/k/ - Weapons

>butt stock and controls

Wew space AR

>E/M trigger

What the fuck is this? Remingshit etronx making a revival?

>Powered rail

What's wrong with scopes that have 1 year long life span batteries?

So how soon until they decide it doesn't provide a 60gorillion percent improvement to what they already have?

>>576112

>not a bullpup

>powered memerail for your pleasure

>supposed lightweight materials must be experimental shit that is expensive and hard to produce

>seems to be 100% machined

>6.8mm instead of 6.5mm or 6.66mm

Well, fuck, at least there is now a chance for a general purpose cartridge to be adopted. All I have to do is design a clearly superior rifle. Also, can we get the source?

>>576114

>What the fuck is this?

I think this is "Tracking Point" like sight integration.

>>576116

>General purpose round

Why won't this meme die? It's always better to specialize into a coherent role instead of trying to do everything, that's the entire point of combined arms.

>>576121

So you're saying that we should get rid of assault rifles entirely and go back to SMG+battle rifle combat?

>>576125

Too generalized. You need a battalion of men armed only with daggers and an other battalion of men armed only with heavy machine guns on tripods.

>>576125

No, because assault rifles have a clearly defined role: a weapon with the capability to deal with 90% of the threats your average infantryman has to deal with, within the ranges that the average infantryman should expect (<400 m). Increasing the service rifle caliber to something like 6.5 Grendel, .264 USA, has a lot of drawbacks (more recoil, lower mag capacity, but, most importantly, wight of ammunition) for the sole benefit of being able to deal with those isolated situations in which the GP cartridge would have solved the problem, but a smaller round like 5.56 or 5.45 wouldn't have. The example that people love to bring up is US troops getting outranged by 7.62 machine guns in Afghanistan. But that's a stupid example, because you're suggesting that every infantryman be able to outperform a specialized automatic gunner. The appropriate answer to that situation is to counter the enemy's MGs with your own MGs, not go into a spastic fit about 'overmatch' and demand that every infantryman become a machine gunner.

>>576120

>What do they mean by "intelligent"?

That it can transfer information and power both.

>>576120

the smarter the soldier the more accurate it is, thats why they're going to put all smart white men on the front lines to get blown up for israel.

>>576132

Here master faggot.

https://taskandpurpose.com/army-next-generation-squad-weapon/

Do I get a smiley face on my belt now?

zero effort jewgleing and tldr didju rike it

>>576112

Wait

>no scope

Can you shoot 360° with it?

>>576141

looks like an ork clunker

>>576138

I'm beginning to like the fish. Will you post it tomorrow again?

>>576128

Should we replace 308 with something like 6.5 or 7.92x41?

>telescoped 6.5mm ammunition

Oh fuck, they should just go ahead and make it caseless while they're at it.

>High pressure chamber

What did they meme by this? Most every firearm is considered as having a high pressure chamber.

Was this infographic actually presented to the military, or is someone having a lark? The bipod was fucking copy pasted onto the diagram; they didn't even bother to use a fucking .png.

>>576138

I love these "were going to REVOLUTIONISE OUR BATTLEFIELD" every so years, where all they manage to do is give defense contractors a couple billion to stay afloat while they create the shittiest meme rifle they can, claiming more and more rediculous feats every time to keep the retarded lawmakers from pulling funds, just to keep using the same shit we've been using for damn near 50 years now.

There are of 5-10 million AR's owned in the country in the country,and U.S. Military has 2.3 million total troops combined, active, reserve, and national guard.

So would the civilian market be a bigger market than the US military?

If they adopt this rifle then would the manufacturers push to gut the NFA?

>>576157

Instead of 45,000 psi, they're looking for 80-100 thousand psi. Longevity is going to be a massive problem. This is another meme outing to keep defense contractors alive, and invested in our country and not others for the time being.

See:

>>576158

So how much do I have to modify the M14 before they'll consider putting it back into service?

>>576138

That gun did revoutionize the fire arm industry.

>>576157

>What did they meme by this?

5.56x45 is 55000 psi max pressure round. Proposed round has 75000-100000 psi max pressure. Nearly doubling that, it is more than any magnum rifle round has. This is some HIGH pressure.

>>576168

the recoil must be crazy.

At that point, why not arm everyone with 7mm rem mags?

>>576169

>At that point, why not arm everyone with 7mm rem mags?

But this is what it is. 7mm rem mag on steroids in more lightweight space age technology package. Battle rifle fags should be celebrating.

>>576156

For full-caliber rifles a 6.5 makes sense because of muh ballistic coefficient, 6.5 Mememoor, .264 winmag, and similar cartridges provide objectively better performance than their .30 caliber counterparts, and weigh less to boot.

>>576210

The joke is that all those rifles were the new US army rifle you fucking /v/edditor.

>>576127

>>576125

Tell me if this is a stupid idea.

>Standardize on three cartridges for small arms, (pistol, intermediate, full size rifle)

>Each is based on same straightwall belted magnum parent cartridge, differing only in length and maximum chamber pressure.

>This allows for any 'tier' of firearm to chamber ammo for its own tier or lower.

>Issue pistol cartridge for sidearms and PDWs. Issue intermediate cartridge for salt raifus. Issue rifle cartridge for LMG/DMR.

>If your Marksman runs out of rifle ammo, he grabs some intermediate ammo and keeps shooting, adjusting for the reduced muzzle velocity. If you're really hard up, you start using pistol ammo.

