Is there still a place for submachine guns in modern military use in the age of carbines and short barreled assault rifles?
Is there still a place for submachine guns in modern military use in the age of carbines and short barreled assault rifles?
Is there still a place for submachine guns in modern military use in the age of carbines and short barreled assault rifles?
yeah, just chamber it in 5.56
Excuse me if I'm wrong, but isn't the entire point of a submachine gun that they're chambered for pistol ammunition?
The point is to have controllable full-auto fire. The fact that they use pistol ammunition is just a coincidence of what humans are capable of handling. If we get good exosuits or if we're dealing with some ayylmao species far stronger than us, then SMGs could have far more powerful cartridges.
.223 is bad for just about everything, it's worthless
inside of 300m, 300blacked/x39 is better
outside of 300m, 6.8, 308, etc is better
to look cool
>you see, Jack, if you extend your handguard to the muzzle, it doubles as a suppressor.
correct, actually. KAC made the suppressors for the DOE that ran the length of the A2 handguard
I think it’s cool just say submachine gun.
relegated to niche weapon role but i love them
Yeah, pretty much this. They’re cool and a lot of fun to shoot. But obsoleted for the most part by the advent of assault rifles, and obsoleted thoroughly by 300 blackout. Not useless by any means, not even close, just that there are guns now that do everything better.
>and obsoleted thoroughly by 300 blackout.
How so? .300 BLK doesn't really offer much more in subsonic performance for the large increase in cost per round.
300 blackout subsonic has more energy than most popular pistol calibers (~500ft*lbs vs ~350-450ft*lbs for 9mm/40), with a much higher BC bullet, longer effective range, and wider expansion on account of the extra length. Not to mention full parts compatibility with 5.56 assault rifles, and the ability to switch to supers with a mag change. It’s just a far more versatile and effective chambering for conventional pattern rifles. MP7s, mp9s, and other non-conventional layouts are a different story.
True, it’s more expensive, but this category of guns is already relegated to specialist roles with low round counts anyways.
Do you consider PDWs like the MP7 and P90, that were made specifically to address the problem of submachine guns in normal pistol calibers being less than ideal for use out to the ranges that military firefights typically happen at along with failing to penetrate kevlar armor intended for shrapnel protection. to be submachine guns? If not, then there really isn't a place for them outside of maybe some niche use that some special forces group can come up with that doesn't concern anyone else in the military.
PDWs that can be smaller/lighter than any assault rifle can get without becoming horrifically impractical.
Also low recoil/noise/over-penetration for SWAT teams to go in and take out people inside a building with maximum precision and minimal collateral damage.
Yeah I know they have used among police forces facing unarmored threats hence the question about their use among modern military forces
Yes if you consider special forces. No for the average infantryman. Perhaps for rear echelon troops who won't see combat or those who are in vehicles
do any modern spec ops kit out with SMGs though?
Short barrel assault rifles seem to be the meta
SF guys seem to love the MP7
HK doesn't deserve that love after their sperg out against the P90
ok
Wut? The MP7 is objectively the better gun given the actual use case that PDWs were meant for.
>links an absolutely moronic take which demonstrates exactly how not to use full auto
If you're mag dumping into someone and only taking your finger off the trigger when you see them react, then you're going to be wasting a few rounds simply due to the time it takes for you to react and remove your finger from the trigger, not to mention the time it takes for you to notice their reaction as a reaction. There's a reason proper full auto use is short controlled bursts rather than holding the trigger and dumping ammo until you see the result you want to see.
>The MP7 is objectively the better gun given the actual use case that PDWs were meant for.
Then why the Krauts derail the whole NATO PDW trials over the MP7 not being selected?
>Then why the Krauts derail the whole NATO PDW trials over the objectively better gun not being selected?
Are you moronic?
it's literally what happened, the 5.7 outperformed the 4.6 in testing, but kraut feefees got hurt so the whole program went nowhere
NATO has since adopted 5.7x28mm in March 2021 as its PDW round.
Pity it's 20 years too fricking late to matter. You've got a lot of newer, better rounds. I'd rather take the new 7.5 Czech as pistol/PDW round over the 5.7.
>non-logistic constrained systems
Well, yes, that's the point. Glowies feel like X caliber gives them a specific advantage, and the gub'ment breaks out the checkbook. That's a luxury the average cafeteria-cleaner doesn't have, courtesy of the bean counters. otherwise every forklift jockey, trugg monkey or slop pusher would rock a .300 BLK auto carbine. Plus, this part
>rounds that aren't part of the existing logistical train
isn't 100% accurate. One of the specific requirements for most of the gucci exotics was to recycle as much of the existing M4 innards as possible.
