Firearms experts: What is this?

[Konovalov]

As per the title of this thread can someone tell me what on earth this is? I have seen quite a few officers now using a variant of the H&K G36 instead of the old and trusty H&K MP5. But what is the SMG shown in the photo below?

http://i42.photobucket.com/albums/e323/BenKonovalov/smg.jpg

[U-533]

hmm...

Looks like the prototype for the New 6.6mm Uzi

But don't take my word for it cause it's to small for me.

Long range weaponry on the other hand is my line.:up:

[Chock]

Looks like an MP7:

http://www.heckler-koch.de/HKWebText/detailProd/1926/81/4/20

:D Chock

[waste gate]

Looks like an MP7:

http://www.heckler-koch.de/HKWebText/detailProd/1926/81/4/20

:D Chock

Yes.

[AntEater]

As the poster before said, a Heckler&Koch MP7 PDW
Basically a submachine gun in 4,6mm caliber in the size of a larger handgun. Alledgedly you can fire it quite accurately in full with one hand.
I didn't know anybody aside from the Bundeswehr used them.

[Konovalov]

Okey-dokey. Thanks guys. That took about 6 mins for an answer. Typical speedy service at Subsim. :up:

I guess I'm just not up with the times anymore. My Rogue Spear and Ghost Recon Days seem to be behind me now. :oops:

[SUBMAN1]

I'd post a video on it, but I'd probably get in trouble.

-S

[Konovalov]

I didn't know anybody aside from the Bundeswehr used them.

This was in central London.

[Konovalov]

I'd post a video on it, but I'd probably get in trouble.

-S

From who? :-? Come on, some video action would be nice? :yep:

[VipertheSniper]

I've checked the H&K US site and it seems to be the MP7A1

[Konovalov]

With a name like VipertheSniper I'll take your word for it. Gulp! :o

[VipertheSniper]

Was a bit late tho...

[SUBMAN1]

I'd post a video on it, but I'd probably get in trouble.

-S

From who? :-? Come on, some video action would be nice? :yep:

Fine. I'll have to cut it out of something tonight. Give me a bit.

-S

[Smaragdadler]

http://www.hkpro.com/pdwpos1.jpg

http://www.hkpro.com/pdw.htm

http://world.guns.ru/smg/smg49-e.htm

edit: youTube link removed

[P_Funk]

Heh, I recognized that thing right away. Its one weird looking gun. Its some weird specialization that gets inside the space between an SMG and a pistol.

Looks like a nice bodyguard weapon. Powerful but small enough to hide in your jacket and carry around unnoticed.

[SUBMAN1]

Heh, I recognized that thing right away. Its one weird looking gun. Its some weird specialization that gets inside the space between an SMG and a pistol.

Looks like a nice bodyguard weapon. Powerful but small enough to hide in your jacket and carry around unnoticed.
I still have questions about the 416 round. I've seen the video, but I doubt that I personally wouldn't want anything less than a 5.56 mm. The 5.56 mm has so many redeaming properties, especially its ability to shatter upon contact creating massive injury. Of course you only get that affect from 14.5" barrels and longer since shorter barrels don't generate sufficient velocity. You really need a 16"+ barrel to achieve this effect reliably I think.

At longer range, the 5.56 holds together quite well, creating a wound over killing. This is more desirable at range because a wounded soldier takes 2 to 3 people off the battlefield vs. a dead soldiers 1.

But without getting into anymore detail, I bet this 4.16 mm round has none of these desirable properties, just like the Russian 5.45 mm round doesn't have them.

The video is chopped. Uploading now.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

File has been uploaded. It's probably not a good idea to post it in a public forum though since it is TV broadcast, so I've decided to refrain from posting it here.

-S

[bradclark1]

I assume the magazine goes inside the pistol grip? Thats some short rounds.

[Heibges]

IIRC the G-11 was 4.7mm and caseless.

Personally, I say go back to the 7.62mm x 51 NATO.

Don't even get me going how the SAW doesn't have the plunging fire ability like the M-60. :nope:

You could even take out light skinned armored vehicles with the M-60.

[P_Funk]

IIRC the G-11 was 4.7mm and caseless.

Personally, I say go back to the 7.62mm x 51 NATO.

Don't even get me going how the SAW doesn't have the plunging fire ability like the M-60. :nope:

You could even take out light skinned armored vehicles with the M-60.
So why is the SAW the standard BOF weapon for them ole' Yankees?