It's all the benefit of role-specific cartridges without the drawback of being completely screwed when your logistics system shits the bed.

>>576128

>capability to deal with 90% of the threats your average infantryman has to deal with

>equip infantries of twenty member states with state of the art 5.56 composite projectiles

>max effective range 500m

>go after enemy durkas

>they equip their troops with WWI lead 7.62x54mmR and motorbikes to control the range

>you cant catch them to bring them into range of 5.56

>they stay comfy and safe by forcing the 10% of situations your infantry can't fight

>because you only equipped them for 90% and standardized it like a moron

>all your infantry is pointless

>you only score kills on the enemy with .50bmg machine guns and sniper rifles

Good job you just sank trillions of dollars into a losing war and became an international embarrassment.

>>576232

>The appropriate answer to that situation is to counter the enemy's MGs with your own MGs, not go into a spastic fit about 'overmatch' and demand that every infantryman become a machine gunner.

>>576116

>>576112

>didn't change to a bullpup

>haven't published new weight data

>this shitty carbine probably still weighs nearly 10lbs since they added to the barrel

>still probably uses stupidly expensive medical PEEK plastic for the bullets

This is what you get when you hire non-firearms engineers to design weapons, a fucked up hunk of junk just like SA80 project.

>>576238

Nah, the proper response is to have a continous range and variety of weapon systems from pistol to heavy machine gun. Any standardization, any "arm for 90%" bullshit, and you leave massive vulnerabilities in your combat ability.

>>576241

There's the soviet 107mm rocket which is basically the #1 piece of artillery used by durkas during the 15 years we were invading them. If you want to have fun watch this whole video.

>>576247

>Nah, the proper response is to have a continous range and variety of weapon systems from pistol to heavy machine gun

Outside of small numbers of elite units, it's really not worthwhile. It's what all of the major players in WWII were doing, and all of them came to the conclusion that the logistics clusterfuck created by that kind of doctrine far outweighed the marginal benefits of having a different weapon and ammunition for every situation. This is (slightly) less true for asymmetric warfare, in which you have a massive economic and organizational advantage over the enemy, but it's fundamentally a bad idea to organize your army around the idea of fighting exclusively inferior foes, because it means your forces will get a hard unlubed dicking in any conventional war. And modern conventional wars are very much wars of economy, meaning your logistics are very much going to help influence victory; this is also why a large number of cheap, easily replaceable vessels would make a superior navy to the fuckhueg, white elephant supercarriers the USN is focused around today.

Furthermore, there's the issue of training. Even if you can handle the logistics of acquiring and maintaining such a large variety of weapons and calibers, the fact of the matter is your average infantry grunt won't have combat-effective accuracy at the ranges being requested. Even with optics your current infantrymen are effective to 300-400 meters. Part of that has to do with the somewhat lax standards of Army marksmanship (I believe 7 MoA is all that's required to gain an "expert" ranking), but even if you tighten up training the best you can hope for from the average infantryman is ~500 meters. Much more beyond that point, and the men have to be trained in not only marksmanship fundamentals, but more advanced precision shooting techniques that precisely and scientifically determine elevation drop, windage, parallax, and so on. And you run into issues deploying that kind of training on a large scale, again because of logistics. Marksmanship fundamentals are almost entirely muscle memory and don't need all that much practice to be kept at an adequate level. The advanced marksmanship techniques in contrast are very technical skills that need to be constantly maintained, expending tens of thousands of rounds per person per year; it's simply not practical to expect this kind of training on an army-wide level. As such, it's far better to train and equip the "normal" infantryman to reliably engage within 500 meters (current doctrine calls for 300 meters), and for those less common engagements at longer range rely on smaller numbers of soldiers with more specialized training, e.g. GPMGs, DMRs, and so on. Nathan F., a ballistician over on TFB goes into this pretty in-depth in several of his articles.

http://archive.fo/Eo5mv

>>576161

If they adopt this rifle then would the manufacturers push to gut the NFA?

>>576251

Why do people knock down 5.7x28 since it's an obvious replacement for 9mm grease guns?

Wouldn't we better off phasing out x51 and 5.56 for something like 6.5 CM to further reduce logistical headaches?

I don't see a point in replacing 50bmg, I mean if you need better range then load the bullet. Beyond 50bmg range, you should be using cannon caliber.

>>576238

>>576251

Fuck off Nathan, nobody likes you.

>>576262

Why not use a straight walled case with a saboted projectile. If it were drag stabilized then you could avoid any accuracy problems from poor rifling engagement or warping in the sabot, you lose no velocity to drag on the rifling, and the cartridge is effectively necked down because the projectile is significantly smaller than the case diameter. Add a small solid rocket booster for anti-material weapons and you can potentially get penetrators up to mach 3.

>>576267

Straight-walled cases are inherently less reliable than tapered cases due to extraction issues is the problem, and as >>576270 says sabot isn't quite the same as a bottlenecked cartridge. However, if one were to use CT ammo with that moving-chamber action the extraction issues would be made moot, and it would be a lot easier to "standardize" CT cartridges in the manner you're suggesting if they were all the same diameter.

>>576266

Isn't spin drift the same as the magnus effect though?

>>576271

>use CT ammo

If CT is so amazing, why don't why start reloading magnum shotshells with our 556 loads? I was under the impression there was a very good reason CT remained the bailiwick of over-anxious military contractors.