Imagine being unable to read and commenting on things. If you weren't illiterate, you'd have noticed the comments were centered around PDW rounds being unable to reliably incapacitate in a few rounds, which necessitates spraying the magazine into the target until you finally hit CNS with your tiny hole poking machine. You can use a controlled burst with a real round because it will reliably stop the target, which isn't the case with PDW rounds because their terminal performance is fricking terrible. I'm sure you can provide evidence from people who have multiple bodies to their name that contradict this if you want to defend PDWs for anything other then VIP protection where you have to conceal your weapons, and even then a SBR is almost always a better choice.
So you're saying that they like the ability to carry them because they're light as long as they don't expect to do any killing, which perfectly aligns with what I said. A PDW is also not going to be quiet, because the majority of the noise from a weapon comes from it breaking the sonic barrier, and if you're going to limit your velocity like that, you want a heavy bullet, not 4.6 or 5.7 which are both very light rounds that require moving quickly to do anything significant. Back in the day before SBRs and modern rounds intended for subsonic usage like .300 Blackout, there would be an edge case for a supressed MP5 or other weapon firing a subsonic pistol round since they're weighty bullets which allow better performance with subsonics then 5.56, but even that is no longer the case.
>If you weren't illiterate, you'd have noticed the comments were centered around PDW rounds being unable to reliably incapacitate in a few rounds, which necessitates spraying the magazine into the target until you finally hit CNS with your tiny hole poking machine.
Why the frick would I or anyone else care about someone's opinion pertaining to firing a gun on full auto, when they blatantly demonstrate a lack of understanding of the basic rules of effectively using full auto? You might as well be referencing Jamal off the street who bought an autosear for his Glock off Wish. Having killed someone doesn't mean jack shit for knowledge of effective weapon handling.
>just fire controlled bursts, bro
>nah, don't worry about the fact that it has good odds of not incapacitating the target, bro
>once you hit someone, they have to stop shooting at you, thats how it works in airsoft, bro
>if you get killed because Ahmed shrugged off a couple of rounds of 4.7 to the chest long enough to dome you, complain to Saint Michael at the gates he was cheating, bro
Having killed multiple people does tend to make you an authority on the stopping characteristics of the round, and you've yet to produce any evidence that suggests that PDW rounds are good at killing people.
>>nah, don't worry about the fact that it has good odds of not incapacitating the target, bro
Again, these "odds" are based off someone who doesn't know how to employ full auto, and is going to end up wasting ammo simply due to the reality of reaction time. A reaction time of .2 seconds is in the normal range for esports gamers who only need to worry about lightly clicking a button while playing a game, and under those circumstances and given the rate of fire of an MP7 they'd still end up firing 3 additional rounds (with a high probability of that being 4 rounds with a P90) in the time it takes for them to react in whatever game they're playing. Add in the reality of stress in combat and squeezing the trigger on a firearm with pounds of pressure rather than just clicking a button and you could easily see people who went down after 2 rounds "taking" 7-8 rounds or more simply due to the time it takes for someone to react and take their finger off the trigger.
Once again, you are focusing on the mechanics of full auto usage, and not the actual problem. A controlled burst of 3 to 5 rounds of 5.56 is reliable at stopping a target because of the terminal performance that it has. A controlled burst of 4.6 is substantially less likely to incapacitate the target because of the poor effect on target it has, especially if you're using an AP round which is the nominal benefit of an PDW even if they can't punch through modern armor any better then a rifle can. Now, you're welcome to move onto the second target with a 20% chance of the first one gunning down your entire team as they push through the door before they finally realize they're dead, but why are you going to take this risk when you can use a rifle round out of an SBR and bring that chance down to 2%? PDWs are an outmoded concept and your harping on about the usage of full auto doesn't change the fact that PDWs are less reliable at taking a target out of the fight to an unacceptable level.
>and not the actual problem.
You're assuming there's actually a problem rather than just junk data coming from people not understanding how to use full auto and mashing the trigger until they see a reaction, considering that's exactly what the source of the data talks about doing. Especially considering it isn't like grunts burning through ammo due to poor discipline when using full auto hasn't been a known problem since at least the late 70s when the US Government first went ahead with developing the M16A2 with a burst mode as a solution to that exact problem.
To add, if this shit was actually a real problem rather than just a user issue pertaining to people not understanding the correct way to use full auto, pump action shotguns would never have stuck around like they did because it would be normal for people to require more than one buckshot shell to drop, considering each pellet only has about half the muzzle energy to work with and 00 buck pellets aren't that much larger before you consider that those PDW rounds are designed to tumble which greatly increases their frontal area.
