Main Military Weapon of Your Country: Part 12

[Sevvania]

Here are the small arms in use by the Panzergrenadier, Jäger and FallschirmJager troops of the Wulfenburg Heer.
(Image)
top to bottom
M1911 Colt pistol chambered in .45 ACP
AK-74 chambered in 7.62x39mm
AK-74 with underslung GP-25 Kostyor grenade launcher
AKS-74U used by the Fallschirmtruppen
M-1C sniper rifle with M84 scope

Special purpose forces (Sondermaschinen Truppen)
(Image)
Top to bottom
Heckler und Kock Mk.23 pistol with suppressor and Laser Aim Module,
PorsimoTech M-150 with suppressor, ACOG and forearm
PorsimoTech M-150 with holosight, leafsights and PorsimoTech Underslung Grenade Launcher
PorsimoTech M-150 Battlefield Marksman variant with M-150 scope and bipod
CheyTac Intervention M200 with scope and bipod

If you're aiming for a blend of German and Russian, I would suggest some slight modifications to your arsenal:
•The Colt M1911, good sidearm it may be, could probably be replaced by either a Russian Tokarev pistol or a German Walther P08.
•And while the Garand is another good gun, if you're aiming for a more German/Russian blend, the Kar98k or Mosin might be better-suited.
•The special forces weaponry seems a bit at odds with the rest of your equipment, and might be something to look into modifying.

[Hodori]

Sometimes, I like to think I know what I'm doing

[Wulfenburg]

If you're aiming for a blend of German and Russian, I would suggest some slight modifications to your arsenal:
•The Colt M1911, good sidearm it may be, could probably be replaced by either a Russian Tokarev pistol or a German Walther P08.
•And while the Garand is another good gun, if you're aiming for a more German/Russian blend, the Kar98k or Mosin might be better-suited.
•The special forces weaponry seems a bit at odds with the rest of your equipment, and might be something to look into modifying.

Well the USSW is a mix of German and Russian designs yes, but the reason that the SF weapons are at odds is because the whole of the Wulfenburg Wehrmacht is under going modernization and re-equipment and the SF were the first units to benefit from these programs. The M-150 is Indigenously developed. I used the name PorsimoTech as Porsimo was the one that did the actual models I used in the image. I do appreciate the input though, thanks for the advice.

[Paddy O Fernature]

IIRC, AKs cost the Russian military roughly 300 USD. This is probably a combination of a large production run, ease of manufacture and relatively low wages compared to, say, France. There probably aren't as many environmental regulations etc either, and those do add a bit to the cost of goods.

I could buy an new automatic "AK" still in factory cosmoline for $25 US off the local market overseas. I paid $200 after tax for my Romanian 10/63 pre Obama from Cabelas. Now while I do not know what Ivan pay's per rifle, I highly doubt it's $300 US. Maybe for the new gen ones perhaps....

[Puzikas]

Gladly.

How?

Add it. Literally.

For example, a rifle with an accuracy of 2 MOA will have a natural dispersion of 2 inches at 100 yards. If, at thus range, it has been blown half an inch off course, the bullet will impact anywhere on the horizontal axis up to 2.5 inches from the point of aim.

Similarly, if the projectile has a drop of 1 inch at 100 yards, it could strike anywhere on the vertical plane up to 3 inches from the point of aim.

At least, that's my theory.

This is basically correct for NS Sake.

Seems reasonable. Any idea on the accuracy of a mass produced barrel?

1.5-2.5MOA is a safe bet. AK-103s shoot at a 1..6-2.2 MOA and a stock Colt 6920 shoots 1.5-2.0 MOA IIRC.

But at what cost?

When talking about cost, there's many factors to keep in mind. When you get a cost from a rifle that is non-military you normally get the Civilian cost, which is sold for greater prophet: Case in point being that the MRSP of a Colt 6920 is about 1 grand while the M4 from colt (which is basically the same thing I believe) is about $640 USD contracted to the US Government. Let's say it costs 475 to make them: By the same reasonable adjustment paddies 1.0MOA rifle would cost the manufacture about $550. Unless that's a Colt 6920. I don't speak ARs.

