Hearted Youtube comments on Forgotten Weapons (@ForgottenWeapons) channel.

  1. 12000
  2. 7100
  3. 5100
  4. 4800
  5. 4800
  6. 4700
  7. 4200
  8. Hey Ian, so nice to finally see the Negev on here. I was a 'negevist' (negev operator) in the IDF and I just wanted to point out a few things you didn't cover in this overview.  1. the gas system can be easily disassembled (and really should be each time the gun gets cleaned). It consists of three pieces: the selector (baseplate with struts and tubular extension for easy grip), the retaining pin and plate which are located on the opposite site, and a small but very stiff spring which provides tension so it stays in place. It all fits in the tubular recess under the sight. At 1:50-2:00 you can see the exposed gas chamber on the commando barrel, where the piston sits inside it, and just in front of it, under the sight, is a circle with a small slot in it. When clean, that circle can be pushed in and rotated 90 degrees while you hold the gas selector in place. At 3:35 you can see an odd shaped pin in the baseplate of the selector and two black sections on the sides. The pin is actually an asymmetric 'T' attached to the circle with slot from the other side, and which goes through the selector, rotates and hooks into place. The asymmetric design means it can only be installed one way. The slot on the other side is so you can use a tool to increase torque when you've been shooting a lot and the carbon build-up fouls the mechanism. 2. The bolt has an internal ratcheting system of three catches (three on the old ones which I used, but I believe there are a lot more on newer ones, like what you have) which will be engaged if you don't pull the bolt back far enough to engage the sear. As you found at the 7:51-7:56 mark, the bolt seemed like it was back, but you couldn't drop it with a pull of the trigger. You had to pull it back farther, and there was a click as it engaged with the sear, and then you could drop it. I'm sure you became more aware of this once you got out to the range and started putting rounds through it. The system is, as you must have easily guessed, a safety to ensure that you don't accidentally end up firing the weapon if you didn't charge it properly. 3. As you can see from the trigger assembly, the sear gives no resistance to the bolt carrier sliding back over it to reset. For this reason, during disassembly, there is no need to pull the trigger to release the bolt; I'll just slide right out. 4. The STANAG mag well does more than just allow you to feed with magazines. It is also the mechanism which holds and retains the box which the belt feeds from. IDF uses a bag/box called a 'toph', which carries 150 rounds (a combat load out is 4 'toph-eem', plus extra belts). The belt comes out through the upper left hand side (9:30/10:00 if you're looking at a clock) and there is a metal extension, like the top of a GI mag, which clicks into the mag well and holds it in place. Very secure, but also easy to switch and reuses a necessary part of the design; very slick. 5. The Negev is always issued with two barrels per gun. It's intended to be changed every 150 rounds (or one 'toph') during consistent fire, to keep from overheating the barrel. 6. It has night sights! The rear iron sight has a distance dial meter which, as you rotate, will positively click into different ranges with detents. It moves the sight by way of an off-set bar which rotates upward as your turn the dial. Once you've reached the top range, twist a little further and the sight will be able to lift off the bar and swing all the way forward. Underneath the peep sight is a wide 'U' notch sight with two tritium night-sight dots. The front sight post adjusts for elevation like any AR pattern rifle (the base of the front sight can be adjusted for windage), but the rotating part is made up of two elements: the elevation dial and a top section. The detent for adjusting needs to be pushed down far enough to spin both parts in order to adjust the sight, otherwise you only spin the top part. The top part spins independently because it too has a tritium dot on one side of it, which lines up with the detent pin. Obviously, this is so you can adjust the sight back in line with the shooter once sighting in has been achieved, and the tritium isn't on all sides so you don't reveal yourself to an enemy. 7. The bipod folds forward as well as backwards. While this may seem awkward, it does help to get the bipod legs out of the way of the operator if the operator is just carrying the gun by the sling and there is a 'toph' inserted. As you'll notice at 6:00-6:07, the bipod lies around the mag well for storage. To be folded, the legs need to be brought together and then rotated up into place. This is possible if you have a magazine inserted, but impossible to do if you have a 'toph' inserted (though if you have the legs folded already, then you can insert a 'toph' but then you can't take the bipod down). Thus, the ability to fold the legs forward is quite handy and useful. 8. The barrel removal button is only the one side, on the right. That side of the pin face has knurling, and its position is such that it is possible to change the barrel with only one hand. 9. Just behind the gas selector, on the left-hand side of the gun is a 'U' piece of metal crudely welded to the frame. That is the front sling attachment point, and the extra welding material is to ensure against breakage. When loaded with a full 'toph', the negev is 10kg. With any optics or the barrel mounted laser sight (for the older versions), that weight goes up, and you don't want the sling attachment to break. At the rear of the gun, on the top left corner of the stock plate, is another 'U' loop strongly welded into place, and that's the rear sling attachment. 10. At 4:14, just above the trigger and to the left of the 'Automatic' fire selector letter, is a large hole. There is a similar hole behind the bipod mounting point (2:19). As you might have guessed, these are for attaching the gun into a vehicle mount. Sorry, this got a little longer than I had originally intended, but I felt it was important to add a bit more to the presentation, just to fully showcase how awesome this LMG is. I miss my negev every day. Love the videos.
    3900
  9. 3900
  10. 3600
  11. 3600
  12. 3500
  13. 3200
  14. 3000
  15. Mr. Wick finds himself in a distant country with no contacts. He hears of a museum curator who may be able to help. You see The Curator used to be a member of the High Table but now has an excommunicado status just as John has. The Curator has been living a normal life far from the High Table. His Museum is his pride and joy each weapon has a story and colorful history. John enters the museum after hours. The Curator, "Sir, the museum is closed. We open tomorrow at--" John interjects, "Excommunicado..." The Curator removes his reading glasses and looks at John intensely. John continues, "I need weapons, please." The Curator takes a deep breath and sighs, "Come with me." He says. They continue down the hall. The Curator tugs on a wall lamp. What was assumed to be just another exhibit folds inward to reveal a hidden hallway. "This way." The Curator Continues to lead John further in, "My weapons are unconventional, you understand." John nods. The Curator continues speaking, "The weapons on display outside have been decommissioned, so they no longer fire you see. However, I keep the ones I couldn't bring my self to desecrate hidden back here." John remains silent. They enter a victorian styled study. The Curator walks over to a globe and opens it to reveal a long-aged bottle of scotch, pours it into two glasses. He hands one to John. They clink glasses as John downs his, The Curator takes a sip and walks over to a keypad on the wall. He inputs a code and a Vault opens. The Curator sits down in one of the lounge chairs, motions with his glass towards the vault, "Take your pick." Rock music starts playing as John saunters into the vault. AND SCENE! Thanks for coming to my Ted Talk.
