Will introducing 30 000 of these into Australia not cause the death of the next 5 generations of babies ? It looks evil and shoots more than an sks and those seem to be highly feared over there . Oh well Glad I live in Canada with our liberal views on firearms ownership for civilians.
New Australian Defense Force Assault Rifle In Action
- Thread starter Melnibonean
- Start date
The real question we need answered is.....if they call it something else (Other than an AUG) and made a semi auto only version of it, can we import them into Canada or will the powers that be declare them a version or variant of the Aug and deem it prohibited?
Scott
Scott
Canadian Firearm Lab has this escape clause called "deem to be a variant of"
And that 4-6% will buy you another 50-60 meters of reliable fragmentation and tumbling, which is not insignificant.
So it applies to the only ammo that the Aussie mil will be using.
Obviously, but if you've got 20" barrel in a 30" bullpup, the length becomes much less of an issue. If I can get a 20" barrel in a rifle the size of 14.5 M4 Carbine, in a light infantry role, I'd take that any day of the week if it gives me another ~50 meters of fudge factor for imperfect shot placement.
I don't know, why doesn't everyone just walk around with 10" barrels?
red magnum
CGN Regular
- Location
- Sundre, Alberta
You should give them a call, tell them they are doing it wrong.
That makes sense, I suppose, since Australia was one of the users of the original Aug.
Given that it's Australia's service rifle, I'm guessing that the RCMP will never have the problem of deciding, they're the folks seriously looking at banning the lever action.
Re: mag changes - if you're doing it out in the open, you're already in a world of hurt - if you haven't developed and practiced a way to do it blindfolded it's the wrong place for you to be. Doctrine is great, training is better, but individual initiative will keep you alive when it comes to using your tools.
And that 4-6% will buy you another 50-60 meters of reliable fragmentation and tumbling, which is not insignificant.
Usually you get fragmentation or tumbling, not both.
So it applies to the only ammo that the Aussie mil will be using.
You're sure about that? The Aussies wouldn't ever use some m855 or Mk 262 when doing joint ops with the US or another nation?
Obviously, but if you've got 20" barrel in a 30" bullpup, the length becomes much less of an issue. If I can get a 20" barrel in a rifle the size of 14.5 M4 Carbine, in a light infantry role, I'd take that any day of the week if it gives me another ~50 meters of fudge factor for imperfect shot placement.
That doesn't answer the question as to why they offer different lengths. The gain in performance isn't huge and isn't something you should bank on. A less than ideal shot is remedied with more rounds on target.
I don't know, why doesn't everyone just walk around with 10" barrels?
Because 10" barrels are inferior to 11.5" ones, and offer near zero projectile performance when talking about M193 or M855 ammo. The rampant belief that an ultra short rifle is needed or necessary is simply not true. They have their purpose and it isn't as a general purpose setup. The CQB/FISH/FIBUA/urban warfare work has been done with much longer guns with little difficulty. Having the ultra short rifle is great but it's a tradeoff and one that needs to be carefully considered. If concealment, weight, OAL suppressed or dedicated work in tight quarters are of primary concern then an ultra short rifle may just fit the bill. If the majority of a rifle's use does not involve any of the above, then a longer barrel is likely a better choice.. Just saying..
In the bold above
I don't really care what the ADF adopts, or what anyone else uses for that matter. The perceived benefits of a bullpup are not significant whereas the drawbacks are.
TW25B
- Location
- The Orion Arm
From what I remember, there is no accuracy difference between a 16" and a 20" barrel. What you gain with the longer barrel is an increase in velocity. A 62 grain bullet out of a 20" barrel can fly at 3000fps while out of a 16" barrel you'll probably see speeds of around 2700fps. The 5.56 bullet will cause more damage the faster it's flying (mass X speed = force) and it will more likely fragment causing even more damage, but the overall accuracy is the same. The terminal ballistics - fragmentation range - maybe 150 yards for the 16" and 150-200 for the 20", can't remember the exact numbers (in fact, I had a conversation with a US officer at a bar about this, something like - IIRC - the M193 will fragment out to 100y max. from an M4 barrel (14.5"). But that's for killing things and is academic. A hole is a hole; fragmentation is a bonus.
ChrisAlston
Regular
- Location
- Calgary, Alberta
In the bold above
I don't really care what the ADF adopts, or what anyone else uses for that matter. The perceived benefits of a bullpup are not significant whereas the drawbacks are.
TW25B
I would say many of the perceived drawbacks of a bullpup are not significant either if you are even remotely adaptable.
