www.militaar.net

gorilla kirjutas: -Ühendkuningriik, FN FAL ''vaba maailma parem käsi'' läks riiulisse, kasutab L85A2, kuulu järgi väga rahul.

It is an obvious advantage: Delete the stock, move the pistol grip forward, and voila, an extra 4-8″ of barrel absolutely free. But, if it’s so easy to see the appeal of the bullpup, why has the concept lost ground in global military market?
...
In the 1960s and 1970s, with the memory of World War II fresh, and the threat of World War III looming large in the minds of the world’s engineers, the challenges of the bullpup seemed insignificant. In a large-scale war, draftees or conscripts would need a simple, if inelegant weapon that could be produced cheaply and that provided good effectiveness. What human factors considerations that existed then were the legacy of the gravelbelly 10-ring-shooter’s tradition, not hard-learned lessons taught by terrorists, timers, and AR500 steel. During the Cold War, the threat of nuclear weapons led to the rise of the Armored Personnel Carrier, and later Infantry Fighting Vehicle, machines that packed troops tightly within their armored hulls, protecting them against nuclear, biological, and chemical attacks. The needs of the armies during this period were thus ideal for the bullpup; designers were free to take the simplest route regardless of ergonomic considerations, so long as the product was cheap and small enough for the large-scale mechanized warfare expected at the time. The FAMAS, AUG, and L85 are all typical products of this martial environment.

Aixc kirjutas:Heckler & Koch teatab uue HK 433 nimelise automaadi väljatöötamisest. Väidetavalt ühendab see relv G36 ja HK 416 meeldivad ja kasulikud omdused, olles samas odavam kui HK 416.
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017 ... och-hk433/

The HK433 uses the NATO standard 5,56 mm x 45 mm and a short-stroke piston, but the system is prepared for other calibers like 7,62 mm NATO and .300 Blackout as well as 7,62×39 Kalashnikov

Ma sellest M16 vihkamisest aru ei saa. Olen lasknud ja puhastada pole ka raske. Lastes on mugav - relv tõuseb lastes veidi ja kohe pärast lasku on sihikupilt samal kohal ning saad kohe edasi lasta.

Probleemid, mis sellega Vietnamis tekkisid, lahendati parandustega paari aasta jooksul, aga halb maine jäi külge ja seda korratakse edasi hoolimata sellest, et need probleemid olid 50 aastat tagasi.

Hea külg on modulaarsus, võrreldes AK-ga on väga lihtne relvale külge panna vajalikke ja mittevajalikke asju . Ja arvestades, et see 1950ndate disain mõningate parandustega praegugi võidab ära mitmete riikide (Prantsusmaa, Uus-Meremaa) automaatide konkursse, siis ei saa see olla halb relv.

alariga nõus, millest see M16 süsteemi viha?

alari kirjutas:Ma sellest M16 vihkamisest aru ei saa.