    2900
  16. 2700
  17. 2600
  18. 2500
  19. 2300
  20. 2100
  21. 2000
  22. 1900
  23. 1900
  24. 1800
  25. 1800
  26. 1800
  27. 1800
  28. 1700
  29. 1700
  30. 1700
  31. 1700
  32. 1700
  33. 1600
  34. 1600
  35. 1500
  36. 1500
  37. 1500
  38. 1500
  39. 1500
  40. 1500
  41. 1500
  42. 1400
  43. 1400
  44. 1300
  45. 1300
  46. 1200
  47. 1200
  48. 1100
  49. 1100
  50. 1100
  51. 1100
  52. Off topic but damn Ian -- I don't own a gun. Probably shot maybe a few hundred rifle rounds my entire life. Im an engineer though, so your channel kept me in from the first ep simply because you went into the whole :: 'this is why this was placed here' and 'here is why this change from that previous generation made this revision so much more effective'. The two things that standa out are 1) you don't brand-whore/soften up your reviews to get more from company A/you disclose all your affiliations, and 2) more importantly, you don't use jargon past what is necessary ('reciever' and 'stock' is just going to have to be used). This makes you one of the "conveyers of information" (I wanted to say 'lecturers' but I didn't want to do you that injustice) makes you one of the best lecturers I've ever had the pleasure of ever hearing (watching?). Clarity, brother If I were AI or H&K, I'd immediately scoop you up for 300-400k (about 1/3rd of a single cheap ad campaign for a niche product) and make you the US west coast distributor/spokesman at gun shows/accounts man for large clients/dude in charge of the direction marketing strategy goes. People (from ad readers to purchasing authorities at large institutions)are tired of buzzwords and just want a guy who shoots straight, has enthusiasm on the product he's actually backing, has the technical know-how without making them feel dumb, and will find the 'right solution' for them without trying to upsell. Your analytic skills and ability to convey both enthusiasm and knowledge to the listener in a no-bullshit way are miles better than (almost) any lecturer, researcher, or PR campaign I've seen. They'd recoup their investment in you in 2 quarters, absolutely no fuckin question
    1100
  53. 1100
  54. 1100
  55. 1100
  56. 1000
  57. 1000
  58. 1000
  59. 1000
  60. 1000
  61. 1000
  62. 1000
  63. 1000
  64. 1000
  65. 1000
  66. 1000
  67. 1000
  68. 1000
  69. 1000
  70. 984
  71. 982
  72. 973
  73. 963
  74. 959
  75. 940
  76. 918
  77. 915
  78. 903
  79. 887
  80. 885
  81. 870
  82. 866
  83. 855
  84. 851
  85. 850
  86. 849
  87. 845
  88. 845
  89. 838
  90. 831
  91. 811
  92. 810
  93. 809
  94. 804
  95. 794
  96. 776
  97. 770
  98. 755
  99. My uncle Jimmy worked as a contracting machinst for Automag Pasadena/El Monte and AMT. Part of the problem was they never paid properly a lot of workers and so their was a huge turnover of workers and sometimes sub contractors barely got paid. Machinist usually bring their own tools and many had their tools grow 4 legs and disappeared ( stolen by other workers BTW as my uncle usually found his expensive machinist tools at pawn shops in the LA area). There was several times my uncle said his paychecks bounced so much that he asked for cash only. Other workers were not pushy about it and just left and most likely because of their immigration status. Also, there wasn't any paperwork on what was done to various parts. It was all based on assumptions that maybe the heat treating was done, maybe the anodizing was done, maybe the correct metal was used for casting, maybe the tolerances were correct on final maching in the CNC machine. It was all based on assumption from the engineering staff. IOWs, there wasn't a smooth like production for parts. My uncle left in the 80s when he finally had enough of the bounced checks and poor work environment. He worked for barsto on the side when it was at 29 Palms and also Weatherby for a brief time. He knew Dickie Stembridge who gave him project guns to fix and machine new parts for various rental guns. In the end, he accumulated the most parts and accessories from his machining days from Automag , AMT, High Standard, etc, because his checks kept bouncing and they would give him parts to make up the difference. He would fix and assemble some parts that were in specification and sell them at the Great Western Gun show in Pomona and also to B and B guns in north Hollywood( the gun shop being infamous for loaning ARs to LAPD during the North Hollywood Bank heist fiasco). In the end, it was a fly by wire, edge of the seat operation made up of promises never kept and checks that kept bouncing. They could have saved so much time and money if they would have just kept better paperwork on everything. Reinventing the wheel every time does start to add up when you can't find the TDP and other stuff and it keeps getting tossed around like a cheap rag. I have one AMT hard baller long slide from my uncle when he passed away and it works correctly with no issues. I fired that pistol back in the early 90s like a crazed monkey at Angeles Shooting range while he was watching and loading magazines full of 45acp and it worked perfectly. Gun manufacturing was really a circus act back in the 70s and 80s in Southern California.. Different times..different era. Thanks for doing this video, I will likely buy one in honor of my uncle Jimmy. RIP.
    738
  100. 733
  101. 729
  102. 727
  103. 718
  104. 717
  105. 711
  106. 700
  107. 680
  108. 668
  109. 660
  110. 659
  111. 656
  112. 632
  113. 631
  114. 629
  115. 616
  116. 613
  117. 612
  118. 599
  119. Some notes. Pocket battleships weren't battleships at all. You got it right - it was more of a heavy cruiser with an inordinately heavy battery. The purification system wasn't destroyed. Was knocked out of action by splinters that damaged the piping going into and out of it, but that could be easily repaired by the crew. And, in fact, was repaired while in montevideo. It also was exactly the same system you talk about for the machinery, as that purificator wasn't just for drinking water. It was critical for the supply of ready fuel to be used for the machinery aswell. Again, the system was repaired and perfectly functional after repairs. The most compromising damage sustained during the battle was a penetration hit on the bow galleys that compromised the watertighness of the fore bulkhead. The hole couldn't be properly sealed, and that in the Atlantic (where stormy weather and moved seas is pretty much the common thing) was a serious risk for flooding. Mixed with the weakened bulkheads (meaning that whatever flooding that came in might break out of the affected compartments causing massive flooding and putting the whole ship at risk) made Langsdorff really nervous about the prospect of having to return all the way to Germany, with the allies at their back, and a potential catastrophic flooding risk between his hands. The fire control system had also received some damage. Ammo supply was running short (roughly 40% rounds left). Machinery was worn out after the long voyage and needed a refit. The ship wasn't able to come anywhere close to it's nominal top speed because of the worn machinery and bottom fouling. Summing up, AGS could present a fight, but was nowhere near battle ready. And even if she had run the gauntlet of the british blockade and made through it, it still was a very long trip back to Germany, with no less than eight allied surface task forces hunting. Including carriers and battlecruisers. She was trapped and sentenced to sink one way or another. Langsdorff knew it, OKM knew it, the crew knew it. That's why Berlin gave Langsdorff a green light to scuttle the ship if he considered it necessary. The british did indeed spread the rumor that a much more massive force was waiting out of the river plate. Doesn't change the fact that what WAS there was more than enough to smash Graf Spee anyway. Ajax and Achilles came out of the previous battle pretty much at full combat readiness. Exeter had been crippled in the engagement but after some jury rigged repairs she still was able to present battle. And that force was reinforced by HMS Cumberland (a bigger exeter with 8 guns, rather than the six Exeter had). If AGS had to run from Exeter, Ajax, and Achilles, she didn't stand a chance against those PLUS a fully intact County class as Cumberland. About the "salvage" part...the british knew AGS had radar beforehand. They had access to plenty of photograpic evidence before even the war that gave away the aerials in the main superstructure. Not because they suspected anything from the battle. And in fact her radar set had little to do with the in-battle performance of the ship (it was only good for rangefinding, couldn't be used for fire control other than to assist the optical rangefinders' estimates. and IIRC it was knocked out really early during the fight anyway). Just some pointers and corrections, the story overall was more or less as you described, but there's too much hype about that ship so it never hurts to set the record right ;).
    595
  120. To the neverending "Chassepot vs Dreyse"-discussion, some statistics from the franco-prussian war. Before the war the prussian estimated that 3 Chassepot were as effective as 5 Dreyse-rifles. And the Chassepot did prove to be superior, BUT - According to the book "Die deutsche Gewehrfrage mit Berücksichtigung der neusten europäischen Ordonnanzmodelle..." ("the german rifle question in relationship to the newest ordnance modells") by Major Ritter Wilhelm von Plönnies, published 1872, 96% of all german casualties in the war of 1870/71 were caused by "Infantry projectiles", while only 70% of all french battlefield casualties were caused by infantry projectiles. Of the 96% caused by the chassepot cartridge, von Plönnies estimates that 5% were caused by the Mitrailleuse (300 used) and 90% by the Chassepot. On both sides, 2-3% were caused by edged weapons and the rest by artillery (25% german and only 2-3% french). 90% vs 70% sounds very lopsided. But french battlefield fatalities (killed in action & died of wounds) were about 77.000, while the entire german armies only suffered 28.306 battlefield fatalities. So... 77.000 x 70% = 53.900 killed by Dreyse's (or Werder's) 28.306 x 90% = 25.475 killed by Chassepot's. 28.306 x 5% = 1.415 dead caused by 300 Mitrailleuse's - so this was a very effective weapons. Overall the author does not use this data to defend the Dreyse, quite the contrary. He writes that the overwhelming victory was mainly due to tactics and organisation, and that the Dreyse's shortcommings were ignored for much too long. Yet it was not like the prussian infantrists were completely helpless. Here are some interesting casualty statistics from the other prussian wars: Danish-german war 1864 danish casualties: 84% by Dreyse's, 4% by edged wepons, 10% by artillery, 2% unknown. prussian casualties: 74% by infantry rifles, 20% by artillery, 6% by other weapons. austro-prussian war of 1866 austrian casualties: 90% Dreyse, 4% by edged weapons, 3% unknown, 3% artillery prussian casualties: 79% by rifles, 16% by artillery, 5,4% by edged weapons some other interesting battle statistics In the war of 1866 2 Million Dreyse cartridges were shot for 30.000 hits. (66,6 shots per hit). During the battle of Lundby in 1864 64 prussians killed 88 danes with 750 shots.
