NationStates

San-Silvacian wrote:Suddenly you get hit by assault rifles

ur ded

this isn't for a mainline unit.... this is what would be Called a B group in soviet terminology , also 1960s

Bezombia wrote:
If you're in 1945 and have a very strange love affair with SMGs, then sure.

1960's actually how did you know I had a thing for SMG's?

Tule wrote:
Your squad would get slaughtered in CQC.

It might be worth it to have a designated marksman in your squad armed with a bolt-action rifle, though he would probably need a PDW.

I already do some weird shit with DMR's and snipers. also not late enough for the concept of DM's in a squad.

Vorkova wrote:

Black Hand wrote:Would it be reasonable to use bolt action rifles provided that a 12 man squad featured an automatic weapon at a ratio of 1:2/. so say 8 bolt action riflemen, 2 automatic riflemen, and 2 belt fed MG's, and an SMG wielding officer. would that work out? (keep in mind said SMG is 6.8 SPC)

I love bolt action rifles too, but they just aren't effective now. There's a reason why even guerillas use AKs.

I understand that, automatic fire no matter how accurate has far more potential

Black Hand wrote:this isn;t for a mainline unit.... this is what would be Called a B group in soviet terminology , also 1960s

Honestly by the 1960's you should be able to get your hands on at the very least second hand semi automatics like the M1 Garand or SVT-40, maybe even the SKS.

Black Hand wrote: 1960's actually how did you know I had a thing for SMG's?

Because you'd need to have an unnatural attraction to them to actually be issueing them in the squad level.

Soviet Union did because they fought an enemy who did and found that they were all dying because of them. Nobody else really used SMGs.

Vorkova wrote:

Black Hand wrote:Would it be reasonable to use bolt action rifles provided that a 12 man squad featured an automatic weapon at a ratio of 1:2/. so say 8 bolt action riflemen, 2 automatic riflemen, and 2 belt fed MG's, and an SMG wielding officer. would that work out? (keep in mind said SMG is 6.8 SPC)

I love bolt action rifles too, but they just aren't effective now. There's a reason why even guerillas use AKs.

Not all guerillas actually.

The SMLE still reigns supreme at long range.

Spreewerke wrote:

3 State Alliance wrote:I know right - nothing says "Badass coming through!" like good urban camo.

I did that during a paintball game once - had to use a garden hose to wash my shield afterwards

Tule wrote:

Vorkova wrote:I love bolt action rifles too, but they just aren't effective now. There's a reason why even guerillas use AKs.

Not all guerillas actually.

The SMLE still reigns supreme at long range.

Sorta proves my point, bolt action rifles are still weapons of terror, see how effectively a single marksman pins down those marines? Now imagine 8 of those riflemen firing upon them with automatic fire supplanting them. What I'm trying to determine now is if I could feasibly make a straight pull bolt action 9.3X64 that feeds from clips as well as magazines. because straight pull and 9.3X64 aren't terms I've seen together.


Also Beno is there an issue with giving NCO's SMG's? I also realized that I need a different SMG for interwar era. M/45 chambered in 9X25 or 9X23? (basically a 10mm auto necked to 9X19 rounds Vs .45 acp necked to 9X19)

Black Hand wrote:

Tule wrote:
Not all guerillas actually.

The SMLE still reigns supreme at long range.

Sorta proves my point, bolt action rifles are still weapons of terror, see how effectively a single marksman pins down those marines? Now imagine 8 of those riflemen firing upon them with automatic fire supplanting them. What I'm trying to determine now is if I could feasibly make a straight pull bolt action 9.3X64 that feeds from clips as well as magazines. because straight pull and 9.3X64 aren't terms I've seen together.


Also Beno is there an issue with giving NCO's SMG's? I also realized that I need a different SMG for interwar era. M/45 chambered in 9X25 or 9X23? (basically a 10mm auto necked to 9X19 rounds Vs .45 acp necked to 9X19)

There is absolutely no reason to use a bolt action at the squad level. You won't really be needing uberaccuracy, and there's nothing a typical bolt action can do for the squad that a semi-auto like the SVD or M110 can't do better.

Black Hand wrote:

Tule wrote:
Not all guerillas actually.

The SMLE still reigns supreme at long range.

Sorta proves my point, bolt action rifles are still weapons of terror, see how effectively a single marksman pins down those marines? Now imagine 8 of those riflemen firing upon them with automatic fire supplanting them. What I'm trying to determine now is if I could feasibly make a straight pull bolt action 9.3X64 that feeds from clips as well as magazines. because straight pull and 9.3X64 aren't terms I've seen together.


