I think the proper term for these are anti-materiel rifle. Made for stopping vehicles.
...it says that in the title
The title was edited between my post & yours I guess.
Fair enough I didn't notice that
I like the plan, and it looks good, but I just feel that dual wielding them may not work.
I think this is how you get Americans back interested in helping Ukraine. Girl with ridiculously big guns.
Not just American's, all guys (and some gals) are horny for that
I'm an American guy and horny for guns. The woman is just a nice addition.
Are those massive silencers on the end or something else?
Never seen a rifle that large before.
Could also be massive muzzle brakes. That rifle must kick like a horse on five different kinds of steroids.
A muzzle brake is not a closed cylinder. There would also be no reason to make it that long.
yeah, I'm European, I don't know shit about guns
I have to ask: You are aware that you have no idea what you are talking about, yet you felt the need to answer him? Can you explain why? This is an extremely common thing for people to do, so it is very interesting to hear (if possible) what your train of thought was.
I'm not sure that beating up on someone who decides to say that they aren't familiar with something and are retracting an earlier suggestion is a good idea. Seems likely to lead to people not retracting things even when they think that they might not be correct.
I simply want to understand the thought process. I appreciate that they acknowledge it to begin with.
Since we're all going off what is visible and nothing more: the outer bits seem to be fabric, maybe those are dirt covers?
Suppressors tend to get very hot very quickly. This produces a mirage effect when looking through the scope. Wraps made of high temperature materials help mitigate that and also allow the shooter to remove the suppressor without having to wait until it cools down.
They are suppressors (a.k.a. silencers). They work just like your car's muffler and both were invented by the same guy: the grandson of the inventor of the Maxim machine gun.
It will certainly not make these monster guns movie-quiet but it reduces their massive sound and flash signature making it harder to locate where they were shot from.
They work just like your car's muffler and both were invented by the same guy: the grandson of the inventor of the Maxim machine gun.
Well that's a cool TIL.
Flash suppressors. Snipers are very high-value targets.
Certainly looks that way. As if it wasn't big enough already. In most pictures I have seen they have only muzzle brakes, but in some they clearly have suppressors. A useful side-effect may be to reduce the visible muzzle fire for night operation.
*supressors
What's the difference?
"Silencer" is the older and frankly BS term. Silencers don't silence anything outside of video games and movies. They more "suppress" the noise and muffle it a bit.
Basically it's the difference of firing it outside and having your ears ring forever or just for a long time
It's not a BS term it is the patented term used by Percy Maxim when he invented it.
Those things conveniently double as a flag pole at a rural Ford dealership.
For when you need to kill a whole company standing in a line
That thing looks like it can cause some serious damage, even to things that are relatively well hardened.
Like, what would happen if a sniper fired that gun into the barrel of a T-80 that had an HE shell loaded?
Don't have to hit the barrels they usually aim for weak spots hoping for penetration then the round bounces around inside taking everyone out.
Anti-material rifles were initially designed to take out tanks. However all modern tanks have thick enough armor to deflect its bullets.
Now APC's, trucks, vans, and most engines and electronics are destroyed by these rounds. Hence the anti-material label now.
Given some of the antique tanks the Russians pulled out of the moth ball heap, it might still be an anti-tank-weapon occasionally ...
Would it be possible to ruin the barrel by shooting at it from the side? Or would it just ricochet?
The barrel is thicker than the armor on tanks. Usually they weigh in at over 2 tons of steel. The circular shape also makes it very likely to deflect the impact like sloped armor.
It might make a little ding in the paint.
They are designed to withstand huge pressures while maintaining their structure.
It would be hard to get the angle just right to get the bullet all the way down the barrel without it impacting the sides of the barrel
Bullets are deflected along surprisingly sharp bends in a barrel (or any other pipe), so it would be sufficient to hit the tank gun muzzle roughly from the front, and it would probably hit a loaded projectile.
Technically, it would be sufficient of they lodge a bullet into the barrel. As soon as the tank fires, the bullet will wedge between the shell and the barrel, destroying - at least - the barrel.
Cobra assault cannon...state of the art bang-bang!
I don't really see the real benefit.
Assuming a BC of 1.05--I'm using the BC for a match-grade .50 BMG bullet, which might be high--and using a 921gr bullet with a 3300fps muzzle velocity, you're going to see about a 13' drop at 1000y. That's pretty significant.
If you compare that to a .338 Lapua Magnum, .685 BC , 250gr at 3030fps, you end up with a 18' drop at 1000y. Also significant.
So it's a bigger, heavier rifle, and it will definitely go through body armor, but you aren't really seeing a huge gain in functional range, and the ammunition (since 14.5x44mm is an HMG bullet) is likely not nearly as consistent as .338LM and so likely not as consistent at long range.
They aren't looking to shoot at soldiers with these things, they are for taking out vehicles and equipment.