But if it's a solved problem, by all means clue me in – shotshells and a modified barrel should be all that's needed, right?

https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/ndia/2018/science/Singleton.pdf

>>576275

No, there are still kinks to work out from what I understand. However, the technology is much, much closer to true maturity now than it was a mere fifteen years ago, and I do think it's the next logical step in small arms technology. Due to existing ammo stockpiles, general government inertia, and the massive problems associated with the last two rapid adoptions (M14 and M16), any major change to the armed force's service rifle is going to need to have dramatic and noticeable improvements in effectiveness compared to what we have now in order to get through. Because, of the nascent small arms technologies in development right now, CT is the most mature by a wide margin, I think it's safe to say that it would play a factor in whatever it is the military adopts next.

>>576283

> to increase the volume of the propellant chamber without increasing the length of the projectile.

That's the part that I don't believe sabots do well, if at all.

Saging because we're devolving into he-said-she-said territory by this point.

>>576251

>Outside of small numbers of elite units, it's really not worthwhile.

You know there is fifteen years of combat precedent in the middle east that proves you wrong, you can't just ignore tha- oh wait you can.

>>576290

>>576238

>>576128

There is more to it than plinking at long range.

>penetration

One of the benefits of 7.62x39mm over other intermediate cartridges is that it can go through the wall of a commieblock, and that also means you need more than a bit of dirt or a fallen tree if you want effective cover. Do I need to tell how useful is that in a city or a forest? 7.62x39 weights around 15-16g, about as much as that 6.5mm CT cartridge they developed for the LSAT. And if starving Viet Cong can carry enough ammo to fight in a jungle, then I don't see how that cartridge would be too heavy.

>machine guns and squad logistics

7.62x51mm and 7.62x54mmR have quite similar ballistics. Now, I can't speak for all ex-Warsaw pact countries, but I do know that in the average Hungarian squad there is still 2 RPKs today, with 600-800 rounds each. That is quite a lot of firepower, but it takes two people to carry both the weapon and the ammo. A Hungarian squad back in the day was 10 man with an IFV, and the three crew members were counted as squad members. So in practice 4 out of 7 men has to deal with the machine guns. Can you see the benefits of switching to a cartridge that is as good as 7.62x54 but weights only as much as 7.62x39?

>suppressive fire

Effectively the combination of the previous two points. A single rifleman without adequate training won't be a sniper, even if he has a general purpose cartridge, that is true. But two GPMGs with bipods and scopes firing a more effective cartridge (that is lighter but the projectile still carries more energy at greater ranges) could lay down some very effective suppressive fire.

>suppressors

Russians still keep 7.62x39 for their special forces only because it's easier to suppress that cartridge. Now, I'm not a fan of suppressors in general, but I can see how they could be useful in certain situations. With a general purpose cartridge, instead of keeping two completely different cartridges in production you'd only need a different load to be used with suppressors.

In conclusion: you burgers love your .22 varmint cartridge way too much. Meanwhile PKMs with scopes are one of the most popular weapons in Syria.

>>576128

But the assault rifle was designed to replace both BRs and SMGs by using an intermediate cartridge, and they did so effectively. But you said that "It's always better to specialize into a coherent role".

>>576328

The most common and popular weapon in Syria, by far, is the AKM bought by the US, UK, and France, and distributed to ISIS and others.

>>576328

>in the average Hungarian squad there is still 2 RPKs today

A small but important correction: I meant PKMs, not RPKs.

>>576352

>The problem is unreasonable addition of other equipment, a vietcong didn't carry 80lb backpack in addition to 15-30lb of gun and ammo.

So spergook really was right all along…

>>576380

I never said that PKMs are the most popular. Still, that might some weight to my argument that 7.62x39 isn't that heavy.

>>576383

>that might some weight to my argument that 7.62x39 isn't that heavy.

It is. They just go into battle with almost nothing, only a couple of extra magazines, and expect to die and go to their version of heaven. Also, they take the weapons they can get, mostly Eastern Bloc via US, UK, and France, and Russia. Russia had been supplying both sides to keep the war going as long as possible and make the Syrian government more dependent. Chinese Type 81s have also shown up in the conflict, though they're quite a bit rarer.

>>576383

Spergook was wrong in saying we should completely abandon things like med packs. But having five of them per pack might be going overboard…

>>576330

> But you said that "It's always better to specialize into a coherent role".

You're right I did, and in retrospect maybe that was a little disingenuous. At risk of sounding like a cheeky cunt, the "coherent role" of a general infantry squad is to be generalist, which is to say be equipped in such a way that they can handle ~90% of what you throw at them. The assault rifle is good for this because an assault rifle can do almost everything within that ~90%. A battle rifle is less effective because of diminishing returns; the better range and higher energy projectile extends that ~90% by a couple percentage points, but the extra weight and reduced capacity means that everything else that's closer in than those couple percentage points is done with less effectiveness. As a result, the infantry squad loses its "coherent role" as a generalist, because they're now only mediocre ~93% of the time instead of great ~90% of the time.

>>576352

>which is everything you're against here

I don't think I've ever stated I'm against larger cartridges where they're necessary, like GPMGs. I do think it's a bit redundant to put them in place at the fireteam level, however. We've already got them at the platoon level, and squads aren't meant to be truly independent from the greater platoon.

>The effective range of 6.5mm is superior to a medium machine gun round.

And to that end, chambering a MMG in some kind of 6.5 cartridge would be an excellent idea.

