>t. too autistic to communicate like a human
ftfy
are you saying 5.56 has a lot of recoil? a little? why are you so mad?
2 years ago
Anonymous
me on the right
2 years ago
Anonymous
POST THE FRICKING SET
2 years ago
Anonymous
Pls no
2 years ago
Anonymous
what the frick am I looking at?
2 years ago
Anonymous
We're getting to the point where AI is so good I can't tell if shit like this is real of some surreal bullshit.
Hello tourists
2 years ago
Anonymous
You can't just post one anon.
2 years ago
Anonymous
We're getting to the point where AI is so good I can't tell if shit like this is real of some surreal bullshit.
2 years ago
Anonymous
newbie.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I've been here for years and I've seen the image before but call me a newbie if you want. I don't give a frick. Could you tell the story of the image for me and the other anons who've asked?
2 years ago
Anonymous
One autist with photoshop.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Basically one dedicated autist has photoshopped a shitload of this stuff, all of very similar scenarios. It is assumed that this is an incredibly esoteric fetish, so niche that he has to make it himself.
Be glad and thankful Anon for your double father who both loves you dearly. Some unfortunate soul didn't even have one. Praise God and Lord Jesus Christ for such a gift Anon.
That is incorrect. Repeaters existed. Organ guns existed. Early semi-automatics in the form of air guns existed. And we know the founding fathers were aware of them. Pretty much none of these were mass produced however due to practical concerns or reliability issues.
Many concepts were also actively being debated as far as gun development went, but there simply wasn't the technical knowhow yet in order to do it. You can bet your life savings that it wouldn't requires more than 3 seconds to explain the concept of a cardridge to someone from 1700's because the concept itself was self evident, logical, and the expected next development, but metallurgy and chemistry hadn't yet caught up to meet this desire
Read an opinion from a guy who claimed that the biggest problem with inline recoil, or rather the height over it results in, is that you need to raise your head higher to shoot above cover, meaning you're more likely to get shot.
Realistically the height over bore difference between an AR and an AK with irons is only like .6”. If you’re willing to deviate from a 2022 Russian Army clone build and put an optic on your AK, it pretty much disappears.
I guess if you’re a big boomer you could run an M14 with iron sights and then you might see a noticeable difference.
>black neighborhoods are overpoliced
I love how the left just switches gears, making shit up to suit the current argument. The original meme used to be that white neighborhoods were overpoliced because police only cared about protecting whites. Now the left meme changed somehow? Also, studies show crime goes less reported in black neighborhoods because of the whole “no snitching” culture
The issue they always fail to acknowledge is WHY the highly policed areas are "overpoliced," which is the fact that there is more violent crime there. Yeah, more black and latin people probably do get clipped for drug possession than white people disproportionate to the rate of usage, but that's a side effect of the police being in the neighborhood trying to catch murderers and drive by shooters. Why the frick would they be wasting time and gas patrolling up and down the block in peaceful suburbs where nobody is calling them? White neighborhoods that happen to have high violent crime rates are going to get higher police presence too. It's how the frick policing works.
True. Racially focused suburbanites created this narrative that blacks neighborhoods are uniquely focused on by cops more than white neighborhoods when
1) police presence compared to crime rate shows there are more police presence per crime in wealthy neighborhoods compared to poor neighborhoods. That’s just the nature of the inverse squared law though, it doesn’t scale evenly.
2) poor white trash neigborhiods in the Deep South see the same police presence as poor black neighborhoods
>FBI only tracks crimes when there’s a conviction
I know this is some weird bait, but because there are morons here on /k/, I want to point out that this is false. Along with every other point made in the infographic
Okay, but that's what you buy a 9mm, 45 or 38 for. To have some force multiplier on you should you ever need it. Civilians have no use for AP rounds because we don't get mugged by fully decked out PMCs. I just don't understand the mindset behind that. Plinking? You gonna destroy your targets with steel ammo. Target shooting? Regular ammo does just fine. Hunting? "OH YEAH, I NEED AP ROUNDS TO KILL THE BUCK BEHIND THAT HOG BEHIND THAT MOOSE!"
