Firearms have shifted from tools for reclaiming masculinity. Today, these weapons bolster identity, preparedness, and security.
Modern guns are easy to use and equipped with state-of-the-art features. This makes them ideal for law enforcers and personal defense. The Glock 19 is an example of a reliable tool for firearm owners. It helps them prioritize responsible gun ownership.
But how can you find the perfect concealment holster to compliment the bad boy?
Gun carrying is more than just claiming ownership. It carries an element of safety and responsibility. Proper selection of a concealment holster for your Glock 19 will guarantee comfort and security.
Experienced gun holders know the necessity of a comfortable holster. Plus, it can take time to find the right type of holster for your needs. A good holster should:
- Secure your gun even if you’re running or on the go
- Offer access to the gun fast when required
- It should be concealed
Pick from available types of materials when buying a Glock 19 concealment holster. The best choice is Kydex, which comes in leather, hybrid, and nylon forms. It has the following benefits:
- It’s waterproof and can resist scrapes and cuts
- It’s rigid and can draw and re-holster easily
- It offers high levels of retention
Most people pick up a gun holster as an afterthought. That’s not an excellent idea because it can save your life, especially in emergencies. Your firearm must always be safe and ready for use when needed.
Utilize the safety features your gun holster provides as outlined below:
Trigger Guard Protection
Most rifles and handguns have trigger guards. These devices help to prevent guns from discharging unexpectedly. It’s a significant protective feature, especially for gun holders who carry loaded or unloaded weapons. Many states require firearm holders to have trigger guards on their firearms or face legal consequences.
Modern holsters are molded to a specific gun type to ensure better retention. Your holster should be tight enough to stay on even when running or bending over. Plus, you shouldn’t struggle to retrieve your gun from the holster because it’s too tight.
Easy to Carry or Draw
In most cases, your gun should not hangup when retrieved. A tight holster will prevent you from drawing your gun, which can expose you to grave danger. In simple terms, it should have better retention to allow easy holding of your gun and not prevent draw.
Your holster should grip your firearm even if you’re actively engaged. It should keep your gun secure and safe from unauthorized people. The common systems of retention for concealed holsters are:
- Passive retention
- Active retention
Each system has its benefits based on individual’s needs. An excellent holster should conceal your gun to avoid drawing unnecessary attention. Some states have strict gun laws created to enhance public safety and encourage responsive ownership.
These factors can affect retention:
- Material: The texture of a holster has an impact on its retention abilities. Leather is good for retention and easily aligns with your weapon’s shape.
- Design: Holster design can affect retention, especially when they have screws that can be adjusted to suit your needs.
- Tension: The tension ensures the holster secures the firearm and prevents it from slipping out.
- Proper holster retention can boost your self-defense skills and promote gun safety.
A gun holster conceals your weapon, which means it isn’t plainly visible. A holster’s material and design can affect its concealability. The inside-the-waistband (IWB) holsters conceal guns more securely. Their counterparts, OWB, need covers to conceal. Choose carefully the size and shape of your holster to fit the gun and avoid bulking.
Retention, durability, and comfort can affect how the holster conceals. An effective holster secures your gun and makes it comfortable to wear. Adjusting the ride height and the holster’s position can improve its concealability.
Compatible with Other Accessories
Attaching lasers and accessories to guns strengthens their time-to-target. Your holster should align with accessories mounted on the firearm. But it should not interfere with retention or fit.
Choosing a holster for your gun adds comfort and safety to it. A holster that limits free movement burdens the user, which reduces safety and deters carry. Try out different materials to establish which one is more desirable for your needs. Remember, safety is key, so opt for a holster with better retention and a clear draw for comfort and reliability.


When it comes to handguns, rifles, and other firearms,
you can always rely on BigHorn GunShop and our wide selection to have what you’re looking for.
Whether it’s your first gun or your tenth, you need a gun shop that knows every inch of the guns and rifles you want.
Save on a quality used and reconditioned gun, or buy a brand new firearm from the best brands in the business.
Responsible gun ownership starts with us
Safety and knowledge are the most important aspects of owning a gun.
That’s why we offer classes on various gun ownership topics.
Whether you’re a novice or expert, you’ll find the right class for you here!


Women would want to feel secure all the time they are at their homes and away from their homes. It has been noted that not many women who have the ideas of making sure they are not attacked by anyone or anything. This is because they lack the right defense weapons and tactics they can use to make sure they are not attacked by any criminal.
Today, a lot of crimes are reported to be affecting women more than men. It is because of this women are encouraged to make sure they have some defense weapons they can be carrying to make sure they are safe and can use to protect themselves. If every woman is able to protect themselves, then it will be easy for us to do away with the many crimes being experienced today affecting women.
The main problem that most women face is that they are not able to know some of the best defense weapons or mechanisms they can use. The best thing that one should note is that you might not use any weapon if you do not know how to handle it. Before choosing the best self-defense weapons for women, there are things they need to consider.
Once someone has some guidelines to follow, then it will be easy for everyone to make sure you get the best weapon. Below are some tips to help all women buy defense weapon they can be using to protect themselves.
It is vital for one to get a weapon that will be readily available. There are some defense weapons that are not readily available for anyone to obtain them. Any woman who is interested in obtaining a defense weapon should make sure they get a weapon they can easily access whenever they want for them to be safe. There are some weapons that are only meant to be used by a certain group of people. If you choose a weapon that you are not allowed to use, then you will be forced to go back and get another weapon you are allowed to use.
Know if you are able to use the weapon or you need to go through some training. It is not all defense weapons that you get can easily be used. One might suffer a lot if you do not have the right skills to handle the weapon, forcing you to be attacked instead of defending yourself. It is thus important for one to make sure you are able to know how to handle a certain weapon before you get to acquire them. In case you realize you cannot handle the weapon well, then you have the right to make sure you get another simpler weapon that you can use easily.


We would also look at the just scout rifles shopping, which will undoubtedly describe all your valuable questions and help your considering choosing an individual. These rifles possess a too-long reputation of oneself army as well as to civilian make use of and therefore are 9mm Ammunition still several of the most widely used weapons. A scout rifle has a many software as well as essential-had gotten component almost every hands stock. Regularly suppressors is definitely improved for any a variety of comparable calibers. That will be to some extent because they have becoming engineered so that passing of a provided range topic as well as you can easily hold the stresses different units with which will undoubtedly topic size.
- Right after i have the marker right back beyond Hull, I put in a couple hundred units all the way through it within my local variety without errors.
- A key portion of the reasons why that one life happens to be positioned among the best are their cleverness it is possible to fire other bullets people without the use of a changeable propane technique of one’s ones.
- It is placed it is simple to take perfectly possibly 875 home gardens, yet which might will depend on experience.
- Merely clip I am able to find take Twitter and youtube Tx JAGD – hog google search channel.
- Contrast all of them and acquire an individual suitable for a person take needs.
- Truly a stringent product like the cask try mated to a wonderful carbon dioxide metal target.
Their tripped solution is short, white in color, so you can customizable, so they really got’t are having issues firing. Its the ultimate option for spanking new shooters, however some of these really does outgrow it as they get bigger. Your marker’s thunderbolt strategy is the most effective since it supporting quick bicycle without established your own player’s cheek outside of store. It also has a dime plating which enables caused by smoothness and sturdiness. Really drilled to keep a scope, also to Browning tends to make scopes which are developed particularly for this rifle. Browning’s production quality was thriving, which is makes certain that this option rifle are genuine so you can fairly productive.
The very best 308 Sniper Rifle
As soon as shouldered, your own RDB is actually small than the usual handgun assigned a two palm traction thus correct within the restricted experiences. Furthermore, may tuck your very own store underneath the armpit and also to shooting truthfully far from fashionable whenever you’ll need from the intimate grade. Later burn numerous models, love metal bullets, that is my personal are able to sign the residence safeguards. Considering ergonomics much better than a brief barrel rifle as well as to the number one 30 circular record, little intruder will allow it to be the process.
Just 32 Winchester Unique Ammunition
However indeed there’s no losing knowledge more info on their Remington Version 700, these days? Really, as it is equipped with premium content so to a thrilling videos, it may possibly be one of the better 308 rifles ones own. In addition, the Browning By-Thunderbolt normally made usage of one Inflex Software recoil base. It helps as well as reduces some kind of reaction noticed, and also it helps useful buttstock carefully set up.
He is a highly-respected player and also made scout rifles gained their appeal between your people in which would have a passion with regards to capture. You will also find many scout rifles that were from many companies, as stated by his concise explanation of a lookout rifle. If you’re people were bustling developing AR15’s 10 years earlier I built partners six.5lb considering Setting Armalite located AR10’s. My favorite mission was to broaden the best rifle my wife in many cases can overcome that may at a distance marker a lot of thieves.
Produced and improved inside the Austin Lone-star state, Alfred happen to be take guns because he is actually 18. That’s 2 decades with the professionally maintaining their Texan marker people. They are a business believer from inside the flexibility associated with the engaging in political right, and that includes the perfect of each statutes-abiding citizen to achieve the as well as to hold a weapon. 1] limitations an individual exposure to reaction time period without inside your fidelity. The optimal braking system is usually meant to get rid of muzzle finger because this will likely bearing accuracy. Your very own build in order to design of a particular 308 muzzle braking system should consult the straightforward reason of making a hurricane it’s easy to oppose the stress removed from gas.
Measures, Tasks, Host, And Rifle Silencers
As well as within the l back gardens with a bit of kind of fatal rounded upcoming within me personally? Ensure that your bloody 1800 metres precision thunderbolt gun and provide me which is going to Is-several. Well, I’ve talked prior to now about how a lot more I adore your .308 ammunition, as well as how optimal actually for that our requirements great requirements of all of the shooters as well as hunters. It’s the most effective out to 800 yards zero sweat, and also to the absolute best complement bullets, whenever you’re pricey, will probably be other correct than only many shooters. Your .308 war sign happens to be an up-to-date style of your very own M14 rifle which is generally used by a unique army gadgets for a favored marksman life.
Needless to say that isn’t claiming it is the just 8.62 infantry combat rifle, yet it is is truly the most recent so to prodigious. With the fairly how big is testing regarding the “fight rifles” within my recent We view what the simply 308 warfare rifle become a concern which has a quickly contacted mission solution. Maybe perfect CZ or Remington, not Ruger alongside Mossberg to become Ruger is not recognized for their constancy and also to I discover for the top quality problems with Mossberg. This package rifle is a great, inexpensive, and very real systems. I do think your Ruger Accuracy Rifle is capable of better still accuracy than only We met.
Which happen to be an army rifle, it’s easy to take down and certainly will fire effectively despite having the best ammo. Their Gunsite Scout is a compact rifle which contains a reliability better than several lookout rifles. It’s a tall capacity for rounds, and the three-position protection is rather amazing for its scan vacations. Likewise, their rifle doesn’t require any significant variations.


