View Full Version: Concordeian Service Rifle (6.4x40mm, caseless)

Nsdraftroom > Ground Warfare > Concordeian Service Rifle (6.4x40mm, caseless)

Pages: [1] 2

Title: Concordeian Service Rifle (6.4x40mm, caseless)


Concordeia - December 31, 2010 05:12 PM (GMT)
user posted image

Type: Assault Rifle

Place of Origin: The Commonwealth of Concordeia

Weight: 5.0 lb (2.3 kg) empty, 5.5 lb (2.5 kg) loaded

Length: 33 inches (838 mm) stock extended, 30 inches (762 mm) stock retracted

Barrel length: 18.5 inches (470 mm)

Cartridge: 6.4x40mm (.252 caliber)

Action: Gas-piston

Rate of Fire: 1,000 rounds/min

Muzzle velocity: 2,821.5 ft/s (860 m/s)

Effective Range: 600 meters (point target), 850 meters (area target)

Description:

The CSR is the current standard-issue assault rifle of the Concordeian military. Similar in appearance to the popular M4 carbine, this rifle is unique in that it utilizes electronically-fired caseless telescoped ammunition, greatly reducing weight and increasing accuracy and firing rate. Another unique feature is it's rising chamber, which connects to and operates an aft feed mechanism, resulting in an 'internal bullpup' action within a conventional rifle layout. This gives the CSR an extra 4 inches of barrel length without sacrificing the balance and ease of reloading of conventional rifles. The CSR's free-floating, cold hammer forged barrel features hexagonal polygonal rifling, further increasing accuracy and muzzle velocity, as well as increasing barrel life.

The rifle's short-stroke piston system allows for lowered recoil and higher reliability than previous direct-impingement systems, as well as easier maintenance and longer service life. The piston action also functions as a generator, recharging a battery stored in the trigger grip which powers the rifle's electronic ignition system.

The CSR's outer frame is made of highly durable yet lightwight polyamide composites, and the top of the receiver and the handguard are built with Picatinny rails, allowing the CSR to be equipped with a wide variety of sights, scopes, grips and other accessories.

((Sorry for the lack of details on my drawing, I'll try and add more detail later on, though I may need some help with it. And yes, this is a conventional rifle layout with a bullpup internal feed and action. Here's a rough visual of what it would look like, only without the forward ejection system: http://tinypic.com/player.php?v=35amxyp&s=5))

Bloody_Sahara - December 31, 2010 05:22 PM (GMT)
does your gun have a spring loaded stock? it appears so in the drawing, but there's no reason to have one.

Actually if i were you i'd go for an lr-300 style action with the spring around the gas key.

On a more general note, firing caseless ammo and having electrical trigger mechanism really warrants the design of a whole new gun. If it were really a modification on the m4, it would be so far removed as to make it a new system anyway.

You dont HAVE to use caseless, telescoping, electronics, etc though... you can have a good gun without it.

Concordeia - December 31, 2010 05:34 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Bloody_Sahara @ Dec 31 2010, 06:22 PM)
does your gun have a spring loaded stock? it appears so in the drawing, but there's no reason to have one.

Actually if i were you i'd go for an lr-300 style action with the spring around the gas key.

On a more general note, firing caseless ammo and having electrical trigger mechanism really warrants the design of a whole new gun. If it were really a modification on the m4, it would be so far removed as to make it a new system anyway.

You dont HAVE to use caseless, telescoping, electronics, etc though... you can have a good gun without it.

I have an expanding stock so that individual soldiers can modify the rifle to a comfortable length.

Having caseless ammo and an electronic ignition system does necessitate designing an entirely new weapon, just making appropriate internal modifications. And the reason I went with an M4-type design was primarily so I could retain it's picatinny rail foregrip, which is very useful for equipping accessories.

And I use all those features because it makes for a lighter and better-performing weapon.

Bloody_Sahara - December 31, 2010 05:39 PM (GMT)
yes, but is your stock spring loaded? do you know what that means?

QUOTE (concordeia)
Having caseless ammo and an electronic ignition system does necessitate designing an entirely new weapon, just making appropriate internal modifications.


i'm no expert in caseless ammo, but suffice to say that the action of a gun must be purpose designed if it is to fire it. "Internal modification" of the m4 would have to be so great as to make entirely different really.

QUOTE (concordeia)
I went with an M4-type design was primarily so I could retain it's picatinny rail foregrip, which is very useful for equipping accessories.


...

not really sure what to say to this...

Concordeia - December 31, 2010 05:52 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Bloody_Sahara @ Dec 31 2010, 06:39 PM)
yes, but is your stock spring loaded? do you know what that means?

QUOTE (concordeia)
Having caseless ammo and an electronic ignition system does necessitate designing an entirely new weapon, just making appropriate internal modifications.


i'm no expert in caseless ammo, but suffice to say that the action of a gun must be purpose designed if it is to fire it. "Internal modification" of the m4 would have to be so great as to make entirely different really.

