Re: gun nut thread

[LoC978]

30mm? They shoulda just gone all the way and given her one of these:

... you'd hafta make custom trigger and handgrip assemblies for it, though. Damn thing's supposed to mount to the front of a gunship.
fuckin' things are HEAVY (I once accidentally rolled one onto my leg in training. That didn't feel good).

[rusty-spring]

(I once accidentally rolled one onto my leg in training. That didn't feel good).

"I would have snapped to, but I seem to have a 30mm cannon on my leg."

Speaking of escalating weapon sizes...shoulder mounted ICBMs...It's just an RPG x 100,000...right?

[Guest]

Pfft...those aren't big. We all know we want over-the-top, impossible
to implement oversized, Big Friggin Guns. Ya know. Like anime style.

For example, the sniper rifle Police Girl uses in "Hellsing."

Well, that''s the thing, the sniper rifle from one of LoC's post can be chambered for 30mm...

30mm? They shoulda just gone all the way and given her one of these:

You mean like this?

[Guest]

I would like to point out that in Rk95 300 meter accuracy is with open sights. With optical sights you can shoot to around 600-700 meters. I think that the Finnish 7,62 bullet is better than 223. FMJ, because its heavier and in Finland and northern Europe there is a lot of vegetation. So that bullet doesnt go as much off course as does 223. Although 223. bullet has better armour penetrating capabilities and it is more accurate when there is no vegetation, for example in the desert. This accuracy is mostly achieved by high muzzle velocity and low recoil, which allow for three round bursts that are not possible with 7,62 round due to higher recoil.

[Thanatos]

You mean like this?

Yeah....even the author himself wrote in the end of that volume that he went overboard with that.

[Wileama]

... you'd hafta make custom trigger and handgrip assemblies for it, though.

Don't forget ammo can. That's going to have to be massive unto itself. Oh yeah, and the power supply.

[Nachtsider]

The Valmet rifles are nice, Tony. Along with the Vektor CR-21 and IMI Galil, they totally outstrip the old Kalashnikov, which they were based on.

Hellsing's a nice series, although I'm pretty much fedup of seeing character types who behave like cackling, sadistic demons in combat and are continually obsessed with being 'stronger than everyone else'. Whatever happened to quiet, kind, competent professionals - people like Bazzel Baz, Steve Claggett or Jody Taylor?

And to all those posting details of large weapons - you want a big gun? This is a big gun.

[rusty-spring]

I would agree that all those AK derivatives are superior to the original, BUT...to me, the wood of the '47 is what makes it ultimately the most appealing.

Now as for "Dora...." Heh...despite the Germans being painted as unholy demons of WWII...they had some mad, mad, mad (and BRILLIANT) engineers/scientists. I mean c'mon...look at the size of that friggin' 80cm round!

Also...

'Schwere Gustav' was not used against civilian targets.

Probably because for the size of the projectile, it'd just be simpler to drop a Duesenberg on them.

[Wileama]

Ever heard of a book called My Tank is Fight! It is a silly zany little book chronicling the various wacky idea's that people on both sides of world war two thought up. The Germans had a bunch of smart people working for them. However they also scared, and chased off some of their greatest minds. [See albert einstien, Hans Bethe, ect.]

'Dora' was an impressive engineering accomplishment. It was also a wacky waste of war time assets. Honestly blitzkrieg with a mammoth gun that takes 6-10 weeks to set up. Only with a crazy dictator, who also happened to be an artillery officer, and just for humors sake had to compensate for what was in his pants would build that monster. Give me the panzer division any day. Honestly as brilliant as the german war machine was, it was crippled at times by it's lunatic leader.

Anyway this is by far the coolest weapon of wolrd war two: Bat bomb. It is not in fact a weapon from the zany 60s Batman tv show. Rather it was a bomb that would released a little over a thousand bats, each one carrying a small incendiary charge. Bat would hole up in dark places, most likely a wooden Japanese building, and the charges would then explode. On the face of it, the concept really does seem crazy. What makes it awesome is if it had ever been used, it probably would have been very successful.

[rusty-spring]

I remember the Bat Bomb. It's a pretty smart idea. Of course only in pre-liberal USA would that ever fly (literally.) Nowadays you try to create little exploding animals, you'll have the animal rights activists all over your ass.

[Nachtsider]

For all their devilry, the Axis nations' scientists were truly mad geniuses - from revolutionary infantry weapons like the Haenel MP43 and insanely effective ordnance like the 'Long Lance' torpedo and Henschel Hs 293 missile to kickass combat vehicles like Messerschmitt Me 262 Schwalbes, Mitsubishi A6Ms and the Shinano. But when it all came down to it, the Allies' scientists ended up churning out the ultimate weapon - the atomic bomb.