The R93 LRS1 (Long Range Sporter 1) Series is a spring action rifle.
It has a straight-pull designed to improve the loading speed,
which is different from other air cocking rifle. The buttpad,
cheek piece and trail spade of the stock can be adjusted easily.
Package comes with a quick detach adaptor for mounting bipod.


Megaman vs. Firearms
Series: Megaman NT
Test Date: November 25, 2005
- Megaman action figure
- Safety glasses and earplugs (SAFETY FIRST!)
- Wood blocks
- Plastic strap
- Kimber Stainless 1911 (semi-auto pistol, .45 ACP)
- Yugoslavian military M59/66 SKS (semi-auto rifle, 7.62x39mm Soviet)
- Remington 870 Express Magnum, 26" barrel w/ imp. cyl. choke (pump shotgun, 12 gauge)
- Winchester "white box" .45 ACP FMJ target ammo
- Wolf 7.62x39mm Soviet FMJ ammo
- Remington Express Magnum 12 gauge 00 buckshot shells
- Federal Hi-Power #6 shotshell
WE ARE PROFESSIONALS: DO NOT TRY THIS TEST AT HOME!
(It might even be illegal depending on your location.)
As our previous experiment demonstrated, Megaman is one tough bugger. For this experiment, we decided to pull out the big guns. Literally.
As can be seen here, Megaman suffered practically no damage from the previous blender test.
Due to the nature of this test, Megaman was delivered to the care of our Chibi Project scientist residing in Virginia. This experiment was conducted on an undeveloped 75 acre plot in a rural county in a southern part of the state.
The tests were to involve the usage of three types of firearms - handgun, rifle, and shotgun. The ammunition used was (left to right) .45 ACP FMJ, 7.62x39mm Soviet FMJ, 12 gauge 3" magnum 00 buckshot, and 12 gauge #6 shot. A quarter is included in front for comparison.
The first test to be conducted was the handgun test. A Kimber Stainless 1911 was employed for this purpose. The 1911 was the US military's sidearm of choice for over 50 years, and who are we to argue with that? The Kimber pictured here has various improvements over J.M. Browning's original mil-spec design and is the regular carry weapon for the scientist carrying out this test.
An attempt at a head shot led to the bullet grazing Mega Man's right temple. Though the wound was only superficial at the entry point, much of the rear of Megaman's head was removed by the force of the impact. The sword that made up his right forearm was also popped loose by the impact, but it was easily reattached before the next test. No further shots were taken with the 1911 in order to preserve Megaman enough for the followup tests.
As can be seen here, Megaman's head is almost entirely hollow.
The second test to be conducted was the rifle test. The rifle used for this test was a Yugoslavian military surplus M59/66 SKS. The SKS saw usage as the standard military rifle of the Soviets in the early part of the last century until the advent of the AK-47 after WWII, but the Simonov design has been employed by various nations throughout the 20th century. This particular rifle was manufactured in 1979. Sadly, neither the folding bayonet nor the attached grenade launcher were to be used in this test.
The shot at the right arm missed slightly, hitting Megaman in the right torso. It did, however have the effect of removing the right arm as well as splitting his body into upper and lower parts. These two parts still had enough integrity to be reattached so he could be stood up for the following test, but the right arm was practically destroyed.
Megaman is shown pictured here after recovering the pieces that were thrown into the grass as a result of the force of impact. One of the pieces shown is a recovered section of head broken loose by the handgun test.
The third test to be conducted was the shotgun test. The shotgun used was a Remington 870 Express Magnum pump 12 gauge. The attached barrel was 26" in length with an improved cylinder choke installed.
As it became apparent from the result of the first shot, improved cylinder was not the best choice to use for firing buckshot. An improved cylinder choke causes the shot to spread in a wide pattern, and of the 15 pieces of shot contained in the 00 buckshot shell only two appeared to have hit their target. The only serious damage was the destruction of his remaining arm. Megaman's upper and lower body were once again separated, and more of his head was broken loose.
The second shot with buckshot would be done much closer to compensate for the wide shot pattern.
The second shot was taken, and much of Megaman shattered into tiny pieces. The only relatively intact pieces left are shown here, including the sword which had been omitted from the last test shot due to the missing right arm. As this result did not satisfy our scientist, one final shot was taken at these remaining parts with a #6 shotshell.
About 20 minutes were taken after this in a search effort in order to recover as many pieces as possible. Some pieces were found several yards away from the target site. None of Megaman's face was recovered, and much of the sword was lost.
Megaman was utterly destroyed. Less than 50% of his body could be recovered from the test site by the scientist administering the tests. The recovered parts, a few pieces of recovered buckshot, and the expended .45 bullet found lodged in the wooden block are pictured to the right.
Megaman can partially survive both pistol and rifle damage, but he is no match for a shotgun at close range.


So you're new to weapons?This is an introductory page to weapons, made by users of /k/, so if you want to learn about weapons, you have come to the right place. Throughout this wikia, you should find information on safety, choosing your first gun, differences between firearms, basic terminology, calibers and much more. As this is a new site we encourage others to make new pages and update exsisting ones.
- Always treat guns as if they are loaded. Even if you know that they aren't, this is an extremely important rule.
- Never point a gun at anything unless you fully intend to shoot it.This means don't point it at people, animals, even inanimate objects, regardless of if it is loaded or not.
- Keep your finger off the trigger, unless you are going to pull it. This is called trigger discipline. The reason behind this is if you trip, sneeze, slip or anything you could end up shooting yourself or someone around you. It can also cause a negligent discharge (the weapon firing against your will due to carelessness).
- Always be sure of what is beyond your target. This means, when you are firing a weapon, always make sure you know your surroundings, so if there is anyone around then you won't accidentally hit them, or hit anything near them.
- Keep the gun unloaded and the safety on. Unless you are going to immediately shoot the weapon then remember this rule.
- Primitive versions of firearms were invented in China in the 1100's
- They were exported to the Middle East in the 1300's along trade routes
- When they were eventually brought to Europe, the Europeans utilized the gunpowder into what we would now know as cannons
- The Europeans invented 'hand cannons', essentially a cannon small enough to be carried by hand
- These hand cannons evolved into Flintlock rifles and eventually into muskets
- In 1807 the first self containted rounds were made, meaning operators no longer had to load musket balls but could actually put rounds staight into their rifles and handguns
- In the 1850's, the Springfield armory produced the Springfield rifle, one of the very first mass produced breech loading rifles
- In 1856 the first revolvers were produced, allowing users to fire several bullets without the need to reload
- In 1862 the first mass produced machine gun was released, the Gatling gun, allowing the operators to fire hundreds of rounds a minute
- In 1894 the first semi-automatic pistol was unveiled, the C-93
- By 1919, the first semi-automatic rifles had been produced, one of these being the M1 Garand
- In 1947, Mikhail Kalashnikov invented the AK-47, it's variants the most widely used assault rifles today
- In 1963, the M16 was invented, it's variants the US service rifles still used today
In the following photos, you will find the basic parts of these weapons.
The first revolvers ever produced used the Single Action. This means that after you fire the revolver, you need to manually pull back the hammer in order to chamber the next round, ie put the next bullet in front of the firing pin. A famous revolver which uses this action is the Colt Single Action Army Pistol.
As revolvers developed, the Double Action was invented. This means when you pull the trigger on the revolver, it automatically puts the next bullet in front of the firing pin, so there is no need to pull the hammer back manually after each shot. A famous revolver which uses this action is the Colt Anaconda.
Eventually, the Automatic was invented. An Automatic uses the pressure of gasses to cycle the weapon (move the next bullet into the chamber ready to be fired) whereas in the other types, the operator of the weapon would be the person doing this, by pulling the trigger. A famous handgun which uses this action is the Colt 1911.
After muzzle loaders and other antiquities, the Bolt Action rifle was invented. A bolt action rifle will have a small handle, located on the bolt, that must be pulled back then pushed forwards to load a cartridge from either an internal or external magazine. After each shot, the handle is pulled back which ejects the empty cartridge, then when pushed forwards moves a new one into the breech ready to be fired. Bolt actions were used extensively during World War 1 and 2. They remain very popular for collectors value, value, reliability and accuracy. Famous examples of these rifles include the Mosin Nagant (/k/'s favourite), the Lee Enfield, the Mauser 98k and the Arisaka.
Bolt action rifles were eventually phased out of service and replaced with Semi Automatic rifles. These rifles are usually loaded with a clip into an internal magazine or have an external magazine. For every time you pull the trigger, one shot will be fired. They work by using the force of either recoil or gas pressures when fired to eject the empty casing and allow a new cartridge to be loaded into the breech. Nearly all civilian rifles are semi automatic(unless they are bolt action or class 3 firearms). Famous military semi automatic rifles include the M1 Garand, SKS and SVT-40.