I know some about guns but not as much about the politics of the armies that use them.

[bradclark1]

Don't even get me going how the SAW doesn't have the plunging fire ability like the M-60. :nope:

You could even take out light skinned armored vehicles with the M-60.
The Hog was close to a perfect weapon.

[Heibges]

IIRC the G-11 was 4.7mm and caseless.

Personally, I say go back to the 7.62mm x 51 NATO.

Don't even get me going how the SAW doesn't have the plunging fire ability like the M-60. :nope:

You could even take out light skinned armored vehicles with the M-60.
So why is the SAW the standard BOF weapon for them ole' Yankees?

I know some about guns but not as much about the politics of the armies that use them.

1. As Subman was saying the idea is to wound an enemy soldier so 2 or 3 of his comrades have to carry him off the battlefield.

2. The Infantry School (:down: :D) follows the theory that you can never carry too much ammo. 5.56mm is a lot lighter that 7.62mm on a per round basis.

3. Because the US Army is made up of many folks who never fired a weapon before the Army, the 5.56mm M-16 is designed to not have any kick so new shooters don't become "gun shy" and thereby worthless as shooters.

4. The ammunition for the M-16A2 can also be used in the SAW.

[SUBMAN1]

1. As Subman was saying the idea is to wound an enemy soldier so 2 or 3 of his comrades have to carry him off the battlefield.

2. The Infantry School (:down: :D) follows the theory that you can never carry too much ammo. 5.56mm is a lot lighter that 7.62mm on a per round basis.

3. Because the US Army is made up of many folks who never fired a weapon before the Army, the 5.56mm M-16 is designed to not have any kick so new shooters don't become "gun shy" and thereby worthless as shooters.

4. The ammunition for the M-16A2 can also be used in the SAW.
I think the SAW uses mostely 55 gr 5.56 (M193). Most ammo for the M16 lately, and what is currently loaded in my AR-15, is 62 gr M855 ammo that has a steel core for 6 mm of armor penetration. It has less than a 100 fps drop in velocity for a more solid punch of added weight, as well as retaining its ability to fragment on impact at short range.

This reminds me that I need to get out and fire that thing. I put a fresh coat of Miltec-1 on it about 3 weeks ago, but it has been over a year since I've put rounds down range in that thing. I usually go tto the range with only a .45 or so, so I need some practice with a real rifle.

I must admit though, my AR is exteremely accurate. Picked off full pop cans one after another in quick succession from about 70 yards last time I had it out. The carbination blowing up all over the place kind of screws up your aiming for the next one, but you learn to not have it affect your sites over time.

-S

[fatty]

I still have questions about the 416 round. I've seen the video, but I doubt that I personally wouldn't want anything less than a 5.56 mm. The 5.56 mm has so many redeaming properties, especially its ability to shatter upon contact creating massive injury. Of course you only get that affect from 14.5" barrels and longer since shorter barrels don't generate sufficient velocity. You really need a 16"+ barrel to achieve this effect reliably I think.

At longer range, the 5.56 holds together quite well, creating a wound over killing. This is more desirable at range because a wounded soldier takes 2 to 3 people off the battlefield vs. a dead soldiers 1.

But without getting into anymore detail, I bet this 4.16 mm round has none of these desirable properties, just like the Russian 5.45 mm round doesn't have them.


All excellent qualities in a main battle rifle, which this is not and does not pretend to be. It's a quick and dirty PDW, easy to carry and conceal, great in tight quarters, and with decent penetration of body armour.

[SUBMAN1]

I still have questions about the 416 round. I've seen the video, but I doubt that I personally wouldn't want anything less than a 5.56 mm. The 5.56 mm has so many redeaming properties, especially its ability to shatter upon contact creating massive injury. Of course you only get that affect from 14.5" barrels and longer since shorter barrels don't generate sufficient velocity. You really need a 16"+ barrel to achieve this effect reliably I think.

At longer range, the 5.56 holds together quite well, creating a wound over killing. This is more desirable at range because a wounded soldier takes 2 to 3 people off the battlefield vs. a dead soldiers 1.

But without getting into anymore detail, I bet this 4.16 mm round has none of these desirable properties, just like the Russian 5.45 mm round doesn't have them.

