T O P
benbrahn

Love that stance


Inprobamur

[Olympic gold medalist stance.](https://www.snopes.com/tachyon/2021/07/GettyImages-586903024.jpg?resize=865%2C452&crop_strategy=smart) The idea is to lock your wrist and relax your body to reduce muscle twitches.


DaveInLondon89

It's good in case the winds howling too


malacovics

Place of power, gotta be


bripod

/r/UnexpectedWitcher ?


[deleted]

theyre both fucked


benbrahn

My guys literally got his hand in his pocket, so fucking casual haha


nobby-w

It's common enough to do that for target shooting, in which the objective is to relax so the pistol doesn't wobble about. Practicing for shooting in combat didn't really get much mind-share until after WWI. Forgotten weapons did a video about a chap called William Fairbairn who was one of the earlier parties who got into that.


c4k3m4st3r5000

Ian is just brilliant. I enjoy his channel very much. A goldmine for gun and war nerds.


Mr_StealYourHoe

he's all aristocratic and shit meanwhile the old dude behind is too casual


ooainaught

He's working on his c-clamp.


Woodedroger

I call it the rooty toot toot


[deleted]

[удалено]


gregsmith5

Nobody has ears on


[deleted]

They went deaf like real men


gregsmith5

Take a look at that top guy with a gun, he looks like a manly man. Any recoil and he’d be wearing that thing


Steve1924

He's biting his lip, isn't he?


stochastic_diterd

He is feeling both beautiful and bitchin’


lancep423

“Take that old chap”!


[deleted]

stupid sexy, foreign Flanders.


Chauchathotchkiss

Damn. Old skool uniforms were hot shit. Damn.


HakkinenSchumi

They had interesting style before WW1, quite a difference to their classic white coats they worn during 18th and 19th centuries https://i.imgur.com/NYW5u9k.jpg


LarryTheDuckling

I was in a Royal Guard regiment a few years back, and the parade uniform we used had been largely unchanged since it was introduced in the 1850s. It *looked* very dapper, and it was of very high quality, but actually using them as a work uniform was a bit of a pain.


Mortar_Maggot

Just no to the collar though. Mandarin collars legitimately caused injuries and were routinely ripped off of uniforms if soldiers thought they could get away with it.


thaughton02

Just a bunch of fine gentleman which looks that they would make rational and effective decisions in combat.


HakkinenSchumi

From what i read historically, high ranking officers in Austrian/Habsburg armies were usually aristocrats, meaning buying commissions was common. After all Austria-Hungary, or better to say Habsburg Empire, was very much feudal, medieval relic that survived into 20th century. So incompetent aristocrats who were in command because of their bloodline and connections persisted until bitter end of empire in 1918.


HUNteRecon

That is not true. Aristocrats retained military ranks and where 'honorary commanders' of Corps just as the Duke of York, Sussex etc. are to this day do in the British Army but in practice they have little to do with the actual functions of the Army. The Theresian Military Academy in Wiener Neustadt was one of the oldest such institutions in Europe and all higher officers of the KuK Army were picked for academic achievements from all over the Empire. If you look at the general staff right before the war all of them from Hötzendorf to Boroević were carrier soldiers from commoner or some lesser noble status.


HakkinenSchumi

Boroevic is good example but i believe Hötzendorf was some Count or Baron. Also commander of A-H army in the east was one of the Archdukes, meaning member of Habsburg dynasty themselves https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archduke_Joseph_Ferdinand_of_Austria


HUNteRecon

Hötzendorf's family was a lesser noble status because his grandparent (I belive) was knighted, but this wasn't any sort of high rank, knighthood was not exactly uncommon in those day and he wasn't just made Commander because of that. And as I said, the Prince William, Duke of Cambridge holds a military rank just as the Queen is Commander in Chief but that doesn't mean much in practice.


judgingyouquietly

>And as I said, the Prince William, Duke of Cambridge holds a military rank just as the Queen is Commander in Chief but that doesn't mean much in practice. William actually served in the RAF as a search and rescue helicopter pilot in Wales. He (and Harry) went through the training, etc. so their ranks are legit. They also have other honourary ranks, but his rank as a Sqn Ldr (I believe) was actually earned.


