| So it would make perfect sense to keep the Tokarev round as a sub machinegun and pistol round, but go to 7.62 NATO for battle rifle...still uses the same barrels - just different lengths and thus save on manufacturing costs...interesting. I've always had high regard for the high powered Tokarev rounds from easter bloc countries. I tihnk CZ manufactures some very high velocity ammo that easily pierces level II vests.
This is a seriously powerful pistul and SMG round - would be great for vehicle crews in SMG form, since it has more range and power than a 9mm, and a smaller diameter, so more ammo can be hauled.
I'm fascinated by the manufacturing process that goes into military weapons - especially small arms.
I was thinking of a SMG along the same lines as the Sten or maybe the greasegun - stamped and super cheap to manufacture. Straight blowback from a closed bolt. It could be stamped steel or composites. I would go with composites to reduce cost and weight.
I considered going with the 5.45 round currently in use in some russian weapons, but I'm pretty sure it wouldn't work as a handgun round - they key here is consistency...Consistency is next to Godliness. If you can set up a manufacturing process for 4 weapons using the same barrel stock and techniques, wouldn't it be cheaper and faster?
A 7.62 Handgun
A 7.62 SMG
A 7.62 Assault Rifle
A 7.62 Sniper system
A 7.62 Squad MG
And a 7.62 GPMG
All operate on a blowback design - probably not as weird as the HKG3, but you get the idea.
Maybe use 7.62x39 for the AR and Squad MG - less recoil and plenty ammo lying around. |