Think of it as the difference between an F-15 Eagle and an F-15 Strike Eagle, or the difference between an F/A-18 Hornet and an F/A-18 Super Hornet. Both versions have similar, almost identical external airframes, but the internal components of the latter versions have been significantly upgraded.

Bloody_Sahara - December 31, 2010 06:00 PM (GMT)
Ok, but don't say it is based off of the m4 with all those modifications, it's standalone. And is the stock spring loaded or not?

Concordeia - December 31, 2010 06:05 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Bloody_Sahara @ Dec 31 2010, 07:00 PM)
Ok, but don't say it is based off of the m4 with all those modifications, it's standalone. And is the stock spring loaded or not?

It's based on the M4's external design, alright? You can clearly see similarities with the foregrip and the stock. The stock on mine, is simply length-adjustable, not spring-loaded.

Bloody_Sahara - December 31, 2010 06:09 PM (GMT)
i guess that's fine.

wait, what foregrip?

lol, i know what you're talking about. But technically it's called a handguard, foregrips are those vertical handles like another pistol grip.

Crookfur - December 31, 2010 06:17 PM (GMT)
Well you could get rid of the whole misleading idea by just saying it has a AR-15 carbine style RIS with controls simialr to that found on the AR-15 series. Saying that its "based" on the M4 implies that there is a AR-15 mechanism hiding in there. Of course decent RIS's are not restricted to Ar-15s.

With a caseless rifle it is all about your mechanism and how you deal with the issue that come with casless action.

From your drawing you obviously don't have room for a conventional bolt so off the top of my head you are likely to be using a steyr ACR falling breach mechanism.

I'm not sure how a short stroke system would give lower impulse than DI unless you are goign down the ultimax cosntant recoil path.

How and why do you have 2 different rate of fire for auto and burst?

On the image if you are goign to have an adjsutable stock cut down by at least half its current length.

Pres. Kalashnikov - December 31, 2010 06:32 PM (GMT)
Well I'm going to give you a few problems I see/suggestions I have right off the bat.

1. Common mistake but there is no visible fire selector or magazine release.

2. Angle of the pistol grip looks a bit awkward, look at the M16 or the G36 (as examples of modern assault rifles). They both have more angled pistol grips. Heck, even the AKM has an angled pistol grip.

3. You could go with a Bushmaster ACR style stock which is adjustable for length of pull, has a dual position cheek rest, and a cheek riser. Plus, the whole thing folds to the right side. But obviously modify it if you want it to fit your rifle.

4. Looks like your receiver is splitting down the middle of the gun (if you're looking at it from a birds eye view) instead of a down the middle of the side of the gun (if you're looking at it from the side) like an M16 or Kalashnikov.

5. The write up says that the gun is 30 inches stock retracted and 33 inches stock extended but your picture is not showing that if you have a 18.5 inch barrel.

6. You can make the rails free floating too, just saying.

7. 800 rpm on fully automatic is possible but it seems like a bit too much.

That's about all I can see for now, hope I helped to point out some flaws.

Pres. Kalashnikov - December 31, 2010 06:34 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:17 PM)
Well you could get rid of the whole misleading idea by just saying it has a AR-15 carbine style RIS with controls simialr to that found on the AR-15 series. Saying that its "based" on the M4 implies that there is a AR-15 mechanism hiding in there. Of course decent RIS's are not restricted to Ar-15s.

With a caseless rifle it is all about your mechanism and how you deal with the issue that come with casless action.

From your drawing you obviously don't have room for a conventional bolt so off the top of my head you are likely to be using a steyr ACR falling breach mechanism.

I'm not sure how a short stroke system would give lower impulse than DI unless you are goign down the ultimax cosntant recoil path.

How and why do you have 2 different rate of fire for auto and burst?

On the image if you are goign to have an adjsutable stock cut down by at least half its current length.

Hmm, I think it looks like he has just enough space for a conventional rotating bolt.

Concordeia - December 31, 2010 06:36 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:17 PM)
Well you could get rid of the whole misleading idea by just saying it has a AR-15 carbine style RIS with controls simialr to that found on the AR-15 series. Saying that its "based" on the M4 implies that there is a AR-15 mechanism hiding in there. Of course decent RIS's are not restricted to Ar-15s.

With a caseless rifle it is all about your mechanism and how you deal with the issue that come with casless action.

From your drawing you obviously don't have room for a conventional bolt so off the top of my head you are likely to be using a steyr ACR falling breach mechanism.

I'm not sure how a short stroke system would give lower impulse than DI unless you are goign down the ultimax cosntant recoil path.

How and why do you have 2 different rate of fire for auto and burst?

On the image if you are goign to have an adjsutable stock cut down by at least half its current length.

Um...I have really no idea what the AUG falling breach mechanism or the recoil path for the Ultimax 100 are. I'm sort of a newb when it comes to gun mechanics.

Wikipedia said that short stroke pistons induce less recoil than direct impingement. At least that's what I THINK it said.

Also, the HK G-11 was able to fire a 3-round burst at 2000 rounds/min, with full auto at 480 rounds/min. This was probably because of a special mechanism, so I guess I should go back and make the firing rate the same for both fire modes.

