KF M4 Update

[Spartan1388]

I am not a big fun of forward-ejection designs.

I do not have a degree in engineering, but from what i know, simple designs are better.

I personally love the Tavor.

This is a CTAR-21.

I would prefer if the barrel in the standard TAR-21 was covered by the hand guard to be better protected.

The distance between the grip and the stock is long, but i think i will have no problem with it.


Normal guns will stay for years to come. Some applications require the normal design, like LMGs, and weapons for militia use.
If the USA or Israel for example wanted to stockpile weapons for the population to use for Homeland Defense, an AK-type weapon would be a great choice.

 

[mrsirr]

HA I wish. Our current president aims to horriby maim our right to own firearms. But China has bullpup LMGs and bullpups in all of their roles except maybe snipers. Of course we know sniper bullpups can be done.
I'm not a visionary; I don't think we are going to see any kind of total conversion, but bullpups are like
THE FIREARMS OF THE FUTURE!!! :O
I always thought the TAR-21 was cool but never knew too much about it.

 

[Spartan1388]

The Chinese QBZ-95s are not as battle proven as the Tavor. Although they seem to be decent rifles, they are to be issued in bulk numbers, and i doubt that Chinese Soldiers can talk about their weapons in a negative way and also these are the only weapons most of them have used anyway.

QBZ-95
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QBZ-95

Tavor TAR-21
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMI_Tavor_TAR-21

The IDF has used the Tavors in combat numerous times, and they use them for every day patrols and as far as i know they like them and trust them, but some women and shorter men find them a little uncomfortable.

The M4 stock for example has 6 different stock length settings. Even if you are a big guy, when you wear a flak/bullet-resistant vest and carry all your gear, a shorter length stock would be better.


The Tavor is in my opinion superior, because the Israelis designed with quality in mind, and also with the intention to increase the effectiveness and survivability of the soldiers. Israel is a small country with a small population, they cannot just sent soldiers to the grinder, and the Israelis never adapted or used such tactics as far as i know.

For this reason, i would trust the Tavor over most of the other Bullpups.

The AUG is also good, but a person i know who server in Bundesheer, told me that the Scope tends to loose its zero, and the tiny iron rights are just bad. Maybe i would favor the new AUGA3 or the AUGA2, just not the Original AUG. Although the original AUG looks cool, the "mandatory" scope is just a frivolous idea.

There is also the FAMAS, but after the Chauchat i do not trust any French weapons...


A Bullpup LMG is just a bad idea. 100-200 bullet magazines are too bulky to have behind the grip, and 30-40 round magazines just won't do it. Maybe casket magazines, but these hold only about 60 bullets.

On the other hand, Sniper Bullpup Rifles would be great. The Russian converted AK-type weapons including the Dragunov to be used in Bullpup configurations, the German have developed the DSR 50, and generally, Bullpup rifles are favored by snipers these days. Also there is the Barrrett M95, but it is bolt-action only.


I am aware of the "War" going on in the States. My thoughts are with you.

 

[mrsirr]

The Tavor is in my opinion superior, because the Israelis designed with quality in mind, and also with the intention to increase the effectiveness and survivability of the soldiers. Israel is a small country with a small population, they cannot just sent soldiers to the grinder, and the Israelis never adapted or used such tactics as far as i know.

Oh yeah don't get me wrong, I'm not really a fan of the new Chinese stuff even though they say it's far superior to everyone else's weaponry; since they won't tell us how the guns actually perform, that sounds like BS. I was just using them as an example of huge utilization of bullpups. I oughta get some more TAR-21 knowledge.

There is also the FAMAS, but after the Chauchat i do not trust any French weapons...

Awww give 'em some slack <:I

A Bullpup LMG is just a bad idea. 100-200 bullet magazines are too bulky to have behind the grip, and 30-40 round magazines just won't do it. Maybe casket magazines, but these hold only about 60 bullets.

Well the upcoming SAW for the US will be using extended STANAG magazines holding around 50 rounds so it seems like maybe it's more viable than it seems.

I am aware of the "War" going on in the States. My thoughts are with you.

Thank you. We are probably going to lose. It probably won't be in my lifetime but I can't imagine the future of the US involving firearms for civilians.

 

[ArcheKruz]

A Bullpup LMG is just a bad idea. 100-200 bullet magazines are too bulky to have behind the grip, and 30-40 round magazines just won't do it. Maybe casket magazines, but these hold only about 60 bullets.