I understood some of those words
BC - ballistic coefficient. How your bullet reacts to the air. It's a combination of weight and shape of the bullet. Higher is better for long-range shooting.
gr - grains. The weight of a bullet. 5.56x45mm (standard AR-15) uses bullet weights as low as 55gr, and as high as mid-70s. Lighter bullets are easier to push faster (which is why AR-15 rifles tend to be pushing bullets to 3200fps with pretty minimal recoil).
fps - feet per second, usually measured at the muzzle. Bullets slow down as they head down range, due to air resistance.
Bullets don't travel in a straight line; the second they leave the barrel, gravity is acting on them, and they're getting pulled down. So you're always shooting in an arc. For short ranges, that arc is pretty negligible. For a long range shot, you may need to be pointing significantly higher than your target. In the case of the rifle pictured, you should need to aim about 13' above a target that's 1000 yards away in order to have your bullet hit (that's your "hold over"). If there's wind--and there almost always is--you're going to need to compensate for that by aiming to the right or left ("windage"). A spotter makes this much easier; your spotter should be trainer to read winds. They should also be trained to see where the bullet hits, so you can make an adjustment, e.g., one target to the left, one half target low.
(I've only gotten to shoot longer range a handful of times, the last time with a spotter, and the spotter made it so easy to get on target. Check out 9HoleReviews on YouTube for examples of how that works with a really excellent marksman and spotter.)
Anti-materiel is it's primary purpose. For that 14.5mm beats the .338. The pictured weapons are for penetrating engine blocks that are stationary or moving with simple motion, within a greater effective range, not body armour (but will all the same). Long range extreme precision is secondary but is still a feature of 50cal and 14.5mm (top 3 records sniper kills are with a 50cal/14.5mm: #3 is actually with one of those type rifles).
Maybe it's just easily accessible ammo.
Yeah, other calibers are available, but this might be the most abundant around.
You forget it's not a precision rifle, and it's not meant to be used against Infantry directly. It's accuracy isnt meant to be measured in minute of angle but instead minute of APC
I think the proper term for these are anti-materiel rifle. Made for stopping vehicles.
...it says that in the title
The title was edited between my post & yours I guess.
Fair enough I didn't notice that
I like the plan, and it looks good, but I just feel that dual wielding them may not work.
I think this is how you get Americans back interested in helping Ukraine. Girl with ridiculously big guns.
Not just American's, all guys (and some gals) are horny for that
I'm an American guy and horny for guns. The woman is just a nice addition.
Are those massive silencers on the end or something else?
Never seen a rifle that large before.
Could also be massive muzzle brakes. That rifle must kick like a horse on five different kinds of steroids.
A muzzle brake is not a closed cylinder. There would also be no reason to make it that long.
yeah, I'm European, I don't know shit about guns
I have to ask: You are aware that you have no idea what you are talking about, yet you felt the need to answer him? Can you explain why? This is an extremely common thing for people to do, so it is very interesting to hear (if possible) what your train of thought was.
I'm not sure that beating up on someone who decides to say that they aren't familiar with something and are retracting an earlier suggestion is a good idea. Seems likely to lead to people not retracting things even when they think that they might not be correct.
I simply want to understand the thought process. I appreciate that they acknowledge it to begin with.
Since we're all going off what is visible and nothing more: the outer bits seem to be fabric, maybe those are dirt covers?
Suppressors tend to get very hot very quickly. This produces a mirage effect when looking through the scope. Wraps made of high temperature materials help mitigate that and also allow the shooter to remove the suppressor without having to wait until it cools down.
They are suppressors (a.k.a. silencers). They work just like your car's muffler and both were invented by the same guy: the grandson of the inventor of the Maxim machine gun.
It will certainly not make these monster guns movie-quiet but it reduces their massive sound and flash signature making it harder to locate where they were shot from.
Well that's a cool TIL.
Flash suppressors. Snipers are very high-value targets.
Flash hiders maybe? Idk
Certainly looks that way. As if it wasn't big enough already. In most pictures I have seen they have only muzzle brakes, but in some they clearly have suppressors. A useful side-effect may be to reduce the visible muzzle fire for night operation.
*supressors
What's the difference?
"Silencer" is the older and frankly BS term. Silencers don't silence anything outside of video games and movies. They more "suppress" the noise and muffle it a bit.
Basically it's the difference of firing it outside and having your ears ring forever or just for a long time
It's not a BS term it is the patented term used by Percy Maxim when he invented it.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US916885
Fair enough, but it when most people hear the name, they expect what they see in media and not what it is in real life
They make nothing silent, it's a false term
It's a Supressor
That's quite a suppressor.
Compare to an M4 carbine, the current US issue rifle (not a suppressor on an M4, but the whole weapon):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M4_carbine
Holy crap that's a good point. My current AR setup is 8.2lbs fully done up. That's a huge can.