Also, why would I need to cut the length of my stock in half? It's about the same length as the stock on an HK416.

Concordeia - December 31, 2010 06:50 PM (GMT)
One other thing, exactly how much room do I need behind the magazine port to have a conventional bolt?

Crookfur - December 31, 2010 06:51 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 06:34 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:17 PM)
Well you could get rid of the whole misleading idea by just saying it has a AR-15 carbine style RIS with controls simialr to that found on the AR-15 series. Saying that its "based" on the M4 implies that there is a AR-15 mechanism hiding in there. Of course decent RIS's are not restricted to Ar-15s.

With a caseless rifle it is all about your mechanism and how you deal with the issue that come with casless action.

From your drawing you obviously don't have room for a conventional bolt so off the top of my head you are likely to be using a steyr ACR falling breach mechanism.

I'm not sure how a short stroke system would give lower impulse than DI unless you are goign down the ultimax cosntant recoil path.

How and why do you have 2 different rate of fire for auto and burst?

On the image if you are goign to have an adjsutable stock cut down by at least half its current length.

Hmm, I think it looks like he has just enough space for a conventional rotating bolt.

Only if it was crammed into the adjsutable stock which while big enough for a return spring/buffer tube won't accomodate the bolt and bolt carrier assembly


Concordeia:

Steyr ACR, rather than AUG: http://world.guns.ru/assault/at/steyr-acr-e.html


The HK G3 used a some what complicated mechanism very different to that used in msot modern assault rifles. The burst mode rate of fire of the G-11 was its true RoF which was heavily reduced for atuoamtic mode. It was a bit complicated but in burst mode the G-11 fired 3 roudns by the time the whole firing mechanism reach the back of the "receiver" but in autoamtic mode only 1 roudn was fired during the mechanism movement. Well that might be a simlification but it works.

HK pro do have a nice article on the G-11:

http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=com_...otypes&Itemid=5


The thing is on the HK416 the stock starts immediately after the psitol grip, on this you have the amgazine and some of the mechanism behidn the pistol grip adding another 70-100mm onto the weapon's "length of pull" (the distance btween the rear of the stock and the grip) possibly making the distance too logn to be comfortable.

Bloody_Sahara - December 31, 2010 06:53 PM (GMT)
he is clearly using the tkb-022 mechanism

of course he has enough space

Pres. Kalashnikov - December 31, 2010 06:57 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:51 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 06:34 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:17 PM)
Well you could get rid of the whole misleading idea by just saying it has a AR-15 carbine style RIS with controls simialr to that found on the AR-15 series. Saying that its "based" on the M4 implies that there is a AR-15 mechanism hiding in there. Of course decent RIS's are not restricted to Ar-15s.

With a caseless rifle it is all about your mechanism and how you deal with the issue that come with casless action.

From your drawing you obviously don't have room for a conventional bolt so off the top of my head you are likely to be using a steyr ACR falling breach mechanism.

I'm not sure how a short stroke system would give lower impulse than DI unless you are goign down the ultimax cosntant recoil path.

How and why do you have 2 different rate of fire for auto and burst?

On the image if you are goign to have an adjsutable stock cut down by at least half its current length.

Hmm, I think it looks like he has just enough space for a conventional rotating bolt.

Only if it was crammed into the adjsutable stock which while big enough for a return spring/buffer tube won't accomodate the bolt and bolt carrier assembly


Concordeia:

Steyr ACR, rather than AUG: http://world.guns.ru/assault/at/steyr-acr-e.html


The HK G3 used a some what complicated mechanism very different to that used in msot modern assault rifles. The burst mode rate of fire of the G-11 was its true RoF which was heavily reduced for atuoamtic mode. It was a bit complicated but in burst mode the G-11 fired 3 roudns by the time the whole firing mechanism reach the back of the "receiver" but in autoamtic mode only 1 roudn was fired during the mechanism movement. Well that might be a simlification but it works.

HK pro do have a nice article on the G-11:

http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=com_...otypes&Itemid=5


The thing is on the HK416 the stock starts immediately after the psitol grip, on this you have the amgazine and some of the mechanism behidn the pistol grip adding another 70-100mm onto the weapon's "length of pull" (the distance btween the rear of the stock and the grip) possibly making the distance too logn to be comfortable.

Concordeia mentioned in the comments before that his gun didn't have a buffer system in the stock so he indeed does have enough room in the stock for the bolt without any fancy TKB022ish system.

Concordeia - December 31, 2010 07:03 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:51 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 06:34 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:17 PM)
Well you could get rid of the whole misleading idea by just saying it has a AR-15 carbine style RIS with controls simialr to that found on the AR-15 series. Saying that its "based" on the M4 implies that there is a AR-15 mechanism hiding in there. Of course decent RIS's are not restricted to Ar-15s.

With a caseless rifle it is all about your mechanism and how you deal with the issue that come with casless action.

From your drawing you obviously don't have room for a conventional bolt so off the top of my head you are likely to be using a steyr ACR falling breach mechanism.

