this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2024
405 points (98.3% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
6623 readers
575 users here now
A community for your defence shitposting needs
Rules
1. Be nice
Do not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.
2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes
If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.
3. Content must be relevant
Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.
4. No racism / hatespeech
No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.
5. No politics
We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.
6. No seriousposting
We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.
7. No classified material
Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.
8. Source artwork
If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.
9. No low-effort posts
No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.
10. Don't get us banned
No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.
11. No misinformation
NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.
Join our Matrix chatroom
Other communities you may be interested in
- !militaryporn@lemmy.world
- !forgottenweapons@lemmy.world
- !combatvideos@sh.itjust.works
- !militarymoe@ani.social
Banner made by u/Fertility18
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I was in the 🇫🇮 military for a few years so my service weapon was the RK 62 and I've seen some 95s, and the drip rifle doesn't look like either - especially not the 95 which looks much more "modern", iirc doesn't have a stockless variant (edit: nvm the drip has a folding stock but way different compared to the 95), has a different kind of muzzle device etc. 62 doesn't really match either, controls look different, the gas tube on the drip is way more AK-ish when on the 62 it's kinda blockier, etc. In general the drip one looks more like a classic stereotypical AK than Sako's stuff.
Dunno what this drip one is actually. It's a more classic AK pattern but I'm not that deep into pew pews to be able to guess the manufacturer
edit: I know gold plated Sakos exist though, so I don't doubt you saw one, just saying this one isn't it 😁
I did my service in the late 90's and a gun just like on the picture above was on display at the gun exhibit at the RUK main hall. It was of course heavily modified according to the wishes of the buyer, but built upon the basic RK-95 frame.
Here's a link that somewhat matches my memories:
https://metsastysjakalastus.fi/sakon-aseaarteet-sako-rk-95-762x39-kultainen-ase/
EDIT:
It is completely possible I am wrong. There are bound to be a large number of gilded AK-variants in the arab courts, everyone probably wanted their own after the first one got them. The picture does match my memory, but it was a long time ago...
Oh yeah like I said they've made a bunch of gold plated ones and I've likely seen the same gold plated RK you have, but they still look very much like Sako, like the one on that page:
Looks like the drip I posted is a Chinese Type 56-1 at least according to reddit and I'd tend to agree, because you'd need to modify a Sako really heavily to make it look that much like an AK, and I doubt Sako would bother since they'd have to custom make everything including the receiver. They do customize stuff but that wouldn't be customization, but a whole 'nother gun with practically no common parts except maybe some of the guts (even the charging handle is "wrong" for RK95 so the bolt carrier would have to be custom)
Yep, after comparing both images more closely I am now certain that I was wrong. The structural dissimilarities are simply too great, even for a heavily modified model.
This is a good reminder for me to keep my facts straight before I start claiming truths online, based on just memories from quarter a century ago ;)
Thank you for kindly showing me my mistake!
That's the shit part about human memory: you never really know if you brain is lying to you or not.
You went with your best knowledge and then changed your view when it turned out you weren't right, and that's pretty much the best anybody can do.
True.
I think I've reached the age where finding out I've been wrong about something isn't all that bad. Accept and examine the presented facts and you just learn something new. And there's no shame in that.