Since we were talking about rifle costs, does anyone happen to know if there's some charts with the prices listed? (or maybe even an estimate on how much you can subtract for the civilian semi-auto versions for bulk pricing?) I think I recall the Forgotten Weapons guy said manufacturing costs for the EM-2 were 10x as much as the FN FALs, someone on here said AKs are only $75 to the Russian military, and FAMAS' seem to be 2700 Euros and up depending on your source. Those seem like such huge variations...

I had one at one point. I might still.

That price figure is for the AKM c. 1965, adjusted.
#communism

The -74M coated Russia about 200 per in 2006, 30% of the M4 to the US Government. The AK12 I have an estimate at $378 per unit in mass production.

[Aqizithiuda]

Sometimes, I like to think I know what I'm doing

I'd try and get the graph on the Border Barrels site to be a tad smoother.

Add it. Literally.

For example, a rifle with an accuracy of 2 MOA will have a natural dispersion of 2 inches at 100 yards. If, at thus range, it has been blown half an inch off course, the bullet will impact anywhere on the horizontal axis up to 2.5 inches from the point of aim.

Similarly, if the projectile has a drop of 1 inch at 100 yards, it could strike anywhere on the vertical plane up to 3 inches from the point of aim.

At least, that's my theory.

This is basically correct for NS Sake.

Seems reasonable. Any idea on the accuracy of a mass produced barrel?

1.5-2.5MOA is a safe bet. AK-103s shoot at a 1..6-2.2 MOA and a stock Colt 6920 shoots 1.5-2.0 MOA IIRC.

But at what cost?

When talking about cost, there's many factors to keep in mind. When you get a cost from a rifle that is non-military you normally get the Civilian cost, which is sold for greater prophet: Case in point being that the MRSP of a Colt 6920 is about 1 grand while the M4 from colt (which is basically the same thing I believe) is about $640 USD contracted to the US Government. Let's say it costs 475 to make them: By the same reasonable adjustment paddies 1.0MOA rifle would cost the manufacture about $550. Unless that's a Colt 6920. I don't speak ARs.

Since we were talking about rifle costs, does anyone happen to know if there's some charts with the prices listed? (or maybe even an estimate on how much you can subtract for the civilian semi-auto versions for bulk pricing?) I think I recall the Forgotten Weapons guy said manufacturing costs for the EM-2 were 10x as much as the FN FALs, someone on here said AKs are only $75 to the Russian military, and FAMAS' seem to be 2700 Euros and up depending on your source. Those seem like such huge variations...

I had one at one point. I might still.

That price figure is for the AKM c. 1965, adjusted.
#communism

The -74M coated Russia about 200 per in 2006, 30% of the M4 to the US Government. The AK12 I have an estimate at $378 per unit in mass production.

So, half right. I had the $200 figure in mind, but thought it was the manufacturing cost.

[Puzikas]

They were about the same, IIRC it was $178 manufacturing to $240 to buy or so. Russia cooked its books in the 1950s-1990s to fool the west into thinking they had more/less weapons that they actually had, which made shit real confusing to the West and anyone looking into such things.

[Aqizithiuda]

They were about the same, IIRC it was $178 manufacturing to $240 to buy or so. Russia cooked its books in the 1950s-1990s to fool the west into thinking they had more/less weapons that they actually had, which made shit real confusing to the West and anyone looking into such things.

Ah, that explains a lot.

Thanks for that! Apart from getting a better idea on what the AK series costs, I've now got a more accurate baseline for my rifle project.

[Bhelyant]

alright, thanks guys

How feasible would it be to cast aluminium (for upper and lower receivers) for a rough product, and then CNC mill for a final product? Would it just be the worst of both worlds? It seems like casting has a poor history for AR-15 receivers, but that might just be because the design wasn't changed at all to try and cut costs, or maybe an inferior alloy? That said, Ruger seems to have a lot of success with casting (but that's also with steel.)

[Khornatenreich]

Oi, quick question, how do the prospects of a 15.5x115 or 16.5x120 sound as candidates for the HMG/notheavystubber?

[Aqizithiuda]

alright, thanks guys

How feasible would it be to cast aluminium (for upper and lower receivers) for a rough product, and then CNC mill for a final product? Would it just be the worst of both worlds? It seems like casting has a poor history for AR-15 receivers, but that might just be because the design wasn't changed at all to try and cut costs, or maybe an inferior alloy? That said, Ruger seems to have a lot of success with casting (but that's also with steel.)