I'm not sure how a short stroke system would give lower impulse than DI unless you are goign down the ultimax cosntant recoil path.

How and why do you have 2 different rate of fire for auto and burst?

On the image if you are goign to have an adjsutable stock cut down by at least half its current length.

Hmm, I think it looks like he has just enough space for a conventional rotating bolt.

Only if it was crammed into the adjsutable stock which while big enough for a return spring/buffer tube won't accomodate the bolt and bolt carrier assembly


Concordeia:

Steyr ACR, rather than AUG: http://world.guns.ru/assault/at/steyr-acr-e.html


The HK G3 used a some what complicated mechanism very different to that used in msot modern assault rifles. The burst mode rate of fire of the G-11 was its true RoF which was heavily reduced for atuoamtic mode. It was a bit complicated but in burst mode the G-11 fired 3 roudns by the time the whole firing mechanism reach the back of the "receiver" but in autoamtic mode only 1 roudn was fired during the mechanism movement. Well that might be a simlification but it works.

HK pro do have a nice article on the G-11:

http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=com_...otypes&Itemid=5


The thing is on the HK416 the stock starts immediately after the psitol grip, on this you have the amgazine and some of the mechanism behidn the pistol grip adding another 70-100mm onto the weapon's "length of pull" (the distance btween the rear of the stock and the grip) possibly making the distance too logn to be comfortable.

Crap. I wanted to have a bullpup rifle which looked similar to the M4, but the stock makes it too long to be held comfortably and the main receiver section is too short for a conventional bolt.

I wonder if maybe I should just stick with a conventional layout instead. Or find a different bullpup arrangement.

Concordeia - December 31, 2010 07:06 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:51 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 06:34 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:17 PM)
Well you could get rid of the whole misleading idea by just saying it has a AR-15 carbine style RIS with controls simialr to that found on the AR-15 series. Saying that its "based" on the M4 implies that there is a AR-15 mechanism hiding in there. Of course decent RIS's are not restricted to Ar-15s.

With a caseless rifle it is all about your mechanism and how you deal with the issue that come with casless action.

From your drawing you obviously don't have room for a conventional bolt so off the top of my head you are likely to be using a steyr ACR falling breach mechanism.

I'm not sure how a short stroke system would give lower impulse than DI unless you are goign down the ultimax cosntant recoil path.

How and why do you have 2 different rate of fire for auto and burst?

On the image if you are goign to have an adjsutable stock cut down by at least half its current length.

Hmm, I think it looks like he has just enough space for a conventional rotating bolt.

Only if it was crammed into the adjsutable stock which while big enough for a return spring/buffer tube won't accomodate the bolt and bolt carrier assembly


Concordeia:

Steyr ACR, rather than AUG: http://world.guns.ru/assault/at/steyr-acr-e.html


The HK G3 used a some what complicated mechanism very different to that used in msot modern assault rifles. The burst mode rate of fire of the G-11 was its true RoF which was heavily reduced for atuoamtic mode. It was a bit complicated but in burst mode the G-11 fired 3 roudns by the time the whole firing mechanism reach the back of the "receiver" but in autoamtic mode only 1 roudn was fired during the mechanism movement. Well that might be a simlification but it works.

HK pro do have a nice article on the G-11:

http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=com_...otypes&Itemid=5


The thing is on the HK416 the stock starts immediately after the psitol grip, on this you have the amgazine and some of the mechanism behidn the pistol grip adding another 70-100mm onto the weapon's "length of pull" (the distance btween the rear of the stock and the grip) possibly making the distance too logn to be comfortable.

Concordeia mentioned in the comments before that his gun didn't have a buffer system in the stock so he indeed does have enough room in the stock for the bolt without any fancy TKB022ish system.

But crookfur just said that the stock wouldn't be able to fit the bolt or bolt carrier assembly...unless it can fit? This is getting confusing.

Also, what exactly is a spring/buffer stock?

Bloody_Sahara - December 31, 2010 07:15 PM (GMT)
In the ar15 series of rifles, the spring that pushes the bolt back into place is located behind the bolt, which means it must extend into the stock. It is called spring loaded because the spring is in it.

I think you could have the bolt slide into the stock when the gun was fired if the spring was somewhere else on the gun. Like wrapped around the gas key LR300 style.

Concordeia - December 31, 2010 07:20 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Bloody_Sahara @ Dec 31 2010, 08:15 PM)
In the ar15 series of rifles, the spring that pushes the bolt back into place is located behind the bolt, which means it must extend into the stock. It is called spring loaded because the spring is in it.

I think you could have the bolt slide into the stock when the gun was fired if the spring was somewhere else on the gun. Like wrapped around the gas key LR300 style.

Ah screw it. I want my collapsible stock. I think I'm just gonna go ahead and make the CRS a conventional rifle. I'll try a bullpup design some other time.

Pres. Kalashnikov - December 31, 2010 07:23 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Concordeia @ Dec 31 2010, 08:06 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:51 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 06:34 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:17 PM)
Well you could get rid of the whole misleading idea by just saying it has a AR-15 carbine style RIS with controls simialr to that found on the AR-15 series. Saying that its "based" on the M4 implies that there is a AR-15 mechanism hiding in there. Of course decent RIS's are not restricted to Ar-15s.