Let me rephrase it in a way that even you should understand: What do you do with it that regular off-the-shelf-ammo doesn't do as well? Is it just some arts and crafts project?
2 years ago
Anonymous
>Is it just some arts and crafts project?
Painting with the blood of federal employees.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Let me rephrase it to help your mongoloid mind understand, the vast majority of people won't ever need a gun let alone an ar, by your logic no one should have either. Therefore, you're a gay.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>the vast majority of people won't ever need a gun
Can you quote me the part that you think i was advocating against having AP rounds? I'm talking, specifically and exclusively, about the time/work/effort investment. I don't see the point of going through the process of making AP rounds because i see no use for them that regular ammo doesn't cover. If you wanna make them because you enjoy the process of creating them, go ahead, but what do you do with them then?
If you have to ask why someone would need AP ammo they’re zero explanations that would be convincing for you. This is a difference in perspective and ideology at the end of the day, and the mere question indicates your inability to see it from his point of view. Perhaps start examining your internal biases and figure out why.
>the vast majority of people won't ever need a gun
Can you quote me the part that you think i was advocating against having AP rounds? I'm talking, specifically and exclusively, about the time/work/effort investment. I don't see the point of going through the process of making AP rounds because i see no use for them that regular ammo doesn't cover. If you wanna make them because you enjoy the process of creating them, go ahead, but what do you do with them then?
2 years ago
Anonymous
What do you do with any other ammo?
2 years ago
Anonymous
plinking, target shooting, hunting and just in general getting more used to shooting(to reduce flinching/stress) in case i need to defend myself or my home.
Thanks for explaining it Mr. Glowie. Pretty much this, same when people ask why you need magnified optics and plates and NVGs. If you don’t get it you don’t get it and that’s as far as it’s worth explaining.
2 years ago
Anonymous
>anyone i don't like is a 3 letter agent out to get me
2 years ago
Anonymous
Lmao I’m not insulting you, I’m saying I agree. I just think there’s also a non-negligible chance that you’re on the taxpayers’ payroll.
WRONG!
Using the names in your drawing:
Fx = F + Fz, where Fz (unmarked in your drawing) is perpendicular to F, and pointing upwards (towards the shooter’s glasses.
Fy in your drawing does not exist. If it did, it would mean that force F is greater than the force of the gun firing.
If you really want to get into it, Fz imparts torque around the center of gravity and causes the barrel to rise, which is what the straight line recoil was supposed to prevent.
I don't undestand what you're saying.
If, as you say, Fx = F + Fz
then
=> Fx = (Fx + Fy + Fz) + Fz
=> Fx = Fx + Fy +2Fz
Which make absolutely no sense.
In my drawing, the XY plane is defined by the long-wise cross-section of the stock. This means that there are only X and Y components to the force F, since the force acts only inside this plane.
>Fz imparts torque around the center of gravity and causes the barrel to rise
How could a moment M(Fz) cause a clockwise rotation in XY plane? It's literally impossible, as far as I know.
The “z” in “Fz” doesn’t indicate a force in the third dimension; it’s just a follow on term after “y” since the dude who posted the first vector pic fricked up his vectors. “Fy” doesn’t exist. The vectors are simply:
https://i.imgur.com/YTjJKVp.jpg
Reposting: forgot the pic
[...] (You) # >Force Blue = - Force White
According to vector sums, >Force Blue = Force Purple + Force Yellow
Force Purple is the recoil passed into the shooter
Force Yellow is the imparted muzzle rise
>purple + yellow = blue
And the moment is generated by yellow.
If you really want to knit-pick, the force vectors should all originate from the chamber, in front of the magazine, not from where the Burt’s rock meets the upper receiver.
