← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Faust
Thread ID: 15240 | Posts: 16 | Started: 2004-10-07
2004-10-07 03:46 | User Profile
"XM-8 Is Gun of the Future" M-16 replacement?
Looks like they have a new M-16 "replacement." I wonder how long this one will last.
"XM-8 Is Gun of the Future" [url]http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,128512,00.html[/url]
Looks like a real bad idea to me. The M-16 is not perfect, but I am sue this will cost more and not be any better. I think it has a plastic frame too, yuck! Isreal did yes use .223 AK, but changed over to M-16.
I have not seen anything about that 20mm/.223 mess, they were playing with a few years back. it looks as if it may have gone away, none of the articles I read said anything good about.
2004-10-08 17:26 | User Profile
.223 AK of israelis was not an bad idea, but it is preferable to them to use free american weapons.
AK-related system has many advantages over direct gas systems of M16-series. First, it does not lead dirt to inside of receiver like direct gas action. Also by using oversized gas piston system, it makes loading motion overpovered, so that it WILL work nearly in any situations. There are differences in AK-style weapons, some are better than other. For example, one cannot compare swiss Sig551-series or finnish Sako RK95 in same day within chinese Norinco 56 although they all are AK-related or inspired weapons.
And using plastic parts is not so stupid as it seems. It makes weapon cheaper, and modern plastics ARE durable and light also.
2004-10-08 22:39 | User Profile
Suomi Finland Perkele,
I have never been a strong fan of the AR-15/M-16, but I think charges guns is more trouble than it is worth, also one fears the new gun will be much more costly.
Yes I agree [QUOTE] AK-related system has many advantages over direct gas systems of M16-series. First, it does not lead dirt to inside of receiver like direct gas action. Also by using oversized gas piston system, it makes loading motion overpovered, so that it WILL work nearly in any situations.[/QUOTE]
I rather like the South Korea Daewoo K-2.
[url]http://world.guns.ru/assault/as32-e.htm[/url]
[url]http://www.pmulcahy.com/assault_rifles/south_korean_assault_rifles.htm[/url]
As for plastics guns, a dog can crew a GLock up very fast and the AUG will melt if overheated. In the long run the frames are not tustworthy so they are replaced after a few years of use. The police replace thier Glocks every few years.
I do not know why they don't Phenolic resin (Bakelite) It is very strong, does well with age and will not melt and stand temp. up to 800F. I think it would be better for use in firearms.
2004-10-08 22:55 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Faust]Suomi Finland Perkele,
I rather like the South Korea Daewoo K-2.
[url]http://world.guns.ru/assault/as32-e.htm[/url]
[url]http://www.pmulcahy.com/assault_rifles/south_korean_assault_rifles.htm[/url] [/QUOTE] Which uses gas piston system, not very unlike of AK. Also FAL uses one. I think both differ AK by being more complicated. AK is straightforward weapon, very simple, and so very reliable. AK family is not inherently inaccurate, if one uses enough good tolerances, it is accurate and capable weapon. It will kick harder because of moving masses but they also make it more reliable.
[QUOTE=Faust]As for plastics guns, a dog can crew a GLock up very fast and the AUG will melt if overheated. In the long run the frames are not tustworthy so they are replaced after a few years of use. The police replace thier Glocks every few years. [/QUOTE]
Dog can also destroy every wood part of an AK, or every plastic part of M16, big dogs can bite over 600 kilogram force, which will tear many things to shreds. Glock is still reliable enough, and it parts under pressure are made of steel. Many modern bolt-action rifles have plastic stocks and they are not in any way inferior to wooden all all steel ones.
[QUOTE=Faust]Suomi Finland Perkele,I do not know why they don't Phenolic resin (Bakelite) It is very strong, does well with age and will not melt and stand temp. up to 800F. I think it would be better for use in firearms.[/QUOTE]
Bakelites strike strenght is not quite good, as far as I know it will shatter because of strong strikes. Nakeltite is oldest plastic and there are reasons why for example germans didn't use it in primary weapons parts
2004-10-08 23:06 | User Profile
BTW. AK-LMG variants can burts to flames in long fire bursts because of overheating, M16 wil jam because of it, and so on. No weapon is immune to overheating. Even bolt-action rifles can fire prematurely or start burning because of over heating. Even my M39 get burning hot by 10 rounds fired fast, If one would not visited checking results I could have fired it hot enough to ignite its wooden stock.
