This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.
Latest 14:21 by RovingPedant
Latest 6/2/21 by gatnerd
Latest 26-Nov by BruhMomento
Latest 25-Nov by roguetechie
Latest 24-Nov by roguetechie
Latest 23-Nov by stancrist
Latest 19-Nov by BruhMomento
Latest 18-Nov by renatohm
Latest 18-Nov by smg762
Latest 17-Nov by Farmplinker
Latest 16-Nov by hobbes154
Latest 13-Nov by gatnerd
Latest 12-Nov by EmericD
Latest 11-Nov by gatnerd
Latest 11-Nov by renatohm
Latest 9-Nov by Refleks
Latest 8-Nov by EmericD
Latest 6-Nov by poliorcetes
Latest 4-Nov by RovingPedant
Latest 2-Nov by roguetechie
Latest 2-Nov by smg762
Latest 1-Nov by poliorcetes
Latest 31-Oct by stancrist
Latest 28-Oct by bradys555
Latest 27-Oct by gatnerd
Assumptions are 140 rounds per gun for all the NGSW rifles, 1,000 rounds per gun for the NGSW belt feds, and 220 rounds per gun for the GDOTS mag-fed AR.
GIGO. Your assumed ammo loads may be quite different from the actual ammo loads.
Yes, but for comparison purposes using the same number of magazines as currently issued as basic load is a reasonable basis.
I'm not sure how "reasonable" -- or useful -- it is to make a comparison that may have no resemblance to reality.
And IIRC, the early statements were that the same number of rounds would be carried, not that the same number of magazines would.
I'm so glad I have Stan blocked lmao. Life is bliss.
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
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.
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.
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.