I'd say "thanks for the faves" if they didn't piss me off, but alas I hate getting a pile of faves and no comments. FAVES DO NOT HELP.
Just note with a detailed description, sketch, or link to a weapon that needs shoopin'.
"Shock troop, devil dog, blood sucking war machine."
Developed by Greyson Arms to fill a standing requirement by the United States Marines Joint Munitions and Lethality Contracting Center for a high accuracy, low recoil battle rifle. For years the Marine Corps had been experimenting with a vast number of assault rifles and battle rifles, leading to a logistical nightmare with a massive range of weapons and cartridges being used throughout the Corps. The M12 ICR filled the need for a powerful, well rounded interim weapon and was adopted the first fiscal quarter 500. In 523 the -A1 series fixed several minor design flaws, improved ergonomics, slightly reduced production costs, added chrome to several components in the mechanism, and a stellite coating to the barrel. No requirements have been posted for replacement as of the last fiscal quarter 559. The manufacturer states the weapon is designed to be comfortable for both human and nakanii shooters, however this claim is disputed by both.
The ICR ushered in a revival of old-school weapon design, featuring all manual workings, RIS systems, and no electronic components, IFF, user recognition, or inhibitors. The rugged utilitarian design, high accuracy, and stopping power has made it a favorite with Marines as a standard issue weapon and with every other branch and several police agencies as a marksman rifle. It's unique firing system has also been used as the base for several other weapons and has proven difficult for other companies to reproduce without directly copying it.
The 7.5x50-US HV (or +P+ overpressure) is an advanced derivative of the 7.62 NATO utilizing a high pressure gas propellant generating much higher expansion pressure. Standard weapons designed to fire the 7.5mm/.306 WAC can be damaged or destroyed by the extreme pressure generated by mil-spec 7.5USHV.
Features: Quad rail standard RIS. Collapsing bolt firing system. Sturdy alloy and composite construction. Rubberized grips. Chrome lined chamber and stellite lined 23inch tight-spin barrel. Thick carbon rubber butt pad with honeycomb cavities. 25 round high capacity mags. Chambered in 7.5x50US High Velocity
Accessories: The rail mounts accept all standard RIS attachments. AHOG Advanced Holographic Optical Gunsight A variable zoom holographic sight able to to change magnification levels in combat without having to be re-zeroed. ATAM Advanced Target Acquisition Module A battle net linked stabilized gun camera with visible(RBG), IR, and UV spectrum lasers(adjustable beam) for aiming, target marking, range finding, and "dazzling".
Cartridge: 7.5x50 US +P+ Action: Gas-operated Dual-mode Impingement-Piston, collapsing bolt Rate of fire: 600-650 rounds/min Muzzle velocity: 3,600 Feet Per Second Effective range: 500 Yards 850+ with optics Feed System: 25-round detachable box magazine
Interesting -- now all you (we) need is to get the US military interested! Of course, there's the small matter of a factory, etc. . .
BTW, I'm sure you list all the details (but I can't get to the pics just now): what caliber do you anticipate using? Given that the 5.56MM Armalite has just about run its course, it seems to me that the US needs now (and most likely will have in the future) an idea of which way to go -- smaller (personally, I think that's a bad idea), intermediate (say 6.5X39 or 6.8X43) or larger (something like David Drake predicted a 20MM rifle and 10MM SMG). Or, alternatively, would 7.62 NATO be the best choice?
Sorry for the slow reply, but I haven't been online for a while (at least not for "playing"), so what's new? I know you've been hoping to join the USMC -- any news on that front?
I hear what you're saying about 7.62 NATO. And, I agree, compared to 5.56 Armalite, there's no contest. BUT, I'm wondering about intermediate rounds like 6.8X43MM SPC for example.
Granted, I have only limited small arms experience (I served in the Israeli Auxiliary Police about 30 years ago), but I do have some experience. If I remember correctly, most 7.62N rifles (like the M-14) are bulky and heavy and real SOBs to fire accurately. On the other hand every veteran I've spoken to wanted the killing power of 7.62N with the weight of the 5.56N round. Personally, I'd split the difference, though to be honest, my favorite weapon of all time is the .30 Cal M-1 Carbine (7.62X33MM).
