Colt Canada's Next Generation Bullpup Prototype
- Thread starter TV-PressPass
- Start date
![-[Crosshair]-](/forum/data/avatars/m/31/31565.jpg?1718745216){kind=avatar}
redshooter
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Central Ontario
You win todays prize!!!!! That, or Colt will end up owning the data and process and take it somewhere else.
It's turning into quite the thread...
a little fact, a little fun...kept me entertained for days!!! Thank you TV-PressPass!!!
Last edited:
r34skyline
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
It's a wonderful and hateful thing at the same time. If you are using shears on prepreg be prepared to replace them frequently. But once the finished product pops out of the autoclave it is a good feeling.
Expendable Nate
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- New Brunswick
4 magazines*.
Don't forget the "tactical" charging-handle latches. Or the TRIADs. Or the vertical grip rail on the C9A2s. Or the folding mechanism for the C9A2's stock that gives us a great length of pull of 2 feet. Definitely what we need on a heavy weapon.
Everything we're getting is a cheap as hell, half-a**ed version of something that's actually good... that other countries have already been using for years.
Yeah, money on R&D.... my poor tax pennies. As for F-35:
Eurofighter Typhoon, operational, F-35 is not. Typhoon has (for the same length and wing span):
Range 3,790 km over 2,220 km (70% advantage)
Speed 2,495 km/h over 1,930 km/h (30% advantage)
Has superior maneuvering. Has stealth coating, most modern avionics, all the bells and whistles F-35 claim to deliver at some point, except stupid VTOL which we won't see anyway.
Saab JAS 39 Gripen operational, faster, better range, smaller frame, cheap fuel, can operate from unprepared ROADS for fck sake!
Dassault Rafale, operational, has more payload than all above, still faster than F-35, better range, better manuvering.
Rafale and Typhoon are twin engines, still have more range and better maneuvering than F-35 and it has significantly more wing loading then all the above (meaning you can't improve it at all). Thrust-to-weight ratio worst of all above. ALL but F-35 have supercruise, officially F-35 does not. All cheaper than F-35, all are operational. F-35 is not operational, inferior in all major characteristics, super uber expensive, 10 to 15 years LATE. After 9 years (first flight 2006) cannot fly in bad weather, cannot fly near thunderstorms, cannot operate in a hot weather, has reported issues with frame cracking, coating, electric, engine, helmet and software, oxygen supply, ejection seat. Can mount less pods and weapons than current super hornet.
And I in a small part have to pay for it.
Eurofighter Typhoon, operational, F-35 is not. Typhoon has (for the same length and wing span):
Range 3,790 km over 2,220 km (70% advantage)
Speed 2,495 km/h over 1,930 km/h (30% advantage)
Has superior maneuvering. Has stealth coating, most modern avionics, all the bells and whistles F-35 claim to deliver at some point, except stupid VTOL which we won't see anyway.
Saab JAS 39 Gripen operational, faster, better range, smaller frame, cheap fuel, can operate from unprepared ROADS for fck sake!
Dassault Rafale, operational, has more payload than all above, still faster than F-35, better range, better manuvering.
Rafale and Typhoon are twin engines, still have more range and better maneuvering than F-35 and it has significantly more wing loading then all the above (meaning you can't improve it at all). Thrust-to-weight ratio worst of all above. ALL but F-35 have supercruise, officially F-35 does not. All cheaper than F-35, all are operational. F-35 is not operational, inferior in all major characteristics, super uber expensive, 10 to 15 years LATE. After 9 years (first flight 2006) cannot fly in bad weather, cannot fly near thunderstorms, cannot operate in a hot weather, has reported issues with frame cracking, coating, electric, engine, helmet and software, oxygen supply, ejection seat. Can mount less pods and weapons than current super hornet.
And I in a small part have to pay for it.
FSAR is an absolute mess and it has been that way since it was stood up. They hold numerous working groups a year asking 18 year old privates who don't own guns what they would like our next rifle to be. Wait till you see what they want in an optic....