All excellent qualities in a main battle rifle, which this is not and does not pretend to be. It's a quick and dirty PDW, easy to carry and conceal, great in tight quarters, and with decent penetration of body armour.
I've put more ammo than I can count through various flavors of MP5's, mostly 9mm, but including a 40 cal varient, and I am not sure I would trust such a skinny round like that (It is considerably smaller than a 22!) to drop my foe in close quarters combat. Even with his heart removed, the Red Baron managed to land his plane and have a conversation with the British soldiers before dying. With such a small round, how can you expect to hit something critical if it stays intact, let alone remove a heart like the Red Baron?

People just don't die so easily as hollywood has portrayed and crammed into our brains!

Color me skeptical I guess. It needs to be combat tested.

-S

[Chock]

You are certainly correct about small calibre rounds not dropping an enemy very quickly. But that's not even remotely true at all about Von Richthofen. Just thought I'd point that out.

:D Chock

[Heibges]

1. As Subman was saying the idea is to wound an enemy soldier so 2 or 3 of his comrades have to carry him off the battlefield.

2. The Infantry School (:down: :D) follows the theory that you can never carry too much ammo. 5.56mm is a lot lighter that 7.62mm on a per round basis.

3. Because the US Army is made up of many folks who never fired a weapon before the Army, the 5.56mm M-16 is designed to not have any kick so new shooters don't become "gun shy" and thereby worthless as shooters.

4. The ammunition for the M-16A2 can also be used in the SAW.
I think the SAW uses mostely 55 gr 5.56 (M193). Most ammo for the M16 lately, and what is currently loaded in my AR-15, is 62 gr M855 ammo that has a steel core for 6 mm of armor penetration. It has less than a 100 fps drop in velocity for a more solid punch of added weight, as well as retaining its ability to fragment on impact at short range.

This reminds me that I need to get out and fire that thing. I put a fresh coat of Miltec-1 on it about 3 weeks ago, but it has been over a year since I've put rounds down range in that thing. I usually go tto the range with only a .45 or so, so I need some practice with a real rifle.

I must admit though, my AR is exteremely accurate. Picked off full pop cans one after another in quick succession from about 70 yards last time I had it out. The carbination blowing up all over the place kind of screws up your aiming for the next one, but you learn to not have it affect your sites over time.

-S

Is it an AR-15 HBAR? I have quite a few friends who love them. And you're right about it being super accurate, especially for a semi automatic.

I just meant that it was possible to fire M16A2 ammo through a SAW. I was a tanker so I generally tuned out anything to do with Infantry on general principle.:D

[SUBMAN1]

You are certainly correct about small calibre rounds not dropping an enemy very quickly. But that's not even remotely true at all about Von Richthofen. Just thought I'd point that out.

:D Chock

I have a Discovery Channel episode that would differ your opinion. Evidence shows the Red Baron lived for a full 20 seconds with no beating heart.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Is it an AR-15 HBAR? I have quite a few friends who love them. And you're right about it being super accurate, especially for a semi automatic.

I just meant that it was possible to fire M16A2 ammo through a SAW. I was a tanker so I generally tuned out anything to do with Infantry on general principle.:D
Its a Bushmaster

[Chock]

I don't doubt that you have such a TV programme Subman, but here are the facts, most of which make the claim seem unlikely, and one of which says the absolute opposite, i.e. the statements of the guys who reached the Baron first, minutes after the crash:

Von Richthofen was hit by at least one bullet, which entered under his right armpit, ricocheted off his spine and exited one and a half inches above his left nipple. Most experts have stated that such a wound could certainly have killed him instantaneously. Although it seems this was not the case on this occasion, as he apparently was able to switch off the engine of his aircraft, which could be done from the stick - the Fokker Dr1 didn't actually have a throttle - WW1 rotary engines generally were either on flat out, or off, power being managed by a series of cut-off switches which were generally placed on the control column, these stopped certain cylinders from firing in order to reduce power.

Since the torque from a rotary engine would probably flip a Triplane without corrective action on the rudder, it is apparent that when the Baron realised he was in trouble, his instinct was to cut the engine and attempt a landing, as he had done before in the past when he was wounded in the air by a bullet to the head. But it is likely that shutting down the engine was his last ever action.

Von Richthofen did not land his aircraft, it crashed in a beet field alongside the Corbie-Bray road in the Somme Valley, after having come down in a tight right hand turn, where it hit the ground, bounced approximately ten feet into the air and then smashed down, tearing off the undercarriage in the process, smashing off one propeller blade and then slewing around, damaging the lower wings in the process and probably breaking Von Richthofen's lower legs as they slipped off the rudder bar.

