Gun Porn!

CT was developed for the same reason we switched to 5.56mm: on a long patrol, ounces equals pounds and pounds equals pain.

Being cased, the rounds may not be damaged during the loading process.

from The Other Wiki:

As for the rifle? It's still in the development phase, but it's getting there. See this article on TFB.

8.79 lb/3.99 kg is that of a fully loaded M16A2 (rilfe+magazine, no extras). While the M4 (7.49 lb/3.40 kg with 30 rounds) is lighter than both an M16A2 and the LSAT rifle, the shorter barrel trades off some muzzle velocity. 6.8mm seems to be a good compromise to allow a smaller weapons given the weight penalty. And the rifle is still being worked on.

edited 29th Oct '17 1:14:45 PM by TairaMai

Twenty 30 round 5.56mm magazines, about 600 rounds is 21 lbs of ammo. You can easily chew through most if not all of that in a 10 minute fire fight.

edited 29th Oct '17 1:19:13 PM by TuefelHundenIV

^ Especially if there's any full-auto being traded. (Tight spaces, that many guys, panic and the dreaded "Oh shit!" moment, etc.)

edited 29th Oct '17 2:18:23 PM by MajorTom

The question is less is CT worth it, the answer is a hard yes, it is an improvement in every way.

The real question is whether it can get enough inertia to get adopted, you are talking about replacing all ammo in the supply chain as well as issuing new guns.... and bluntly the army being the army I cant see that happening.

The big hurdle is convincing the infantry branch to make the switch and then not fucking over the guard and reserve. Many NG and Reserve units took M-60's to the first stages of The War On Terror.

It is project SALVO all over again.

Er nope, Project Salvo was a stupid idea from start to finish. The LSAT programme, on the other hand, looks like being the first real revolution in small arms since the death of John Moses Browning.

And when the US finally stops dicking around and accepts it into service, it, or at least its ammunition, will be the next NATO standard.

Kalashnikov Media Show Off Rare And Significant Fyodorov Avtomat.

[tips fedorov◊]

TFB Reviews The FK BRNO Field Pistol.

I have so much want for that but I can audibly hear the hurricane of moths screaming out of my endlessly empty wallet. (How they've survived the cold this long, I'll probably never know.)

I recently fired a bit of an antique that one of the other people who uses the range brought down, it was a Martini action shotgun that the police in my country used to use for riots.

It was a pleasure to shoot, I can see why people like shotguns so much now.

That is really cool, sounds like you might have reunited her with her trusty pistol!

edited 5th Dec '17 12:30:07 PM by RevolverZen

One of my sidearms is a Beretta M1934 with 1941 Romanian markings. Years ago a Bulgarian engineer who helped clean up Chernobyl asked me how I got it because it has the same five didget serial number as the one she had back then.

Patent drawings for the Magpul FMG-9.

...that's about it.

So that thing WAS real, at one point anyway?

Good spot, bro.

USMC Fields M38 DMR.

Tuffel, your Marines are being idiots again. A new (technically existing inventory) scope does not translate to new model of rifle. We aren't the UNSC, we're supposed to be better than that

Speaking of antiques, one of these days I'm going to take that old Argentine model Remington Rolling Block to the shooting range and pop off a few rounds of .43 Spanish.

Tom: I am afraid you don't know what you are talking about. You do know that modern optics are not weapon dependent right? As long as they can mount the scope and tune it to the rifle and ammo to be fired from it there will be no issue. That isn't a new scope by any stretch as it has been in use for over a decade. I seriously doubt they will have many issues with adjusting the Leupold scope for use on another 5.56mm DMR weapon using the same kind of rail system.

That and you should stop relying on the comments section for info. They leave something out. DMR's get a little extra attention such as deburring, higher levels of maintenance, and tightened standards for parts tolerances.

edited 30th Dec '17 10:22:36 AM by TuefelHundenIV

I would be more concerned with the effective range, please tell me its better then the M4.

Far better. The 5.56 DMRs have always been pretty legit.

Immy: It is. The Marines have actually being using it as an unofficial DMR since they first started using it. There are some reports of up to 700 meter point target shots in some cases with other optics on the rifle. It is heavier than an M-4 but it is more reliable and has better out of the box accuracy to boot.

Hey doing some math for something.

How much does 20 rounds of 7.62 NATO weigh? 30 rounds of 5.56? 30 of 9x19mm?

Normal ones, not the neat CT stuff.

The m-14 20 round mag is about 1.65 lbs with ammo the m-16 is .71 for a 20 round mag, 1.08 for a 30 rnd mag.

^ There's a table on the other wiki's page for 7.62 NATO that gives you 7.62 NATO in 20 round mags, 5.56mm (M193) in 30 round mags, and 7.62 Soviet (M43) in 30 round mags and how much ammo you could carry with a 10 kg weight limit.

But for speed's sake:

• 7.62x51 NATO has 25.4 grams of weight for the cartridge, 20 rounds would be 508 grams
• 5.56x45mm NATO (M193) has 11.8 grams of weight for the cartridge, 30 rounds would be 354 grams.
• 9x19 Parabellum has 7.0 grams to 8.3 grams depending on type for the cartridge, 30 rounds of either gives you 210 grams and 249 grams respectively.

Got a link to that table? I'm having a hard time digging it up.

It's about halfway down the section titled "Development".