
Combat proof is laughable. Right. So there's never been a case where one side was armed with pistols and the other was armed with rifles? Never? Wow that really surprises me.(sarcasm)
That is not my point. My point was you said you can break an M16's stock by stepping on it. Then surely the Glock can break by just dropping it right? Why is it regarded as the most solid and reliable pistol.(Extra note. I'm not a glock fan, much prefer sigs and rugers.)
Yes, it scares you that someone that has been shooting his whole life and might dare say that it's easier to miss with a pistol than a Assault rifle in a high stress combat scenario owns a pistol. So scary.
Your points about the old west make me laugh even more. First off, quick drawing is completely different than room clearing. I'm not referring to the US army. I'm referring to any army. It's always a better decision to use a rifle. Does not matter the case. On top of that you don't need a burst to kill someone. That was brought up because rof is better to use up close. This isn't even any thing complicated. That's just common sense.
Combat proof is laughable. Right. So there's never been a case where one side was armed with pistols and the other was armed with rifles? Never? Wow that really surprises me.(sarcasm)
"It's really hard to argue with someone so goddamn close minded and downright fucking stupid, so I'm just not going to." HAHA. It seems every time you post I have to quote and do nothing more than point out how hypocritical you are. Get the stick out of your ass and just learn to debate next time.
You should absolutely positively never carry your P99 with you anymore. Like I said before, if you cant hit the broad side of a barn from 10 feet, you shouldn't be carrying a gun.
I -can- shoot, but I don't need to carry a gun. Firstly because I'm not paranoid, Secondly: because if it came down to the wire, I could kill someone, and the law doesn't look too kindly on that no matter what the circumstances, and Third: I don't lack confidence which I try to make up for by trying to seem superior to somebody on the internet and carrying a pistol at all times.
I -can- shoot, but I don't need to carry a gun. Firstly because I'm not paranoid, Secondly: because if it came down to the wire, I could kill someone, and the law doesn't look too kindly on that no matter what the circumstances, and Third: I don't lack confidence which I try to make up for by trying to seem superior to somebody on the internet and carrying a pistol at all times.
Every time you say that it makes me just say you've obviously never fired a gun before and are talking out of your ass. At least I have proof I do.
God you prove your stupidity with every post. Carrying has nothing to do with paranoia. It's like having a fire extinguisher. You don't plan to use it, you never want to use it, but I'd rather have it than not just in case. I live in Portland. I don't have much worry about any confrontation. Pretty safe city.
So, you'd take being dead over dealing with state? Since that's the only time you'd ever need to use a gun. If you'd die otherwise.
Yup, sure. I lack confidence. That's why I own a shop at age 21 making thousands weekly. Lack so much confidence. You can have your confidence. In the end I'll still be alive. Once again. You're making yourself look more and more immature with every post. FYI, debating doesn't have a thing to do with insults.
It's funny how upset people get when they know they're wrong and talking out of their ass.
God you prove your stupidity with every post. Carrying has nothing to do with paranoia. It's like having a fire extinguisher. You don't plan to use it, you never want to use it, but I'd rather have it than not just in case. I live in Portland. I don't have much worry about any confrontation. Pretty safe city.
So, you'd take being dead over dealing with state? Since that's the only time you'd ever need to use a gun. If you'd die otherwise.
Yup, sure. I lack confidence. That's why I own a shop at age 21 making thousands weekly. Lack so much confidence. You can have your confidence. In the end I'll still be alive. Once again. You're making yourself look more and more immature with every post. FYI, debating doesn't have a thing to do with insults.
It's funny how upset people get when they know they're wrong and talking out of their ass.
Lulz, internet debate. You keep your high paying job and the fact that you've 'obviously fired a gun before'
Congratu-fuckin-lations, internet tough guy, You've won, not by courage or valor, but by annoying me so fucking much that I refuse to continue a conversation with someone too stupid to tell their ass from their mouth.
Congratu-fuckin-lations, internet tough guy, You've won, not by courage or valor, but by annoying me so fucking much that I refuse to continue a conversation with someone too stupid to tell their ass from their mouth.
I don't know if either of you have been in situations where you slept with an M16 in your sleeping bag but stepping on the butt stock of an M16 is not going to break it. All through training I humped an M16 around, other Marines dropped them and they never broke. They did jam often enough but we were using blanks so they didn't have the same amount of powder but that was after hiking up a mountain in the pouring rain with flinging mud and then going to living in a fighting hole and being rolled in the sand.
The M16 is a pain in the ass to maintain detail but it's easy to clean quickly and field strip if it just needs a quick once over but for inspection purposes I hate cleaning the damn thing.
