NS infantry discussion thread. Mark II

[Premislyd]

It's suppose to have a wide neck diameter for all dat extra powder

*bullet falls out of case*

I don't see how.

[Gallia-]

A nice way to do it would be like the Russians in WWII. Build a gun that can fire your enemies' ammunition, but they can't fire yours.
7.63x25mm Mauser can be safely fired in a 7.62x25mm Tokarev weapon, but not the other way around.

They still do that with their mortars, I believe; I heard they chose 81mm as their standard mortar calibre after NATO/the US (can't remember which atm) standardised 80mm.

Then again, I could be chatting out of my rectum.

The Soviets rounded up.

The West rounded down.

Both calibers are derived from the British 3" Stokes mortar. The Stokes was 81.5mm, or 3.2". The 81/82mm thing appeared in the mid 1930s if not earlier, so it predated NATO by at two decades.

[Aqizithiuda]

*bullet falls out of case*

I don't see how.

Because, if you're hold half a grain or so of powder between the bullet and the neck, you're solely relying on glue and the tiny contact point between the canalure and the crimp.

Since the powder will have give, the bullet will be able to yaw within the neck, potentially breaking the glue and allowing the bullet to be bushes back into the case or, in an extreme case, fall out.

Due to the lack of grip, pressure quite possibly won't build up, leading to the bullet being stuck in the barrel in the worst case scenario.

[Premislyd]

I don't see how.

Because, if you're hold half a grain or so of powder between the bullet and the neck, you're solely relying on glue and the tiny contact point between the canalure and the crimp.

Since the powder will have give, the bullet will be able to yaw within the neck, potentially breaking the glue and allowing the bullet to be bushes back into the case or, in an extreme case, fall out.

Due to the lack of grip, pressure quite possibly won't build up, leading to the bullet being stuck in the barrel in the worst case scenario.

And simply having a thicker neck wall wouldn't alleviate any of this

[Aqizithiuda]

Because, if you're hold half a grain or so of powder between the bullet and the neck, you're solely relying on glue and the tiny contact point between the canalure and the crimp.

Since the powder will have give, the bullet will be able to yaw within the neck, potentially breaking the glue and allowing the bullet to be bushes back into the case or, in an extreme case, fall out.

Due to the lack of grip, pressure quite possibly won't build up, leading to the bullet being stuck in the barrel in the worst case scenario.

And simply having a thicker neck wall wouldn't alleviate any of this

Not unless the neck contacts the projectile itself, which is impossible if the neck is meant to contain propellant.

[Mozria]

Repost number three:

What kind of a mechanism is it in which the bolt handle for a bullpup bolt-action rifle is extended by way of an attached arm to being on the forend of the firearm? I know I've seen this before on something. I think it was an AMR, but I'm unsure about that.

[Bezombia]

Repost number three:

What kind of a mechanism is it in which the bolt handle for a bullpup bolt-action rifle is extended by way of an attached arm to being on the forend of the firearm? I know I've seen this before on something. I think it was an AMR, but I'm unsure about that.

When you've reposted it this much, assume that people have seen it already.

[Purpelia]

Instead of being a three-part unit like the K-31 bolt (firing pin enclosure/bolt end piece, bolt sleeve, bolt), it is a two-part unit made up of only the bolt and the bolt sleeve. Rotation of the sleeve would be manual, which would allow for greater control of the locking if the mechanism is a bit gummy and stiff. However, as the bolt itself would be pressed into the cams in the sleeve as it is telescoped over the breech, it would be forced to lock as the sleeve does.

Due to the locking being both at the breech and outside of it, the mechanism would be very strong and resistant to detonation in the event of a barrel obstruction, similarly to how the robustness of the Arisaka rifle line led to their ability to withstand squib loads and other nasty things. However, this design is specifically intended to handle high-pressure loads and is supposed to have been ovr-designed for such RP-wise. Would it work for this, or should I just do something more conventional?

˙ǝsɐɔ sıɥʇ uı ʇı ɥʇɹoʍ ǝq ʇsnɾ ʎɐɯ ʇןoq ʇıun-ǝןƃuıs ɐ puɐ ƃuıʞɔoן ʇuɐpunpǝɹ ɥʇıʍ ɯǝʇsʎs ɐ ƃuıʌɐɥ ʎןdɯıs ʇɐɥʇ ƃuıǝǝs 'ʎɹɐssǝɔǝu ʎןןɐǝɹ sı sıɥʇ ɟo ʎuɐ ɟı ǝɹns ʇou ɯ,ı ɥƃnoɥʇןɐ

If you want a really simplified K31 action you should look at my rifle. The bolt is a one piece affair aside from a screw on cap on the end for assembly with a floating firing pin inside. And the locking lugs are machined right into it. And the charging handle attaches to the bolt body directly without any sleeves. Much simpler.

