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.

  • 3433
    MEMBERS
  • 198212
    MESSAGES
  • 14
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

PDW again   Small Arms <20mm

Started 20/12/20 by DavidPawley; 197618 views.
gatnerd

From: gatnerd

29/4/23

DavidPawley said:

And to what benefit? For control of the weapon, the centre of mass should be between your hands. 

Thats bio-mechanically wrong. 

The further a weight is from the shoulder, the more fatiguing it is, and more leverage it exerts against the shoulder. 

Having the weight forward of the pistol grip also minimizes the amount of weight / stability the shoulder can offer, giving most of the burden of stabilizing the rifle to the much more wobbly and fatiguable arms. 

Having a neutral or rearward weight distribution means a good % of the rifles weight ends up being supported by the friction of the stock against the shoulder. This reduces the effort needed by the shooters arms to support the rifle, and allows the rifle to be supported one handed when needed. 

The rearward balance also helps offset the forward weight of suppressors and IR Lasers/WML, which on a conventional layout can make a rifle quite front heavy and fatiguing to aim off hand.

DavidPawley

From: DavidPawley

29/4/23

So, the user will spend all their time with the PDW shouldered?

PDW, not rifle. CQB, self-defence, not long-range musketry. Control of the weapon when some fucker is trying to rip it out of your hands and stab you, not leisurely aiming on the range.

At any rate, I strongly oppose the suggestion that the Q Honey Badger would be improved as a PDW by being a bullpup.

https://liveqordie.com/honey-badger-sd/

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

29/4/23

DavidPawley said:

At any rate, I strongly oppose the suggestion that the Q Honey Badger would be improved as a PDW by being a bullpup

No, for a PDW / 8" barrel etc weapon there is no need to be a bullpup. Once you reach a ~26"-28" long weapon (MP5 sized) going shorter is of limited benefit.

Those examples were provided to show how one could be done if the goal was a very short integrally suppressed .300.

DavidPawley

From: DavidPawley

30/4/23

Agreed. I think for a full size service rifle, bullpups are the best compromise. I was very impressed by the design of the GD NGSW candidate as the IW, even aside from the TVC ammunition advantages. 

stancrist

From: stancrist

30/4/23

DavidPawley said:

PDW, not rifle. CQB, self-defence, not long-range musketry.

It's actually SBR, not PDW.  And CQB, not self-defence.

The question was about a bullpup for special forces.

SF is primarily about offensive action, not defensive.

10th Special Forces Group (Airborne) CQB Training

CO, UNITED STATES09.19.2018Video by Spc. Jacob KroneSoldiers assigned to 10th Special Forces Group (Airborne) execute a close quarters combat drill on Fort C...

DavidPawley said:

Control of the weapon when some fucker is trying to rip it out of your hands and stab you...

Unless he has three or four hands, it seems rather improbable that he is trying to do both at the same time.  smile

And in the event of such a scenario, it looks like a bullpup would be easier to retain -- and offer less area for said fucker to grab -- than a conventional rifle.

DavidPawley said:

At any rate, I strongly oppose the suggestion that the Q Honey Badger would be improved as a PDW by being a bullpup.

As a PDW, I doubt that it would make a significant difference either way.

As a CQB weapon for special forces, I think it might be noticeably better.

P.S.  I think that the original question did not really belong in this thread.  

EmericD

From: EmericD

30/4/23

gatnerd said:

Having the weight forward of the pistol grip also minimizes the amount of weight / stability the shoulder can offer, giving most of the burden of stabilizing the rifle to the much more wobbly and fatiguable arms.  Having a neutral or rearward weight distribution means a good % of the rifles weight ends up being supported by the friction of the stock against the shoulder. This reduces the effort needed by the shooters arms to support the rifle, and allows the rifle to be supported one handed when needed. 

Just to add a point, a "front heavy" rifle have a higher moment of inertia than a "rear heavy" (bullpup) rifle, so if you need more effort to swing the rifle and switch from a target to another, a front heavy rifle will be more stable when firing full-auto.

stancrist

From: stancrist

8-Oct

Russian Pilots Fielding PP-2000s & PLK Pistols

At the end of September it was confirmed that Russian aircrew survival kits will now include PP-2000 submachine guns. Sources suggest that the PP-2000 and PL...

.

stancrist

From: stancrist

17-Oct

The Flux Raider: The P320 That Transitioned To A PCC

Honestly I thought the Flux Raider was going to be Hypebeast vaporware. However after about 3 months with the system color me impressed. In today's video we ...

.

smg762

From: smg762

21-Oct

if you wanted an MP9 but wanted it slimmer in a holster, is it better for the gun to have a telescope or AK vertical stock?

stancrist

From: stancrist

21-Oct

I am assuming that by AK "vertical" stock you refer to the underfolding stock shown below:

It looks to me like an AK-type underfolder may not be compatible with the MP9 configuration:

Even if an underfolder would work on the MP9, I think a telescoping stock would be slightly slimmer.

TOP