h a l f b a k e r yRecalculations place it at 0.4999.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
AR36
36" long barrel assault rifle | |
The AR36 chambers the rounds at the back end of the rifle as compared to the mid rifle chambering of most long weapons.
The reason I think this has never been done before in a rifle is due to kickback, shell ejection, and even gas ejection at the end of the stock making it impractical.
I have
a new idea of placing this action behind the shoulder.
The AR36 has shoulder plates on the front and back of the shooting shoulder. One on the back of the shoulder to protect from escaping gasses / shells, the other on the front of the shoulder to brace for recoil.
The barrel is 36" long compared to the 18" or 21" standards, but due to the behind the back chambering system, it seems like the AR36 actually has a shorter barrel to the user. It is mounted on a swivel so that when not in use it hangs down to about mid thigh.
Always seconds away from flipping up on the hinge, taking the safety off and firing.
The 36" barrel provides long range accuracy that just can not be achieved with the 21's or 18's, yet due to the shoulder swivel mount, high manueverability in tight situations. If you don't believe me, find your yard stick / meter stick and place the 12" mark (30cm?) under your armpit and swing it into firing position. SEE!
I think the magazines for the AR36 would be non standard. I imagine spring loaded cylinders that run lengthwise with the barrel and hold maybe 10 rounds, but I also imagine a revolver type magazine holding system.
Feeding rounds into the chamber would require a secondary revolver type system, I think, making the rate of fire slower than most assault rifles, but probably not so much as to negate the accuracy / manueverability factor.
I think you could probably get five of the cylindrical magazines yeilding 50 rounds as compared to I think the 30 max on AK's, AR15's, etc.
I don't know why I thought of such an evil thing. Perhaps because my self taught Sith thing is not really working out.
High Standard Model 10
http://en.wikipedia...h_Standard_Model_10
Bullpup shotgun [8th of 7, Apr 27 2010]
Neostead
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neostead
Vicious recoil ... [8th of 7, Apr 27 2010]
Pancor Jackhammer
http://en.wikipedia...i/Pancor_Jackhammer
Uncomfortably heavy. [8th of 7, Apr 27 2010]
[link]
|
| |
I'm not 100% sure I'm picturing this right, but if I am wouldn't this be impossible for the shooter to reload without completely dismounting the weapon? Also I foresee some weight and balance issues - think of holding a 2x4 over your shoulder and swinging it back and forth. The weight behind you will throw you off balance. |
|
| |
The barrel swings up from under your armpit, not over your shoulder. |
|
| |
The sites / scope would have to be high above the barrel (possibly 6-8") - I did notice that when swinging around the yardstick, but didn't think it to be unworkable. |
|
| |
I thought reloading would be something like this: |
|
| |
A thumb pushed release lever frees the cylinder magazine (they are long - I know), it pops out, you reach back like robin hood and pull out another cylinder magazine click it in place, rotate, and repeat until you've got another 50 rounds lined up or have to fire again, whichever comes first. |
|
| |
It would have to be about 2x4 shaped to do all of this and the sites / scope would have to be front mounted and cantilever back over the barrel / magazines, so it might not take abuse in handling well without messing up the sighting. |
|
| |
When I said revolver type magazine system, I was imagining 5 30" long independent tubes that would spring feed the rounds back like the first repeating rifles did. Each tube would have an opening at the back end that another revolving feeder would act within to pull the rounds out and load into the chamber upon trigger depression. |
|
| |
If the cylindrical magazine is empty, you reach up and twist it to the next magazine. |
|
| |
When all magazines are empty, you can hit the release, pull out the empty magazine cylinder, do the over the shoulder robin hood thing and snap in a loaded magazine cylinder, rotate the cylinder 'till you hear or feel the click indicating proper alignment, twist the exterior revolving mechanism & repeat. |
|
| |
I just don't see the advantage over bullpup designs. |
|
| |
Having the sight line so high over the barrel will affect sighting. |
|
| |
General rule of thumb - the more complex the magazine, the less likely to be reliable. |
|
| |
Lastly, I think this would be the antithesis of "maneuverable". Most modern warfare is going the way of urban combat. This involves a great deal of contortion, swapping hands, aiming under/over/around stuff. Hell, they're coming up with prismatic sight add-ons to allow off-the shoulder, hold the gun around the corner shooting. I mean, how would you get this baby to your shoulder to shoot out the window of your UHMMW? |
|
| |
I think [MikeD] would have a lot to say about this, him being someone who's been there and done that. |
|
| |
// I was imagining 5 30" long independent tubes //
So, not so much an assault rifle (the clue's in the name), more a light infantry support weapon.
Or indeed, a rather heavy support weapon. |
|
| |
Oddly enough your design gets rid of one of the problems with bullpup designs where off-hand shooting results in spent cartridges bouncing off your nose. Also a nifty take on a quiver full of magazines. |
|
| |
But it sounds even more difficult to "switch hit" quickly should occasion require. You've also gotten rid of any method of easily checking/clearing the chamber: you'd have to remove the gun from your shoulder. |
|
| |
It's not an assault rifle [re 21Q]: at best you'd be competing with reinforced assault rifles for usage as a light/medium mg squad weapon. |
|
| |
here I was getting ready to bun it just to counter a
"guns are bad mmmkay"bone... but having read 21q's
anno I have to bone this. |
|
| |
//When I said revolver type magazine system, I was imagining 5 30" long independent tubes that would spring feed the rounds back like the first repeating rifles did.// |
|
| |
If you check back to those "first repeating rifles", you'll notice they always used blunt or flat nosed bullets. Why? Well, take a cartridge loaded with a spire-point bullet, and lay it along a straight edge. Place another cartridge behind it, and see where the point of the bullet touches. |
|
| |
Now imagine holding it that way with a spring. Now imagine some recoil. |
|
| |
"This is your face before recoil. This is your .... your ... ear ? Nose ? Lip ? No, pretty sure it was your nose ... after recoil ..." |
|
| |
//Machine guns aren't meant for long range, either //
I was ruminating weight redistribution for light/medium squad machine-guns and wondering if you could go back to using the "Mark I" bipod. |
|
| |
[lurch] beat me to to my post, what works on a shotgun will not work on a rifle. You don't want to have a tube of pointy bullets each point bumping into the primer of the next. As [21Q] alluded to, the longer barrel would significantly increase the moment of inertia and increase the weight, needing both a longer and stronger barrel to prevent bending. As for creating a shorter sniper rifle, I'm doubtful that I'd want the bolt action under my armpit and since you have to ditch the tube feeds, I wouldn't want all the bullet weight all the way in the back of the rifle. (-) |
|
| |
A lot of the issues are as much about balance as overall size. |
|
| |
Consider the typical 12-gauge double barrel sporting shotgun. Since the 1880's, it has been technically possible to make a "Bullpup" design with the breech just in front of the stock plate, and the trigger and grips moved well forward along the barrel. Given the short length of the hinged breech mechanism, the overall length of the weapon would only be a small amount longer than the overall length of the barrels.
The mass of the weapon could be adapted to control recoil, and a sculpted cheek pad provided. A side-mounted sight might be needed. |
|
| |
Yet these have never acheived popularity. |
|
| |