>Be US military

>refuse to update to new rifle for decades, not enough benefit

>replace M9 pistol with one that is a marginal improvement seemingly on a whim

Fucking why?

>>576290

Don't bother arguing with Nathan, he'll just keep throwing out strawmen and pretending that having one useful weapon in a 40-man platoon is a perfectly acceptable solution.

>>576431

>>576431

>>576432

>>576433

What are all these pdfs?

>>576454

Ah, explains why there's so many of them

>>576431

>PRINCIPLE OF OPERATION

>PRINCIPLE OF OPERATION (CONT)

>PRINCIPLE OF OPERATION (CONT)

>PRINCIPLE OF OPERATION (CONT)…

this is amazing

>>576120

>>576429

The MHS had been in development hell for something like 15 years before congress told the Army "pick something or we'll pick it for you."

>>576464

Weren't the pistols beat to shit though?

The Tom Cats were falling apart and they used vacuum tubes. At some point you need to replace equipment.

>>576138

So what's wrong with this gun and why was it never picked up by the various Burger fast food services?

>>576120

it does the thinking for you

>>576482

It's plastic shit. Looks pretty nice though.

>>576478

The M9s were, the MHS examples were all prototypes. The Army refused to adopt Glocks because then the program would end and they couldn't beg for more money.

>>576482

It was actually a very good G36 clone. It did have some problems with heat on the furniture but that was fixable. The real problem was that it didn't do anything that the M16 didn't do better already. It had just 2 advantages: a scope (which can be added to any rifle no problem) and it lacked a buffer tube. But the standard configuration didn't take advantage of that.

Ultimately it was just a stylized inferior alternative.

>>576486

Should the glocks be chambered in something like 5.7?

>>576489

Are you joking? You know about the Stoner 63 right?

>inb4 I was only pretending to be retarded

>>576497

If you're talking about modularity specifically, why not drop the M69W moniker?

>>576144

if only….

>>576497

So why didn't modularity take off then?

So have we made the improvements in tech needed to truly make the G11 serviceable yet? I've got a 30 year long boner over this thing.

>>576601

It was serviceable, it wasn't cost effective.

>>576478

smhtbhfam the vacuum tubes were far more resistant to EMP, even modern jets should have miniaturized vacuum tube backups.

>>576529

>So why didn't modularity take off then?

It… it did man.

First of all they were modular weapon systems, second of all Stoner 63 and CMG were in service until the late 80s. They encouraged projects like the Fishgun in the military. But civilians didn't know much about Stoner 63 until the late 80s-early 90s, after it was already being phased out.

Either way it jumpstarted modularity, that's true. Some other guns may have perfected it though.

>>576629

Well, it's H&K. Of course they are gonna push the numbers of their new super expensive hyper project.

>>576629

>you could modify the G3

Can't, it has that big bolt extension meme that would block stripper clips.

>>576659

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/02/27/come-side-feed-stripper-clip-ar-15-loaders/

http://archive.is/efvkh

There is more than one way to skin a cat.

>>576157

>going caseless instead of telescopic

Why?

>>576665

<instead of

Nearly all caseless ammo is also telescopic, because the projectile is fully enclosed within the casing.

>>576700

Hi there, Cave.

>>576133

Dubs of truth.

>>576737

that should be a real company, why the fuck isnt it

>>576755

Yeah, but it has VAG in the name so it's kind of off the table.

>>576776

What are you gay or something? I bet you are you fucking Fagot.

>inb4 that's not how you spell faggot

>>576776

You can name the final product BOIPUCCI-22 if you want.

>>576830

From where do you think Splinter Cell got its inspiration you doublenigger?

>>576830

looks more like the FN2000 than the XM8

>>576867

Fucking faggot, I bet you think troops should have first aid kits too.

>>576875

What a nice chart of Belgian marine life. I never knew what biodiversity their rivers and lakes hold.

>>576755

And it would cost 10$ per round. The production tolerances to get anything close to passable gyrojet ammo would ruin you. Also: rocketballs need a rather large barrel diameter to hold any significant advantage. And large caliber guns automatically reduce ammo capacity in box magazines, which are (by current standards) the best available.

>>576487

>The real problem was that it didn't do anything that the M16 didn't do better already.

It had far better reliability though, didn't jam every 2 magazines like a typical ar15.

>>576112

One thing that confuses me with the telescopic cased ammo is, how the hell do you extract the projectile and charge from the barrel if you decide at some point that you don't want to fire it?

>No casing

>No safe method of extraction that isn't hugely time consuming and ends in destruction of the round

>>576900

That's so fucking simple it's genius.

>>576901

>hurr the M16 jams all the time guys

That's a shit meme and you know it.

>>576904

There actually is a quite simple solution to that problem I just won't tell you because I want to be a dick and patent it, so I can cockblock everyone the same way Colt did with revolvers.

>>576904

>how the hell do you extract the projectile and charge from the barrel if you decide at some point that you don't want to fire it?

They all use a moving chamber. Move the chamber to the loading position, push the cartridge out of the chamber. It's how everyone has been doing it for as long as the concept has been around.

There are also pull extraction methods with large rim-like surfaces in the inside of the rear of the case on some concept guns, but the push through extraction works fine.

Somebody please screencap this thread, this is a goldmine of nigtardation

>>576879

nice birbs

>>576900

>dude just individually spot weld every round of ammo

YOU ARE RETARDED

>>577444

>dude just press the bullets into place on every individual round of ammo

Get the fuck out of here, retard.