Of course, 7.62N could be making a return -- the Kel-Tec RFB being a pretty good place to start!
I'm exactly one week away from taking my GED/diploma tests which are pretty much the only thing standing in my way of joining right now.
The 6.8 SPC or the 6.5 Grendel will likely become standard assault rifle rounds in the near future as they, like you said, split the difference between 5.56 and 7.62 but they still fall a bit short in range and raw killing power. I imagine the 7.62x51N will either be replaced with a casesless version or a rounded number version like 7.5 or 8mm by 50/55 or some variation of casesless rounded numbers. As for the recoil, it's still a factor but if you don't go spraying it doesn't kick that hard especially in non-manual weapons. However, I have limited experience with sub .30 cal weapons so I'm no really sure about ammo weight but they're complete lack or kick is in my opinion the only thing they have going for them.
I'm not sure of the source but my favorite quote for any cartridge is regarding the .30 carbine "If you shoot me with that I'll be very pissed when I find out."
How'd the GED go? Per the M-1 Carbine, the only people who criticized it were the ones who tried to use it as if it was a full powered rifle. Actually, it's hitting power compares pretty well with most of the SMGs of the period (especially over 50M) and the virtual lack of recoil meant that it was much easier for guys like me to actually hit a target. I don't care who you are, how much armor you're wearing, orwhat I hit you with, a shot between the eyes is going to give you a whole lot more than just a headache! Actually think about this combo: the M-1 carbine with a modern area ruled small arms round like the 6X35MM KAC or the 5.7X28 FN.
BTW, I'm sure you list all the details (but I can't get to the pics just now): what caliber do you anticipate using? Given that the 5.56MM Armalite has just about run its course, it seems to me that the US needs now (and most likely will have in the future) an idea of which way to go -- smaller (personally, I think that's a bad idea), intermediate (say 6.5X39 or 6.8X43) or larger (something like David Drake predicted a 20MM rifle and 10MM SMG). Or, alternatively, would 7.62 NATO be the best choice?
Anyway, just a few thoughts.
Ta for now
I hear what you're saying about 7.62 NATO. And, I agree, compared to 5.56 Armalite, there's no contest. BUT, I'm wondering about intermediate rounds like 6.8X43MM SPC for example.
Granted, I have only limited small arms experience (I served in the Israeli Auxiliary Police about 30 years ago), but I do have some experience. If I remember correctly, most 7.62N rifles (like the M-14) are bulky and heavy and real SOBs to fire accurately. On the other hand every veteran I've spoken to wanted the killing power of 7.62N with the weight of the 5.56N round. Personally, I'd split the difference, though to be honest, my favorite weapon of all time is the .30 Cal M-1 Carbine (7.62X33MM).
Of course, 7.62N could be making a return -- the Kel-Tec RFB being a pretty good place to start!
Anyway, let's kep the conversation!
The 6.8 SPC or the 6.5 Grendel will likely become standard assault rifle rounds in the near future as they, like you said, split the difference between 5.56 and 7.62 but they still fall a bit short in range and raw killing power. I imagine the 7.62x51N will either be replaced with a casesless version or a rounded number version like 7.5 or 8mm by 50/55 or some variation of casesless rounded numbers. As for the recoil, it's still a factor but if you don't go spraying it doesn't kick that hard especially in non-manual weapons. However, I have limited experience with sub .30 cal weapons so I'm no really sure about ammo weight but they're complete lack or kick is in my opinion the only thing they have going for them.
I'm not sure of the source but my favorite quote for any cartridge is regarding the .30 carbine "If you shoot me with that I'll be very pissed when I find out."
How'd the GED go? Per the M-1 Carbine, the only people who criticized it were the ones who tried to use it as if it was a full powered rifle. Actually, it's hitting power compares pretty well with most of the SMGs of the period (especially over 50M) and the virtual lack of recoil meant that it was much easier for guys like me to actually hit a target. I don't care who you are, how much armor you're wearing, orwhat I hit you with, a shot between the eyes is going to give you a whole lot more than just a headache! Actually think about this combo: the M-1 carbine with a modern area ruled small arms round like the 6X35MM KAC or the 5.7X28 FN.
Talk to you soon, I hope!