You are treating the X/Y plane, in your description and in the context of the picture you posted, as of it was based on being level with the earth. This would imply that the recoil is completely dependent on the angle at which the shooter is pointing the weapon.
Since a force vector can be described by the sun of two perpendicular vectors, in your drawing, the force traveling down the but stick to the shooter’s shoulder is greater than the force of the bullet itself, which violates Newton’s third law. The equal-but-opposite force (blue) travels exactly in the opposite of the bullet (white). The blue force can then be described by two perpendicular vectors:
1). The force traveling down the but stick to the shoulder, and
2). The moment generating force, which causes the barrel to rise
2 years ago
Anonymous
Autocorrect is killing me
“But stick” = “buttstock”
“Sun” = “sum”
2 years ago
Anonymous
>in your drawing, the force traveling down the but stick to the shooter’s shoulder is greater than the force of the bullet itself, which violates Newton’s third law.
Ok, I get it now.
You're saying that the recoil force is the blue force (in your drawing), which is parallel to the ground the soldier is standing on.
In my drawing, the recoil force is the dark blue one. This force does have X and Y components (the XY plane cuts through the length of the stock).
2 years ago
Anonymous
Right. The recoil is just the equal-but-opposite force to that acting upon the bullet. (Blue in my drawing, Fx in yours). In my drawing, it appears parallel to the ground, but that is only because the shooter is shooting parallel to the ground. Blue would be a vector that is equal in magnitude but opposite in direction to the force of the bullet traveling down the barrel, so if the shooter was pointing straight up, the blue counterforce would be straight down.
The recoil can then be broken into two perpendicular vectors whose sum equals blue/Fx. One part is the force imparted directly upon the shooter via the buttstock (purple in my drawing, “F” in your drawing). The moment generating force can then be solved as SIN(sigma)*-(F_bullet), where sigma is the angle between blue and purple in my drawing.
In your drawing, Fy comes out of nowhere. (It could be viewed as the force of gravity, but that is counteracted by the shooter holding the rifle up, so it doesn’t factor in). This means that either (i) your force Fx is not equal to the force of the bullet, or, if it is, (ii) F is greater than the force of the bullet. Both cases are inconsistent with Newton’s third law.
WRONG!
Using the names in your drawing:
Fx = F + Fz, where Fz (unmarked in your drawing) is perpendicular to F, and pointing upwards (towards the shooter’s glasses.
Fy in your drawing does not exist. If it did, it would mean that force F is greater than the force of the gun firing.
If you really want to get into it, Fz imparts torque around the center of gravity and causes the barrel to rise, which is what the straight line recoil was supposed to prevent.
>Force Blue = - Force White
According to vector sums, >Force Blue = Force Purple + Force Yellow
Force Purple is the recoil passed into the shooter
Force Yellow is the imparted muzzle rise.
WRONG!
Using the names in your drawing:
Fx = F + Fz, where Fz (unmarked in your drawing) is perpendicular to F, and pointing upwards (towards the shooter’s glasses.
Fy in your drawing does not exist. If it did, it would mean that force F is greater than the force of the gun firing.
If you really want to get into it, Fz imparts torque around the center of gravity and causes the barrel to rise, which is what the straight line recoil was supposed to prevent.
(You) # >Force Blue = - Force White
According to vector sums, >Force Blue = Force Purple + Force Yellow
Force Purple is the recoil passed into the shooter
Force Yellow is the imparted muzzle rise
Damn, I've got to give you props for the effort of actually drawing a free body diagram.
Anyway, here's my take on it, having done a good few of these for my degree, not that this is done to that standard.
My diagram is essentially a precursor to yours, if you resolve out the forces, the orange force is equivalent to the F in your diagram.
Sorry, my handwriting is absolutely atrocious.
Yes, those are lowercase f with numerical subscripts. They represent forces applied by the shooter onto the gun, excluding those acting through direct contact with the shoulder.
