Are they ever going to replace bullets with something that isn't metal? Obviously, it would still need a similar mass, but surely there are benefits to using different materials
Handheld Railgun/Coilgun technology I suspect is the next big step in weapon evolution, outside of the adaption of caseless ammo. The issue there lies in having a powerful and small enough energy supply to support shooting shrapnel at lethal speeds in excess of 1000 meters.
>it needs similar mass >but it's not metal
there are high-density compound materials, but if you use that as bullets you almost always have one or more downsides
- the material is toxic
- the material is too plastic to retain form at high speeds
-the material is too strong to disintegrate like high-velocity lead
Where metal is going to be replaced is in penetrators.
Right now we use tungsten, which sucks dick because it is too hard and expensive to shape and poisons shit when you mine it.
The future is ceramics and industrial gem stones.
>you still need the stupid buffer tube
someone needs to pair it with those weird bcgs that don't need a buffer extension. Still dumb as shit but I wanna see
It would have been more useful than the L1A1/FAL at the time. How good or bad a gun is really depends on the doctrine. How it is utilized. Given to everyone as the standard service rifle, yeah I think the Janson EM2 would have been pretty devastating
the contract was awarded to SIG before all tests could have finished.
SIG underbidded so massively that cost-wise Glock was too expensive in comparison
would've loved to see Beretta get the contract
Bro's my big brain is telling me we need to have a gun that injects gunpowder in to a chamber and stuffs a bullet in front of it. The era of the casing is over. How do we achive this?
It's been tried plenty of times: Liquid propellant guns.
Problem is they tend to explode spontaneously - unless you put in so many safeguards and regulation mechanisms that the whole thing becomes a nightmarish complicated, expensive and unreliable mess.
It's been tried plenty of times: Liquid propellant guns.
Problem is they tend to explode spontaneously - unless you put in so many safeguards and regulation mechanisms that the whole thing becomes a nightmarish complicated, expensive and unreliable mess.
IMO, unironically, I think gyrojets (rocket bullets) have potential to be the future of bullets. They can provide increased energy with less recoil.
The original 13mm Gyrojet could reach twice the energy of the similarly sized .45 ACP.
Biggest problems of the originals were poor performance from short barrels, and poor manufacturing quality, but these problems are solvable.
>The original 13mm Gyrojet could reach twice the energy of the similarly sized .45 ACP.
Yeah, eighteen meters downrange, which is really helpful in a handgun that'll very rarely be used beyond ten meters.
>2-stage projectile >stage 1: caseless propellant, fires inside the gun, giving accuracy and short range performance >stage 2: rocket projectile, counteracts bullet drop and gives extra punch
nobody patent it, i thought of it first
moron boomer meme
Running suppressors actually help infantry units communicate without sacrificing any velocity on rounds and noise reduction goes a long way too
GD would have been wienerblocked on user acceptance, which would also give Sig a leg up on Textron. DoD actually involved soldier subjective preferences as part of their UAT criteria, and soldiers prefer familiar things and bullups are very unfamiliar while the AR layout from Sig is very familiar. Accounting for the preferences of soldiers in decision making always proves to be a mistake.
Sig even put an extra charging handle on the gun just so that guys transitioning from the M4 could operate the gun even if they were totally braindead.
I have never understood the training argument. Literally half my company in basic had never touched a rifle before. Three guys in my class of 91F small arm repairers had never shot outside of the army. So what if SGT Johnson gets a 35 on rifle qual instead of his usual 40 for the first two times with the new rifle. Within 5 years I'd be willing to bet that it wouldn't even be remembered as an issue. The POGs who weren't shooting before had still wouldn't be shooting and would learn from the ground up like always, the 11Bs and shit would have hopped on the bullpup train, and you'd have a handful of guys who take 4 seconds instead of 2 to reload their rifle for the first week or so of training
The scope was a separate bid, we could've had a different rifle with the same scope. And it's genuinely impressive, Vortex did a good job on it. Pity we won't get civie equivalents for some time.