I had to look this up to make sure I wasn't going to be talking out of my arse, but the issue with cast receivers is a combination of a less suitable alloy and them needed to be thicker in order to retain the same strength. Cast receivers, however, are cheaper than forged or milled receivers when done in large production runs. If you didn't mind the extra weight and thickness - which, I'm told, might not be as great a difference nowadays as it was in days long past - then you could certainly use cast aluminium receivers on your military firearms. You don't really need the CNC mill, though.

Oi, quick question, how do the prospects of a 15.5x115 or 16.5x120 sound as candidates for the HMG/notheavystubber?

.661 Vickers or bust.

[Khornatenreich]

alright, thanks guys

How feasible would it be to cast aluminium (for upper and lower receivers) for a rough product, and then CNC mill for a final product? Would it just be the worst of both worlds? It seems like casting has a poor history for AR-15 receivers, but that might just be because the design wasn't changed at all to try and cut costs, or maybe an inferior alloy? That said, Ruger seems to have a lot of success with casting (but that's also with steel.)

I had to look this up to make sure I wasn't going to be talking out of my arse, but the issue with cast receivers is a combination of a less suitable alloy and them needed to be thicker in order to retain the same strength. Cast receivers, however, are cheaper than forged or milled receivers when done in large production runs. If you didn't mind the extra weight and thickness - which, I'm told, might not be as great a difference nowadays as it was in days long past - then you could certainly use cast aluminium receivers on your military firearms. You don't really need the CNC mill, though.

Oi, quick question, how do the prospects of a 15.5x115 or 16.5x120 sound as candidates for the HMG/notheavystubber?

.661 Vickers or bust.

Well, I can't exactly .661 because Khornazi, but I can at least emulate it's sheer destructive power. So 16.5x120 it is.

[Aqizithiuda]

I had to look this up to make sure I wasn't going to be talking out of my arse, but the issue with cast receivers is a combination of a less suitable alloy and them needed to be thicker in order to retain the same strength. Cast receivers, however, are cheaper than forged or milled receivers when done in large production runs. If you didn't mind the extra weight and thickness - which, I'm told, might not be as great a difference nowadays as it was in days long past - then you could certainly use cast aluminium receivers on your military firearms. You don't really need the CNC mill, though.



.661 Vickers or bust.

Well, I can't exactly .661 because Khornazi, but I can at least emulate it's sheer destructive power. So 16.5x120 it is.

Fair enough . Just expect to use a case with a wider base if you want similar power.

[Imperializt Russia]

Random question time. How would you rate a round with 250J of energy?

.........wouldn't know I have never measured in joules

Small.
40-50% the energy of 9mm Para.

your job being what exactly?

Private Investigator.........yes I know that I might never need it but it's also tax deductible since it's a business purchase.

God Bless the tax system.

I think in Holland, drug dealers can legally deduct firearms purchased as business expense.

Moderator names are red, not orange, except when one is using the dark theme for NS.



See?

That looks exactly the same to me

I imagine that it is the exact same colour, just that it has the appearance of becoming orange when surrounded by black.

Apparently some ARs get 1 MOA out of the box.

As do some AK and RPK-type rifles.

[Aqizithiuda]

Duplex ammunition in ballistics gel at close range.

Naturally, not ideal, but the 5.56x45mm version was interesting. The two projectiles hadn't quite separated yet when they hit the gel, so they separated in the gel, giving two wound tracks instead of the one that happened with the 7.62mm duplex load. Of course, at longer ranges, they would have spread out enough that the second projectile didn't follow enter the wound track produced by the first one, but at close range it looks like you'd just have normal ball performance.

[Khornatenreich]

Fair enough . Just expect to use a case with a wider base if you want similar power.

Hmmm............. I'll fiddle with the dimensions, maybe even have the thing "belted" like the 13x64mm Borsig. Also, I'm working on the Kalahari-cousin cartridge, it'll replace all standard infantry rifle munitions, but be geared a rad-bit more for armor penetration.

THE RISE OF THE REICH BEGINS! Miltech wise anyhow.

