Armas individuales y de escuadra

Ejércitos de tierra de todo el mundo y elementos que los componen

Moderadores: poliorcetes, Lepanto, Orel, Edu

Re: Armas individuales y de escuadra

Notapor poliorcetes el Lun Oct 01, 2012 12:15 pm

A mí me interesa particularmente su evolución en arma individual: An-94, AK-12, resurrección del AK-107. Diría que es seguro que el 5.45x39 se mantiene, pero lo mismo me equivoco. Y es una pena que no hayan corregido los defectos de ergonomía y complejidad mecánica de un arma realmente revolucionaria como era el Nikonov An-94

Por donde crees que van los tiros con el FUSA ruso, charly? porque por más que se modernice al infante con electrónica y demás, tendrá que seguir repartiendo pildorazos en el ejercicio de su profesión
Nunca digas que éste es mi último sendero
**
podcast de portierramaryaire
https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-portierra ... 223_1.html

y recuerda nuestro patreon para actualizar el foro y crecer
https://www.patreon.com/portierramaryaire
Avatar de Usuario
poliorcetes
Site Admin
 
Mensajes: 11850
Registrado: Vie Abr 17, 2009 11:54 am

Re: Armas individuales y de escuadra

Notapor charly015 el Lun Oct 01, 2012 12:27 pm

Saludos

Yo creo que el principal problema de la industria en esta categoría es que el principal cliente a medio plazo no va a adquirir grandes cantidades de armas. Por lo tanto, la revolución del calibre, por ejemplo, tendrá que esperar. Hay 17,5 millones de AKs de la series 74 en los almacenes de las fuerzas armadas rusas y no van a quitarselos de encima de un plumazo. De ahí que se hayan presentado 4 opciones de modernización que pretenden colocar al AK-74M en un bun lugar y así poder seguir con ellos un tiempo.

Por lo que yo entiendo, para el ejército ruso el fusil es un capítulo del libro que puede ser cubierto con lo que tienen mejorandolo. No a largo plazo pero sí a corto y medio. Es la protección del infante y su integración electrónica lo que prima y sin duda donde se colocará el acento en los próximos años.

O sea, más importante que qué fusil llevan será qué óptica lleva el fusil.

UN SALUDO
charly015
 
Mensajes: 6194
Registrado: Vie Feb 24, 2006 6:29 pm

Re: Armas individuales y de escuadra

Notapor poliorcetes el Lun Oct 01, 2012 3:14 pm

Vale, entiendo que no se puede hacer retrofit al 74M con el sistema de equilibrio del retroceso del AK-107 o del AL-7. ¿Me equivoco? ¿Cuáles son las opciones de retrofit que están abiertas? Dónde puedo leer al respecto?

Lo de meter ópticas modernas (reddot/holográfica de momento, seguro que hay proveedores rusos que pueden desarrollar o incluso ofrecer visores sintéticos) es un avance muy importante. A nivel tan bajo como son las escuadras o secciones, fuerzas similares pueden tener un desempeño muy diferente si emplean los visores tradicionales ("iron sights") o con ópticas modernizadas (más que las ópticas incomprensiblemente obsoletas del G36, p.e.)

Iraq y Astán han demostrado más allá de la duda razonable que las ópticas modernas son casi tan revolucionarias como el cambio de calibre. Casi
Nunca digas que éste es mi último sendero
**
podcast de portierramaryaire
https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-portierra ... 223_1.html

y recuerda nuestro patreon para actualizar el foro y crecer
https://www.patreon.com/portierramaryaire
Avatar de Usuario
poliorcetes
Site Admin
 
Mensajes: 11850
Registrado: Vie Abr 17, 2009 11:54 am

Re: Armas individuales y de escuadra

Notapor charly015 el Lun Oct 01, 2012 4:26 pm

Saludos

Hay 4 opciones de modernización que pasan por invertir de 60 a unos 300 $ por fusil...

http://lenta.ru/news/2012/09/28/ak74/

... es de imaginar que la versión de 60 $ tendrá lo justo y la de 300 incluirá algunas o todas las cosas que se citan en ese artículo (fijaciones tipo Picatinny, culata telescópica, etc).

La decisión se hará pública a finales del 2012.

UN SALUDO
charly015
 
Mensajes: 6194
Registrado: Vie Feb 24, 2006 6:29 pm

Re: Armas individuales y de escuadra

Notapor poliorcetes el Lun Oct 01, 2012 6:56 pm

No entiendo por qué no modernizan el compensador del 74M. Es eficaz, pero a cambio de la firma acústica y el flash. Lo que he leido es que el compensador del AN-94 bajaba mucho la firma sonora porque parte del estampido era ultrasónico por una configuración como la de un silbato.