>millions of private owners across the U.S. will never own a bullpup because they are too fat and lazy to buy themselves a good trigger
M7 deserves to be a bullpup to concentrate all the seething in the country
Same reason people buy consoles over PCs. Once you ask them to put something together they don't want to put in the 5 IQ points of brainpower required and go for something premade instead.
Do you really think 50% of /k/ doesn't just dickride a stock AR-15 they've never taken a look inside of?
Also it would've made everybody mad—our NATO allies because they've mostly all gotten around to adopting 5.56 ARs and now we're adopting a bullpup in a real rifle caliber, normies because it's a bullpup, and bullpup gays because now normies who want the army gun will be intruding on their secret club. Also the ammo would've been really cost-effective at scale and could even have been cranked out in-theater.
It would've been perfect, down to the last minute details.
I come from the alternate reality where it was adopted. People still complain about it being a product of corruption, the plastic case ammo, and how Sig should've won. On an unrelated note the textron reality has us all receive state mandated GFs, the YF-23 and YF-12 projects are revived, and every ATF agent simultaneously committed suicide
Since this tread has some keltech crack vibes I want to ask a question of this idea could work (mind im a moron).
What if you have a problem with hit probability and want to increase it like they tried with duplex bullets, burst rifles, flechette rifles.
What is you make a bullet that is 3 seperate parts intertwined, kind of like 3 corkscrew shapes that intersect to make 1 traditional bullet but can seperate in the air and make 3 seperate projectiles/flechettes that still retain some sort of decent flight path, not to dissimilar from airburst fleccetes. Would this work and could you model it so that after say ~500 meters they start to unfold and take different flight paths giving you more of a chance to hit a target, essentially airburst but without the burst
>What if you just invent magic tech that makes a bunch of silly shit reliable?
Its not a thing thats on the table because its practically impossible to design something like that in a way that actually works much less is affordable to produce. Any attempt to do any of it is more likely to just not work at all at worst and at best work but be garbage compared to traditional rounds.
airburst rounds have a very spesific purpouse exaxtrly because of this trait, imagine loading your rifle with these self franging bullets to counter say a commercial drone more effectively, I could see the application in practice but my question is, is it even doable in the first place
The issue with something like airburst isnt getting it to work since they had working prototypes of it decades ago. Its getting it small cheap and effective enough to actually be practical. None of which is really possible with tech levels as they are. If you want airburst to do -anything- to any target its going to need quite a bit of charge in the bullet and quite a bit of bullet to fragment. You arent looking at rifle sized bullets anymore you are looking at a cannon or grenade. Then you have to realize that for all of this special super tech you are making so something explodes over a target you can just make something that fricking explodes and destroys the cover and whatever is behind it instead.
Airburst is one of those concepts that sounds really cool on paper but doesnt really have a practical use.
I am not talking about chemical airburst but when the X parts of the bullet start to split up due to loss in velocity of the bullet itself, kind of like the right picture in my post but instead of all those spikes 3 seperate intertwined flecettes that spread out once a bullet loses its velocity. Also since it is only the actual bullet that will need to be redesigned and manufacturerd i imagine it being a whole lot cheaper than alternatives like a decicated person with a shotgun or anti drone device.
Oh so fantasy bullshit again got it. Might as well be asking about hypotheticals around a wizard casting meteor on enemy trenches. There is no way a bullet can be designed to split into multiple projectiles and still remain effective. All you are designing is a shitty shotgun and as we all know shotguns are really fricking bad in almost every situation in war.