Wasted Trips.

>>577445

>your system for cheap rocket nozzles requires welding otherwise the force of the projectile would cause the plates to fly off and the nozzle would be destroyed

>just press it really hard and it will stay dude even when fired out of a gun it's that simple bro

>>577442

But the optimal is 6-7mm, not 6-8mm.

>>577482

I'm convinced this retard is using a British IP to try and sully the good name of our resident bongs.

>>577483

>bongs

>goon name

Heh.

>>577445

>Dude, just use a system that requires no extra material, is proven to work reliably for very small parts en masse, can be easily done in paralel, requires next to no maintenance and only one moving part

instead of

>Dude, just use a method that completely changes the heat-treatment of a very important area of the casing, requires constant refilling of the welding material and thus constant realignment of the welding position, and has a set minimum size requirement for the area it can weld

I am with the bong on this one.

>>577491

>hurr lets mill a device out of a solid block of metal instead of mass producing it

>imaginary production problems!

>it could explode!

NIGGER IT IS IN SERVICE NOW ARE YOU RETARDED IT IS BEING USED EVEN BY DURKAS ITS BEEN USED FOR OVER FIFTY YEARS AMERICAN TROOPS ARE GETTING SHELLED BY ROCKETS USING THIS METHOD THERE ISNT ANY DANGER IT IS PROVEN EFFECTIVE FROM PRODUCTION LINE TO FRONT LINE

This is why Germans and Brits no longer rule the world, and why Americans and Russians do. If you were permitted, you would still be hand-chiseling entire trains out of solid blocks of metal.

>>577509

tfw islamig gommunists are literally making rocket engines in their garages because of this, but its still too unsafe.

gotta keep that gyrojet technology suppressed!

>>577519

Seems like the jews who control catridge manufacturing are paying shills to derail the truth about Gyrojet.

>>577541

Cuckridges are scared of the Chadrojet.

>>577451

>>577442

Is there a particular reason people don't make integer mm calibers for under 20?

>>577509

No, all the people that could have passed on stamped metal way of thinking got stolen in OP Paperclip and the russian equivalent.

It allows for high quality cars but not for low expense high capability munitions.

Now, on to the topic: What has stopped people from using solid, hard propellants like C4 and giving them an expansion chamber to drop chamber pressure to acceptable limits? I know that Voere used that to stabilize their burn and get consistent muzzle velocity. If the cartridge is only held by, say, the shoulder and the rim, these parts could be made heat resistant while the rest can be less heat tolerant.

>electronic trigger

>not a bullpup

WASTED

POTENTIAL

>>577655

Solid propellants have low burn rates because their surface area is low. This why propellants are divided in so many grains to make this surface large.

>INB4 G11

Its round was broken into pieces by primer during ignition.

>>577660

>no taper

>no bottleneck

Enjoy having feeding issues

>>577660

This.

Imagine if you do this with a 6.5 Creedmoor, you would have the same ammo capacity of 5.56 but with a stupid range and accuracy.

>>577683

>Enjoy having feeding issues

When was the last time you heard of feeding issues on a SMG?

The tapering used to help ejection back in the stone age of repeating firearms (in the XIXth century) and is one of those things that never went away because no-one dared to fuck with it.

Today with CAD and the immense knowledge we have to make repeating firearms we could make cartridges with really minimal tapering and chambers to take them in without any reliability issues.

>>577444

The only retard here is you.

Vid related.

>>577655

>What has stopped people from using solid, hard propellants like C4

Pelletized RDX costs more than current propellant. Modern smokeless powder costs $15 to $20 per kilogram for bulk reloading (less for ammo factories probably), while pelletized RDX would cost up to ~$26/kg.

>>577714

Price.

Normal smokeless is turned into pellets by turning it in a drum of liquid propellant, and letting the pellets cool over time into measurable sizes, which are then sorted. Pelletized RDX has to be alternated between a drum of propellant, and a drum of parafin or some other control chemical. It's not impossibly complex, just slightly more complex than modern propellants.

Failure of the case isn't an issue, the chamber itself prevents that. Worst case scenario, use steel cases, which would even bring cost down.

Although more likely someone who makes smokeless paid the generals to not make that decision.

>>577691

would those high pressure barrels chambered in 6.5 CM have a good barrel life?

>>577765

Machining makes it a lot more expensive in the long run, in this case too expensive to make gyrojet viable. Spot welding allows for mass production, which brings costs down enough to make it viable.

>>577764

>You don't even know what spot welding is.

What makes you think that?

Also, nice shifting of goalposts. In my entire post I didn't mention chamber pressure at all. Go fuck yourself, faggot.

>>577759

The nozzles are made separately from the casings, you spot weld them, not the case. To put them into the case you can simply press fit them in then put a small crimp over it. Are you getting enough air to your head or are you being retarded on purpose?

>>577780

>The nozzles are made separately from the casings, you spot weld them, not the case.

So you were unable to comprehend that I was saying exactly the same? I wonder which one of us is pretending to be retarded.

>>577770

>What makes you think that?

Because you're talking about variations in humidity and temperature affecting how welds form. These aren't continual welds, they're spot welds, made in controlled conditions. A current is passed through metal and heats it to melting only where needed, there isn't any widespread deformation like you seem to think.

>I didn't mention chamber pressure at all.

There isn't anything else you could be complaining about. The casing itself experiences no pressure differential, the gasses are vented as they burn, that's the point.