    591
  121. Here is what USPSA President Andy Hollar wrote in the May/June 1994 issue of "Front Sight" magazine: "The .356 TS&W pistol produced by the Smith & Wesson Performance Center has been on the market for more than a year and many more than the 1000 units have been sold. Ammunition manufacturers producing the ammunition or planning to produce it include Federal, Cor-Bon, and CP Bullets. Only Federal ammunition is "generally available" at this writing. The pistol may be used in Limited, but only at minor power. The good news is that the sample Federal ammunition easily made major (178.5 power factor at 4200 ft elevation) and as soon as two more commercial manufacturers come on line, the pistol will be completely legal at major power factor." At the USPSA BOD meeting of July 9, 1994, Jeff Nelson moved that .356 TSW ammunition be approved and be considered legal in Major and Minor PF for Limited Division. Following discussion, the motion failed with three in favor and five opposed. The .40 caliber threshold for Limited Major PF was formalized no later than the February 20, 1995 BOD meeting. The timing of the rule change was terrible as S&W and its distributors had just begun promoting the Model 3566 semi-auto pistol and the .356 TSW cartridge as an eligible Limited Major PF combination. Besides the "Pocket Rocket" Model 940 and the Model 3566 Limited, there was a really nice Open Division Model 3566 variant built in conjunction with Briley. (Briley's head pistolsmith Claudio Salassa and the S&W Performance Center's head pistolsmith Paul Liebenberg had worked together back when they lived in South Africa.) However, no one in the US really wanted to compete using anything other than an M1911 variant once the widebody frames became available. S&W also briefly offered a couple of Model 6906-sized pistols in .356 TSW known as the Model 3566 Compact. The "Super 9" commercial export model was basically an economy model of the Model 3566 Limited, eliminating the fancy stepped slide contours, two-tone finish, and magwell funnel. The Super 9's 5" barrel had a standard 3rd Gen. muzzle profile instead of being machined straight for the spherical bushing of the Model 3566. In addition, the Super 9's long slide had a standard Novak rear sight dovetail with an aftermarket LPA adjustable sight instead of the Model 3566's BoMar sight. The version I encountered had three barrels: 9x19mm, 9x21mm IMI, and .356 TSW. One interesting thing I found was that the sear for the single-action Super 9 was originally meant for the double-action only models. I want to say that it used a standard hammer as well. The Model 3566 Limited, as with the other S&W single-action autos of its day, used what looked like a cropped version of the Model 52-2 hammer.
    582
  122. 581
  123. 580
  124. 561
  125. 558
  126. 557
  127. 555
  128. Hello, I’m Nathaniel Frisque the gunsmith that tried to make a shotgun from halo. Here I’ll have a few responses to common questions and statements regarding the gun To the winner, this shotgun was a development of myself as a designer and fabricator. While I have moved on from it I do still wish for the m90 to be appreciated. I make myself available to help people with their projects and this creation in particular. Also the other side plate does have an Easter egg for those that see it. Mk.2 would have been radically different. The only commonality would have been the use of AR-15 components. The trigger was going to be reworked with new freedoms from a completely new shotgun receiver. More polymer material would have been used to facilitate the much needed reduction in weight, complexity, and cost. The gun was intended to have top load bottom ejection with a dual mode operating gas system. It was discussed at one point to use the p320 FCU for the trigger and serialization. Plans to make the gun modular with three different front end and three different back ends being tailored to different uses. Some would use AR furniture and feature more tactical styling while others would be better suited to games and hunting. All in all it was to be readily accessible, fully customizable, and debatably superior to any shotgun using a tube magazine. At least on paper. The issues that arose were obvious and daunting. I welcome questions about this as I would prefer to see such a thing exist in reality rather than my mind. The logic behind the routing of the trigger was largely due to the rules of CST and the interpretation of rules by the ATF. “No manufacturing or remanufacturing of firearm receivers”. So a hand made solution that went behind the entire gun became a requirement. I went through about a dozen different ways to make the trigger able to work with the end result being a living lesson you see today. Machine time and time remaining were also important factors. As my time in CST went by my ability to make it my sole focus was difficult. I also made an attempt to make a skin for a desert Eagle to be the magnum from halo. Unfortunately it was not finished before my obligations were shifted as an actual full time gunsmith. This prototype had many points of failure that were adjusted and remade, considered into further development and so on. It did its job perfectly. At around the same time I finished this gun and began using it the MK.2 was being drafted. The final version of the top loading tube shotgun is ,as Ian has said, a magazine fed shotgun. Investment was hard to obtain despite huge amounts of interest. Building a company on a dream in a garage is no longer possible, especially within the industry of arms. Even less possible as one man with one degree and one income. If a company ever did want to make this happen I would be exuberant. If I got the opportunity to help such a project, even under another banner than my own, I’d feel fulfilled all the same.
    552
  129. 551
  130. 541
  131. 539
  132. 537
  133. 528
  134. 519
  135. 513
  136. 513
  137. 512
  138. 511
  139. 501
  140. 497
  141. 496
  142. 490
  143. 486
  144. 484
  145. 482
  146. 481
  147. 479
  148. 476
  149. 476
  150. 474
  151. 474
  152. 467
  153. 465
  154. 455
  155. 451
  156. 449
  157. 448
  158. 443
  159. 440
  160. 438
  161. 438
  162. 437
  163. 433
  164. 432
  165. 431
  166. 424
  167. 422
  168. 418
  169. 416
  170. 414
  171. 413
  172. 412
  173. 402
  174. 399
  175. 389
  176. 388
  177. 387
  178. 387
  179. 386
  180. 379
  181. 373
  182. 372
  183. 371
  184. 370
  185. 370
  186. 367
  187. 360
  188. 360
  189. 358
  190. 357
  191. 357
  192. 357
  193. 356
  194. 352
  195. 352
  196. In 1943, USSR actually did some testing comparing Lend-Lease M1s and SVT-40s. The result was heavily in M1s favour, with M1s suffering 1,75% malfunctions compared to 9.75% on the SVT-40s. Indeed, the issues of quality control were well understood by Soviet experts, but unfortunately you cannot get an experienced industrial base without making mistakes. Consider that just 30 years prior the Russian Empire had a literacy rate of 30%. USSR was beating the odds here. I would like to correct something that Ian said about USSR's adoption and then move away from the SVT. In 1940 the production of Mosin rifles was halted and stopped. The plan was to fully move to the SVT as the standard rifle. Even the sniper variant would be SVT only - the PU scope was developed specifically for the SVT, and it wouldn't be until 1942 that it would be adapted to the Mosin. Mosin used the older PE scope. When Germany attacked, USSR did not have a running Mosin production. In autumn of 1941 the factories were restarted, and the idea of moving to the SVT fell off specifically because it was more expensive to manufacture than the Mosin. And USSR was having to equip tens of millions of men. The submachine guns were considered a good enough substitute for the volume of fire, since they were easier to produce. Had USSR entered the war a year later, perhaps it wouldn't have returned to the Mosin. But with less than a year of production experience on the SVT-40, without having fully scaled it up, it was not practical to push ahead with the semi-auto concept if it meant being unable to provide enough rifles for the army. The Red Army had 30 million people serving throughout the war.