With a caseless rifle it is all about your mechanism and how you deal with the issue that come with casless action.

From your drawing you obviously don't have room for a conventional bolt so off the top of my head you are likely to be using a steyr ACR falling breach mechanism.

I'm not sure how a short stroke system would give lower impulse than DI unless you are goign down the ultimax cosntant recoil path.

How and why do you have 2 different rate of fire for auto and burst?

On the image if you are goign to have an adjsutable stock cut down by at least half its current length.

Hmm, I think it looks like he has just enough space for a conventional rotating bolt.

Only if it was crammed into the adjsutable stock which while big enough for a return spring/buffer tube won't accomodate the bolt and bolt carrier assembly


Concordeia:

Steyr ACR, rather than AUG: http://world.guns.ru/assault/at/steyr-acr-e.html


The HK G3 used a some what complicated mechanism very different to that used in msot modern assault rifles. The burst mode rate of fire of the G-11 was its true RoF which was heavily reduced for atuoamtic mode. It was a bit complicated but in burst mode the G-11 fired 3 roudns by the time the whole firing mechanism reach the back of the "receiver" but in autoamtic mode only 1 roudn was fired during the mechanism movement. Well that might be a simlification but it works.

HK pro do have a nice article on the G-11:

http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=com_...otypes&Itemid=5


The thing is on the HK416 the stock starts immediately after the psitol grip, on this you have the amgazine and some of the mechanism behidn the pistol grip adding another 70-100mm onto the weapon's "length of pull" (the distance btween the rear of the stock and the grip) possibly making the distance too logn to be comfortable.

Concordeia mentioned in the comments before that his gun didn't have a buffer system in the stock so he indeed does have enough room in the stock for the bolt without any fancy TKB022ish system.

But crookfur just said that the stock wouldn't be able to fit the bolt or bolt carrier assembly...unless it can fit? This is getting confusing.

Also, what exactly is a spring/buffer stock?

A buffer spring is a well, spring, found in the stock of some firearms which helps to reduce rate of fire thus allowing more rounds to be put on target. The bolt carrier recoils into a series of buffers, which compress a spring. Spring lets go, bolt carrier is launched back forward (this is what I read in an article, I can be wrong though). Problem is that some of the buffers have so much spring pressure that they cause the bolt carrier to bounce but that's a different story...

Anyway, what crookfur thought was that you had a buffer spring which takes up space and since your stock is so small, the bolt wouldn't have enough room to move. But since you don't have the buffer springs, there is enough room. The general rule of thumb to finding out the space needed for the bolt to cycle back is to put two of your magazines together, back to back.

Crookfur - December 31, 2010 09:29 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 07:23 PM)
QUOTE (Concordeia @ Dec 31 2010, 08:06 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:51 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 06:34 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:17 PM)
Well you could get rid of the whole misleading idea by just saying it has a AR-15 carbine style RIS with controls simialr to that found on the AR-15 series. Saying that its "based" on the M4 implies that there is a AR-15 mechanism hiding in there. Of course decent RIS's are not restricted to Ar-15s.

With a caseless rifle it is all about your mechanism and how you deal with the issue that come with casless action.

From your drawing you obviously don't have room for a conventional bolt so off the top of my head you are likely to be using a steyr ACR falling breach mechanism.

I'm not sure how a short stroke system would give lower impulse than DI unless you are goign down the ultimax cosntant recoil path.

How and why do you have 2 different rate of fire for auto and burst?

On the image if you are goign to have an adjsutable stock cut down by at least half its current length.

Hmm, I think it looks like he has just enough space for a conventional rotating bolt.

Only if it was crammed into the adjsutable stock which while big enough for a return spring/buffer tube won't accomodate the bolt and bolt carrier assembly


Concordeia:

Steyr ACR, rather than AUG: http://world.guns.ru/assault/at/steyr-acr-e.html


The HK G3 used a some what complicated mechanism very different to that used in msot modern assault rifles. The burst mode rate of fire of the G-11 was its true RoF which was heavily reduced for atuoamtic mode. It was a bit complicated but in burst mode the G-11 fired 3 roudns by the time the whole firing mechanism reach the back of the "receiver" but in autoamtic mode only 1 roudn was fired during the mechanism movement. Well that might be a simlification but it works.

HK pro do have a nice article on the G-11:

http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=com_...otypes&Itemid=5


The thing is on the HK416 the stock starts immediately after the psitol grip, on this you have the amgazine and some of the mechanism behidn the pistol grip adding another 70-100mm onto the weapon's "length of pull" (the distance btween the rear of the stock and the grip) possibly making the distance too logn to be comfortable.

Concordeia mentioned in the comments before that his gun didn't have a buffer system in the stock so he indeed does have enough room in the stock for the bolt without any fancy TKB022ish system.

But crookfur just said that the stock wouldn't be able to fit the bolt or bolt carrier assembly...unless it can fit? This is getting confusing.

