Moderadores: Lepanto, poliorcetes, Edu, Orel
Silver Surfer escribió:El Ministerio de Defensa lanzó la actualización de los SA80
y nosotros como lelos pidiendo su SA80 .
Silver Surfer escribió:Del SA-80 solo los visores SUSAT que se incorporaron a fusiles y ametralladoras de La Infanteria de Marina.
poliorcetes escribió:El problema de ambos diseños españoles es que la empresa ahorró más de lo que debía en materiales y controles de calidad.
poliorcetes escribió:Ojo, las historias del SA-80 y del CETME-L son muy diferentes. El problema del SA-80, tal y como describe magistralmente Ian McCollum en su serie de post y videos sobre la historia de su desarrollo, es que increíblemente partes críticas de su diseño fueron responsabilidad de ingenieros sin experiencia en diseño de armas. Es una historia muy, muy increíble https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=P ... ySNqh-xJWb
La historia del CETME (y de la AMELI) es mucho, mucho más triste. Los diseños eran completamente satisfactorios, como de hecho prueban esos modelos americanos que no modifican sustancialmente el diseño original (recordemos que H&K tuvieron que modificar muchos de los internals del SA-80 para llegar a un estado funcional del arma). El problema de ambos diseños españoles es que la empresa ahorró más de lo que debía en materiales y controles de calidad. Los plásticos no correspondían a las especificaciones, los cargadores STANAG eran usados y/o de muy baja calidad...
Es una historia demencial, que algún día deberá ser escrita. Es la historia de una pérdida compartida con franceses e ingleses: la de la capacidad de diseño de armas individuales y de escuadra de infantería. No consuela pensar que les pasó lo mismo a los franceses, por ejemplo.
Hay que señalar, también, que el cierre por retroceso retrasado por rodillos no se adapta tan bien al cartucho 5,56x45 como al anterior o al de pistola. Se puede lograr, como demuestran estos modelos o el HK33/41, pero a costa de aumentar el costo de fabricación. Y, por desgracia, el costo unitario es esencial en nuestros días para que un modelo sea elegido.
El AUG-77 es el diseño más equilibrado de su época. El problema que tuvo es que la capacidad de Lobbying austríaca es casi cero, y por ello sólo se vendió en mercados comparativamente menores con la única excepción del australiano. Pero tiene soluciones realmente equilibradas y capaces, entre las que destacaría la capacidad de cambio rápido de cañón.
Saudi Arabia to Start Licensed Manufacturing of AK-103 Rifles
According to Russian news agency TASS, as a result of the official visit of King Salman of Saudi Arabia to Russia, a memorandum was signed between Saudi Arabian Military Industries and Russian Rosoboronexport State Corporation. The memorandum is about the purchasing of Russian arms and arranging licensed manufacturing of AK-103 rifles and various types of ammunition in Saudi Arabia.
Besides the memorandum, the two parties have also signed a contract with the general terms of arranging the licensed manufacturing of the mentioned firearm. There is no information concerning what types of ammunition Saudi Arabia will start producing based on the signed documents.
AK-103
AK-103 is one of the 100-series AK rifles. It is similar to AK-74 in appearance, however, it is chambered in 7.62x39mm caliber. The AK-103 along with other variations of 100-series AK rifles have been exported to a number of countries. Its manufacturing has been earlier licensed to Venezuela. Reportedly, there are also ongoing negotiations to license the manufacturing to India, too.
Interesting to note that armed forces of Saudi Arabia already use the AK-103 rifles along with a huge diversity of other rifles in service. The licensing of the manufacturing is probably associated with the intention to increase the number of AK-103 rifles in the Saudi Arabian armed forces.
Army Eyeing 6.5mm for Its Future Battle Rifle
TOPICS:Battle Rifle
Textron Systems maintains that its Intermediate Case-Telescoped Carbine, chambered for 6.5mm, delivers 30 percent more lethality than 7.62mm x 51mm brass ammunition. Photo: Textron Systems.
POSTED BY: MATTHEW COX OCTOBER 13, 2017
The U.S. Army’s chief of staff recently made a bold promise that future soldiers will be armed with weapons capable of delivering far greater lethality than any existing small arms.
“Our next individual and squad combat weapon will come in with a 10X improvement over any existing current system in the world, and that will be critical,” Gen. Mark Milley told an audience at AUSA 2017 on Oct. 10.
Milley’s pledge to “significantly increase investments” in a leap-ahead small arms technology appeared low in the story I wrote for Military.com since soldier lethality was the lowest of the Army’s top six modernization priorities.
As Milley was speaking, Textron Systems officials were showing off their new Intermediate Case-Telescoped Carbine, chambered for 6.5mm on the AUSA exhibition floor.
The working prototype has evolved out Textron’s light and medium machine guns that fire 5.56mm and 7.62mm case-telescoped ammunition developed under the Lightweight Small Arms Technology program.
Over the last decade, the Army has invested millions in the development of the program, which has now been rebranded to Textron’s Case-Telescoped Weapons and Ammunition.
Textron’s cased-telescoped ammunition relies on a plastic case rather than a brass one to hold the propellant and the projectile, like a conventional shotgun shell.
The ICTC is a closed bolt, forward feed, gas piston operated weapon, weighing 8.3 pounds. The 6.5mm case-telescoped ammunition weighs 35 percent less and offers 30 percent more lethality than 7.62mm x 51mm brass ammunition, Textron officials maintain.
