The Gun Thread

Most semiautomatic pistols use either a short recoil mechanism (like the Browning tilting block system) or a straight blowback system (in which the breech has no locking mechanism, and only the mass of the bolt and the stiffness of the recoil spring holds the breech closed.) Submachine guns typically use a blowback system as well.

About the only recoil-operated machine gun still in common use is the Browning M2 .50 caliber. But that design dates back from 1917-1918. Most others were derivatives of the Maxim machine gun, and have long since been replaced by more modern designs.

One problem with early gas-operated mechanisms was corrosive primers. The nitrates in the priming compound would get into the gas tube, and had to be thoroughly cleaned out or else the mechanism would soon rust and become fouled. It wasn't until WWII that non-corrosive primers were introduced. (The M1 Carbine was the first gun whose ammo used non-corrosive primers exclusively.)

edited 19th Mar '17 10:24:12 AM by pwiegle

The M2 Heavy Machine Gun uses a flash hider like that. Oddly enough it does help reduce your flash signature as it narrows it down instead of allowing it to billow out. Think of it like the difference between a tightly focused flashlight beam and one that is wide to cover a an area.

Well if you can see the Fiddy Cal flash, it is probably the last thing you will see

No, I definitely don't want to see Ma Deuce flashing me.

No offense, but it seems like the US sucks at making LM Gs. The BAR, M 1919 A 6, and M60 all had major problems, and while they did usually get the job done, most European and Russian LM Gs were far better than them and used by more militaries, and the US mostly stuck with their own LM Gs out of Misplaced Nationalism. At least they eventually wised up and adopted the Minimi and MAG, though they made some unnecessary changes to their Minimis that caused reliability problems with them.

edited 20th Mar '17 2:45:40 PM by Bat178

I feel like it's been said a lot that the BAR wasn't an LMG anyways (how was it used in comparison to LM Gs/other LM Gs, BTW?)

I might be tempted to argue that given the much higher preponderance of semiautomatic rifles in US service compared to other powers of WWII (the M1 Garand and the M1 Carbine both come to mind, supplementing or supplanting the older bolt-action M1903s), the US simply didn't need a squad-level machine gun. When even truck drivers can lay down a decent barrage of supressive fire, your overall doctrine is probably going to be a bit different.

There's some truth to insofar as the individual firepower of a US company was much higher than anyone else's, but in terms of company-level firepower, every major power in World War 2, on the European front, outgunned them, both in terms of machine guns and submachine guns.

That's not counting artillery, of course. American artillery warfare was a work of art. They also had pretty solid mortar support. Generally, American infantry doctrine leans heavily on the rifleman. The British were the same way until the Great War taught them otherwise.

edited 20th Mar '17 6:07:55 PM by math792d

And WWII was pretty much when semi-automatic rifles diverged into assault rifles while bolt-action rifles diverged into sniper rifles, correct?

Not entirely. The Russians didn't develop the first assault rifle until 1946 when Kalashnikov had the first AK prototypes.

There were a couple interesting designs and of course the StG-44 but that was ultimately still deployed like an SMG most of the time. Whether the Germans would have actually figured out what to do with it we don't know as it was developed far too late to be relevant in the war.

Erm, no.

It was when newer and older doctrines were tested and other forms of warfare expanded, like the urban warfare became prominent and newer weapons and tactics began to form to address the combat environment that was becoming more common.

Semi autos were supplanted by Assault Rifles and Automatic Rifles because they offered the flexibility that bolt action and semi automatic rifles didn't. However every assault and automatic rifle has semi-automatic single shot, their ability to use automatic fire is an aspect of their flexibility between close quarters combat and the ability to provide suppressive fire when needed.

World War II just highlighted the need for such flexibility, hence why the Germans developed the Stg-44 and the Russians started to develop the AK-47. Meanwhile the Western Powers were late to adopt the assault rifle as a concept, preferring to use Battle Rifles instead most commonly through the CETME, M14, G3 and FN-FAL as their mainstay rifles until some events showed the limitations and drawbacks of the Battle Rifle in face of lighter, more controllable and more flexible Assault Rifles.