>Now, you're welcome to move onto the second target with a 20% chance of the first one gunning down your entire team as they push through the door before they finally realize they're dead
That's not how those situations are handled no matter what gun is used you moron. And what is this ridiculousness of focusing on PDWs from a direct action building clearing perspective when they were designed and intended to be used as an upgrade over a handgun for people who's MOS is unlikely to ever have someone in a situation where they might need to shoot at an enemy combatant?
>pump action shotguns would never have stuck around like they did because it would be normal for people to require more than one buckshot shell to drop
The data actually puts shotguns at at a 60% chance for a one stop shot which is about equivalent to a rifle, while pistol calibers are around 30%. Now remind me, are PDW rounds close to a rifle round or a pistol round? Also, you're further moronic because the pump shotgun was fricking replaced by the SMG as far back as WWII in every capacity except door breaching, and even in WWI the SMG was pushing the pump shotgun out of every military who could afford it. Even in the civilian market, pump action shotguns have been replaced by the AR-15 as the self defense weapon of choice and only hung around as long as they did because of the AWB.
>And what is this ridiculousness of focusing on PDWs from a direct action building clearing perspective when they were designed and intended to be used as an upgrade over a handgun for people who's MOS is unlikely to ever have someone in a situation where they might need to shoot at an enemy combatant?
Because you are fricking illiterate and jumped in to defend their honor in direct response to someone who was refuting the claim that SOF love the MP7, in a thread about if they have a purpose in the modern military, and was never about them being better then a fricking M1 carbine equivalent back when they were developed. I understand that words are scary, but you really should try to fricking understand the ones that are being used before you open your fricking mouth. Do you go into threads about the effectiveness of the F-15 against it's peers and start screeching about the NGAD making it obsolete because you're worried about the evil text in the OP stealing your soul?
>The data actually puts shotguns at at a 60% chance for a one stop shot which is about equivalent to a rifle, while pistol calibers are around 30%. Now remind me, are PDW rounds close to a rifle round or a pistol round
>completely missing my point
>Even in the civilian market, pump action shotguns have been replaced by the AR-15 as the self defense weapon of choice and only hung around as long as they did because of the AWB.
>moron thinks the AWB sunsetting is what changed people's buying preferences and not the market getting flooded due to companies jumping on the bandwagon due to Obama era panic buying to the point where you could buy an AR for $400 during Obama's second term a bit over a decade after the AWB sunset rather than spending $800 for a lower end model
And I was meaning pump action shotguns being replaced with semi auto shotguns, because if this was a real issue it would also put followup shots with shotguns as being much more important than they actually are.
>Because you are fricking illiterate and jumped in to defend their honor in direct response to someone who was refuting the claim that SOF love the MP7
No, I simply pointed out that the example given for PDW lethality, which would be relevant regardless of the use case, was fricking moronic.
>in a thread about if they have a purpose in the modern military
Ah yes, the "modern military", where everyone is an 11B just like Call of Duty. Meanwhile other countries still went the route of issuing PDWs rather than taking the US's M4s for everyone route.
Please cite a single modern use of a shotgun in the military past WWII outside of door breaching, you drooling monkey. Pump shotguns have stuck around because they're dirt cheap and good enough for hunting, while no one uses a shotgun for killing.
>Meanwhile other countries still went the route of issuing PDWs rather than taking the US's M4s for everyone route.
Now let's see. Here's a list of everyone who's still using the MP7 off of Wikipedia. I see cops and special forces make up 99% of the list, and if you look at the same list for the P90, it's exactly the same. It turns out, that despite your delusions, no one actually ever adopted the PDW concept and issued it at large to their backline troops, which is still irrelevant because they certainly don't do it now because SBRs simplify logistics and are a far superior weapon for the cooks to have if they do need to shoot someone.
Marine MPs used 12 GA 00 Buck to great effect during the invasion of Iraq. Said it worked great against armor-less enemy combatants.
SOF used shotguns in Vietnam. They even made those duck bill chokes for them. They also continued to be used for boarding.
I'm not going to argue that they are actually a good tool to use but they were used. They were also used by military police regularly into the GWOT and I've read GWOT door kickers complain about underbarrel shotguns and say they preferred to breach with a regular shotgun, which offers follow up capabilities that are fine in doors if you absolutely need them.
thinks the AWB sunsetting is what changed people's buying preferences and not the market getting flooded due to companies jumping on the bandwagon due to Obama era panic buying to the point where you could buy an AR for $400 during Obama's second term a bit over a decade after the AWB sunset rather than spending $800 for a lower end model
So you're too dumb to see how the AWB meant that manufacturers didn't just flood the market with AR-15s and push the pump shotgun out far earlier, and it took the panic buying to get them to invest in the manufacturing capacity. You're also doing a great job of proving that pump shotguns were only kept their marketshare because they were cheap and not facing competition in the civilian marketplace from better alternatives, not because they were effective which does seem like the opposite of the point that you want to make, but go off king.