[Premislyd]

And simply having a thicker neck wall wouldn't alleviate any of this

Not unless the neck contacts the projectile itself, which is impossible if the neck is meant to contain propellant.

It's okay. It's only a prototype anyways

[Puzikas]

I find it funny that here an argument for retaining 7.62x39 is "so we can resupply from fallen Russians", and I guess that even those Russian troops stationed on Finno-Russian border probably have AK-74s or newer.

Mostly AK-74Ms but a few units have AKs in 7.62x39.
Its just unit dependent.

[Black Hand]

Rifleman Training program questions
I'm thinking that after soldiers become comfortable basic marksmanship (adjust sights hit target at X range) that I should have the Recruits zero their rifles at the Combat setting (300M) and force them to engage targets at 25, 50, 75, 100, 150, 200, 350, 400, 500, and 600 Meters without adjusting the sights for distance or windage. I'll force them to do the same with optics units on both Zoom settings(2.5/4.5X) as well.
All rifle training will be done right handed only because Conformity and practicality.

However would it be worth while to train both left and right hand shooting with pistols as half of the reason to have a sidearms (especially for pilots and vehicle crews who are quite likely injured in any situation where they need their sidearm) is as an emergency backup.

This is rifleman training, not spec ops training/shock troops.
I guess that the windage and optics part would be a good final test, but as far as actual battles go, I don't think the wind is going to change dramatically during the battle.
But difficult testing is still good testing.
You should also time them.
They should get a chance to know what sort of terrain they'l be engaging in though.
For shock troop testing, I would stuff them in a casket and open it up in a "battlefield" they have not yet observed.

Yes this is rifleman
Optics are standard issue so The fact that they train with Iron sights first is merely to reinforce the basics.
(also I mislabeled my optics. its 1.5/4.5X not 2.5/4.5X) Wind is dependent on the range though given the environment for my infantry training center high winds are a given. The whole point of my marksmanship tests is that it gets soldiers adapted and comfortable with all of the equipment that both their armor and weapons allow them but removes the crutch by forcing them to test and finish both with and without all of those advantages.

Special forces training? for Enlightened at least(my combat Special forces, more akin to SEAL's and Ranger analogs) have very harsh training. for the final test, Special forces trainee's are dropped from aircraft over the test zone with minimal supplies and limited simulation ammo and are hunted by Instructors leading two assault(airborne/naval) infantry company's. (since my Special forces units are trained by platoon this is a serious numerical disadvantage). They must coordinate rendezvous, establish some form of FOB, and perform a variety of tasks (no two final tests are ever the same) and then extract. All hits are logged by the soldiers armor and the prevailing battlefield network. all Casualties are "permanent" and and result in the failure to pass of said Trainee (wounds are allowed as due to the suits power armor may be accurately simulated in regards to immobility) the final test takes place over the course of multiple weeks during which the trainee's must evade patrols, eliminate a variety of objectives, maintain a communication with command and coordinate successful extraction. The opposing force has access to section of artillery as well as 2 flights of both attack and transport Rotor-aircraft. (explosive kills are assigned using Sensor rounds that Ping Armor units within a given radius and Assign wounds accordingly.) and must protect those assets accordingly there are no restrictions as to their behavior and or tactics they may use. they simply must eliminate as many of the trainee's as possible while protecting strategic and tactical objectives (strategic objectives such as a small signal corp relay installation, supply depots, Bridges, roads and railways, a and tactical objectives such as their motor pool, their own supplies, aircraft, artillery and such)

[Black Hand]

I find it funny that here an argument for retaining 7.62x39 is "so we can resupply from fallen Russians", and I guess that even those Russian troops stationed on Finno-Russian border probably have AK-74s or newer.

Mostly AK-74Ms but a few units have AKs in 7.62x39.
Its just unit dependent.

Wouldn't it be logical to Update them to the AK-103 standard (or am I overlooking something that can't be converted.)

[Spreewerke]

Mostly AK-74Ms but a few units have AKs in 7.62x39.
Its just unit dependent.

Wouldn't it be logical to Update them to the AK-103 standard (or am I overlooking something that can't be converted.)

I believe he just said "AKs" as a catch-all since the AKM and AK-103 are likely both being used.

[Black Hand]

Wouldn't it be logical to Update them to the AK-103 standard (or am I overlooking something that can't be converted.)

I believe he just said "AKs" as a catch-all since the AKM and AK-103 are likely both being used.

Of course. that makes sense.
the question remains am I overlooking anything that would make it impossible to convert an AKM to an AK-103

[Bezombia]

I believe he just said "AKs" as a catch-all since the AKM and AK-103 are likely both being used.

Of course. that makes sense.
the question remains am I overlooking anything that would make it impossible to convert an AKM to an AK-103

Anything can be converted to anything if you use enough cosmoline.

[Spreewerke]

I believe he just said "AKs" as a catch-all since the AKM and AK-103 are likely both being used.