The 5.56 the M16 shoots is a good round. It might not have the blunt stopping power of a .30-30 or .306 but the recoil is very manageable allowing for quick sight alignment after one shot and hammer pairs. It is very accurate at ranges up to 550m for point targets. The round tumbles after it hits something which is a lot deadlier than something that punches through the target. My instructors had somebody shot in the thigh from an upward angle and it traveled along the bone and came out the foot and it will explode somebodies grape if you shoot them in the head.
The M16 is a pain in the ass to maintain detail but it's easy to clean quickly and field strip if it just needs a quick once over but for inspection purposes I hate cleaning the damn thing.
The 5.56 the M16 shoots is a good round. It might not have the blunt stopping power of a .30-30 or .306 but the recoil is very manageable allowing for quick sight alignment after one shot and hammer pairs. It is very accurate at ranges up to 550m for point targets. The round tumbles after it hits something which is a lot deadlier than something that punches through the target. My instructors had somebody shot in the thigh from an upward angle and it traveled along the bone and came out the foot and it will explode somebodies grape if you shoot them in the head.
Liking something has nothing to do with it's combat effectiveness. So explain to me how this revolver magically makes you flank someone else and why the AR wouldn't do the same thing if you flanked someone with it? Flanking someone wouldn't matter on the gun and don't try to tell me you can turn to shoot someone with a revolver faster then the bullet can fly to you. It doesn't work that way. On top of that. If body armor is included. The last thing you want is to shoot someone and have them get back up which is a HUGE possibility with the small pistol rounds.
I hate to burst your bubble here, but like I said. A revolver is NEVER at an advantage. Up close you need rate of fire. Revolvers shoot slow and only hold six shots. ARs are full auto and depending on the mag you can have 30-100 rounds. Far away you need range. ARs, especially M16s, are VERY accurate. Good luck hitting any thing with a revolver at 100 yards away or more and 100 yards is being generous.
Yeah, it fires tiny egg-shaped projectiles which react heavily on impact
The 'slot' I think you mean is the powercell for the weapons firing assistance, yes
I dunno what chamber you're referring to at the moment, but if I haven't opened it there's nothing to be shown :3
Thank you very much =^-^=
The 'slot' I think you mean is the powercell for the weapons firing assistance, yes
I dunno what chamber you're referring to at the moment, but if I haven't opened it there's nothing to be shown :3
Thank you very much =^-^=
funny thing is I can see this gun being a real world design. If you went with your more 'old-fashion' floating barrel, selectable firing mechanism and some shiny brass shells with 5.56mm nato rounds etc it can be easily a real world gun just without the more exotic magnetic acceleration. of course a mag gun like that can probably be made but it would be frighteningly expensive.
Love it when someone actully puts some thought into a futuristic weapon concept besides the basic "It shoots plasma and kills stuff"
Quick question on the ammo: Assmuning the 12mm flechette rounds fire a single spike rather than the modern day shotgun rounds firing a cluster of them, wouldn't it in therory have a higher ammo capacity than the 20mm ovaloids?
Quick question on the ammo: Assmuning the 12mm flechette rounds fire a single spike rather than the modern day shotgun rounds firing a cluster of them, wouldn't it in therory have a higher ammo capacity than the 20mm ovaloids?
Actually we've established that energy weapons would very likely have recoil, but to answer your question:
The weapon does not fire plasma in the classical sense, since actually keeping plasma cohesive outside a magentic field is pretty much impossible (or it is, according to what I read last o.o ), so the weapon instead fires a flechette (or ovaloid) which is a reactor in itself and explodes on impact.
The weapon does not fire plasma in the classical sense, since actually keeping plasma cohesive outside a magentic field is pretty much impossible (or it is, according to what I read last o.o ), so the weapon instead fires a flechette (or ovaloid) which is a reactor in itself and explodes on impact.
So it's basically a bullet (in a really vague sense of the word) filled with a plasma reactor? Ok that answers both questions, as regular bullets (especially ones with a reactor in them) have recoil, and in the sci-fi world, such a technology could exist to contain plasma in the flechette.
However, I disagree with the fact that most other energy weapons would have recoil. Strictly speaking from videogames and movies, (like Halo and Star Wars), those weapons are all shown to have some kind of recoil, even though it wouldn't make sense because light/energy has no/very little mass. And because recoil is generated when a force tries to move a heavy mass (like a bullet) those laser/energy guns shouldn't kick back at all.
But anyways I'm ranting about nothing now, as your weapon actual makes energy weapons 'somewhat' plausible. (As opposed to the Energy weapons in Halo which are admittedly ridiculous and more than likely impossible to ever create)
However, I disagree with the fact that most other energy weapons would have recoil. Strictly speaking from videogames and movies, (like Halo and Star Wars), those weapons are all shown to have some kind of recoil, even though it wouldn't make sense because light/energy has no/very little mass. And because recoil is generated when a force tries to move a heavy mass (like a bullet) those laser/energy guns shouldn't kick back at all.