2004-10-09 01:02 | User Profile
Henry Ford made Car bodies out of fiber reinfored Bakelite in 1930's, the car did not go into production. I saw a film of him beating the car body with a steel bumper without any damage. I think glass fiber reinforced Epoxy resin would better than thermoplastic for firearms. One Comany does make AR-15s out Carbon Fiber material.
2004-10-24 20:14 | User Profile
The Russians have a better rifle. The new Russian military rifle can fire two round bursts at 1600 roundpersecond, so the second round is actually fired before felt recoil. This causes two rounds to be fired on the same exact spot at the same time.
The M-16 three round burst fires three bullets into three different spots because recoil moves the barrel. So you have one aimed shot and two random shots.
2004-10-25 01:39 | User Profile
Why the concern of the posters with dogs chewing the furniture of a rifle? How often could this, if ever happen? The new composite materials while having an "off" feel are superb for the job under most circumstances. If the new Russian weapon does what the poster says it does, then that is a nice touch, though most soldiers are not that good a shot to take advantage of it.
2004-10-25 23:16 | User Profile
[QUOTE=heritagelost]The Russians have a better rifle. The new Russian military rifle can fire two round bursts at 1600 roundpersecond, so the second round is actually fired before felt recoil. [COLOR=Red]This causes two rounds to be fired on the same exact spot at the same time.[/COLOR]
The M-16 three round burst fires three bullets into three different spots because recoil moves the barrel. So you have one aimed shot and two random shots.[/QUOTE]If one round is accurate, it will suffice. The second is a waste. Aiming the rifle is overestimated by those who have never been shot at.
Things roughly even, the man is much more important than the weapon.
2004-10-27 00:22 | User Profile
edward gibbon,
You are most Right!
[QUOTE]If one round is accurate, it will suffice. The second is a waste. Aiming the rifle is overestimated by those who have never been shot at.
Things roughly even, the man is much more important than the weapon. [/QUOTE]
2004-10-28 12:09 | User Profile
[QUOTE=heritagelost]The Russians have a better rifle. The new Russian military rifle can fire two round bursts at 1600 roundpersecond, so the second round is actually fired before felt recoil. This causes two rounds to be fired on the same exact spot at the same time.[/QUOTE]I've heard that this feature was developed to allow better penetration of heavy body armor such as ceramic plates. Apparently two bullets hitting a plate in exactly the same place in quick succession can do what a single bullet can't. Pretty neat, actually.
On the other hand, that rifle (which I think is called the AN-94) is said to have very complicated internal mechanisms, which makes it difficult to manufacture and lessens reliability. I'm going by memory here -- if I can find the place where I read that, I'll post a link.
2004-11-08 14:54 | User Profile
Angler,
Hitting a bullet in exactly the same place on a target range in paper is not easy, the chances of doing in combat seem very unlikely. I might happen at close range, but then penetration is not much of problem anyway. But two bullets hitting a pen point at 300 yards? So it seems like not too good of an idea. Also I do not think .223 has much of a problem with penetration, it just does not do much after that.
A machine gun works much like a shotgun with a longer range. You aim at the target, shoot a bust of bullets with the hope one will hit. And one hit gets the job done a good part of the time.
2004-11-08 16:57 | User Profile
If you guys want real fire power then get the new Australian disign weapon that fires 1'000,000 ROUNDS PER MINUTE of ANY caliber, that's what I call fire power.
And before you guys call me a liar because you don't know about this you better check out Popular Mechanics and other news media.
2004-11-18 08:40 | User Profile
Sorry for only replying just now...
[QUOTE=Faust]Angler,
Hitting a bullet in exactly the same place on a target range in paper is not easy, the chances of doing in combat seem very unlikely. I might happen at close range, but then penetration is not much of problem anyway. But two bullets hitting a pen point at 300 yards? So it seems like not too good of an idea. Also I do not think .223 has much of a problem with penetration, it just does not do much after that. All of what you're saying certainly applies to typical weapons, but the whole idea behind this new Russian design was to overcome that. Like you said, I don't think there's a weapon in the world that can get two bullets from a burst to hit in the same place at 300 yards, but it might be possible at 50-100 yards or so. You see, this AN-94 (or whatever it's called) has such a high cyclic rate in the two-round burst mode that both bullets leave the barrel before the weapon even has a chance to recoil significantly; hence, they strike at nearly the same location if the target isn't too far away.
