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.

  • 3371
    MEMBERS
  • 192490
    MESSAGES
  • 13
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

NGSW Phase 2 Consolidation and info   Small Arms <20mm

Started 30/8/19 by gatnerd; 576000 views.
Farmplinker

From: Farmplinker

12/9/19

They need to give us all here a case or two to play with.

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

12/9/19

"Look at the lenght of CT cartridges. Compare them with the pens to the left."

Good catch! I didn't even notice them till you mentioned them.

I cropped the image and edited it (poorly) to help make them stand out more:

Also, on the second pass I spotted the 6.8 mag. Looks fairly thick, but is sadly not a quadstack as hinted at in some of Textrons patents.

 
 
gatnerd

From: gatnerd

12/9/19

"I'm seeing "brass case" and "metal base", so maybe the base is not steel?.

The weight reduction of ~20% is not an impossible task if the base represent 60% of typical a brass case total weight, and replacing this brass base with lightweight alloy base."

Several different articles over the last few months have mentioned a steel base / brass body. It's possible they are all wrong in their reporting; that said the bases sure look shiny like machined steel. 

 

Shell Shock achievers a 50% case weight / ~20% cartridge weight savings using an aluminum base / thin wall steel body, so if they are using aluminum instead of steel that would be good.

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

12/9/19

"I think it would be at least as bad as a bullpup.  It would be extremely ass heavy, and have a length of pull better suited to apes than humans."

The ideal is a neutral ballance over the pistol grip, ala the AUG. 

But if the choice is massively front heavy, or massively ass heavy, ass heavy is definitely how to go, especially once suppressors and accessories are added. 

When the weapon is ass heavy, quite a bit of that weight is supported by the shoulder, and then the rest is largely supported by the shooting hand a the pistol grip. This grip is held close to the body, and the closer a weight is to the shoulder, the easier it is to support.

As an example of this, its possible to shoot bullpups one handed fairly accurately:

With a very front heavy weapon, most of the weight is supported by the shooters left arm, held away from the body, which exerts more mechanical leverage against the shoulder and makes it more fatiguing. 

An example of this is why 'fly weight' exercises use very light weights - when held away from the shoulder, even a ~5lb weight is very fatiguing after awhile:

So a very front heavy rifle sucks more then a very ass heavy rifle. 

stancrist

From: stancrist

12/9/19

I did not need a lecture on the balance and handling of bullpups, thanks.  I am just as aware of those charcteristics as you.

However, I did grossly misread your post, and thought you were talking about locating the pistol grip in front of the "tumor"

A bullpup with pistol grip near the center of balance seems possible, but the gun would be rather tall.  Something like this:

  • Edited 12 September 2019 22:10  by  stancrist
gatnerd

From: gatnerd

12/9/19

"A bullpup with pistol grip near the center of balance seems possible, but the gun would be rather tall.  Something like this"

I actually got to handle the Tavor12 at SHOT show last year. It looks weird but actually handled surprisingly well. 

The 'tallness' could be an advantage as well, in that it would likely make a longer, 30rd magazine more palatable. 

autogun

From: autogun

13/9/19

gatnerd said...

With a very front heavy weapon, most of the weight is supported by the shooters left arm, held away from the body, which exerts more mechanical leverage against the shoulder and makes it more fatiguing. 

I experienced a painful example of that a couple of years ago, when trying out a SCAR H fitted with a heavy TI night sight + scope combination. I had great difficulty in getting a clear view through the sight (as described HERE) and spent so long trying to get a sight picture that my left arm just gave up. I had to lie down to shoot the gun. I'm an old guy now, but I'm not in bad shape for my age. I went on to shoot some Tavors from the standing position, and they were no problem at all - I could have carried on all day with those.

PS My left shoulder gave me trouble for months afterwards, I must have seriously overstrained it.

 

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

13/9/19

"I experienced a painful example of that a couple of years ago, when trying out a SCAR H fitted with a heavy TI night sight + scope combination. I had great difficulty in getting a clear view through the sight (as described HERE) and spent so long trying to get a sight picture that my left arm just gave up. I had to lie down to shoot the gun. I'm an old guy now, but I'm not in bad shape for my age. I went on to shoot some Tavors from the standing position, and they were no problem at all - I could have carried on all day with those.

PS My left shoulder gave me trouble for months afterwards, I must have seriously overstrained it."

Yes, the effect of weapon balance on fatigue is quite profound. 

I first noticed it a few years ago, playing with a LMT MARS AR15, with its rather heavy monolithic handguard + suppressor. I was quite taken aback by how much front heavy this combination was, and how quickly fatiguing it was to hold steady. The suppressors weight, and even worse, that weight extended to the furthest end of the rifle where it exerts maximum leverage, really has an effect disproportionate to the weight increase.

In my personal collection, the difference between my AUG and my AR is really pronounced.

The AR is a modern, mlok handguard model with medium contour barrel, and currently only iron sights. Weight is 6.5lbs. 

My AUG, by comparison, is fully accessorized with an ACOG, Surefire Light + mount, sling, and loaded 42rd mag, and weighs in at 10.25lbs. 

Yet just standing in my living room, holding aim at the lightswitch on the wall 10yd across the room, the unloaded 6.5lb AR becomes more tiring to hold on target then the 10.25lb loaded AUG, despite the AUG being nearly 4lbs heavier. 

 

So when I look at the 6.8 Textron, with its tumor + likely 8lb weight + a suppressor...I shudder at the balance. 

The TFB article seem to imply that they also may have built a battery into that tumor section, further adding weight forward of the pistol grip... 

As good as LSAT is as a technology, its hard to see it winning with this current carbine configuration. On the other hand, given SIG's case design, I'm extremely skeptical that SIG is achieving much in the way of cartridge weight savings. 

The real wildcard is GD/True Velocity/Beretta submission. If they can produce a decent rifle and LMG with more conventional ergonomics, I suspect they will win out over Textron. 

Alesar

From: Alesar

13/9/19

Pardon my ignorance, but how is it possible to use a suppressor with a cased telescopic cartridge? Doesn’t that type of cartridge use some kind of polymer wad at the front?

EmericD

From: EmericD

13/9/19

gatnerd said...

Several different articles over the last few months have mentioned a steel base / brass body. It's possible they are all wrong in their reporting; that said the bases sure look shiny like machined steel. 

Right, but steel base + 20% weight reduction are not a good match, and according to this picture I'm not 100% confident that the base is steel, could be light alloy also...

TOP