Custom-quality slides from Caspian, ready to be fitted to the frame of your choice. They start as high-quality forgings for extra strength, then are heat-treated to Rc 38-41 before machining for exceptional dimensional stability. Sides are polished, while the rest of the surface is bead-blasted for a non-glare, matte finish. Deep-cut, forward-angled rear cocking serrations prevent slippage when racking, even with a wet hand. Available in 4340 carbon steel (CS) and 416 stainless steel (SS) with .45 ACP, .40 S&W, and 9mm breechfaces. Commander and Officers models in .45 ACP only. Choose a slide without sight cuts (NC), or between two pre-cut dovetail options: a Novak Lo-Mount or Bo-Mar Mfg: Caspian SPECS: 4340 carbon steel, in-the-white, or 416 stainless steel, natural finish. Government model accepts 5" barrel. Commander accepts 4.25" barrel. Officers model accepts 3.5" barrel. All Caspian slides require the use of a 9mm/.38 Super firing pin.


"You! You. Where were you during the Battle of Utapau? Where were you?"
"*Gonk Droid Bleeps*"
"That was rude."
-Danson and this droid.This unidentified gonk droid was utilized as an ammunitions droid by the Galactic Empire during the Galactic Civil War.
In 0 BBY, this droid was stationed on the Imperial superweapon, the Death Star, as a ammunitions droid. It was present on the superweapon shortly after the Battle of the Tantive IV and was encountered by the rogue Clone Trooper Danson during his tour of the station.
Identifying the droid as one of the older ammunition droids used by the Galactic Republic during the Clone Wars, Danson patronized the droid, asking where its model was at the Battle of Utapau. The droid then responded with a quick beeping noise, which Danson identified as a rude remark. It is possible that this droid later perished when the Death Star was destroyed by the Alliance to Restore the Republic in the Battle of Yavin.
- Star Wars: A Clone Apart Episode II: New Time, New Place (first appearance)


Bomb Disposal Training Rounds
The brief: We were approached by a company that trains Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD). They were looking for someone to produce dummy 81mm mortar rounds for training kits that can be. Using an inert training round for reference we produced a CAD model which we could then print the final model.
Length of project: 2-3 days