Probably they'll have to change the feed mechanism. I wouldn't be surprised if they came up with a modified P90 design with a double-stacked top-loading magazine, or a cylindrical spiral design.

 

[mrsirr]

That is delicious.

 

[Spartan1388]

Well the upcoming SAW for the US will be using extended STANAG magazines holding around 50 rounds so it seems like maybe it's more viable than it seems.

Even with these magazines, you will have to reload 4 times to fire as much bullets as a guy with an M249 can fire without reloading.

In Greece, the Army uses the H&K HK11, which is a G3 on steroids, that can be feed from 7.62 STANAG magazines and from belts. Most of the time, they use the belts, and the magazines are to be used when the belts are gone.

There are LMG versions of the AUG and the L85, but standard belt-feed machine guns are still essential, and i do not think this is going to change in the near future. It won't be cost effective as well.
Current designs are effective, simple, reliable and battle proven. The Browning M2 for example has been around for a century, same as the Colt M1911 pistol.

Probably they'll have to change the feed mechanism. I wouldn't be surprised if they came up with a modified P90 design with a double-stacked top-loading magazine, or a cylindrical spiral design.

Good idea.
But, a P90-like magazine that holds 200 or 100 5.56 or 7.62 rounds will increase weight, and this system will increase the mechanical complexity.
LMGs are meant to be fired constantly, so everything has to be buffed up.

Here is a 5.7 compared to a 5.56

Spoiler!

There is no way to stack the required firepower of 200 rounds behind the grip without making the gun uncomfortable or unusable from prone position. Yes, we need 200 rounds for suppression purposes. Also keep in mind that many times, LMG operators fire from prone position or from trenches, with the gun on flat ground.

Probably we will have to wait until Gauss guns with 1mm-2mm projectiles become reality.

Thank you. We are probably going to lose. It probably won't be in my lifetime but I can't imagine the future of the US involving firearms for civilians.

Both the E.U and the U.S are gone unless we have the courage to make radical changes. But this is another topic...

 

[mrsirr]

even with these magazines, you will have to reload 4 times to fire as much bullets as a guy with an m249 can fire without reloading.

But that's what I'm saying. Since we are planning on using these, maybe they are teaching some fancy new tactic that allows for suppression without just throwing 200 rounds down range. I'm not really making any arguement here. I just find it to be interesting that our military seems to think it's a pretty good idea despite what common sense would say.
Also I've heard lots of different things about 5.7. I have no idea how it performs because I've heard the old 'goes straight through without wounding' as well as the 'tumbles point over base for MASSIVE DAMAGE' I wish people couldn't just write random jazz on the internet
But yeah I'd imagine that some crazy new design like a helical magazine or some crazy integral magazine or something totally new and exotic will be invented or something like that. There are complaints about basicly everything people have tried, including belt fed. So I have no idea at this point really but it seems like America is thinking about innovation.
*Thread derailed hardcore
We should all just go to some gun forum

 

[Spartan1388]

Gun Forum? Let's Go!

But keeping posting here, we may give TWI some ideas they might find useful...


I see your point, but in a battle situation, it is preferable to have as much firepower as you can.

This is why in Greece we use belt-fed HK11s.
The British and the Austrians cannot use belts on their Rifle-on-steroids guns, so they are stuck with 30-40 rounds magazines.

As far as i know, the M249 can too be feed standard STANAG magazines, when the belts are gone.

It is way easier to "spray" and not worry about reloading, and fast-reloading is something that only few people can do, and most of them are athletes who do these things at ranges and competitions, or cowboy-shooters, or some "gun-nut" gun-enthusiasts.
Soldiers are just average persons of good physiology and health.

So, why waste time and money to teach something new and hard when we have already something that works?


Maybe it will be technically possible to move the chamber a few inches to the back, which would result to a bulkier weapon, but also to a shorter weapon.
Nothing like a Bullpup, but close.


The 5.7 is a good round, but it is intended to be a high-penetration SMG round. Nothing more.

P90 work nice in "Stargate" for example, because most engagements happen in SMG ranges and also in close quarters.

I know some Cypriots, but have not shoot at nothing other than paper targets with their P90s, so i cannot say.
Probably it will go straight through because it is meant to penetrate kevlar. "Civilian" rounds will probably cause more damage.

