Armas de Fogo Ligeiras e seus Acessórios

  • 2403 Respostas
  • 677450 Visualizações
*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 23777
  • Recebeu: 4435 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 3160 vez(es)
  • +3588/-4641
Re: Armas de Fogo Ligeiras e seus Acessórios
« Responder #1935 em: Junho 27, 2015, 06:45:02 pm »
Contra a Esquerda woke e a Direita populista marchar, marchar!...

 

*

Menacho

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 2815
  • Recebeu: 302 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 60 vez(es)
  • +6/-50
Re: Armas de Fogo Ligeiras e seus Acessórios
« Responder #1936 em: Junho 29, 2015, 11:52:49 am »
Interesantísimo video sobre los efectos de las balas explosivas (rusa y alemana) sobre "jabón balístico". Menos mal que sólo se emplearon de forma masiva en ese frente y en esa guerra, porque expresan perfectamente la necesidad de mantener la convención de la Haya

https://www.full30.com/video/82efb579fd ... 66ef3d3c9d

Vía Poliorcetes Foro Ejércitos.
 

*

Menacho

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 2815
  • Recebeu: 302 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 60 vez(es)
  • +6/-50
Re: Armas de Fogo Ligeiras e seus Acessórios
« Responder #1937 em: Junho 29, 2015, 09:40:50 pm »
Citar
Fusiles españoles sin los fallos del original alemán

M.G.
El Ejército español asegura que sus fusiles HK-36 no presentan los fallos del original alemán. El Ministerio de Defensa germano ha reconocido que el G-36 tiene un serio problema pues, cuando se calienta, tras haber disparado dos cargadores, su precisión baja al 53%, lo que puede poner en peligro la vida de los soldados. El Ejército alemán tiene 176.000 fusiles, frente a 70.000 del español.
Cuando salieron a la luz los problemas en Alemania, el jefe del Ejército de Tierra, Jaime Domínguez-Buj, ordenó un estudio. Según un portavoz del Ejército, todos los HK-36 “pasan una prueba de resistencia de materiales y con algunos, elegidos aleatoriamente, se realizan 10.000 disparos”, sin que “hasta la fecha se haya detectado ningún problema”. Además, se han pedido informes a la Legión y otras unidades “sobre posibles desviaciones en régimen de alta cadencia de tiro y altas temperaturas y no se ha recibido ninguna queja”. Los HK-36 españoles incorporan componentes alemanes, pero el cañón se fabrica en La Coruña.
 

*

Menacho

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 2815
  • Recebeu: 302 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 60 vez(es)
  • +6/-50
Re: Armas de Fogo Ligeiras e seus Acessórios
« Responder #1938 em: Julho 01, 2015, 06:57:16 pm »
 

*

HSMW

  • Moderador Global
  • *****
  • 13006
  • Recebeu: 3372 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 7969 vez(es)
  • +1276/-2152
    • http://youtube.com/HSMW
Re: Armas de Fogo Ligeiras e seus Acessórios
« Responder #1939 em: Julho 04, 2015, 06:26:08 pm »
Um marco Na evolução. HK VP70
https://www.youtube.com/user/HSMW/videos

"Tudo pela Nação, nada contra a Nação."
 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 23777
  • Recebeu: 4435 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 3160 vez(es)
  • +3588/-4641
Re: Armas de Fogo Ligeiras e seus Acessórios
« Responder #1940 em: Julho 07, 2015, 02:15:50 pm »
Contra a Esquerda woke e a Direita populista marchar, marchar!...

 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 23777
  • Recebeu: 4435 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 3160 vez(es)
  • +3588/-4641
Re: Armas de Fogo Ligeiras e seus Acessórios
« Responder #1941 em: Julho 08, 2015, 09:45:19 am »


Some guns are boringly reliable, some guns are incredibly fun to shoot and other guns speak to you. My HK 91 was shouting at me today and I loved it. | ‪#‎ThePewPewLife‬
Contra a Esquerda woke e a Direita populista marchar, marchar!...

 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 23777
  • Recebeu: 4435 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 3160 vez(es)
  • +3588/-4641
Re: Armas de Fogo Ligeiras e seus Acessórios
« Responder #1942 em: Julho 10, 2015, 03:51:24 pm »
Contra a Esquerda woke e a Direita populista marchar, marchar!...

 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 23777
  • Recebeu: 4435 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 3160 vez(es)
  • +3588/-4641
Re: Armas de Fogo Ligeiras e seus Acessórios
« Responder #1943 em: Julho 11, 2015, 01:09:09 am »
FBI Finally Decides On Standard Service Rounds For Its Use

 :arrow: http://p2t2solutions.com/fbi-finally-de ... r-its-use/
Contra a Esquerda woke e a Direita populista marchar, marchar!...

