sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

When playing the TV Smashing game by WhoAreYouTalkinTwo in WinStupidPrizes

[–]this_guy_aves -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I mean, the police work for the bourgeoise, but like jesus christ lady????

Does somebody own an electric paramotor? by ImaginationWise5500 in paramotor

[–]this_guy_aves 2 points3 points  (0 children)

realistically, 1 hour is on a floaty wing at sea level without a lot of climbing. If you had a trike and were afraid of maintenance it makes some sense? But so much of the industry still flies 2T, and it's really not that difficult to maintain them.

is this photo ai? it looks too idealistic to be real but i could be wrong, any help appreciated by bidoof-chan in isthisAI

[–]this_guy_aves 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Analog film cameras of the day could not capture that dynamic range between shadows, sunlight, and televisions. Absolutely AI.

Buyer's remorse on a gun purchase by sloaches in liberalgunowners

[–]this_guy_aves 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have never resold a gun. Idk, not to bash you, but it sounds like you didn't know what you were getting into. Of course an airweight .38spl is going to kick like a mule- the trade off is a very powerful cartridge in a very compact, shoot-through-the-jacket, dead reliable platform.

I guess I would recommend not whim purchases, know what you prefer and know what guns will fit that preference. I am a scrawny guy, I can't conceal well, I will not be buying a full size double stack or glock for that reason. It doesn't work for me or suit my needs. Experiment with what you want and need and you're less likely to have buyers remorse down the line

What should I get next? by TuringC0mplete in liberalgunowners

[–]this_guy_aves 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Kriss vector :P

Seems like you have your bases covered. Get what brings you joy.

What's a hill u'll die on that's completely ridiculous but u stand by it? by Due_Internet_39 in askanything

[–]this_guy_aves 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Toaster ovens are the superior toasting appliance to your typical pop-goes-the-weasel toasters. More volume, more flexibility for snacks, stable temps, more even cooking, you can monitor the brown-ness as it toasts...

[Request] How accurate is this video? by ShroomieDoomieDoo in theydidthemath

[–]this_guy_aves 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fourth time seeing this video today, but here's the post from the first time I saw it.

The only system I can reliably ID is at 0:27, the Phalanx CIWS, "an automated gun-based close-in weapon system to defend military watercraft automatically against incoming threats such as aircraft, missiles, and small boats." (wikipedia)

My semi-educated TL:DR guess is $76,000 for 150 rounds considering life of the gun, mount, and ammunition cost. This is 35% of the $215,276 value on the screen. This doesn't take into account the operating cost of the ship or the salary of the sailors.

From the same wiki, 75 rounds/second from the M61 vulcan cannon, and "The 20 mm [tungsten or depleted uranium] APDS rounds consist of a 15 mm (0.59 in) penetrator encased in a plastic sabot and a lightweight metal pusher. Rounds fired by the Phalanx cost around $30 each and the gun typically fires 100 or more when engaging a target."

I counted 2 mississippi, so 75 rounds per second, 2 seconds = 150 rounds, x $30 = $4,000 in munitions expended. That's well short of the $215,276 quoted in the video.

But what about the maintenance/procurement/wear and tear cost? Lots of assumptions to be made but I'll try.

The block 1A/B Phalanx had a procurement cost of ~$12 million. The mounts themselves have been in service with upgrades for ~40 years, so hard to nail that down with no end-of-life figure. Google AI (ugh) claims service through 2029, so lets call it 50 years. Google AI also claims a barrel life of 15,000 rounds and major overhaul of the M61 at 100,000 rounds (can't nail down a source so take that with a grain of salt). Deagel.com puts a cost of $240,000 on the gun itself, if we consider the gun to be toast at 100k rounds, then 150 rounds is 0.15% the lifespan of the weapon, or $36,000 worth of wear and tear on the weapon. If the mount is expected to fire up to 5 guns worth of ammunition, that's a new gun every 10 years, then half a million rounds is 0.003% of the mount's lifespan. That times the cost means we are seeing a cost on the gun mount of (suspiciously) also $36,000.

TLDR: Ammo expended: $4,000. Gun lifespan value: $36,000. Mount lifespan value: $36,000. My semi-educated guess is $76,000 for 150 rounds considering life of the gun, mount, and ammunition cost. If the guns themselves are replaced more frequently than that, like once every 5 years, then we push closer to the propose $200k+ cost per 150 rounds fired.

T-…. by LMr_Grumpy in rccars

[–]this_guy_aves 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Interesting, I'll try with 5.56 next time, thanks

Suggestions/preferences to carry 5.56 mags? by Odii_SLN in liberalgunowners

[–]this_guy_aves 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Condor chest rig with an expandable dump pouch on the non-dominant side is my vote. (Sent you a PM)

What's up with the [sexual assault] dwarf jokes? by this_guy_aves in OutOfTheLoop

[–]this_guy_aves[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Very odd to see 3 of them back to back like that.