The P90 is popular mainly for its firepower (50 rounds!), size, and ergonomics.
I hold an Airsoft, accurate weight, replica once. It felt totally natural and weightless, and also if we draw an imaginary circle around our body, no part of the weapon is protracting, making it ideal for CQB and it will not give away your position until fractions of the second before you have eye contact with the target.

 

[nd2spd]

Gun Forum? Let's Go!

Or start a new thread that isn't about updating the M4...

 

[ArcheKruz]

Spartan : It doesn't have to be 200-rounds per magazine, it could be 100 rounds with 50 rounds per stack.

 

[Spartan1388]

Of course it can be.

But this will decrease the effectiveness and the suppression capabilities of the weapon.

Just imagine the gunner firing suppressive fire while his teammates advancing, to yell "Hit the floor guys! Reloading!".
No imagine them waiting until he reloads, and he yell "Go!".
Then he runs out of ammo and the circle is repeated four or more times.

Any drum/double drum magazines will be troublesome in bullpup configurations because of the human anatomy. Keep in mind that it is more uncomfortable when you wear a vest and have all your gear on.

Armies use belt fed LMGs for many reasons. Magazine fed bullpup-assault-riles-on-steroids just don't do.
Even guns like the HK11 are not intended as LMG replacements.
(I mistakenly called the HK11, G11, we do this mistake here because we "Greekify" the names. )


The L86A2 LSW for example, weights 6.58 kilograms. It is a cool gun and has the advantage of a long barrel. Personally i think about it as a "support assault rifle".

It is as long as an assault rifle, it uses 30 rounds magazines, and it has a long heavy barrel, so you can use it as a Light Support Weapon (LSW), meaning accurate, long-range, fully-automatic fire, as an assault rifle, and as a sharpshooter weapon at the same time.

For 1 Kg more you can have a M249, and for approximately 1.5 Kg more you can have something like the HK11.
The M249 is a far better choice.

 

[mrsirr]

Gun Forum? Let's Go!

But keeping posting here, we may give TWI some ideas they might find useful...


I see your point, but in a battle situation, it is preferable to have as much firepower as you can.

This is why in Greece we use belt-fed HK11s.
The British and the Austrians cannot use belts on their Rifle-on-steroids guns, so they are stuck with 30-40 rounds magazines.

As far as i know, the M249 can too be feed standard STANAG magazines, when the belts are gone.

It is way easier to "spray" and not worry about reloading, and fast-reloading is something that only few people can do, and most of them are athletes who do these things at ranges and competitions, or cowboy-shooters, or some "gun-nut" gun-enthusiasts.
Soldiers are just average persons of good physiology and health.

So, why waste time and money to teach something new and hard when we have already something that works?


Maybe it will be technically possible to move the chamber a few inches to the back, which would result to a bulkier weapon, but also to a shorter weapon.
Nothing like a Bullpup, but close.


The 5.7 is a good round, but it is intended to be a high-penetration SMG round. Nothing more.

P90 work nice in "Stargate" for example, because most engagements happen in SMG ranges and also in close quarters.

I know some Cypriots, but have not shoot at nothing other than paper targets with their P90s, so i cannot say.
Probably it will go straight through because it is meant to penetrate kevlar. "Civilian" rounds will probably cause more damage.

The P90 is popular mainly for its firepower (50 rounds!), size, and ergonomics.
I hold an Airsoft, accurate weight, replica once. It felt totally natural and weightless, and also if we draw an imaginary circle around our body, no part of the weapon is protracting, making it ideal for CQB and it will not give away your position until fractions of the second before you have eye contact with the target.

Well I was thinking about the low-capacity SAWs thinking that having some neat new training to be able to suppress with fewer rounds and thus, still reloading seldomly, would be neat; but I think you're right that especially in a big crazy firefight more rounds would just work better for suppression. I do love myself a M249 :T. But all I get when I search G11 is that wierd prototype with the caseless ammunition :/
Yesterday while doing some research (and having some ******* from china try to hack my computer) I found that the 5.7 duty rounds transfer less energy to target but do in fact roll base over end. So by KF standards I'd say they would do 30 base damage :T Of course I also read that the P90 has an effective range of 200m which is 4x that of the M4 using plain M855; that is pretty magnificent.
EDIT: Didn't see that newer post there. Man I take forever to post.