 

*

Menacho

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 2815
  • Recebeu: 302 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 60 vez(es)
  • +6/-50
Re: Armas de Fogo Ligeiras e seus Acessórios
« Responder #1944 em: Julho 12, 2015, 05:15:58 pm »
El futuro. Programa ASUSAT:

Citar
The Future of Small Arms
Posted on June 20, 2015
Years ago, I satisfied my writing urges by writing short stories. These were typically military-themed, and were almost always in some subset of science fiction. At the time, my backup career field was going to be game design. I wrote several game design documents, detailing all manner of plot lines and imaginative equipment. To this day, I have several friends in various design studies making AAA titles. In one of my stories, I wrote about a rifle with a system of moving counterweights and gyros that allows the user to fire large caliber rifles with a minimum of recoil. I was quite proud of myself for that idea.

Why do I bring this up on a blog about marksmanship? Well, Nathan at The Firearm Blog mentioned an Army-sponsored conference about the targets for development in the coming years. As I read through the various presentations, I came across something very interesting. One project, presented by Terence Rice of the Advanced Small Unit Small Arms Technology (ASUSAT) Research Program, involves placing a M4 carbine into a housing that utilizes mechanical means to stabilize the rifle. In this case, however, it’s not just for recoil. This system actually stabilizes the rifle during the aiming process, reducing the “wobble zone” of a standing shooter to that of one shooting supported prone. The intended purpose here is to help shooters land first round hits faster by reducing, or eliminating, the need to stabilize before a shot. The initial testing shows that an experienced shooter in the offhand was able to replicate similar sized groups to another shooter from a supported prone.

This is a pretty awesome development. I have concerns though. Whereas a system like this could help an already experienced shooter become even faster and more accurate, I Screen Shot 2015-06-20 at 12.10.25 PMfear that the existence of such a system will come at the expense of those training dollars needed to get a shooter up to high levels. Instead of a new class of skilled shooters with weapons that enhance that skill, we will be now have not-so-well trained shooters relying on technology to reach the same level of proficiency we already have today. In effect: we don’t really gain anything for the average joe. What happens when the stabilization technology fails when the shot counts and the shooter has never learned and practiced fundamentals?

Other interesting developments are in the ammunition category. Many of the briefs advocated for changes to the standard cartridge from 5.56×45 to some new cartridge in the 6.5-7mm category. Their justification for this change centers around the overmatch capability of likely adversaries in the future. A presentation by Mr. Jim Schatz was probably the most informative of these.

The general push seems to be not counting on some new revolutionary ammunition technology to arrive in thirty years and replace our current weapons. Rather, we should be working incrementally with slightly heavier bullets (with better ballistic coefficients) paired with polymer cases right now. This shift, the claim goes, would enable the soldier to carry a similar amount of ammunition with no change to weight requirements, and give the soldier several hundred more meters of effective range. The experimental .264 USA cartridge makes several appearances in the presentations.

My reading is that a lot of folks are frustrated with the speed of the bureaucratic acquisition system when it comes to big projects, and feel that it is more important to start closing capability gaps with potential adversaries right now. Taking advantage of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) technology in the short term will enable that incremental transition more effectively than “scheduling a technology breakthrough” for the future.

Also of interest in Mr. Schatz’s presentation was the focus on the role of skilled marksmen in the modern and future battlefield. I certainly agree with his points. Future dollars should be more focused on proper training of marksmen. That training better allows them to take advantage of those new developments in small arms technology that the Army wants so badly.



Lastly, I saw a brief discussion on the future of optics from Army Lieutenant Colonel Terry Russell, the product manager for individual weapons. He basically outlines the three phases of combat optics. Generation I optics have all but become standard. These include ACOGS, Aimpoints, EOtechs, and anything else that fixed magnification and ruggedized for field usage. Generation II optics appear to be things like Trijicon’s VCOG and other variable magnification optics that have also been ruggedized. Generation III is the most interesting, as it includes the fusion of computerized displays with ruggedized optics, similar to what Lothaen mentioned last year with a joint project between Trijicon and Kopin.



 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 23777
  • Recebeu: 4435 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 3160 vez(es)
  • +3588/-4641
Re: Armas de Fogo Ligeiras e seus Acessórios
« Responder #1945 em: Julho 21, 2015, 04:57:10 pm »
Contra a Esquerda woke e a Direita populista marchar, marchar!...

 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 23777
  • Recebeu: 4435 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 3160 vez(es)
  • +3588/-4641
Re: Armas de Fogo Ligeiras e seus Acessórios
« Responder #1946 em: Julho 22, 2015, 12:16:10 pm »
Contra a Esquerda woke e a Direita populista marchar, marchar!...

 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 23777
  • Recebeu: 4435 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 3160 vez(es)
  • +3588/-4641
Re: Armas de Fogo Ligeiras e seus Acessórios
« Responder #1947 em: Julho 24, 2015, 12:21:05 pm »
Contra a Esquerda woke e a Direita populista marchar, marchar!...