>University of Phoenix online
Obtained at a Russel Group University, sorry to disappoint you.
2 years ago
Anonymous
But the rifle is in stasis the moment before the charge ignited, so every force must be being counteracted at the time of shooting. So the hand is not applying a counterforce that reduces recoil. And even if it did, you’re not accounting for the transfer of that force through the arm to the shoulder, which is where the rest of the force is being countered.
2 years ago
Anonymous
I wrote a whole rambling reply that got way the frick off topic, so I'm going to try again, going back to the OP.
In
https://i.imgur.com/EuvfJlR.jpg
AR fans: muh straight line recoil!
Soldiers:
the principle comment being made is that the soldier will not experience "straight-line recoil" because of the way he is holding it.
This is true. That form will result in a felt force that will need to be compensated for by arm strength if you want to avoid muzzle-flip i.e. rotation of the gun.
I misunderstood the post I was initially responding to, because, like a dumbass, I posted without reading the whole thread, and I can say that he was wrong, there is no Y component to the recoil, and so it doesn't cancel out and invalidate the OP's point.
Then your post, asking me to clarify my admittedly garbage diagram,
Wtf is this? What is f1? Or for that matter any of the other forces you marked
. I have not helped myself here. My diagram only shows forces in the torso, which does not grant the full picture of recoil absorption in the human body.
And finally, your current post . The rifle is in stasis before the charge ignites, but this does not mean it won't move after. The gun pushes the bullet out of the barrel, and this has to have an equal and opposite momentum transfer into the gun. Thankfully, the gun is heavier, so it moves much slower than the bullet, but it's still in contact with the hands and shoulder, both of which resist its backward movement.
This decreases the rearward momentum of the gun over time, and momentum changing over time requires a force to cause it, the force of the shoulder and hands resisting it.
You are totally correct that the hands merely transfer force into the shoulder, and it was foolish of me to miss that, so the hands are only really compensating for muzzle-flip.
Anyway the rest of the recoil dissipation is just leaning into the recoil, to be reductionist. Obviously you can't just put your full weight into it, but you can perform subtle balance and weight shifting that means that the recoil ends up transferred through your feet, into the Earth.
556 has no kick. man up newbie, i fire 500 magnum one handed because im not a b***h, ive never shouldered a weapon in my carrier because i kill what i look at.
>it's a straight-line system to minimize muzzle climb from recoil >there's no recoil >the c-clamp is a technique to control muzzle climb from recoil
so which is it?
Unless you’re in a city, or a fighting emplacement. You should be doing almost all of your shooting from the prone. That was even more emphasized when the AR was designed. If you’ll notice, being prone, undoes what you’re talking about.
You dumb fricking Black folk there is no recoil force perpendicular to the recoil axis, that's the whole point. The fact that the recoil axis is above the shooter's shoulder contact point generates a moment which rotates the barrel upward. There is no up/down recoil force, only the moment caused by the shooter not putting the recoil axis inline with their shoulder contact point.
probably another factor for why people are gravitating towards super height over bore mounts
It's a fricking 5.56 who the frick cares about recoil?
People in gu fights.
Your understanding of physics or guns is non-existant OP
*BANG BANG BANG*
>oh nooooo my 5.56 recoil
kek
Thank you for confirming to everyone you are a nogunz moron.
>aaaaahhhhh my shoulder
>the RECOIL
>THE REEEECOIIIILLLLLLL
Post your bruises, soeyboey
the bot broke again, someone tell Demych to crawl back into the hole and fix it right this time
t. has never shot a gun
>t. too autistic to communicate like a human
ftfy
are you saying 5.56 has a lot of recoil? a little? why are you so mad?
me on the right
POST THE FRICKING SET
Pls no
what the frick am I looking at?
Hello tourists
You can't just post one anon.
We're getting to the point where AI is so good I can't tell if shit like this is real of some surreal bullshit.
newbie.