 

[Spartan1388]

It seems the my reply was... deleted...?

Anyway, G11 is HK11.
I made a mistake because i had the "local" name "Gamma 11" in mind.


From what i know, the 5.7 AP is good at penetrating, while the 5.7 "Civilian" will penetrate less and make more damage.

In KF, 30-35 Damage will do it.

 

[mrsirr]

But I dunno. In reply to your earlier thingy:
I feel like belt fed is kinda a primitive concept. It just seems like there has to be a better way to put lots of fire down range.
For that matter, come to think of it, there's got to be a better way to suppress than throwing 200 bullets at a dude.

 

[Spartan1388]

It is primitive, but also battle-proven and tested for over a century, and reliable.

There are experimental alternatives like case-less rounds linked on a "belt", but any replacement has to be cheaper and more or equally reliable and easy to use to be adopted by any serious Army.

When you throw 200 rounds down range, the psychological factor plays an important role in keeping the enemy suppressed, and most armies teach soldiers to stay in cover when they are under a hail of lead, so the tactic works and any reloading in between will give advantage the the enemy with the bigger ammo capacity while rendering our guys unable to suppress the enemy.


Remember that we used to fight with swords and spears for around 3.000 years of recorded history, so our primitive firearms are not going anywhere in the near future. They will get better and better, but not every experiment will contribute to the betterment of firearms.
Actually only few experiments add something, and let us not forget that many weapon engineers have no military or combat experience. In countries with no mandatory military service and gun-prohibition, engineers cannot have the necessary experience.
(Just look at the recent failure of the French PAPOP thingy...)

On the other hand, the U.S had many of the most successful and influential engineers, like Browning and Colt as well as many other great engineers and even today they come out with interesting designs.

So we have to keep the primitive things that work and make them better. One small step at a time, unless something really revolutionary like a Gauss gun or an Energy gun comes out.

 

[mrsirr]

Yeah I'm juss bein a visionary I don't really have any better ideas, I'm just talkin about the future.
Of course the dude that made the flintlock couldn't imagine a minigun.
I'm juss sayin that modern times are all innovative. Next thing you know we'll have plasma guns (already do)
Plus infantry is getting outdated anyway.
The US, at least, is working on all sorts of crazy jazz.

 

[Spartan1388]

There are Plasma Torches around, that are used to cutting metals. Really cool to watch.

Here, let me YouTube this one:
http://www.youtube.com/results?sear...j12.12.0...0.0...1ac.1.11.youtube.HcUy74Sa6x4


Now, the Infantry is not going to become "obsolete".

I understand that many countries have outdated tactics and strategies, but foot-soldiers are, and will continue to be essential, for "cleaning" and occupation, as well for infantry combat or even versus armoured vehicles with the right weapons.

Maybe we will see soldiers like those from Heinlein's novels in the future, or maybe something like Warhammer 40K Space Marines, or most probably regular guys with better weapons, gear, armour and tactics.

The point is that infantry will always be essential, and although they will do the 10% of the job, compared to the Air Force, Navy and "Smart" Weapons, this 10% would be essential for winning the war.

 

[mrsirr]

Well what I actually should have said was that humans will be obsolete. The infantry role will still be required for quite some time. However, the US is working on mechanized infantry, and we are coming up with more and more ways to fight without being in harm's way every day.

There's also something called MARAUDER
I don't know if they are still working on it but it seemed to be pretty cool.

 

[Spartan1388]

Well, humans should evolve into something better, so humans will indeed become obsolete, as our ancestor species became obsolete.
Nietzsche said it better.


I had read that U.S Armed Forces and specially the U.S.M.C, borrows ideas from Heinlein's "Starship Troopers", and actually there are quite interesting ideas on this book.

It is quite possible that in the future we will have Remote Controlled Robots, and soldiers will actually be gamers, and they will control these robots from the other corner of the world. I am not actually sure if i would like this future..

There is also the concept of Terminator-like robots, but i strongly believe that it should be forbidden for robots to enforce the law, to judge, or to be used as soldiers in a war. Although using them against terrorists, i wouldn't mind, because it is not an honorable engagement. Yes, i am old school about rules of war.


I cannot find th Marauder thing...


Tomorrow (in my local time), i am going to put this topic back on track.