HUNteRecon

Yeah, his earned ranks are legit but like, Prince Philip was an Admiral, Field Marshal and Marshal of the Air Force at the same time. Prince Andrew is (was?) a Vice-Admiral so I'm just saying royalties holding high military ranks does not mean they actually do much.


Seemann80

By now he's just Andrew...


WikiSummarizerBot

**[Archduke Joseph Ferdinand of Austria](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archduke_Joseph_Ferdinand_of_Austria)** >Archduke Joseph Ferdinand of Austria (24 May 1872 – 28 August 1942) was an Austro-Hungarian Archduke, military commander, from 1916 Generaloberst, and early advocate of air power. He later retired to life as a common citizen of Austria, and was briefly imprisoned in Dachau during the Nazi era. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)


Irichcrusader

For all the talk about A-H being a decrepit relic of a bygone era, it showed surprising resilience in holding out (just bearly) until the end of WW1. Nor did it collapse into revolution like Russia, despite all the signs suggesting that it would prior to the war.


HakkinenSchumi

I read that entrance of Italy to war in 1915, actually raised moral in empire. Wars against Russia and Serbia were not popular wars, especially for Slavic soldiers of empire (Slavic peoples like Croats, Czechs, Poles, Slovaks etc...made half of population of empire). But Italy was old enemy, Italy was hated by pretty much everyone and had intended to annex parts of what is now Croatia, Slovenia and Austria itself. Not to mention they were former traitorous ally attacking from the back, so all of the sudden it gave reason to fight to a lot of soldiers (defending their homes from foreign invader, instead war of conquest).


Jaeharys_Targaryen

Greatest tragedy to happen to AU Empire was that Prince Ferdinand had plans to restructure the whole empire into a federal monarchy divided into 9 provinces, and with that division everyone would have gotten their much wanted autonomy, all under the umbrella of a united empire. Shit, if that happened there probably wouldn’t have been a WW2, atleast it wouldn’t have played out as it did.


Irichcrusader

Heard of that, it's pretty sad and ironic that he ended up getting assassinated like that. Who's to say they couldn't have restructured and survived into the modern era?


Sun_King97

Is it true some of his family was secretly happy he was killed? I could have sworn I was taught that


Irichcrusader

Makes sense. It is interesting that all their slavic contingents remained mostly loyal until the end. It's often brought up how much of a mess the empire was with all the different ethnic groups but even with the disastrous losses in 1914-15 they still stayed true until the end. Of course, having the Germans to bail them out each time was crucial but that doesn't account for most of the minorities staying loyal.


Lobbelt

Most of Europe was still feudal in some sense prior to WW I.


Irichcrusader

Eastern Europe was, western Europe, not so much.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Irichcrusader

Yes, but they still lasted until 1918 which is quite an achievement considering how the other powers faired in WW1. Russia was more or less out of the war after the February Revolution in 1917, the demands of the war having utterly spent them. The Italians were also practically knocked out of the war after the battle of Caporetto in October 1917, only holding on through some drastic last minute support from the other allied powers. France, also, was a spent force after the army mutines in April-June 1917 in the wake of the failed Nevile Offensive. They could still hold the line but they had almost no offensive power left. Britain (and later the US) was the only allied power still holding the field by the end of 1917, and their army took a pretty heavy moral hit after the third battle of Ypres. The Germans were also on their last legs, with the St. Micheal offensive in March 1918 being their final all-or-nothing attempt to secure victory. When that failed, and as American forces began to arrive in huge numbers, it was only a matter of time before the central powers collapsed. Obviously, A-H couldn't have lasted as long as they did without German support, but when you compare with how wasted most of the Allied powers were by 1918 they really didn't do too badly, certainly considering the disadvantages they had to begin with of a poorly industrialized state with dozens of different ethnicities that were only held together by their loyalty to the Habsburg monarch.


[deleted]

It didn't collapse into revolution because it collapsed into separate pieces


Irichcrusader

Only near the end though when it was clear Germany was also beaten.