    350
  197. 347
  198. 345
  199. 344
  200. 337
  201. 335
  202. 333
  203. 331
  204. 330
  205. 327
  206. 326
  207. 323
  208. 318
  209. 316
  210. 316
  211. 315
  212. 313
  213. 311
  214. 310
  215. 310
  216. 309
  217. 303
  218. 302
  219. 298
  220. 298
  221. 297
  222. 294
  223. 292
  224.  @CZProtton  former soldier. I was issued a VHS-D1 and later a VHS-2D, original model, prior to product improvement. in the field it was perfectly serviceable, if a bit heavy. I absolutely hated the 3 point sling, mostly due to the doctrine of use. We had to use the guardsman's carry, rather than the legionaire's carry, so the gun always hung in front of you or even between your legs. On terrain, I reverted to legionaire's carry, so when unslung, it would hag by my side almost like a pistol and was much easier to swing behind on my back from that position when I needed it out of the way. The sights on my rifles were copies of HK sights, drum sight on the VHS-2. Very pointable and easy to align. Quite open and a very good sight picture. Utterly useless in low light conditions. The weight of the rifle was terrible. 3.9kg empty for the VHS-2D is far, far, far from ideal. Maintenance was quite easy and it really wasn't a pampered diva that demanded constant polishing and rubbing, doctrine of use aside. In terms of accuracy, "good enough for government work" as they say. I'm probably a better shooter than most, but no marksman and at 100m 5 shot groups the size of a closed fist, so 2-3 MoA roughly, with irons. I did have a problem with my particular rifle, as the flash hider would loosen after 3 shots and then the bullets would start flying willy-nilly. When it wasn't important, I didn't bother tightening it to prevent, to not damage the rifle and to not make cleaning and maintenance more of a chore. in filed, I'd either take it off or overtighten it. Having an AK style pin system to hold it in place would have been better. one last thing i noticed is that in the field, it sticks out like a sore thumb and de-camouflages the soldier. because it has a very large profile and is pitch black, it is impossible not to see in the field. it becomes a really obvious big black blob. they should start making them in FDE or just camo tape them, which is what I did with mine on one particular field exercise and the difference was staggering. The proprietary mgazines for the VHS-2 were much better than the original ones and I much prefer the G-36 style latch method to the AR style. the VHS-2 is an improvement in every way over the VHS-1, except the weight. Ergonomically better, easier to disassemble and maintain. Materials were also improved significantly. The VHS-1 could rapid fire 120 rounds before the barrel became too hot. VHS-2 upped this to 350 rounds. It's no ultra-modernized AR or AK, but it is perfectly good rifle that can hold it's own no problem with any competitor out there. In terms of bulpups, it is one of the better ones.
    289
  225. 285
  226. 285
  227. 285
  228. 282
  229. 282
  230. 280
  231. 280
  232. 278
  233. 278
  234. 277
  235. 276
  236. 276
  237. 276
  238. 272
  239. 268
  240. 267
  241. 262
  242. 259
  243. 258
  244. 257
  245. 257
  246. 257
  247. 255
  248. 254
  249. 252
  250. 251
  251. 250
  252. 248
  253. 247
  254. 247
  255. A bit of background on the scope's original owner: Patrick Augustine Bates, r/n 234399 was born August 04, 1889 at Sydney Nova Scotia. Two brothers served with the 25th (Nova Scotia) Battalion, one of whom died at Vimy Ridge.. He enlisted with the 203rd (Winnipeg Rifles) Battalion on March 23, 1916 at Winnipeg. Went to England with the 203rd aboard SS Grampian from Halifax to Liverpool, October 24 to November 04, 1916. Posted to Bramshott Camp on arrival. Posted to the 78th (Winnipeg Grenadiers) Battalion on December 28, 1916 and proceeded to France. Joined the 78th on January 04, 1917 at Vimy Ridge near Souchez. Seriously wounded on November 06, 1918 in the left arm, (compound fractures of Radius, Ulna, and some Metacarpels of left hand), back and left thigh by gunshots and shrapnel while crossing the Grand Honelle River near Quarouble. By successfully crossing the river, the 78th became the first CEF unit to enter Belgium. That night, the battalion went into reserve in billets near Anzin, and did not see any more combat before the Armistice. Bates was invalided to England on November 11, 1918, and spent the next six months in hospital. He returned to Canada in May 1919, and was admitted to the Dominion Orthopaedic Hospital at Toronto. His left arm was not healing as hoped, and he had severe movement limits. On July 11, 1919, his left arm was amputated below the elbow. He remained in hospital in Toronto until January 1920, when he was transferred to Halifax. He was discharged as medically unfit at Halifax on January 30, 1920. Bates died at Halifax on February 24, 1976.
    247
  256. 244
  257. 243
  258. 242
  259. 240
  260. 236
  261. 235
  262. 234
  263. 232
  264. 231
  265. 231
  266. 230
  267. 229
  268. 228
  269. 226
  270. 226
  271. 225
  272. 224
  273. 223
  274. 222
  275. 218
  276. 217
  277. 217
  278. 213
  279. To add another data point to the history as we know it, my father was in the Estonian Army between the wars. And he actually saw those rifles. They were commonly referred to as 'Arsenal Rifles". They were reputed to be very accurate and of very high quality. But from his recollection they were never issued to anyone. They were kept in reserve for a war that pretty much never happened as envisioned. As a marksman, my father and pretty much every other Estonian soldier trained with the "English" rifles, which we would recognize today as the Pattern 14. I got the feeling that the arsenal rifles were a matter of national pride, He never made any mention that they were upgraded Russian rifles. They were most certainly too good to be issued to the troops and gotten wet or dirty by common Estonian soldiers during peacetime or in training. So to set the record straight, these rifles were safe queens, while the actual Estonian military rifles were P-14s. My father was studying in Germany when the war broke out. So it is possible that these rifles were issued during or immediately prior to the war by or to someone, but I haven't come across any significant contribution they made in the conflict. I further inquired about the quality and condition of the p-14s in Estonian service at the time. My father seemed originally confused by the question and then he replied "Every Friday my company had a shoot for weekend passes and every Saturday I got a hair cut and watched a movie. If you could shoot, they hit what you shot at." I suppose I've always wondered how the arsenal rifle actually shoots, If you get to actually shoot it, let me know.
    211
  280. 209
  281. 205
  282. 204
  283. 203
  284. 202
  285. 202
  286. 202
  287. 200
  288. 198
  289. 196
  290. 196
  291. 195
  292. 191
  293. 191
  294. 189
  295. 188
  296. 186
  297. 186
  298. 186
  299. 184
  300. 182
  301. 181
  302. 177
  303. 173
  304. 169
  305. 168
  306. 166
  307. 166
  308. 165
  309. 164
  310. 163
  311. 161
  312. 160
  313. 160
  314. 160
  315. 158
  316. 156
  317. 155
  318. 155
  319. 155
  320. 154
  321. 154
  322. 153
  323. 153
  324. 151
  325. 151
  326. 150
  327. 149
  328. 148
  329. 148
  330. 148
  331. 147
  332. 146
  333. 145
  334. 144
  335. 144
  336. 144
  337. 143
  338. 142
  339. 142
  340. 140
  341. 139
  342. 139
  343. 139
  344. 139
  345. 139
  346. 139
  347. 138
  348. 138
  349. 138
  350. 138
  351. 137
  352. 136
  353. 136
  354. 135
  355. 135
  356. 135
  357. 135
  358. 134
  359. 134
  360. 133
  361. The Graf Spee and her sister ships (none of them were identical: they were all different lengths) were designed for very long range, but only with diesel fuel not available in sufficient quantity in South America, whose trucks mostly ran on gasoline. Ordinary bunker oil was available everywhere, not least because the Royal Navy bought it. The solution was to provide a system to make bunker oil work in the Graf Spee's diesels (largely by steam-heating it, as was done to make waste fish and chip shop cooking oil work in diesel engines in the recent past.) This system being an afterthought, it was outside the strongly-protected parts of the ship. The Graf Spee was intended to be able to fight any British cruiser with impunity (it was the cruisers, not the battleships, which had the range and speed to catch her) and so armour was added to protect the fuel system from British 8" shells. However, German Naval intelligence took their understanding of the penetration of most standard British shells by what had happened to the ships that returned to Germany after the battle of Jutland in WW1. The Royal Navy, meanwhile, had concluded, also from the slightly disappointing outcome of the battle of Jutland, that their shells didn't penetrate as well as perhaps they might, and a project was put in hand to make better shells, especially for 8" and 15" guns, which continued in service between the wars and into WW2. This, coupled with the fact that the fuel system was what the Royal Navy was going to hit if someone aimed at the Graf Spee's director tower (the standard aiming point for British cruisers at the time) -and missed, resulted in Exeter's three hits on Graf Spee taking out the fuel system. The 6" guns on Ajax and Achilles (Leander class cruisers) weren't capable of doing this. But they were firing at twice the rate which German Naval Intelligence had told Captain Landsdorf of the Graf Spee to expect. So, they did "no critical damage" but even non-critical damage becomes a problem if there's enough of it and pretty well everything that could be hurt by a 6" shell, was hurt. This meant that even if the Graf Spee had been able to avoid further combat with the Royal Navy, she wouldn't have been able to make any friendly port with any fuel that was available in sufficient quantity to purchase in Uruguay or Argentina. Cunning schoolboy deception plots not-withstanding, HMS Cumberland really had arrived, and she had eight of the 8" guns which had done the problematic damage (Exeter was a lighter class and had only six main guns.) So, the ship really there and visible on the horizon was sufficient to further seriously damage Graf Spee and even if she got past Cumberland, she could only hope to make another neutral port further North, which would be in range of Royal Navy Battleships and Battlecruisers that could sink her with one salvo. The main reason why Graf Spee was patrolling where she was, was to stay out of the normal range of such heavy British units. Despite the damage done to Exeter, she was able to reach the Falklands for repairs. This is the other end of Argentina, one of the world's longest countries, and represents an awesome feat of seamanship for the crew of a heavily-damaged vessel using improvised steering gear.