I've been here for years and I've seen the image before but call me a newbie if you want. I don't give a frick. Could you tell the story of the image for me and the other anons who've asked?
One autist with photoshop.
Basically one dedicated autist has photoshopped a shitload of this stuff, all of very similar scenarios. It is assumed that this is an incredibly esoteric fetish, so niche that he has to make it himself.
tl;dr
*BANG*
"Oh noes, I missed."
*BANGBANG*
"Gottem"
It's a 5.56 automatic rifle with magazines, it's not like it's a .308 bolt action rifle
>about recoil?
What recoil?
God I hate morons.
I will never forget my drill sgt shooting the m16 off his crotch.
Its 223, WHAT FRICKING RECOIL
you mean GIs are moronic? say it ain't so
The eternal American infantryman yearns for the Kentucky Longrifle, he just doesn’t know it yet.
It's a symbol of our culture.
Frick ya mudda
I have two dads. What now, uh?
Frick ya fadda
Be glad and thankful Anon for your double father who both loves you dearly. Some unfortunate soul didn't even have one. Praise God and Lord Jesus Christ for such a gift Anon.
Those lines you drew have no relation to anything.
First shot in the chest
Second in the head 🙂
I use it in CSGO all the time. Good tactic so obviously a soldier would do this.
>No automatic weapons
That is incorrect. Repeaters existed. Organ guns existed. Early semi-automatics in the form of air guns existed. And we know the founding fathers were aware of them. Pretty much none of these were mass produced however due to practical concerns or reliability issues.
Many concepts were also actively being debated as far as gun development went, but there simply wasn't the technical knowhow yet in order to do it. You can bet your life savings that it wouldn't requires more than 3 seconds to explain the concept of a cardridge to someone from 1700's because the concept itself was self evident, logical, and the expected next development, but metallurgy and chemistry hadn't yet caught up to meet this desire
Read an opinion from a guy who claimed that the biggest problem with inline recoil, or rather the height over it results in, is that you need to raise your head higher to shoot above cover, meaning you're more likely to get shot.
Realistically the height over bore difference between an AR and an AK with irons is only like .6”. If you’re willing to deviate from a 2022 Russian Army clone build and put an optic on your AK, it pretty much disappears.
I guess if you’re a big boomer you could run an M14 with iron sights and then you might see a noticeable difference.
> There's probably an invisible mountain of THOUSANDS of unreported murders by white people that make up the gap!
Sounds great OP
>Reality has an anti-black, anti-female bias
These people produce the most hysterical of takes
I'm starting to hate pajeets more than israelites and I didn't think that was possible
Kek'd check'd and heil'd
>trust the science NO NOT LIKE THAT
burying spiky end into your shoulder...
great idea bro...
>no recoil
heh...
Because it doesn't really matter on a 5.56.
Remember that the OG gun is picrel.
sex with AR-10
>AR15
>recoil
>black neighborhoods are overpoliced
I love how the left just switches gears, making shit up to suit the current argument. The original meme used to be that white neighborhoods were overpoliced because police only cared about protecting whites. Now the left meme changed somehow? Also, studies show crime goes less reported in black neighborhoods because of the whole “no snitching” culture
This…“I came fast like 911 in a white neighborhood” - j cole
I’ve never heard that black neighborhoods were overpoliced, this must be some new BLM meme or something some white suburban socialist made up.
The issue they always fail to acknowledge is WHY the highly policed areas are "overpoliced," which is the fact that there is more violent crime there. Yeah, more black and latin people probably do get clipped for drug possession than white people disproportionate to the rate of usage, but that's a side effect of the police being in the neighborhood trying to catch murderers and drive by shooters. Why the frick would they be wasting time and gas patrolling up and down the block in peaceful suburbs where nobody is calling them? White neighborhoods that happen to have high violent crime rates are going to get higher police presence too. It's how the frick policing works.
