/k/ - Weapons

>A pistol? What is that?

Wow, the economy is doing pretty well right now. It would be impossible for something drastically bad to happen in, say, the next 20 years. I am going use my family's saved funds to purchase stock in a bunch of factories.

Boy I sure wish the Bulgarians don't invade Serbia next year

>>655563

>His dad bought him a self-loader

>Enjoy_your_jam.telegram

Sidearm development peaked in 1887, we're going to be using revolvers until some nut actually gets teleforce-kill-rays up and running (protip: they won't).

>>655568

Nah, that's all going to blow over and be forgotten in a year or two. Nicholas and the Russian Empire would crush them if they did and everyone knows it.

>>655567

Invest in military zeppelins, if you look at the potential developments in that field they are going to completely dominate the next round of colonial wars, and you are going to make an absolute killing if you buy in now.

I'm thinking of buying some nice house in Maubeuge. What do you lads think?

This frontier land was cheap though the summers are too short and the winters harsh, they say a trans-Canadian railway is to be built nearby, I hear they’re already importing chinamen from across the pacific and many are staying in the western lands. Though I say it’ll be a challenge to cross the rocky mountains. Anyways I hear tensions in Europe are rising, I wonder if war breaks out, how we’ll defend against the Americans, surely they’re still fiendish towards Britan and our dominion, though it’s of little concern to me. The farm is hard work and it’s my only focus, I’ll be too busy helping father, and town is too long a ride to ever see a chance of getting a newspaper. Perhaps once they get mail closer to our homestead Father can write a letter to uncle back in Pomerania.

>>655570

>Nicholas and the Russian Empire would crush them if they did and everyone knows it.

Surely you jest. You mean the Russian empire that lost to Mongoloids? They’re on their way out, if the Japanese can rise out of the Iron Age and beat Russia, the Prussian army will arrive in Moscow in a matter of weeks, France won’t even be an issue, sure the king George V and the Kaiser have been at odds but they’ll team up to beat the French. The Prussians will march through Paris again 30 years after the Franco-Prussian war.

>>655572

You mean Malbode, right?

It's a quiet city. I have been there just last year while traveling the northern parts of France for business purposes. The old library is very beautiful.

>>655570

>still using revolvers

Ahoy, 1800s calling! They want their technology back, old man!

>that's all going to blow over and be forgotten in a year or two

I agree. The white army will probably end those Balkan struggles soon. Shame, I was already looking forwards to reading about the war in the papers.

>military zeppelins

I am more inclined to think that the machines of Monsieur Cornu will lead the world in the not too distant future. Especially those capable of stationary flight appear to be most useful. I imagine it would be quite the comfortable pastime to drink beer and talk about the progress the Russians are making on this front or the other.

>>655573

Do not fear. War in Europe is as unlikely as man ever reaching the moon.

>Guns

Katana don't need reloading.

>>655581

A maxim gun only has to reload every two hundred and fifty savages.

>>655576

I think you're underestimating the number of serfs he can conscript. Granted, losing that war to the Japs was about as humiliating things can get - but that was clearly due to their problems at sea. When has Russia ever been a naval power? Shift the war to an area where they can just keep shipping soldiers as fast as the trains can carry them though, and things change dramatically. Now, you and I may not find it attractive or skilled, but even with Germany and the Autrohungarians against them Russia wins that fight ten times out of ten. I mean come on! You'd need to engineer some kind of catastrophic revolution or other kind of social collapse to give the central powers a chance there!

>>655579

>They want their technology back, old man!

I used the Mk.IV in South Africa back in that unpleasantness with the Dutchies down there and could not give you a single reason not to own and love one. What's your little futurist pop-gun loaded with by the way? Anyone who trusts something smaller than .455 Webley deserves everything that happens to them. Those new 'hollow point' manstopper rounds will stop a Gorilla with any hit to centre-mass.

>I was already looking forwards to reading about the war in the papers

Eh, come on, you know that all the European Royals are related now. It's one thing to send a strongly worded communique, but you don't go to war with family. Ever. We're never going to see another European war again.

>Promoting baguette powered whirlybird deathtraps that will never be more than toys for overly wealthy thrill-seekers

Now you're just being silly. Zeppelins are clearly the vehicle for the future, there's literally no downside to them.