Although .223 does actually have surprisingly good penetration of Kevlar and certain other materials, it can be stopped by vehicle armor and even some kinds of hard body armor at close range (e.g., ceramic rifle plate inserts). That's where this newfangled design is supposed to come into its own. Just how well it works, I'm not sure.
A machine gun works much like a shotgun with a longer range. You aim at the target, shoot a bust of bullets with the hope one will hit. And one hit gets the job done a good part of the time.[/QUOTE]True, but the superfast two-round burst mentioned above is supposedly designed for better penetration of armor rather than increased hit probability. You don't even really get better hit probability out of a light rifle by using full-auto as opposed to rapid semi-auto fire anyway except at close range -- at least according to current military doctrine:
At ranges beyond 25 meters, rapid semiautomatic fire is superior to automatic fire in all measures (shots per target, trigger pulls per hit, and even time to hit).
URL: [url]http://atiam.train.army.mil/portal/atia/adlsc/view/public/297091-1/fm/3-22.9/c07.htm[/url]
On the other hand, if I were in an intense firefight, I imagine the temptation to spray and pray would be very great!
2004-11-18 08:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Ponce]If you guys want real fire power then get the new Australian disign weapon that fires 1'000,000 ROUNDS PER MINUTE of ANY caliber, that's what I call fire power.
And before you guys call me a liar because you don't know about this you better check out Popular Mechanics and other news media.[/QUOTE] I certainly won't call you a liar; I've heard of that system. It's called Metalstorm or something like that. It's currently being tested.
My own humble opinion is that such a system would be fairly useless as an individual weapon (who's gonna carry all that ammo, anyway?!) but superb as an anti-aircraft gun or something along those lines. On the other hand, even with vehicle-mounted weapons one has to be careful about ammo conservation, and 1 million rounds per minute sure is a lot of ammo to be spending all at once!
2004-11-24 06:37 | User Profile
You never know what will happen till you see it happen,,,,,,,but you can get an idea of what will happen if you are able to see the future, and I have.
As you guys know I am from Cuba therefore I know what it means not to have anything, not personally but because I went to Cuban once in a while in order to see my father I found out what it meant to live with the bare essentials in order to survive.
Biclycles took the place of cars, horse drawn carts the place of trucks and cattle drawn machinary the place of tractors.....given a chance people can adapt themselves to any situation if you give them the chance.
They are now eating less meat and more vegetables and fruits and are therefore more healty.
Garbage day here in the US means at least one big trash can full of stuff than in Cuba no one would dare to throw away,,,,In Cuba trash day is a very small platic bag with a minimum ammount of trash.
Very seldom did I see a fat person in Cuba and the IQ of the kids are way above of those in the US,,,,,they don't have video games or tv or anything that will distract them from the family life or their studies, tv in Cuba consist of two station and both are only for propaganda.
Main thing that you would need in order to survive would be,,,,,spare parts for your car (tires, belts, oil, whipers, bearins, grease, plugs, hardwire) and bicycle, shoes and winter clothing, oil, salt, vitamins, medical equipment, medecine, hand tools with extra nails screws and so on (hardware) this may sound hash or extreme but,,,,,, don't share what you have because you don't know how long the emergency will last and you or your family might need it some time in the future.
No one has guns therefore crime is at a minimun and every block everyone knows everyone else so is easy to see someone who dosen't belong.
Traveling between big cities consist of hitchhiking, and someone is always willing to give you a ride, you give them what ever money that you can afford for gas.
If the end ever does hit the US I would love to be back in Cuba because that's the way that they have been living for the past 45 years and it would have no great inpact, they are doing just great.
In Cuba lights go out all the time and sometimes for up to 24 hours, and most days for 6 or 12 hours at the time,,,,,,, if that were to happen in the US it would be like the end of the world.
Given a chance we can make it but,,,,,,,,you will have to be ready in order to go into it slowly, not to be would be like junping into ice water all at once.
By being ready you will be ready either for things to get better or for it to get worse,,,,,,,the choice is yours.