Por lo demás, entiendo que el pistón no admite modificación y que, por lo tanto, no se contempla en serio incorporar ese salto que es el tubo de compensación de retroceso y que lleva 50 años esperando a que algún fabricante lo adopte.

Una pena
Nunca digas que éste es mi último sendero
**
podcast de portierramaryaire
https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-portierra ... 223_1.html

y recuerda nuestro patreon para actualizar el foro y crecer
https://www.patreon.com/portierramaryaire
Avatar de Usuario
poliorcetes
Site Admin
 
Mensajes: 11850
Registrado: Vie Abr 17, 2009 11:54 am

Re: Armas individuales y de escuadra

Notapor charly015 el Lun Oct 01, 2012 8:39 pm

Saludos

Aquí tienes una de las opciones de modernización de los AK-74M de las fuerzas armadas rusas ...

Imagen

UN SALUDO
charly015
 
Mensajes: 6194
Registrado: Vie Feb 24, 2006 6:29 pm

Re: Armas individuales y de escuadra

Notapor Corsair el Mié Ene 23, 2013 9:01 pm

Buenas noches.

No se si estaba ya posteado.

SR-47, básicamente un AR-15 en calibre 7.62×39mm que utiliza los cargadores del AK-47.

Imagen

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR-47

Un saludo.
Si el rey de España tuviera
cuatro como Barceló,
Gibraltar fuera de España
que de los ingleses no.
Avatar de Usuario
Corsair
 
Mensajes: 1215
Registrado: Mié Nov 10, 2010 3:37 pm

Re: Armas individuales y de escuadra

Notapor poliorcetes el Jue Ene 24, 2013 10:03 am

No me suena que estuviera publicado y es una tremenda curiosidad. Fue un diseño preparado para una situación que si no es irrepetible le falta poco. Además, el problema es que es mucho más limitado que los nuevos diseños multicalibre que permiten al combatiente llevar los adaptadores (cañón, cierre, tolva) para utilizar distinta munición y cargadores a los habituales.
Nunca digas que éste es mi último sendero
**
podcast de portierramaryaire
https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-portierra ... 223_1.html

y recuerda nuestro patreon para actualizar el foro y crecer
https://www.patreon.com/portierramaryaire
Avatar de Usuario
poliorcetes
Site Admin
 
Mensajes: 11850
Registrado: Vie Abr 17, 2009 11:54 am

Re: Armas individuales y de escuadra

Notapor poliorcetes el Vie Abr 05, 2013 11:56 am

Charly, podrías traducirnos esta entrada?

http://lenta.ru/news/2013/04/02/izhmash/

Es que google se ha lucido y no queda claro si izmash va a innovar también en munición. Si se confirma que es algo parecido a un "Grendelsky", sería un notición
Nunca digas que éste es mi último sendero
**
podcast de portierramaryaire
https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-portierra ... 223_1.html

y recuerda nuestro patreon para actualizar el foro y crecer
https://www.patreon.com/portierramaryaire
Avatar de Usuario
poliorcetes
Site Admin
 
Mensajes: 11850
Registrado: Vie Abr 17, 2009 11:54 am

Re: Armas individuales y de escuadra

Notapor poliorcetes el Vie Abr 12, 2013 12:01 pm

Magnífico aporte en los foros de autogun, acerca del concurso actual para carabina americano

Guardsman26 says:
I am curious about the US Army's Improved Carbine competition.

I see one of three things happening:

(1) A winner is chosen, but Colt offers to provide an upgraded M4 variant that incorporates all key innovations from carbine competition at no extra cost, thus pulling the rug from under the feet of Remington, FN, and H&K. Colt soldiers on.

(2) A winner is chosen and the Army commits to buying an initial manufacturing run of 100,000 only for a new technology to come along 12 months later that is substantially better than the IC and which then subsequently replaces it.

(3) No winner is chosen and the IC competition is simply cancelled and justified by the need to reduce the budget.

One thing is for sure and that is no IC candidate is a substantial improvement over the M4.

It says a lot about Eugene Stoner's brilliance that his design has endured for half a century.

It'll be a combination of 1 and 3. Kids being born today will likely be issued an M16 variant upon their joining the services.

And, I don't know that it was necessarily Eugene Stoner's brilliance we have to blame this on. He was the guiding light behind the design of the AR-10, but Sullivan had more to do with converting the design over to 5.56mm, and Stoner was always a fan of the bigger 7.62mm cartridge. The longevity of the M16 has more to do with an unholy concatenation of events, being "just good enough" to succeed at its mission, and not quite bad enough to deserve replacement the way the other POS from that era finally was, the M60.