>I imagine it would be quite the comfortable pastime to drink beer and talk about the progress the Russians are making on this front or the other

While you're being shaken about by those huge fan things that power it I'll be sat at the in-flight bar, sipping a nice sweet Riesling, and wondering if it's worth wandering through to the zeppelins casino to check if there's a free seat at the Baccarat table.

Boy I sure do love to have my entire economy rely on saltpeter exports.

Fully globalized economies are the future, so long as the world as a whole does well, we do well, and it'd take a cathastrophe to ruin that.

>>655597

>clearly due to their problems at sea

Then why did they get their asses handed to them on land as well?

You guys hear about the Federal Reserve Act going through Congress right now? I hope it helps this country!

>>655622

The actual honest 1913 everyman's response to this would be

What are you talking about? No. What's that?

oh gee I really love my 99.95% white countries

Who would be the best European power to colonize the chaotic mess that is China in case the Japs or Russians don't conquer it first?

Those bug-people will scarcely be able to govern themselves given the absymal results of their "modernization" thus far.

Are we just gonna keep letting these spics bring their bullshit war over the border?

It was funny and all to watch them kill each other, but now they're crossing over raping and killing Americans.

Fucking animals, I've signed on because of it and just got out of training. Loving my Springfield, it's a really nifty gun. I just hope we don't get dragged into any future conflict in Europe. I've got family in England and Germany, and I'm not so comfortable with shooting at either of them. Besides, who the fuck knows what kind of super weapons they have now.

>>655629

>irish flag

>implying you'll ever be independent

Ha! The Brits will have to fuck things up big time for that to happen

Bohemia ain't free. The stills of beer need to be litterd by the blood of Austrians. Franz "old stroll" Joseph the first, aka "fans hungarian wurst" is not my emperor. He is an Austrian occupant and probably absolutist as well :DD. ROMANOVS and panslavism, not federationalism and HABSBURGS, ok? Praise Masaryk.

>>655642

Well, so long as you don't touch the Slovaks you'll probably get away without the Magyars having an autistic shitfit

Maybe Wilhelm wasn’t so wrong after all. I mean Bismarck’s concern was to secure peace in Europe and with the provocation of the old powers by seeking colonies, building the 20% fleet, and eclipsing both of the old ones in population size and industrial output, it would all deload in some grand war.

The first signs of the supposed coming conflict were the Morocco crisis, that ‘Made in Germany’ scandal and the call of the destruction of Carthage, aka Krautland.

Thank god it won’t happen or I may have to change my second name from Mueller to Muller.

>>655646

Nice shooter, but .45 lacks velocity and is a bit overkill. Browning ought to opt for a smaller and faster cartridge. I think that 9x19mm round in Europe would be perfect. Just imagine a magazine fed semi-auto pistol with more than ten rounds.

>>655597

>What's your little futurist pop-gun loaded with by the way?

It uses 7.63×25mm (.30 Mauser). But your ignorance of the fact that diameter of the bore is not the only factor to have an effect on lethality shows your simplistic spirit.

>Now, you and I may not find it attractive or skilled, but even with Germany and the Autrohungarians against them Russia wins that fight ten times out of ten.

They said that about the Franco-Prussian war, and we are still celebrating every second of September. It doesn't matter how many serfs the czar can send to the battlefields. If he can't equip them and ship them faster than we can get our guns to Moscow, he will end in our camps and forced to sign a treaty. I am telling you, the future of warfare is all about speed. The fastest army will win. This is why I asked to be assigned to a cavalry unit.

I am certain the same will be true at sea. With modern guns armouor is useless anyways.

>We're never going to see another European war again.

Oh, I wasn't referring to a Russo-Austrian war, or even a European war. All that would happen would be small skirmishes between Russian troops and local Austrian law enforcement, and then the Habsburgs would cede control of the area to the Czar. It's not like anyone would voluntarily go to war with Russia over the Balkans.

>there's literally no downside to them.

Besides the immense costs of production. How could anyone afford an aluminium structure that large? If there were an accident, or (god forbid) some Slavic rebels were to blow one up, thousands of tonns of this prescious material would go down. While I must admit, a Zepplin catastrophe would be far slower and more gentle than a heaver-than-air catastrophe, the immense financial damage caused would scare away most investors.