>>577780

>you can simply press fit them

This is a good point. They can actually just be forced in and then crimped in place, then the solid propellant compacted on top, no welds needed.

Fuck you could hard solder/braze it together like Mosin scopes, or even glue it together with epoxy. It only needs to resist some shear stress for a few seconds.

>>577764

how so?

>>577804

>. These aren't continual welds

I am not talking about variation within a single piece, I am talking about variations between the individual plates you weld together. In order to prebend the plates you need to know exactly how they will bend after colling down from welding.

Since a slight difference in temperature or weather can have an effect on the after-weld bend you would need to prebend the plates slightly differently every hour. While this process could be automated you would need a lot of experimental values to figure out which air pressure/humidity/temperature combination requires what type of prebending, and then have the bending machines automatically adjust for that.

"Controlled conditions" is still a very loose term. Have you been inside a factory during summer and then in winter? In summer it gets super hot, because all the machines produce a lot of heat and you are in a big fucking hall with lots of people and lots of machines where you don't want too much air ventilation because it could blow metal swarfs to be picked up by the wind and carried onto a part you want to finish. Metal dust could also be blown into someone's eyes.

In winter it can get very cold during low-pressure work times, because some of the machines are off and the building was not designed to keep heat in, rather to vent heat out. Of course with modern factories that weren't constructed thirty to fourty years ago you could implement a modern and expensive temperature control system, but that too has it's limits. You can't keep a large factory exactly the same temperature all year round, not to mention humidity and air pressure, which WILL change sometimes hourly.

You could put the entire welding process into a small controlled environment room, but that would also be expensive. The cooling would also need to happen inside that room, so it would need to be rather large, which further complicates the issue. Maintenance on those is already a bitch. Increasing them in size only makes it worse.

>The casing itself experiences no pressure differential, the gasses are vented as they burn, that's the point.

Again you are wrong. The nozzles experience a lot of pressure difference after the round exists the barrel. There is standard air pressure outside the round (possibly even lower because it's on the rear of a supersonic projectile) and very high pressure on the inside, where the propellant continuously burns and creates high pressure which is vented to the outside. Without a difference in pressure the rocket engine would not work at all.

>They can actually just be forced in and then crimped in place

So you actually thought that anyone would weld a back plate on a casing? What the fuck?! How would you even quality check that once it's finished? Of course you simply press the back plate into the casing, just like primers. Nobody ever suggested anything else.

>>577760

>would those high pressure barrels chambered in 6.5 CM have a good barrel life?

With the average barrel currently in existence, no.

The problem is the average barrel is really shitty steel compared to what is now the metal industry standards. Just making them with tool steel would considerably last longer for a negligible increase in cost (and none in weight), add to that a new rifling technique (any really) and you would have a barrel with a better barrel life than what we have on gun that's shoot flat from 0 to 800 yards, has no trouble going through light body armor at a distance or penetrating concealment.

Oh and you can finally fit your troops with ONE small arms caliber up to the .50 BMG considerably simplifying logistics.

But instead the (very scarce) R&D money for firearms is spent on making new rail systems for gizmos or stupid caseless ammo.

>>577936

>Oh and you can finally fit your troops with ONE small arms caliber up to the .50 BMG considerably simplifying logistics.

But that would be terrible! We all know that wars aren't won by the side that throws more explosives at the enemy, but by highly trained operators who need at least 5 different cartridges in a single infantry squad! But joking aside, is .50 BMG really a cartridge to be kept? If you were to switch to RDX based propellants and CT cartridges, then might as well do something with that too. General Dynamics made a machine gun that fires Lapua Magnum, and it seems to be just as effective as an M2, but both the cartridge and the gun weight a lot less. Although there is also vid related, and that seems to be a good alternative to spending money on sniper schools. So maybe the solution is to make the smallest projectile that you can outfit with a guidance system, and issue that to snipers; and also make a dumb version for machine guns. I guess in size and performance it would be somewhere between Lapua Magnum and .50 BMG.

>>577936

wouldn't a manufacture stand to make a lot of money off the civilian market if they produced 7mm RUM barrels that lasted tens of thousands of rounds?

>>577838

I don't understand the question. Barrel erosion happens because a bullet is forced into it and forced to turn too soon. A progressive rifling starts off with a lower twist rate and progressively increases it, gently. This causes less stress on the barrel and bullet.

>>577913

No.

>>576130

6.8mm is going to be weak against the machines

>>577936

Not expert, but i am again tormented by vague doubt of your statement. Are you saying military engineers are going for the cheapest shit? Sure, I think we all understand this. But is there some great ignorance of quality of steel for gun barrels in private sector? Very doubt it.

This is industry where every other year some guy comes out with carbon fiber reinforced polymer sling swivels for super weight savings on your rifle. That in these years everyone just keeps using the same shitty steel military procures – very doubtful.

>>577764

>Progressive rifling

Turns out that don't hold up when it comes to real war shit. Italians and later people who bubba's surplus carcanos found out the hard way on what happens when the muzzle is fucked with in any shape or form.

>>577676

If I recall that was marketing talk.

>Metford or Lancaster rifling

Need better steel. The English absolutely fucked up on a technological miracle when they used shit steel with their metford rifling. Japs used it with zero problems.

>I have interest into this working.

Don't we all?

>>577691

I'd love that stupidly accurate flechette shit the Russians came up with to be actually marketable.

>>577683

lel no.