If they (and this won't happen) buy and issue that immature and proprietary rifle I will release. The Canadian military has absolutely no business developing its own small arms. You should hear the people at DRDC and other places go on about things like caseless ammo. Seriously? If HK and Merica couldn't make it work what makes you think you should have a crack at it.
My issue is that the lives of our soldiers are at stake and unqualified egg heads in Ottawa continue to push impractical and half assed ideas on the field force. I don't need a new carbine. I need an optic that doesn't lose zero after being placed gently on the ground. I need a laser that isn't 20 years old. I need a rail system. I need magazines that feed reliably.
If they (and this won't happen) buy and issue that immature and proprietary rifle I will release. The Canadian military has absolutely no business developing its own small arms. You should hear the people at DRDC and other places go on about things like caseless ammo. Seriously? If HK and Merica couldn't make it work what makes you think you should have a crack at it.
My issue is that the lives of our soldiers are at stake and unqualified egg heads in Ottawa continue to push impractical and half assed ideas on the field force. I don't need a new carbine. I need an optic that doesn't lose zero after being placed gently on the ground. I need a laser that isn't 20 years old. I need a rail system. I need magazines that feed reliably.
redshooter
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Central Ontario
I'll just use caseless ammo as an example...sometimes concepts overstretch current technology. Considering the HK G-11 finished development before a desktop computer was practical I'd say to use that as an example is really short sighted. Knowledge moves forward at an exponential rate, if you want to play in the big league you have to spend on R&D. If you rely solely on industry you'll end up with something they want to sell you, not what you may need.
You want to point the finger, how about the people far up the chain of command that started at the bottom using the gear. The Officers and Senior NCO's who could direct the egg heads more effectively. Ever wonder why it doesn't happen like that? I do all the time and my answer is the top tends to get filled with people with lots of EQ and not much IQ.
You want to point the finger, how about the people far up the chain of command that started at the bottom using the gear. The Officers and Senior NCO's who could direct the egg heads more effectively. Ever wonder why it doesn't happen like that? I do all the time and my answer is the top tends to get filled with people with lots of EQ and not much IQ.
Actually very, very few things the military developped themselves are better than commercially deveopped things. Very very very few things aren't developped/manufactured by private industries.
The Canadian Colt has exactly ZERO problems, it's actually the best run of the mills AR pattern rifle in service on the PLANET.
That bullpup/whatever dumb####ery is the result of people having zero combat experience and a glorious lack of common sense making decisions. On the same scale as the American ACU/UCP, and the now dumber than ever new and improved (not) Scorpion W2, which is an inferior rip-off of the commercially designed Crye Multicam.
Last edited:
redshooter
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Central Ontario
You guys love to bring up the current rifle...I'll play that game...go read the history on the M-16. Before you go crowing about Mr. Stoner being part of a private endeavor, consider where the advances in material science came from to allow him to build such an innovative weapon.
Those Eggheads I worked for in the late 90's developed the tech to some degree at McMaster University on the governments dime (that they then sold as a private corporation). If you served in the Canadian Forces in the last 20 years you've likely benefited from their gear.
I love how the thought process plays out sometimes...we need someone who knows how it's applied to be part of the development...so let's leave it to be done by a corporation...so unless your suggesting some corporation like Aegis be contracted to work on the concept who better than to establish the requirements than those who are going to use it.
Those Eggheads I worked for in the late 90's developed the tech to some degree at McMaster University on the governments dime (that they then sold as a private corporation). If you served in the Canadian Forces in the last 20 years you've likely benefited from their gear.
I love how the thought process plays out sometimes...we need someone who knows how it's applied to be part of the development...so let's leave it to be done by a corporation...so unless your suggesting some corporation like Aegis be contracted to work on the concept who better than to establish the requirements than those who are going to use it.
You guys should have been issued "militia rounds" (Bang! Bang!). Dirt cheap, never cause stoppages, and we have an infinite supply.
^No sh*t, I mean how degrading is it as an adult all kitted up moving through empty buildings saying bang, bang when you are supposedly confronted with a bad guy; what a f*#king disgrace, but you're right no FTF's and an unlimited supply...
Our military had no money in the 90's and has even less money now.
Cheers D