>The data actually puts shotguns at at a 60% chance for a one stop shot which is about equivalent to a rifle
>posting one shot stop data that isn't even adjusted for shots that actually hit the head or torso rather than an extremity where there's zero reason for someone to stop
>Please cite a single modern use of a shotgun in the military
So we're just going to ignore that pump action shotguns were the go to option for cops opting for a long gun in the US up until the North Hollywood shootout in the 90s and still stuck around afterwards despite that even? And there wasn't a massive push for autoloading shotguns due to how often followup shots were needed, like the anecdotes about PDW effectiveness would suggest if they weren't due to training issues?
>that pic
Yes and? Small groups that only need to order small batches of something to adopt it are over represented on a list of groups that have bought a adopted that something. There are still armies on that list rather than just special forces groups.
>posting one shot stop data that isn't even adjusted for shots that actually hit the head or torso rather than an extremity where there's zero reason for someone to stop
>I don't understand data science and that I would need to prove that people hit different areas on a statistically significant basis with a caliber dependency
>And there wasn't a massive push for autoloading shotguns due to how often followup shots were needed, like the anecdotes about PDW effectiveness would suggest if they weren't due to training issues?
Yea, they skipped right over autoloading shotguns to go straight to the autoloading rifle, what a fricking shock. Also, this may come as a surprise to you, but the average cop is not doing many door breaches with their patrol car gun, and SWAT teams had adopted SMGs by that time, or are we memoryholing the entire MP5 era?
>There are still armies on that list rather than just special forces groups.
There is 3 armies on that list, the Germans who make it, and the Norwegians and Spanish. As it turns outs, there are 30 NATO countries and a 10% adoption rate for the PDW concept, even without going into the overestimation that is taking Wikipedia at face value when they're citing Jane's from 2003, is not a successful concept, much less one that has any place in the modern day military.
>>I don't understand data science and that I would need to prove that people hit different areas on a statistically significant basis with a caliber dependency
The source you got that data from includes the data for shots that hit the torso or head rather than extremities you moron. For shotguns, it climbs to 86% when you exclude shots to extremities that have no reason to instantly incapacitate someone and 9mm is the worst performing option at 47%.
>they skipped right over autoloading shotguns
Despite the first models hitting the market before WWI and there being tons of time to focus on improving them if followup shots were actually an issue, like the anecdotes about PDW effectiveness would suggest if they weren't due to training issues. It's almost like it wasn't actually an issue.
>and SWAT teams had adopted SMGs by that time, or are we memoryholing the entire MP5 era?
Are you seriously taking big city SWAT teams as being representative of police across the fricking country?
>they're citing Jane's from 2003
What's wrong with this? Do you really think armies change what guns they issue that often?
>Despite the first models hitting the market before WWI and there being tons of time to focus on improving them if followup shots were actually an issue, like the anecdotes about PDW effectiveness would suggest if they weren't due to training issues
Once again, you drooling monkey, the military had already done away with shotguns since they were replaced by the SMG. Meanwhile, the PDW concept and it's failures lead to the development of SBRs, which have seen mass adopment, whether that's the M4 replacing the M16 as the general issue weapon or more specialized choices of exotic SBRs that special forces use over PDWs.
>Are you seriously taking big city SWAT teams as being representative of police across the fricking country?
So what the local department was using because they didn't want to spend the money on replacing things is supposed to be representative, but the choices made by the people who could actually choose weren't. Got it. I guess the fact that the Brazillian police are using fricking Brens means they're still a good choice by your standards.
>Once again, you drooling monkey,
>proceeds to type out some bullshit that's completely unrelated to the point he's replying to
>So what the local department was using because they didn't want to spend the money on replacing things
So PDWs have no place in a modern military because only 10% of NATO adopted the MP7 for rear line troops, but you think discussion should focus solely on the choices made by big city SWAT teams that accounted for an insignificantly small portion of the cops out there rather than the guns that were kept in normal police cruisers for when normal cops wanted more than a handgun?
I like how you've moved the goalposts so far that we're in the fricking upper level of the stands, so this is my last reply before I just start spamming smug anime girls at you because that's clearly the only level of discourse you're able to function at.