Thus I turn your insult around. Heavier-than-air vehicles will be the ones of the common man getting from position A to position B, while lighter-than-air transportation will be affordable only to the rich and royal in the foreseeable future.

>>655632

Just look at the results of the Sino-Japanese war. China will get swallowed whole by the Japanese within the next decade, and while the Russian navy is still recovering from their last loss against the Japanese, the czar will not dare to engage in that area either.

It is going to end quickly, and the Japanese will turn into quite the adversary, with all the (human) resources available to them in China.

Maybe we will see a great Euro-Asiatic war after that. Surely: a good opportunity for the European empires to work together against a common enemy.

>>655642

Shut up, peasant, or we will bring our Maxims to Prague.

>>655646

Another friend of automatics, I see. How does the detachable magazine work out for you?

>>655653

If it's good enough for the US Army it's good enough for me, what would you know anything about it?

>>655661

From shooting at injuns for a bit, it's been working out just fine.

I AM ANGRY

ANGRY ABOUT GERMANS

We just got out of two exhausting wars,artillery shells and ammo are depleted and people are tired of fighting. I sure hope nobody does anything stupid.

>>655701

Yeah, like murdering a king to be or something

>>655694

Why must you hate us so?

The Kaiserreich would not be opposed to letting the Polish people form their own puppet Nation in the aftermath of some future war against the Russian Empire Alsace-Lorraine is giving us enough administrative troubles as is.

>>655701

>wanting to be permanently landlocked and separated from your brothers on the other end of the Drina when the krauts annex Bosnia.

>>655661

>the future of warfare is all about speed

Oh, Germany, your wide eyed futurism can be so charming. Speed is a significant factor, but war isn't going to get much quicker than it is at the moment. How would your artillery going to keep up? Are you planning to mount the howitzers on some kind of moving metal box? Even if you could manage that how are you going to move the barbed wire forwards at that kind of speed?

>It's not like anyone would voluntarily go to war with Russia over the Balkans

God, can you even imagine a world that crazy?! It would make about as much sense as us siding with the French against our German friends and cousins over some bullshit little nothing like Belgium.

>Heavier-than-air vehicles will be the ones of the common man getting from position A to position B, while lighter-than-air transportation will be affordable only to the rich and royal in the foreseeable future.

Even if I accept your points about construction costs the risks involved in heavier than air flight - and the commensurate rise in insurance costs - would ensure that only the hyper-wealthy are able to afford even a short trip in one. Things that are heavier than air do not float for a reason.

>>655694

wait, I thought this was '1913 /k/' rather than business as usual?

>>655708

Exactly,that would be horrible,wouldn't it.

>>655709

Make sure you stop for sandwich at Schiller's bro.

>>655731

We sure have come a long way from being landlocked country with sizable population being in other country haven't we .

>>655749

Gosh that all must have cost you nearly 500$ how might you afford such lavish items? I wish I had money to blow on an automobile, though it is quite the useless contraption. It’ll never replace the horse as the common man’s transportation.

>>655720

I often thought Bismarck should have annexed Austria proper for a truly unified Germany, then you would access to the Mediterranean as well. Though these days it seems like it was for the better to allow the Habsburgs to keep their empire, I cannot imagine unrest will grow, the Balkans will never be fully stable but nothing of any large impact will occur I can assure you. It seems the Reich is low on allies though, Britan is friendly but the tensions over the Kaiser’s fleet, and German industry may antagonize them. Perhaps the collapse of the Ottoman states will sharpen up relations. Anatolia, the Middle East and North African could be dived up to everyone’s satisfaction.

I don't know about you guys but I think the big dick waving surface navies of our time might soon turn out to be some kind of meme, it is not unfeasible for the majority of future naval engagements to happen below water given recent advancements in the realm of seagoing submarines.

Large Battleships and the like might soon be relegated to mere artillery support during landing operations and carrying seaborne heavier-than-air reconnaissance craft.

Once said seaborne aerodynes become capable of carrying proper armaments as far as flying machines go it is not unreasonable to expect most conventional surface navies to gradually retire the majority of their current surface vessels in favor of submarines serving the same role, with the sole remaining surface warships being submarine hunting seaplane tenders and anti-air destroyers.

Discovery of Atlantis fucking when?

