NA Guns

[Let'sgoflying!]

Put me on the list to try it out.

 

[jesse]

So what happens when you shot all your ammo in .2 seconds and need to reload? You can't just slap another magazine in.

I'm not sure this is a problem that needed to be solved. I suppose it could be useful in some scenarios but doubt small arms will be it.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

I simply separate the logic part of my brain from the experience, and go into a Disneyland mode: "Hell - that's cool! I want one!"

 

[dmccormack]

Somebody got an SBIR, then a Congressional add, now has something minutely original, and contacted the show's producers.

You truly could do 5 hours a week on innovations in various defense technologies if you weren't concerned with the details of fielding the device.

 

[ron22]

I agree with Jesse not real useful in small arms.
That being said I agree with Dave I still want one.

 

[dmccormack]

I agree with Jesse not real useful in small arms.
That being said I agree with Dave I still want one.

The real advantage of caseless ammo in small arms is the lack of evidence after the firefight.

 

[ebacon]

The real advantage of caseless ammo in small arms is the lack of evidence after the firefight.

But if the firefight is done right there will be a stack of dead bodies full of hot lead injection evidence.

 

[ron22]

The real advantage of caseless ammo in small arms is the lack of evidence after the firefight.

That is what a revolver is for :wink2:

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Interesting how they increasing the firepower of weapons; then, they can't supply the ammo to the folks in the field.

Fire control has been an eternal infantry issue. The fix for the infantryman's automatic weapon has been to have a switch for three round bursts v. full auto. Wonder how well this would do with three round bursts <g>

Best,

Dave

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

Interesting how they increasing the firepower of weapons; then, they can't supply the ammo to the folks in the field.

Fire control has been an eternal infantry issue. The fix for the infantryman's automatic weapon has been to have a switch for three round bursts v. full auto. Wonder how well this would do with three round bursts <g>

Best,

Dave

The statistics just for existing weapons are amazing. The average "rounds:kill" ratio is in the bare minimum of tens of thousands of rounds for every enemy killed. The estimates go as high as 250,000:1. Granted, that doesn't count wounded instead of killed, and these are at best rough estimates, and I think they're from Vietnam as opposed to modern day, but any way you slice it that's still a tremendous amount of ammunition - simply supplying that amount on a continuing basis seems like a pretty remarkable feat of itself.

Frederick the Great is alive and well, it seems.

 

[airbornejohnny]

The statistics just for existing weapons are amazing. The average "rounds:kill" ratio is in the bare minimum of tens of thousands of rounds for every enemy killed. The estimates go as high as 250,000:1. Granted, that doesn't count wounded instead of killed, and these are at best rough estimates, and I think they're from Vietnam as opposed to modern day, but any way you slice it that's still a tremendous amount of ammunition - simply supplying that amount on a continuing basis seems like a pretty remarkable feat of itself.

Frederick the Great is alive and well, it seems.

Can't really go by those numbers though if you're looking for accuracy numbers. Combat tactics also use fire for suppression; keep their head down while ya flank them. The first goal is to establish fire superiority, and all kinds of fire aimed in the enemies general direction, and a volume of fire greater than the enemy can contend with. If this isn't possible, pop smoke and call in an airstrike

Interesting how they increasing the firepower of weapons; then, they can't supply the ammo to the folks in the field.

Fire control has been an eternal infantry issue. The fix for the infantryman's automatic weapon has been to have a switch for three round bursts v. full auto. Wonder how well this would do with three round bursts <g>

Best,

Dave

Whats funny is there's talk of doing away with three-round burst. Having a TRB sear actually varies the trigger pull in semi-auto...not a big deal close up and personal, but for those longer shots its a royal PITA.

I still agree with everyone about small-arms fieldability...call me old-fashioned, but I don't believe in relying on battery power, especially on the tool that stands between life and death for the feet in my boots.
Put these in the air or on a HUMMWV though...different story.

 

[John Baker]

Cabela's is going to be all over this one. Imagine the game you could bring down combining these new weapons with Cabela's motion censoring and video cam equipment.


Heck, a sportsman could just stay home, watch TV, get a good nights sleep, then drive out a pick up his kill in the morning.


Hunting couldn't get any better. Almost as convenient as driving to the butcher shop.

John

 

[Dave Siciliano]

I'm with you on reliability. You may recall, we had issues with the M-16 when the Secretary of Defense decided to save some money by not putting chrome in the barrel of a weapon to be used in a tropical environment with very close tolerances.

I usually fired single shot when there was a specific, identifiable target, or three round bursts when firing at an area or with suppressive fire and we couldn't see the exact target (jungle). I never had trouble with three round bursts after practicing a bit. Still wanted to be able to use full auto if needed.

When we advanced on a position with cover; three round bursts. When we advanced in the open; every other man fired until low on ammo; then, the other man fired with the first reloaded. This was done when moving forward against light return fire to develop the situation.

I always favored fire discipline training and saw it work well with well trained troops. Yes, there were times we put down suppressive fire, but even that could be done better with well-aimed fire v. just rocking and rolling on full automatic. An experienced enemy can determine the difference between sporadic, voluminous fire and well-aimed fire; as could we.

Early in the war, we were taught to be more deceptive when attacked. Start defending with what was needed only so the enemy didn't know where your key weapons were, what you had and how many. Later in the VN war, folks just opened up relying on overwhelming fire power because we usually had it. I didn't like that, but it usually worked because of out firepower superiority.

If in an situation like that again (and I hope I'm not ever), I wouldn't reveal all of what I had at my disposal without it costing a determined enemy a lot of lives to find out <g>. The more progress they made, the more they would discover we had another weapon to which they hadn't been introduced yet!

Best,

Dave

 

[Obi Heed Kenobi]

Can't really go by those numbers though if you're looking for accuracy numbers. Combat tactics also use fire for suppression; keep their head down while ya flank them. The first goal is to establish fire superiority, and all kinds of fire aimed in the enemies general direction, and a volume of fire greater than the enemy can contend with. If this isn't possible, pop smoke and call in an airstrike

....

Oh, for sure - but that's still the amount of ammunition that you're going through on a regular basis. I was thinking that just shipping those amounts is a pretty remarkable thing to accomplish - especially when you factor in everything else that has to be supplied!

 

[Ghery]

Cabela's is going to be all over this one. Imagine the game you could bring down combining these new weapons with Cabela's motion censoring and video cam equipment.


Heck, a sportsman could just stay home, watch TV, get a good nights sleep, then drive out a pick up his kill in the morning.


Hunting couldn't get any better. Almost as convenient as driving to the butcher shop.

John

Not very sporting. And given the collection of organizations Cabela's supports (see the wall behind the checkout counters) not likely to happen. But, they would be fun to play with.

Oh, for sure - but that's still the amount of ammunition that you're going through on a regular basis. I was thinking that just shipping those amounts is a pretty remarkable thing to accomplish - especially when you factor in everything else that has to be supplied!

Logistics is an amazing issue. But, for the short term, you can go a lot longer after running out of C rats than after running out of 5.56mm NATO ball ammo.