11 months ago
Anonymous
difference is that you get a shitty shotgun by just swapping out a bullet, that can be an incredible advantage at bearable cost but shure have no fun on this board its your right
11 months ago
Anonymous
>that can be an incredible advantage at bearable cost
It would be no fricking advantage because it would be a terrible fricking bullet. You would be at a disadvantage by having it because you would be lugging around a bunch of weight that would be absolutely useless. Even in larger caliber bullets if you have to design a bullet that somehow magically splits into multiple bullets at a certain range each fragment of that bullet is just lighter and will do less damage. Not to mention that when something seperates at high speed its going to catch the wind and fricking zip off in random directions and you arent going to hit shit while losing a shitload of energy due to air resistance. Just look how sabot tank rounds shed their sabot and imagine its a bullet splitting into 4 pieces instead.
The way we improved hit probability in the 90s was by putting an ACOG on the M4. The way we improve it in the 2020s is by with laser rangefinders built into the optic.
So? There are countless of times a lazer rangefinder will expose people for too long in a short to medium range engagement. If you are going to state the obvious dont bother speaking at all lol, im asking the exact opposite.
no I think the operation within the first 300 meters serves no purpouse and your better off with a inaccurate buckshot esque alternative for quick engagements
>Announce a civilian version before you know if you actually won the contract to receive the money and tooling to create said civilian version as well
I wanted it to win too but lol at this
People are STILL fricking screeching over the military trials and its so goddamn sad. Its not some kind of fricking conspiracy. The military designated design features they wanted and companies competed for them. The company that delivered the gun that fulfilled those criteria while being affordable won. You can all stop fricking whining about it now. Nobody gives a shit about the losers of the contract.
he company that delivered the gun that fulfilled those criteria while being affordable won. >final evaluation will be made on a 23.000 round performance test >GAO describes Sig Sauer 320 as having lower reliability than Glock 19 >award contract to SIG before 23k endurance test is concluded, with no reason given
okay but it's not a conspiracy tho when it's openly rigged
Im sure a fricking random butthole on PrepHole of all places is a fricking expert in military acquisitions and knows more about the process than the people overseeing the fricking thing in the first place. Its totally not a bunch of rambling from some company fanboy or contrarian shitposting because his favorite company lost. Might as well be fricking PrepHole with its console war homosexualry. Just eat a dick and shut the frick up. I dont want to be hearing this stupid shit for the next fricking 20 years.
>Im sure a fricking random butthole on PrepHole of all places is a fricking expert in military acquisitions
yeah, you're right. of course you're not an expert. let me explain it for smoothbrained individuals like you: >2 companies get picked for the final phase of a contract >1 company bids the weapons for $170M, while the other bids $270M >they both have to do two tests, the cheap one scores good on the first test, while the expensive company scores outstanding >the contract is awarded before test 2 is concluded >the final contract is worth more than the two initial bids, according to the army >expensive company says "hey, that's unfair, we haven't done test two yet" >US court of appeals says "it's only unfair if there is proven prejudice towards you, which we haven't found. ammo licensing (for standard 9mm mind you) is most likely to have been the tiebreaker, so your appeal is dismissed >GOA doesn't discuss why the trials have been cut short
see, it's not that weird that people question the reasoning of the Army, especially when on the ground you need to trust the equipment, and during the test the more expensive company scored better on reliability.
You chucklefricks actually think the military picks solely based on performance? You dont need to be the BEST OF THE BEST to win a contract you just need to be good enough and cheap. PAssing over a """""superior""""" option that costs almost twice as much isnt some kind of fricking sign of conspiracy. Its a sign they didnt want to spend a bunch of money on something that was only marginally better and that WILL LIKELY NEVER SEE ACTUAL USE IN SERVICE. A fricking side arm isnt standard fricking issue and most of the people that carry them never leave the fricking base.
You are all just a bunch of dumb schizo tinfoil hat delusional brand fanboy c**trags. No amount of fricking screeching or posturing will -ever- amount to a fricking thing and you will never know what the frick you are talking about.
then why did they have the trials in the first place?
the M9 was perfectly capable as officer's pistol. if they didn't want the best of the best, why did they budget half a billion dollars for an upgrade?
