Dear visitor, welcome to WesWorld. If this is your first visit here, please read the Help. It explains in detail how this page works. To use all features of this page, you should consider registering. Please use the registration form, to register here or read more information about the registration process. If you are already registered, please login here.
Quoted
Originally posted by Marek Gutkowski
I don't see why this weapon is being developed at this time.
Grenade luncher is better anti personel weapon while AT rifle is better choice for destroying tank.
Both AT rifle and grenade launcher permit the infantry men to carry more ammo and dont have the nasty side effect of signaling your enemy your position after firing.
AT rifle has about the same weight as today GPMG with is a lot.(I carried a PK on a 10 mile long hike,Mechanized Infantry my a** we walk every were)but the combatant can carry about 30 15mm rounds instead of 3 RPG's. As long as wesworld powers don't start building Panzer IV,Centurions, T-34 and Shermans I dont see the reason for fielding RPG or Panzerfaust's.
This post has been edited 3 times, last edit by "howard" (Sep 7th 2008, 2:08am)
Quoted
Originally posted by Marek Gutkowski
I was thinking that a grenade launcher like the M79 is a better choice allowing the solider too carry more ammunition. Rifle grenade is also a possible, and more in line with what was used at the time.With out the shape charge warhead as in Kaiser Kirk post there isnt much advantage over what is already in service in the late 30's.
Basically I'm saying that If I was in WW Thai R&D devision I be an opponent of this idea.Why have a novel weapon brought in too service when of the shelf idea can already fill is role.
This post has been edited 2 times, last edit by "howard" (Sep 7th 2008, 3:26am)
Quoted
Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
Rockets simple, safe, well understood? In 1938-9????? Most military rockets of the day (what very few there were) were ARTILLERY weapons, where accuracy wasn't expected and the deviations were accepted because enough rounds were fired that the area was still affected even though no rounds ended up where they "should" have. The other major military rockets were air-to-ground weapons, and were lucky to hit a target the size of a tank 10% of the time. The last type of military rockets were the desperate replacement for AA cannon, which were so effective they were replaced as soon as more cannon became available.
Quoted
Historically, infantry rocket weapons were fielded AFTER HEAT rounds became available, not before. HEAT rounds and heavier tank armor gave a reason for these weapons to be developed, not the long-already-existing pillboxes and bunkers. Rocket weapons of the day were too inaccurate to hit the weak points of a pillbox or bunker (early trials of the Panzerschreck had 3 rounds out of 12 hitting a stationary tank target at 100 m), and an HE round, as proposed, wouldn't penetrate (not enough mass or velocity),
Quoted
Originally posted by howard
I know this technology and what it could and can do.
Quoted
Originally posted by ShinRa_Inc
Quoted
Originally posted by howard
I know this technology and what it could and can do.
you know this, in 2008. Does anyone in Siam know this, 70 years earlier?
Goddard and Pershing are in the US (And didn't participate in the Great war in WW, to boot), while Congreve, Hale, and Trengrouse are British.
What rationale is there for Siam making these advances when the people and technology are not availible to you?
Quoted
Originally posted by Rooijen10
... just curious. When will the Siamese start aiming that thing into the sky to take on planes flying over their position?
This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "howard" (Sep 7th 2008, 5:43pm)
Quoted
Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
Trengrouse rockets were simple, yes, plain old black-powder rockets intended to hit the shore from a ship. Not any particular 1m square area of the shore, the shore. A pretty large target, don't you think?
Congreve rockets were, like their later counterparts, artillery weapons: not intended to hit point targets.
This post has been edited 3 times, last edit by "howard" (Sep 7th 2008, 6:41pm)
Quoted
This weapon is possibly the most impressive and most dangerous to use on this page. Although basic in design it utilizes simply found materials to make a devastating weapon.
The launcher itself is simply an aluminium pipe, partially blocked at one end. A switch is built into the handle along with a 9 volt battery so that when the switch is pushed, the circuit is completed and the igniter ignites.
The blockage at the back end is vital, as the bought rocket engines are designed for vertical flight the initial thrust is not powerful enough to quickly gain the velocity needed for horizontal flight, and will simply plough into the ground after a few metres. However with the back end partially blocked the gas from the rocket engine will pressurise the tube as the rocket is launched in the same fashion as a bullet fired from a rifle giving the rocket a far flatter trajectory.
diagram of rocket launcher
The rocket is powered by a bought estes D class engine, these can be found in most hobby shops however are rather expensive at around $7-8 Australian per shot, trying to improvise a homemade rocket engine only increases the already high risk of an accident.
The rocket is detonated from the ejection charge in the rocket at a set distance, this is the safest and most reliable way.
The rockets body is made from thin aluminium tubing (again available at hobby shops), The rocket engines ejection charge is drilled into (clay on top of engine) until you hit the black stuff (blackpowder). The engine is than glued with araldite or equivalent into the Al pipe, the pipe is filled with the explosive charge eg. blackpowder and nose cone fitted.
To stabalize the rocket you can do two things that I know of , they are add fins or add spin to the rocket. The method below to some extent does both.
The fins are cut from a flexable plastic ( I used the cover off a ring binder) and glued with a strong epoxy to the sides of the rocket. when the rocket is pushed into the launcher the fins are folded around the body of the rocket.
Quoted
Originally posted by ShinRa_Inc
Quoted
Originally posted by howard
So I know I can have Avrit Singhram do it in the WW Thailand sim.
Well, I've already nabbed most of Avro Canada's historical design staff, so I guess I can start up some Avro Arrows in a year or two...
Forum Software: Burning Board® Lite 2.1.2 pl 1, developed by WoltLab® GmbH