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.

  • 3326
    MEMBERS
  • 188685
    MESSAGES
  • 23
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

NGSW Phase 2 Consolidation and info   Small Arms <20mm

Started 30/8/19 by gatnerd; 458681 views.
EmericD

From: EmericD

8/11/21

stancrist said:

The French army had set a 600-meter range requirement, and "the initial will was really to be able to cover 0 - 600 m with the FAMAS", so why did they develop the FAMAS in a caliber that was incapable of meeting the requirement, instead of a caliber that could? 

I wasn't there so I can't be 100% sure.

In 1962, the French army wanted to replace the MAS49/56 with the FN FAL, the procurement process selected the MAS62 and the Army never fielded the weapon.

Sometimes, you don't have what you want.

With the political decision to adopt the 7.62 mm MAS62 as the "next 7.62 mm rifle", and with the ageing fleet of MAS49/56, selecting another cartridge was maybe (pure speculation from me) viewed as a way to escape from the MAS62 and in 1973, the French army announced that the MAS49/56 will be replaced by the HK 33 (or the FN CAL if Belgium was to buy Mirage F1 planes). Well, anything but not the MAS62.

Unfortunately, the procurement process selected the FAMAS instead (which was not fully developped at this time) and bought some SIG 540 from Manurhin so the troops could have access to something more "up to date" than a 20 years old semi-auto rifle with a 10-shots magazine capacity.

Sometimes, you simply don't have what you want.

So, the French army ended with the FAMAS rifle (a rifle the army didn't want) as an interim weapon, firing a round that was selected because it could kill a 25 kg & retired security dog with one shot in the leg at 10 m... but with the budget to launch a program for the development of the "perfect rifle" that never arrived...

stancrist

From: stancrist

8/11/21

Thanks for that review.   Now the adoption of the 5.56mm FAMAS makes much more sense.

nincomp

From: nincomp

8/11/21

It seems that France, like the US, adopted the 5.56x45 as an "interim solution" for a wonderweapon that has yet to materialize.  

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

8/11/21

EmericD said:

One push "up" or "down" to adjust the range by 25 m if I remember well (so if your target is located at 532 m, you simply clic "up" until you display "525 m" and add a little holdover.

Thank you for the info on the system. That does seem pretty advanced / ahead of the curve / much more capable then its brief Wikipedia mention described.

In terms of range, how is distance to the target determined? By eyeball? 

Determining accurate ranges 'in the field' always seemed like a very refined skill. Especially once angles also are factored in. 

Does France plan to keep the FIL/FIR now that you have switched to the 416? Or is there a plan to shift to a new generation of optics? 

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

8/11/21

roguetechie said:

Primary and secondary has some stuff on them and their rep. Judging by the amount of stuff in their product catalog civilians aren't allowed to buy and etc/things their devs have said they're extremely legit and are using outright classified technology in some of their offerings. Personally, when I upgrade I'll probably do stealth armor systems flexible plates which aren't the thinnest or lightest but they move with and conform to your body more.

I'm always torn between considering P&S a reputable source of info, or a FB cult of group think. "If its not SME approved it doesnt exist - and the SME's are only those we approve" seems to be the common refrain. 

Certainly, I'm more inclined to trust you vis a vis the armor than them. The specs do look fantastic. 

I had also been eyeing Stealths flexible armor, mostly because it could offer coverage comparable to II/IIIA soft armor.

However 1.5lb, .35" thick plates...

roguetechie

From: roguetechie

9/11/21

Yeah that's an eye opener right?

Blew my mind too.

I'd been hearing whispers about what xsapi and it's follow on's had been doing but actually seeing something like that you can buy shocked me.

Especially since it's not even more expensive than things like the stealth flexible standalone plates.

I don't claim to know where any of this is going, but now that we know stuff like that is possible and just plain not that expensive... 

It changes things. 

I have a very strong suspicion I know one of the core technologies involved and if I'm right about what that is, we've got an even bigger problem on our hands because they're potentially stupid cheap to manufacture en masse.

EmericD

From: EmericD

9/11/21

gatnerd said:

In terms of range, how is distance to the target determined? By eyeball?

The squad leader have a laser rangefinder, so when he assign the fire sectors to soldiers, he also give them the range.

