View Full Version : Everything old is new again
Business_Casual
02-18-07, 23:21
Really.
SCAR:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v235/glock23carry/scar-l_disasm.jpg
MP-44:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v613/Tim_Orrock/StG-44/StG44c.jpg
M_P
If anything, the SCAR's sight height-over-bore line will be its downfall.
The last time I talked with the 3/5 SFGA Battalion Commander and CSM, when they shot the SCAR at a demo the selector switch broke off.
If anything, the SCAR's sight height-over-bore line will be its downfall.
The last time I talked with the 3/5 SFGA Battalion Commander and CSM, when they shot the SCAR at a demo the selector switch broke off.
When and where was this demo?
Couple years ago. LTC Kim B. and CSM Eric H.:)
....ooohhhhh STG/MP-44.........soo nice.
Yep, small arms are evolutionary, not revolutionary....
That StG belongs to a member of my club. He brings it out every so often.
Even the M16, while "revolutionary" was just the end product of a few decades of small arms development...Stoner took the multi lugged bolt from the Johnson system of WWII and the direct gas system fom the Swedish AG42 Ljungman and the French MAS-44.
Jay Cunningham
02-22-07, 07:34
I wonder what the next "revolutionary" step in small arms will be?
What do we want to call our previous starting point? The invention of the sturmgewehr?
I'm thinking the Garand was the pinnacle of the previous technology and the StG is the first in line of the new.
I'm thinking it will be a combination of a new ammo type, perhaps an electrically primed caseless round or some such. Integrated fire control computer with laser rangefinding, IR and thermal sensors and ballistic calc.
I think we're still quite a ways off for a directed energy weapon. Just thinking out loud...
Business_Casual
02-22-07, 09:10
True, but when do we run into the law of diminishing returns? All that technology would increase the individual weapon cost quite a bit.
If a well-trained operator, primer and a barrel are sufficient to get the job done; will anyone be willing to pay for the additional components?
M_P
wild_wild_wes
04-20-08, 18:53
I wonder what the next "revolutionary" step in small arms will be?
Plastic cased cartridges.
I'm still waiting for someone to come out with a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range.
:D
Well the selector broke but at least the Army is looking for a new "quiet" selector so hopefully the fact that they break will be fixed too...
Failure2Stop
04-20-08, 20:26
I wonder what the next "revolutionary" step in small arms will be?
AN-94
Jay Cunningham
04-20-08, 23:02
AN-94
Umm... no.
;)
Failure2Stop
04-20-08, 23:38
I say the AN-94 not because I think it to be superbly executed or effective, but because it is a truly revolutionary approach to the operating system.
1800 round per minute rate for two shot bursts, two shots down range before recoil can appreciably effect the system.
Unlike caseless ammo prototypes, it actually works.
Jay Cunningham
04-21-08, 00:51
I say the AN-94 not because I think it to be superbly executed or effective, but because it is a truly revolutionary approach to the operating system.
1800 round per minute rate for two shot bursts, two shots down range before recoil can appreciably effect the system.
Unlike caseless ammo prototypes, it actually works.
Has the operating system been proven in-theatre? We both know that the ergonomics are not so great but I'm wondering if the operating system has truly been run through the wringer? Also interested in the effectiveness of the muzzle device and the db reduction claims.
I've never shot, handled, or even seen an actual AN-94 (other than pics, of course). But I have to say I'm skeptical about some of the claims. Putting such a small projectile right on top of another at any reasonable range involves a lot more than just the muzzle being in the same spot when the bullet starts flying. Furthermore, there still has to be some muzzle rise.
It'll also be interesting to see if a force which is used to fielding an incredibly robust and low-maintenance rifle can adapt to something which is reported to need a lot more TLC to keep running.
Didn't the G10 have a similar operating option?
Plastic cased cartridges.
Caseless is, IMHO, a greater advance than some new casing material. Either option is more evolutionary than revolutionary anyway, since the premise will still be a projectile propelled by a chemical explosive down some sort of metal tube, with some of the energy (whether gas or recoil impulse) redirected to effect loading and mechanism reset functions.
I'm still waiting for someone to come out with a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range.
:D
That will be the next "revolution," energy-based weapons.
At this point firearms have pretty much reached the apex of "revolutionary" development. The first revolution was the overall "gun" concept, the second was making it truly portable and individually-operated, third was self-contained cartridges, fourth was reutilization of energy for automatic action, fifth (possible) was cheap mass-production and simplification. I really don't see where the "firearm" can go from there that would be much more than evolution of the current concepts.
Didn't the G10 have a similar operating option?
You mean the G11? Yes, it had a similar selector option.
If we're really going to take a hard look at new conventional firearms the AEK-971 looks a whole lot more promising than the AN-94.
IMHO, neither are revolutionary, but evolutionary.
Redman -- Yes, G11. Duh. That's what I get for having too many polymer-scaled knives around when I type. :cool:
FWIW on the "energy weapon" front, I went to NDIA's first "Small Arms Center of Excellence" a few years ago and somehow found myself in a discussion group with a bunch of people working on such things. Their prediction was that man-portable directed energy weapons were less than 20 years away at that time.
I specifically remember asking, "Are you saying that there will be Star Trek phasers in my lifetime?" And half a dozen people from half a dozen different companies, universities, etc. looked at me and chanted almost a choir-like "duh ... of course."
:confused:
Jay Cunningham
04-21-08, 08:16
Redman -- Yes, G11. Duh. That's what I get for having too many polymer-scaled knives around when I type. :cool:
FWIW on the "energy weapon" front, I went to NDIA's first "Small Arms Center of Excellence" a few years ago and somehow found myself in a discussion group with a bunch of people working on such things. Their prediction was that man-portable directed energy weapons were less than 20 years away at that time.