11 months ago
Anonymous
Because the M9 is fricking expensive and the old pistols were showing their age and really needed replacement. Getting M9s would likely have been double the cost of a newer more modern design so you just replace it with something that has newer features and is cheaper. Its not fricking rocket science. The military has never and will never be in the market for Gucci $3000 pistols to hand to a bunch of officers that will never use them. Its the same with any mass adopted weapon. The only time you spring for the extra cash is in platforms that REALLY benefit from it like airplanes and ship hulls. That shit being 3% better is life or fricking death for a plane or boat so cost is less of an issue. Grunts having a 3% boost for double the cost is just really fricking stupid.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>WILL NEVER SEE ACTUAL USE IN SERVICE >really needed replacement.
please pick one (1) and only one (1)
11 months ago
Anonymous
Its still considered an important bit of kit by the army even if it never sees actual use dipshit. In an ideal world they would have just canned the fricking pistols altogether but the army dictates that a pistols is NEEDED so they require having a supply of functional weapons. Now kiss my ass.
They fricked their bid with the ammo.
the ammo was the only good part about their project
That frickin huge knob on the end of the gun was pretty awesome.
They fricked their ammo bid with shitty guns
Are they ever going to replace bullets with something that isn't metal? Obviously, it would still need a similar mass, but surely there are benefits to using different materials
depleted Uranium
That's metal you fricking moron
Handheld Railgun/Coilgun technology I suspect is the next big step in weapon evolution, outside of the adaption of caseless ammo. The issue there lies in having a powerful and small enough energy supply to support shooting shrapnel at lethal speeds in excess of 1000 meters.
>it needs similar mass
>but it's not metal
there are high-density compound materials, but if you use that as bullets you almost always have one or more downsides
- the material is toxic
- the material is too plastic to retain form at high speeds
-the material is too strong to disintegrate like high-velocity lead
Where metal is going to be replaced is in penetrators.
Right now we use tungsten, which sucks dick because it is too hard and expensive to shape and poisons shit when you mine it.
The future is ceramics and industrial gem stones.
>industrial gem stones
>poisons shit when you mine it.
That seems like a feature rather than a bug.
My handgun frame is polymer but has tungsten added to it to help poison more things.
>That seems like a feature rather than a bug.
yeah I also support anything that results in Chinamen dying horribly
>bullpup
It deserved to die
Have you ever even used a bullpup anon?
Yes and they're absolute horse shit. Anyone who claims they're superior is a pseudointellectual
Anon, do you know what a pseudointellectual is?
frick you and take your meds
Why do all these companies make guns that look like my father's penis?
if bullpups were good, everyone wouldnt be adopting ARs
Why not a bullpup AR
>bullpup AR conversion
Apparently they exist but you still need the stupid buffer tube so it makes the bullpup configuration not really have any pros
Well at least the M7 will be easier to bullpup as it doesn't have that ridiculous buffer tube.
What about the SIG MCX?
yeah
>same oal
>less ergonomic
distilled bullpup brain logic
>you still need the stupid buffer tube
someone needs to pair it with those weird bcgs that don't need a buffer extension. Still dumb as shit but I wanna see
throw the extra mass for the bcg on top like an oa-96 and we're in business
I lt felt like my iq dropped several points looking at that image
BRN180 would be a better base for AR type bullpup
of course, because military procurement programs always select the objectively superior weapon
You have to let her go, Ian
Honestly would this have been a pretty good bullpup?
It would have been more useful than the L1A1/FAL at the time. How good or bad a gun is really depends on the doctrine. How it is utilized. Given to everyone as the standard service rifle, yeah I think the Janson EM2 would have been pretty devastating
It would have been the m16 before the m16
still mad about SIG rigging the XM17 competition
>still mad about SIG rigging the XM17 competition
You should be more mad at Glock for not following the requirements and over-bidding their contract (it was 3x what SIG was going to cost).