True. Racially focused suburbanites created this narrative that blacks neighborhoods are uniquely focused on by cops more than white neighborhoods when
1) police presence compared to crime rate shows there are more police presence per crime in wealthy neighborhoods compared to poor neighborhoods. That’s just the nature of the inverse squared law though, it doesn’t scale evenly.
2) poor white trash neigborhiods in the Deep South see the same police presence as poor black neighborhoods
> Camp Rogain
The Norwood Reaper Drone strikes again
>FBI only tracks crimes when there’s a conviction
I know this is some weird bait, but because there are morons here on /k/, I want to point out that this is false. Along with every other point made in the infographic
that's because it's a toy rifle in .223 rather than the original in .308
To be fair he's shouldering that like a fricking moron. Exaggerates your point i guess.
>Be 60 year old woman
>Us BJJ on 5 young urban scholars
Wow way to be an ableist piece of shit.
>civilian makes steel core AP ammo
somebody please explain to me, on a realistic and rational level, why someone would do this?
possibility of coming into armed conflict with armored opponents.
Okay, but that's what you buy a 9mm, 45 or 38 for. To have some force multiplier on you should you ever need it. Civilians have no use for AP rounds because we don't get mugged by fully decked out PMCs. I just don't understand the mindset behind that. Plinking? You gonna destroy your targets with steel ammo. Target shooting? Regular ammo does just fine. Hunting? "OH YEAH, I NEED AP ROUNDS TO KILL THE BUCK BEHIND THAT HOG BEHIND THAT MOOSE!"
>need
you're a gay
Let me rephrase it in a way that even you should understand: What do you do with it that regular off-the-shelf-ammo doesn't do as well? Is it just some arts and crafts project?
>Is it just some arts and crafts project?
Painting with the blood of federal employees.
Let me rephrase it to help your mongoloid mind understand, the vast majority of people won't ever need a gun let alone an ar, by your logic no one should have either. Therefore, you're a gay.
>the vast majority of people won't ever need a gun
Can you quote me the part that you think i was advocating against having AP rounds? I'm talking, specifically and exclusively, about the time/work/effort investment. I don't see the point of going through the process of making AP rounds because i see no use for them that regular ammo doesn't cover. If you wanna make them because you enjoy the process of creating them, go ahead, but what do you do with them then?
If you have to ask why someone would need AP ammo they’re zero explanations that would be convincing for you. This is a difference in perspective and ideology at the end of the day, and the mere question indicates your inability to see it from his point of view. Perhaps start examining your internal biases and figure out why.
read
What do you do with any other ammo?
plinking, target shooting, hunting and just in general getting more used to shooting(to reduce flinching/stress) in case i need to defend myself or my home.
Okay, so that's the reason.
Thanks for explaining it Mr. Glowie. Pretty much this, same when people ask why you need magnified optics and plates and NVGs. If you don’t get it you don’t get it and that’s as far as it’s worth explaining.
>anyone i don't like is a 3 letter agent out to get me
Lmao I’m not insulting you, I’m saying I agree. I just think there’s also a non-negligible chance that you’re on the taxpayers’ payroll.
>Civilians have no use for AP rounds because we don't get mugged by fully decked out PMCs
Yet
>Civilians have no use for AP rounds
your point being?
it's cool and I want em
I hope he is wearing a respirator
This is straight line recoil, moron
Do you understand levers and moments?
This is assuming the forces and distances at play are all low (which they are).
>uses math and science to call OP a no brain homosexual
doing gods work
WRONG!
Using the names in your drawing:
Fx = F + Fz, where Fz (unmarked in your drawing) is perpendicular to F, and pointing upwards (towards the shooter’s glasses.
Fy in your drawing does not exist. If it did, it would mean that force F is greater than the force of the gun firing.
If you really want to get into it, Fz imparts torque around the center of gravity and causes the barrel to rise, which is what the straight line recoil was supposed to prevent.