Developed as an intercontinental ballistic missile, the Titan II also served as a launch vehicle for the Gemini manned spacecraft missions and … Gen John L. McCoy (director of the Titan Systems Program Office) reaffirmed BSD's stance that the pogo and combustion instability problems in the Titan were not a serious issue to the ICBM program and it would be too difficult and risky at this point to try to improve them for NASA's sake. At this point, BSD suspended further flights. For orbital launches, there were stro… Titan II - military version of the rocket. This was followed by a launch from VAFB on 27 April when Missile N-8 flew successfully. First stage performance was near-nominal, but the second stage developed low thrust due to a restriction in the gas generator feed. Titan II GLV. A decommissioned Titan II missile complex is being sold for $395,000 on the real estate site Zillow. © 2021 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Leadership within the USAF and SAC were reluctant to retire the Titan II because while it made up only a small fraction of the total number of missiles on standby, it represented significant portion of the total megatonnage that was deployed by Air Force ICBMs. Unlike refurbished Atlas missiles, which were completely torn down and rebuilt from the ground up, the Titan 23G had relatively few changes aside from replacing the warhead interface and adding range safety and telemetry packages. Two men escaped alive, both with injuries due to the fire and smoke, one by groping in complete darkness for the exit. In Service: 1963-1987, The Titan II development program grew out of a 1959 upgrade program which considered adding an in-silo launch capability and improved first and second stage engines for the Titan I.1 In 1960, this upgrade program was officially spun off into the Titan II program and placed under the direction of the Titan I developer, the Martin Company.2, In order to increase the Titan’s range and payload capacity, a redesigned engine system was mounted on a larger fuselage. It is able to lift approximately 1,900 kg (4,200 lb) into a circular polar low-Earth orbit. A new set of engines had to be ordered from Aerojet, and the missile lifted off from LC-16 on the morning of 25 July. No 66-4315 at the Spaceport USA Rocket Garden, B-108 AF Ser. Norton Air Force Base buildings 942 and 945 held the missiles. The missile was upgraded with an improved guidance system in 1979.14 The missile used a single Mk 6 Reentry Vehicle (RV) which carried a W-53 9.0 MT nuclear warhead. Following the decommissioning of the Titan II as an ICBM, the remaining missiles were converted into space-launch vehicles for satellites and remained in that role until the final Titan II was launched in 2003.13, The Titan II was the largest and heaviest missile ever built by the United States. By the mid-1970s, the original AC Delco inertial guidance system had become obsolete and spare parts could no longer be obtained for it, so the guidance packages in the stock of Titan missiles were replaced by the Universal Space Guidance System.  The fire occurred while the 750-ton silo lid was closed, which contributed to a reduced oxygen level for the men who survived the initial fire. The top half of GLV-5 62-12560 was recovered offshore following its launch and is on display at the U.S. Space & Rocket Center, Alabama. Launch crews were in a panic as they had a missile that was not only out of control, but could not be destroyed and might end up crashing into a populated area. , Meanwhile, the Titan II development program ran into difficulties during the first half of 1963. During development, the missile met the objectives set by the Air Force for use as an ICBM fairly early but ran into trouble meeting the criteria set by NASA for a manned space launch platform. The remaining thirty-six missiles were equally divided between Little Rock Air Force Base in Arkansas, and McConnell Air Force Base in Wichita, Kansas, and also placed on continuous 24-hour alert, making for a total of fifty-four operational combat asset Titan IIs. Diameter: 3.05 m Each stage is 10 feet (3.0 m) in diameter and has fuel and oxidizer tanks in tandem, with the walls of the tanks forming the skin of the missile in those areas. The LGM-25C ballistic missile (Titan IIc) consisted of a two-stage, liquid rocket-engine-powered vehicle and a reentry vehicle. The actual launch vehicle was the Titan II, a modified Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) that had been modified to carry men into space. Titan II was originally designed and used as an ICBM, but was later adapted as a medium-lift space launch vehicle to carry payloads to Earth orbit for the United States Air Force (USAF), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The missile’s Mk VI reentry vehicle safety measures prevented the warhead from being damaged significantly. The rocket was derived from the Titan II ICBM. The guidance system of the Titan II would then configure itself to take control of the missile and input all guidance data to guide the missile to the mission target. The missile guidance computer (MGC) was the IBM ASC-15. The reentry vehicle was found and dredged up along with parts of the second stage, but the guidance system was not recovered. Of these, 38 and one second stage were stored outside at the Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Center (AMARC), now known as the 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group (309 AMARG), adjacent to Davis–Monthan Air Force Base, to await final destruction between 2004 and 2008. Spirers, David N., “On Alert An Operational History of the United States Air Force Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) Program, 1945-2011,” Air Force Space Command, United States Air Force, Colorado Springs, Colorado, 2012, Stumpf, David K., Titan II, The University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 2000. Most of the Titan rockets were the Titan II ICBM and their civilian derivatives for NASA. Once an order was given to launch, launch codes were sent to the silos from SAC HQ or its backup in California. The 25 July test (Vehicle N-4) had been scheduled for 27 June, but was delayed by a month when the Titan's right engine experienced severe combustion instability at ignition that caused the entire thrust chamber to break off of the booster and fall down the flame deflector pit, landing about 20 feet from the pad (the Titan's onboard computer shut the engines down the moment loss of thrust occurred). B-14/20 AF Ser. Its inertial guidance system gave an accuracy of 900 meters CEP and was capable of making in-flight corrections without ground control input. , On the other hand, only Missile N-11 suffered a malfunction due to pogo and the combustion instability issue had occurred in static firings, but not any actual flights. 8-86): Air Force Facility Site 8 (571-7)", "Martin Marietta SM-68B/LGM-25C Titan II. The first stage, Stage I, is the booster, Stage II … If the cookie matched the remaining five digits in the sub-code, the launch order was authenticated. The safe featured a separate lock for each operator, who unlocked it using a combination known only to him or herself. GLV-5, AF Ser. With their warheads removed, the deactivated missiles were initially placed in storage at Davis–Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona, and the former Norton Air Force Base, California, but were later broken up for salvage by 2009. However, it allowed for a much simpler and more trouble-free engine system than on cryogenic propellant boosters. Missile Threat is a product of the Missile Defense Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. There was only one problem: a high rate of longitudinal vibrations during first stage burn. Titan II carried the largest single warhead of any American ICBM. Titan-II surviving missiles/ Museum locations within the United States: The Titan II space-launch vehicles were purpose-built as space launchers or are decommissioned ICBMs that have been refurbished and equipped with hardware required for use as space launch vehicles. Round of applause for our sponsors Titan II Rocket by hypelights. A large number of civilian contractors were evacuated from the Command and Control Bunker. Its inertial guidance system gave an accuracy of 900 meters CEP and was capable of making in-flight corrections without ground control input. The third launch, Missile N-6 on 11 July, was completely successful. The Titan II was originally expected to be in service for only 5–7 years, but ended up lasting far longer than anyone expected in part because of its large size and throw weight. Titan II carried the largest single warhead of any American ICBM.. When spares for this system became hard to obtain, it was replaced by a more modern guidance system, the Delco Universal Space Guidance System (USGS). The airframe is a two-stage, aerodynamically stable structure that houses and protects the airborne missile equipment during powered flight. It became known as the Titan I, the nation's first two-stage ICBM and first underground silo-based ICBM. The Titan II rocket was used to launch each of the two-man crews during the Gemini program. Forty-nine were launched for testing at Vandenberg Air Force Base from 1964 to 1976. 61-2768 at the Stafford Museum, Oklahoma. The Titan II ICBM was the successor to the Titan I, with double the payload. 61-2738/60-6817 resides in the silo at the Titan Missile Museum (ICBM Site 571-7), operated by the Pima Air & Space Museum at Green Valley, south of Tucson, Arizona, on Interstate-19.. This page is dedicated to the Titan II ICBM launch crews and maintenance support teams, that kept the Titan II ICBM an important and vital addition to the strategic defense of this country during the cold war. , The tenth Titan II flight (Vehicle N-15) took place on 10 January, the only nighttime Titan II test. Possessed By: United States No. On 19 September 1980, a major explosion occurred after a socket from a large socket wrench rolled off a platform and punctured the missile's lower-stage fuel tank, causing a fuel leak. For the smartphone, see, Type of Intercontinental ballistic missile, Hansen, Chuck, Swords of Armageddon, 1995, Chukelea Publications, Sunnyvale, California, page Volume VII Page 350-352, Titan II, by David K, Stumpf, p 64, The University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 2000, The Titan II Handbook, by Chuck Penson, p 115, Chuck Penson, Tucson, Arizona 2008, On The Shoulders Of Titan, A History of Project Gemini, by Barton C. Hacker and James M. Grimwood, NASA SP-4203, Appendix B Flight Data Summary, Scientific and Technical Information Office, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1977, Stumpf, David K., Titan II, p 75, The University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 2000, Stumpf, David K., Titan II, p 78, The University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 2000, Titan II, by David K, Stumpf, p 78, The University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 2000, Titan II, by David K, Stumpf, p 78-79, The University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 2000, Stumpf, David K., Titan II, p 79, The University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 2000, Stumpf, David K., Titan II, p 78-79, The University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 2000, On The Shoulders Of Titan, A History of Project Gemini, by Barton C. Hacker and James M. Grimwood, NASA SP-4203, p 139-140, Scientific and Technical Information Office, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1977, Stumpf, David K., Titan II, p 86, The University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 2000, Stumpf, David K., Titan II, p 90, The University of Arkansas Press, Fayetteville, Arkansas, 2000, Schlosser, Eric, Command And Control, p 26, The Penguins Press, New York , 2013, The Titan II Handbook, by Chuck Penson, p 152, Chuck Penson, Tucson, Arizona 2008, Green, Warren E., 1962, The Development of the SM-68 Titan, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base: Air Force Systems Command, 1962, AFSC Historical Publications Series 62-23-1, p. 63, History of Liquid Propellant Rocket Engines by George P. Sutton, pgs 386, American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, VA, 2006, United States tri-service rocket designations post-1963, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Learn how and when to remove this template message, 308th Missile Inspection and Maintenance Squadron, 309th Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group, Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Center, National Museum of the United States Air Force, National Museum of Nuclear Science & History, List of military aircraft of the United States, "Restricted Data Declassification Decisions 1946 to the Present", "Titan II Accident Searcy AR, August 9 1965", "1 killed, 6 injured when fuel line breaks at Kansas Titan missile site", "Thunderhead of lethal vapor kills airman at missile silo", "Titan II Accident McConnell AFB, Kansas 1978", "USDI/NPS NRHP Registration Form (Rev. The ISDS (Inadvertent Separation Destruct System) then activated and blew up the first stage. Impact occurred 1,500 miles (2,400 km) downrange, half the planned distance. Building 945 held 30 missiles, while Building 942 held 11 plus a single stage 1. Inside was a plastic "cookie", with the five letters written on it. This reduced time to launch and permitted it to be launched from its silo. The W-53 had a yield of 9 megatons. Two were lost in accidents within silos. NASA chose this powerful booster to propel the Gemini spacecraft into orbit and my town was, for a little while, one of the key locations in the Space Race of the 1960s. It was solved by adding extra lanyards to the umbilicals so they would have sufficient "play" in them to separate without damaging the missile. This is an approximately 1:20 scale model of the Gemini-Titan II rocket, used by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to launch all ten manned spacecraft in the Gemini program during 1965-1966. Access doors are provided on the missile forward, aft and between-tanks structure for inspection and maintenance. Enjoy this highly detailed replica of the Titan II (LGM-25C) ICBM. Impact occurred only 700 miles (1,100 km) downrange. All models made by me and most textures from quixel. The 54 Titan IIs, in Arizona, Arkansas, and Kansas, were replaced in the U.S. arsenal by 50 MX "Peacekeeper" solid-fuel rocket missiles in the mid-1980s, the last Titan II silo was deactivated in May 1987. The flight went entirely according to plan up to first stage burn, but the second stage malfunctioned again when the hydraulic pump failed and thrust dropped nearly 50%. Titan II rockets were later used in the mid-21st century, during World War III, as a type of nuclear missile. by hypelights on 15 Dec 2020 Made for another contest, the theme was destruction. Named after the NASA rocket that launched the Gemini manned space missions, the Titan II has arrived to blast your tone into the stratosphere! Since the ICBM program came first, pogo suppression had to be shelved. An umbilical cord failed to separate cleanly, ripping out wiring in the second stage which not only cut power to the guidance system, but also prevented the range safety charges from being armed. The missile pitched down and the second stage separated from the stack at T+52 seconds, triggering the ISDS, which blew the first stage to pieces. During the Black Mesa Incident several scientists at the facility prepare to launch a Satellite Delivery Rocket in an attempt to close the dimensional rift, only to be stopped by HECU personnel, leaving Gordon Freeman to complete the task himself. The Titan II GLV (Gemini Launch Vehicle), was developed to launch Gemini spacecraft. , The Titan rocket family was established in October 1955, when the Air Force awarded the Glenn L. Martin Company a contract to build an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). , The Stage I airframe consists of an interstage structure, oxidizer tank forward skirt, oxidizer tank, inter-tank structure, and fuel tank. FUZZ, DISTORTION, OVERDRIVE… The Titan II is a unique discrete circuit using silicon transistors. The missile lifted with a continuous uncontrolled roll, and at about T+15 seconds, when the pitch and roll program would normally begin, it began a sudden sharp downward pitch. The second stage was manually destroyed by the Range Safety officer shortly thereafter. They were stored under plastic coverings and had helium pumped into their engine components to prevent rust. Twelve Titan-II Gemini Launch Vehicles (GLVs) were produced. It used an IMU (inertial measurement unit, a gyroscopic sensor) made by AC Spark Plug derived from original designs from MIT Draper Labs. The second stage then separated and began its burn, but due to the improper speed and attitude at separation, the guidance system malfunctioned and caused an unstable flight trajectory. The Titan II was a two-stage liquid-fuel rocket, using a hypergolic propellant combination of Aerozine 50 fuel and nitrogen tetroxide oxidizer. No. The Titan II space launch vehicle is a two-stage liquid fueled booster, designed to provide a small-to-medium weight class capability. The launch was part of the Anti Ballistic Missile program and was witnessed by an entourage of general officers and congressmen. Gemini was also the first program to use the newly built Mission Control Center at the Houston Manned Spacecraft Center for flight control. An Air Force airman was killed, and the complex was destroyed. Many of these flights took place at Cape Canaveral due to the Titan II’s selection for usage in NASA’s Gemini program.4, The Titan II entered active service with the U.S. Air Force in 1963.5, Much like its predecessor, the Titan II was primarily valued for its quick counter-strike capability. A Titan II missile test launches . On 16 February, Vehicle N-7 was launched from a silo at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California and malfunctioned almost immediately at liftoff. "Titan II" redirects here. Ironically, the two largest oxidizer spills took place 14 years apart at the same site, Launch Complex 533-7, 381st SMW, McConnell AFB, Kansas. Eighteen of the missiles were on 24-hour continuous alert surrounding Davis–Monthan Air Force Base near Tucson, Arizona. The two missile operators would record the code in a notebook. The interstage structure, oxidizer tank forward skirt, and inter-tank structure are all fabricated assemblies using riveted skin, stringers and frame. All rights reserved. The missile resting in the silo is a real Titan II, but was a training missile and never contained fuel, oxidizer, or a warhead. Martin–Marietta thus added a surge-suppressor standpipe to the oxidizer feed line in the first stage, but when the system was tested on Titan N-11 on 6 December, the effect was instead to worsen pogo in the first stage, which ended up vibrating so strongly that unstable engine thrust resulted. Titan’s exemplary record established a standard for perfection, safely launching two-man crews into orbit 10 times from 1965-66, one of the most dynamic and fast-paced periods in the Space Race. • Former space engineer and rocket scientist James Oberg said the Gemini 4 was the only one of 10 manned flights in which a rendezvous was attempted (and nearly accomplished) with a beer can-shaped target (ie: the upper stage of the Titan II rocket that had been floating in space for 50 hours). All Titan 23G missions were launched from Space Launch Complex 4 West (SLC-4W) on Vandenberg Air Force Base, under the operational command of the 6595th Aerospace Test Group and its follow-on organizations of the 4th Space Launch Squadron and 2nd Space Launch Squadron. , The Stage II airframe consists of a transition section, oxidizer tank, inter-tank structure, fuel tank and aft skirt. But by this point, the Air Force was taking a bigger role in the Gemini program due to proposed uses of the spacecraft for military applications (e.g. Most of the Titan rockets were the Titan II ICBM and their civilian derivatives for NASA. Due to the high yield of the warhead and the accuracy of the missile’s guidance system, it was possible for the Titan II to destroy hardened targets. Titan-2 ICBMs in storage at Norton Air Force Base 1989, The remaining 38 and one half missiles awaiting destruction at Davis–Monthan Air Force Base in 2006. Gemini Titan II Model Rocket: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Gemini-Titan-model-rocket-parts-kit-size-BT-70/283975738360 , Despite the Air Force's lack of interest in human-rating the Titan II, General Bernard Adolph Schriever assured that any problems with the booster would be fixed. The last Titan II missile, located at Silo 373-8 near Judsonia, Arkansas, was deactivated on 5 May 1987. After the two accidents in 1978 and 1980, respectively, deactivation of the Titan II ICBM system finally began in July 1982. Payload: Single warhead Blue Gemini). Hypergolic fueled rocket nozzles of the Titan II rocket. I tried to have the characteristics be as accurate as possible, for example the weight of the rocket is exactly 154.000 kg like the real life counterpart Don't forget to upvote if you liked it. The rocket first flew on 8 April 1964. Meanwhile, Martin–Marietta and Aerojet both argued that most of the major development problems with the booster had been solved and it would only take a little more work to man-rate it. The Autopilot attempted to keep the missile straight during first stage flight and sent commands to the Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) on the 2nd stage. All twelve Gemini capsules, including ten crewed, were launched by Titan II launchers. , The mishap was traced to an unforeseen design flaw in the silo's construction – there was not enough room for the umbilicals to detach properly which resulted in wiring being ripped out of the Titan. This was due to a longitudinal oscillation issue dubbed the “pogo effect” which caused increased gravitational effects on the missile.
Vasco Rossi - Vado Al Massimo Sanremo, Posti Dove Mangiare E Vedere La Partita, Nave Mercantile In Inglese, Nomi Sovrabbondanti Treccani, Germania Francia 1982 Risultati, 22 44 Angeli, Zecchino D'oro 1959,