But anyways I'm ranting about nothing now, as your weapon actual makes energy weapons 'somewhat' plausible. (As opposed to the Energy weapons in Halo which are admittedly ridiculous and more than likely impossible to ever create)
Mmmmmh...well, it depends on what the weapon fires specifically, but a weapon that fires power (as in electricity) would very likely at least have a magnetic repulsion, but this is just completely wild speculation. I'm not a physics major.
As for the topic on believable weapons; I try to make my designs as plausible as possible, but even I just skip it sometimes and present a weapon just because it's cool to have a certain effect just work with FM X3
As for the topic on believable weapons; I try to make my designs as plausible as possible, but even I just skip it sometimes and present a weapon just because it's cool to have a certain effect just work with FM X3
Yeah I'm no physics major either (in fact I'm even horrible at normal math), so it's hard to say for sure.
And I don't blame you for the 'cool' factor, it's always good to have something that breaks from the norm just because it does something totally awesome (like fire reactor-flechettes)
And I don't blame you for the 'cool' factor, it's always good to have something that breaks from the norm just because it does something totally awesome (like fire reactor-flechettes)
Very excellent concept art design for this particular firearm. I was very surprised to see a lot of detailed information about the weapon (calibur, rate of fire, background info. and functionality, etc.), and even more so to find out there was a Cleaning Kit stored inside the gun! Very convienient. :)
Looks like you put a lot of time and effort into this pic and the specs for this gun. Great job on this!
Looks like you put a lot of time and effort into this pic and the specs for this gun. Great job on this!
the prototype was nickel disks that were the size of a dime.... then because of them welding to the rails i made dry ice cooled ceramic disks the same size. they kinda worked better then I did more R&D and made some ceramic darts with a tungsten core and it had a "bridge" wrapped around it that was basically aluminum foil that would vaporize and form into a super conducting plasma launching the dart, the wight of the dart was the same as a .50 cal round ( about 647 grain) and was 6mm in dia and 5.5 cm long I wish i could tell you more but I don't have all my lab stuff anymore from when I moved from Okinawa and I don't know where my book is
Hmmm, ich hatte letztens für ein Projekt einen Entwurf für Plasma Waffen entwickelt, quasi der Versuch ein Funktionsprinzip für Plasma Waffen zu entwickeln welches in real funktionieren würde.
Daraus resultierten Hybridwaffen, eine Mischung aus Coilgun, Gyrojet Flechette und Plasma Arc Technologie, also kleine Pfeilartige Gyrojet Projectile welche ein Fusionsreaktives Gasgemisch enthalten, und beim Zünden auch die Energie für die Coilgun liefern. Wenn ich mir so deinen Schematik angucke, glaube ich wir denken teils recht ähnlich, kann das sein? XD
Anyway, ich find das Design der Waffe immernoch derbe geil. Nur die stärkere Abschrägung an der Front der Waffe, is irgentwie nen Knick inner Optic finde ich, bei den alten sah das besser aus D:
Ach und btw, wieso hat die Waffe einen Rückstoss Dämpfer? Wenn sie auf purer magnetischer Beschleunigung arbeitet, ensteht der Rückstoss nur durch das gewicht des Projektils und der Luft welche es im Lauf verdrängt, also keine Treibgase (Bei SloMo aufnahmen von Feuerwaffen sieht man immer gut das der Rückstoss erst nach dem das Projektil den Lauf verlassen hat wirklich "los geht"). Oder Benutzt die Waffe eine Plasma Induktion und magnetische Beschleunigung?
Daraus resultierten Hybridwaffen, eine Mischung aus Coilgun, Gyrojet Flechette und Plasma Arc Technologie, also kleine Pfeilartige Gyrojet Projectile welche ein Fusionsreaktives Gasgemisch enthalten, und beim Zünden auch die Energie für die Coilgun liefern. Wenn ich mir so deinen Schematik angucke, glaube ich wir denken teils recht ähnlich, kann das sein? XD
Anyway, ich find das Design der Waffe immernoch derbe geil. Nur die stärkere Abschrägung an der Front der Waffe, is irgentwie nen Knick inner Optic finde ich, bei den alten sah das besser aus D:
Ach und btw, wieso hat die Waffe einen Rückstoss Dämpfer? Wenn sie auf purer magnetischer Beschleunigung arbeitet, ensteht der Rückstoss nur durch das gewicht des Projektils und der Luft welche es im Lauf verdrängt, also keine Treibgase (Bei SloMo aufnahmen von Feuerwaffen sieht man immer gut das der Rückstoss erst nach dem das Projektil den Lauf verlassen hat wirklich "los geht"). Oder Benutzt die Waffe eine Plasma Induktion und magnetische Beschleunigung?
