2012-02-12, 01:02 | Link #382 | ||
Sensei, aishite imasu
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hong Kong Shatterdome
|
Since we were spamming up another thread with off topic chatter...
Quote:
Quote:
But as you said. Full auto IS less accurate. And a .50 cal machine gun is perfectly capable of sniping dudes from a thousand yards out if you get good optics on it. Isn't that power armor? Cause I can't imagine normal soldiers would be able to fight with that kind of heavy gear.
__________________
|
||
2012-02-12, 01:30 | Link #383 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
I believe what I used was some version of the H & K MP5 that used 9mm ammunition. (it pulls up and to the right at full auto) We used two different ones. One has a sound suppresson system and the other a laser sight. The sound suppression version I didn't care for as it blew a lot a air back in my face, made it annoying to aim. The laser was more fun. I only got one clip for each. We'd be using the .44 magnum earlier, but the cylinder seemed to be out of alignment as I got a lead fragment in my shirt after my father fired once...and I was behind him.
On the other hand I've managed to shoot my uncle in the back...with a shotgun...while he was behind me. We were shooting clays, high, and it seems one piece of lead bounced off and came down on my uncle...to pieced his shirt and skimmed his back on the way down...drew blood. He was not in my line of fire and a good 10 yards behind me. Uncle Fester would be proud.
__________________
Last edited by Ithekro; 2012-02-12 at 02:12. |
2012-02-29, 08:21 | Link #391 |
Likely To End Up In Jail
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Your base,stealing your Knightmares.
|
The 7.62x39mm used on the AK-47 isn't really perfect,it goes straight through people with tumbling at short range and it loses speed faster than the NATO standard,5.56x45mm at longer ranges,dealing less "damage". The AK-47,on the other hand,is actually light and contrary to popular belief,it doesn't recoil much (less than a G3 atleast). It's just not accurate,not suited for a professional army at all. But it is a great representation of an idea,in particular that day's Soviet doctrine.
__________________
|
2012-02-29, 20:38 | Link #392 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Virginia
Age: 46
|
Quote:
|
|
2012-02-29, 21:28 | Link #393 |
Onani Master
|
The 7.62x39mm may lose speed quicker and drop quickly over shorter distances than the 5.56x45mm but it has a higher ballistics coefficient due to nearly twice the projectile weight and will actually reach out farther and harder the 5.56x45mm.
But as Linda has said, the current service rifles use the 5.45x39mm round which like the 5.56x45mm tends to tumble as it hits a target due to being a front heavy projectile.
__________________
|
2012-04-29, 06:56 | Link #397 |
Onani Master
|
Shot some steel this afternoon with a friend;
Lased at 410m. At that range our rounds were dropping like 40" from our 100 metre zero. I was shooting for headshots, my mate wasn't too confident but I did get him on the top plate a couple of times. There were some pretty strong cross winds at times. You can see in the above image there are bullet holes through the steel posts supporting the targets. The right side hit was a result of a huge gust of wind just as I shot which pushed the round wide. The next shot the wind was blowing something chronic so I held left and shot... just as the wind died. lol. But the biggest surprise is how easy the rounds were chewing through the steel plate. I know it's only mild steel but straight through 8mm plate as if it was nothing? Scary stuff.
__________________
|
2012-04-29, 17:12 | Link #398 |
Sleepy Lurker
Graphic Designer
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Nun'yabiznehz
Age: 38
|
Looks like someone has been making progress lately in the US... I thought this thing was likely to end up in the technological scrap yard like so many military programs nowadays, so I was kind of surprised (though in a pleasant manner) to learn that it had actually come along quite well and it's getting close to completion. I'm talking about the LSAT LMG, a weapon that is meant to complement -if not even replace- the FN Minimi/M249, while offering a perk that few firearms of this kind have managed so far: significant weight reductions.
The LSAT is actually one of the very few firearms that can make use of caseless/lightweight ammunition: the propellant is either encased in plastic (instead of brass) or left completely naked (the manufacturer, AAI, bought several patents from Heckler&Koch, especially those concerning the caseless ammo-firing -though never put in production- G11 rifle). Either way, a LSAT LMG + 1,000 rounds of plastic case rounds is up to 20 pounds lighter than a M249 + 1,000 rounds of brass case rounds. The LSAT is also rumored to be slightly more accurate and offers shooting performances comparable to the M249's. Spoiler for YT vids:
To be honest, I was not sure whether the caseless ammo would ever go anywhere past the lab test stage, since the last time I checked there were severe concerns about ammunition cook-off (an argument already raised at the time when the G11 was still in development)...and when I heard about the ammunition being telescopic, I was seriously pondering whether the rounds would actually have LESS propellant than inside the brass case equivalent. The developers and testers seem quite hyped about the advantages of the LSAT (20 pounds less equals less fatigue and higher concentration for the shooter), but I have to wonder as to whether the new loading system (a rotating bolt - its operation can be seen in one of the YouTube vids above) will be as rugged and reliable as a conventional bolt system. Looking past these issues -valid or not-, I still wonder if they could upscale the LSAT LMG to challenge the M240 on its own ground. The 240 is by all means a reliable weapon, but it's one heavy log to carry around, even if the PEO Soldier division recently managed to shear a couple pounds (the kinda awkward-looking M240L) off the vanilla M240B. It'd be nice if the development team could, but AAI apparently prefers to focus on a carbine/rifle version (PDF here - could take some time to load) that could eventually supplement the M4. But I wonder if the advantages of the LSAT program could actually bring the US to consider investing in the rifle derivative and away from the M4/16...the US are, after all, quite culturally attached to the AR15 family, and the Pentagon's latest attempt to launch a competition for a possible M4/16 successor (XM8, SCAR) ended quite anticlimactically. Even without the gas piston that improves reliability (though one could argue that a direct gas impingement system actually offers greater precision than the GP-equipped variants, since it allows the barrel to be practically free-floating), US forces are quite satisfied with AR15s (ever noticed that most of the replacement candidates are actually evolutions of the AR15 - all except the FN SCAR?). Heck, even the 1980s ACR program, which welcomed a LOT of technologically revolutionary candidates such as the flechette-firing Steyr ACR, the twin round-firing Colt ACR and the caseless ammo-firing H&K G11, was cancelled since the organizers didn't see any perk that was dramatic enough to warrant a departure from the AR15 dynasty. As for a civilian firearm that will use LSAT technology? I don't think we'll see one... I think most shooters won't mind actually using brass rounds and the military will probably want to curtail the widespread use of caseless ammo.
__________________
Last edited by Renegade334; 2012-04-29 at 17:28. |
2012-04-29, 17:21 | Link #399 |
Dictadere~!
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: On the front lines, fighting for inderpendence.
|
Ultimately it will have to be "significant" enough for the soldiers to actually want to make the switch or adopt any number of them. One of the problems with the development of the XM8 (from what I've seen) is that the soldiers didn't care much to start carrying a new weapon around when the one they already got used to is "just fine". With this LSAT, it'll need to be so good, that soldiers will drop their guns and fight over the thing... xD
Though I'm sure they will appreciate a 20 ib drop. I certainly would.
__________________
|
Tags |
firearms, guns |
|
|