They could have picked a handgun other than either Glock or Sig though
the contract was awarded to SIG before all tests could have finished.
SIG underbidded so massively that cost-wise Glock was too expensive in comparison
would've loved to see Beretta get the contract
Cult of the AR
Same thing with the cult of the Mauser in the early 1900s
>people use good designs
What a shocking revelation
Bro's my big brain is telling me we need to have a gun that injects gunpowder in to a chamber and stuffs a bullet in front of it. The era of the casing is over. How do we achive this?
It's been tried plenty of times: Liquid propellant guns.
Problem is they tend to explode spontaneously - unless you put in so many safeguards and regulation mechanisms that the whole thing becomes a nightmarish complicated, expensive and unreliable mess.
IMO, unironically, I think gyrojets (rocket bullets) have potential to be the future of bullets. They can provide increased energy with less recoil.
The original 13mm Gyrojet could reach twice the energy of the similarly sized .45 ACP.
Biggest problems of the originals were poor performance from short barrels, and poor manufacturing quality, but these problems are solvable.
>The original 13mm Gyrojet could reach twice the energy of the similarly sized .45 ACP.
Yeah, eighteen meters downrange, which is really helpful in a handgun that'll very rarely be used beyond ten meters.
hence why gyrojets would be far better in a rifle platform, duh.
Have a projectile about the size of a 5.56 cartridge (eg. 9x50mm dimension), with high BC, and you'll get much better than 5.56 performance.
>2-stage projectile
>stage 1: caseless propellant, fires inside the gun, giving accuracy and short range performance
>stage 2: rocket projectile, counteracts bullet drop and gives extra punch
nobody patent it, i thought of it first
>i thought of it first
Nah. Kellgren was ahead of you. 1979. Article "Physical limits of rifle performance."
Link? Can't find it anywhere
My mistake it was 1978.
It was published in the Italian military magazine "Parabellum" 3rd issue of the 1978. Doubt that was ever uploaded to the net.
Damn, RIP.
*blocks ur path*
That only happened with the short-barrelled pistol, IIRC. It won't happen with a long-barrelled rifle.
And I'm sure modern propellants are far more powerful than 70 years ago, so low muzzle velocity shouldn't be a problem now.
If it's any consolation it's in COD now
Since when? Whats it called?
I forget but it's ok but most people don't use it since it's under rated.
Cronen squal or some shit, it’s listed under battle rifles. Currently my favorite gun.
Should've made a decent MG.
They forgot to submit a machine gun.
Also Bullpups are a meme.
It doesn't really matter anyway though because the Spear won't see widespread adoption.
moron boomer meme
Running suppressors actually help infantry units communicate without sacrificing any velocity on rounds and noise reduction goes a long way too
They did submit an automatic rifle and the nigsaw-R was allegedly more important anyway.
GD would have been wienerblocked on user acceptance, which would also give Sig a leg up on Textron. DoD actually involved soldier subjective preferences as part of their UAT criteria, and soldiers prefer familiar things and bullups are very unfamiliar while the AR layout from Sig is very familiar. Accounting for the preferences of soldiers in decision making always proves to be a mistake.
Sig even put an extra charging handle on the gun just so that guys transitioning from the M4 could operate the gun even if they were totally braindead.
People have posted how the rear charging handle is heavy to pull and flimsy. So that was a huge mistake
see
I have never understood the training argument. Literally half my company in basic had never touched a rifle before. Three guys in my class of 91F small arm repairers had never shot outside of the army. So what if SGT Johnson gets a 35 on rifle qual instead of his usual 40 for the first two times with the new rifle. Within 5 years I'd be willing to bet that it wouldn't even be remembered as an issue. The POGs who weren't shooting before had still wouldn't be shooting and would learn from the ground up like always, the 11Bs and shit would have hopped on the bullpup train, and you'd have a handful of guys who take 4 seconds instead of 2 to reload their rifle for the first week or so of training
and just like the pentagon wars, this facebook meme is completely wrong on all counts
>that optic
OH NO IS THAT HECKING TECHNOLOGY IN MY INFORMATION AGE?!??!?!