    133
  362. 133
  363. 132
  364. 130
  365. 130
  366. 130
  367. 129
  368. 127
  369. 126
  370. 125
  371. 125
  372. 121
  373. 121
  374. 120
  375. 119
  376. 118
  377. 118
  378. 117
  379. 117
  380. 117
  381. 116
  382. 116
  383. 116
  384. 115
  385. 115
  386. 114
  387. 114
  388. 113
  389. 112
  390. 111
  391. 111
  392. 108
  393. 107
  394. 107
  395. 105
  396. 104
  397. 103
  398. 102
  399. 101
  400. 100
  401. 99
  402. 99
  403. 98
  404. 97
  405. 96
  406. 96
  407. 95
  408. 93
  409. 93
  410. 92
  411. 92
  412. 92
  413. 90
  414. 89
  415. 89
  416. 89
  417. 89
  418. 89
  419. 88
  420. 88
  421. 87
  422. 87
  423. 86
  424. 86
  425. 85
  426. 85
  427. 84
  428. 84
  429. 83
  430. 82
  431. 82
  432. 81
  433. 81
  434. 81
  435. 80
  436. 80
  437. 80
  438. 80
  439. As a german Facharbeiter(trained worker) i must speak about a small mistake, unclear description Ian has made. The word Meister can mean a ,Champion' or a very talented craftsman, artist etc.. But in this case a Meister means a ,master craftsman' , a title which goes back to middle ages. Formerly a boy who wants to become a craftsman started his training at an age of 14 (my father was some weeks younger than 14 when he started in 1952) as a , Lehrling (today Auszubildender), today with 17 or 18 (the school system changed), after a training time of usually 3 to 3,5 years you are in Industry a Facharbeiter, in old style (non industrial) craftmanship/ Handwerk you are a Geselle, also a title which goes back to middle age. When you worked some years as a Facharbeiter or Geselle you can do a difficult and expensive training and you have to produce a Meisterstück/ mastrepiece. When everything is well a Facharbeiter becomes an Industriemeister, a Geselle becomes a Handwerksmeister. Whats the difference? A Handwerksmeister can open his own Werkstatt/ shop(??), hire some Gesellen, train new Lehrlinge as it has been for centuries, while an Industriemeister is ,only' the leader of a team of workers or a production room etc. in an industral factory, whatever products the factory produces. A Waffenmeister doesn't work in a armsfactory, thats an an armorer who has to repair and inspect the arms of soldiers, policemen etc. or this word is very rare used for a Fechtmeister/ maitre d'armes.
    78
  440. 78
  441. 77
  442. 77
  443. 77
  444. 76
  445. 76
  446. 76
  447. 75
  448. 75
  449. 75
  450. 74
  451. 74
  452. 73
  453. 73
  454. 72
  455. 72
  456. 72
  457. 72
  458. 71
  459. 71
  460. 71
  461. 71
  462. 70
  463. 70
  464. 69
  465. 69
  466. 68
  467. 68
  468. 67
  469. 66
  470. 66
  471. 64
  472. 64
  473. 63
  474. 63
  475. 63
  476. 62
  477. 62
  478. 61
  479. 61
  480. 60
  481. 60
  482. 59
  483. 58
  484. 58
  485. 57
  486. 57
  487. 57
  488. 56
  489. 56
  490. 56
  491. 55
  492. 55
  493. 55
  494. 54
  495. 54
  496. 54
  497. 53
  498. 53
  499. 52
  500. 52
  501. 51
  502. 51
  503. 51
  504. 50
  505. 50
  506. 50
  507. 49
  508. 49
  509. 49
  510. 49
  511. 48
  512. 48
  513. 47
  514. 47
  515. 47
  516. 47
  517. 47
  518. Turkish officer here. In early 2000's when clearing out a PKK (kurdish insurgents) stash in Siirt province in a cave after which inhabitants killed or routed, 4 of these Mausers appeared, 3 from a box and one from the body of a higher ranking terrorist. Two of them had the same Abdulhamid II tugras and the other two were original mauser oberndorf. We filed the captured guns as two former ottoman and two imperial german specimens, all were chambered in 7.63x25mm and none had wooden holsters. Also noticed that the kurds were using soviet Tokarev TT ammuniton with it. Standard procedure with the captured material in Turkish Gendarmerie is to identify the gun > check if their serial numbers are in the system > Place them in a box with a copy of the report > send to Ankara MKE for revealuation / Rechambering / Redistribution. Some captured East German Mpi47/AK's for example can be issued in western provinces thus. If the gun seems in a workable state it is either redistributed or sold to the interior for a price. Usually discounted to the law enforcement. Ashamed to say that the guns or the confiscation report have never reached Ankara back then. It didn't even reach half way. On the way I heard that some higher ranking officials fucking plundered it. Because everyone knows they are rare, has a ww1/gallipoli connection and in the second hand market they are easily sold five figures. Such is the value of C96 in Turkish sentiment. And oh these are almost always called "Boxed Mauser" / Kasali Mauser in Turkish. Thanks for the video!
    47
  519. 46
  520. 46
  521. 46
  522. 46
  523. 44
  524. 44
  525. 43
  526. 43
  527. 42
  528. 42
  529. 41
  530. 41
  531. 41
  532. 40
  533. 40
  534. 40
  535. 39
  536. 39
  537. 39
  538. 39
  539. 38
  540. 38
  541. 38
  542. 38
  543. 38
  544. 37
  545. 37
  546. 37
  547. 37
  548. 37
  549. 37
  550. 36
  551. 36
  552. 36
  553. 36
  554. 36
  555. 35
  556. 35
  557. 35
  558. 35
  559. 35
  560. 35
  561. 34
  562. 34
  563. 34
  564. 34
  565. 34
  566. 34
  567. 34
  568. 33
  569. 33
  570. 33
  571. 33
  572. 33
  573. 32
  574. 32
  575. 32
  576. 32
  577. 32
  578. 32
  579. 31
  580. 31
  581. 31
  582. 31
  583. 31
  584. 31
  585. 31
  586. 31
  587. 31
  588. 30
  589. 30
  590. 30
  591. 30
  592. 30
  593. 30
  594. 29
  595. 29
  596. 29
  597. 29
  598. 29
  599. 28
  600. 28
  601. 28
  602. 28
  603. 28
  604. 28
  605. I own a Suomi kp31/m31, kp44, beretta 38a, beretta 38/44, ppsh41, pps43, zk383, mp34, yugo 49/57, beretta pm12, and a number of other sub machineguns. All are post-86, so not nearly as cool as the original transferables shown here. The Suomi takes the edge on durability, the ability to accept drums or stick mags, compactness for storage, and being able to swap out barrels in the event of a squib or broken case is a huge plus. Further, the Suomi does have a “relief valve” in the receiver end cap that can be used to mitigate the rate of fire some, albeit marginal at best. My experience is that it will allow you to go from an indiscriminate vomiting stream of lead to a somewhat more discriminate firehose of lead…but never really gets below 900-1000 ROF. The m38a is, like all beretta smgs, an excellent firearm and incredibly well designed. They are a pleasure to shoot. The beretta has a big edge over the Suomi when it comes to magazine changes; the magwell of the Suomi, and the rather small slot/tab orientation that must occur to lock a mag or drum into the gun, with no magazine well funnel to guide you, makes magazine changes a slight bit cumbersome when compared to the beretta’s magwell. However, from a durability standpoint, the beretta fire control group is a bit more complex, and the more parts you have, the higher the likelihood of failure. Stuff breaks, and often at the worst time, and I’d hate to be in a firefight when the super-cool floating firing pin engagement system completely craps out, as I’ve had happen on my 38a before. The magazines for both guns are excellent, although the 50 round quad stack magazines are difficult to load under the best circumstances, (let alone in the field while being shot at) as are the drums. Ergo, while I love the beretta and it’s slow rate of fire, dual-trigger design, and overall excellent construction…the rate of fire and simplicity of the kp31, a 100-year old design that is still respected and copied, is what I would lean towards. The Finn’s proved it is a serious gun that can be used for any combat task, while the Italians never really got to test the limits of the 38a in long term combat. In terms of original collectibles, both are valid and should command very high prices with respect to their histories.