[rusty-spring]

DSA-58OSW



A variant of the FN FAL for the US market. Man, we Yanks sure do love slapping accessory rails on everything. I blame Hollywood.

Also, is it just me or does that magazine look huge? Like AK-47 huge...though it does also fire 7.62mm. *shrugs*

[Nachtsider]

That there's a nice gun, Rusty - I reckon the size of that mag is, indeed, related to the larger-caliber rounds. Does it retain its selective-fire option?

Accessory rails are handy things, actually. And they were in wide use long before Hollyweird got to the masses.

[Wileama]

I will further back up how awesome accessory rails are. Being able to make a switch on your weapon that quickly, and easily is a god send.

[LoC978]

especially when you run an arms room...

[ElfenMagix]

I remember hearing of the M2 being used in 'Nam by loonitic
soliders who did as their former generations did (Pacific Theater in WW2 & Korea); go to the airbase, 'barrow' a few aircraft .50 cals, bolt on some handles and a trigger to it and go bug spraying into the fields with it!

After hearing this (again and again), the top brass finally got Browning to make the current .50 cal used today.

[rusty-spring]

That there's a nice gun, Rusty - I reckon the size of that mag is, indeed, related to the larger-caliber rounds. Does it retain its selective-fire option?

Accessory rails are handy things, actually. And they were in wide use long before Hollyweird got to the masses.

It's for law enforcement use (no civie version) so it does still have select-fire.

I also understand the usefulness of rails on a gun. Apparently so does the government who is switching our soldiers over to versions of weapons that include them.

Although one thing I don't necessarily understand is the switch to the M4 weapon in favor of the M16. If I remember correctly, the whole point of 5.56mm is to kill by velocity, so the shorter barrel of the M4 would reduce velocity...

Perhaps my buddy in the Army summed it up best. "M16s are big and ugly. M4s are cool and tactical."

"Big and Ugly"


"Cool and Tactical"


A picture of a soldier displaying the Land Warrior system. [/exaggeration]

[Wileama]

Last I checked the M4 hasn't replaced the M16. The M16 is still considered the primary weapon for the Marines, and I believe Army. However the M4 is smaller so it's easier to carry, and better at taking corners. If your say a vehicle operate a smaller weapon is more convenient. Also the carbine is the better choice in urban, and similar, environments. So the army issues different weapons to different troops.

EDIT: Wasn't the M2 originally an infantry weapon to begin with? As I recall it was meant to be used as an anti-tank machine gun. Which worked in World War 1. I don't think the M2 was ever pulled from front line troops...

[rusty-spring]

Last I checked the M4 hasn't replaced the M16. The M16 is still considered the primary weapon for the Marines, and I believe Army.

That's true, I misworded my statement. I should have said the government is looking into possibly replacing the M16 with the M4 in the future. Course we all know how often things like this actually happen or are true when it comes to Federal planning.

Thanks for the catch.

[Nachtsider]

The M4 is basically a dwarf M16. I like to call it the Mini-16.

LoC - the Browning M2 was, indeed, purpose-designed as an anti-armor and anti-aircraft weapon back in 1921 (sorry, Elfen). The current configuration's virtually unchanged from the initial production model - it's an oldie but a goodie, handy in taking down anything from mad banzai charges to VC gunboats.

[LoC978]

Last I checked the M4 hasn't replaced the M16. The M16 is still considered the primary weapon for the Marines, and I believe Army.

Marines: maybe, I don't know. Army: the M4 is the new primary weapon. the M16 is still being phased out (almost all M16A2s in Germany still), but here in the states, it's mostly done (even my guard unit is all M4s).

However the M4 is smaller so it's easier to carry, and better at taking corners. If your say a vehicle operate a smaller weapon is more convenient. Also the carbine is the better choice in urban, and similar, environments.

and with no difference in accuracy, a lighter frame, nearly the same feel as the M16, and only moderately more recoil, it's pretty much completely superior to the M16... though the M4 is also a less effective melee weapon (I'll miss buttstrokin' people in the head... that rear sling mount can do some DAMAGE)

So the army issues different weapons to different troops.

yeah, but they're trying to phase out the M16 completely. The only reason it's issued right now is if a unit doesn't have M4s yet.

regarding the browning M2

great weapon, though it's kind of a bitch to mount to a HMMWV...I've seen one rip a human silhouette target in half with 2 shots... sadly, I was the driver- so I had casings raining down on my helmet, and a M9(Beretta 92F) on my hip.

