Well, since the M4 works - and HAS worked, many times - at literal point-blank range, I don't really see a gap in "close-in urban" combat. Mechanized combat? I think they are talking about mounted patrolling in HMMWVs or MRAPs, and not armor engagements between tanks. Most of this kind of fighting is handled by crew-served weapons, and if troops dismount it is usually to clear a structure. Again, the old M4 works fine here, and is very maneuverable inside a building.In addition, the SMG platform was chosen as it potentially fills a gap in the global arms portfolio that is gaining increased attention as the battlefield moves to more close-in urban and mechanized combat, which requires hi-power,adjustable ROF and highly maneuverable weapon frames.
No, you are not the only one. I hate to be a spoilsport, but that is one of those things that looks cool, but has no practical benefits, and some real drawbacks.Somebody sent that link to me a few months ago...
Am I the only one who thinks that design looks more complicated then a standard SMG and necessitates a shorter barrel?
AgreedNot sure why an adjustable rate of fire is required. Most shooting from individual weapons in theater is on semiauto. Very few situations call for burst fire from a handheld weapon. Rather, rapid and accurate semiauto fire is generally used.
The problem with bullpups is that the LOP is invariably made too long. Try shooting a Steyr AUG, for example, from a squared-up fighting stance while wearing body armor of the IBA/IOTV type. It's practically impossible. Reloading is also less efficient with a bullpup versus a standard configuration. I could forgive the latter, but not the former.The folks at Mag-Pul have proposed that it be reconfigured as a bullpup. Put the magazine inside the pistol grip; put the action behind the trigger group instead of in front, and you've got something...Compare, and you'll see the bullpup is much more practical.
Well in my case, of course, it would join all the other range toys! The full-auto pistol caliber subgun belongs in a car, or under a coat. Consider the Secret Service guys with their Uzis. The Uzi is nice. Now make it smaller and lighter, in a major caliber. In a car, the problem with the Beretta Storm (to use your example) or a carbine is that you can't swing it around, can't switch from shooting from right side to left side. OAL is too long.The problem with bullpups is that the LOP is invariably made too long. Try shooting a Steyr AUG, for example, from a squared-up fighting stance while wearing body armor of the IBA/IOTV type. It's practically impossible. Reloading is also less efficient with a bullpup versus a standard configuration. I could forgive the latter, but not the former.
Perhaps they can come up with an adjustable stock length on their bullpup redesign. But it's still just a weak submachinegun, which has extremely limited use in the military context, having been superceded by short assault rifles. Much the same can be said for the police market, though I suppose somewhat less so since a police officer is less likely to face an armored opponent than is a soldier.
I am not sure what practical use a bullpup carbine in .45ACP would serve for the civilian market, beyond being a range toy. It would be okay for home defense, but no better than other weapons. And again, what could it do that can't already be accomplished by a Beretta Storm or similar?
Looking at the pics on the Mag-Pul site, I see that by making it into a bullpup, they have raised the bore axis very considerably compared to the original design. Comparing it to your example of the Uzi (a weapon with which I was not terribly impressed, though I have very limited trigger time on it), I have to question how controllable it will be. Minus the depressed bore axis, and making it lighter and more powerful than the Uzi, it seems to me it will be rather difficult to control. But maybe I am wrong and the mechanism will make it easier to control than I envision.Well in my case, of course, it would join all the other range toys! The full-auto pistol caliber subgun belongs in a car, or under a coat. Consider the Secret Service guys with their Uzis. The Uzi is nice. Now make it smaller and lighter, in a major caliber.
True, but I was talking about civilian-legal guns. Make the OAL of the TDI/Mag-Pul design 26" for NFA purposes, with a minimum 16" barrel, and it will also be unwieldy inside a car. Although, we manage to do okay with our M4s inside very cramped HMMWVs, though we don't usually shoot through open windows.In a car, the problem with the Beretta Storm (to use your example) or a carbine is that you can't swing it around, can't switch from shooting from right side to left side. OAL is too long.
Yes, the LOP is fine. I retract my previous statement involving the AUG.Look at the photos on the Mag-Pul website. Good LOP, no?
Agreed. You're describing scenarios almost exclusively related to executive protection missions. Joe Sixpack carrying a rifle in his trunk for general emergencies has a wider latitude in gun choice than the narrow and specialized field of VIP protection. Joe Sixpack isn't going to carry anything bigger than a pistol under his coat. And Joe Sixpack probably isn't going to be able to drive and shoot a subgun out the window. :mrgreen:Just the ticket for deploying quickly from a car, or fighting from inside a car, or guarding bodies while wearing a suit coat, but no, definitely not a general issue weapon.
Or you could just use an MP9.:smt033IMO, it would be better to re-design the old Ingram M10 (MAC-10) with better ergonomics (grip/safety/sights), modern plastics, and a way to reduce the cyclic rate and improve the trigger pull, perhaps by figuring out how to run it from a closed bolt. A compact package like that would have practical applications, not just Star Wars looks.