>>655752

I wisely invested my salary during my time fighting in the Philippines and boy, am I glad I went down there to have fun in the sun instead of freezing my toes off up in the Klondike looking for gold. Those Moros didn't know when to quit though.

>>655753

>majority of future naval engagements to happen below water given recent advancements in the realm of seagoing submarines

I don't know, it didn't work so well the first time we tried it with the Turtle during the revolution and the Southerners' own H.L. Hunley sank twice during testing killing all of her crew twice including her inventor before being lost a third and final time and taking her crew with her to a watery grave. Traveling and fighting beneath the waves just seems suicidal

>>655661

>or we will bring our Maxims to Prague.

Who is "we"? I don't recognise that flag of yours. It looks kind of like a scrambled flag of Belgium. ARe you a Belgian?

>>655761

>Traveling and fighting beneath the waves just seems suicidal

On a river it certainly does, but modern day steel construction of seagoing submarine warships appears to be alot more robust than that of their unfortunate pioneers.

Besides, there is hardly a more discrete way outside of mines to attack a surface vessel on the open sea other than firing a torpedo just below the surface and then diving the heck out of dodge.

Torpedoes are currently somewhat limited due to their low speed and visibility on the surface of the water, but once someone inevitably attaches some kind of wire or god forbid, radio control mechanism to these things allowing them to be remotely steered once fired it will surely be open dreadnaught season on the high seas for a time.

I shudder to think what might happen to wartime shipping convoys once someone figures out how to refill the onboard Oxygen reserves of a submarine without surfacing.

test

>>655763

It’s the flag of the German confederation, haven’t you read a history book? He’s a liberal Pan-Germanist type, like those scoundrels students who started the revolutions in 1848. He wants a constitution, Freedom of speech, right to arms and freedom of press. Rather silly if you ask me.

>>655780

You’ve got your telegraph sounder working?

>>655743

>Are you planning to mount the howitzers on some kind of moving metal box?

Don't be ridiculous. Have you seen the flimsy automobiles the French are constructing? They can hardly stay together while driving on well paved roads! No, I am thinking about reducing the size of artillery pieces and machine guns to a point where they can be easily drawn on horse carriages. Cavalry is going to become a lot more interesting in the near future. I am sure.

>barbed wire

Come again. The transmission line must be damaged. What purpose would barbed wire have in warfare?

>>655749

I assume that's a Model of 1892, firing a .30-40 cartridge. But why are you still shooting those outdated rounded-tip projectiles, when you could easily switch to a pointed ones and drastically increase the range of your rifle?

>>655784

>He wants a constitution, Freedom of speech, right to arms and freedom of press.

Those items, but under the rule of a common German Kaiser.

>>655813

>why are you still shooting those outdated rounded-tip projectiles

They were all that was available at the local general store and I was a bit overeager to use my rifle. I also think the sights are calibrated for round nose bullets

>>655825

Anyways, that is certainly a very nice weapon you got yourself, and I am sure you won't need more than three kilometers of range for mere hunting purposes.

Defence might be a different problemthough. What if those Indians >>655663 mentioned got their hands on spitzer bullets and decided to pick off travellers from a long way away? Being capable of dealing with them from afar would be wise.

Damn. Aren't round nosed bullets a lot more expensive than spitzer ones these days?

>>655813

>Cavalry is going to become a lot more interesting in the near future. I am sure.

I'm sure you're correct, but you can't seriously be postulating an entirely mounted army (which you'd need to make speed more of a factor than it is today)? Can you? As much as the idea of an entire army of dragoons supported by horse-drawn guns sounds bloody marvellous where would you breed a sufficient number of horses of the appropriate quality? I know that their numbers can be increased, but not nearly to the levels needed for this without severely damaging the agriculture of the nation that tried it. Besides, such a mobile army would be spread out too far for a general to control it, a bugle can only be heard so far away.

>What purpose would barbed wire have in warfare?

Hamstringing your lightning advances for one thing. The future of war is looking more and more static and long range focused, and placing an obstacle like that in the path of your opponents advance would stop it dead in its tracks.

>>655884

>Muh landsherps!