Of course. that makes sense.
the question remains am I overlooking anything that would make it impossible to convert an AKM to an AK-103

Gas port, primarily. AKM has a 45-degree gas port whereas the '103 has a 90-degree port. I guess you could just have an AK-103 with a 45-degree gas block, though. The internal parts will not be the same. Bolt stem diameter is different, trunnion is appropriately different (because of the different bolt construction), bolt-carrier itself will be different (due to bolt stem, yet again)...

You could put an AKM in AK-103 clothes, though. That's what the SLR-107 series is, except they went ahead and made them with a 90-degree gas port since they are/were new-production.

[Black Hand]

Of course. that makes sense.
the question remains am I overlooking anything that would make it impossible to convert an AKM to an AK-103

Gas port, primarily. AKM has a 45-degree gas port whereas the '103 has a 90-degree port. I guess you could just have an AK-103 with a 45-degree gas block, though. The internal parts will not be the same. Bolt stem diameter is different, trunnion is appropriately different (because of the different bolt construction), bolt-carrier itself will be different (due to bolt stem, yet again)...

You could put an AKM in AK-103 clothes, though. That's what the SLR-107 series is, except they went ahead and made them with a 90-degree gas port since they are/were new-production.

If the barrel ever ended up being replaced couldn't the 90-degree port be used instead?
So the parts wouldn't be interchangeable but it would be Functionally identical?

[Spreewerke]

Gas port, primarily. AKM has a 45-degree gas port whereas the '103 has a 90-degree port. I guess you could just have an AK-103 with a 45-degree gas block, though. The internal parts will not be the same. Bolt stem diameter is different, trunnion is appropriately different (because of the different bolt construction), bolt-carrier itself will be different (due to bolt stem, yet again)...

You could put an AKM in AK-103 clothes, though. That's what the SLR-107 series is, except they went ahead and made them with a 90-degree gas port since they are/were new-production.

If the barrel ever ended up being replaced couldn't the 90-degree port be used instead?
So the parts wouldn't be interchangeable but it would be Functionally identical?

If you replaced the barrel, yeah: the gas port is in the barrel, so if you replaced the gas block with it, sure. If you replaced the barrel, you could probably replace the barrel trunnion, too, and let it use AK-103 internals, but then you're stuck with a bunch of AKM internal parts. Replacing the barrel and such would probably be more labor-intensive than just issuing the next batch of ~$225.00 AK-103s, though.

[Black Hand]

If the barrel ever ended up being replaced couldn't the 90-degree port be used instead?
So the parts wouldn't be interchangeable but it would be Functionally identical?

If you replaced the barrel, yeah: the gas port is in the barrel, so if you replaced the gas block with it, sure. If you replaced the barrel, you could probably replace the barrel trunnion, too, and let it use AK-103 internals, but then you're stuck with a bunch of AKM internal parts. Replacing the barrel and such would probably be more labor-intensive than just issuing the next batch of ~$225.00 AK-103s, though.

I figured the barrel would eventually be replaced at the end of it's service life.
Good point, at which point Russia being Russia would pack it with Cosmoline and throw said AKM into a warehouse to wait out the rest of eternity.

[Spreewerke]

If you replaced the barrel, yeah: the gas port is in the barrel, so if you replaced the gas block with it, sure. If you replaced the barrel, you could probably replace the barrel trunnion, too, and let it use AK-103 internals, but then you're stuck with a bunch of AKM internal parts. Replacing the barrel and such would probably be more labor-intensive than just issuing the next batch of ~$225.00 AK-103s, though.

I figured the barrel would eventually be replaced at the end of it's service life.
Good point, at which point Russia being Russia would pack it with Cosmoline and throw said AKM into a warehouse to wait out the rest of eternity.

For what it's worth, Puzikas encountered some AKMs in Chechen hands from the 1960s, if I remember correctly, while serving in Chechnya.

[The balkens]

I figured the barrel would eventually be replaced at the end of it's service life.
Good point, at which point Russia being Russia would pack it with Cosmoline and throw said AKM into a warehouse to wait out the rest of eternity.

For what it's worth, Puzikas encountered some AKMs in Chechen hands from the 1960s, if I remember correctly, while serving in Chechnya.

Puz was a soldier?

[Spreewerke]

For what it's worth, Puzikas encountered some AKMs in Chechen hands from the 1960s, if I remember correctly, while serving in Chechnya.

Puz was a soldier?

He was a juggernaut.

[Bezombia]

Puz was a soldier?

He was a juggernaut.

He was the juggernaut.

[The balkens]

He was a juggernaut.

He was the juggernaut.

Awesomeness approved, asskicking equals authority.

[Premislyd]

For what it's worth, Puzikas encountered some AKMs in Chechen hands from the 1960s, if I remember correctly, while serving in Chechnya.

Puz was a soldier?

No.