The crash site was in the British Fifth Brigade area, but the line was held at that point by a Company of Australian machine gunners, two of whom (Robert Buie and William Evans) are most likely to have fired the fatal shot, witnesses claiming that when Evans fired, the aircraft jerked and Richthofen reached up and pulled off his goggles, throwing them out of the cockpit.

The Baron could equally have been shot by Canadian Pilot Roy Brown, who was pursuing and firing at the Baron seconds before this in an attempt to get him off the tail of fellow Canadian and Squadron mate Wilfred May, whom the Baron was chasing along the Somme River. But it seems that the Australian gunners have the more legitimate claim, despite the official decision at the time to say a pilot shot him down, for reasons of propaganda.

When soldiers reached the wreck of the Triplane at just before 10:50 am (which incidentally, was several minutes after the crash), Von Richthofen was still strapped into the aircraft, and stone dead, his head was resting on the side of the cockpit and his neck was ringed with bruises from the violent motions of the crash without any restraint other than his lap strap, his fur hat was alongside the aircraft, thrown clear as the aircraft ground to a halt. His nose was broken and his lip cut and he was thoroughly soaked in blood from the torso down, but his hand still gripped the control column.

Some witnesses claim that the Baron also appeared to have been hit in the legs and possibly the lower abdomen too, although this may have been simply because of the blood from the chest wound had pooled in his lap. Although his body was given two medical examinations, no post mortem was carried out, but based on the Baron's wounds, General Sir Henry Rawlinson was in no doubt that Evans and Buie were the ones who dealt the final blow. Nevertheless, we will never know for sure.

It was only upon searching his body when they first reached the crash site that Australian soldiers learned of the pilot's identity, whereupon they started stripping bits from his aircraft as souvenirs, leaving it nothing more than a bare airframe.

This is based on a quick look through several of the books I have on Richthofen and of course stuff I know from having read lots on the subject, which is something of a hobby for me as you might have guessed!

Sources:
Richthofen, The man and the aircraft he flew, by David Baker.
Under the guns of the Red Baron, The complete record of Von Richthofen's Victories and Victims, by Norman Franks, Hal Giblin and Nigel McCreery.
Richthofen, Beyond the legend of the Red Baron, by Peter Kilduff.
The Red Baron Combat wing, Jagdgeschwader Richthofen in battle, by Peter Kilduff.
Der Rotte Kampflieger, by Manfred Von Richthofen.
Fokker DR1 in action, Squadron/Signal Publication number 98

I'd take these well-respected aviation researcher's opinions, and of course some stuff from the man himself about the DR1, over a TV programme any day of the week.

:D Chock

[P_Funk]

The carbination blowing up all over the place kind of screws up your aiming for the next one, but you learn to not have it affect your sites over time.

-S
Pink Mist? :p

[U-533]

Just gemme onea these
http://www.cherrys.com/pedpics/s320a.jpg
and
http://www.brasscompass.com/bowiemarineblk1.jpg
for up close&personal combat&defense


I prefer to wait for my intended then send my intentions with prejudice,
via this
http://www.airsoftelite.com/products/VFC/image/m82a1_Latest.jpg

My choice for Light Armoured stuff
http://www.strategypage.com/gallery/images/xm_109_1.jpg

http://images.hobbytron.com/tankanima.gif

[The Avon Lady]

I didn't know anybody aside from the Bundeswehr used them.
This was in central London.
I was going to say someone's been in Heathrow lately.

[Konovalov]

I didn't know anybody aside from the Bundeswehr used them.
This was in central London.
I was going to say someone's been in Heathrow lately.

FYI I am the Airfreight Manager (Import and Export) of a logistics company based near LHR so yes I have to deal with LHR and many of the airlines and cargo operators there.

[AntEater]

Funny story with the MP7 is that one high ranking bundeswehr officer managed to shoot himself in the foot with an MP7 in Kabul.
Since he was too embarassed to admit his incompetence, he launched an investigation into "safety faults" with the MP7 which left H&K quite baffled, as they had designed a fool proof weapon, but obviously not a general proof one.

Regarding the "practical test", the MP7 has definitely been fired in anger by now. The Bundeswehr is limited to the "quiet" north by order of our cowardly politicians, but even the quiet north has its share of ambushes.
Also KSK operates everywhere and does normal combat deployment with US forces.

