Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Anti-aircraft gun 40 mm 1.575 Ordnance QF 3-pounder Vickers: Naval gun 47 mm 1.85 inch Ordnance QF 6-pounder: Anti-tank gun 57 mm 2.244 inch Ordnance BL 10-pounder Mountain gun: Mountain gun 69.8 mm 2.75 inch 12-pounder (multiple types) Light field gun 76.2 mm 3 inch Ordnance QF 13-pounder: Light field gun 76.2 mm 3 inch 15- pounder (multiple ...
The US Navy adopted the Maxim-Nordenfelt 37 mm 1-pounder as the 1-pounder Mark 6 before the 1898 Spanish–American War. The Mark 7, 9, 14, and 15 weapons were similar. [ 25 ] It was the first dedicated anti-aircraft (AA) gun adopted by the US Navy, specified as such on the Sampson -class destroyers launched in 1916–17.
Main page; Contents; Current events; Random article; About Wikipedia; Contact us; Pages for logged out editors learn more
Common rifle cartridges, from the largest .50 BMG to the smallest .22 Long Rifle with a $1 United States dollar bill in the background as a reference point.. This is a table of selected pistol/submachine gun and rifle/machine gun cartridges by common name.
The propulsion system uses an obturating case base with a semi-combustible cartridge wall. It has a total weight of 41.1 lb (18.6 kg) and a 627 mm (24.7 in) DU penetrator with a 27 mm (1.1 in) rod diameter, [2] which reaches a muzzle velocity of 1,670 meters per second (5,500 ft/s) using 8.1 kg (18 lb) of JA-2 propellant. Its maximum effective ...
The primary differences between the two weapons include: development time and intent (the K1 took less time to develop and entered service sooner than the K2, and was developed originally as a submachine gun because it was intended to replace the M3 Grease Gun; the K2 was developed from the start as a service rifle); rifling (K1: 1-in-12 twist ...
How much is the aluminum in a can worth? Aluminum can prices vary by region and are based on weight. The average recycling value per pound of cans in the U.S. is currently $0.56.
The XM806 weighed about 63 pounds (29 kg) less (49% lighter), had 60% less recoil than the M2, [1] [2] and had a greater rate of fire than the failed previous attempt to replace the M2, the XM312. The XM806 did however have a considerably slower rate of fire than the M2. [3] The XM806 also had improvements to user safety and was easier to ...