[rusty-spring]

However the M4 is smaller so it's easier to carry, and better at taking corners. If your say a vehicle operate a smaller weapon is more convenient. Also the carbine is the better choice in urban, and similar, environments.

and with no difference in accuracy, a lighter frame, nearly the same feel as the M16, and only moderately more recoil, it's pretty much completely superior to the M16... though the M4 is also a less effective melee weapon (I'll miss buttstrokin' people in the head... that rear sling mount can do some DAMAGE)

I'm not a ballistics expert, but like I said before the M4's shorter barrel would result in less velocity which is what I hear largely gives the 5.56 it's damage capability to compensate for the smaller bullet. The small rifle=small barrel problem is offset by bullpups.

Too bad the US hasn't adapted a bullpup design. That way you can have both the smaller, more maneuverable gun with a nice long barrel. I think it's because traditionalists don't like the "futuristic" looks of most bullpups.

But, I'm not a soldier so I guess I can't give opinions based on experience what today's soldier would need/want. :silent:

[LoC978]

The difference is pretty negligible (at least in the manuals... maximum point target range is still 550m. Not too sure about real life, though. Never shot someone with a 5.56). when you have both weapons side-by side you realize that the barrel length isn't much different. most of the length was cut from the buttstock/recoil adapter.
also, this is another reason I LOVE the Steyr AUG. Set the bolt further back, and BAM! There's your full length barrel (and recoil be damned. The 5.56 doesn't kick for shit anyway).

[Wileama]

Marines: maybe, I don't know. Army: the M4 is the new primary weapon. the M16 is still being phased out (almost all M16A2s in Germany still), but here in the states, it's mostly done (even my guard unit is all M4s).

Hu. Well the Wikipedia article says the marines still run the M16 as their primary. I didn't realize the M16 was being replaced quite that heavily.

Too bad the US hasn't adapted a bullpup design. That way you can have both the smaller, more maneuverable gun with a nice long barrel. I think it's because traditionalists don't like the "futuristic" looks of most bullpups.

I've heard two good arguments against bullpup designs. First, it's more difficult to reload. I don't know how much truth there is to that, but I can see the point. The second is that with out a front magazine you don't have a good support for the rifle when your prone. I'm not sure those are good reasons, but the arguement does extend past looks.

[LoC978]

I've heard two good arguments against bullpup designs. First, it's more difficult to reload. I don't know how much truth there is to that, but I can see the point. The second is that with out a front magazine you don't have a good support for the rifle when your prone. I'm not sure those are good reasons, but the arguement does extend past looks.

well, there is some truth to both of those, but there are fixes as well.
1: reloading. -training, training, training! The only reason it's more difficult is because people (specifically the firearms testers of the US military) aren't used to it. I know I found it awkward as hell the time I held an AUG, but I saw the German guy who was showcasing it reload the thing faster than I can an M16 (and, sad though it is, practicing on my airsoft model has helped me get used to the feel. The mag release is in the same place, and it's almost as heavy... without a loaded magazine, anyway).
2: prone support. -one fix is a bipod. Many bullpup marksman weapons have them, and it's an option on many bullpup automatics (the AUG HBAR, for example). The other one: learn to use your damned bone structure! That's why we train for shooting in the prone unsupported position!
...that's all I've got.

[Nachtsider]

The SAR-21 gave me no trouble when I fired it - with no downward-pointing magazine out front, I was able to rest it on things like logs and rocks for support. But then again, I've never fired a conventional-type assault rifle like the M16 for comparison.

[Piero]

Actually, the biggest anti-bullup argument I seem to run across (and I should note that I have almost no real world firearms experience, most of what I know is from research for writing projects and such) is that you can't easily switch shoulders with them (which is apparently useful in close quarters combat) because the ejected casings will hit you.

Although I've heard it claimed that it's possible to switch shoulders with an AUG if you fire it on a cant. Never having handled one, I'm not sure how practical that would be though in terms of speed and how much of your body you'd need to expose.

And of course, that argument does not apply to FN's bullpups (the P90 and F2000) thanks to their ejection systems.

[Nachtsider]

The SAR is ambi-dexter, too. It ejects all its brass forward of the user.

[Piero]

Yeah, I'd heard of that one as well. It uses a brass deflector, doesn't it? Makes me wonder about whether any of the brass deflector equipped AUGs are capable of anything similar. (I'm not entirely sure of the technical details of brass deflectors though -they're a little piece that sticks out to keep brass from being flung back at the user, aren't they? Is it usual for them to keep them from being thrown in such a way that they could hit someone beside the gun as well?)

