British tech has always been about weirdos in sheds making things that just work. We should get George from Robot Wars to come up with some crazy drone design that decapitates people and mass produce it to clear out the Donbas.
this post was submitted on 12 Mar 2025
212 points (98.2% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
7165 readers
497 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Believe it or not Arthur 'Two Sheds' Jackson got his nickname from his sheds
Used the a2 in combat with the hk ugl and it kills baddies just fine a1 was gash
I worked at HK on the SA80 and was piece of work everytime, damn sheet metal garbage
Just stop giving money to leadership and give it to engineers after they come up with a good design.
Ah, the silicon valley startup approach.
You end up with maybe 10% good projects, 70% grifters and 20% projects that seem great to the engineers but have limited practical use.
Yeh but thats a fantastic return compared to 1% good projects , 50% of which never get finished and 49% of which never get started yet somehow 100% of them go 500% over budget.
I read this with my VR headset in 3D while in the Metaverse.
You know, I actually wonder if there's a universal law at play here. Maybe the same budget and the same ability to project accountability always gets the same return. To fund every good idea in a short period you have to fund a certain amount of bad or nonexistent ones.
That's what they get for letting the EM-2 die in favor of conforming with NATO standardization of 7.62x51mm.
So now straight up facts are noncredible?
Someone hasn't been following the news recently, credible and non-credible have flipped this year.
They should just adopt the zip 22.
Hands down the most reliable, and powerful small caliber platform ever conceived.
Wait, I know I'm late to the party, but is that a bullpup sniper rifle?
Why.
I can't see how a sniper rifle benefits from any of the positives of a bull-pup save for maybe the shorter profile being easier to store. Something a folding stalk would do just as well.
Why?
Not at all familiar with the gun. Please tell me it's a regular rifle intented for a designated marksmen and not a real sniper rifle. I see the optic which pushes me in that direction
The SA80 is one of the early examples of the push to give everyone an optic.
While the SA80 is a service rifle, there is a prominent bull pup sniper. In the early 80s, Walther made the WA2000. It was intended for urban counterterror operations, so it focused on portability and quick setup.
they only made 176 WA2000s and no military wanted them
e:no shade btw, that gun is super interesting
That wood furnishing was just too sexy for the military
I mean, the shorter profile with the full barrel gives you the mostest boolet speed in a compact package, best used for urban combat where there's a lot of walls and cover interfering with a full-size rifle.
There are bullpup snipers, tho - DesertTech makes a couple and Barrett has the model 99 (more an anti-materiel rifle).
The Green Meanie? No, the magazine is in front of the trigger.
No, the SA80. I'm very familiar with the beautiful L96A1.
Looks like I was wrong though and the SA80 is supposed to be a service rifle. Look man, I'm tired, allow me some stupidity
Zach was literally the first person I thought of when I saw this image lmao
Shout out to Sine_Fine_Belli who originally posted this over on R*ddit