    28
  606. 27
  607. 27
  608. 27
  609. 27
  610. 27
  611. 27
  612. 26
  613. 26
  614. 26
  615. 26
  616. 26
  617. 26
  618. 25
  619. 25
  620. 25
  621. 25
  622. 25
  623. 24
  624. 24
  625. 24
  626. 24
  627. 23
  628. 23
  629. 23
  630. 23
  631. 23
  632. 23
  633. 23
  634. 23
  635. 23
  636. 23
  637. 22
  638. 22
  639. 22
  640. 22
  641. 22
  642. 22
  643. 22
  644. 22
  645. 21
  646. 21
  647. 21
  648. 21
  649. 21
  650. 21
  651. 21
  652. 20
  653. 20
  654. 20
  655. 20
  656. 20
  657. 20
  658. 20
  659. 19
  660. 19
  661. 19
  662. 19
  663. 19
  664. 19
  665. 19
  666. 19
  667. 19
  668. 19
  669. 19
  670. 19
  671. 19
  672. 19
  673. 19
  674. 19
  675. 19
  676. 19
  677. 19
  678. 18
  679. 18
  680. 18
  681. 18
  682. 18
  683. 18
  684. 18
  685. 17
  686. 17
  687. 17
  688. 17
  689. 16
  690. 16
  691. 16
  692. 16
  693. 16
  694. 16
  695. 16
  696. 16
  697. 16
  698. 16
  699. 15
  700. 15
  701. 15
  702. 15
  703. While imprecise (and frankly contradictory), "semiauto machinegun" or "semiauto submachinegun" is both the commonly used term, and rather descriptive of what the gun is - a semiautomatic adaption of a machinegun. Much like calling a mobile phone (whether cellular or Ye Ancient 1990s house phone) a "wireless telephone" when it is really just a radio remotely connected to a telephone switching service. Or calling something an electric knife when it is really just a reciprocating saw for food. As such, the imperfect, technically incorrect, terminology of "semiautomatic machinegun" is, for all its strict semantic flaws, a very useful term to explicitly identify a discrete class of items whilst distinguishing them from most similar classes of items. Especially since it is invariably applied to things that are originally mechanically quite dissimilar to common semiautomatic rifles. For example, making a "semiauto RPK" is relatively easy - you just have to bugger the fire control group so it only works in semi, and make a reciever that won't accept the parts that normally make it go full auto. Which is why (outside antigun screeds or the absolutely ignorant about modern firearms types), you won't normally see folks referring to a sporting AR15, semi-only AK or RPK, etc., as a "semiautomatic machinegun", even when they are based on an actual LMG (like the RPK). But a semiauto-only Browning M1919, Maxim, MG42, M249, Sten, etc., is rather different, especially when the original design is open bolt (forcing you to come up with a new firing system, not merely restrict how the FCG works... innadditionnto having to create a receiver that is mechanically different enough from the original that one cannot just drop the original - or very lightly modified - "go faster" parts and have it fire full auto).
    15
  704. 15
  705. 15
  706. 15
  707. 15
  708. 15
  709. 15
  710. 14
  711. 14
  712. 14
  713. 14
  714. 14
  715. 14
  716. 14
  717. 14
  718. 14
  719. 14
  720. 14
  721. 13
  722. 13
  723. 13
  724. 13
  725. 13
  726. 13
  727. 13
  728. 13
  729. 13
  730. 13
  731. 13
  732. 13
  733. 13
  734. 13
  735. 13
  736. 13
  737. 13
  738. 13
  739. 12
  740. 12
  741. 12
  742. 12
  743. 12
  744. 12
  745. 12
  746. 12
  747. 12
  748. 12
  749. 12
  750. 12
  751. 12
  752. 12
  753. 12
  754. 12
  755. 11
  756. 11
  757. 11
  758. 11
  759. 11
  760. 11
  761. 11
  762. 11
  763. 11
  764. 11
  765. 11
  766. 10
  767. 10
  768. 10
  769. 10
  770. 10
  771. 10
  772. 10
  773. 10
  774. 10
  775. 10
  776. 10
  777. 10
  778. 10
  779. 10
  780. 9
  781. 9
  782. 9
  783. 9
  784. 9
  785. 9
  786. 9
  787. 9
  788. 9
  789. 9
  790. 9
  791. 9
  792. 9
  793. 9
  794. 9
  795. 9
  796. 9
  797. 9
  798. 9
  799. 9
  800. 9
  801. 9
  802. 9
  803. 9
  804. 8
  805. 8
  806. 8
  807. 8
  808. 8
  809. 8
  810. 8
  811. 8
  812. 8
  813. 8
  814. 8
  815. 8
  816. 8
  817. 8
  818. 8
  819. 8
  820. 8
  821. 8
  822. 7
  823. 7
  824. 7
  825. 7
  826. 7
  827. 7
  828. 7
  829. 7
  830. The where not refusing to pay him for his work, they didnt want to change the terms of how they paid him. The flat rate they had been paying him was for ANY patent he could make. Even if it would never be produced(therefore, they would pay him for things they knew wouldn't make THEM any money), and when the agreement was first made, it was insanely generous to someone who was at the time a complete nobody. Browning was never formally hired by Winchester( thus how at the same time he able to work with Colt on handgun development, as long as Colt didnt compete with Winchester in the long arm market), and was a free agent. He just had a long and fruitful working relationship with the company. The part of the story that is left out of this is that Winchester had just had a change of management, the man who had recruited Browning initially had passed away, and a new person was in charge, one who had not had a decades long good working relationship with Browning, and a stupidly narrow perspective on his worth. Winchester had spent the last several decades in a detente with all the other major arms manufacturers in the US, whereby they had gentleman's agreements to not compete with each other in their main market niche, essentially enforcing informal monopolies on agreed upon segments. Winchester and Remington didnt make revolvers, Colt and Remington didnt make leveractions, etc. While they had competition inside their market segments from other companies, the narrower focus allowed them to maintain primacy in their own fiefdoms. This caused the new head of Winchester to have an overly secure view of Winchesters place in the market, and having a caretaker view of his job, and not a growth orientation, preference was to maintain current arrangements( as they where a known quantity, thus stable) wherever possible, and from an accountant's point of view, Winchesters long standing agreement with Browning had been extremely generous for an outside contractor, when despite the many successes, they had also spend a lot of money of things with no returns. And his overly narrow focus in the US market, blinded him to idea that Browning WAS a free agent, and had competitors he could take his ideas to. This US focus also biased against his belief in the viability of Brownings patent, as Winchesters main competition in the shotgun market had been against cheap imports and other lower cost alternatives to their offerings, and them stagnant in the high end of the market, giving the impression there was no demand for a very complex, very expensive, completely new type of mechanism. And it was his opinion that Winchester made Browning, not the other way around. This is hubris from someone who was defined by his place in the company he worked for, not on any accomplishments he had apart from it. The capitalism part of this, is that Browning thought he was worth more than Winchester did, so he took his ideas to someone else, who recognized his worth, and paid him what both parties agreed was a fair agreement.