[Aqizithiuda]

Okay, so based on a very quick skim read of the Salvo II and SAWS studies, duplex ammunition offers more hits per targets and more close misses than simplex ammunition at ranges below 450 yards (SAWS has no data between the ranges of 300 and 450 yards and notes that the dropoff in effectiveness occurs somewhere between the two). After this point, though, simplex ammunition becomes more effective.

So, to sum up, duplex ammunition provides better suppression at classical combat ranges, without much, if any, degradation of accuracy or hit probability, but is insufficient for longer ranges.

Just some random food for thought.

[Khornatenreich]

Okay, so based on a very quick skim read of the Salvo II and SAWS studies, duplex ammunition offers more hits per targets and more close misses than simplex ammunition at ranges below 450 yards (SAWS has no data between the ranges of 300 and 450 yards and notes that the dropoff in effectiveness occurs somewhere between the two). After this point, though, simplex ammunition becomes more effective.

So, to sum up, duplex ammunition provides better suppression at classical combat ranges, without much, if any, degradation of accuracy or hit probability, but is insufficient for longer ranges.

Just some random food for thought.

Dude, CTA chambered sidearm firing duplex munitions. It sounds batshit as all fuck, but would kickass for a space-future PDW, sidearm, bullet-hose or sommat.

[Aqizithiuda]

Okay, so based on a very quick skim read of the Salvo II and SAWS studies, duplex ammunition offers more hits per targets and more close misses than simplex ammunition at ranges below 450 yards (SAWS has no data between the ranges of 300 and 450 yards and notes that the dropoff in effectiveness occurs somewhere between the two). After this point, though, simplex ammunition becomes more effective.

So, to sum up, duplex ammunition provides better suppression at classical combat ranges, without much, if any, degradation of accuracy or hit probability, but is insufficient for longer ranges.

Just some random food for thought.

Dude, CTA chambered sidearm firing duplex munitions. It sounds batshit as all fuck, but would kickass for a space-future PDW, sidearm, bullet-hose or sommat.

Salvo squeezebore, caseless, gas delayed, bullpup, integrally suppressed rifle in 2010.

[Bezombia]

Integrally suppressed AN-94.

/thread

[Khornatenreich]

Dude, CTA chambered sidearm firing duplex munitions. It sounds batshit as all fuck, but would kickass for a space-future PDW, sidearm, bullet-hose or sommat.

Salvo squeezebore, caseless, gas delayed, bullpup, integrally suppressed rifle in 2010.

Skadi's frozen tits................... One of the polymer addicts (notyoubeno) on this thread, of whom, I may or may not be hinting-at/and-or suggesting that Prem, Colt, Anemos, RB were to handle it.......well.....

[Bezombia]

Wait a minute. A revolver couldn't fire 7.62x54R, 7.62x39, and 7.62x25 interchangeably because they have different case dimensions other than length.

Back to 7.62x25/35/45.

[Aqizithiuda]

Salvo squeezebore, caseless, gas delayed, bullpup, integrally suppressed rifle in 2010.

Skadi's frozen tits................... One of the polymer addicts (notyoubeno) on this thread, of whom, I may or may not be hinting-at/and-or suggesting that Prem, Colt, Anemos, RB were to handle it.......well.....

It's probably going to be one loading and configuration for the 8mm version of my caseless rifle.

[Khornatenreich]

Skadi's frozen tits................... One of the polymer addicts (notyoubeno) on this thread, of whom, I may or may not be hinting-at/and-or suggesting that Prem, Colt, Anemos, RB were to handle it.......well.....

It's probably going to be one loading and configuration for the 8mm version of my caseless rifle.

I cannae' wait to see it. Oh, I've decided, Khornatenreich space-age support rifle/SAW/LMG gear'll probably be influenced by the G11-ish salvo rifle. For all the eighties scifi-spacepunk POWER!


This is the German abomination of which I speak:

[Aqizithiuda]

It's probably going to be one loading and configuration for the 8mm version of my caseless rifle.

I cannae' wait to see it. Oh, I've decided, Khornatenreich space-age support rifle/SAW/LMG gear'll probably be influenced by the G11-ish salvo rifle.


This is the German abomination of which I speak:

Expect it sometime in the next year or two .

Good choice there!