“I think the most important thing is what we have been able to do with the intermediate caliber, the 6.5mm in this case,” Wayne Prender, vice president of Textron’s Control & Surface Systems Unmanned Systems told Military.com. “We are able to not only provide a weight reduction … and all the things that come with it – we are also able to provide increased lethality because of the ability to use a more appropriate round.”
Textron officials maintain they are using a low-drag “representative” 6.5mm bullet while U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center, or ARDEC, is developing the actual projectile.
“We actually used three different bullet shapes and we scaled it,” said Paul Shipley, program manager for of Unmanned Systems. “We scaled 5.56mm up, we scaled 7.62mm down and took a low-drag shape and ran that between the two” to create the 125 grain 6.5mm bullet that’s slightly longer than the Army’s new 130 grain M80A1 Enhanced Performance Round.
Textron officials maintain that the new round retains more energy at 1,200 meters than the M80A1. At that distance, the 6.5mm has an impact-energy of 300 foot pounds compared to the M80A1 which comes in at about 230 foot pounds of energy, Textron officials maintain.
“The increased lethality we are referring to has to do with the energy down range,” Shipley said. “You can take whatever kind of bullet you want, compare them and it’s going to have increased energy down range.”
Lethality has always been a vague concept. Is it the amount of foot pounds of energy at the target? Or is it the terminal performance, or the size of the wound channel, it creates after it penetrates an enemy soldier?
It’s hard to predict how much performance will change if and when ARDEC creates a 6.5mm projectile that meets the Army’s needs.
A lot can be done to predict performance with computer modeling, but ultimately there is no way of knowing how a conceptual bullet will perform until it is live-fire tested thousands of times under multiple conditions, according to a source with intimate knowledge of military ballistics testing.
The Army has also spent years developing its current M855A1 5.56mm and M80A1 7.62mm Enhanced Performance Rounds. After many failures, the service came up with a copper-jacketed round composed of a solid copper slug that sits behind a steel penetrator tip designed to defeat battlefield barriers and remain effective enough to kill or incapacitate.
Is the Army going to throw all of that away, invest millions of dollars to redesign its ammunition-making infrastructure to switch to case-telescoped ammunition?
“What they’ve got in stockpile does what it does, and they know that is not good enough anymore, so they are faced with that choice,” Shipley said.
The Army has not come to a definitive conclusion on a future caliber, but it has been very open about its waning trust in the 5.56mm round.
In late May, Milley revealed to Congress that the M4 Carbine’s M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round cannot penetrate modern enemy body armor plates similar to the U.S. military-issue rifle plates such as the Enhanced Small Arms Protective Insert, or ESAPI.
In August, the service launched a competition to find an Intermediate Service Combat Rifle chambered 7.62mm NATO. The Army intended to purchase up to 50,000 new 7.62mm rifles to meet the requirement, according to the solicitation, but sources say that the service has already backed away from that endeavor.
Textron’s 6.5mm case-telescoped carbine certainly looks like the leap-ahead, small-arms tech that the Army is searching for to arm its future soldiers.
Then again, the Army’s imagination was also captured in the late 1990s by the Objective Individual Combat Weapon, or XM29.
Remember that? It featured a 20mm airburst weapon mounted on top of a 5.56mm carbine. XM29 had an advanced fire-control system that could program 20mm shells to burst at specific distances. At 18 pounds, it proved to be too heavy and bulky for the battlefield.
Textron officials maintain that case-telescoped carbine can be customized to whatever the Army wants.
“It’s configurable,” Shipley said. “The technology that is inside is what counts.”
De acuerdo que el diseño de la munición es de capital importancia y en esto los rusos/soviéticos han destacado, pero como regla general un calibre menor a mayor velocidad penetra más. Cuando se adoptó el 5,56 SS109 por la OTAN se le exigió igualar la penetración del 7,62 NATO en el casco estándar hasta los 800 m (creo recordar). Y una ventaja del 5,45 mm soviético sobre el 7,62x39 era su mayor penetración a casi cualquier distancia.Silver Surfer escribió:El calibre no es necesariamente descriptivo de la penetración del cartucho. Depende del tipo de la munición específicamente empleada. La incorporación de chalecos anti-bala en las fuerzas terrestres de muchos ejércitos del mundo en los 1980s y su uso en actos criminales y terroristas fue la razón para mejorar el cartucho con bala ordinaria para mejorar su penetracion en diversos calibres. En Rusia esta "modernización" fue liderada por Barnaul con la bala perforadora de blindaje 7.62 BP (7N23) con nucleo de acero. Este triplica la capacidad de penetrar comparado con el cartucho de bala ordinaria.
Mientras que la falta de penetración y de incapacitar son problemas reales, en el trabajo policial es importante considerar los peligros de la sobrepenetración. Incluso si alcanzas al malo, una bala que pasa por una amenaza y continúa con el potencial de causar daño no intencional representa un riesgo a asumir por las fuerzas policiales. En ejemplo de adaptarse a este concepto es el cartucho Tipo PRS. En intervenciones a corta distancia la alta velocidad de las balas ordinarias con el núcleo de acero conduce a un montón de rebotes en paredes de edificios, pavimento, etc. Las balas del tipo PRS expanden al golpear en una barrera firme, pierden rápidamente velocidad y no dan tanta cantidad de rebotes peligrosos como bala con el núcleo de acero
Usuarios navegando por este Foro: No hay usuarios registrados visitando el Foro y 0 invitados