I don't get it. Why is there a slow but sure change towards bullpup designs? What advantages does it have over the classic design?



Bah!

It's shorter, but has the same length barrel, thus it's just as accurate as a long rifle but easier to carry.

From what I've read over almost a decade of online debates is this:

Bullpups are advantageous in CQC thanks to their shorter overall length, but since the trigger is not directly connected to the mechanism the trigger pull is usually just not as good as a rifle of conventional layout. They can also be more difficult to fire from the prone position because the magazine is sticking out. Lastly, people who have used a lot of firearms of the conventional layout seem to have a bit of difficulty adjusting to reloading and handling bullpups.

That's just what I've heard, I've never had a chance to actually fire a bullpup rifle yet.

You may as well ask why did we change from the black powder to smokeless propellant, or from muzzle loaders to bolt action.

Originally Posted by senojekips

You may as well ask why did we change from the black powder to smokeless propellant, or from muzzle loaders to bolt action.

You think it's that much of an improvement? I've got to tell you...I've fired bullpups and I have a hard time getting over how awkward it is to reload them. You may be able to cram more accuracy into a smaller package, but if you can't do a quick combat reload during CQB all the accuracy in the world doesn't help.

Originally Posted by major liability

From what I've read over almost a decade of online debates is this:

Bullpups are advantageous in CQC thanks to their shorter overall length, but since the trigger is not directly connected to the mechanism the trigger pull is usually just not as good as a rifle of conventional layout. They can also be more difficult to fire from the prone position because the magazine is sticking out. Lastly, people who have used a lot of firearms of the conventional layout seem to have a bit of difficulty adjusting to reloading and handling bullpups.

That's just what I've heard, I've never had a chance to actually fire a bullpup rifle yet.

That's my problem. I am so ingrained with the AR-15 platform (M16) that I cannot work with other rifles. Only other system I might be able to go to is something that is laid out like the AR-15.

The Bullpup is a smaller platform with the same ballistic power as the full size service rifle. They're great for CQB and modern day urban combat. Sadly I will be a dinosaur with the coming revolution. I'm only 24 but the AR-15 is MY RIFLE. I don't ever see myself changing to another platform. Maybe a piston system AR but that's about it.

The MSAR STG-556, Bushmsater M17, Sig Sauer 556, TPD AXR, FNH SCAR, FN 2000, Robinson XCR, AK Series, L85 (SA-80), FAMAS, and Steyr AUG will never replace the AR-15 for me as my go to rifle.

Originally Posted by c/Commander

You think it's that much of an improvement? I've got to tell you...I've fired bullpups and I have a hard time getting over how awkward it is to reload them. You may be able to cram more accuracy into a smaller package, but if you can't do a quick combat reload during CQB all the accuracy in the world doesn't help.

It all comes down to training. I've trained with some brits that work with the L85 (SA80). They can work that weapon pretty well... I'm like a drunk monkey. When they worked with our M4A1s they had issues doing fast reload drills also.

Originally Posted by c/Commander

You think it's that much of an improvement? I've got to tell you...I've fired bullpups and I have a hard time getting over how awkward it is to reload them. You may be able to cram more accuracy into a smaller package, but if you can't do a quick combat reload during CQB all the accuracy in the world doesn't help.

That's a personal problem, nothing to do with firearms design. Like any piece of unfamiliar equipment, you must learn to use it properly. Practice until it becomes second nature.

On the other hand, if it's not broken, don't fix it - retraining troops is expensive and results in a temporary drop in combat proficiency. Maybe during peacetime we could switch, but as long as we're engaged as heavily as we are, any weapons changes will still keep the AR-15 layout.

That said, I'd be interested in seeing some sort of limited trial go into effect with some of the more skilled units - 75th Rangers, maybe?

I think that you are letting your personal preferences get in the way here. Hundreds of thousands of troops have successfully changed to bullpup type weapons and other than ejection problems for left handers on some early types they have been widely accepted as a great improvement.

Like any new weapon they must undergo usage and firing trials, but that focuses on a much wider range of potential problems than just the fact that the weapon has been made into a shorter and handier unit.

Originally Posted by senojekips

I think that you are letting your personal preferences get in the way here.

True, but imagine having to retrain 3 million active and reserve military personnel...