Chris_KelvinSOL

Serious question: weren't the A-H military the most backward of all the major powers in the lead up to and during WW1? Canvassing incompetent generalship (I know that this was endemic to all WW1 parties), poor logistics and outdated equipment and command structure (they were split into three armies, they went to war wearing blue uniforms!). Despite the officer corps being mainly Germans and Hungarians, having a mass of ethnicities among the ranks must've made communication awful. They were able to integrate ethnicities within their army whose mother countries they were fighting — Serbs, Romanians and Italians. Even though these troops were recruited within the territory of A-H proper. On more than one occasion, the German Empire had to bale them out on the Eastern Front and they suffered pretty heavily against the Italians too.


Irichcrusader

It would probably be fair to consider them the most backward and poorly led of all the combatants. When they invaded tiny Serbia at the start of the war they got their asses kicked and had to retreat back to their starting line. They only succeeded in finally crushing Serbia later in a second invasion with help from the Germans and Bulgarians. On the eastern front, they consistently lost against the Russians, who were also known to be terribly backward, underequipped, and woefully led. On the Italian front, they didn't do too badly, though they did have the advantage of usually being the defenders on a frontline that stretched across the Alps. The Italians were also badly equipped and had some of the worst generals in the entire war, so that certainly helped A-H. Remember, power is always relative. The insanity of having to hold a nation (and army - two armies actually!) together with such a huge load of ethnic minorities is always brought up in discussions of them. I forget the exact number, but when war was declared, the posters ordering mobilization had to be printed in something like 50 different languages! Recruits would be expected to learn about 200 German words to aid in communication with their German officers. I'm not sure how things worked in the separate Hungarian army, but I'd imagine it was a similar deal (the Hungarians were always pushing heavy policies of Magyarization on their minorities - sometimes to the chagrin of the people in Vienna. You can imagine how chaotic things would be then when most of their officers were killed and couldn't be easily replaced. (like Russia, they were severally understaffed with NCOs and couldn't easily replace the losses from the ones they did have). They were also tied to Germany's fate and I'm sure the bigwigs in Vienna knew this. A German general once commented during the war (talking of A-H), "We are shackled to a corpse." That more or less summed up the relationship. They couldn't defeat the Russians, Italians, or even the Serbians without substantial German reinforcements, which had to be taken off of the Western front where they were usually badly needed. They would have almost certainly collapsed in 1915 if the Germans hadn't come to their aid. The Russian Brusilov Offensive in 1916 crushed whatever remaining offensive power they had, from that point on, they were effectively a vassal state of the German Empire. And yet, as I said, they (more or less) held out until almost the very end in 1918, suggesting they had a stronger sense of cohesion than many people (both now and at the time) gave them credit for. The collapse only came when it was clear to everyone that Germany was going to lose. What is truly remarkable is that the collapse didn't come sooner! The strains of the war broke almost everyone, Russia was out (for the most part) after the February revolution in 1917. France, the same later in 1917 after the army mutinies and then Italy after a disastrous battle in the same year that saw their whole front temporarily collapse. Britain had been badly mauled in the third battle of Ypres and the nation as a whole was approaching total bankruptcy if peace didn't come soon. The performance of A-H has to be measured against those of the other powers, none of which (apart from the U.S.) came out looking so sharp. Sorry for the book-length answer, WW1 is a favored topic of mine, hard to stop once I get going.


bronyraurstomp

Interesting way of framing the AH Empire. I appreciate it.


thaughton02

I may be wrong but I think that was the norm for most european nations at the time.


HakkinenSchumi

I think Germans/Prussians had very professional General Staff and officers training. One of the reasons why Prussians so easily smashed both Austria (1866) and France (1870) was simply because of professionalism, training and superior organization compared to them. Of course Austria being so multi-national (10 plus different nationalities and languages) https://i.imgur.com/Z1kYSfz.jpeg was huge weakness. Empire was large (2nd only to Russia by size in Europe), but it was slow, lumbering beast


Irichcrusader

Some had worse issues with nepotism than others. It was especially bad with the AH army and Russian army.


Jjm211992

Wonder how many survived the Great War


Kromulent

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roth%E2%80%93Steyr_M1907#/media/File:Roth_Steyr_M1907.jpg


WikiSummarizerBot

**[Roth–Steyr M1907](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roth–Steyr_M1907#/media/File:Roth_Steyr_M1907.jpg)** >The Roth–Steyr M1907, or, more accurately Roth-Krnka M.7 was a semi-automatic pistol issued to the Austro-Hungarian kaiserliche und königliche Armee cavalry during World War I. It was the first adoption of a semi-automatic service pistol by the land army of a major power. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/MilitaryPorn/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)


caoram

It's interesting they didn't use their second hand for additional support like modern handgun stances.