Also, what exactly is a spring/buffer stock?

A buffer spring is a well, spring, found in the stock of some firearms which helps to reduce rate of fire thus allowing more rounds to be put on target. The bolt carrier recoils into a series of buffers, which compress a spring. Spring lets go, bolt carrier is launched back forward (this is what I read in an article, I can be wrong though). Problem is that some of the buffers have so much spring pressure that they cause the bolt carrier to bounce but that's a different story...

Anyway, what crookfur thought was that you had a buffer spring which takes up space and since your stock is so small, the bolt wouldn't have enough room to move. But since you don't have the buffer springs, there is enough room. The general rule of thumb to finding out the space needed for the bolt to cycle back is to put two of your magazines together, back to back.

Totally not where i was going, i was saying that it wouldn't actaully be wide enough for the blocky bolt/bolt carier assembly, it has nothing to do with length or or the positioning of the return spring/buffer. Also please don't lump me in with the TKB022 solves all issues brigade.

Concordeia: The whole joy of using caseless ammo is that you can do things differently. With your original image you CAN actually fit a workable caseless action in without much issue it was just the adjustable bit of the stock was a bit long.

Ideally you shouldn't really be using a "conventional" action at all as msot weapons for caseless and cased telescoped ammunition have used a "traveling chamber" where the chamber/breahc itself does the moving. There are a variety of ways of doign thing this either a simple falling breach/chamber as in the Steyr ACR and PDW-11, a swining chamber as in the LSAT machine gun or even a revolver mechanism as in the LMG-11. All of these system use push through feeding in that the ammunition is pushed forwards or backwards into the breach/chamber which then moves into the firing position.

With your original image you had plenty of room for the ammunition to be pushed forward into the chamber which would then rise to be inline with the barrel. With your new layout you could be feeding the ammo backwards thus giving you another 40mm or so of barrel length (well actually closer to 80mm) comapred to a "conventional" cased ammunition rifle of the same length.

Concordeia - December 31, 2010 09:44 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 10:29 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 07:23 PM)
QUOTE (Concordeia @ Dec 31 2010, 08:06 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:51 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 06:34 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:17 PM)
Well you could get rid of the whole misleading idea by just saying it has a AR-15 carbine style RIS with controls simialr to that found on the AR-15 series. Saying that its "based" on the M4 implies that there is a AR-15 mechanism hiding in there. Of course decent RIS's are not restricted to Ar-15s.

With a caseless rifle it is all about your mechanism and how you deal with the issue that come with casless action.

From your drawing you obviously don't have room for a conventional bolt so off the top of my head you are likely to be using a steyr ACR falling breach mechanism.

I'm not sure how a short stroke system would give lower impulse than DI unless you are goign down the ultimax cosntant recoil path.

How and why do you have 2 different rate of fire for auto and burst?

On the image if you are goign to have an adjsutable stock cut down by at least half its current length.

Hmm, I think it looks like he has just enough space for a conventional rotating bolt.

Only if it was crammed into the adjsutable stock which while big enough for a return spring/buffer tube won't accomodate the bolt and bolt carrier assembly


Concordeia:

Steyr ACR, rather than AUG: http://world.guns.ru/assault/at/steyr-acr-e.html


The HK G3 used a some what complicated mechanism very different to that used in msot modern assault rifles. The burst mode rate of fire of the G-11 was its true RoF which was heavily reduced for atuoamtic mode. It was a bit complicated but in burst mode the G-11 fired 3 roudns by the time the whole firing mechanism reach the back of the "receiver" but in autoamtic mode only 1 roudn was fired during the mechanism movement. Well that might be a simlification but it works.

HK pro do have a nice article on the G-11:

http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=com_...otypes&Itemid=5


The thing is on the HK416 the stock starts immediately after the psitol grip, on this you have the amgazine and some of the mechanism behidn the pistol grip adding another 70-100mm onto the weapon's "length of pull" (the distance btween the rear of the stock and the grip) possibly making the distance too logn to be comfortable.

Concordeia mentioned in the comments before that his gun didn't have a buffer system in the stock so he indeed does have enough room in the stock for the bolt without any fancy TKB022ish system.

But crookfur just said that the stock wouldn't be able to fit the bolt or bolt carrier assembly...unless it can fit? This is getting confusing.

Also, what exactly is a spring/buffer stock?

A buffer spring is a well, spring, found in the stock of some firearms which helps to reduce rate of fire thus allowing more rounds to be put on target. The bolt carrier recoils into a series of buffers, which compress a spring. Spring lets go, bolt carrier is launched back forward (this is what I read in an article, I can be wrong though). Problem is that some of the buffers have so much spring pressure that they cause the bolt carrier to bounce but that's a different story...

Anyway, what crookfur thought was that you had a buffer spring which takes up space and since your stock is so small, the bolt wouldn't have enough room to move. But since you don't have the buffer springs, there is enough room. The general rule of thumb to finding out the space needed for the bolt to cycle back is to put two of your magazines together, back to back.