Police used shotguns and surplus carbines in their patrol cars because they're gud enough when you're responding to an armed robbery by a guy with a 6 shot revolver or maybe an early wonder 9 where your kevlar means that you have a massive survability advantage. However, for the people who were doing door kicking against serious threats, everyone who could afford to had moved to the MP5, Uzi, and various other SMGs. As PDWs entered the scene, they were adopted and then quickly replaced because their sole advantage of defeating armor better then an SMG was quickly outmoded by advancements in modern armor, while their terrible terminal performance against a target meant that there was a big push for SBRs, which is why you have them replacing SMGs in SWAT teams, special forces, and literally everyone who matters, including the only military who actually matters in the US. Even the European countries who tried the PDW concept for backline troops are in the process of replacing it with SBRs, most notably the Germans and their movement to the 416. You are welcome to cope, seethe, and deflect about this however you want, but the PDW concept failed, largely due to it's low ability to stop a target in a round effective manner, and the MP7 and P90 being sexy looking guns doesn't save them from being oudated pieces of trash.
>I like how you've moved the goalposts so far that we're in the fricking upper level of the stands
I was talking about PDW lethality. Shotguns were only brought up as a comparison to a burst from a PDW to point out how similar lethality problems to what your link claimed PDWs had were never encountered. You're the one who keeps posting about unrelated shit.
And from this comparison, you started to insist upon the development of autoloading shotguns to replace the pump action despite the numerous alternatives that did see adoption because you're the blackest gorilla Black person and realized that you had no argument.
>you started to insist upon the development of autoloading shotguns to replace the pump action
No, I pointed out how that never happened, and how pump action shotguns remained the go to long gun for cops up into the 90s. Meanwhile, if the ridiculous reports of lethality issues with PDWs that were linked here:
were actually an issue with the ammo and not a training issue, you would have seen pump action shotguns quickly being replaced in police service long before anyone here was born because no one would want to use them if you regularly had to shoot attackers 2 or more times
So we're back to not understanding that the gun in patrol cars weren't used to kick doors, while the people who did used SMGs then PDWs that they replaced with SBRs. Meanwhile, you have presented no evidence for your claims that PDW rounds don't suffer from lethality issues, and your armchair ballistic breakdown completly ignores the fact that buckshot doesn't behave the same way that a tiny, solid bullet moving at much faster speeds does, a well documented behavior commonly known as icepicking.
>continues to go on a tangent comparing guns and ignoring the lethality issues being discussed
>Meanwhile, you have presented no evidence
I gave examples of exactly how many rounds would be fired after a threat was neutralized utilizing full auto how it was described in the link you posted.
>solid bullet moving at much faster speeds does, a well documented behavior commonly known as icepicking.
You mean the small, high velocity bullet with twice the energy to work with as a single buckshot pellet and is designed to tumble? If you bring up DocGKR's testing of the 5.7x28mm SS90 round that was discontinued because of its poor performance 30 years ago, the only ice pick here is going to be the one I'll be inserting into your urethra when I track you down.
>my hypothetical numbers talking about fire rate is the same as multiple users talking directly about how the rounds demonstrate poor lethality
>over penetration of AP ammo against unarmored targets is a meme, it's never happened
>this is all just a training issue by the most heavily trained and experienced SOF in the world, they're all just doing it wrong
>this is all just a training issue by the most heavily trained and experienced SOF in the world, they're all just doing it wrong
Yes.
>train for rifles, as is sensible
>training for rifles bleeds over into SMG use
>doesn't work as well, because lol 4.6mm
Simple as pie. You're not going to train for an entire different method of use for SMGs, confusing your nervous system and complicating situations where split-second actions determine life or death.
>training will make my bullets more lethal
Anon, if short bursts are what's trained for rifles, and they're not putting down the targets reliably enough, how do you propose fixing this issue with more training? Try and fish for headshots like this is Counterstrike?
Using existing parts was always a nice benefit, but you also have things like the SCAR and other systems which were completely unique despite being just another 5.56 rifle. The point is that PDWs not being issued solely on the basis of cost is rather silly since it was replaced by the things that are, more or less, issued even in the hands of people who don't have to care about the unit cost.
>Anon, if short bursts are what's trained for rifles,
Double taps are what's trained for rifles you moron.
Take it up with
who's saying the usage for full auto is short controlled bursts. Be careful because big words seem to scare him.
...I'm sorry, do you actually think the US Army trains soldiers to use their rifles on full auto for CQB?
NTA, but I hope to God they do. Hand grenades go in first, then full-auto fire. If you're close enough to see the whites in someone's eyes, you need to introduce the maximum amount of bullet into their system as fast as humanly possible. With semi-auto you're not even making it through their plates before getting injured yourself.
