autogun

Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by autogun

This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons, particularly in larger calibres (12.7+mm).

  • 3175
    MEMBERS
  • 180422
    MESSAGES
  • 1
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

NGSW evaluation update   Small Arms <20mm

Started 31-Jul by autogun; 9618 views.
RovingPedant

From: RovingPedant

1-Aug

stancrist said...

Ditto.  But, a more visually-appealing suppressor wouldn't help with other aspects of the design.

- Bullpup configuration.

I quite like the aesthetics of a bullpup rifle, so that’s not a negative for me. I understand that others hold strong opinions on it though.

stancrist said...

- Stock not adjustable for LOP.

I’ve never been convinced that LOP is an issue for flat-topped rifles with long sight rails.

stancrist said...

- Magazine-fed automatic rifle.

That I agree is a negative. Someone would have to remind me on the difference between a Light Machine Gun and an Automatic Rifle before we get hung up on the subject of what’s best for a squad automatic.

 

QuintusO

From: QuintusO

1-Aug

I see that I'll have to do a "reverse" weight reduction plan to show how stupid this all is.

Farmplinker

From: Farmplinker

1-Aug

Usually, LMG=belt-fed and/or quick-change barrel; AR= mag-fed and "fixed" barrel. That's my personal rough and dirty definitions. YMMV.

stancrist

From: stancrist

1-Aug

RovingPedant said:

I quite like the aesthetics of a bullpup rifle, so that’s not a negative for me.

Ditto.  Personally, I love the bullpup concept.  I'm just skeptical that the US Army will go for it.

RovingPedant said:

Someone would have to remind me on the difference between a Light Machine Gun and an Automatic Rifle...

I'm not sure if there is a consensus.  When talking about modern weapons, I see it basically the same as Farmplinker:

LMG = belt-fed

AR = mag-fed

RovingPedant said:

I’ve never been convinced that LOP is an issue for flat-topped rifles with long sight rails.

I don't know if it actually would be a problem or not.  But it looks like it could be, depending on the optic used.

General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems RM-277 - Maryland ...

In reply toRe: msg 14
QuintusO

From: QuintusO

1-Aug



Assumptions are 140 rounds per gun for all the NGSW rifles, 1,000 rounds per gun for the NGSW belt feds, and 220 rounds per gun for the GDOTS mag-fed AR.

  • Edited 01 August 2020 18:36  by  QuintusO
renatohm

From: renatohm

1-Aug

You posted the reduced load elsewhere but I can't remember it - memory isn't what it once was...

taschoene

From: taschoene

1-Aug

So is it accurate that most of the weight savings for the GDOTS combo comes from a sharply reduced ammo load for the AR/LMG?  

How are the Marines loading up their AR gunners with the M27?  Just a 30% increase like you're calculating for the GDOTS AR?  

QuintusO

From: QuintusO

1-Aug

taschoene said:

So is it accurate that most of the weight savings for the GDOTS combo comes from a sharply reduced ammo load for the AR/LMG?  

Yes. I have them carrying 1,420 rounds per squad, instead of 2,980 rounds for the other two.

taschoene said:

How are the Marines loading up their AR gunners with the M27?  Just a 30% increase like you're calculating for the GDOTS AR?  

Correct. 11 magazines (330 rounds for the M27, 220 rounds for the GDOTS NGSW-AR).

  • Edited 01 August 2020 18:38  by  QuintusO
stancrist

From: stancrist

1-Aug

QuintusO said:

Assumptions are 140 rounds per gun for all the NGSW rifles, 1,000 rounds per gun for the NGSW belt feds, and 220 rounds per gun for the GDOTS mag-fed AR.

GIGO.  Your assumed ammo loads may be quite different from the actual ammo loads.

TOP