Even if you did build them they'd be too slow to be worth a damn. A weapon you can defeat by walking away from it (at twice the speed it can achieve) is not exactly terrifying. How much armour would they need to clad the thing in to keep it from being wiped out the moment it came in range of the enemies heavy guns too?

>>655887

Exactly, warfare is too mobile for "muh landships" autism. It's not like there's drawn out medieval-style sieges and lines anymore, it's retarded.

>>655890

Even on an entirely static front they'd be knocked out by the defenders artillery long before they became useful. Actually, that could be a use for them, have colossal blocks of armour plating on wheels advancing just ahead of the men to draw artillery fire away from them. I know it's ridiculous, but it could be useful if the life of the individual soldier became important for some reason.

>>655896

>if the life of the individual soldier became important for some reason.

Bloody good joke, chap. Besides I doubt they’ll be of any use, Artillery is basically front line guns, they’ll be the first thing to spot any metal bunker moving around a field. The concept is flawed change it to a highly mobile automobile with an artillery piece and you have guns that can keep up with the foot soldiers and the Calvary.

On that matter of Calvary the Hun is completely off, it’s almost as if the Prussians haven’t hear of machine guns, the Americans issue four (4!) machine guns per entire regiment. With that much firepower and the averaged solider’s rifle carrying 5 rounds, ours’ 10 in their rifle horse Calvary and dragoon’s will be held in reserve only for mopping up a retreating force or for use in harsher terrain. The future of warfare is long, mobile front lines with artillery guns placed intermittently perhaps 50-100 metres behind the front line soliders. Engagements will be held at no closer than 300 metres unless fighting is occurring in a town or forest. Perhaps a set of armoured plates or a pile of sandbags on a wagon to be pushed in front of soliders as they advance. With frontlines being kilometres long overextended enemies will be encircled in manoeuvres taking place across hundreds of metres. This is the future field phones bring us, making such manoeuvres possible because of our constant communication.

>>655899

pardon my grammar it’s nearly 4am and I haven’t slept well in a fortnight, my sleep schedule is buggered and I am not entirely with it, I hope I’m not insitutionalized, I swear it’s not madness.

>>655917

>Warfare in such a scope would be economically untenable.

Frequent wars are a thing of the past. While my family fought for Friedrich the Great, those times are over. Today’s war’s will be once a century at most and on such large scale due to unbelievable levels of connection and communication. Wars will be decided by a single battle which will be bloody and costly but will last little more than a month. Fortifications are useless because of the speed of the armies nowadays, I tell you long frontline battles are the way forward now that each man has the firepower of 5.

>Maybe the Americans could, but their tiny little army is barely big enough to defeat the spanish of all people. I met a yank mountainman the other month, come to climb our mountains he had. Over a beer he told me of what he though for America’s future: a world power he said. I couldn’t help but laugh at him, such a pitiful empire with a divided population can never become great. Plus they’re almost as empty in the middle as we are, their only advantage is idustrial power, but what good is that when you’re isolated from the world in Europe? At least our population is united under the King regardless of which party we elect.

>And their ignorance of European affairs is quite a blessing, really.

They’re far too isolated to care, I say that America will never take part in a war outside of the new world, or in defence of their new Asian islands, though I fail to see how they’ll hold them.

>On the topic of machine guns, it comes as no suprise our beloved Kaiser even bought some out of his own pocket, so impressed was he with their potential.

Yet you’ve joined with the cavalry? Are you not bothered with charging into that maddeningly fast fire on a horse? Though I’m sure I’m glad cousin Bill see’s their use and purchased some from the Empire, he may be closer to the Czar but I know most of us British citizens are respectful of our Germanic cousins. Besides anyone who rivals the French is okay in our books, though I only hope Quebec doesn’t go up in rebellion should we ever war against France again.

Also, how do you guys our new Feldgrau uniforms? In dawn or dusk or fog or mist, our soldiers will be all but invisible!

It’s a coward’s tool to hide himself in battle. Next you’ll be toting armour plates and hiding in the grass.

>And it looks a damn sight better than that British toddler-diarrhea khaki.

Just what I’d expect from a nation without any experience in Africa. If you had half the experience fighting the negros in Africa or even a third of the colonial land we have you’d see where our focus is. Besides when will the Empire ever fight a European land battle?

>What I'm more concerned about than anything is Austria-Hungary. These KuK fools used to be our rival and enemy for so long and beating on them used to be a fun pastime. I believe no good can come of this alliance.