Also Beno is there an issue with giving NCO's SMG's? I also realized that I need a different SMG for interwar era. M/45 chambered in 9X25 or 9X23? (basically a 10mm auto necked to 9X19 rounds Vs .45 acp necked to 9X19)

Then suddenly:

Assault rifles.

Suddenly Mr. bolt action pin point shooter is being sprayed by some bloke with an M16A1.

Black Hand wrote:

Tule wrote:
Not all guerillas actually.

The SMLE still reigns supreme at long range.

Sorta proves my point, bolt action rifles are still weapons of terror, see how effectively a single marksman pins down those marines? Now imagine 8 of those riflemen firing upon them with automatic fire supplanting them. What I'm trying to determine now is if I could feasibly make a straight pull bolt action 9.3X64 that feeds from clips as well as magazines. because straight pull and 9.3X64 aren't terms I've seen together.

If 2/3'ds of your squad members are armed with bolt action rifles, then 2/3 of your squad is useless at ranges of less than 300 meters, where most combat takes place.

Put one bolt-action rifleman on your squad at the very most.

I would also like to point out that 7.62x51 is the upper limit of what most infantrymen can handle in terms of recoil. Anything over 20 ft. lbs of recoil energy and your riflemen's accuracy degrades rapidly as they are now dreading each shot they take. 9.3X64 is way too powerful for anythinig other than specialized troops.

Is it possible to make a round like a 5.56 explode on impact? (not hollow point) but like a very very small grenade?

Romic wrote:Is it possible to make a round like a 5.56 explode on impact? (not hollow point) but like a very very small grenade?

Explosives aren't really small like that. Explosive bullets certainly are a possibility and have been for decades, but a round that small won't get much out of one.

Bezombia wrote:

Romic wrote:Is it possible to make a round like a 5.56 explode on impact? (not hollow point) but like a very very small grenade?

Explosives aren't really small like that. Explosive bullets certainly are a possibility and have been for decades, but a round that small won't get much out of one.

What would be the smallest round possible for it to be pratical for a single person?

Romic wrote:

Bezombia wrote:
Explosives aren't really small like that. Explosive bullets certainly are a possibility and have been for decades, but a round that small won't get much out of one.

What would be the smallest round possible for it to be pratical for a single person?

They made spezzial exploding 7.92x57mm Mauser cartridges with an explosive projectile in WWII, so you might be able to squeeze it down into a 7.62mm package, but I wouldn't go any lower than that.

Would I be able to rechamber an M4 for that round?

Romic wrote:Would I be able to rechamber an M4 for that round?

Shorten an AR-10.

Romic wrote:Would I be able to rechamber an M4 for that round?

The M4 is based on the AR-15 which is based on the AR-10.
The AR-10 is already a 7.62 battle rifle.



If you give an AR-10 an explosive 7.62x51mm cartridge, a lot of people will love you for it.

What about a more modern round that I could rechamber an M4

Romic wrote:What about a more modern round that I could rechamber an M4

There is nothing "unmodern" about 7.62x51. It's still used by every major NATO power.

Tule wrote:

Black Hand wrote:Sorta proves my point, bolt action rifles are still weapons of terror, see how effectively a single marksman pins down those marines? Now imagine 8 of those riflemen firing upon them with automatic fire supplanting them. What I'm trying to determine now is if I could feasibly make a straight pull bolt action 9.3X64 that feeds from clips as well as magazines. because straight pull and 9.3X64 aren't terms I've seen together.

If 2/3'ds of your squad members are armed with bolt action rifles, then 2/3 of your squad is useless at ranges of less than 300 meters, where most combat takes place.

Put one bolt-action rifleman on your squad at the very most.

I would also like to point out that 7.62x51 is the upper limit of what most infantrymen can handle in terms of recoil. Anything over 20 ft. lbs of recoil energy and your riflemen's accuracy degrades rapidly as they are now dreading each shot they take. 9.3X64 is way too powerful for anythinig other than specialized troops.

What about the 8mm Mauser? Was it that unshootable by the average soldier?

Bezombia wrote:

Romic wrote:What would be the smallest round possible for it to be pratical for a single person?

They made spezzial exploding 7.92x57mm Mauser cartridges with an explosive projectile in WWII, so you might be able to squeeze it down into a 7.62mm package, but I wouldn't go any lower than that.

There's an explosive 7.62x54mmR round, IIRC.

Romic wrote:What about a more modern round that I could rechamber an M4

Shorten an AR-10.

Okay I'm beginning to think my entire operational doctrine is broken. Should I just take 7.62x54R make it standard and be done? And as augments and power armor ate developed simply up rate of fire and magazine size and call them assault rifles. I'm thinking that better control is preferable to fire power and well to be honest a improved/modernized 7.62x54R cartridge using modern propellants and primers would get rather good penetration.