I don't undestand what you're saying.
If, as you say, Fx = F + Fz
then
=> Fx = (Fx + Fy + Fz) + Fz
=> Fx = Fx + Fy +2Fz
Which make absolutely no sense.
In my drawing, the XY plane is defined by the long-wise cross-section of the stock. This means that there are only X and Y components to the force F, since the force acts only inside this plane.
>Fz imparts torque around the center of gravity and causes the barrel to rise
How could a moment M(Fz) cause a clockwise rotation in XY plane? It's literally impossible, as far as I know.
The “z” in “Fz” doesn’t indicate a force in the third dimension; it’s just a follow on term after “y” since the dude who posted the first vector pic fricked up his vectors. “Fy” doesn’t exist. The vectors are simply:
>purple + yellow = blue
And the moment is generated by yellow.
If you really want to knit-pick, the force vectors should all originate from the chamber, in front of the magazine, not from where the Burt’s rock meets the upper receiver.
You are treating the X/Y plane, in your description and in the context of the picture you posted, as of it was based on being level with the earth. This would imply that the recoil is completely dependent on the angle at which the shooter is pointing the weapon.
Since a force vector can be described by the sun of two perpendicular vectors, in your drawing, the force traveling down the but stick to the shooter’s shoulder is greater than the force of the bullet itself, which violates Newton’s third law. The equal-but-opposite force (blue) travels exactly in the opposite of the bullet (white). The blue force can then be described by two perpendicular vectors:
1). The force traveling down the but stick to the shoulder, and
2). The moment generating force, which causes the barrel to rise
Autocorrect is killing me
“But stick” = “buttstock”
“Sun” = “sum”
>in your drawing, the force traveling down the but stick to the shooter’s shoulder is greater than the force of the bullet itself, which violates Newton’s third law.
Ok, I get it now.
You're saying that the recoil force is the blue force (in your drawing), which is parallel to the ground the soldier is standing on.
In my drawing, the recoil force is the dark blue one. This force does have X and Y components (the XY plane cuts through the length of the stock).
Right. The recoil is just the equal-but-opposite force to that acting upon the bullet. (Blue in my drawing, Fx in yours). In my drawing, it appears parallel to the ground, but that is only because the shooter is shooting parallel to the ground. Blue would be a vector that is equal in magnitude but opposite in direction to the force of the bullet traveling down the barrel, so if the shooter was pointing straight up, the blue counterforce would be straight down.
The recoil can then be broken into two perpendicular vectors whose sum equals blue/Fx. One part is the force imparted directly upon the shooter via the buttstock (purple in my drawing, “F” in your drawing). The moment generating force can then be solved as SIN(sigma)*-(F_bullet), where sigma is the angle between blue and purple in my drawing.
In your drawing, Fy comes out of nowhere. (It could be viewed as the force of gravity, but that is counteracted by the shooter holding the rifle up, so it doesn’t factor in). This means that either (i) your force Fx is not equal to the force of the bullet, or, if it is, (ii) F is greater than the force of the bullet. Both cases are inconsistent with Newton’s third law.
>Force Blue = - Force White
According to vector sums,
>Force Blue = Force Purple + Force Yellow
Force Purple is the recoil passed into the shooter
Force Yellow is the imparted muzzle rise.
Reposting: forgot the pic
(You) #
>Force Blue = - Force White
According to vector sums,
>Force Blue = Force Purple + Force Yellow
Force Purple is the recoil passed into the shooter
Force Yellow is the imparted muzzle rise
Force yellow is literally just the moment caused by force purple. It's not the Y component of force purple (which is the recoil).
You fricking moron
Nice freebody diagram
Damn, I've got to give you props for the effort of actually drawing a free body diagram.
Anyway, here's my take on it, having done a good few of these for my degree, not that this is done to that standard.
