The ideal weapon for the conscript is the one that is cheap to make and easy to learn. This is basically the SMG. SMGs can be made much cheaper than assault rifles and are just as easy to use. As a bonus, they are lighter, their ammo is lighter per round, and can be more compact, too. Plus, they’re more controllable in full auto. All good things for extended firefights and for CQB.
Drawbacks? Not really.
>effective range
Don’t pretend that your conscripts with minimal training and no scope are gonna hit shit beyond 100 meters
>body armor
If they have no body armor, there’s no problem.
If they have low-tier body armor, you can probably use some AP round without compromising the advantages of the SMG too much.
Or, you can just accept that you’ll need a hit to the limbs or the head, which will reduce effectiveness somewhat but not by too much
conscripts are useless even if you gave them all XM25s and NODs
We aren't broke, we don't use conscripts and if we did, we have so many M4s in inventory that some pipegun SMG is unneeded. I'm not just saying that as an American, that's true of any first world country. Massed low-quality infantry with bottom-dollar guns is a concept that died in WW2. Even the russians are only considering such things because they're totally depleted, rather than as an informed strategic choice like you're advocating.
This isn’t about the USA in particular
Think of the countless shitholes in Africa and South America that would need cheap bodies for their wars
I’f mention Russia and Ukraine too but they have a stockpile of AKs
Then go sell them on your brilliant idea. You're not interested in feedback, you're just autspergic. If you are right you'll make money so go succeed selling the concept by selling some hardware.
maybe for some diy gun makers if they can't into high pressure and gas port yet, but commercially smg has not been cheap to buy than an assault rifle.
In what wars have you used an SMG and in what roles?
There'd be many if the NFA were overturned
I don't see any use for them beyond compact personal defense weapons
>The ideal weapon for the conscript is the one that is cheap to make and easy to learn. This is basically the SMG.
your thread was over after you opened with this retarded statement. There is no reason why an SMG is inherently easier to learn or even much cheaper to make. You can serviceable AR or AKs for a price any country can afford especially when you are ordering them in large quantities like a military would.
Really bad thread OP.
>There is no reason why an SMG is inherently easier to learn or even much cheaper to make.
an SMG uses a lot less material than an assault rifle and can use simpler designs (e.g. blowback).
>An smg can be slightly cheaper than a rifle
No military cares. There's a little thing invented in 1913 called mass production. Any military can afford to equip their guys with rifles. Yes, even African shithole despot militaries have been equipping their child soldiers with AKs. No one gives a fuck about the price.
>slightly cheaper
Several times cheaper, by my math. Big difference when you’re a shithole that needs to turn civilians into “soldiers” ASAP
You just don't get it. No one cares about this. The poorest militaries in the world can outfit their armies with AKs. AKs which will be far superior to even the gucciest SMGs, and we aren't talking gucci if this hypothetical military is so desperate they can't afford rifles.
No one will ever adopt your idea, it's really dumb.
>AK
>superior
>can't hit broadside of the barn
Anon, when someone points out you are wrong it's best to just be humble and accept defeat graciously. Acting like a retarded child isn't a good look.
it’s ok bud. we know you’ve never fired a gun
please explain why an AK is so much more inacurate than an smg
hes weaker than a 10 year old starving african and cant handle the recoil
Any gun with a semblance of QC will be more accurate than one of the atrocities that passes for an AK in the third world. I think the Khyber Pass is one of the worst offenders in this regard. As I mentioned:
> third world gunsmiths don’t know what the sight is for so they make sights that are useless (e.g. without a notch)
> guns are tested by dropping a bullet through to see if the barrel is worn. Sellers in the know will cheat this test by squeezing the barrel with a vice. Naturally, this degrades the barrel from “worn out” to “absolutely dogshit”
These are the two things I can recall from the top of my head
> AKs which will be far superior to even the gucciest SMGs
I’m pretty sure that remembering to cut a notch in the sights and not squeezing the barrel in a vice to make it pass the “bullet drop test” will make the smg come out ahead
Name the militaries fielding SMGs as the standard issue infantry weapon. After you're done, name the militaries fielding an AK variant as a standard issue infantry weapon.
/thread
>militaries are dumb and bought into comfy muh accurate rifle fire concept
Now look at videos of mobiks cqb in Ukraine ans see how this peacetime concept is shattered to pieces when hit stone wall of the reality
Your idea is bad man, sorry. We all have bad ideas from time to time. Try to learn from this mistake.
>can't disprove the point
>just crying no you are wrong wrong wrong
>democratsealofaproval.jpg
hi newfag!
Your proposed design would be a new firearm with no existing supply chain. AR-15s are ubiquitous. Parts will be inherently cheaper because of economies of scale.
Your math stinks.
>Surplus doesn't exist
>Doesn't get free rifles from one colonisator or another.
No, anon, assault rifles are here and can be had quite cheap. No need for smg, besides niche roles.
shitty open bolt blowback smgs often actually are easier and cheaper to produce than gas operated just because there is less machining required. even in mass production when there is less machining required things become cheaper. not that OP is right but if you want to make a really cheap gun, open bolt fixed firing pin straight blowback is the way to go, and that's not really feasible as a rifle.