[SUBMAN1]

I don't doubt that you have such a TV programme Subman, but here are the facts, most of which make the claim seem unlikely, and one of which says the absolute opposite, i.e. the statements of the guys who reached the Baron first, minutes after the crash:

Von Richthofen was hit by at least one bullet, which entered under his right armpit, ricocheted off his spine and exited one and a half inches above his left nipple. Most experts have stated that such a wound could certainly have killed him instantaneously. Although it seems this was not the case on this occasion, as he apparently was able to switch off the engine of his aircraft, which could be done from the stick - the Fokker Dr1 didn't actually have a throttle - WW1 rotary engines generally were either on flat out, or off, power being managed by a series of cut-off switches which were generally placed on the control column, these stopped certain cylinders from firing in order to reduce power.

Since the torque from a rotary engine would probably flip a Triplane without corrective action on the rudder, it is apparent that when the Baron realised he was in trouble, his instinct was to cut the engine and attempt a landing, as he had done before in the past when he was wounded in the air by a bullet to the head. But it is likely that shutting down the engine was his last ever action.

Von Richthofen did not land his aircraft, it crashed in a beet field alongside the Corbie-Bray road in the Somme Valley, after having come down in a tight right hand turn, where it hit the ground, bounced approximately ten feet into the air and then smashed down, tearing off the undercarriage in the process, smashing off one propeller blade and then slewing around, damaging the lower wings in the process and probably breaking Von Richthofen's lower legs as they slipped off the rudder bar.

The crash site was in the British Fifth Brigade area, but the line was held at that point by a Company of Australian machine gunners, two of whom (Robert Buie and William Evans) are most likely to have fired the fatal shot, witnesses claiming that when Evans fired, the aircraft jerked and Richthofen reached up and pulled off his goggles, throwing them out of the cockpit.

The Baron could equally have been shot by Canadian Pilot Roy Brown, who was pursuing and firing at the Baron seconds before this in an attempt to get him off the tail of fellow Canadian and Squadron mate Wilfred May, whom the Baron was chasing along the Somme River. But it seems that the Australian gunners have the more legitimate claim, despite the official decision at the time to say a pilot shot him down, for reasons of propaganda.

When soldiers reached the wreck of the Triplane at just before 10:50 am (which incidentally, was several minutes after the crash), Von Richthofen was still strapped into the aircraft, and stone dead, his head was resting on the side of the cockpit and his neck was ringed with bruises from the violent motions of the crash without any restraint other than his lap strap, his fur hat was alongside the aircraft, thrown clear as the aircraft ground to a halt. His nose was broken and his lip cut and he was thoroughly soaked in blood from the torso down, but his hand still gripped the control column.

Some witnesses claim that the Baron also appeared to have been hit in the legs and possibly the lower abdomen too, although this may have been simply because of the blood from the chest wound had pooled in his lap. Although his body was given two medical examinations, no post mortem was carried out, but based on the Baron's wounds, General Sir Henry Rawlinson was in no doubt that Evans and Buie were the ones who dealt the final blow. Nevertheless, we will never know for sure.

It was only upon searching his body when they first reached the crash site that Australian soldiers learned of the pilot's identity, whereupon they started stripping bits from his aircraft as souvenirs, leaving it nothing more than a bare airframe.

This is based on a quick look through several of the books I have on Richthofen and of course stuff I know from having read lots on the subject, which is something of a hobby for me as you might have guessed!

Sources:
Richthofen, The man and the aircraft he flew, by David Baker.
Under the guns of the Red Baron, The complete record of Von Richthofen's Victories and Victims, by Norman Franks, Hal Giblin and Nigel McCreery.
Richthofen, Beyond the legend of the Red Baron, by Peter Kilduff.
The Red Baron Combat wing, Jagdgeschwader Richthofen in battle, by Peter Kilduff.
Der Rotte Kampflieger, by Manfred Von Richthofen.
Fokker DR1 in action, Squadron/Signal Publication number 98

I'd take these well-respected aviation researcher's opinions, and of course some stuff from the man himself about the DR1, over a TV programme any day of the week.

:D Chock

Good summary! :up:

The only problem is, it was a cover up from the governments standpoint because the evidence as analyzed shows a 30.06 caliber bullet doing the dirty work, passing through the heart from the right side, exiting on the left side of the body. He was most certainly killed by ground fire, and their are two soldiers that swear they talked with him prior to him passing out and dying, though this was covered up as well. They may have been Aussies too. I forgot. And it might have been two British soldiers that pulled the trigger too.