My diagram is essentially a precursor to yours, if you resolve out the forces, the orange force is equivalent to the F in your diagram.
Wtf is this? What is f1? Or for that matter any of the other forces you marked
Sorry, my handwriting is absolutely atrocious.
Yes, those are lowercase f with numerical subscripts. They represent forces applied by the shooter onto the gun, excluding those acting through direct contact with the shoulder.
Obtained at a Russel Group University, sorry to disappoint you.
But the rifle is in stasis the moment before the charge ignited, so every force must be being counteracted at the time of shooting. So the hand is not applying a counterforce that reduces recoil. And even if it did, you’re not accounting for the transfer of that force through the arm to the shoulder, which is where the rest of the force is being countered.
I wrote a whole rambling reply that got way the frick off topic, so I'm going to try again, going back to the OP.
In
the principle comment being made is that the soldier will not experience "straight-line recoil" because of the way he is holding it.
This is true. That form will result in a felt force that will need to be compensated for by arm strength if you want to avoid muzzle-flip i.e. rotation of the gun.
I misunderstood the post I was initially responding to, because, like a dumbass, I posted without reading the whole thread, and I can say that he was wrong, there is no Y component to the recoil, and so it doesn't cancel out and invalidate the OP's point.
Then your post, asking me to clarify my admittedly garbage diagram,
. I have not helped myself here. My diagram only shows forces in the torso, which does not grant the full picture of recoil absorption in the human body.
And finally, your current post . The rifle is in stasis before the charge ignites, but this does not mean it won't move after. The gun pushes the bullet out of the barrel, and this has to have an equal and opposite momentum transfer into the gun. Thankfully, the gun is heavier, so it moves much slower than the bullet, but it's still in contact with the hands and shoulder, both of which resist its backward movement.
This decreases the rearward momentum of the gun over time, and momentum changing over time requires a force to cause it, the force of the shoulder and hands resisting it.
You are totally correct that the hands merely transfer force into the shoulder, and it was foolish of me to miss that, so the hands are only really compensating for muzzle-flip.
Anyway the rest of the recoil dissipation is just leaning into the recoil, to be reductionist. Obviously you can't just put your full weight into it, but you can perform subtle balance and weight shifting that means that the recoil ends up transferred through your feet, into the Earth.
>University of Phoenix online
stocks on ar15s are basically a forced meme because of the buffer tube.
even 10.5s are light enough to shoot without needing to use the stock
556 has no kick. man up newbie, i fire 500 magnum one handed because im not a b***h, ive never shouldered a weapon in my carrier because i kill what i look at.
why are morons itt talking about recoil?
because we recoil at the sight of you
most moronic thread on /k/ right now, this kid really thinks guns recoil down
You're not the brightest, are you?
moron
That buttstock is nowhere near his shoulder pocket.
POG!
/k/ is so stupid
>He's using elbow pads
>5.56
>recoil
@55666359
Nice bait.
>it's a straight-line system to minimize muzzle climb from recoil
>there's no recoil
>the c-clamp is a technique to control muzzle climb from recoil
so which is it?
Yeah armor + manlet will do that. One of the reasons why they moved towards the adjustable stocks.
>Soldiers:
caring what zogbots have to say
have you never shot an ar before
Unless you’re in a city, or a fighting emplacement. You should be doing almost all of your shooting from the prone. That was even more emphasized when the AR was designed. If you’ll notice, being prone, undoes what you’re talking about.
Shut your Black person mouth lmao
ar = null and void
Do you really thing the fricking bolt Tokyo Drifts inside the stock?
Some of you Black folk never tried to shoulder a rifle with an IBA on and it shows.
You dumb fricking Black folk there is no recoil force perpendicular to the recoil axis, that's the whole point. The fact that the recoil axis is above the shooter's shoulder contact point generates a moment which rotates the barrel upward. There is no up/down recoil force, only the moment caused by the shooter not putting the recoil axis inline with their shoulder contact point.