 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 23777
  • Recebeu: 4435 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 3160 vez(es)
  • +3588/-4641
Re: Armas de Fogo Ligeiras e seus Acessórios
« Responder #1948 em: Julho 29, 2015, 12:56:38 pm »
Por esta não estava à espera.

Marine brass endorses infantry plan to ditch M16 for M4

Marine leaders have made the momentous recommendation to ditch the iconic M16 in favor of the M4 carbine as the new universal weapon for infantrymen.

The recommendation to swap the venerated rifle that has served as the grunt's primary implement of war since Vietnam now sits on the commandant's desk, pending his final review and a decision. But, the swap appears imminent and if approved will relegate the M16 to a support role. It follows a similar shift already underway in the Army.

With the endorsement of several major commands already supporting the switch — including Marine Corps Combat Development Command; Combat Development and Integration; Plans, Policies and Operations; Marine Corps Systems Command; and Installations and Logistics — final word is possible in weeks or months.

"The proposal to replace the M16A4 with the M4 within infantry battalions is currently under consideration at Headquarters Marine Corps," according to a jointly written response from the commands provided by Maj. Anton Semelroth, a Marine spokesman in Quantico, Virginia.

The change would be welcomed by infantrymen who say the M16A4 was too long and unwieldy for close-quarters battle in Iraq or vehicle-borne operations in Afghanistan. They tout the M4 for its weight savings, improved mobility and collapsible butt stock, allowing the rifle to be tailored for smaller Marines or those wearing body armor.

"I would have to say my gut reaction is it's the right choice and will do a lot of good for the guys in the infantry," said Sgt. Nathan West, an explosive ordnance technician with 8th Engineer Support Battalion, who carried an M4 on dismounted patrols and vehicle-borne operations during two deployments to Afghanistan as an anti-tank missileman.

"The M4 is a great weapons system that has done everything I have ever asked of it," he added.

The proposed switch also gets the thumbs up from senior marksmen such as the 1st Marine Division gunner, Chief Warrant Officer 5 Vince Kyzer.

"The carbine is a great weapon system for its time," he said. "...It will increase the war fighter's lethality and mobility."


Ultimately, if the move to the M4 is approved by Commandant Gen. Joseph Dunford, the M16 would be used exclusively by support personnel in communities like logistics or admin. Once approved, the swap could happen as fast as unit armories can issue weapons because the 17,000 M4s needed to outfit infantrymen who don't already use one are in the current inventory, said Barb Hamby, a Systems Command spokeswoman. Thus, officials described the move as an "improved capability for the infantry at no additional cost."

Wider adoption of the M4 is part of an overall small-arms modernization strategy that will look at incremental improvements, based on existing technologies as funding becomes available, according to a Marine official who said more details will likely be revealed in the months ahead.

For now, here is what Marines need to know about the infantry's next likely weapon of choice — the M4 carbine.

The call for a compact weapon

The M4 makes maneuvering in tight urban spaces easier with a 14.5-inch barrel and an overall length that is about 10 inches shorter than the M16A4, in a package that is a pound lighter at just over six.

No fight illustrated the need for a smaller primary weapon during ferocious close-quarters combat better than Operation Phantom Fury in November 2004, when Marines fought to wrest control of Fallujah from Iraqi insurgents, sometimes going hand-to-hand.

Rounding corners and getting on target in small rooms was difficult, leading to use of a tactic called "short-stocking," when a Marine places his rifle stock over his shoulder – instead of securely against the chest and cants his weapon45-degrees so he can still use his optics. It helps in maneuvering, but compromises recoil management and follow-up shots.

"We were taught to short stock around tight corners when we got to our platoon for deployment — it was something unofficial," said Ryan Innis, a former scout sniper with 2nd Reconnaissance Battalion, who left the service as a sergeant in 2013 after serving on the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit's anti-piracy raid force near East Africa.

Innis trained for shipboard operations — the closest of close-quarters combat — and said he was fortunate to be issued the M4 because the weapon's shorter length proved better for tight spaces.


"I would definitely agree the M4 is the way to go," he said.

The longer M16 was also challenging when hopping in and out of vehicles in full battle rattle, said West, who made his second deployment to Afghanistan in 2012 with 3rd Battalion, 9th Marines, as part of a vehicle-borne combined anti-armor team.

"Anytime you operate out of a vehicle, something compact makes life easier, especially when you need to get out quickly and engage [the] enemy," he said.

Even when he conducted dismounted patrols on his first Afghanistan deployment in 2011 with 1st Battalion, 6th Marines, the M4 he was issued helped in clearing compounds, jumping walls and crossing deep ditches, he said.

West never wanted to go back to the M16 because of the weight savings alone.