Black Hand wrote:

San-Silvacian wrote:Suddenly you get hit by assault rifles

ur ded

this isn't for a mainline unit.... this is what would be Called a B group in soviet terminology , also 1960s

Bezombia wrote:
If you're in 1945 and have a very strange love affair with SMGs, then sure.

1960's actually how did you know I had a thing for SMG's?

Tule wrote:
Your squad would get slaughtered in CQC.

It might be worth it to have a designated marksman in your squad armed with a bolt-action rifle, though he would probably need a PDW.

I already do some weird shit with DMR's and snipers. also not late enough for the concept of DM's in a squad.

Vorkova wrote:I love bolt action rifles too, but they just aren't effective now. There's a reason why even guerillas use AKs.

I understand that, automatic fire no matter how accurate has far more potential

Sixties is nőt too late for designated marksmen.
Had there been enough funding, every infantry squad in Finnish army would have had a one mosin with scope in WWII.

Figured I would put out a history for a Submachine guns.

M3 Submachine Gun (1952-Present): the M3 Grease Gun was adopted into serves in 1952 as it became evident that combat in urban areas would be common as seen from when the Byrrus Res Novae took hold in many urban areas and although the Revolution was quelled in 1949 the issue of the M1 Garand being too big and bulk to maneuver correctly witching the tight areas of the city most notably within buildings and ally ways. The first and most obvious candidate to fix the issue was the M1 Carbine but was dropped due to the fact that it's ammunition was not in high stock within the nations Armories by which time the M3 had been cast as a suggestion mainly for its short design and it's use of the .45 ACP round the same one used by the standard issue M1911 handgun. After a trial stage against other weapons including the MP40 and Carl Gustav m/45. After a year of trials the M3 was picked as the new Standard Issue Submachine gun of the United Confederate Armed Forces.

It was quickly handed out to urban unites and tank crews it was quickly nicknamed Proximasi which translates to "Shorty" and many grew to like it for its reliability and ease of use. It first saw major combat during the Islamic Uprising in Virliurba in 1967 which saw a 89 day siege of the city from Islamic Militants which ultimately resulted in Black Saturday which was the assault of the Mosque which was the headquarters for the militants activity resulting in the death of over 469 militants and 78 members of the United Confederate Armed Forces and 3 members of the Confederate Air Force after their
Hughes OH-6 Cayuse helicopter was shot down (at the time it was only one of two in use). The M3 played an important role in the attack as it served as the main weapon used by UCAF Members and was immortalized in a picture of a UCAF soldier holding it slumped across his shoulder as he smoked a cigaret with a mosque burning in the background.

It would see continual use in small counter-terrorist operations across the nation but was tested greatly in the Tribus Bellum which took place from 1999 until 2011 and occurred mostly in the arid north. It was used extensively in urban areas along with the L1A1 as well as with tank crews. Although complaints came in from tank crews complaining of power and range issues when in heavy combat and eventually lead to many soldiers buy their own rifles and using them in combat with the Ruger Mini-14, FAL-OSW, and Kel-Tec RFB were among the most popular with troop. After the war in 2011 the Ministry of the Military laid out plans to phase the M3 out of service with tank crews and has proposed many successors including the FAL-OSW, Kel-Tec RFB, and SCAR-H Mk 17 CQC however a choice has yet to be made. The submachine gun still continues to A&E survive with Urban UCAF forces but has slowly seen a drop in usage with other shorter FAL/L1A1 veto ants being used instead. Currently the MoM is debating on wether to replace the gun by ether replacing it with another Submachine gun or with a short barrel carbine.

Black Hand wrote:Okay I'm beginning to think my entire operational doctrine is broken. Should I just take 7.62x54R make it standard and be done? And as augments and power armor ate developed simply up rate of fire and magazine size and call them assault rifles. I'm thinking that better control is preferable to fire power and well to be honest a improved/modernized 7.62x54R cartridge using modern propellants and primers would get rather good penetration.

Updated plan. what about using a 7.62X54R case and loading 7.62X39 and 7.62X25 projectiles for various weapons, in this manner would it not be possible to build a K2 based Battle rifle that could in turn be adapted to serve as a carbine and PDW respectively but still be capable of using the heavier longer ranged loads.everything from subsonic 7.62X54R all the way down to a 7.62X54R (7.62X25 projectile) that was launched out the barrel at absurd velocity. all without changing anything except maybe the return spring and adjusting the gas valve. I think this might be a way to make simple modular weapon system, only I issue I see is that it's awfully heavy and large cartridges for a PDW in most cases.