Totally not where i was going, i was saying that it wouldn't actaully be wide enough for the blocky bolt/bolt carier assembly, it has nothing to do with length or or the positioning of the return spring/buffer. Also please don't lump me in with the TKB022 solves all issues brigade.

Concordeia: The whole joy of using caseless ammo is that you can do things differently. With your original image you CAN actually fit a workable caseless action in without much issue it was just the adjustable bit of the stock was a bit long.

Ideally you shouldn't really be using a "conventional" action at all as msot weapons for caseless and cased telescoped ammunition have used a "traveling chamber" where the chamber/breahc itself does the moving. There are a variety of ways of doign thing this either a simple falling breach/chamber as in the Steyr ACR and PDW-11, a swining chamber as in the LSAT machine gun or even a revolver mechanism as in the LMG-11. All of these system use push through feeding in that the ammunition is pushed forwards or backwards into the breach/chamber which then moves into the firing position.

With your original image you had plenty of room for the ammunition to be pushed forward into the chamber which would then rise to be inline with the barrel. With your new layout you could be feeding the ammo backwards thus giving you another 40mm or so of barrel length (well actually closer to 80mm) comapred to a "conventional" cased ammunition rifle of the same length.

So wait...you're saying that if I utilize a different action, even with my current conventionaly layout (magazine front, trigger back), the action can push the ammo backwards and fire from the back of the receiver, effectively becoming an internal bullpup?

Exactly what mechanism would I use to do this? I'm going to be honest, trying to visualize how this stuff works in my head is very difficult for me.

Pres. Kalashnikov - December 31, 2010 09:47 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 10:29 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 07:23 PM)
QUOTE (Concordeia @ Dec 31 2010, 08:06 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:51 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 06:34 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:17 PM)
Well you could get rid of the whole misleading idea by just saying it has a AR-15 carbine style RIS with controls simialr to that found on the AR-15 series. Saying that its "based" on the M4 implies that there is a AR-15 mechanism hiding in there. Of course decent RIS's are not restricted to Ar-15s.

With a caseless rifle it is all about your mechanism and how you deal with the issue that come with casless action.

From your drawing you obviously don't have room for a conventional bolt so off the top of my head you are likely to be using a steyr ACR falling breach mechanism.

I'm not sure how a short stroke system would give lower impulse than DI unless you are goign down the ultimax cosntant recoil path.

How and why do you have 2 different rate of fire for auto and burst?

On the image if you are goign to have an adjsutable stock cut down by at least half its current length.

Hmm, I think it looks like he has just enough space for a conventional rotating bolt.

Only if it was crammed into the adjsutable stock which while big enough for a return spring/buffer tube won't accomodate the bolt and bolt carrier assembly


Concordeia:

Steyr ACR, rather than AUG: http://world.guns.ru/assault/at/steyr-acr-e.html


The HK G3 used a some what complicated mechanism very different to that used in msot modern assault rifles. The burst mode rate of fire of the G-11 was its true RoF which was heavily reduced for atuoamtic mode. It was a bit complicated but in burst mode the G-11 fired 3 roudns by the time the whole firing mechanism reach the back of the "receiver" but in autoamtic mode only 1 roudn was fired during the mechanism movement. Well that might be a simlification but it works.

HK pro do have a nice article on the G-11:

http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=com_...otypes&Itemid=5


The thing is on the HK416 the stock starts immediately after the psitol grip, on this you have the amgazine and some of the mechanism behidn the pistol grip adding another 70-100mm onto the weapon's "length of pull" (the distance btween the rear of the stock and the grip) possibly making the distance too logn to be comfortable.

Concordeia mentioned in the comments before that his gun didn't have a buffer system in the stock so he indeed does have enough room in the stock for the bolt without any fancy TKB022ish system.

But crookfur just said that the stock wouldn't be able to fit the bolt or bolt carrier assembly...unless it can fit? This is getting confusing.

Also, what exactly is a spring/buffer stock?

A buffer spring is a well, spring, found in the stock of some firearms which helps to reduce rate of fire thus allowing more rounds to be put on target. The bolt carrier recoils into a series of buffers, which compress a spring. Spring lets go, bolt carrier is launched back forward (this is what I read in an article, I can be wrong though). Problem is that some of the buffers have so much spring pressure that they cause the bolt carrier to bounce but that's a different story...

Anyway, what crookfur thought was that you had a buffer spring which takes up space and since your stock is so small, the bolt wouldn't have enough room to move. But since you don't have the buffer springs, there is enough room. The general rule of thumb to finding out the space needed for the bolt to cycle back is to put two of your magazines together, back to back.

Totally not where i was going, i was saying that it wouldn't actaully be wide enough for the blocky bolt/bolt carier assembly, it has nothing to do with length or or the positioning of the return spring/buffer. Also please don't lump me in with the TKB022 solves all issues brigade.

Concordeia: The whole joy of using caseless ammo is that you can do things differently. With your original image you CAN actually fit a workable caseless action in without much issue it was just the adjustable bit of the stock was a bit long.