I'm a pretty staunch AR guy, and have lots of time with the C7A1/A2 from my reservist years, but after owning two different bullpups (T97 and Tavor) I will say I'm fully onboard with the bullpup concept. A shorter rifle is highly beneficial for a number of reasons, not just FIBUA and CQB scenarios, but also just simple things like mounting and dismounting from vehicles, one handed operation, and just carrying/moving around with the rifle in the course of your duties.
The desire for shorter rifles for general infantry use is nothing new, just look at the rise of the M4 carbine in the US military, it has essentially replaced the M16 as the standard issue, despite the M16 having a more desirable 20" barrel for ballistic performance . A bullpup has the advantages of a short rifle without having to sacrifice the ballistic performance of 5.56 ammo. Yes they are ergonomically different because, well, they have to be. Just because they are different doesn't make them bad. It's just a training issue.
The M4 in its 14.5" configuration is a near ideal compromise between length and performance. Naturally a shorter OAL equates to lighter weight, improved handling and superior confined space movement. Plenty of people are dead thanks to the M4 and it's 14.5" barrel, it works as advertised.
If we discuss training issues then we need to discuss what isn't a training issue. Fixed LOP is not a training issue. Non ambi use is not a training issue. Lack of rail space for designators, lights, NOD's etc is not a training issue. The fact this rifle weighs more than an M4 is not a training issue. The risk of serious injury due to the chamber being rested against your face(think catastrophic case failure or squib) is not a training issue. The horrible mechanical offset(the F90 isn't the worst offender, the type 97 and Tavor are atrocious) is not a training issue. These are real problems that are unique to all bullpups and their "cutting edge" design. The only benefits a bullpup has going for it are better balance and a more compact package when compared to similar length barrels in other rifles. The negatives listed above far outweigh those two benefits by both numeric and practical values. Entering and exiting a vehicle with a rifle of any length efficiently and effectively, is a training issue. One handed operation is far from the norm and not difficult with an AR or similar conventional rifle design, regardless it too is a training issue.
TW25B
I love how guys always shoot down equipment they are not used to. If you can't become proficient on a weapon with instruction, training and practice without constant #####ing you have a poor attitude.
If the CF issued bull pups next week we would adapt to it and carry on. As long as it's reliable and accurate who cares, it's a rifle, it shoots bullets.
If the CF issued bull pups next week we would adapt to it and carry on. As long as it's reliable and accurate who cares, it's a rifle, it shoots bullets.
Shorter barrels are inherently more accurate due to a lower amplitude of barrel vibrations, they're stiffer for a lack of a better term. The velocity from a 16" is not 2700 fps, it is closer to 3000 whereas 20" barrels average around 3200. The loss is between 4-6%(depending on ammo and who did the testing). The accepted fragmentation range for m193 or m855 is 2700 fps and above. The accepted upset yaw or tumbling range for the same ammo is 2500-2700 fps. Neither phenomenon is guaranteed regardless of velocity, so banking on the bullet to do it's magic is foolish.
Cut to the 2:00 min mark to see this individuals data, albeit it is .223. http://www.ar15.com/content/page.html?id=213
Here's the second half from the same guy with some 5.56x45 NATO spec ammo. The 20" puts out 106 fps more than the 16", absolutely not an issue and not worth the 4" of length and weight.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEaMw_yCLmo&feature=youtu.be
Here's another comprehensive chart regarding barrel length and velocity with many different brands and bullet weights.
http://www.ar15.com/content/page.html?id=213
If you look at the xm193 data you'll see that an 11.5" puts out 2911fps, only 321fps slower than the 20" barrel that is nearly twice as long. the 14.5" puts out 2991 fps or 241 fps less velocity and the 16" a solid 3106 fps, a mere 126 fps less than the 20". Some load comparisons are less than 100 fps difference between the 20" and 16" values.
TW25B
A soldier is 5'4" wearing hard armour and winter clothing, and is left handed. How does the bullpup accommodate this individual??
TW25B
The 16" versions are usually only used by Cav units where there is limited room in the vehicles and getting the weapon in and out can be a pain if its over a certain length.
The Aug is a great weapon and IMO perfect for the average infantry. You can also change mags without looking with practice like any other weapon. Im pretty sure the Aus special forces still use an M4 variant though.
The Aug is a great weapon and IMO perfect for the average infantry. You can also change mags without looking with practice like any other weapon. Im pretty sure the Aus special forces still use an M4 variant though.
So it's not ambidextrous as I pointed out. It can be configured for a lefty. The height has everything to do with LOP and proper fitment. With armour and cold weather gear there is no chance the soldier can properly mount the rifle and use the optic(reddots being the exception).
TW25B
