gatnerd

Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by gatnerd

This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.

  • 3254
    MEMBERS
  • 184724
    MESSAGES
  • 6
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

NGSW evaluation update   Small Arms <20mm

Started 31/7/20 by autogun; 16353 views.
roguetechie

From: roguetechie

2/8/20

If you go with the same number of rounds you have two very major issues.

Weight goes up massively and you run out of places to put magazines.

Going with the reduced round counts is an attempt to make the situation look fair and sane since keeping round counts the same gives insane and outright ludicrous weight increases

stancrist

From: stancrist

2/8/20

roguetechie said:

If you go with the same number of rounds you have two very major issues. Weight goes up massively and you run out of places to put magazines. Going with the reduced round counts is an attempt to make the situation look fair and sane...

I question that.  It looks more like a dishonest attempt to make the mag-fed AR appear better than the belt-fed candidates.

Notice that he reduced the round count for the mag-fed, but kept the round count for the belt-feds the same as the M249.

Also, if it is "reasonable" to assume that the automatic riflemen can carry 11 magazines, why can't riflemen do the same?

Now, if you want to talk about what ammo load is realistic, considering the bulk of 6.8 NGSW mags, it looks to me like there is insufficient room on a plate carrier to have pouches for more than four spare mags.

combat #action #activity #military #war #operator | Airsoft ...

Pin by Spirit of woodland on Special Forces | Active duty, Special ...

  • Edited 02 August 2020 17:40  by  stancrist
Farmplinker

From: Farmplinker

2/8/20

100-125 cartridges were good enough for their great-great-grandfathers, by cracky!

The scary thing is someone will try to use that as a legitimate argument.

Red7272

From: Red7272

2/8/20

This is all so weird. 

So this isn't a SAW in the usual sense, it's some kind of glorified AR/DMR with a single operator.  More of a fireteam weapon than a squad weapon. Rather than carrying the random crap of his squadmates he just gets a slightly heavier gun and more ammo.  This makes the belt fed guns look like an exceptionally stupid. A heavy barrel, 50 round drum and a bipod on the standard rifle being a better idea.

Trying to achieve all this with the same 20 round magazine as the squad seems optimistic. 

QuintusO

From: QuintusO

2/8/20

SAWs were supposed to be fireteam weapons with a single operator. That's kind of why they suck (belt feds need an AG).

There are 2x M249s in the Army Rifle Squad (one per fireteam) with no AGs.

Red7272

From: Red7272

2/8/20

QuintusO said:

SAWs were supposed to be fireteam weapons with a single operator. That's kind of why they suck (belt feds need an AG). There are 2x M249s in the Army Rifle Squad (one per fireteam) with no AGs.

This is all part of the current Western manpower deficiency and trying to make the quad fit the transport exacerbated by the symmetrical fire team concept. 2x 4 man fire teams with or without a leader is pretty standard (and yes marines are special). 

The Soviets went with a 7 man squad for their BTR and BMP motor rifle platoons that included a gun team and assault team. The entire mechanised platoon is 29. 3x gunner and driver, Platoon commander, platoon 2IC and 3x7 man squads.  The commander or the 2IC dismounts with the squads and the other commands the vehicles.  Whole thing fits in 3 BMPs/BTRs with a spare seat for the FOO/FAC. It seems insanely austere but it has been their structure for 4 decades. Even the Wagner PMC troops in syria appear to adhere to the 7 man squad structure from photo evidence. 

Western vehicles aren't much bigger and both current loads and the size of GPMGs precludes rifle calibre LMGs in fire teams. The Brits split their platoon in 2x12 rather than 3x8 and so had 2x 4 man fire teams and a 4 man GPMG team, but that left the platoon without the 3rd maneuver element which was a considerable disadvantage. 

Dropping the symmetrical fireteams for a gun team and assault team seems the only way that a rifle calibre belt fed LMG will be practical at section level. 

stancrist

From: stancrist

3/8/20

Red7272 said:

Western vehicles aren't much bigger and both current loads and the size of GPMGs precludes rifle calibre LMGs in fire teams.

Umm...

Weapons of the Danish Mechanized Rifle Squad" Poster by ...

Red7272

From: Red7272

3/8/20

stancrist said:

Umm...

For a mechanised squad, they ain't going to be wandering about mountainsides with that loadout. 

And i'm pretty sure everybody thinks a belt fed gun really needs an assistant gunner.

  • Edited 03 August 2020 0:33  by  Red7272
stancrist

From: stancrist

3/8/20

QuintusO said:

belt feds need an AG

Many of the world's armies seem to not share your opinion.

Weapons of the Swedish Army Rifle Squad (2019)" Poster by ...

Weapons of the Danish Mechanized Rifle Squad" Poster by ...

Pin on Military

Australian Light Rifle Platoon (Modern)

German Schützenkompanie (May 1944)

Visual History of the U.S. Army Rifle Squad

stancrist

From: stancrist

3/8/20

Red7272 said:

For a mechanised squad...

Yes.  Wasn't that what you were discussing?  You did mention BMP and BTR squads.

Red7272 said:

...they ain't going to be wandering about mountainsides with that loadout.

Why not?  It's basically the same carbine that Danish dismounted infantry used in Afghanistan.

And the machine gun is actually a few pounds lighter than the one they used in that country.

FIREFIGHT WITH TALIBAN AND DANISH SOLDIERS | PART 2/3 - YouTube

Red7272 said:

And i'm pretty sure everybody thinks a belt fed gun really needs an assistant gunner.

Who is this "everybody" you're talking about?  It doesn't seem to include a number of the world's armies.  (See post #35.)

TOP