|AR-10 Lower Receiver 80% Finished||AR-45 Lower Receiver 80% Finished|
Precision machined from solid weapons grade aluminum, our 80% AR-10 lower is adaptable to DPMS and SR-25 style mags.
Our 80% finished AR-45 lower receiver is a specifically engineered and modified AR-15 lower made to be a .45 acp carbine. Machined from Billet aluminum, our lower receiver is designed to use 30 round M3 “grease gun” magazines. The...
|Mistake Coverage Warranty||AR-15 Lower Receiver 80% Finished|
Here at AP we wanted to provide full confidence to our valued customers. Worried about making a mistake while machining out one of our warrantied lowers? No problem. We've got you covered.
This is our AP 80% finished AR-15 lower receiver is precision machined for your gun build. Being 80% finished there is still work to be done on this lower receiver before it is functional. This unfinished lower receiver is not a FFL item and...


Last time we spoke, I mentioned the superiority of ranged weaponry over melee combat. Well, now its time to investigate the flip side of that. Close Combat wins games. Going back over some of the stuff from last time if you remember that even the worst WS can still hit the best WS on a 5+. So that means even your lowly zombie with a WS 2 can potentially hit even that super evolved Possessed model.
Therein lines the rub, though. Everyone can potentially hit everyone else with equal ease. So what makes the difference? Well, mainly its choosing the right tool for the right job. And when picking the right tool, there are a few things to consider. Those are the Weapon Skill, Strength, Initiative, and lets not kid ourselves, the cost. These are really the things that make a difference.
Before we get into those, and how they effect close combat I want to take a moment to mention something. This is something that is completely overlooked by most wargamers, and most people that play any of GW's games. The base line model in Mordheim is the standard human. Most stats are 3, except for wounds and leadership. In 40K the baseline is the tactical marine, and everything is scaled up or down from that. Mordheim, everything is scaled from a base of 3. That makes a huge difference. It means that for almost all actions you have a 50/50 chance of succeeding. That's our center point.
With three being our center point that's where the WS, Strength, and Initiative come into play. Anything that is under three is low, anything over three is high. Three is the magic number, and it doesn't make a difference. With a three in any score, you concentrate on the other stats instead of the one that is a three, and if all of them are three, then just do what you like. There are things that you need to consider with each other. I could make a whole spread sheet of different combinations, but that would take awhile, so I am going to highlight each one.
Low WS: These guys are your filler. They only have a 33% chance of hitting, so in most cases you want to avoid things that don't improve your chances of causing a wound, because you might not get a chance later.
High WS: These are the mainstay of your close combat troops. These are the guys that you want to give weapons with special abilities to. The axe, club, are excellent in these hands. Especially the club, which can help get a stunned result.
Low Strength: With a low strength you almost have to take some sort of strength increasing weapon, fortuitously there are very few things that have a strength lower then three.
High Strength: While it is tempting to give these guys weapons that increase thier strength to really high amounts, it isn't worth it. Save yourself some money, and go with weapons like halberds and morning stars. These increase your strength by one, and a five strength wounds the most common toughness on a 2+, with an armor modifier of -2 as well.
Low Initiative: There's two ways around this. You can take a spear which always hits first (except against other spears, or special skills), however that only effects the first round. The other thing to do is to take a double handed weapon, since you will be hitting last anyway, you might as well make that hit a big hit.
High Initiative: These guys are gods in Mordheim. The only thing you want to avoid totally is the double handed weapon. Speed is their strength, so don't turn it into a weakness.
So those are the main things to keep in mind, because they effect almost every hit. However, there are a few things lesser things that you want to keep in mind as well. They effect each combat, but are of lesser importance. Those are handedness, cost, and something else to be determined.
Handedness: This seems kind of obvious, but it can make or break a model. A single handed weapon can allow you take a shield, buckler, or a second single handed weapon for a bonus attack. The two handed weapons generally have a better ability or a strength increase, but they don't allow you to use a second weapon, shield, or buckler in close combat. You have to weigh the benefits of two handedness special abilities against the defense or extra attack a one handed weapon can give you.
Cost: Again, seemingly obvious, but it makes a big difference, especially at different points in the game. A low cost weapon, like a club/hammer/mace or axe are great for the beginning when you want to put boots on the ground or you are playing a horde warband, but give very few extra abilities. The mid point weapons are often what I like to call the game makers. Mid point weapons, like the sword, halbred, or spear have almost no drawbacks and a pretty good ability. High cost weapons like flails, morningstars, and double handed weapons have huge advantages, but also have huge drawbacks.
These are the things that make a difference in Mordheim, WS, Strength, Iniative, Handedness, and cost. There is a lot more to think about when equipping your models with close combat weapons then with ranged weapons, but I hope I gave you a bit more food for thought with these.


The Trajectory of Turkish-Western Relations after S-400s - Mensur Akgün | Al Sharq Forum
It is well known that Turkey has long sought to purchase long-range anti-ballistic missiles and American Patriot missiles had been on its shopping list since the early 1990s. However, Turkey could not reach an agreement with the United States and as far as I am concerned, technology transfer was the main hurdle in reaching a deal. Turkey showed interest in alternative Chinese manufactured systems, but mostly due to stiff opposition from the United States and some other NATO allies, Ankara decided to postpone the procurement. The need to obtain a nationally operational anti-ballistic system re-imposed its urgency on Turkey when Syrian missiles and anti-ballistic missile systems became both a threat against and deterrent for Turkey, particularly in the earlier stages of the civil war in Syria.
To read the full article please click here.
To read Mensur Akgün's part of the article, please click here.