I hear the reason the SAR generally isn't fired from the left shoulder despite that capability is that the safety piece it has to protect the users face in the event of a chamber exploding only works if it's being fired from the right shoulder, and might even make such an event more dangerous to the shooter if fired from the left...

[rusty-spring]

It ejects all its brass...

Too bad the G11 flopped. Caseless ammunition just hasn't been made efficient/reliable enough yet. (Problems with moisture, heat dissipation.)

I suspect we'll be using metal cartridges for quite some time into the future , and when we finally do move away from propellant based firearms we'll have advanced far enough to use some sorta coilgun/railgun.

Directed energy weapons of some sort could also possibly happen, as they are already being developed...but lasers are lame. Electromagnetically hurled steel is much more manly.

[LoC978]

first we need a vastly better energy storage unit than a chemical battery. until we get that, railguns, coilguns, projected energy weapons, et cetera... will be useless without a power cord. metal casings are just so much more practical. Why fix what isn't broken?

[rusty-spring]

first we need a vastly better energy storage unit than a chemical battery. until we get that, railguns, coilguns, projected energy weapons, et cetera... will be useless without a power cord. metal casings are just so much more practical. Why fix what isn't broken?

I agree, that's sort of what I was trying to say. When we do give up metal cartridges (which like you said isn't broken) it'll be because we can reliably and practically use such things as coilguns and such.

So yeah, everyone will be enjoying gunpowder for quite a while yet.

[Nachtsider]

Too bad the G11 flopped.

Flopped? I understand it worked just fine, but wasn't accepted due to cost problems.

[Guest]

The ammunition was shaped in the shape of rectangular prizms (except the bullet itself.) It's a shame it didn't make it.

[Wileama]

The G11 flopped. Any weapon that has a large chance of the ammo cooking off is not a good weapon. The idea is unfortunately ahead of it's time. Also I believe the G11 still had some issues with dirt, and cleaning.

[Nachtsider]

But how does dirt get into that tough synthetic housing?

[Wileama]

Hmm going back to check my sources I must confess that accusation was wrong. Maybe it wasn't dirt. I could have sworn I was in a discussion where it was brought up that it still had to be cleaned, and thus the advantage on paper didn't translate to the real world. Or maybe I really I'm talking out of my butt.

[rusty-spring]

Information I read about the G11 had problems with overheating, and (ultimately as Wileama mentioned) the ammunition cooking off. One, the caseless propellant had to be ignited at a higher temperature than normal gunpowder. Secondly, the metal casing of a normal round absorbs some of the waste heat and is then ejected - something the G11 couldn't take advantage of.

Can't say if this is fact or not, just what I've read.

[Wileama]

The higher ignition point of the ammo actually helps to reduce the chance of cook off. Originally the powder burned off at normal temperatures. They say that this along with some other changes, greatly reduced the chance of cook off. Which wouldn't make me feel much more comfortable firing the damn thing.

The fact that the brass didn't absorb the heat was the major issue. It turns out that the brass acts as a little ejectable heat sink. Furthermore the brass helped to provide a barrier between the powder, and the hot barrel.

[rusty-spring]

The higher ignition point of the ammo actually helps to reduce the chance of cook off.

Ahh, thanks for the correction/insight. Learn something new everyday.

[LoC978]

It turns out that the brass acts as a little ejectable heat sink.

some burn scars on my neck can vouch for that one.

[Nachtsider]

To Piero, regarding the SAR-21 - whoops, it would seem like I missed your earlier follow-up post. Apologies for that, my friend - I'll reply now.

Yes, the SAR uses a brass deflector. You're quite right about how those things work - they fling the spent casings away from the user, almost always to the front.

When I first fired the SAR back in survival camp, my DI told us that lefties could shoot the rifle left-handed. It was only sometime around 2005, when a poor left-handed sod doing jungle warfare training in Brunei got his face rearranged by a cartridge that blew up in the breach, that they started forcing lefties to shoot the SAR with their right hands. This is supposedly a temporary interim measure only, though - I hear they're going to produce SARs with the safety piece on the other side of the butt, specially for lefties to use, but I can't confirm this.

[Guest]

@ Dirt/cleaning problem. That might have been caused by the quality of the propellant burn. Even if it burned very well you'd get some residue (and it's possible that it burns not as well as standard prop.). In a norrmal weapon the residue would be left mostly on the inner walls of the casing.

