Bullpup vs. classic rifle designs? - Page 2




 
--
 
July 30th, 2008  
AussieNick
 
Why do you need to change. Eg, the US uses the M4 and Australia uses the F88 Steyr... it works for both nation so why would either swap platforms.

To address 2 issues:

1. I find the prone position easy to fire in with the Steyr. If you use the prone supported position it is incredibly stable with the magazine supporting the rear of the rifle.

2. Mag changes... an interesting debate, but I've always found it easy. I find it very intuitive and easy to access close to the body creating an easy mag change situation especially in the dark or while running.
July 30th, 2008  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by c/Commander
True, but imagine having to retrain 3 million active and reserve military personnel...
So I guess you think that it's preferable to stay in the past?

Every new piece of equipment ever issued requires re training, if it were not for that, we would still be throwing stones at one another and chasing around with sticks.
July 30th, 2008  
A Can of Man
 
 
Bullpup seems like a good idea.
How does the FN P90 type of magazine feed work? The reloading does look like a b*tch but it does hold more ammo, which you can see through the transparent magazine just by looking down. That might be the next direction for automatic weapons.
Also I too can see the great benefit of having the ammunition CLOSE to your body's center. It'll feel a heck of a lot lighter than having a magazine or two hanging away.
--
July 30th, 2008  
5.56X45mm
 
 
I'll stick with my platform thank you very much..

July 30th, 2008  
Lunatik
 
 
I totally agree with 5.56 on this.

July 30th, 2008  
A Can of Man
 
 
That's probably THE best thing about the standard AR layout. A lot easier to modify.
July 30th, 2008  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5.56X45mm
I'll stick with my platform thank you very much..

99.999% of which is totally unnecessary for the average infantryman. Looking at the "we'll sell you a million things that you'll never need" advert above, the word "frivolous' immediately comes to mind.

An infantryman needs a weapon that is sturdy, easy to carry and clean needing an absolute minimum of maintenance. This is about having the most practical weapon, not the most "bling". Which is not to say that the same stuff couldn't be made for a bullpup.

Go,go gadget vapouriser!
July 30th, 2008  
5.56X45mm
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
99.999% of which is totally unnecessary for the average infantryman. Looking at the "we'll sell you a million things that you'll never need" advert above, the word "frivolous' immediately comes to mind.

An infantryman needs a weapon that is sturdy, easy to carry and clean needing an absolute minimum of maintenance. This is about having the most practical weapon, not the most "bling". Which is not to say that the same stuff couldn't be made for a bullpup.

Go,go gadget vapouriser!
Hey, I like my bling..... My service rifle had a Eo-tech, BUIS, VFG, PEQ II, and a Streamlight M6... I was able to bring everything home except the PEQ II.

As for the bullpup platforms and bling... yeah. Have of the useless crap out there for the AR-15 is out there for everything else.
July 30th, 2008  
c/Commander
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by senojekips
So I guess you think that it's preferable to stay in the past?

Every new piece of equipment ever issued requires re training, if it were not for that, we would still be throwing stones at one another and chasing around with sticks.
But we've reached a point where it really doesn't matter as much anymore. This isn't a revolutionary new design; it's merely an evolution in current firearms technology. For a force as large as the US military, I'd say the current cons outweigh the pros.
July 30th, 2008  
senojekips
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by c/Commander
But we've reached a point where it really doesn't matter as much anymore. This isn't a revolutionary new design; it's merely an evolution in current firearms technology. For a force as large as the US military, I'd say the current cons outweigh the pros.
Imagine if they would have said that about the adoption of breech loading rifles. Many improvements are not big things in themselves, but when combined with other advances, that how we got to where we are now.

You can't just stop the advancements in any sphere hoping the world will remain the same. If we stop, the rest of the world will just steam on past us.

Tell me about the cons you see.
 


Similar Topics
Barrett Arms (Maker of the .50 Caliber Sniper Rifle) Told California to screw off.
DPMS Panther Lite 20 Rifle & DPMS Panther Lite 16 Carbine Review
Take a Look at the Army's New Sniper Rifle
Bullpup or classic rifle design?
Help with a SA80A1 review