This is the problem - most of the evidence presented was presented by governments that desperately wanted to show him downed by one of our pilots, so this is why you will find so much conflicting information on the subject. That is why I enjoyed that program - they waded through all the conflicting detail, and talked with a few survivors (who were quite old) to get some actual accounts. I need to find that program again. It totally changed my opinion on what happened that day.

If I don't have it, I know someone that probably does, so I'll forward it on to you.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

The carbination blowing up all over the place kind of screws up your aiming for the next one, but you learn to not have it affect your sites over time.

-S Pink Mist? :p

Could be grape too! Or Orange!

[Chock]

If I don't have it, I know someone that probably does, so I'll forward it on to you.

I'd certainly be interested to see such a programme Subman. Even though I have plenty of books, videos etc on the matter, I'd not be so blinkered to imagine that new evidence could never be presented which refutes the generally accepted version of events, and if the entire thing had in fact been subjected to a massive (or even a small) cover-up, it would most certainly not be the first time.

Anyway, back on topic, here's an interesting take on the argument of whether small calibre rounds can do the job, with FN's funky (and controversial) FiveseveN:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-seveN

:D Chock

[SUBMAN1]

Anyway, back on topic, here's an interesting take on the argument of whether small calibre rounds can do the job, with FN's funky (and controversial) FiveseveN:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-seveN

:D Chock
I have a bit of a negative view of the P90. My friend had one and if you tap the magazine just right, it spits out all the ammo onto the ground. Also, that article fails to mention that multiple rounds destroy most body armors, except the controversial dragon skin, so I'd opt for a larger calibre round in a side arm personally. How many here know that the .45 is one of the most sought after and coveted arms in Iraq right now? That is because it works when entering a room! Even if the target has body armor, it is still going to break a rib or two when shooting at that very body armor due to its bullet mass when striking. It may not penetrate that armor, but it is similar to a very big guy punching you in the stomach. It upsets whatever the target is trying to do.

All around though, (both short and and at range) the 5.56 is probably the right round for the job. The .45 is rather pathetic at any range.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Hey CHock - I found the program in question incase you see it at your local library - http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/redbaron/

It was a .303 bullet fired from long range because it was still in the body, or at least recovered.

-S

PS. THis is the part I was talking about:

NORMAN FRANKS (Aviation Historian): Once we looked at the pathology, weinterviewed two or three eminent pathologists, and they said that the sort of wound that he would have suffered would have given him no more than 12 to 20 seconds of life once he was hit—just enough to get down.


ALEX IMRIE: I've spoken...I've asked a few pilots about this—those that were there—and one in particular, Rudolph Stark, a Bavarian, he was flying that morning, and he reckons that Richthofen was still alive when he landed because he said the triplane was so touchy to fly, it was absolutely impossible for it to land smoothly on its own.


NARRATOR: Although mortally wounded, had von Richthofen somehow managed to wrestle his aircraft safely to the ground? Eighty years after the event, an important new piece of evidence surfaced in a letter from the son of an Allied soldier who claimed to be the first to reach the crashed triplane.


SON OF GUNNER ERNEST TWYCROSS (Excerpt from 1973 letter): My father's officer sent my father down to take the pilot prisoner, which my father did. My father was the first man to the aircraft and the pilot tried to say something in German to my father. The pilot then sighed and died.


BRADLEY M. KING: This added a whole new dimension to the final moments of Richthofen's life and confirmed that the aircraft came down intact. It was practically flown down. Richthofen was still alive, which nobody had known about before.

[AntEater]

Sorry I don't get it:
Was Richthofen shot down by a PDW??
:o:doh::damn::hmm:

[SUBMAN1]

Sorry I don't get it:
Was Richthofen shot down by a PDW??
:o:doh::damn::hmm:

No - groundfire!

[Heibges]

Anyway, back on topic, here's an interesting take on the argument of whether small calibre rounds can do the job, with FN's funky (and controversial) FiveseveN:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-seveN

:D Chock
I have a bit of a negative view of the P90. My friend had one and if you tap the magazine just right, it spits out all the ammo onto the ground. Also, that article fails to mention that multiple rounds destroy most body armors, except the controversial dragon skin, so I'd opt for a larger calibre round in a side arm personally. How many here know that the .45 is one of the most sought after and coveted arms in Iraq right now? That is because it works when entering a room! Even if the target has body armor, it is still going to break a rib or two when shooting at that very body armor due to its bullet mass when striking. It may not penetrate that armor, but it is similar to a very big guy punching you in the stomach. It upsets whatever the target is trying to do.