[Piero]

Does anyone know if the brass deflectors available on rifles other then the SAR-21 consistently send brass forward (rather then simply keeping it from being flung back towards the user)? I'm curious, because I seem to remember reading that the brass deflector that's available on some AUGs is supposed to prevent scarring to the stock or some such. If it made it so that the user could switch shoulders easily, why wasn't it advertised as such (as far as I know, the AUG isn't designed to channel the blast of a chamber explosion to one side like the SAR is, so that wouldn't be so much of a concern)?

[Guest]

The G11 cook off issue was solved in the later prototypes by Dynamit-Nobel and Bundeswehr had some 1000 rifles made.
In the late 1980s the Bundeswehr began the field tests of the pre-production
G11s. After testing these improvements were made, such as removable optical sight,
mounting of two spare magazines on the rifle, and bayonet/bipod mount under the muzzle.

The rifle model K2 was used by Bundeswehr, but it was sacked after the unification of Germany, because of financial issues and NATO pressure to use similar cal. (5.56)

So in the end only 1000 rifles were made and used by Bundeswehr and 95% were K2 models. There has been a lot of speculation around G11 so I cant give 100% info. I think that it just wasnt the right time for an expensive rifle like G11 to make an appearance just yet.

However the weapon itself was a success, but it was heavyish (when fully loaded and two spare mags it had 150 rounds plus 3.6kg weapon), expensive as hell and it didnt use NATO standard rounds (doh)

[Guest]

Just had a look at the design. Loading the mag from the front is kind of awkward. And the actual system that reorients the bullets is very similar to the one in the P90 (I thought that solution was rather original, but apperently it has been used before.).

[edit] TO clarify the G11 was before the P90 so it's the P90 which is un-original. (Although the G11 is probably not the first to use it either.)

[rusty-spring]

And of course someone has to mention it. The G11 was ugly as sin.



I know aesthetics aren't crucial as long as they don't negatively affect the ability to fire it, but they sure do help... :pale:

[LoC978]

I kinda like it. nothing quite like shooting with a grey brick. That's secretly why I like glocks, too...
nuuuu! my secret! she has escaped!

[Nachtsider]

I like the G11's look, actually. And Glocks are pure win.

[Tommygunner70]

FN Minimi SPW - Special Purpose Weapon

Boom Baby!

[Nachtsider]

The Minimi is a wondrous weapon - seldom do you find a more effective way of putting so much firepower into so compact a package.



This here's an Alexander Arms .50 Beowulf - a semiauto M-16 chambered for a .50-caliber round, packing the punch of a Barrett with the recoil of a mere 20-guage shotgun. In a word, awesome.

[LoC978]

... less punch than a barrett, the Beowulf is a proprietary round, it's no .50BMG. bigger than a .50AE, though. and it does pack one HELL of a wallop for an assault rifle.

[Nachtsider]

At fifty yards, I'd say it'd knock you on your ass just as good as any Barrett. This baby Aharon's going to use the next time I spring the Childville boys on the fanfic scene.

[Guest]

That's the sukker I reffered to in the first RPG thread.


p.s. - Sometimes a weapon doesn't have to be big to be cool.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abTGAP7tG0Y&feature=related

I'd sure love to have one of those on my work desk... (Your co-workers will never try to steal your doughnut ever again.)

[LoC978]

dude... a .22LR can actually be quite lethal... that little guy would be a monster for takin' down soft targets. you could mow down a field of people with a long enough belt... 'course, a calico is much more practical...

...back to the Beowulf... I wish I could find the test I viewed on television back in AIT (circa 2004)... it went to the same gun show as some new type of bulletproof plexiglass... and it was the only round present to penetrate the 5" thick block they brought. If I ever got myself an AR-15 family weapon, I would NEED a beowulf upper reciever for it... though I imagine my most often used would be the .308 upper... the AR-15 is kinda like Windows in that... not the best design in the world, but SO many options to customize it with...

[Nachtsider]

Why not 6.5 Grendel instead of .308?

[LoC978]

.308 is a cheap(ish) and very standardized (7.62x51mm NATO) round, while it still packs a decent wallop (much more than the .223/5.56x45mm). Basically, I'd use it more because it's more common. Kinda like the 9x19mm or .45ACP pistol conundrum. My .40S&Ws are common enough here, but what happens if I ever try to go to another country? ...I'd better have a 9mm variant, or I'll just run outta ammo.

[Nachtsider]

That depends on whether or not you'll be able to take your firearms with you when you flee America, LoC. Assuming the answer is yes, Rock River Arms has a very good 9mm variant of the M-16 you might want to check out.

[LoC978]

bah. if I want a 9mm that's not a pistol, I'll just go with one of H&K's myriad submachine guns... not that I think I ever would want one.

[Sponsored content]