If you were actual boomers you'd b***h about night vision
the scope is the silver lining of the NGSW program
The scope was a separate bid, we could've had a different rifle with the same scope. And it's genuinely impressive, Vortex did a good job on it. Pity we won't get civie equivalents for some time.
It's never too late anon
no Battle Rifle for you
That carry handle is way ahead of the center of balance.
shut up SHUT UP
thank frick. God I hate bullpups.
ftfy
ftftfyfy
gay and moronic
Glory to the first man to die!
I like it
I love it
>ejection port right next to your head
But why
t. nopup
>millions of private owners across the U.S. will never own a bullpup because they are too fat and lazy to buy themselves a good trigger
M7 deserves to be a bullpup to concentrate all the seething in the country
What they can’t afford kel-tec?
Same reason people buy consoles over PCs. Once you ask them to put something together they don't want to put in the 5 IQ points of brainpower required and go for something premade instead.
Do you really think 50% of /k/ doesn't just dickride a stock AR-15 they've never taken a look inside of?
bullpups are pure sex but that suppressor looks goofy as hell
looks like a butt plug
It poops the casings out a tube along the barrel so ew no
I am genuinely upset that we didn't go for the bullpup. It's a nice looking gun and very cool, except the chodepressor.
Also it would've made everybody mad—our NATO allies because they've mostly all gotten around to adopting 5.56 ARs and now we're adopting a bullpup in a real rifle caliber, normies because it's a bullpup, and bullpup gays because now normies who want the army gun will be intruding on their secret club. Also the ammo would've been really cost-effective at scale and could even have been cranked out in-theater.
It would've been perfect, down to the last minute details.
>Also it would've made everybody mad
That's the best part. Mainly I think it looks cool as frick.
I'm more angry at the ammo not being used. Frick they even made it HEAVIER.
It introduced new and genuinely useful techniques and wasn't built for ARgays. Of course it didn't make it.
Disgusting mongrel country gets disgusting mongrel rifle.
Somehow still worth more than your monthly salary
>A2 grip
to hell, where it belongs
That's clearly a Magpul MIAD with the straight backstrap and duckbill frontstrap. Straight to moron jail.
If it's got the nub, it's the same
you can go to hell with it
Joke's on you, I'm already in Hell.
What is this picture from?
It's probably just an average apartment building with some filters and a Huxley quote.
Never.
Please clap.
>bullpup
>lightweight
>ez takedown
bros, it hurts
I come from the alternate reality where it was adopted. People still complain about it being a product of corruption, the plastic case ammo, and how Sig should've won. On an unrelated note the textron reality has us all receive state mandated GFs, the YF-23 and YF-12 projects are revived, and every ATF agent simultaneously committed suicide
textron is tard gf i'm sorry
Since this tread has some keltech crack vibes I want to ask a question of this idea could work (mind im a moron).
What if you have a problem with hit probability and want to increase it like they tried with duplex bullets, burst rifles, flechette rifles.
What is you make a bullet that is 3 seperate parts intertwined, kind of like 3 corkscrew shapes that intersect to make 1 traditional bullet but can seperate in the air and make 3 seperate projectiles/flechettes that still retain some sort of decent flight path, not to dissimilar from airburst fleccetes. Would this work and could you model it so that after say ~500 meters they start to unfold and take different flight paths giving you more of a chance to hit a target, essentially airburst but without the burst
>What if you just invent magic tech that makes a bunch of silly shit reliable?