>>my hypothetical numbers talking about fire rate is the same as multiple users talking directly about how the rounds demonstrate poor lethality
"hypothetical", being numbers calculated from reaction times under ideal video game conditions (where the results will be much worse with a real gun in real combat rather than clicking a button on a mouse) and the rates of fire of the guns being discussed. Along with pointing out how soldiers using full auto in the same way was identified as a problem in the past. Again, there's a reason why people are trained to use full auto in short bursts rather than laying on the trigger until they see a reaction, but people decided that didn't apply because of how controllable PDWs are on full auto.
>>over penetration of AP ammo against unarmored targets is a meme, it's never happened
>moron thinks that AP ammo and ammo designed to tumble when impacting a soft target are mutually exclusive
>people decided that didn't apply because of how controllable PDWs are on full auto
>no, I will not present evidence of this
>no, I will not acknowledge multiple sources who said that it was required because of low lethality
>no, I will not think for a millisecond and realize that this is common knowledge and trained behavior, and yet the decision to do the opposite was based on observed results
>what the frick, why is everyone calling me moronic
>>no, I will not present evidence of this
Literally in the fricking link you posted, where the guy talking about burning through most of a magazines talks about doing exactly that.
>>no, I will not acknowledge multiple sources who said that it was required because of low lethality
Anon, military guys don't have ridiculous video game tier body counts to their name where they personally test a variety of techniques. There's no reason to believe this was a decision due to experience with the amount of bodies that they were stacking rather than "huh, this gun is really controllable, I can just hold down the trigger and lay into someone with it."
>no, I will not present evidence of this
>no, I will not acknowledge multiple sources who said that it was required because of low lethality
>no, I will not think for a millisecond and realize that this is common knowledge and trained behavior, and yet the decision to do the opposite was based on observed results
>clearly US SOCOM has forgotten this knowledge and trained all their soldiers wrong as a joke because PDW go brrrrt is cool
>what the frick, why is everyone calling me moronic
>Even the European countries who tried the PDW concept for backline troops are in the process of replacing it with SBRs
Not the guy you've initially responded to, but the reason PDWs are dropped is good ol' logistics. It's ultimately irrelevant how gucci a particular weapon system is, taken in isolation; if the use case is too narrow for the logistical tail to make it worthwhile, it'll get dropped. And a specialized light auto weapon for rear echelon troops is a very narrow use case.
Things might've been different had 5.7 been adopted as the standard pistol cartridge in the early-00s, so PDW and pistol would've shared the same round. But, as it stands, it makes no sense to cart tools, spares and ammo for something that realistically sees even less use than a 9 mm sidearm.
Except that being the sole reason falls apart when you look at non-logistic constrained systems like the numerous SWAT agencies and special forces which did try the PDW concept and then transitioned to the SBR meta anyway, most of of them using relatively exotic SBRs and rounds that aren't part of the existing logistical train like .458 SOCOM and .300 Blackout because they provide a much better effect, or even non-standard 5.56 loadings. Them being expensive to keep around for minimal use is a reason they didn't see widespread adoption, but doesn't explain why they were quickly replaced in situations where that wasn't a limiting factor given their replacements were equally as non-standard.
>if i move goalposts and greentext i can salvage this argument
3 round bursts significantly increased the chances of hitting a target at close range in a joint Brit/US study.
Shotgun spread also increases you chance of hitting and a shotgun has the best chance to drop a guy in one shot.
The best home defense and CQC option is obvious then, a three round burst from a FA shotgun.
Folks don't want to admit it, but there it is.
Further, if you're dealing with human waves of mobiks or defending against a large SOF raid, I'm going to give you another IDEAL weapon, the belt fed 12 gauge.
Only problem is the lack of spread and velocity at greater distances. That's why I think an ideal trench defender would be a sort of automatic canister shot autocannon. Think an M1028 120mm cannister round, but scales down to a manageable 25-30mm autocannon with a choke to help the spread. A few bursts across a human wave is far more efficient than rifles.
The use case PDWs were meant for were Russian paratroopers landing behind NATO lines during the 80s.
In 2023, there is no actual use case.
Absolutely incorrect. The only people who like the MP7 even amongst special forces is people for whom if they're shooting, things have gone incredibly wrong and so they want the lightest thing they can carry. If you have to kill people, even PDWs absolutely fricking suck and SMGs aren't much better.