The $5.4 Billion deal was inked in October 2018 between Russia and India for delivery of five S-400 Missile systems from former to latter. It is projected to widen the conventional asymmetry between India and Pakistan. The induction of S-400 Anti Aircraft Missile system, aims at bottling up the Pakistan Air Force, denying possibilities of air dominance, which the PAF has been achieving over its Indian counterpart in the past.
How Capable is the S-400 System?
The Anti-Aircraft missile system can carry four types of missiles with varying ranges, the shortest being 40 km with 9M96 while the longest being 400 km with 40N6 missiles. One of the variants of above mentioned missile, i.e. 9M962 is lightening quick. It can fly at Mach 15 and engage targets at low altitude. S-400 is a mobile system that comprises of a very powerful radar with automated detection and targeting, missiles that can destroy aircrafts, cruise and ballistic missiles and a very powerful command and control centre.
The deployment of an S-400 system takes mere five minutes. It can launch 72 missiles at a time, taking down 36 targets at maximum. S-400 is an upgrade to its earlier version S-400 and defence experts believe that the system is at least twice as lethal as S-300 owing to its much more powerful radar, improved accuracy and extended range of detection which stands at around 600 km. It can destroy a ballistic missile within 60 km of its point of deployment.
S-400: The Game Changer
S-400 is a system whose acquisition has prospects of destabilising the strategic balance in the region. With its high range of detection, interception and increased accuracy, it has the ability to render Pakistan Air Force jammed to operate within areas of its range. S-400 has a very powerful radar, which at least on paper, can detect and intercept all fourth generation fighter planes. It may even go as far as to intercept a fifth generation stealth fighter as per manufacturers’ claims, however, this remains doubtful unless observed practically in battlespace.
Pakistan Air Force has been the best performer among all the forces in 1965 and 1971 wars with India and is known for establishing quick air dominance over its adversary. However, With S-400 systems deployed across the border, Pakistan Air Force, which does not yet comprise of any fifth generation stealth fighter, will have a very hard time.
The deployment of the precious systems will not be very close to border with Pakistan, in order to survive saturation strike from Pakistan. The most proficient deployment would be at least 200-300 km from border with Pakistan and for the purpose of shielding high value counter force targets from Pakistan Air Force. While also providing ability to intercept aircrafts or missiles within the Pakistani airspace.
The ability to hit Pakistani aircrafts and missiles including cruise and ballistic, within Pakistani airspace is what changes the game entirely in India’s favour. S-400, therefore, will dramatically extend India’s ability to execute its Cold Start Doctrine, aimed at rapidly folding up Pakistan’s defence by multiple penetrations with swift mobilisation of the Indian troops. Pakistan will struggle to stop Indian Cold Start penetrations as its air force will be locked up to an extent and precious time will be lost in countering the Air Defence system.
S-400, will dramatically extend India’s ability to execute its Cold Start Doctrine
The threat emanating form S-400 acquisition, to Pakistan, is alarmingly serious due to the fact that the country depends largely on its air force in its conflicts, particularly with India. With Pakistan’s inability to afford S-400 or any system equivalent to it due to financial crunch, the prospects of dealing with the threat efficiently appear bleak.
Pakistan, in order to evade detection by S-400 radars, needs a fifth generation stealth fighter which the air force of the first Islamic Republic cannot afford. Experts believe that the F-22 Raptor might be the only fighter which could sneak through the S-400 radar as its visibility on the radars, even the most powerful, is somewhere equivalent to that of a golf ball.
Experts believe that the F-22 Raptor might be the only fighter which could sneak through the S-400 radar
Pakistan has a ray of hope emanating from its successful test of Ababeel (Multiple Independently targetable Re-entry Vehicle) in 2017. Ababeel is capable of carrying missile payload consisting multiple warheads which could also be nuclear. Ababeel is a medium range ballistic missile with a range upto 2200 km. It can serve well in a saturation strike against an S-400 system by carrying multiple warheads, provided Pakistan has the accurate intelligence information regarding the position of the S-400 system to hit.
Pakistan believes that its Submarine Launched Cruise Missile (SLCM) Babur, is also capable of bypassing Indian air defence system. However, Babur is a subsonic cruise missile with a speed of Mach 0.8, which makes it very much vulnerable to detection and interception by the S-400. Therefore, SLCM Babur might not be a fit to strike S-400 system as it might get neutralized before hitting its target.
Pakistan has a ray of hope emanating from its successful test of Ababeel (Multiple Independently targetable Re-entry Vehicle) in 2017
The fact that that India has been working on its indigenous air defence capabilities in collaboration with Israel, has provided it tactile experience in this realm. It is believed that India might be able to shield at least its major cities like Delhi and Mumbai against a Pakistan’s ballistic or cruise missile carrying conventional or non-conventional warheads. On top of it is the acquisition of S-400 which is at par with the US Patriot Air defence system.
Pakistan has recently inducted HQ-16, designated as LY-80, a Chinese made medium ranged Surface to Air Missile system with a range of 40km. The sea variant of the missile is capable of intercepting objects flying as low as 10 m above sea level. The induction has boosted Pakistan’s air defence capabilities to a great extent. The Army conducted a successful test of the newly inducted missile on January 10, 2018.
So Here’s How it looks like for Pakistan
Indian acquisition of S-400 has significantly disturbed the strategic stability in the region and has posed a serious question mark on Pakistan’s ability to respond via ballistic or cruise missile strikes. S-400 also poses a significant threat to Pakistan Airforce, covering its operational abilities with clouds of despondency and supplementing India’s cold start doctrine. Pakistan’s possible options range from inducting stealth fighter which remains unaffordable, to the use of MIRVs in saturation strike against S-400. Recent induction of HQ-16 SAM has reduced India’s relative advantage over Pakistan. The S-400 Threat, however, exists unless Pakistan comes up with the ability to ensure piercing through it or ensuring success of saturated attack to take out the system with confidence.


