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.
- 3434
MEMBERS - 198254
MESSAGES - 22
POSTS TODAY
Discussions
NGSW Phase 2 Consolidation and info Small Arms <20mm
From: gatnerd
10/5/23
Good catch with SIG listing them both as the same weight, clearly and error on their part.
Then the image weights should be pretty accurate, or at least should not overstate the weight, which is what I was keen to avoid.
From: stancrist
12/5/23
gatnerd said:Accuracy is everything, although short of someone pitching a grenade into that tiny firing port not sure if any grenade would be able to defeat that bunker.
Video of another assault on the bunker. Multiple grenades thrown into the entrance failed to neutralize the position.
The drone dropped two more hand grenades (@ 8:55 and 10:00 in the video below) a few inches from the firing port.
Shortly thereafter the Russians (There were a lot more than I thought!) abandoned the bunker, escaping via a rear exit.
@ 11:00 one Russki appears to fire three rounds at the drone, without hitting it. Infantry needs an anti-drone weapon?
???????? ????? ?????????? ?-2 (54 ????) ????????? ??????? ??????, ??? ???? ??????? ???????. ???? ?????????? ???????, ????? ?????? ???????, ??? ????????? ??.?...
From: gatnerd
13/5/23
stancrist said:Infantry needs an anti-drone weapon?
I think thats one of the takeaways from the Ukraine war. Certainly need one more then they need a NGSW-R....
As for what that weapon would be, theres drone jammer guns, but that will likely not work on emerging AI / Autonomous drones. A proximity airbust M72 LAW would work on loitering quadcopters, but would be way too slow to deal with a FPV diving suicide drone.
...
In terms of grenades, we've seen a number of lackluster effect in various vids. I wonder to what extent that is older F1/RGD-5 style hand grenades being meh due to a limited number of fragments, vs frag grenades in general being meh in outdoor use?
From: gatnerd
13/5/23
Updated NGSW vs M4 graphic - alas had to use a 3d render for the M4, couldn't find one of the M4 w/ current PEQ15 + ACOG by itself.
From: graylion
15/5/23
renatohm said:4.5 pounds heavier, 10 rounds less - yikes!
what's that in real money? Also, clearly putting the rifle into rifleman
From: gatnerd
15/5/23
renatohm said:4.5 pounds heavier, 10 rounds less - yikes
Yes it weighs a bit more then a loaded M4+ACOG+IR+M203
In fairness to the NGSW, half of that disparity is due to the unusual lightness of the M4A1 compared to other 5.56 rifles.
Weight wise, the Marines current M27+VCOG 1-8X VCOG + IR + Suppressor is likely getting up to NGSW weight. I'll have to run those numbers later.
But in terms of return to Battle Rifle, a loaded NGSW is 13.24lbs, vs 10.7lbs for a loaded M14.
From: gatnerd
16/5/23
stancrist said:It hardly seems fair to compare the NGSW rifle with its adjustable stock, advanced optic, and suppressor, to the old M14 with its fixed stock, iron sights, and no suppressor
It is and it isn't.
In the sense that you mention, it's obviously unfair as NGSW does indeed have a lot more stuff.
However in terms of evaluating the wisdom and future success / issues for NGSW, I think the comparison with the M14 / past battle rifles is instructive.
Namely, the M14 (and later the Battle Rifle in general) fell out of favor due to the weapon and ammunition being deemed excessively heavy, relatively low capacity vs enemy weapons, and harsh recoiling. And that was when the weapons were ~10.7lbs loaded.
Now we have a gun thats 13.24lbs loaded, with loaded mags of identical weight/size/capacity to the M14....
To me that should ring alarm bells.