Those things conveniently double as a flag pole at a rural Ford dealership.
For when you need to kill a whole company standing in a line
That thing looks like it can cause some serious damage, even to things that are relatively well hardened.
Like, what would happen if a sniper fired that gun into the barrel of a T-80 that had an HE shell loaded?
Don't have to hit the barrels they usually aim for weak spots hoping for penetration then the round bounces around inside taking everyone out.
Anti-material rifles were initially designed to take out tanks. However all modern tanks have thick enough armor to deflect its bullets.
Now APC's, trucks, vans, and most engines and electronics are destroyed by these rounds. Hence the anti-material label now.
Given some of the antique tanks the Russians pulled out of the moth ball heap, it might still be an anti-tank-weapon occasionally ...
Would it be possible to ruin the barrel by shooting at it from the side? Or would it just ricochet?
The barrel is thicker than the armor on tanks. Usually they weigh in at over 2 tons of steel. The circular shape also makes it very likely to deflect the impact like sloped armor.
It might make a little ding in the paint.
They are designed to withstand huge pressures while maintaining their structure.
It would be hard to get the angle just right to get the bullet all the way down the barrel without it impacting the sides of the barrel
Bullets are deflected along surprisingly sharp bends in a barrel (or any other pipe), so it would be sufficient to hit the tank gun muzzle roughly from the front, and it would probably hit a loaded projectile.
Technically, it would be sufficient of they lodge a bullet into the barrel. As soon as the tank fires, the bullet will wedge between the shell and the barrel, destroying - at least - the barrel.
Kaboom, I believe.
That thing might be able to kill someone just by the bullet passing by them.
No.
I want one.
Bitches love cannons
I like finding all these tfs-references
Alucard in the background police girl!
"Bitches love cannons!"
Those would be overkill if you went blue whale hunting. Yikes haha
I always wanted to shoot the Halo sniper rifle
thats some anime type shit here. What happens when you fire that thing? are you gonna be flung back loneytoons style?
It's to kill alligators, right? Right?
More like Krokodil and the people high on it:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desomorphine
Cobra assault cannon...state of the art bang-bang!
I don't really see the real benefit.
Assuming a BC of 1.05--I'm using the BC for a match-grade .50 BMG bullet, which might be high--and using a 921gr bullet with a 3300fps muzzle velocity, you're going to see about a 13' drop at 1000y. That's pretty significant.
If you compare that to a .338 Lapua Magnum, .685 BC , 250gr at 3030fps, you end up with a 18' drop at 1000y. Also significant.
So it's a bigger, heavier rifle, and it will definitely go through body armor, but you aren't really seeing a huge gain in functional range, and the ammunition (since 14.5x44mm is an HMG bullet) is likely not nearly as consistent as .338LM and so likely not as consistent at long range.
They aren't looking to shoot at soldiers with these things, they are for taking out vehicles and equipment.
I understood some of those words
BC - ballistic coefficient. How your bullet reacts to the air. It's a combination of weight and shape of the bullet. Higher is better for long-range shooting.
gr - grains. The weight of a bullet. 5.56x45mm (standard AR-15) uses bullet weights as low as 55gr, and as high as mid-70s. Lighter bullets are easier to push faster (which is why AR-15 rifles tend to be pushing bullets to 3200fps with pretty minimal recoil).
fps - feet per second, usually measured at the muzzle. Bullets slow down as they head down range, due to air resistance.
Bullets don't travel in a straight line; the second they leave the barrel, gravity is acting on them, and they're getting pulled down. So you're always shooting in an arc. For short ranges, that arc is pretty negligible. For a long range shot, you may need to be pointing significantly higher than your target. In the case of the rifle pictured, you should need to aim about 13' above a target that's 1000 yards away in order to have your bullet hit (that's your "hold over"). If there's wind--and there almost always is--you're going to need to compensate for that by aiming to the right or left ("windage"). A spotter makes this much easier; your spotter should be trainer to read winds. They should also be trained to see where the bullet hits, so you can make an adjustment, e.g., one target to the left, one half target low.
(I've only gotten to shoot longer range a handful of times, the last time with a spotter, and the spotter made it so easy to get on target. Check out 9HoleReviews on YouTube for examples of how that works with a really excellent marksman and spotter.)
Anti-materiel is it's primary purpose. For that 14.5mm beats the .338. The pictured weapons are for penetrating engine blocks that are stationary or moving with simple motion, within a greater effective range, not body armour (but will all the same). Long range extreme precision is secondary but is still a feature of 50cal and 14.5mm (top 3 records sniper kills are with a 50cal/14.5mm: #3 is actually with one of those type rifles).
Maybe it's just easily accessible ammo.
Yeah, other calibers are available, but this might be the most abundant around.
You forget it's not a precision rifle, and it's not meant to be used against Infantry directly. It's accuracy isnt meant to be measured in minute of angle but instead minute of APC