All around though, (both short and and at range) the 5.56 is probably the right round for the job. The .45 is rather pathetic at any range.

-S

Interesting. Are the buying the .45's themselves? Do you know where are they getting the ammo?

[SUBMAN1]

Interesting. Are the buying the .45's themselves? Do you know where are they getting the ammo?
From what I read, only two ways - special forces get what they want, as well as a few grunts that are authorized to carry a sidearm, or they are bringing them over. Ammo probably isn't the hard thing to get over there. They have all of it - including so uch 5.56, it costs me $10 to load a single Mag for my AR these days.

-S

PS. One more thing - the military is back in the market for a new .45 because of Iraq. The Berretta is just not cutting it. I'll see if I can find the proposal.

[SUBMAN1]

Here is the Air Forces proposal. They are not the only ones either from what I understand.

-S

Exclusive: Air Force Revives .45-cal Handgun


Twenty years ago, the US Department of Defense decided to replace the .45-cal M1911 handgun with the 9mm M9 Beretta as the standard-issue sidearm.
To say this decision was controversial is an understatement.


You will find plenty of defenders of the M9, such as this one (http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003436.html#comments), but also many, many critics. The critics say the M9's 9mm bullet lacks the "knock-down" power to immediately disable a human being. If this human being is shooting at you, you'd also prefer a bullet that could make this person stop.


I give you the Air Force Future Handgun program, which has just entered the market survey phase (http://fs1.fbo.gov/EPSData/USAF/Synopses/1202/FA8520-07-R-15490/RFI4-16-07Final.pdf). The air force says it "may specify" a .45-caliber round, which is larger than the 9mm and the same size used on the M1911 phased-out in the late-1980s.


The air force program comes several months after the army and Special Operations Command cancelled the Joint Combat Pistol program, which also sought to bring back the .45-calibre sidearm.


History may be repeating itself. Legendary Air Force Gen. Curtis LeMay kept interest alive in the Colt M16 rifle while the army hopelessly pursued the Springfield M14. Will the air force now usher the .45-calibre sidearm back into the inventory, with the army again forced to play follow-the-leader?










http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003439.html

[Chock]

Here is my proposal:

http://www.nmm.ac.uk/collections/displayRepro.cfm?reproID=E8760&picture=1#content

sure, it's old, but it's cool too! Shame it was the 45th reply on this thread, but I was close!

:D Chock

[SUBMAN1]

Here is my proposal:

http://www.nmm.ac.uk/collections/displayRepro.cfm?reproID=E8760&picture=1#content

sure, it's old, but it's cool too! Shame it was the 45th reply on this thread, but I was close!

:D Chock
Scary - its like this - Hey Enemy over there! Stop shooting please, I need to reload my 6 shooter! I have to pack the ball in there so its going to take some time, so you might as well have coffee or something while you wait!

[ASWnut101]

Sorry I'm late, but I was watching FW (Future weapons) and the bald guy (I can't remember his name) said that the MP7 used a rifle round over an automatic-pistol one...


It had some decent penetration, too. Piercing a helmet and Kevlar vest (both sides) with little problem.

[TheBrauerHour]

Yes! The 60 was a beast. I loved that thing. Then they took it away and gave me a SAW and I felt like I was firing an automatic BB Gun.

I always missed the M60 after we switched to the SAW...

[AntEater]

wrong thread:D

[SUBMAN1]

IIRC the G-11 was 4.7mm and caseless.

Personally, I say go back to the 7.62mm x 51 NATO.

Don't even get me going how the SAW doesn't have the plunging fire ability like the M-60. :nope:

You could even take out light skinned armored vehicles with the M-60.

You know why the G-11 design failed don't you? The 4.7mm had the nasty habit of staying in perfect form as it passed through the body. THis actually is an undesirable trait in a bullet.

By the way, 5.56 M855 ammo (steel core) will penetrate light skinned vehicles fine too. THe M855 will penetrate 6mm of steal plate allowing for crew incapacitation in many circumstances. There is also a tungsten version (M955?) that will penetrate 12 mm of armor from a simple M-16 rifle. M855 is the standard round however for American weapons.

-S