Its not a thing thats on the table because its practically impossible to design something like that in a way that actually works much less is affordable to produce. Any attempt to do any of it is more likely to just not work at all at worst and at best work but be garbage compared to traditional rounds.
airburst rounds have a very spesific purpouse exaxtrly because of this trait, imagine loading your rifle with these self franging bullets to counter say a commercial drone more effectively, I could see the application in practice but my question is, is it even doable in the first place
The issue with something like airburst isnt getting it to work since they had working prototypes of it decades ago. Its getting it small cheap and effective enough to actually be practical. None of which is really possible with tech levels as they are. If you want airburst to do -anything- to any target its going to need quite a bit of charge in the bullet and quite a bit of bullet to fragment. You arent looking at rifle sized bullets anymore you are looking at a cannon or grenade. Then you have to realize that for all of this special super tech you are making so something explodes over a target you can just make something that fricking explodes and destroys the cover and whatever is behind it instead.
Airburst is one of those concepts that sounds really cool on paper but doesnt really have a practical use.
I am not talking about chemical airburst but when the X parts of the bullet start to split up due to loss in velocity of the bullet itself, kind of like the right picture in my post but instead of all those spikes 3 seperate intertwined flecettes that spread out once a bullet loses its velocity. Also since it is only the actual bullet that will need to be redesigned and manufacturerd i imagine it being a whole lot cheaper than alternatives like a decicated person with a shotgun or anti drone device.
Oh so fantasy bullshit again got it. Might as well be asking about hypotheticals around a wizard casting meteor on enemy trenches. There is no way a bullet can be designed to split into multiple projectiles and still remain effective. All you are designing is a shitty shotgun and as we all know shotguns are really fricking bad in almost every situation in war.
difference is that you get a shitty shotgun by just swapping out a bullet, that can be an incredible advantage at bearable cost but shure have no fun on this board its your right
>that can be an incredible advantage at bearable cost
It would be no fricking advantage because it would be a terrible fricking bullet. You would be at a disadvantage by having it because you would be lugging around a bunch of weight that would be absolutely useless. Even in larger caliber bullets if you have to design a bullet that somehow magically splits into multiple bullets at a certain range each fragment of that bullet is just lighter and will do less damage. Not to mention that when something seperates at high speed its going to catch the wind and fricking zip off in random directions and you arent going to hit shit while losing a shitload of energy due to air resistance. Just look how sabot tank rounds shed their sabot and imagine its a bullet splitting into 4 pieces instead.
It would be fricking useless.
The way we improved hit probability in the 90s was by putting an ACOG on the M4. The way we improve it in the 2020s is by with laser rangefinders built into the optic.
So? There are countless of times a lazer rangefinder will expose people for too long in a short to medium range engagement. If you are going to state the obvious dont bother speaking at all lol, im asking the exact opposite.
>times a lazer rangefinder will expose people
You actually think that a rangefinder uses the visible spectrum of light?
no I think the operation within the first 300 meters serves no purpouse and your better off with a inaccurate buckshot esque alternative for quick engagements
I find the very concept of "we should fire a bunch of really inaccurate shots" to be kind of silly. Even machine gunners are accurate.
Passed up due to the suppressor not looking cool enough
>Announce a civilian version before you know if you actually won the contract to receive the money and tooling to create said civilian version as well
I wanted it to win too but lol at this
People are STILL fricking screeching over the military trials and its so goddamn sad. Its not some kind of fricking conspiracy. The military designated design features they wanted and companies competed for them. The company that delivered the gun that fulfilled those criteria while being affordable won. You can all stop fricking whining about it now. Nobody gives a shit about the losers of the contract.
>CORRUPTION IS GOOD WHEN "WE" DO IT!
>EVERYTHING THAT HAPPENS I DONT LIKE IS CORRUPTION REEEEEEEEE
Just shut the frick up you schizo c**t.
he company that delivered the gun that fulfilled those criteria while being affordable won.
