Apolyton gun thread

[Donegeal]

Originally posted by Sikander
Regarding the M-16, or more to the point the .223 (aka 5.56mm Nato) cartridge:

The .223 uses another strategy to achieve this goal. It is a light high velocity round with the capability of penetrating all but the best body armors available. The bullet is thin and long, which makes it unstable once it hits anything. It is quite likely to tumble once it makes contact with its target (or a leaf for that matter). This tumbling can produce terrible wounds sometimes, with the bullet taking erratic and sometimes long paths through the body of the target. But it isn't a sure thing at all. As with all ballistics this round trades certain things for others (bullet weight for velocity) while its tumbling tendency tries to balance out the desire for penetration in a military setting against the desire to make the most of a light round within the international conventions against any but solid bullets on warfare. The smaller ammunition allows a lot more to be carried by the individual soldier, which is an important consideration for the military.

Additionally, the M-16 was not designed to kill. It is designed to wound.

If you kill an enemy soldier, that is one person out of the battle.

If you wound an enemy soldier, that one is out of the battle. However, it will take two to carry him away, taking two other soldiers out of the battle, at least temperoraily. It changes "one shot, one kill" into "one shot, three down".

[Pekka]

This is true. It is very much more desirable to wound than kill. It also demoralizes the men more if you get some decent gut shots in there and the people scream in pain, this is very bad for your moral and it takes some out of you , plus the fact that someone needs to carry them away, or take care of them what ever.

[vodkakov]

Originally posted by Dissident
I've always wondered about the M-16. How is it such a small bullet can kill anything? 5.56 mm? Even 7.62 mm seems small.

According to the RSM at my OTC unit, NATO switched from the 7.62 to the 5.56 round because it was less likely to produce an instant fatality - the logic being a wounded man takes more people out of the battlefield (carrying him back to medics; medical staff etc.) and resources than a dead man does.

I've only fired the L85A1 (SA80)... was pretty good (largely due to the 4x magnification scope (SUSAT)), though it is a b***h to clean and maintain.

[Jaguar]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


I'm glad they're done with the M6D, it made things no fun. Grenades are good, but two weapons = kill and chance to survive, while IME gun + grenade = kill and die. At least, if they see you coming.

\
On the contrary, every single two-handed weapon can be used for a one-shot kill.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by shawnmmcc
You're confusing recoil with balance, Kuciwalker. I don't have the formula handy, but it's essentially the mass x velocity of the bullet (momentum, not energy) divided by some factor that includes the weight of the gun. This means the heavier the gun, the less recoil.

No, if the center of mass is along the line of the barrel, then the bullet shouldn't exert any torque and the gun won't be pushed up.

[Immortal Wombat]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
No, if the center of mass is along the line of the barrel, then the bullet shouldn't exert any torque and the gun won't be pushed up.

Recoil is when the gun is pushed back. That happens wherever the centre of mass is.

[Cruddy]

Re: Apolyton gun thread

Originally posted by Dissident
I'm no gun expert, so I'm curious if anyone can inform me.

What is the best weapon for each class. revolver, automatic pistol, submachine gun, assault rifle, shotgun, etc.

Yeah I was watching the history channel again. I love history channel. they just had a program on Kalashnakov weapons. They even said you can get an AK-47 for like $50 in Africa.

Anyone know where I can get one? I would love to get an AK-47. . For collecters item only of course.

I'll never know why guns seem cool to me. I guess that makes me evil.

discuss.

I'm no expert either - but one thing to remember about any weapon - it's effectiveness is also limited by the owner's personal skill and training.

Practice with loads of ammo if you're going to do it properly. On the basis that if you're going to do something, do it properly.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Jaguar
On the contrary, every single two-handed weapon can be used for a one-shot kill.

Not unless you've already dealt a lot of damage to them.

[Drake Tungsten]

Using a single-wielded PP to burst their shields and then switching to a two-handed weapon (Battle Rifle is good) to finish them off is damn effective and allows you to still use grenades.

[Kuciwalker]

Not as fast as other methods, though. Dual-wielded SMG's take someone down in 2.2 seconds. It takes at least half a second just to switch to the BR.

[Drake Tungsten]

With the slow flight of an overcharged PP burst, though, it isn't that bad. Depending on the range to target, you can usually get the BR out just as the PP shot is taking down your opponent's shields. Not the absolute fastest, obviously, but still very quick and with the added bonus of still having grenades at your disposal, which is always nice if you get surprised and need to make a quick getaway...

[Kuciwalker]

I (almost) never have just a PP out, though, because it really sucks in a pinch.

[Drake Tungsten]

True. I prefer a dual-wield PP/SMG myself, but I can see the benefits of a PP/BR combo. I find myself really wishing I could quickly toss a grenade every now and then.

[Kuciwalker]

That's the advantage of the Brute Shot. Grenade, wait half a second, BOOM BOOM BOOM and you've got a triple or quadruple kill.

[Drake Tungsten]

Never really use the Brute Shot. Guess I'll have to try it out now.