>>578111

>italians failed at something so we can't do it either

If we live by that rule we'd be wearing animal skins and living in caves.

Progressive rifling seems to work fine in cannons and snipers. It's only prejudice that keeps it out of small arms. If they use chromed polygonal progressive twist rifling, the level of erosion will be closer to smoothbores than to rifled barrels despite the ridiculous pressures.

>>578128

See, cannons and snipers aren't going to be doing shit that might potentially fuck the muzzle up on their guns, your average GI on the other hand will and then these goes an entire barrel because you can't just fix it like with a standard barrel which is just a recrown job if not a quick polish in most cases.

>>577981

is there a company that would do progressive rifling for customers?

>>578137

https://bartleinbarrels.com/t-style-rifling/

>>577966

>wouldn't a manufacture stand to make a lot of money off the civilian market

No, it's long term suicide.

>>578108

>But is there some great ignorance of quality of steel for gun barrels in private sector? Very doubt it.

It's not ignorance. It's self preservation.

Barrels having an expiration date is a way to plan future income. It's planned obsolescence.

You want your gun to be reliable, but wears out. That way you sell another barrel.

What's better selling one barrel for 5 000 rnds every 3 years or selling one barrel for 25 000 rnds every 15?

It will always be the first one, even if they cost the exact same money per rnds.

A company on a long cycle is at risk of seeing "drought" period, during which it still need to retain it's (qualified) workforce and therefore is at a very high bankruptcy risk.

That's how so many industrial company died, not because they were making bad products or they weren't selling their production, but a case of saturating a market with products that work fine… forever.

It's even worse for a weapon manufacturer that will rely on government contracts to live, the US Government ask you to deliver 1M rifles in 10 years.

Those rifles are meant to be still working for 11 years?

Your company is dead the minute the last rifle is delivered.

>>577946

> is .50 BMG really a cartridge to be kept?

Not really 15mm FN (or 14.5 russian) would be much better but we do need something around that (20mm guns are simply to big to be really practical for an infantry team or a coax in a tank).

The HMG niche should be bridging 6.5 Creedmoor to 40mm CTA/ATGM (which should the only thing before 120mm). .338 Lapua is far too anemic for this.

>>576900

Why not just put the base plate in a jig to hold it at an angle when drilling thru then rotate it 1/4 turn and repeat? Is there some reason that this wouldn't work? Is the stacked plates method really superior to one that doesn't allow high temp gases to seep between the many layers of the composite base plate?

>>578153

>15mm FN (or 14.5 russian) would be much better but we do need something around that

What are the intended targets of the round? Because against infantry 2-3km away it seems to be fine. Or do you want to use it against lightly armoured vehicles and non-fortified buildings that are also 2-3km away?

>40mm CTA/ATGM (which should the only thing before 120mm)

I kind of agree with the sentiment, but interestingly enough the soviets used the 82mm 2B9 vasilek automatic mortar as an alternative to 120mm mortars. If you did that too, then you could equip the light infantry with simple 81mm mortars and use 81mm automatic mortars on vehicles for mechanized infantry. Or is it better to use only 40mm AGLs for area suppression and 120mm mortars with guided shells against harder targers and bigger formations?

>>578192

Wait.

>40mm CTA/ATGM

>ATGM

So you mean AT weapons here, not light artillery.

>>578192

14.5mm tends to fuck anything that is lightly armored up quite well, the Russians have HEI variants of it and AP is a given considering what the round was originally drafted for.

>>578207

IAlthough I like what you say, but you wrote this:

>20mm guns are simply to big to be really practical for an infantry team or a coax in a tank

But aren't these 14.5mm and 15.5mm cartridges nearly as big as 20mm rounds?

>12.7 tungsten core in an 14.5 copper jacket, empty space is filled with an incendiary compound

I take it would quite well even if you replaced the tungsten with steel, right? Tungsten seems to be a waste for a machine fun.

>or it's automated version Mo-120 2R2M

Honestly, with all those electronics and hydraulics you might as well make a basket autoloader for it, and move the crew to a separate compartment of the vehicle. The autoloader could be designed so that you can quickly refill it by hand if you open the backdoor of the vehicle.

>>578155

>>578168

>>578169

That's still multiple drills per cartridge in a jig which isn't likely to be useful on a production line. Also drill bits wear out, its easier to just press it because a press works on shear principle and doesn't wear out nearly as often. I just don't see what massive advantage milling would bring that it would be worth the cost increase.

> Is there some reason that this wouldn't work?

It would work, no one is disputing that, gyrojet ammo does work even with milled parts. The issue is that milling is ridiculously expensive and thus makes the entire thing non-competitive with standard munitions which are extruded or stamped into shape.

There are some milled brass bullets on the markets right now, and they're all like $5 a shot. Hell casting would be cheaper if you really want a solid block there…

And there's no need for insults, we're all friends here.

>>578207

I'm liking the BRG, it looks like a decent replacement for 14.5mm.

>>577660

>>577701

Make it telescopic and fire bullets with osmiridium cores and you can shoot ayys with it

I hope he will find an URZ somehow.

>>578844

Wait, what is stopping the new case from dropping out the ejection port if it is inserted a little too roughly?

>>578850

Some spring loaded rod of sorts.

>>576130

Soldiers have found themselves in need of absolute range to compete with the AK. Soldiers have found themselves having shots taken with AK that are at greater distances than they can return fire from. Doubtless, this is about that.

This is the problem with one size fits all calibers.

