Shadowalker
Active member
Which do you prefer the classic rifle design e.g. M-16 or the more modern bullpup design e.g. Steyr AUG?
Missileer said:Classic, the bullpup is okay for small, special squads working in close ranges.
5.56X45mm said:For rifles I'm for the classic design. For CQB I think that the FN P90 takes the cake.
Whispering Death said:Yes, but fighting in buildings and out of Humvees is the way wars are wom now-a-days. There arn't big maneuvers around pastures and farmhouses anymore.
Whispering Death said:Well, I'm with you in theory that I'd actually like to see standard rifles issued for "general" army units and carbines for MOUT fighting. However, I think it would be a better expenditure of money to have one rifel to do the job, which is why I like bullpup designs.
The other remedy is the compactness in the XM-8s flexibility. You can do the same thing as having two weapons by switching out a shorter stock and barrel in the same XM-8 you used in the field before being deployed to the big city.
Whispering Death said:Yes, but searching caves is a pretty specialized task that is not going to be the norm in warfare over the next century. you surely will not disagree.
I'm not saying there are never going to be situations where a long rifle is prefreable, in fact a long rifle has proven to be an excellent weapon through the test of time.
But the fact is that by 2010 75% of the world's population is going to live in cities. You don't have to clear country roads or nameless patches of ground anymore and when you do it's usually going to be done out of a humvee or other such vehicle.
Yes but what prevents a soldier from changing his upper on the M16 to and M4, or vise versa?
Forrest_Gump said:The mean looking chick with facial hair and sergeants stripes sitting behind the armorers desk.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.