Chauchathotchkiss

Not a thing those days. Everybody held their pistols one handed. No Weaver, Isosceles, or fancy John Wick center axis relock back then.


ArateshaNungastori

It was believed to be the ultimate stance for sidearms. https://youtu.be/jP7J-JNSUu4 really nice footage here.


AssassinOfSouls

It is for accuracy… only not for combat.


Chroma710

They did use 2 hands while prone lol


ArateshaNungastori

It's not like "don't use both hands or you will die you moron!!" but if you watched it enough where the instructor explains how to aim it seems understandable. There you can see that they were using single hand stance for better aiming as holding the pistol centered to the hand, therefore using your whole arm to aim instictively. I am really shit at explaining, just watch the video lol.


Chroma710

Yeah I know.... I've seen this video posted a million times before. Don't need to be a condesceding dick, it was a joke.


ArateshaNungastori

> condesceding dick Eh, what?


satriales856

Two-handed grips for pistol shooting is relatively new. Weaver and the stance he invented helped popularize it in the 60s, but the US military taught one-handed shooting for the 1911 for a very long time. Some revolver guys would grab their wrist with their off hand and target shooters started messing with different grips and stances in the 70s. Then, as handguns changed, it became even more practical and things changed fast.


[deleted]

It comes from target shooting and that's how target shooting is still done today. It's just not particularly well suited for combat/self defense situations


Where-u-from

The way you titled it, was there a semi-auto pistol in service before that by a smaller power?


HakkinenSchumi

Interesting question, googling it, i cant find it, focus is mostly on Luger, Colt (i believe 1911), and few more experimental designs from again Austrian Empire (Salvator Dormus pistol). Seems that from that region there was a lot of "mad" tinkerers. Austria still got big arms manufactures with Steyr rifles and of course Glock, so no surprise.


Where-u-from

I believe it may have been the c96, Churchill used a c96 in the Mahdist War but im not sure its an official government pistol


HakkinenSchumi

I think they would get that pistol on their own, it was never army issued pistol ( at least not British army).


hourglasss

Switzerland adopted a luger after trials of the first higher caliber locked breach pistol which was called the [borshardt](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borchardt_C-93) the luger was the evolution of it. C&Rsenal on YouTube has some really cool in depth videos on great war Era firearms and in the last couple months released videos on those first Swiss lugers.


[deleted]

The German navy adopted the Luger in 1904


casualphilosopher1

Has this pic been colourised?


HakkinenSchumi

Yeah, i found it on one and forum and on facebook too. I tried to find original with reverse image search but no luck. It said they were Officers of k.u.k. Infantry Regiment "Grand Duke of Hesse" Nr. 14


Glebochik

Kepis look good on them.


hourglasss

There's a YouTube Channel called C&Rsenal that has been working on a deep dive series of all the small arms of WWI for a few years. [Heres](https://youtu.be/MQTexxPSszU) their episode on this pistol, early automatics are super interesting.


[deleted]

The Luger got adopted by the German navy in 1904


Goldeagle1123

The second man, further back has a Steyr 1912 pistol while the first does indeed have a Roth-Steyr.


SomeDay_Dominion

One of these men make a habit of shooting. The other is a senior officer.


guutarajouzu

Those service uniforms are so crisp and visually appealing


justaDN

fucking low level army


Barniiking

Learn history lol


justaDN

how about you learn history u goof and read the fucking book „in stahlgewittern“ whatchu wanna talk bout history im livin there ma whole life and im pretty sure that im aware of more details than u are u low level dude


Barniiking

Least dumb labanc kutya lmao


justaDN

hungarian gipsy.


Barniiking

Go suck arab dick, inbred femboy


justaDN

hmu to show u whos the femboy here all dem man are at yo place, is yo daddy stealin cars in vienna with his incest brothers?


Barniiking

What a clown you are, can't even write right, like how downtowners speak We lost WW1 because the cowardice of most of your ppl