    7
  831. 7
  832. 7
  833. 7
  834. 7
  835. 7
  836. 7
  837. 7
  838. 7
  839. 7
  840. 7
  841. 7
  842. 7
  843. 7
  844. 7
  845. 7
  846. 7
  847. 7
  848. 7
  849. 7
  850. 7
  851. 7
  852. 7
  853. 6
  854. 6
  855. 6
  856. 6
  857. 6
  858. 6
  859. 6
  860. 6
  861. 6
  862. 6
  863. 6
  864. 6
  865. 6
  866. 6
  867. 6
  868. 6
  869. 6
  870. 6
  871. 6
  872. 6
  873. 6
  874. 6
  875. 6
  876. 6
  877. 6
  878. 6
  879. 6
  880. 6
  881. 6
  882. 6
  883. 5
  884. 5
  885. 5
  886. 5
  887. 5
  888. 5
  889. 5
  890. 5
  891. 5
  892. 5
  893. One word about the Darne on aircraft. Given the very French "laissez faire" way of doing things, Armée de l'Air fighter aircraft were fitted well into the 1930s with the reliable but already obsolescent Vickers Mk.III in .303 produced under license. The Darne could be synchronized but the system used was not reliable, thus they were mounted in underwing fairings in a few instances, like the early Dewoitine D-37 and Loire-46. Dewoitine D.500s used a combination of fuselage-mounted Vickers Mk.IIIs and Darne, for example. In the late French 501s and 510s they were replaced altogether by the MAC-34. The new design also had to contend with the Darne-Lewis, a licensed version of the Lewis Mk.II/III (easily distinguishable due to the wooden heat sinks on the gas piston). By 1939 the Darne was used mainly on secod-line aircraft thrown into the fray as an observer gun, on the likes of the lumbering Les Mureaux and Potez-39 two-seaters. The ones used by Yugoslavia - not Serbia - were all of the observer type IIRC (it's 5AM and insomnia is frying my brain) and standard issue for rear defence on two-seaters (Potez 25 and Breguet XIX) and bombers like the Bristol Blenheim. Why so many got exported and so few saw service with the Armée de l'Air? Well... It's something I read years ago in a well respected French magazine (AVIONS by SARL Lela Press), and it basically boiled down to the French procurement being a cheap fu... and considering the Darne as both expensive and complicated. "Why bother with new material created by a private company if we have thousands of Vickers Mk.IIIs lying around and our own folks at Saint Etienne and Chatellerault have been croaking for years to no end on how their next machine gun is going to be superlative?" That's the "Petoire" or "Firecracker". I mean, the MAC-34. Also, the French State got a pretty pinch in taxes and fees from the exports. So, 10/10 for the State owned companies and 5/10 for the private one. The Darne could have been the MAC 24/29 of the air with some further development, but official shenanigans and conservatism killed it. Sorry for the wall of text. Got carried away on one of my favourite topics. Cheers.
    5
  894. 5
  895. 5
  896. 5
  897. 5
  898. 5
  899. 5
  900. 5
  901. 5
  902. 5
  903. 5
  904. 5
  905. 5
  906. 5
  907. 5
  908. 5
  909. 5
  910. 5
  911. 5
  912. 5
  913. 5
  914. 5
  915. 4
  916. 4
  917. 4
  918. 4
  919. 4
  920. So, regarding Norwegian AG3F2. Dug some info 15 years ago, here it is 1. Made in house, Kongsberg Vapenfabrik 2. The bolt carrier has distinctive etching to the side open to ejection port, the form of fingerprint to help with silent closure of the bolt 3. The charging handle has a very distinctive shape: more beefy, full steel and with a hole in it, presumably to force-cock the gun in cold weather utilizing round as a handle (T-shape similar to MG-42) 4. Different bayonet mount 5. Reportedly, the collapsible stock had longer rails than on German model, approx 1cm longer. 6. AG3-F2 is, in fact, a field modification first performed by Norwegians deployed in Afghanistan with available parts. The very first rifles that later were designated as AG3-F2 were just issued AG3-F1s with KAC rails bought privately. The reason for AG3 being brought back to active service was field experience: 5.56x45 shot from fancy HK416s couldn't defeat thick mudbrick walls and the target behind it, hence not only AG3-F2 was back to service, but also good old MG3 retrofitted with the same aimpoints M2/M3s 7. NFM group (one of the main Norwegian Military contractors) has a long standing relationship with B&T and naturally provided all the modern stuff (rails, optic mounts and rings, etc) for "official" AG3-F2. http://thinlineweapons.com/MG42/AG3.htm is a leftover from the mg-42.net, the Norwegian weapons enthusiast provided some pictures and info on demand as well. It's now defunct, but I believe some traces could still be dug out.
    4
  921. 4
  922. 4
  923. 4
  924. 4
  925. 4
  926. 4
  927. 4
  928. 4
  929. 4
  930. 4
  931. 4
  932. 4
  933. 4
  934. 4
  935. 4
  936. 4
  937. 4
  938. 4
  939. 4
  940. 4
  941. 4
  942. 4
  943. 4
  944. 4
  945. 4
  946. 4
  947. 4
  948. 4
  949. 4
  950. 4
  951. 4
  952. 4
  953. 4
  954. 4
  955. 4
  956. 4
  957. 4
  958. 4
  959. 4
  960. 4
  961. 4
  962. 4
  963. 4
  964. 4
  965. 4
  966. 4
  967. 4
  968. 4
  969. 4
  970. 4
  971. 4
  972. 4
  973. 3
  974. 3
  975. 3
  976. 3
  977. 3
  978. 3
  979. 3
  980. 3
  981. 3
  982. 3
  983. 3
  984. 3
  985. 3
  986. 3
  987. 3
  988. 3
  989. 3
  990. 3
  991. 3
  992. 3
  993. 3
  994. 3
  995. 3
  996. 3
  997. 3
  998. 3
  999. 3
  1000. 3
  1001. 3
  1002. 3
  1003. 3
  1004. 3
  1005. 3
  1006. 3
  1007. 3
  1008. 3
  1009. 3
  1010. 3
  1011. 3
  1012. 3
  1013. 3
  1014. 3
  1015. 3
  1016. Been to Afghanistan 3 times. Deployed with the same M4 all 3 deployments. Carbine saw combat in all the environmental extremes that country offers. It never failed to fire, and the one time it failed to feed, it was because of a damaged magazine. 1st Deployment I used an Aimpoint red dot, 2nd a EOTech Holographic, and 3rd a Trijicon Acog. When I first joined the military, I was skeptical of the M16 because I heard all the stories from the Vietnam vets in my family. Once I got an M4 and used it in combat, I was sold. Fired every time I wanted it to, Hit everything I meant to hit, no failures. We had fun with AK's over the mountain passes, and their ability to clear a room full of bad guys with 7.62x39 full auto its impressive. But outside of 50 meters, I just cant be seduced to pick anything other than an AR for ground combat. Specially in an Urban environment, where accuracy is paramount and you might be trying to shoot at moving targets in vehicles or through cover. during my first deployment I was amazed at how many failures to feed I saw from US service members. And it wasn't reassuring, until a bearded ODA guy told me, "you cant use those ARMY issue magazines in a firefight bub, it will get you killed". he then handed me a 20 round PMAG and told me to go buy my own magazines. He also told me to get a set of calipers and check my teams magazines for spec and discard all the ones that were out of spec. We did it, and no one on my team had one malfunction the rest of the deployment. Call me a Basic Bitch, but my Rifle is an AR, and my pistol is a Glock. If it isn't broke, don't fix it.
    3
  1017. 3
  1018. 3
  1019. 3
  1020. 3
  1021. 3
  1022. 3
  1023. 3
  1024. 3
  1025. 3
  1026. 3
  1027. 3
  1028. 3
  1029. 3
  1030. 3
  1031. 3
  1032. 3
  1033. 3
  1034. 3
  1035. 3
  1036. 3
  1037. 3
  1038. 3
  1039. 3
  1040. 3
  1041. 3
  1042. 3
  1043. 3
  1044. 3
  1045. 3
  1046. 3
  1047. 3
  1048. 3
  1049. 3
  1050. 3
  1051. 3
  1052. 3
  1053. 3
  1054. 3
  1055. 3
  1056. 3
  1057. 3
  1058. 3
  1059. 3
  1060. 3
  1061. 2
  1062. 2
  1063. 2
  1064. 2
  1065. 2
  1066. 2
  1067. 2
  1068. 2
  1069. 2
  1070. 2
  1071. 2
  1072. 2
  1073. 2
  1074. 2
  1075. 2
  1076. 2
  1077. 2
  1078. 2
  1079. 2
  1080. 2
  1081. 2
  1082. 2
  1083. 2
  1084. 2
  1085. 2
  1086. 2
  1087. 2
  1088. 2
  1089. 2
  1090. 2
  1091. 2
  1092. 2
  1093. 2
  1094. 2
  1095. 2
  1096. 2
  1097. 2
  1098. 2
  1099. 2
  1100. 2
  1101. 2
  1102. 2
  1103. 2
  1104. 2
  1105. 2
  1106. 2
  1107. 2
  1108. 2
  1109. 2
  1110. 2
  1111. 2
  1112. 2
  1113. 2
  1114. 2
  1115. 2
  1116. 2
  1117. 2
  1118. 2
  1119. 2
  1120. 2
  1121. 2
  1122. 2
  1123. 2
  1124. 2
  1125. 2
  1126. 2
  1127. 2
  1128. 2
  1129. 2
  1130. 2
  1131.  @Poolboy001  The finnish forces did NOT supply forces to Nazi Germany. Any attempt by the germans to incorporate the finnish forces into their chain of command was met with a stern outright refusal. Unique case in the eastern front as hungarian, romanian, slovack, croatian, etc, even italian, forces were integrated within the wehrmacht, and put under german direct strategic and operational command. Finnish forces in the meanwhile were 100% independent from the german chain of command and responded only to finnish high command orders. Finnish soldiers participated with the mass killings of Jews?. Source?. Would be highly ironic, given that Finland never prosecuted jews (only place under the "wrong side" of the european war where they were fully safe), they refused to give any to Germany, and for crying out loud finnish jews were frontline soldiers and the finnish army had a field SYNAGOGE for their jewish troops to attend services to. So you better have top-class proof to prove what you just uttered there, because I'm calling it as plain ole BS. Once more, Finland was a german co-belligerant. There was a certain degree of cooperation between both, but that only went as far as the finnish would accept in order to get supplies from Germany (Finland was dependent on german military aid and very particularily, food supplies, from Germany in order to stay afloat during WW2, so of course they had to budge in to some of their demands for cooperation in order to secure that aid back), but other than that they did their own thing in their turf, independently from Germany. Finland was the only democracy that existed in mainland europe throughout WW2 and took part in it (all the rest had been either toppled or invaded and occupied at one point or another, and both sweden and switzerland remained neutral). That fact alone separates them as an unique case and remarks Finland's status as co-belligerant, not an ally. Finally, we're not establishing "blames" here. We're debating wether Finland was a German ally or not. And no, Finland was not an ally of Germany. Neither formally (they refused to sign into the tripartite pact), nor de facto (They remained essentially an independent party from Hitler's and OKW/OKH's diktats for the whole part of the war they were fighting alongside them).
