It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by jetsetter
There was the tround that instead of using a brass case used a piece of plastic.
Originally posted by ch1466
1. Shorten the barrel and the stock.
Anything which puts more heft weight farther out on the fulcrum of the foregrip arm (where your sight post is if you aren't opticaled) is a bad thing in a weapon of such short range compared to the 400-700m longguns we have fielded in the past. Obviously, there will be added benefits in house cleaning or similar confined space CQB. In theory (especially with a full group recoil slider to dampen felt impulse on autofire) you can use a weapon more accurately as a 'from the hip' Thompson (horizontal hold foregrip and lift->push engagement from the REAR grip) /without/ having to turn your entire body to mate the cheek and butt plate to a contorted head posture. Particularly when running.
2. Compensate The Muzzle.
So that small aim errors are not a function of fatigue or rapid swingthru on a target. This will also help make the run and gun system work IF you can track point sources and use the trigger as more of a 'pickle' consent system than a specific sear/release holdoff.
3. Plasticize or Ceramify the receiver group.
You can only achieve so much by materials improvement to the furniture and overall volumetric enclosure. We must 'Go Beyond Glock' to lighten what remains the heaviest (machined) element of the entire weapon. Even as we must continue to find ways to REMOVE OR HARDEN parts that are exposed to gas fouling (in this, IMO, the pistoned XM8 is a step back, weightwise, even as it finally acknowledges of the M16's principle 'clean or else' continuing reliability problem).
4. Shift the aiming system off the gun.
It makes NO sense to put a frickin' zoom lens camera on a weapon that TRIPLES it's profile size, doubles it's weight and adds ten times to the base cost (XM29). Not when I can buy a throwaway digital camera at King Soopers and toss /it/ around the damn corner.
Because Autofire will rip the gun if not the hand off as soon as it is seen. And big rounds will go right through the wall to get the guy holding it.
It is _essential_ to keep both your head and your systems firmly separated in a 'now I look around, now I shoot' basis of surveillance vs. fire control. If you want to get an overlook don't be a fool and stick a 3ft long PLANK of signature/motion increase up to do it. Punch a fiberoptic camera spike THROUGH the wall with a modified nailgun. Or toss a small 'air freshener' sized, self-righting/attaching sensor device OVER it.
But never stick your gun up unless you intend to kill someone with it. And never use your weapon as the sole means of 'over the front sight' restricted (narrowed FOV) target acquisition.
What you want to instead be able to do is remote-link the weapon to a MASTED system on a robot or vehicle to help you out with firefinding a lot further back (upwards of a kilometer perhaps).
And then let the gun be a remote fires link through a dual _active and passive_ receiver (laser mark and spot track, on mount) capability that is about the size of a pencil eraser. The sniper finder designates the target, you point and click.
Again, in this scenario, you can keep all the 'automatic target recognition/classification' (high value, large powered optics electrical consumption factor) gear waaaaay the heck back on a larger platform. And sweep the gun to engage basd on what somebody/something else sanity checks, even if you can't see it at all.
Such can be _critical_ when you are firing down a 10 block street against a sniping threat 5 blocks up and 10ft back from a curtained second floor window.
And it further reinforces the notion that you never expose, even just your hands, to do other than shoot.
Now, if you get a different kind of scenario (indoor or back of beyond) wherein the heavy gear isn't present, then you want to go to _retinal projection_.
Whereby you have a laser scan your soldiers retinal focus points in HIS 'target recognition' interval.
And you train him to swing the gun casually to match as he lets his eyes stay in 'scan mode'. Half the errors inherent to shooting come from the wide-area to tight-FOV biology switch inherent to 'taking aim' with a weapon which is not particularly designed to be point-accurate against a multitude of time-critical targets who WILL shoot you 'anyway' if you don't simultaneously engage them ALL, first. It is a combination of brain motor impulse function and accessing different visual centers, the psychology of fear and kinesthetics of body.
If you put a laser marker on the gun and a laser reader on the retina and hold down the trigger as a pickled consent, you can 'swing through' and as each target is covered by the beam, the eye-reflex monitor will both supply an aimpoint index and a _correction_, thru the flex muzzle, (probably using some kind of miniaturized inertial measurement and head/eye angular differential memory unit on a set of glasses or the weapon) to correct fire even as the actual weapon comes slightly off target (we are talking millisecond reactions here so the error difference won't be much).
4. More Rounds, More Power, Less Kick.
That means pulling the magazine out of the bottom of the gun, switching from a banana styles clip to linear boxes. And relaying them, muzzle to receiver, to get the maximum possible length of round stowage. It also means a stronger propellant (as I recall the G-11 used a kind of solidified HTPB 'rocket propellant') in a given case length (ideally, I would like to see 9-10mm 'pistol cased' round coming out the barrel at a minimum 2,500-2,700fps). And of course it means shifting to some kind of active compensation by which, particularly in automode, a given burst fires very quickly as one felt impulse while the ENTIRE receiver group and attached magazine slides down the main weapon rail on a sealed hydraulic or pneumatic piston. The latter being yet another reason to keep one's head off the gun and hands _well below it_.
Iraqis and Taliban hill billy's have ZERO respect for the 5.56mm round at medium or long combat distances. But you start center punching them with 4X the mass:diameter sectionals and they will think a lot more carefully about desultory engagements and casual ambush.
Perhaps just as importantly; if you make your weapon an integral but _not central_ element in a passive-netcentric engagement system (you don't have to have LINK to be able to exploit lase-on target designations from remote sensor platforms); losing it to a partisan or to export sales doesn't necessarily compromise you when it comes back in an Israeli, Chinese or EU/Russian copy.
Originally posted by Raideur
5.54 still has inferior knockdown punch. Even a hit with that round will not give you the type of disabling effect the 7.62 will. More rounds do not mean more kills if you have to hit the man twice. This has been said by countless people talking about the M-16.
And this is why the Ak-47 is still a lethal gun.
Cheap, big round, big clip, never fails.