autogun

Military Guns and Ammunition

Hosted by autogun

This is intended for people interested in the subject of military guns and their ammunition, with emphasis on automatic weapons.

  • 3216
    MEMBERS
  • 182825
    MESSAGES
  • 8
    POSTS TODAY

Discussions

FN EVOLYS   General Military Discussion

Started 23-Apr by tidusyuki; 3946 views.
tidusyuki

From: tidusyuki

23-Apr

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200284536A1/en?inventor=Pascal+Franssen

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200271404A1/en?inventor=Pascal+Franssen

What's it all about?
So far only the patent documents is shared around.
Anyone got any info about this supposedly new machinegun design from FN?
It looks like it's a unique MG with a feed tray cover that hinges open from the side rather than from the top like a typical machine guns.
I don't know yet about the purpose of the development let alone the caliber used.
Need to know the advantages also compared to current MG design. 

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

23-Apr

From my reading of the patent (still reading) you've essentially hit on the crux of the design - the feed tray opens to the side rather then the traditional 'top cover.'

The advantage claimed in the patent (and seem reasonable)

-Side opening allows a continous solid top rail for optics, allowing the use of longer optics / night vision then with a top mounted feed tray.

-Solid top rail offers better optic zero vs mounting to feed tray.

-Side mount ammo may be more ergonomic 

-FN has also developed a system that ejects the last 2 links from the belt to allow faster reloading 

There was some mention in the patent that most LMG's require a steel receiver; perhaps this system also makes an aluminum LMG receiver more practical. However in my quick read this does not seem to be the main claims in the patent. 

Overall sounds promising. 

roguetechie

From: roguetechie

23-Apr

Keep in mind that while this may be an improvement over the current m249 loading system, which can easily result in 30 second reloads, this gun is being introduced AFTER we've seen the KC rpl-20 demoed which runs slam and go soft ammo packs.

Barring something major we haven't found in the patents yet, or something that comes out during the may 6th unveiling, what we see represents an improvement over the mk46 and m249 loading situation but doesn't take it nearly as far as the RPL-20.

Especially when you consider that the RPL-20's improved loading and functionality dynamics are ambidextrous as compared to this which is definitely going to have a handed preference.

All that said I'm still pretty interested in seeing what they did and how much they got the weight down as well as whether this will translate well to a 7.62/6.8 version.

JPeelen

From: JPeelen

23-Apr

If I recall correctly, one of the early development predecessors of what became the M60 already had a feed cover opening to the side. More or less it was a MG42 feed cover mounted on the left side of a modified FG42.  

Farmplinker

From: Farmplinker

23-Apr

The SIG NGSW has a side hinge top cover, so I doubt that is the patented part, unless they've done something really radical.

gatnerd

From: gatnerd

24-Apr

Farmplinker said:

The SIG NGSW has a side hinge top cover, so I doubt that is the patented part, unless they've done something really radical

Well the Sig is side hinged, but is still a top cover in that it bisects the top rail, preventing optics from being mounted on or extending over it.

From the FN patent, it seems their goal is a side opening that keeps the top rail solid so that the whole length can be used for optics. Not sure how that would work but that was my read.

I wish patents had a 'plane english' section to summarize the invention simply, and then the legal definition of the invention after. 

Farmplinker

From: Farmplinker

24-Apr

Plain English for patents; dude, do you want the patent attorney Mafia to visit you?fearful

roguetechie

From: roguetechie

24-Apr

And don't forget that knights "solved this issue" by making a return to zero top cover.

I think this is what bothers me the most about the current crop of new western machine guns...

They pretty much picked the two absolute lowest hanging pieces of fruit machine gun problems wise and didn't bother fencing with the real issues.

They made the guns lighter, this one was a gimme and knights still managed to do a stupid in the way they did their lightening.

And then they attacked of all things optics mounts.

It feels a bit uninspired all in all.

RovingPedant

From: RovingPedant

24-Apr

roguetechie said...

I think this is what bothers me the most about the current crop of new western machine guns...

They pretty much picked the two absolute lowest hanging pieces of fruit machine gun problems wise and didn't bother fencing with the real issues.

They made the guns lighter, this one was a gimme and knights still managed to do a stupid in the way they did their lightening.

And then they attacked of all things optics mounts.

It feels a bit uninspired all in all.

Given that optics are probably the current/next revolution in small arms effectiveness, it strikes me that they are focussing on the correct area.

roguetechie

From: roguetechie

24-Apr

I mean yes, optics are important and you'd expect them to focus on that TOO.

BUT fast loading is also going to be massively Important too.

TOP