I'd say that the M16/AR-15 has more in common with the QWERTY keyboard than anything else--It's a somewhat-less-than-perfect alternative that became the standard through things other than any particular merit, and it is sticking around more due to its "installed base", as it were, than anything else.

I blame the idiots in the US military small arms procurement system. If they'd been halfway competent and honest, once their fantasy system of the SPIW proved unworkable and unaffordable, they'd have looked at the situation with regards to small arms and started work on a true intermediate-caliber assault rifle/SAW replacement which would have been ready for adoption during the period when the US was doing the first fleet replacement of the M16A1. Instead, they didn't do much more than produce an abortion of a replacement that didn't address any of the real issues with the M16, and instead of being optimized for combat, was based on a Marine requirement for what amounted to a glorified match rifle. So many poor choices, so many lost opportunities...
Nunca digas que éste es mi último sendero
**
podcast de portierramaryaire
https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-portierra ... 223_1.html

y recuerda nuestro patreon para actualizar el foro y crecer
https://www.patreon.com/portierramaryaire
Avatar de Usuario
poliorcetes
Site Admin
 
Mensajes: 11850
Registrado: Vie Abr 17, 2009 11:54 am

Re: Armas individuales y de escuadra

Notapor poliorcetes el Lun May 20, 2013 10:04 am

Interesante innovación de RheinMetall: un sistema tritubo para la MG3 en estación remota, que permitiría un fuego sostenido mucho más prolongado

No se trata de una MG multitubo rotatoria tipo gatling, sino de un sistema automático adaptable a una MG convencional que cambiaría el cañón cuando se hubiera calentado demasiado por otro fresco

Rheinmetall Defence are developing a new 7.62mm medium machine gun called the RMG 7.62 which takes a unique approach to dealing with heat, the age-old machine gun nemesis. At first glance it looks like a small version of the M134 Minigun, but the RMG is no Minigun. Unlike the Minigun, with its insane rate of fire, the RMG is designed to fire at the relatively slow pace of 800 rounds per minute (the exact rate of fire is user adjustable). What it lacks in speed it makes up for in endurance. When its barrel gets over heated the electronics rotate the barrels, replacing the hot barrel for a cool one.

Imagen

Imagen

The three barrel system would obviously be unpractical for soldiers on the ground, but it is perfect for use with remotely controlled gun mounts where it is neither possible nor safe for the operator to swap barrels manually. This setup would allow the remote-controlled gun to fire a lot more rounds and take fewer breaks than would be possible with a conventional single-barrel machine gun like the MG3.

The short clip shows a prototype RMG 762 firing but does not show the barrel changing procedure …


http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2013 ... e-rmg-7-62
Nunca digas que éste es mi último sendero
**
podcast de portierramaryaire
https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-portierra ... 223_1.html

y recuerda nuestro patreon para actualizar el foro y crecer
https://www.patreon.com/portierramaryaire
Avatar de Usuario
poliorcetes
Site Admin
 
Mensajes: 11850
Registrado: Vie Abr 17, 2009 11:54 am

Re: Armas individuales y de escuadra

Notapor charoska el Lun May 20, 2013 1:52 pm

No me convence, normalmente tampoco llevas tanta munición disponible como para que tengas que cambiar de cañón con tanta frecuencia, además, el que rota tarde mucho en enfriarse, y más si a su lado tiene otro u otros calentitos
Última edición por charoska el Lun May 20, 2013 1:59 pm, editado 1 vez en total
Que cada cual cumpla como bueno

....yo estoy aquí para defender la democracia, no para practicarla...........
Avatar de Usuario
charoska
 
Mensajes: 5850
Registrado: Mar Nov 20, 2007 11:08 pm

Re: Armas individuales y de escuadra

Notapor poliorcetes el Lun May 20, 2013 1:55 pm

Es cierto que el aire es un mal conductor térmico... pero por el peso que añaden, eliminarían complejidad poniendo una camisa de refrigeración líquida
Nunca digas que éste es mi último sendero
**
podcast de portierramaryaire
https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-portierra ... 223_1.html

y recuerda nuestro patreon para actualizar el foro y crecer
https://www.patreon.com/portierramaryaire
Avatar de Usuario
poliorcetes
Site Admin
 
Mensajes: 11850
Registrado: Vie Abr 17, 2009 11:54 am

Re: Armas individuales y de escuadra

Notapor poliorcetes el Dom Jun 09, 2013 1:09 pm

Dos aportes interesantes sobre la munición belga y alemana de PDW

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19913

Small Caliber PDW's: FN 5.7 mm/HK 4.6 mm
10/13/11

Several papers have described the incredibly poor terminal performance of the 5.7 x 28 mm projectiles fired by the FN P90:

--Dahlstrom D, Powley K, and Gordon C: “Wound Profile of the FN Cartridge (SS 190) Fired from the FN P90 Submachine Gun". Wound Ballistic Review. 4(3):21-26; Spring 2000.
--Fackler M: "Errors & Omissions", Wound Ballistic Review. 1(1):46; Winter 1991.
--Fackler M: "More on the Bizarre Fabrique National P-90", Wound Ballistic Review. 3(1):44-45; 1997.
--FBI Academy Firearms Training Unit. FBI Handgun Ammunition Tests 1989-1995. Quantico, U.S. Department of Justice--Federal Bureau of Investigation.
--Hayes C: “Personal Defense Weapons—Answer in Search of a Question”, Wound Ballistic Review. 5(1):30-36; Spring 2001.
--Roberts G: “Preliminary Evaluation of the Terminal Performance of the 5.7 x 28 mm 23 Grain FMJ Bullet Fired by the New FN P-90 , Using 10% Ordnance Gelatin as a Tissue Simulant”, AFTE Journal. 30(2):326-329, Spring 1998.

The current 31 gr SS-190 FMJ bullet has nearly adequate penetration, but the wound resulting from this projectile has a relatively small permanent crush cavity, as well as an insignificant temporary stretch cavity. Although the 5.7 x 28 mm penetrates soft body armor, wounding potential is at best like a .22 LR or .22 Magnum. Even 9mm NATO FMJ makes a larger wound--and we are all aware of the awe inspiring incapacitation potential of M882 ball from the M9......

A few large U.S. LE agencies adopted 5.7 mm weapons--after being involved in several OIS incidents with P90's, 5.7 mm usage in these agencies plummeted as a result of the poor terminal performance.

It is all basic physics and physiology. Look at the surface areas in contact with tissue for 9 mm FMJ and JHP compared to 5.7 mm. When both are point forward, the 9 mm FMJ crushes more tissue than the 5.7 mm; for the short time that the 5.7 mm is at FULL yaw, it crushes a bit more tissue than the 9 mm FMJ. At no time does the 5.7 mm crush more tissue than the expanded 9 mm JHP--even when the 5.7 mm FMJ is at full yaw, an expanded 9 mm JHP crushes more tissue. The relatively small temporary cavities produced by both the 9 mm and 5.7 mm projectiles are not likely to cause significant injury to the majority of elastic structures of the body. As with any penetrating projectile, if either a 9 mm or 5.7 mm bullet is ideally placed to cause significant damage to the CNS or major cardiovascular organs, a fatal result is likely.

Imagen

The P90 can definitely penetrate soft body armor, but then so can 9 mm AP rounds. The greater momentum of 9 mm bullets allow them to defeat vehicles and other intermediate barriers better than the 5.7 mm bullets. Standard 9 mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP JHP loads crush more tissue, offer ideal penetration, and are equally likely to not exit the opponent as the 5.7 mm. 5.56 mm and 6.8 mm weapons offer significantly superior terminal effects compared to 5.7 mm. Bottom line—what does the P90 offer that is not already available?


Small caliber PDW's like the MP7 and P90 are niche weapons that have very narrow and specific roles to play.

Below are comments specifically on the MP7 by a combat experienced senior SOF NCO currently serving in the U.S. military:

Quote:
”When employing the MP7 up close, you literally use it like a fire hose and sprinkle 4.6 all over the torso of the guy you want to reduce (usually on Auto, which is a CQB no-go anyway), and you have to keep hosing him down with bullets until his brain figures out that you are filling him in. Usually this takes longer than shooting a NSR with a rifle, so by the time that your brain figures out that the guy has quit and is crumpling, you are almost out of bullets and any other threats in the room have most likely started to engage you. IF your team is on their **** and everyone grasps the true importance of primary/secondary sectors of fire, then perhaps you can get in there and all of your guys can sprinkle 4.6 liberally on all of the bad guys in an efficient manner, but if you fail to do that, then bad things will happen quickly.”
Pat Rogers, a former NYPD officer and combat veteran Marine, is a highly respected firearms trainer who has also commented on the use of small caliber PDW’s like 4.6 and 5.7 mm:


Quote:
”Multiple rounds are required to incapacitate. This means significantly more training, which translates into significantly more ammunition expended, at a higher cost per round and with limited sources available. To ensure immediate incapacitation, brain shots will need to be emphasized. Which requires more training, and also more insertion of luck into the equation- especially dealing with multiple opponents. Limited capability within the system means engagement at anything outside of CQB distances may be problematic. This means movement to objective, egress etc will present a whole new range of difficulties. The gun is easy to shoot and fun as well. This does not always translate well to real world applications. If there is a single reason why these platforms are in any way superior to the M4 FOW, it is not apparent to me.””
A decorated, experienced SWAT officer at a U.S. LE agency that has had multiple OIS incidents with 5.7 mm FN P90's has written the following--note that his comments equally apply to the 4.6 mm MP7:


Quote:
”The 5.7 pistol as a carry gun is a mistake. There are far more effective weapons and ammunition combinations out there. The only factor that comes close to equalizing the P90 (not the 5.7 pistol) is it's full auto capability: 900 rpm of very controllable fire. Even this advantage is limited to close-in, CQB type engagements. I can put more rounds on target faster with the P90 than with my M4 in close contact engagements. Unfortunately you may HAVE to put more rounds in the threat due to the lack of damage the projectile causes. The 5.56 is far more effective at getting the attention of men than 5.7 mm. This is not speculation. We have been using 30 P90's for five years now. There have been multiple BG's shot with them. We will not be buying more 5.7 mm or other small caliber PDW systems”


- 30 P90's for five years
- 100,000 rounds per year through those weapons
- very reliable weapon
- very user friendly
- very easy to shoot
- everyone happy
- three OIS's later and some unbelievably poor terminal balistic performace we dropped them...quickly.
- 22+ OIS shootings using AR-15's with .223...everyone happy (except the 21 dead bad guys)."
As a result of poor terminal performance, a large Federal agency is also no longer running P90’s like they used to. Likewise, some military units that tried small caliber PDW's in combat are procuring other options, like 9" .300 Blackout uppers to run on M4 lowers.

When a civilian LE agency chooses a full-auto system, significantly more time is needed for training. This increases costs, both in the amount of ammunition necessary to purchase, as well as the need to pay officers for increased time in training, rather than being in the field. Instead of a 1-5 shot NSR with an AR15 based system, with an MP7 each officer is now going to be routinely shooting 15-20+ rounds into each target both in training and in actual OIS incidents, thus the amount of ammo expended is going to be 4 times what would be used with an AR15 based system shooting any common CQB caliber like 5.56 mm, .300 Blackout, 6.8mm, or even 7.62x51mm. How is an LE agency going to afford four times more training ammo for a weapon system like the MP7 that needs to be always shot full auto and whose ammo is more expensive than other common calibers?

In the civilian realm, how is an LE agency going to explain to their Admin and media why they are now needing to shoot every suspect 15-20+ times? In addition, when you are having to shoot 15-20 rounds full-auto at every target, there is a higher likelihood that some of those rounds may miss the target; how is an LE agency going to handle the liability from the potential increased number of missed shots that can occur with a system that needs to be used full-auto like a "fire hose" in order to offer adequate incapacitation of threats?

With the data now available, a U.S. LE agency would have to be woefully ignorant or colossally stupid to purchase the MP7 (or P90) for SWAT use given the numerous weapon systems available for LE SWAT/CQB use that are both better and more cost effective than small caliber PDW's. If SBR's are desired, consider a 10-12" 5.56 mm using properly selected good quality barrier blind ammunition (see: http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19881), 8-12" .300 Blackout uppers when appropriate LE ammo is finally released (6-12 months away); even better get 8-12" 6.8 mm's uppers, or if you want to have the best terminal performance go with the new group of 16" .308 rifles like the KAC SR25 EMC, LaRue Predatar (or OBR for precision use), or the FN Mk17/SCAR-H using appropriate ammunition (see: http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=19878).
Nunca digas que éste es mi último sendero
**
podcast de portierramaryaire
https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-portierra ... 223_1.html

y recuerda nuestro patreon para actualizar el foro y crecer
https://www.patreon.com/portierramaryaire
Avatar de Usuario
poliorcetes
Site Admin
 
Mensajes: 11850
Registrado: Vie Abr 17, 2009 11:54 am

Re: Armas individuales y de escuadra

Notapor charoska el Dom Jun 09, 2013 1:37 pm

Del precio de un cartucho de 5,7 no dice nada ¿verdad?

Es prohibitiva
Que cada cual cumpla como bueno

....yo estoy aquí para defender la democracia, no para practicarla...........
Avatar de Usuario
charoska
 
Mensajes: 5850
Registrado: Mar Nov 20, 2007 11:08 pm

PrevioSiguiente

Volver a Ejércitos de tierra

¿Quién está conectado?

Usuarios navegando por este Foro: Google [Bot] y 11 invitados