Steel for Armour
Steel for Armour
Various materials especially metals, ceramics, polymers, and composites have been used in light vehicle defence technology. With each material appearing significant in respective applications, metals are mostly used for ballistic protection due to its mechanical properties. The most common metallic material being used in the armoured vehicles is steel. Steels which are being used for the protection of armour are also known as armour steels. Steels of high tensile strength, hardness, and ductility are mostly used as a ballistic protection plate.
Of course, armour steels are not ordinary steels. These are high strength steels with combined hardness and fracture toughness. The main properties such as toughness, hardness, good fatigue strength, ease of fabrication and joining and having relative low cost make the steel a popular material for the hulls of the armoured vehicle. Steel is the best all round performing armour material in spite of its high density because of its properties like toughness, ready availability, low cost, castability, weldability etc.
Since the armour is used to protect a particular area, its practical weight is best described by its areal density (Ad), which is given by the expression ‘Weight of the armour system/area is being protected’. The unit of the areal density is kilograms per square meter (kg/sq m). Steels provide protection at realistic areal densities for many ballistic applications and also at an affordable price.
Armour steels have historically delivered optimized ballistic performance against a range of battlefield threats, including both armour piercing (AP) and fragmentation threats. For protecting battle tanks, high hardness steel armour has been in use for many years. Steel continue to be highly competitive armour material even today and the ballistic performance of steel continues to improve with incremental advances in steel metallurgy.
Armour steel is basically a high strength low alloy structural steel which has been treated to have property of very high resistance to penetration. This property to the steel is usually imparted by the thermo mechanical treatment. It is well known that the resistance to penetration of steel can be improved by increasing its texture intensity which can be obtained by thermo-mechanical treatment.The mass effectiveness of the armour increases with the hardness of the material. However, very hard armour tends to be brittle and to shatter when hit.
The conceptions such as hardness, strength and toughness are the main features for the ballistic performance of a given steel. Alloying and processing metallurgy are very important in the development of armour steels. Armour steel is required to have such properties as (i) high resistance to perforation and ballistic impacts, (ii) possible fabricability, and (iii) adequate fatigue and wear resistance under service conditions.
It has been reported that the high hardness of armour steel directly determines the ballistic performance and perforation mode. However, there is no basic correlation between hardness and resistance to perforation, as measured by the protection ballistic limit. In order to obtain high hardness values, studies on alloying design and heat treatment conditions are very popular to improve the ballistic performance of the steels.
Toughness is another critical property for armour steel under a dynamic attack of projectiles having high kinetic energies. It is generally considered that armour steels having high toughness are very useful to resist ballistic impacts without being fractured. As it is well known, alloying and also heat treatments affect the toughness of the materials.
Fabrication includes many operations such as cutting, welding machining and forming. It is known that the fabrication operations (thermal cutting, welding, and machining etc.) of armour steels need certain metallurgical properties in the armour steels. Low carbon equivalent (CE), limited segregation, low hydrogen content, low residual stress, and high ductility are the main property requirements for fabrication of armoured steels. Armour steels are required to be weldable. The fatigue behaviour of these steels is to be higher under cyclic stresses. Weld quality directly determines the mechanical properties of the armour steel.
Classification of armour steels
Steel armour can be classified into four main groups. These groups are (i) rolled homogeneous armour (RHA), (ii) high hardness armour (HHA), (iii) variable hardness steel armour, and (iv) perforated armour. Out of these four types, RHA steels are usually being considered as a benchmark material. RHA steel has been considered as the conventional armour for light armoured vehicles. It is a high quality alloy steel which is rolled out before being heat treated to give it an optimum combination of strength and toughness. The chemical composition as well as the most commonly used classiﬁcation for RHA armour steels are given in Tab 1.
|Tab 1 Composition and classification of RHA steels|
|Composition of RHA steels||Classification of RHA steels|
|Carbon||0.18-0.32||Class-1||Readily weldable steel subjected to structural loads||262-311||895-1050||15|
|Manganese||0.60-1.50||Class-2||Readily weldable steel to protect against armour piercing (AP) ammunition||255-341||895-955||14-16|
|Nickel||0.05-0.95||Class-3||Readily weldable higher hardness steel manufactured in thin sections||470-540||1450-1850||8|
|Chromium||0.00-0.90||Class-3A||Readily weldable higher hardness steel manufactured in thin sections||420-480||1200-1600||9|
|Molybdenum||0.30-0.60||Class-4||Higher carbon and alloy content higher hardness armour for thick sections||475-605||1450-2000||7|
|Sulphur||0.015 Max.||Class-5||High alloy content armour with very high hardness used for special applications such as perforated armour||560-655||1800-2400||6|
High hardness armour is the name given to a class of homogeneous steel armour which has hardness values exceeding 430 BHN (Brinell hardness number). Variable hardness steel plate introduces some advantages with varying through-thickness properties. By surface hardening one side of a thick low-carbon steel plate, it is possible to incorporate both hard disruptive and tough absorbing properties in a single material. Such steel is the dual hardness armour (DHA) steel and is much superior to all other metallic forms of armour. However, its use has been very limited because of its high cost. The main advantage is that, the more ductile backing layer is able to arrest crack propagation in the armour plate while the hard front layer is able deform or fracture the threat. The DHA steel is more eﬃcient compared to HHA in defeating AP bullet with a steel core. In perforated armour, holes are introduced into the steel plates. These holes in high hardness steel plate have been shown to be an eﬀective way of disrupting and fragmenting incoming projectiles. This mechanism can be regarded as edge eﬀect.
It is known that the composition, processing and microstructure of the armour steel determine its mechanical properties which then can be correlated to and hence they critically determine its penetration resistance. However, there is a relationship between mechanical properties, specifically the mechanical metallurgy, of armour steels and ballistic performance.
Metallurgical properties of armour steel
The tensile strength and hardness of the armour steel relies on several factors but primarily the microstructure. The final microstructure of material is a result of series of heat treatment. Heat treatment can be categorized by austenizing, quenching and tempering. Tempered martensitic matrix contributes higher hardness as the decreasing of grain size by carbon precipitation.
On studying the grain boundary effect, it is shown that smaller grain size increases tensile strength. Other than that, tempered bainite steel is reported to have superior hardness and toughness when contacting armour piercing 7.62 mm caliber projectile. Also, the percentages of alloying elements are very important for precipitating carbide particles. With proper heat treatment process, the precipitation of carbide particles can contribute to high strength in the steel structure. It is also noticed that boron, carbon, manganese, and nickel elements play a main role to improve ballistic properties of armour steel.
The ballistic performance of armour steel depends on the matrix having tempered martensitic or bainitic structure. This is achieved after application of austenization, quenching, and tempering on low alloyed steel. After the process of austenization and quenching, crystal structure of steel is changed from austenite ‘face centered cubic’ (FCC) structure into carbon supersaturated ‘body centered tetragonal’ (BCT) structure to form martensitic structure. Then heat treatment of tempering develops the strength and toughness of the matrix consisting of tempered martensite (1a in Fig 1). In case quenching is not proper then steel can have bainitic structure which can become tempered bainite after tempering (1b in Fig 1).
Bainite consists of lath type ferrite and precipitates within ferrite phase and at the boundaries of the laths. Apart from that, there can also be some quantity of retained austenite. Existence of retained austenite is caused by the imperfection during heat treatment process. The retained austenite presence is believed due to the non-uniformity of temperature and cooling rate, where the transformation of austenite phase to bainite phase is not complete uniformly. In addition, retained austenite is a softer phase compared to the martensite. Hence, the hardness of the material gets reduced. This retained austenite can decrease the strength to defend against the bullet.
However, RHA steel normally has a tempered martensitic phase (1a of Fig 1). Carbide precipitates is observed disperse in the matrix as well. Similar to RHA, other types of armour steels show fine structure in tempered martensitic phase (1c of Fig 1). Tempered martensite consists of recovery and recrystallization in the matrix to relieve the stress generated during the quenching process. Matrix phase is changed because the carbon atoms move out from the matrix in order to form carbide precipitates. Other than that, banding effect also appears. This banding effect is formed due to the rolling process. The process of rolling involves casting steel slabs of appropriate size and then rolling them into plates of required thickness. Hot rolling changes the coarse grain into the finer grain sizes and increases the mechanical properties.
Fig 1 Typical microstructures of armour steel as observed in optical microscope
The typical stress-strain curve and the tensile properties are shown in Fig 2. According to the stress-strain curve, the armour steel shows a high tensile strength of 1750 MPa. The phases in the high strength low alloy steels are believed the main contributing factors for determining the tensile strength of the materials. The high tensile strength is due to the tempered martensitic phase in the microstructure of the armour steel. Nickel is believed to be the main alloying element responsible to increase the strength of steel besides carbon which also maintains its role as a strengthening mechanism. It is reported that during the tempering process, steel solution rejects carbon in the form of finely divided carbide phases, the high supersaturated solid solution of carbon in iron forming a martensitic microstructure. The final result from the tempering process is a fine dispersion of carbides in an alpha iron matrix. Precipitates of carbide particles are present in high strength steel, having the black particles as iron carbide. During the tempering process, martensite is decomposed to form carbide particles. This is due to the carbon atoms travelling out of the spaces between the iron atoms. The strain in the martensite is relieved as the carbon atoms leave the matrix. This behaviour contributes to higher strength and hardness. Hence, it is observed in the armour steel, the microstructure of tempered martensite with very small iron carbide islands results in its high tensile strength.
Fig 2 Typical stress-strain curve and tensile properties of armour steel
There are several factors which contribute to hardness increment primarily its microstructure phase. Hardenability is to be adequate to achieve by high percentage of martensite. Armour steel normally consists of fully martensitic phase. Martensitic transformation process is generally enhanced by manganese due to decrement of critical quench speed. Apart from manganese, boron also controls martensitic transformation by preventing bainite and pearlite transformation. Since armour steel microstructure is totally in martensite phase, further hardness of martensite is solely dependent on the carbon content of the steel.
Carbon is a very small interstitial atom which tends to fit into clusters of iron atoms. It strengthens steel and gives it the ability to harden by heat treatment particularly if it exceeds 0.25 %. Carbon forms compounds with other elements called carbides, such as cementite, which exist as a precipitate and increase the hardness. Besides interstitial carbon which resists slippage, grain boundary also acts as a pinning point to resist dislocations. Fine microstructure consisting of high number of grain boundary in constant area increases resistance to slippage and this improves both tensile strength and hardness.
Strength and ballistic performance
Based on mechanics of projectile impact, the penetration of bullets depends on many factors which occur over three phases namely the initial impact phase, stress propagation phase, and fracture initiation phase. During initial impact phase, the projectile kinetic energy is converted in impact energy on the surface or steel plate. The enormous force which acts on the steel plate can be reduced by increasing the hardness of the steel. Once the hardness of the plate is higher than projectile tips, the projectile gets shattered and the kinetic energy of bullet gets reduced proportionally to its mass.
A simple equation can be used to introduce the relationship between the most fundamental mechanical property of armour steel, i.e. its strength, and its resistance to penetration by AP projectiles. One of the most common and fundamental failure mechanisms experienced by homogenous steel armour is the ductile hole formation (Fig 3). This failure mechanism shows considerable plasticity and hence an estimate of the work performed in plastic deformation can provide a reasonable guide to the kinetic energy required to defeat a target.
Fig 3 Mechanism of ductile hole formation
The work of ductile hole formation (Wdhf) is equal to the work done in expanding a hole in a target to the projectile diameter. It is expressed by the equation Wdhf = (pi)* (D square)* ho* So/2 where value of pi is 3.14159, D is the diameter of a non-deforming projectile, ho the target thickness and So an appropriate compressive flow stress as the measure of material strength. The plastic strains required for the defeat of a metal target are usually large and hence a compressive flow stress at a high value of strain is appropriate. Estimates of the flow stress at large quasi-static strains are dependent on the actual rate of work hardening and here, a uni-axial quasi-static compressive flow stress at a true strain of 1.0 is used.
At this level of strain for steels, such a flow stress is generally insensitive to any further increases in strain. High strain rate steel properties at large strains can alternatively be used but may not necessarily offer significantly greater accuracy when making first-order estimates of ballistic performance with the equation given above.
The use of quasi-static yield stress rather than flow stress at high strain values provides a greater underestimate of the ballistic limit and the discrepancy is normally significant for steels which have high rates of work hardening. Hardness measurements are also to be used with caution as a measure of material strength since these measurements can only be used usually to estimate the material yield stress.
Development of hard protection plate goes back in the 1980s prior to its contribution to penetration resistance. However, hardness increment is only effective up to critical limit because it promotes brittleness in plate which leads to shattering effect. If a protection plate is not hard enough, a projectile tip made from high hardness material with sufficient kinetic energy can penetrate the plate. During impact, balance kinetic energy from projectile exerts large deformation and stress wave on plate over a short period of time. The ability of the plate material to resist bullet perforation depends on the tensile strength where good energy absorption capacity is needed in order to deform the projectiles tips.
Moreover, stress wave continues to propagate until the rear side and reflects the waves upon the back plate causing fragmentation of brittle metal (spalling effect). Hence, it is essential for protection plate to have sufficient ductility. This allows plate to bend so it can absorb the stress of impact at high velocity without shattering. If monolithic rolled homogenous armour (RHA) is used for the light vehicle armour as its protection panel then the thick monolithic panel is heavy and causes limitations on vehicle mobility. Hence, weight reduction approach is necessary towards protection panel design.
One of the most common methods for weight reduction while maintaining its strength is to use the composite protection panel. The design of laminate is required to retain the original strength, while reducing the weight of panel. Hence, the front material of protection panel is to consist of high hardness, while the back plate is required to have high ductility.
The response of the armour is primarily determined by the steel strength and toughness and projectile type at impact speeds below 2 kms/second. Plastic work is hence the key determinant of the ballistic performance of the armour with the penetration resistance of armour steels initially increasing with increasing flow stress. However, a complex relationship exists between the strength of an armour steel plate and its penetration resistance, shown schematically in Fig 4 where hardness is used to characterize material strength.
Fig 4 Relationship exists between the strength of an armour steel plate and its penetration resistance
The relationship between the hardness of a monolithic armour steel plate and its performance against armour piercing projectiles is shown in Fig 4. Changes in failure mechanisms result in a complex, discontinuous relationship between plate hardness and penetration resistance. This is expressed schematically in Fig 4a, and in terms of Brinell hardness values in Fig 4b, for an unspecified armour piercing projectile. The initial improvements which occur with increases in plate hardness in Fig 4a are a result of increased resistance to plastic flow in a ductile hole formation failure mechanism. Beyond a certain point, however, increased plate hardness results in decreased protection due to an increased susceptibility of the material to low-energy adiabatic shear failure. Further increases in plate hardness result in improved performance, but rather as a result of projectile fracture. At very high hardness levels, a lack of toughness can result in brittle fracture of the steel plate and thus erratic behaviour, depending on the specific steel impacted. Fig 4b suggests a similar relationship to the schematic of Fig 4a but with hardness values specified for the discontinuity in behaviour.
While ballistic performance can sometimes be correlated to the hardness, material hardness is simply a quasi-static measure of yield pressure for a specific indentor geometry which can be related to a compressive yield stress and thus the initiation of quasi-static plastic. Hardness is not a measure of a dynamic yield or flow stress which accounts for work hardening. Hence, strain rate hardening or thermal softening is generally required to fully define the armour steel resistance to plastic flow under projectile impact conditions.
The improved ballistic resistance of steel as a function of increasing hardness is well established and for this reason armour designers are more often incorporating higher hardness (higher strength) armour steels in their designs and structural armour solutions.
While increases in hardness increases resistance to projectile penetration (improved protection), this is not always linear and does not necessarily apply for fragmentation protection, as demonstrated by the ‘fragment simulating projectile’ (FSP) ballistic limits. Fragmentation protection decreases sharply with hardness, making the higher hardness armour steel grades such as HHA a poor choice for such applications. This reduced penetration resistance arises because impacts of blunt fragments cause high strength steels to fail by adiabatic shear plugging, a low energy failure mechanism. Adiabatic shear is responsible for the observed reduction in FSP performance.
It is seen that there is no difference between the ballistic performance of ‘ultra high toughness armour’ (UHTA) with hardness of 450 BHN and HHA (BHN 512). The UHTA grade has leaner alloying element content, providing improved toughness and weldability compared to HHA. UHTA is a better choice than HHA for structural applications and its more consistent ballistic performance allows a weight saving for some protection levels.
Around 2008, ‘ultra-high hardness armour’ (UHHA) steels with hardness values of greater than 570 BHN have been produced which have been assessed and applied as practical armour materials. UHHA steels can offer considerable performance improvements over HHA steels and also fulfill an equivalent ballistic role to dual hardness armour but as a homogenous plate. Ballistic performance increases at very high steel hardness values have been known for many years but it is only recently that armour steels have been produced which consistently meet ballistic requirements without shattering upon impact.
Overall, it is seen that the ballistic performance relates to steel armour hardness, though over specific hardness ranges there can be an increasing or decreasing relationship between ballistic performance and hardness, depending on the projectile and the observed armour failure mechanism. Another important influence of armour hardness is whether it is sufficiently high to deform or shatter a projectile, both of which strongly affect the ballistic performance. In practical terms, hardness is a measurement of strength that can be easily measured on a plate-by-plate basis, and it is particularly convenient as a quality assurance measurement.
Extensive historical studies found that the ballistic performance of structural and armour grade steels correlates to hardness and tensile strength but not yield strength. Interestingly, some studies have found a quite linear relationship with measured quasi-static tensile yield stress between values of 600 and 1700 MPa for quenched and tempered steels (Fig 5).
Fig 5 Linear relationship between quasi-static tensile yield stress and ballistic limit for a range of quenched and tempered steels
However, it has also been demonstrated in another study that a strong correlation exist between predicted and measured ballistic performance for a range of materials when the quasi-static compressive flow stress at high strains, i.e. flow stress at a true strain of 1.0, rather than compressive yield stress, which is used as a measure of material strength. The use of flow stress is reasonable when considering the large strains involved in a ballistic impact event, especially through ductile hole formation and many other failure mechanisms. The quasi static compressive true stress – true strain curve is almost flat at such large strains, thus this flow stress measure is also largely insensitive to the precise value of strain.
There is a reason for the enhancement in the flow stress of steel at high strain rates. In the vicinity of the initial flow stress, flow stress is affected by both temperature and strain rate, and strain rate enhancement can be explained by a ‘thermal activation model’ of dislocation movement. This model assumes that at temperatures lower than a critical temperature (dependent on strain rate), the flow stress depends on both a thermal component and a thermally activated component. The thermal component of flow stress is determined by the effect of long range dislocation obstacles (e.g. grain boundaries, precipitates, etc.) and is largely strain rate independent, but still dependent on temperature. The thermally activated component of flow stress is related to short-range obstacles (e.g. dislocations) which can be overcome by thermally activated glide of mobile slip dislocations due to thermal fluctuations and thus is more strongly affected by temperature and strain rate; and it is increased by either decreasing temperature or increasing strain rate. Decreasing temperature leads to reduced thermal energy while increasing strain rate reduces the time available for dislocation movement. Both circumstances result in a reduced ability of mobile dislocations to overcome short range obstacles and hence lead to strain rate hardening.
However, the ‘thermal activation model’ has been originally established for initial flow stresses. While this model can also be applied to larger strains, this is seldom done as there are no closed form solutions available that describe the stress-strain behaviour as a function of plastic strain, strain rate and temperature. At larger strains, empirical models or the semi-empirical models are often used to describe flow stress behaviour as a function of strain, strain rate and temperature.


