Boomstick's and shooty shooty bang bang's - The GUN Thread!

How bullpup are we talking about? Because if below is unacceptable.
FG42.jpg

Then...
fbcb432759380a11c1f86db46a80f2eaf399213b195209c26fc763fc2969a2d9_3.jpg

That isn't a bullpup, That is the grandfather of the M60.
 
Uh...

VHS rifle is literally built based on feedback of Croatian soldiers from the war. Development in fact started during the war, and both bullpup and non-bullpup versions were tested.

VHS rifle was not used in war and wartime prototypes only saw the firing range. The original version was also derided by soldiers as having ergonomics more suited for monkeys than humans, but that was supposedly fixed in VHS-2.


Should it be mentioned that Ukraine has a domestic produced Bullpup being used in war right now.

It's license production of Tavor and for some reason soldiers in combat roles prefer AKs and other conventional rifles, so Tavors and other bullpups are mostly relegated to security and support troops.
 
VHS rifle was not used in war and wartime prototypes only saw the firing range. The original version was also derided by soldiers as having ergonomics more suited for monkeys than humans, but that was supposedly fixed in VHS-2.




It's license production of Tavor and for some reason soldiers in combat roles prefer AKs and other conventional rifles, so Tavors and other bullpups are mostly relegated to security and support troops.
Uh what? We have seen plenty of it in combat with not just Secrutiy or support troops.
 
VHS rifle was not used in war and wartime prototypes only saw the firing range. The original version was also derided by soldiers as having ergonomics more suited for monkeys than humans, but that was supposedly fixed in VHS-2.
I never said it was used in the Homeland War. Hard to use something that doesn't exist. What I said is that it was designed based on information and requests from soldiers fighting in the war - such as complaints about AK-47 and so on.

Initial VHS design - one from 1992 - was basically a bullpup AK-47.
 
Before it was also gotten rid of because it’s a war crime.





You realize that just means other people will stop following it, right? Because ones the exploding bullet genie is out of the box, modern body armor is going to be useless once people find a cheap way to start making 40k-lite bolt-rounds.

I never understood why we still follow that silly no exploding bullets law from the Mid 19th Century. I mean given they many weapons we have now that can maim you and leave you very much alive. A projectile that explodes in you and kills you graveyard dead should be on the table.
 
I never understood why we still follow that silly no exploding bullets law from the Mid 19th Century. I mean given they many weapons we have now that can maim you and leave you very much alive. A projectile that explodes in you and kills you graveyard dead should be on the table.

I can’t bes sure, but as others and myself have suggested, it probably has something to Dow with keeping the balance of power intact. For various reasons.
 
I never understood why we still follow that silly no exploding bullets law from the Mid 19th Century. I mean given they many weapons we have now that can maim you and leave you very much alive. A projectile that explodes in you and kills you graveyard dead should be on the table.
It should be noted that the treaty against exploding bullets was only applicable to rifles, pistols, and the like, not anti-material and autocannon/grenades.

The reason that the OICW failed was that the 25mm was too small of a round for an applicable explosive charge, especially since body armor was starting to proliferate back then, with body armor proliferating to the point that insurgents could get their hands on a small supply of sets in the 20-teens. The sad thing was that the OICW program would have been quite effective if they had MetalStorm's GL system instead of the more traditional autoloading GL system.

@Carrot of Truth and @PsihoKekec, bullpups are not useless, and from what you're saying, you're getting your information from very biased sources (i.e. effectively the gun equivalent of the Reformers in military procurement).
 
@Carrot of Truth and @PsihoKekec, bullpups are not useless, and from what you're saying, you're getting your information from very biased sources (i.e. effectively the gun equivalent of the Reformers in military procurement).

Bullpups aren't useless but they do suck, Their trigger linkages are always going to be a problem. Also they have really janky ergonomics when it comes to magazine swaps.
 
The reason that the OICW failed was that the 25mm was too small of a round for an applicable explosive charge, especially since body armor was starting to proliferate back then, with body armor proliferating to the point that insurgents could get their hands on a small supply of sets in the 20-teens. The sad thing was that the OICW program would have been quite effective if they had MetalStorm's GL system instead of the more traditional autoloading GL system.
According to the people I talked with that used them they really liked the capabilities it gave them.
When I've researched it, the OICW failed b/c...well, not performance. Likely b/c the US realized the low caliber made it an "explosive rifle round," and the US didn't want to commit a 'war crime'.
 
According to the people I talked with that used them they really liked the capabilities it gave them.
When I've researched it, the OICW failed b/c...well, not performance. Likely b/c the US realized the low caliber made it an "explosive rifle round," and the US didn't want to commit a 'war crime'.
I'm stuck between laughing and sad.

That treaty doesn't include anything above 11mm (if I remember right), or the various quickfire small-caliber cannons would be included in the ban. 25mm HE is perfectly legal.

Also, the GL element was mostly used against unarmored insurgents, not soldiers clad in late Cold War (and onwards) body armor, like how helmets like the stahlhelm vastly decreased the effectiveness of fragmentation during WW1, late and post-Cold War body armor decreased the effectiveness of fragmentation. Basically, you'll need more 'oomph' to increase the effectiveness of your grenades (and, due to current explosives and physics, can only be achieved with bigger rounds), which is why the attempts to replace the 40mm with smaller caliber grenades in NATO inventory always failed. If we had better explosives (i.e. those with a higher REF but still stable and usable for such rounds), then 25mm HE would be effective.
 
Bullpups are more useful in certain specific situations. However, the tradeoffs they make to reduce overall length tend to be a net negative in generalist use.

I would specifically call out:
  • Longer trigger linkage complicating design, maintenance, and longevity. Technologically, soultions (say a reliable solenoid trigger or electrical primer) could mitigate this if they're bulletproof(heh) enough.
  • Gas system operating closer to user's face increases long term health risks from propellant and byproduct
  • In field use, dealing with varying shooting positions and malfunction clearing can be more problematic. I am not 100% sure on this one, is this as much of an issue on modern bullpup patterns?
Solving the trigger issue, in the U.S. as least, is difficult due to the regulatory climate. The other two issues I'm not sure can be solved at the design and physical level, not within the design of semiautomatic gas or recoil driven firearms anyway.

All that said, if you want to shorten overall weapon length and dont care as much about the other concerns, the bullpup is a clever and useful engineering solution.
 




"""Rocket Science"""


Didn't seem too bad. Went clean through... well except for the fins. Those should be banned by the Geneva Suggestions for barbed ammunition or something. 40% Disability like the traumatized war veteran said.

@Carrot of Truth and @PsihoKekec, bullpups are not useless,
Where did I claim they are useless? They are not as good as classic weapons, but still usable, except SA 80, Brits would be better off with fresh built FALs instead of those.

On the other hand if you remove the word Bullpups, he's actually complimenting you.
 
In field use, dealing with varying shooting positions and malfunction clearing can be more problematic. I am not 100% sure on this one, is this as much of an issue on modern bullpup patterns?
It's most problematic on the KelTec RDB. Most of the others have the ejection port behind the chamber and usually big enough to dig out a round.

The Steyr AUG has the removable barrel as a cheat malfunction clearing mechanism.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top