>final evaluation will be made on a 23.000 round performance test
>GAO describes Sig Sauer 320 as having lower reliability than Glock 19
>award contract to SIG before 23k endurance test is concluded, with no reason given
okay but it's not a conspiracy tho when it's openly rigged
>schizo rambling intensifies
Im sure a fricking random butthole on PrepHole of all places is a fricking expert in military acquisitions and knows more about the process than the people overseeing the fricking thing in the first place. Its totally not a bunch of rambling from some company fanboy or contrarian shitposting because his favorite company lost. Might as well be fricking PrepHole with its console war homosexualry. Just eat a dick and shut the frick up. I dont want to be hearing this stupid shit for the next fricking 20 years.
>It's impossible for army procurement to be corrupt! SO JUST STOP FRICKING TALKING ABOUT IT OK?
>Im sure a fricking random butthole on PrepHole of all places is a fricking expert in military acquisitions
yeah, you're right. of course you're not an expert. let me explain it for smoothbrained individuals like you:
>2 companies get picked for the final phase of a contract
>1 company bids the weapons for $170M, while the other bids $270M
>they both have to do two tests, the cheap one scores good on the first test, while the expensive company scores outstanding
>the contract is awarded before test 2 is concluded
>the final contract is worth more than the two initial bids, according to the army
>expensive company says "hey, that's unfair, we haven't done test two yet"
>US court of appeals says "it's only unfair if there is proven prejudice towards you, which we haven't found. ammo licensing (for standard 9mm mind you) is most likely to have been the tiebreaker, so your appeal is dismissed
>GOA doesn't discuss why the trials have been cut short
see, it's not that weird that people question the reasoning of the Army, especially when on the ground you need to trust the equipment, and during the test the more expensive company scored better on reliability.
You chucklefricks actually think the military picks solely based on performance? You dont need to be the BEST OF THE BEST to win a contract you just need to be good enough and cheap. PAssing over a """""superior""""" option that costs almost twice as much isnt some kind of fricking sign of conspiracy. Its a sign they didnt want to spend a bunch of money on something that was only marginally better and that WILL LIKELY NEVER SEE ACTUAL USE IN SERVICE. A fricking side arm isnt standard fricking issue and most of the people that carry them never leave the fricking base.
You are all just a bunch of dumb schizo tinfoil hat delusional brand fanboy c**trags. No amount of fricking screeching or posturing will -ever- amount to a fricking thing and you will never know what the frick you are talking about.
Why are you getting so asshurt about people criticizing the armies illogical procurement selection/waste?
Probably because he's posting from a federal building
then why did they have the trials in the first place?
the M9 was perfectly capable as officer's pistol. if they didn't want the best of the best, why did they budget half a billion dollars for an upgrade?
Because the M9 is fricking expensive and the old pistols were showing their age and really needed replacement. Getting M9s would likely have been double the cost of a newer more modern design so you just replace it with something that has newer features and is cheaper. Its not fricking rocket science. The military has never and will never be in the market for Gucci $3000 pistols to hand to a bunch of officers that will never use them. Its the same with any mass adopted weapon. The only time you spring for the extra cash is in platforms that REALLY benefit from it like airplanes and ship hulls. That shit being 3% better is life or fricking death for a plane or boat so cost is less of an issue. Grunts having a 3% boost for double the cost is just really fricking stupid.
>WILL NEVER SEE ACTUAL USE IN SERVICE
>really needed replacement.
please pick one (1) and only one (1)
Its still considered an important bit of kit by the army even if it never sees actual use dipshit. In an ideal world they would have just canned the fricking pistols altogether but the army dictates that a pistols is NEEDED so they require having a supply of functional weapons. Now kiss my ass.
it's not about /mymultimilliondollarlatestagecapitalismcompany/ lost, it's about the army red tape being moronic when it comes to firearms contracts.
Things are not looking too good for Sig-Shillers in this thread
Was a bullpup ever going to win over an AR? I say this as someone skeptical about the NGSW program from the start.
If Sig had submitted a bullpup, it would have won.