So, in short, WWII laid the ground work and the development was concluded in the Cold War for small arms and doctrines for weapons like Assault Rifles and squad Machineguns.

Garcon: No the STG was not deployed like an SMG at all. There is no SMG in it. It was designed to be an intermediate cartridge weapon that is an Assault Rifle from the ground up. Specifically they wanted something with more punch and range than an SMG but not as bulky as the primary rifles in use by the various militaries at the time. That was the entire goal of the weapon. Sorry but the Russians did not invent the first assault rifle.

There were several almost first moments but none of them panned out for one reason or another. Usually because of technical issues, cost issues, or just lack of interest.

edited 20th Mar '17 7:15:23 PM by TuefelHundenIV

They made the first assault rifle but they didn't deploy it like an assault rifle. The doctrine wasn't quite there yet.

Yes they did deploy it like an assault rifle. Automatic weapons fire good to 300m single fire up to 600m. Sound familiar? It's actual field use is effectively identical to modern assault rifle use. A primary infantry weapon used in combined arms. Automatic fire at shorter ranges with single shot used when greater accuracy and longer range fire was called for.

Pretty straight forward.

edited 20th Mar '17 7:40:40 PM by TuefelHundenIV

On the subject of gun safety, a recent study has found that on average a child or youth is wounded by gunfire once a day in Ontario. The majority of incidents are accidents and non lethal, but there is definitely an issue here.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/researchers-urge-firearm-safety-strategies-after-study-shows-high-number-of-unintentional-injuries/article34431438/?cmpid=PM0317

HK is building a US factory in Georgia.

They're claiming that all production lines are for the civilian market only.

Still wondering what the deal is with the rumors of HK416 production having hit the maximum output possible by existing facilities myself.

Oh, to Hell with HK. Until they give up their jealous proprietary attitude towards their gun designs, I will never waste my hard-earned money on their mediocre products.

"HK — Because You Suck, and We Hate You." Yeah HK, the feeling is mutual.

edited 14th May '17 3:40:48 AM by pwiegle

I feel like HK is finally starting to wise up to it.

Also, today I submitted a proposal for a new reticle for our 1-8x scopes. They love it and want it ready for prototyping in three weeks. In that time we've gotta check if I accidentally violated any patents, and more importantly, if we can patent it ourselves.

Gjal: Good luck running the patent gauntlet.

The closest thing to it is the ACOG reticle, but that's out of patent coverage, so the worst case scenario as far as I can see is that we won't be able to patent it, but we will be able to use it.

@HK in the USA: Given the thumping they've taken in the press and after issues with the G-36, I'm not surprised that they would try to break into the US gun market, just a day late and a dollar short.

i mean, even if there are issues with the G36, their biggest customer (Germany) is probably switching to another H&K product unless FN or someone starts pulling out all the stops. And considering FN has far more, far bigger contracts to consider, it's unlikely they're really going to do that.

I'd be surprised if the Spanish didn't also end up with another H&K product. They've a history with them, too ^note  Y'know, what with sheltering the Mauser engineers who'd go on to form H&K .

edited 14th May '17 4:41:11 AM by math792d

If y'all haven't seen it, the details on the Crane test between Mlok and Keymod are available:

http://soldiersystems.net/2017/05/05/details-on-the-ussocom-sponsored-keymod-vs-m-lok-test-conducted-at-nswc-crane/

I always knew Keymod was shit.

Picked up a new carry gun. Replacing my XD .45 ..

[1]◊

FNX-45.

Got my Talon Grips on it yesterday. Waiting for my Stealth Gear Ventcore Holster to arrive.

Do Heckler and Koch allow other companies to make the same stock you see in the G3 and MP 5, or is it made only by Heckler and Koch?