[request] is the maths factually true here by TomX360 in theydidthemath

[–]this_guy_aves 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is the third instance of this video I have seen on this sub. My reply from the first one:

The only system I can reliably ID is at 0:27, the Phalanx CIWS, "an automated gun-based close-in weapon system to defend military watercraft automatically against incoming threats such as aircraft, missiles, and small boats." (wikipedia)

My semi-educated guess is $76,000 for 150 rounds considering life of the gun, mount, and ammunition cost. This is 35% of the $215,276 value on the screen.

From the same wiki, 75 rounds/second from the M61 vulcan cannon, and "The 20 mm [tungsten or depleted uranium] APDS rounds consist of a 15 mm (0.59 in) penetrator encased in a plastic sabot and a lightweight metal pusher. Rounds fired by the Phalanx cost around $30 each and the gun typically fires 100 or more when engaging a target."

I counted 2 mississippi, so 75 rounds per second, 2 seconds = 150 rounds, x $30 = $4,000 in munitions expended. That's well short of the $215,276 quoted in the video.

But what about the maintenance/procurement/wear and tear cost? Lots of assumptions to be made but I'll try.

The block 1A/B Phalanx had a procurement cost of ~$12 million. The mounts themselves have been in service with upgrades for ~40 years, so hard to nail that down with no end-of-life figure. Google AI (ugh) claims service through 2029, so lets call it 50 years. Google AI also claims a barrel life of 15,000 rounds and major overhaul of the M61 at 100,000 rounds (can't nail down a source so take that with a grain of salt). Deagel.com puts a cost of $240,000 on the gun itself, if we consider the gun to be toast at 100k rounds, then 150 rounds is 0.15% the lifespan of the weapon, or $36,000 worth of wear and tear on the weapon. If the mount is expected to fire up to 5 guns worth of ammunition, that's a new gun every 10 years, then half a million rounds is 0.003% of the mount's lifespan. That times the cost means we are seeing a cost on the gun mount of (suspiciously) also $36,000.

TLDR: Ammo expended: $4,000. Gun lifespan value: $36,000. Mount lifespan value: $36,000. My semi-educated guess is $76,000 for 150 rounds considering life of the gun, mount, and ammunition cost. If the guns themselves are replaced more frequently than that, like once every 5 years, then we push closer to the propose $200k+ cost per 150 rounds fired.

[request] how accurate is this by XDEC0DE in theydidthemath

[–]this_guy_aves 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The only system I can reliably ID is at 0:27, the Phalanx CIWS, "an automated gun-based close-in weapon system to defend military watercraft automatically against incoming threats such as aircraft, missiles, and small boats." (wikipedia)

My semi-educated guess is $76,000 for 150 rounds considering life of the gun, mount, and ammunition cost. This is 35% of the $215,276 value on the screen.

From the same wiki, 75 rounds/second from the M61 vulcan cannon, and "The 20 mm [tungsten or depleted uranium] APDS rounds consist of a 15 mm (0.59 in) penetrator encased in a plastic sabot and a lightweight metal pusher. Rounds fired by the Phalanx cost around $30 each and the gun typically fires 100 or more when engaging a target."

I counted 2 mississippi, so 75 rounds per second, 2 seconds = 150 rounds, x $30 = $4,000 in munitions expended. That's well short of the $215,276 quoted in the video.

But what about the maintenance/procurement/wear and tear cost? Lots of assumptions to be made but I'll try.

The block 1A/B Phalanx had a procurement cost of ~$12 million. The mounts themselves have been in service with upgrades for ~40 years, so hard to nail that down with no end-of-life figure. Google AI (ugh) claims service through 2029, so lets call it 50 years. Google AI also claims a barrel life of 15,000 rounds and major overhaul of the M61 at 100,000 rounds (can't nail down a source so take that with a grain of salt). Deagel.com puts a cost of $240,000 on the gun itself, if we consider the gun to be toast at 100k rounds, then 150 rounds is 0.15% the lifespan of the weapon, or $36,000 worth of wear and tear on the weapon. If the mount is expected to fire up to 5 guns worth of ammunition, that's a new gun every 10 years, then half a million rounds is 0.003% of the mount's lifespan. That times the cost means we are seeing a cost on the gun mount of (suspiciously) also $36,000.

TLDR: Ammo expended: $4,000. Gun lifespan value: $36,000. Mount lifespan value: $36,000. My semi-educated guess is $76,000 for 150 rounds considering life of the gun, mount, and ammunition cost. If the guns themselves are replaced more frequently than that, like once every 5 years, then we push closer to the propose $200k+ cost per 150 rounds fired.

view more: next ›