I specifically remember asking, "Are you saying that there will be Star Trek phasers in my lifetime?" And half a dozen people from half a dozen different companies, universities, etc. looked at me and chanted almost a choir-like "duh ... of course."
:confused:
I am thinking that 20 years from now people are still going to be arguing .45 vs 9mm....
I am thinking that 20 years from now people are still going to be arguing .45 vs 9mm....
And hopefully it will be from personal experience rather than, "My Dad tells me that when he was a kid, they were allowed to have pistols ..."
Redman -- Yes, G11. Duh. That's what I get for having too many polymer-scaled knives around when I type. :cool:
FWIW on the "energy weapon" front, I went to NDIA's first "Small Arms Center of Excellence" a few years ago and somehow found myself in a discussion group with a bunch of people working on such things. Their prediction was that man-portable directed energy weapons were less than 20 years away at that time.
I specifically remember asking, "Are you saying that there will be Star Trek phasers in my lifetime?" And half a dozen people from half a dozen different companies, universities, etc. looked at me and chanted almost a choir-like "duh ... of course."
:confused:
Cool. I'll buy one. :cool:
Am I seeing that right? The SCAR's bottom rail is attached directly to the barrel?
And what exactly IS the height over bore of the iron sights?
Its an old tech, but why hasn't anyone really put effort into caseless ammo? I thought that would be the way everything would be that way by now when I was a kid.
There are two directed energy weapons that were recently in the news. One for personnel, one was anti-plane/anti-warhead.
I saw the anti-personnel one on a History or Discovery episode of Less Lethal Weapons.
Nathan_Bell
04-21-08, 16:25
Redman -- Yes, G11. Duh. That's what I get for having too many polymer-scaled knives around when I type. :cool:
FWIW on the "energy weapon" front, I went to NDIA's first "Small Arms Center of Excellence" a few years ago and somehow found myself in a discussion group with a bunch of people working on such things. Their prediction was that man-portable directed energy weapons were less than 20 years away at that time.
I specifically remember asking, "Are you saying that there will be Star Trek phasers in my lifetime?" And half a dozen people from half a dozen different companies, universities, etc. looked at me and chanted almost a choir-like "duh ... of course."
:confused:
If they could get two little things to work rail-guns would probably be the next revolutionary step.
1st Little thing is they eat themselves up when fired.
2nd Little thing is (which will apply to DEW as well) Power supply.
Problems with DEW from reading scientist written sci-fi of the 60's and 70's.
Atmosphere ionization, you pump enough energy out to kill a man at 500M + you have a very good chance of ionizing the air as well. So you waste a lot of the energy in that, and you make your own thunder.
Barrier penetration. Not so good. Blows the hell out of the first thing it hits, but does not hammer through.
Flash Boiling, what happens when a high power laser hits water or water logged material (the human body falls into the latter category), definatley not JAG landwar compliant:eek:
Wow. I looked up the AEK-971 and found a youtube video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOozMdEV_AU&feature=related
It's in Russian but it shows the rifle clearly and it barely moves when firing. You can watch the little holes appear in the target- reminds me of when I was a kid and the local carnival would have the FA BB guns you would shoot out the black star with.
Jay Cunningham
04-21-08, 19:24
I guess we would first need to define the requirement, i.e. what IS leap-ahead technology, what IS a revolutionary capability vs. evolutionary...
The Army learned a helluva lot during the ACR trials and most of it wasn't stuff that they expected. The emphasis seemed to be on new bullet/cartridge types, new feed/operating systems, bullpup configurations, etc. As it turns out the big lessons learned were electro-optical sights and modularity (picatinny rails). This lesson was applied to the M4 carbine to very good effect.
A primary infantry weapon to replace the M4 and truly be "leap-ahead" would have to take into account:
reliability
ruggedness
lethality
range
accuracy
ergonomics
modularity
and other factors that would have to be a sharp improvement over the current systems.
wild_wild_wes
04-21-08, 22:52
Caseless is, IMHO, a greater advance than some new casing material. Either option is more evolutionary than revolutionary anyway, since the premise will still be a projectile propelled by a chemical explosive down some sort of metal tube, with some of the energy (whether gas or recoil impulse) redirected to effect loading and mechanism reset functions.
Read all about it here: http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=1000
http://www.defensereview.com/stories/ausawintersymposium2007/AAI%20LSAT_4/DSC02547.JPG
Coil guns and rail guns, which will also coincide with caseless ammunition will be the next BIG step in modern small arms. It's amazing how little we currently know about different magnetic forces (they are for the 20+ year out comment).
And back to the original picture, it's the little changes that create the best results. A modern small arm is a simple process when it all boils down, and you can only make it so effective, such as continually tweaking minor components.
KiloSierra
04-24-08, 10:34
Its an old tech, but why hasn't anyone really put effort into caseless ammo? I thought that would be the way everything would be that way by now when I was a kid.
They keep running into problems protecting the ammo during handling and keeping the ammo from cooking off at relatively low temperatures compared to cased ammo in addition to breach sealing problems.
Nathan_Bell
04-24-08, 14:09
They keep running into problems protecting the ammo during handling and keeping the ammo from cooking off at relatively low temperatures compared to cased ammo in addition to breach sealing problems.
Chamber heat in general was also a problem. The last useful act of the brass is to act as a heatsink and leave the chamber with a good bit of thermal energy. Now with caseless, you do not have that, so you dump a few extra Kcal ( I think that was the unit of heat they used) into the chamber of the barrel, exacerbating the problem of having cook offs.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.