Using less material isn't as important as using cheaper material. The biggest factor in a gun's price is cost of R&D and quality control
I like the idea of an SMG being used for CQB especially house break in situations, although unless you wanna shill out 10-20k for a mac or uzi thats full auto, a semi auto smg sounds gay as fuck.
>If they have no body armor you're good
Unless its some hoodlum or crackhead breaking in expect them to wear anything from 3A and above
>If they have low tier body armor use AP
Not gonna punch thru shit unless its black tip and even then thats banned for pistol calibers
>you can just accept that you’ll need a hit to the limbs or the head
You can, but I've heard too many fagtards say that and when I take them to the range their grouping is shit (did that with 3 employees so far) at 15 meters starting, of course they sounded like noguns fags that didnt know shit either.
SMGs are a specialist weapon. Outside of certain circumstances they're more or less inferior to rifles. You may as well suggest "I really think bolt actions should make a comeback".
>Outside of certain circumstances they're more or less inferior to rifles
>inferior
Wish he also tested P90 and MP7...
For that to happen, they must be chambered in magnum handgun cartridges like .50 AE, .357, or .44.
>muh accurate assault raiflus!
Everyone must watch
The Eugene Stoner Tapes - Part 5: Future Weapons Design
OP you dum, these things are hopeless in any real frontline combat considering body armor are pretty much the norm
The only way i can see SMGs being useful in this day and age is in form of something like sten or luty, and only to arm resistance groups (not infantry) until they can raid an armory or some shit where the guards are relatively less hardened and finally get their hands on some proper rifles
Yeah nah there's plenty of videos from the current war proving otherwise
Post em.
>throwing a grenade at a dead body
he is now compost
#
#
#
And how do I know that? How do I know in these cases bullets penetrated rifle plates instead of going around them? I expect you provide quick and accurate answer. Otherwise you are arguing in bad faith.
You can quite literally see in those videos that the bullets are hitting frontally, for example the one dude sitting in trench recess and the dude in the shed
Duude, plate covers around 15% of frontal area. Bullets have 75% chance of hitting around plate abs only 15% of hitting plate.
And you know it
Yes, that's bad faith argument and you can't recover from it. Vatnik style of argument must be punished.
Bullet proof vests should be bigger and I'm tired of pretending weight is an issue
all solider are trained to shoot center mass
vests are designed to cover center mass
impacts of dust can be seen hitting center mass
you are a complete retard
.
There's more but i don't have the time to dig the archives for you, go check that first channel i linked
I fail to see how a SMG would have been any better in this scenario.
Well they won't. I was posting these to disprove OP's "SMG would be better since AKs doesn't penetrate armor anyway" argument
>The ideal weapon for the conscript is the one that is cheap to make and easy to learn. This is basically the AR-15. AR-15 clones can be made much cheaper than a bespoke SMG and are just as easy to use. As a bonus, they have a large existing aftermarket, wide parts availability, their ammo is flatter firing (good for conscripts), and can be more compact or more tacticool through Alibaba accessories. Plus, retards shouldn't have full auto. All good things for extended firefights and for actually having effect on target.
>Drawbacks? Not really.
>Plus, retards shouldn't have full auto
>retards: sorry, still using spray and pray doesn't care what you say
You're the one who brought up prolonged firefights, enjoy your raw conscripts dumping their entire ammo supply into a spooky tree that made a funny noise. If you're so dirt poor that you're considering compromising on even the most basic assault rifle for your troops, you probably haven't heavily invested in logistics to keep those SMGs firing.
Assault rifles armed mobiks would be magdumping the same . But the difference is when they got in situation when they actually can see and hit close enemy, SMG better suited for hipfire auto spray would srvr mobik better. Idea that mobiks would be carefully taking aim with sights and applying marksmanship fundamentals is absolute pipedream
>lighter
With any mechanism more complex then a direct blowback yes they are lighter. But complex mechanism raises the cost. Fully loaded uzi (direct blowjob) is about 9 lbs(aboot 4 kg) . Although it is short and made of steel so aluminum and polimer can reduce weight
M4 is about 8 lbs (sling+mag, no optics and shit).
Mp5 is about 5.6 to 6 lbs , steel + roller delayed blowback but it is an expensive smg.
Dont get me wrong in house to house fighting an smg is absolutely a viable weapon if for no other reason then you can carry a shit ton of pistol caliber mags and they can potentially have high cyclic rates. But for a standing army a rifle caliber makes more sense due to longer range , barrier penetration , soft armor enetration , more POWA. Because you wont always do house to house.
Bro
Its not 1938
These SMGs, were a response to lack of resources to produce proper rifles.
We have gone way to far in manufacturing technology to rely on this trash.
AKs, ARs ect. make all of these obsolete
Cheap direct blowback SMG’s actually have more recoil than an ar15. Also 5.56 actually weighs the same or possibly less than 9mm. If psa is able to sell ar15’s for under $500, then I doubt smg’s are gonna be that much cheaper to produce if it all.
You can make roller delayed intermediate cartridge Ass ault Rifle (TM) with litle added complexity over traditional SMG.
>conscripts with minimal training
at that point you've already failed
>their ammo is lighter per round
incorrect, for example 9mm rounds are generally heavier than 5.56
nah
#Kony2012
>country too poor to make cheap rifles
>but not too poor to make AP pistol ammo
>when any rifle penetrates soft armor
Try again OP
I'm a fan of the Uru myself.