We are also firing a mix of ball / tracers in our IWs (2B-1T-4B-1T-2B), and tracers are easy to track in the IR scope, even in bright daylight.

The front grip panel allows to quickly adjust for the range / windage, while keeping your eyes on target, and the sheer weight of the rifle + scope make it very stable during shooting (and the scope have a very generous field of view, even at 10x power).

gatnerd said:

Does France plan to keep the FIL/FIR now that you have switched to the 416? Or is there a plan to shift to a new generation of optics?

Both.

We are finishing the integration of the scope with BlueTooth link between the front grip, the scope and the soldier personal radio, and planning to buy new sights in the years to come.

The technology of the FIL / FIR sights is more than 15 years old, you could now find something much more ligther and with less power consumption, that could deliver similar capability.

It also seems that the capability to record videos / take pictures and share them with the other member of the group is not really needed, so we are probably going to delete them in order to have a "stealthier" system.

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

9/11/21

roguetechie said:

I have a very strong suspicion I know one of the core technologies involved

So based on this video (literally the only video or info I can find on them) it looks like the plate is UHMWPE:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGEBN1LrfpU&t=612s

That also explains why its not rated for anything with a steel core/ the big bump in weight to go from RF1+ to R2+ in order to stop M855. 

Previously there had been several IIIA+ rigid plates that were ~.25"x1lb, that could stop IIIA threats plus SS198/ Liberty 50gr high velocity soft armor defeat threats.

It seems they've perhaps figured a way to create an even denser pressing of UHMWPE sheets to add enough layers that they can make a ~III plate thats barely thicker, but offers enough 'catching' ability and rigidity to stop lead rifle rounds. At least thats my guess.

Such a plate would be very handy against 7.62x39 lead core weilding foes, but would be of limited use against anything with a steel core. Buffman had tested another IIIA+ plate (but 0.5" thick) that could stop M193 at 3300fps, but was pierced by 5.7x28 SS190 at 2100fps due to its little steel tip. 

EmericD

From: EmericD

9/11/21

nincomp said:

It seems that France, like the US, adopted the 5.56x45 as an "interim solution" for a wonderweapon that has yet to materialize.

Yep.

We had the same bias, but with much less money.

I just check yesterday the technical manual of the FELIN system, it's a 2034 pages document...

poliorcetes

From: poliorcetes

9/11/21

"autonomous" is a very, very problematic term. It integrates a lot of different means, and a lot of that are related with human capabilities

And that's a huge problem, because specific AI is never, ever be "human" by any means.

So, an AEGIS is fully autonomous because it needs to be. Target are not enough numerous, always valuable and critical to be engaged. Humans needs to get out of the loop for enough success rate. Ditto for Active Defense Systems such as trophy or iron fist: targets are easy to discriminate and human reaction times are far from being enough.

Indeed, autonomous guidance is mature for other kind of targets. During the eighties, as you know, there were a lot of functioning systems that can be fired and forgot, such as BAT, any microwave-guided ATGM, etc. Soviet armored menace was a huge opportunity for developing a lot of expensive autonomous systems.

In all these examples, there is no "decission". The algorithm is painfully simple: if inside this volume of space certain specific targets are detected by raw mass, temperature of speed, they will be engaged at the optimal moment. Such targets will be discriminated using non machine-learning decission trees.

However, if the target is a human or a group of humans, or civilian vehicles, then "decission" is an unavoidable task. There are no mechanical decission trees apt for such task. Besides ethical and moral questions such as engaging innocent civilians if possible (something that is really needed to be preserved in our Western world), the opportunity cost is even more important under a military perspective.

You see, any army will have a limited ammount of effectors of any kind. Even if dual / COTS technologies and resources decrease the unitary cost of an effector, the numbers will be limited and even less numbers will be ready for use at any moment for logistical reasons.

Therefore, engaging civilian targets (persons or assets) will be under human supervision, because if the system doesn't engage the most valuable target at the correct moment, the opportunity cost will raise like crazy. Instead of pure autonomous systems (which are demoted only by Western activists and paid campaigneers), the actual game changers are going to be the systems which maximize the human-machine teaming capabilities, shorten the kill chain loop and integrate themselves more in a comprehensive Battle Management System at any organic level.

And I'm afraid that such horrendously difficult enterprise is the core of Chinese efforts since a number of years ago

TOP