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4338-Small-Caliber-PDW-s-FN-5-7-mm-HK-4-6-mm&s=ac562847853073a0e0ad49763db79fd5
I have no way at all to prove this but I grew up with a dude who became a seal. He said they are preferred by some for Vip protection (escorting officers on bases, ect) because 99.999 percent of the time they are just going to be slung and there’s a atf ready to jump and raids where an assault team needs to go in a bunker, cave, building, compound, ect and they have other team mates with mk46s, 48s, gernade launchers, Carl guatavs, vehicles with heavy weapons where their compactness, weight, controllability, and their quiet report are very valuable and they can afford to dump half a mag into a guy because they have 7 other dudes behind. They are also good for the drivers and turret gunners of vehicles because they are faster to get into action and shooting is not the primary role. 90 percent of the time a rattler, mk18, 416s ect are a better choice
Qrf not atf
I used to be a PSDgay and we had Mk18’s then 416D’s. He had a couple collapsible stock MP5’s and MP5K’s in the vault but our SOP was only limo drivers could sign them out bc everyone else needed to be able to penetrate cars, armor, etc. Granted we weren’t in some super low pro capacity.
Every account I can remember off-hand of people actually using the thing from interviews and books is that it was easy to carry but you would have to dump half a mag into someone to put them down.
>Below are comments specifically on the MP7 by a combat experienced senior SOF NCO currently serving in the U.S. military:
>doesn't even have a source for the statement
I remember in a podcast a DEVGRU guy talking about emptying an entire 20 round mag from an MP7 into someone and saying that he only took it out when he was a breacher and laden down with a ton of heavy shit and that it was pretty bad at putting people down unless you shot them in the head. He did say it was really convenient for PSD work
>SWAT teams to go in and take out people inside a building with maximum precision and minimal collateral damage.
when have you ever seen a swat team do this? get real
naval boarding maybe
realistic either for special forces (mp5k mp7 etc) or for totally untrained conscript militias (whatever cheap gun you can get)
tbh im surprised that vatniks havent yet started stamping smgs for mass issue
what SMG designs does Russia even have in the modern day?
The Bizon is all I can think of if you don't reach back to WWII designs
Kedr, vityaz, and that one in 9x21 gyruza or some shit. Kedr is mainly used by police, I was hoping to see them turn up in ukraine
I’ve seen the vityaz in Syria but it seems like they were used for training, not sure if it ever left the wire
Also forgot about the PP-2000
I have never seen one outside of promo videos in Moscow and military shooting ranges. Outside of popularity in vydia games I’m not sure if those were ever produced outside of small batches. You see more stechkins than all of above, machine pistols probably have more potential future usage than any other configuration of smg
vitaz, but i was thinking more of pps43 or making a knock off grease gun in 9x18
Yes but for low profile work like collecting intel in civilian vehicles where you may have to deploy a compact controllable weapon in a car, concealed vip protection, vehicle crews, or as a backup weapon airmen. Short barrel configurations of standard issue carbines have an edge in all but the first two roles. Smgs and pdws typically have a lower report than sbrs when suppressed when that is an important consideration. They have become equally if not more of a niche tool than precision bolt action systems, but they are still cool. In a total war scenario they could also be used by prison guards.
SMGs would had replaced pistols by now were it not for the AWB.
High rate of fire
Bro thinks life is cod
>/k/
>9mm is a perfectly acceptable handgun round
>9mm SMGs can't kill people, not even when you mag dump 50 round mags with you and 7 other guys
compared to 5.56 or 7.62 Russian, yeah it's shit.
someone give me a TLRD on what this autistic argument is about
Posters arguing about whether reports of PDWs regularly taking 20 rounds or more to stop someone are due to PDWs being ineffective or the people using them not understanding how to use full auto and continuing to blow through a significant amount of ammo after the threat has ended.
>TLRD
>two legit morons dueling
these are the two most moronic posters i’ve seen in a long time
even the gravy seal who wrote the book on the bin laden raid criticized the MP7 he was using for magdumping being a requirement to use it effectively
>durr they just don't understand how to use full auto
really dumb argument, but certainly not the dumbest I've seen
The MP7 isn't used for its terminal ballistics, but for the size and ergonomics of the weapon. You can use it one-handed if need be, climb ladders while aiming it, control a dog, push a hostage, aim around extremely narrow hallways. All the kind of shit you might find yourself doing while on a ship, which might just be something concerning the SOF units using the weapon. Same excuses can be made for units using it in sand countries with randomly built mudhouses. The ballistics are a trade-off you have to deal with if you want a tiny gun with barely felt recoil you can use to hose down pinpoint targets.
A tight enough package like an LVAW with its stock folded is simply not going to offer the same kind of control or ergonomics, even if it is the preferred choice for some groups.
