Why dont they slap a battleship canon in this thing?
Why dont they slap a battleship canon in this thing?
Angel Peterson
Evan Perry
its a dedicated transport, and a support vessel no less not designed for delivering troops under fire
Tyler Cruz
They do, it's under the side panels.
Levi Price
Well part of the reason is because BB guns are five stories tall.
Just a small technical obstacle.
Luis Murphy
Not to mention obsolete now that capital ships have VLS capable of launching a multitude of various munitions at extreme ranges.
Cooper Hill
>canon
Jose Robinson
Will an Abrams MBT do the trick?
Hunter Reed
Why not just slap a deck gun on it in that case?
Isaac Brooks
I dont know, nogunz, why dont they slap 380mm guns on a lightweight personel carrier?
Nathan Bell
Washington Naval Treaty prohibits it
Cameron Parker
>near frictionless slidey-boi hovercraft
>put a large-calibre gun on it
I hope you like re-laying the gun user
David Wright
>position yourself between target and retreat point
>fire cannon for extra thrust and effect on target
or
>two cannons pointed in opposite directions cancel each others force when fired simultaneously
what do you think of my design? retarded or extra retarded?
Cameron Morgan
Beautiful.
William Wilson
because that space is needed for the shit its transporting. Its called combined arms, welcome to like all successful military's of all time
Charles Wright
recoil.
Logan Carter
I think something like this would be more appropriate.
Easton Hill
Thing about it! You could point it to the rear and shoot it to get a burst of speed!
Nathaniel Martin
The canon is both the armament AND the means of propulsion!
Nicholas Price
You're a fucking idiot. One shot and they are sent way off course, provided they are flipped over.
John White
>If only we could, combine the two somehow...
Nathaniel Adams
>Battleship canon
>The year of our lord 2019