Njo, sieht schon so aus als würden wir in die gleiche Richtung denken X3 Energie für die Coilgun is zwar im Magazin enthalten, aber der Rest scheint relativ gleich zu sein XD
Die gerade Front war mir ein bisschen 'zu' kantig für das ganze, deswegen hab ich das etwas abgeflacht. Außerdem sieht's besser aus, wenn das Gewehr statt dem Aufsatz Kimme/Korn hat
Was den Rückstossdämpfer angeht. Is zwar richtig, dass der großteil des rückstoßes aus dem Lademechanismus entsteht, aber wir reden hier von einer Waffe die 20 mm Projektile mit unterschiedlicher Gewichtung auf Mach 3 beschleunigt wenn sie feuert, da kommt dann genug kinetische Rückstoß Energie zusammen, auch wenn's nur das 3. Netwon'sche Funktionsprinzip is
Die gerade Front war mir ein bisschen 'zu' kantig für das ganze, deswegen hab ich das etwas abgeflacht. Außerdem sieht's besser aus, wenn das Gewehr statt dem Aufsatz Kimme/Korn hat
Was den Rückstossdämpfer angeht. Is zwar richtig, dass der großteil des rückstoßes aus dem Lademechanismus entsteht, aber wir reden hier von einer Waffe die 20 mm Projektile mit unterschiedlicher Gewichtung auf Mach 3 beschleunigt wenn sie feuert, da kommt dann genug kinetische Rückstoß Energie zusammen, auch wenn's nur das 3. Netwon'sche Funktionsprinzip is
Wäre immernoch weniger Rückstoss als der eines 7,62 Gewehr, und wenn man bedenkt das nicht Menschen dieses Gewehr halten, hur, mit Rückstossdämpfer würde das Teil dann wohl soviel Rückstoss haben wie ne 5 Joul Softair, also quasi 0 wenn der Dämpfer nach dem H&K Prinzip arbeitet XD
H&P Prinzip: Gewischt welches durch Gasdruck kinetische energy nach vorne/unten schlägt, damit dem Rück- und Hoch- Stoss entgegenwirkt. Verflucht schweres Teil, aber das Testgewehr Caliber 7,62mm NATO hatte fast keinen Rückstoss, nur das System wog schon ca 1,5Kg.
H&P Prinzip: Gewischt welches durch Gasdruck kinetische energy nach vorne/unten schlägt, damit dem Rück- und Hoch- Stoss entgegenwirkt. Verflucht schweres Teil, aber das Testgewehr Caliber 7,62mm NATO hatte fast keinen Rückstoss, nur das System wog schon ca 1,5Kg.
Nja, ich hatte eher an ein etwas fortschrittlicheres System als unsere primitiven Ideen gedacht (das H&k Prinzip is aber witzig, die gleiche Idee hab ich nämlich auch amal gehabt wie ich über sowas nachgedacht hab, bzw. etwas ähnliches)
Anyways, was hier wirklich viel wiegt is das Leitsystem und die Beschleunigungs Spulen und die kannst schlecht ohne Performanceverlust rausnehmen ;3
Anyways, was hier wirklich viel wiegt is das Leitsystem und die Beschleunigungs Spulen und die kannst schlecht ohne Performanceverlust rausnehmen ;3
I try to put as much thought behind what I come up with as I can...actually very time consuming stuff, but it's what I do with my imagination =^-^= I love coming up with new stuff
Yeah, it's heavy for huamns, but a Si'itian guardsman in gear wont have any trouble holding it
Yeah, it's heavy for huamns, but a Si'itian guardsman in gear wont have any trouble holding it
That's why i luw her second place (firstly because she's strong little bitch ) - because she reminds me of.... ME!
gimme some stack of weapons, i'm gonna wet myself in cummz.
gimme whole warehouse of weapons - i'm gonna rip our planet off in one week.
P.s. that's why you shoulda keep firearms as much FAR as possible
gimme some stack of weapons, i'm gonna wet myself in cummz.
gimme whole warehouse of weapons - i'm gonna rip our planet off in one week.
P.s. that's why you shoulda keep firearms as much FAR as possible
ayreo I'd like to know more information on the rail gun you made If you caould email me at azmongo[at]yahoo.com
ipoke
If that gun ever goes into production DIBS on the first one
Now if you made a 50cal sniper rifle version then you got me hooked.
ipoke
If that gun ever goes into production DIBS on the first one
Now if you made a 50cal sniper rifle version then you got me hooked.
Comments