I mean if we were considering one-handedness as a justification, the MAC-10 or MP5 can be used one handed. And they have, both of which would provide ample "stopping power" with the ability to do things with your other hand with it readied
>the MAC-10... can be used one handed
It's past your bedtime kid.
>kid
frick off, moron
>some video of a guy fricking around and not hitting anything
Dood why don't they dual wield M249s more as well? There's videos of soldiers doing it.
>subject is concerning compact guns and their ability to be used one-handed
>small, compact gun can be used one handed
>durrrr so can lmg!!11
I hate you tourists so goddamn much holy shit
>carry select fire AR lower
>slap mk18 upper on top for cqb
>slap mk12 upper for longer range
>switch to DMR or bolt gun for 1000 yards or above
Where does the submachine gun fit into this? you can conceal carry a full auto Glock that would serve the same purpose for VIP protection.
>you can conceal carry a full auto Glock
try shooting that as accurately as an MP7.
no and pdws are cope too
in a perfect world their role would be home defense
Not one of you wienersuckers has ever served in the Military. The MP7 is such a meme weapon, Yes its light and compact and yadda yadda, but if you need to "protect a VIP" nothing will be more accurate, reliable and concealable than a pistol. Concerned with penetration? +P+ but in all honesty M882 works fine. Oh you need something with more firepower but still compact enough for CQB?? MK18.
Also, you'll get yoked the frick up for ever using full auto unless specifically directed. Besides you honestly cant hit shit past 10 yds bursting an m16 call of duty style.
>but still compact enough for CQB?? MK18.
It's clearly not compact enough if all these groups are choosing smaller weapons over it. Your grunt/pog experience doesn't apply to these units where they specifically choose to use them.
>Also, you'll get yoked the frick up for ever using full auto unless specifically directed.
The damage of having spent a couple decades fighting against insurgents instead of an actual military.
The MP5 isn't as modular or collapsible into a tight enough package.
>seriously comparing performance by slavic conscripts to US professional soldiers
You've never served, have you?
If the US military trains people to use semi-auto in CQB, that webm is what will happen.
Post DD214.
>implying I'm American
I'd probably be arguing for semi-auto if I were.
>nothing will be more accurate... than a pistol
bro have you ever shot a pistol past 10 yards?
>Besides you honestly cant hit shit past 10 yds bursting an m16 call of duty style.
This is total bullshit if you're referring to 3 round burst. At about 50 yards it's basically a mozambique drill with one trigger pull
Of course, there is even a place for 22LR MP5s with giggle switches and suppressors
For CQB, such as clearing buildings, or fighting underground in tunnels and caves
This thing needs a couple extra mags jungle taped, carry four extra, NVG. Maybe an IR laser. Lights off, ready to rock and roll.
>Lights off? How?
Switch off your own lights or cut the power to the building.
One result of firing rifle cartridges from super short barrels is extreme flash and noise.
Combine this with a suppressor and you can get a lot of fouling from all of that rifle cartridge gas going back through the action of the gun.
There is also not a huge difference in wounding potential if you have to use subsonic rounds.
So for suppressed use for close quarters SMGs have some advantages over SBR.
>a lot of fouling from all of that rifle cartridge gas
That's why gucci calibers were developed for suppressed glowie work. 300 BLK is the best known, owing to it becoming the de-facto glowie auto carbine caliber, but there have been others before it.
One of the things the russian calibers have going for them is the lesser amount of excess gas and loss of velocity out of shorter barrels. Esp the 7.62x39, but I believe even 5.45 performs pretty well from a shorter barrel compared to a 556.
If I had to build a short barreled rig for a rifle round it would be a supersonic .300 blackout or either one of the russian calibers I mentioned.
What you’re talking about is relative capacity/overbore ratio. Divide propellant volume by bore area. the higher the number, the longer the barrel must be for whatever preset efficiency %. IIRC 5.45 is about the same as 5.56. Hard to eyeball. Skinnier bullet, but wider and shorter case.
The AK was designed as a submachine gun and it's the most widely used gun in the world.
As for smaller calibers, I think 10mm could be useful but nobody's bothered to try it yet. It's more powerful and holds more capacity than .45 ACP.
Another round that should be used in SMGs is the .45 Win Mag. It's roughly the same base diameter as .45 ACP but is longer and much more powerful.
Is it splitting hairs differentiating between SMG's and shkrt barreled assault rifles?
I don't know much about guns.
no, SMGs fire pistol rounds and SBRs fire rifle rounds.
The primary difference is the calibers they fire, which beyond the obvious also affects how well they can be suppressed
guerilla warfare, jungle spec ops.
Will depend on the enviroment of the operation.