>>578879

But the 5.56 has a flatter trajectory and greater range than the M43 ammunition used in AK pattern rifles.

5.56 ha less range than 7.62x54 but med MGs and mortars should engage enemy MGs, not teenaged riflemen.

They should use the tavor instead.

>>578984

>>578879

He means maybe an AK-pattern like a Dragunov, using a larger round like 7.62x54mmr, that simply outmatches anything in use by American small units.

>>578989

Autocannons had only one advantage over machine gun, which is a warhead, that has some empty space or other stuff in it. While machine guns are stuck with solid shot. That advantage is degraded by newer methods of construction which let machine gun projectiles have effects similar to warheads, giving almost comparable performance to autocannons double the caliber. And they're cheaper to make, cheaper to feed, lighter overall, often get fed by simpler methods, are easier to maintain and reload… so many advantages.

>>579101

>giving almost comparable performance to autocannons double the caliber.

Only in your imaginable world. 30mm HEI carries 48 grams of RDX, try to beat that with machinegun.

>>579101

>AK-pattern like a Dragunov

Dragunov is not AK-pattern. Kalashnikov's AK-pattern submission to the DMR trial failed. Dragunov is only related in so much as it is also a gas-operated rifle.

Again, the answer to attacks outside of a standard rifle range is not a better rifle, it's a crew served weapon.

>>579123

It's possible >>579101 may be thinking of the PSL as they're technically a Kalashnikov based design and superficially resembles a Dragunuv

>>579099

Something about this comment… and that flag… I just can't put my finger on it.

>>579109

>30mm HEI carries 48 grams of RDX

First of all, which 30mm exactly carries 48 grams RDX? 30mm AGL ammo carries 32 grams RDX, and that's one of the overloaded AGL rounds.

Second of all, what effect does it have on target? Can't compare effect to effect if we don't know what it is…

>>579123

My bad.

>Again, the answer to attacks outside of a standard rifle range is not a better rifle, it's a crew served weapon.

Can't put a crew served weapon with every squad. So your squads can't travel any distance away from your crew served weapons, which means you likely need to keep your platoons (or even your company) concentrated, unable to spread out and give you a defense in depth. And in exchange for this massive loss in mobility and effectiveness the enemy only has to spend the grand total of a dude on a motorbike.

If an enemy has a dude on a bike to concentrate your forces, and accurate artillery or air force to take out the concentration, you pretty much lost the war. The only reason our forces are handing on by the skin of their teeth in the ME is because durkas don't have accurate artillery.

There's no reason whatsoever why there wouldn't be a full size caliber at fireteam level. "Logistics" is a dumb excuse considering we did the same exact thing before and it worked well while being cheap.

>>579124

Nah I'm just retarded on that point. No excuse.

>>579132

The important part is the last row in that table…

It's completely useless to fighting enemy under cover.

>>579136

Anything under cover doesn't stay that way very long when it's getting a belt of 30mm to the face.

That's the reason why IFVs have auto-cannons, primarily to chew through cover.

Heavy MGs like the KPV are lighter, simpler and cheaper precise and with good penetration on vehicle, auto GL are lighter, simpler and cheaper but have a very poor precision and are good at breaking cover.

An autocannon is the best of both projectile performance wise, but are heavy, complicated and pricey.

>>579148

>Anything under cover doesn't stay that way very long when it's getting a belt of 30mm to the face.

But it's not getting a belt of 30mm to the face. It's getting a belt of 30mm to the cover.

IFVs have autocannons because they can afford the mass penalty and because some idiot thought they could use autocannons to shoot down aircraft.

>>580626

Name one example of cover that can survive 30mm HEI but not 14.5mm, and isn't another AFV (we have APDS and missiles for that).

>>580663

Nigga I said almost double the caliber, not for sure over twice the caliber. FFS….

>>580663

>Name one example of cover that can survive 30mm HEI but not 14.5mm

Dense foliage, snow, light cover….. anything that can trigger the 30mm HEI to explode but can't stop the solid 14.5mm projectile.

When firing the apache's chin gun through forests, the contact fuse on 30mm HEI sometimes gets activated by branches and detonates without ever reaching the ground. Granted, they can often just reposition, or use hydras to fuck up the entire forest, but you did ask the question…

>>583145

Aren't proximity fuses based on radar? How the fuck do non metals trigger it?

>>583162

30mm HEI is contact fuses not proximity fuses. Only AAA shells have proximity fuses.

>>576231

the different cartridges would all require the same length in order to fit in different guns. I thought of a similar idea: have all the rifles use the same chamber size and bore diameter, and make them all capable of using the same ammo. Give your soldiers lighter ammo for assault rifles, carbines and SAWs, and a small package of heavier ammo for when they need to penetrate cover, or need to make a really long range shot. That heavier ammo will be used for LMG/DMR/battle rifles normally. Cartridge volumes can be changed easily by making either thinner or thicker walls for the cartridges, as it's all plastic, which is much cheaper than brass.

>>577444

this machine makes chainmail from wire and spot welds every ring.

If it's going to be done in quantities, simple repetitive tasks like stamping out little nozzle plates and spot welding them together could be done on production machinery for pennies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YBIa-9-lus

>>583162

Story time, when I was a kid I had a mortar shell land a few meters in front of me. However because this was tilled earth on a farm and winter snow had melted, the shell buried itself completely in muddy earth before detonating underground. There was a shower of dirt but no damage.

>>584620

Balkans?