    2
  1132. 2
  1133. 2
  1134. 2
  1135. 2
  1136. 2
  1137. 2
  1138. 2
  1139. 2
  1140. 2
  1141. 2
  1142. 2
  1143. 2
  1144. 2
  1145. 2
  1146. 2
  1147. 2
  1148. 2
  1149. 2
  1150. 2
  1151. 2
  1152. 2
  1153. 2
  1154. 2
  1155. 2
  1156. 2
  1157. 2
  1158. 2
  1159. 2
  1160. 2
  1161. 2
  1162. 2
  1163. 2
  1164. 2
  1165. 2
  1166. 2
  1167. 2
  1168. 2
  1169. 2
  1170. 2
  1171. 2
  1172. 2
  1173. 2
  1174. 2
  1175. 2
  1176. 2
  1177. 2
  1178. 2
  1179. 2
  1180. 2
  1181. 2
  1182. 2
  1183. 2
  1184. 2
  1185. 2
  1186. 2
  1187. 2
  1188. 2
  1189. 2
  1190. 2
  1191. 2
  1192. 2
  1193. 2
  1194. 2
  1195. 2
  1196. 2
  1197. 2
  1198. 2
  1199. 2
  1200. 1
  1201. 1
  1202. 1
  1203. 1
  1204. 1
  1205. 1
  1206. 1
  1207. 1
  1208. 1
  1209. 1
  1210. 1
  1211. 1
  1212. 1
  1213. 1
  1214. 1
  1215. 1
  1216. 1
  1217. 1
  1218. 1
  1219. 1
  1220. 1
  1221. 1
  1222. 1
  1223. 1
  1224. 1
  1225. 1
  1226. 1
  1227. 1
  1228. 1
  1229. 1
  1230. 1
  1231. 1
  1232. 1
  1233. 1
  1234. 1
  1235. 1
  1236. 1
  1237. 1
  1238. 1
  1239. 1
  1240. 1
  1241. 1
  1242. 1
  1243. 1
  1244. 1
  1245. 1
  1246. 1
  1247. 1
  1248. 1
  1249. 1
  1250. 1
  1251. 1
  1252. 1
  1253. 1
  1254. 1
  1255. 1
  1256. 1
  1257. 1
  1258. 1
  1259. 1
  1260. 1
  1261. 1
  1262. 1
  1263. 1
  1264. 1
  1265. 1
  1266. 1
  1267. 1
  1268. 1
  1269. 1
  1270. 1
  1271. 1
  1272. 1
  1273. 1
  1274. 1
  1275. 1
  1276. 1
  1277. 1
  1278. 1
  1279. 1
  1280. 1
  1281. 1
  1282. 1
  1283. 1
  1284. 1
  1285. 1
  1286. 1
  1287. 1
  1288. 1
  1289. 1
  1290. 1
  1291. 1
  1292. 1
  1293. 1
  1294. 1
  1295. 1
  1296. 1
  1297. 1
  1298. 1
  1299. 1
  1300. 1
  1301. 1
  1302. 1
  1303. 1
  1304. 1
  1305. 1
  1306. 1
  1307. 1
  1308. 1
  1309. 1
  1310. 1
  1311. 1
  1312. 1
  1313. 1
  1314. 1
  1315. 1
  1316. 1
  1317. 1
  1318. 1
  1319. 1
  1320. 1
  1321. 1
  1322. Man I was following a thread in research of the MR73 and was wondering how on earth so many of your subscribers knew of Cdt Christian Prouteau as in the comments of an other video before I found this. Cdt Prouteau and Capt. Baril were my heros.This video is 2 years old now however I just feel I need to write just to thanks you. There was a lot going on on those days outside just weaponry, politics were running full flow, the fight between GIGN and police special forces, the new president choosing GIGN for personal protection in 81 and dropping Police. The fact that gendarmerie cannot conduct an arrest without an order from State attorney (Procureur) that caused the scandal of the Irish of Vincennes. to reply to some comments: No Prouteau did not frame anyone. They had arrested terrorists without authorization and the police who was also after them after getting inside info by interior ministry was trying to frame GIGN for it. many comments on the philosophy of anti terrorist forces not being the judge but having the task to bring the criminals to justice, well they go even further by considering that police should not carry, That they are not trained enough and cause more damage than good. That the fact they carry will undeniably drive a face off situation into fire exchange, they prefer to see the robbers leave with the money than having innocent civilians get killed. then they go after the robbers but leaving them a small head. Those guys were like born with guns in their hands, not your average forces. Cdt prouteau spent time with Green Berets and SAS to learn their operating and training methods before creating GIGN. The Germans had just developed their own forces from realizing their regular forces could not deal with Baader's red army. France was to have their own special force and Christian Prouteau was chosen to develop and command the project. Right from the beginning GIGN members were smiling about Prouteau's affection for long barrel revolvers. If he initiated and helped develop the project MR73 357 the arm that became official and legendary associated with GIGN he himself carried the 6 inch 44cal a long time. Thanks a lot.
    1
  1323. 1
  1324. 1
  1325. 1
  1326. 1
  1327. 1
  1328. 1
  1329. 1
  1330. 1
  1331. 1
  1332. 1
  1333. 1
  1334. 1
  1335. 1
  1336. 1
  1337. 1
  1338. 1
  1339. 1
  1340. 1
  1341. 1
  1342. 1
  1343. 1
  1344. 1
  1345. 1
  1346. 1
  1347. 1
  1348. 1
  1349. 1
  1350. 1
  1351. 1
  1352. 1
  1353. 1
  1354. 1
  1355. 1
  1356. 1
  1357. 1
  1358. 1
  1359. 1
  1360. 1
  1361. 1
  1362. 1
  1363. 1
  1364. 1
  1365. 1
  1366. 1
  1367. 1
  1368. 1
  1369. 1
  1370. 1
  1371. 1
  1372. 1
  1373. 1
  1374. 1
  1375. 1
  1376. 1
  1377. 1
  1378. 1
  1379. 1
  1380. 1
  1381. 1
  1382. 1
  1383. 1
  1384. 1
  1385. 1
  1386. 1
  1387. 1
  1388. 1
  1389. 1
  1390. 1
  1391. 1
  1392. 1
  1393. 1
  1394. 1
  1395. 1
  1396. 1
  1397. 1
  1398. 1
  1399. 1
  1400. 1
  1401. 1
  1402. 1
  1403. 1
  1404. 1
  1405. 1
  1406. 1
  1407. 1
  1408. 1
  1409. 1
  1410. 1
  1411. 1
  1412. 1
  1413. 1
  1414. 1
  1415. 1
  1416. 1
  1417. 1
  1418. 1
  1419. 1
  1420. 1
  1421. 1
  1422. 1
  1423. 1
  1424. 1
  1425. 1
  1426. 1
  1427. 1
  1428. 1
  1429. 1
  1430. 1