One day, a weapon merchant arrives in a new village and tries to sell his spear and shield.
One villager walks up to him and asks how good his spear, he says that his spear can pierce any shield. Then, when asks how good his shield, he says that it can defend from all spear attacks.
Then the villager asks him what will happen if he takes his spear to strike his shield. The merchant can not answer. So, the merchant picks up the spear and kill the villager.
The lesson behind this story:
If someone asks you a difficult question you cannot answer, just kill the one ask the question.


"NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT: TIME FOR ABOLITION"
A Contribution of the Holy See to the Vienna Conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons
December 8, 2014 (Excerpts)
For sixty years nuclear deterrence . . . is believed to have prevented nuclear war between the superpowers, but it has also deprived the world of genuine peace and kept it under sustained risk of nuclear catastrophe. Since the end of the Cold War more than twenty years ago, the end of the nuclear stand-off has failed to provide a peace dividend that would help to improve the situation of the world’s poor. Indeed, enormous amounts of money are still being spent on “modernizing” the nuclear arsenals of the very states that are ostensibly reducing their nuclear weapons numbers.
. . . [I]t must be admitted that the very possession of nuclear weapons, even for purposes of deterrence, is morally problematic. While a consensus continues to grow that any possible use of such weapons is radically inconsistent with the demands of human dignity, in the past the Church has nonetheless expressed a provisional acceptance of their possession for reasons of deterrence, under the condition that this be “a step on the way toward progressive disarmament.” This condition has not been fulfilled—far from it. . . .
It is now time to question the distinction between possession and use which has long been a governing assumption of much ethical discourse on nuclear deterrence. Use of nuclear weapons is absolutely prohibited, but their possession is judged acceptable on condition that the weapons are held solely for deterrent purposes, that is, to dissuade adversaries from employing them.
The language of intention obscures the fact that nuclear armories, as instruments of military strategy, inherently bear active disposition for use. Nuclear weaponry does not simply lie dormant until the conditional intention is converted into an actual one at the moment when a nuclear attack is launched by one’s adversary. The machinery of nuclear deterrence does not work that way. It involves a whole set of acts that are pre-disposed to use: strategic designs, targeting plans, training drills, readiness checks, alerts, screening for conscientious objectors among operators, and so on.
The political and military officials of nuclear possessing states assume the responsibility to use these weapons if deterrence fails. But since what is intended is mass destruction—with extensive and lasting collateral damage, inhumane suffering, and the risk of escalation—the system of nuclear deterrence can no longer be deemed a policy that stands firmly on moral ground.
The time has come for new thinking on how to challenge complacency surrounding the belief in nuclear deterrence. Changed circumstances bring new responsibilities for decision-makers. The apparent benefits that nuclear deterrence once provided have been compromised, and proliferation results in grave new dangers. The time has come to embrace the abolition of nuclear weapons as an essential foundation of collective security. . . .
. . . .
In search of the political will to eradicate nuclear weapons, and out of concern for the world our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren will inherit, the human family will have to become united in order to overcome powerful institutionalized interests that are invested in nuclear armaments. Only in solidarity will we recognize our common humanity, grow in awareness of the threats we face in common, and discover the paths beyond the impasse in which the world now finds itself. . . .
. . . Now is the time to affirm not only the immorality of the use of nuclear weapons, but the immorality of their possession, thereby clearing the road to nuclear abolition. . . .
. . . .
The re-allocation of funding from arms to development is essential to social justice. For social justice consists in the justice of our institutional arrangements. The disparity of resources between situations dedicated to human development and those dedicated to nuclear armament is a fundamental injustice in the global political order. Re-allocation of resources from wasteful and dangerous weapons programs to the constructive and peaceful purposes of global human development would undo shameful imbalances in public funding and institutional capacities. . . .
. . . .
In short, to achieve nuclear abolition, we need to resist succumbing to the limits set by political realism. While recognizing how these concepts can provide a prudent curb on unwarranted exuberance, we must ultimately reject them as the defining outlook for our common political future. The fear that drives the reluctance to disarm must be replaced by a spirit of solidarity that binds humanity to achieve the global common good of which peace is the fullest expression.
Emphases added. Read full statement here.
“Nuclear Disarmament: Seeking Human Security,” Joint Declaration of U.S. and European Catholic Bishops (July 2017)
U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Background Paper on Nuclear Weapons (February 2018)
Pax Christi International, “Catholic Morality and Nuclear Abolition” (March 2015)