I still think the kleindeutsche Lösung, was the wrong choice, Bismarck ought to have offered the Habsburgs regional monarchy over Austria proper and the south German Czechs, Hungary and the Balkans be dammed. Those regions will be a liability for them and for you. No “great war” will come of it but some unrest will cause those inbred nobels to make demands and send in their troops to quell the issue. You’ll be forced to help if the Austro-Hungarian troops are too incompetent least you look a fool for your alliance with them. And Russia won’t like any action taken against other Slavs. Worst case senario the Reich will have to pay for proper troops to help the Austrians and Russia will fund rebels. But on the other hand who will the Kaiser turn to for friendship? The Italians? The Danes?

You won't believe what happened today lads. So I come back from work with my friend George (A great man I might say, he comes from a family with great military history) and I invite him to my household for a drink. Anyway, after an hour or two our discussion takes us to military matters and my wife out of nowhere interferes and asks "Why are women not allowed to join the army?" with a stupid look on her face. I was furious. I immediately took my belt off and reminded her of who's in charge here, then I threatened her with kicking her out of the house. My good friend George however put some sense into me before things could get out of control. "Why would somebody whip a woman before throwing her out of a house?".

If it wasn't for him that whore would be out in the streets begging right now.

>>655930

All these strange efforts to get women out of the house and into the street pretending to be men as of late worry me.

Could it be part of some villainous marxist plot to destabilize the great nations of man?

>>655930

>Why would somebody whip a woman before throwing her out of a house?

At least he can talk, who is he?

>>655937

He's a real big guy

>>655930

>Why are women not allowed to join the army?

I hope you spanked her in the non-lewd way >implying it can be non-lewd back to her senses. If I were you I’d put her in a uniform with a pack her own weight and march her through a rain storm in the mud until she’s back to her senses. Unless you’re a Turk, then just honour kill her and focus on your other wives.

Ha-ha faggots, in 100 years you're going to be sooo fucked 8(V)

>>656066

I know you colonial farmers don't get much education out in the wilds, but even you should know that the flag displayed above those publications is that of an ottoman province in the location of former ancient greek territory.

>>656132

>faggot

>"male homosexual," 1914, American English slang, probably from earlier contemptuous term for "woman" (1590s), especially an old and unpleasant one, in reference to faggot "bundle of sticks," as something awkward that has to be carried (compare baggage "worthless woman," 1590s).

https://www.etymonline.com/word/faggot

Get your ass out of here.

>>656137

>defending a lame joke by posting dictionary definitions in an attempt to "prove" me wrong

I always knew Germans were autistic retards.

>>656143

after in 1914

>>655936

You know who's responsible for this? LIBERALS. That's right, these "liberty" totin' degenerates thinking we should be ruled by the mob. First they asked for the wealthy to have a say, now the poor, and I guarantee you women will be next and household pets right after! One would think that people would be wiser after what happened in France with Napoleon, but no, "TRUE LIBERALISM HAS NEVER BEEN TRIED". Stupid wankers.

>>656101

Right, and the Ottomen Turks have colonized the area have they not?

>>656163

It’s better than the conservatives, they’d just as soon empty out the cities and send us all back to serfdom. The liberals just want inalienable rights for men. No one believes that women or the lesser races are capable of enough intelligence to understand let alone have rights. Liberals merely want the freedom to speak their ideology, no one is saying we establish a democracy separate from the King, the royal family will always have the last say. As the hun said he wants to be able to own guns and say what he wants, this doesn’t go against his Kaiser and none but a few radicals will use these freedoms for ill.

>>656132

>>656139

Get out of this fucking thread you idiot, you're obviously underage because you're breaking character and posting gore when you're angry like an edgy little cunt.

>>656066

She'll be pretty ragged after that experience, give her a lewd spanking as a treat and then tell her that you're going to spend a week with your mistress (in the flat you keep for her on the other side of town) so wifey doesn't have to worry about pleasing you and can spend a few days reflecting on what she's learned. She'll like that and be grateful for the consideration you've shown her.

>>656167

Come on Canada, you know that the monarchy has been neutered since the civil war. The last time the monarch refused assent to a bill was 1707 for Christs sake.