He said he started his first deployment carrying an M16A4; a Thor radio-controlled bomb jammer, a metal detector, and ammo for an M240 machine gun.

"There was even a time carrying an M32 grenade launcher, so you can see the amount of weight we were carrying at that time," he said. "Anything that takes weight off and keeps guys from getting tired so they are more aware of things around them is good. It is just a little less weight and just as effective of a weapon."


That is what the Marine Corps found when it began testing the ballistics of its infantry rifles and carbines using their improved M318 Mod 0 Special Operations Science and Technology round.

"The Marine Corps conducted an evaluation of its individual weapons (M4, M27 and M16A4), with specific focus on comparing accuracy, shift of impact and trajectory with improved ammunition, and determined the M4's overall performance compares favorably with that of the M27 IAR, the most accurate weapon in the squad," according to the written responses provided by Semelroth.

Negligible drawbacks

There are a few minor drawbacks to adopting the M4, but infantrymen seem to agree those are insignificant compared to the advantages.

Both Innis and West said trading in the M16's 20-inch barrel for the M4's 14.5-inch barrel does sacrifice some muzzle velocity, which translates into a slightly shorter effective range — although Colt markets both with an effective range of about 650 yards. But that isn't a significant concern given the closer ranges at which Marines and soldiers commonly engage enemy in modern warfare.


To strike the enemy beyond the range of the M4 or even the M16, each Marine fire team already has an M27 Infantry Automatic Rifle, which in semi-auto with its free-floating barrel and precision trigger also now doubles as the designated marksman's rifle. It's a role that will no longer be filled by the Squad Advanced Marksman Rifle, a match-grade M16 with a scope.

When the M27 can't get the job done, combined arms doctrine means indirect fire and air assets are just a radio call away, West said.

"As far as accuracy, there is not an effect," he added, saying a longer rifle only really matters when using iron sights.

Greater distance between a weapon's front and rear sights, known as sight radius, makes a weapon easier to aim. But that doesn't apply with the Rifle Combat Optic that the Marine Corps began using in 2005. The RCO is a type of reflex sight with which a Marine only needs to ensure the reticle is on target without regard for sight alignment.

When asked if the Marine Corps is making the right move, preeminent firearms expert Larry Vickers gave a resounding yes.

"I'm the first one to subscribe to this," Vickers said of the M4's increasing popularity as the preferred option for modern combat.

The M4's profile got a boost when the Army, which adopted the M4 in 1994 for special operations, began issuing it more broadly to deploying infantry.

Vickers, a retired master sergeant who served 15 years in the Army's 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment – Delta, commonly known as Delta Force, dismissed arguments against the carbine based on its shorter effective range, saying nearly all real-world infantry engagements happen inside 200 yards.

"Some argue beyond that the M4 carbine lacks effectiveness versus the M16, but the M16 is like driving a sports car with a six-cylinder engine," he said, because it is limited by the same small 5.56mm cartridge as the M4. "You can shoot 400 to 500 yards away, but you are still shooting a 5.56."

A longer barrel would make sense with a heavier hitting round like the .308, but unless Marines are given a larger caliber Vickers said the M4 is "bringing so much more to the table."

"It is the world's gold standard," he said.


 :arrow: http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/m ... /30145257/
Contra a Esquerda woke e a Direita populista marchar, marchar!...

 

*

HSMW

  • Moderador Global
  • *****
  • 13006
  • Recebeu: 3372 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 7969 vez(es)
  • +1276/-2152
    • http://youtube.com/HSMW
Re: Armas de Fogo Ligeiras e seus Acessórios
« Responder #1949 em: Agosto 13, 2015, 02:31:21 pm »


FINLAND GIVES UP NEW RIFLE PROGRAM, WILL MODERNIZE RK. 62 TO SERVE UNTIL 2035

Citar
The Finnish Commander of the Army has announced that the Nordic country will not be purchasing 5.56mm replacements for their existing 7.62x39mm caliber Rk. 62 rifles, but instead will seek to upgrade the venerable Kalashnikov-based Valmet. Altair.com reports (machine translation below):

Commander of the Finnish Army, Lieutenant General Seppo Toivonen said that Finland plans to resign from purchasing until the end of the decade a new, individual arms. Until now, the search for a successor was assumed previously used design, powered cartridge 7.62 mm x 39, through new models of firing ammunition 5.56 mm x 45 NATO standard in countries belonging to NATO and the widespread of the world ( Finnish ARX 160? , 2014 -11-29). Such rifles, in a small number will get only special forces soldiers for which you purchased the Belgian FN SCAR-L ( Weapons for Finnish commandos , 2014-03-13).


O resto em:  :arrow:  http://defence-blog.com/?p=7340
https://www.youtube.com/user/HSMW/videos

"Tudo pela Nação, nada contra a Nação."