Ideally you shouldn't really be using a "conventional" action at all as msot weapons for caseless and cased telescoped ammunition have used a "traveling chamber" where the chamber/breahc itself does the moving. There are a variety of ways of doign thing this either a simple falling breach/chamber as in the Steyr ACR and PDW-11, a swining chamber as in the LSAT machine gun or even a revolver mechanism as in the LMG-11. All of these system use push through feeding in that the ammunition is pushed forwards or backwards into the breach/chamber which then moves into the firing position.

With your original image you had plenty of room for the ammunition to be pushed forward into the chamber which would then rise to be inline with the barrel. With your new layout you could be feeding the ammo backwards thus giving you another 40mm or so of barrel length (well actually closer to 80mm) comapred to a "conventional" cased ammunition rifle of the same length.

No need to automatically assume that I've put you in the (whatever this is) ''TKB022 solves all issues brigade''.

Anyway, caseless firearms aren't really my cup of tea so it's all yours, Crookfur. Good luck.

Concordeia - December 31, 2010 09:48 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 10:47 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 10:29 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 07:23 PM)
QUOTE (Concordeia @ Dec 31 2010, 08:06 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:51 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 06:34 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:17 PM)
Well you could get rid of the whole misleading idea by just saying it has a AR-15 carbine style RIS with controls simialr to that found on the AR-15 series. Saying that its "based" on the M4 implies that there is a AR-15 mechanism hiding in there. Of course decent RIS's are not restricted to Ar-15s.

With a caseless rifle it is all about your mechanism and how you deal with the issue that come with casless action.

From your drawing you obviously don't have room for a conventional bolt so off the top of my head you are likely to be using a steyr ACR falling breach mechanism.

I'm not sure how a short stroke system would give lower impulse than DI unless you are goign down the ultimax cosntant recoil path.

How and why do you have 2 different rate of fire for auto and burst?

On the image if you are goign to have an adjsutable stock cut down by at least half its current length.

Hmm, I think it looks like he has just enough space for a conventional rotating bolt.

Only if it was crammed into the adjsutable stock which while big enough for a return spring/buffer tube won't accomodate the bolt and bolt carrier assembly


Concordeia:

Steyr ACR, rather than AUG: http://world.guns.ru/assault/at/steyr-acr-e.html


The HK G3 used a some what complicated mechanism very different to that used in msot modern assault rifles. The burst mode rate of fire of the G-11 was its true RoF which was heavily reduced for atuoamtic mode. It was a bit complicated but in burst mode the G-11 fired 3 roudns by the time the whole firing mechanism reach the back of the "receiver" but in autoamtic mode only 1 roudn was fired during the mechanism movement. Well that might be a simlification but it works.

HK pro do have a nice article on the G-11:

http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=com_...otypes&Itemid=5


The thing is on the HK416 the stock starts immediately after the psitol grip, on this you have the amgazine and some of the mechanism behidn the pistol grip adding another 70-100mm onto the weapon's "length of pull" (the distance btween the rear of the stock and the grip) possibly making the distance too logn to be comfortable.

Concordeia mentioned in the comments before that his gun didn't have a buffer system in the stock so he indeed does have enough room in the stock for the bolt without any fancy TKB022ish system.

But crookfur just said that the stock wouldn't be able to fit the bolt or bolt carrier assembly...unless it can fit? This is getting confusing.

Also, what exactly is a spring/buffer stock?

A buffer spring is a well, spring, found in the stock of some firearms which helps to reduce rate of fire thus allowing more rounds to be put on target. The bolt carrier recoils into a series of buffers, which compress a spring. Spring lets go, bolt carrier is launched back forward (this is what I read in an article, I can be wrong though). Problem is that some of the buffers have so much spring pressure that they cause the bolt carrier to bounce but that's a different story...

Anyway, what crookfur thought was that you had a buffer spring which takes up space and since your stock is so small, the bolt wouldn't have enough room to move. But since you don't have the buffer springs, there is enough room. The general rule of thumb to finding out the space needed for the bolt to cycle back is to put two of your magazines together, back to back.

Totally not where i was going, i was saying that it wouldn't actaully be wide enough for the blocky bolt/bolt carier assembly, it has nothing to do with length or or the positioning of the return spring/buffer. Also please don't lump me in with the TKB022 solves all issues brigade.

Concordeia: The whole joy of using caseless ammo is that you can do things differently. With your original image you CAN actually fit a workable caseless action in without much issue it was just the adjustable bit of the stock was a bit long.

Ideally you shouldn't really be using a "conventional" action at all as msot weapons for caseless and cased telescoped ammunition have used a "traveling chamber" where the chamber/breahc itself does the moving. There are a variety of ways of doign thing this either a simple falling breach/chamber as in the Steyr ACR and PDW-11, a swining chamber as in the LSAT machine gun or even a revolver mechanism as in the LMG-11. All of these system use push through feeding in that the ammunition is pushed forwards or backwards into the breach/chamber which then moves into the firing position.

With your original image you had plenty of room for the ammunition to be pushed forward into the chamber which would then rise to be inline with the barrel. With your new layout you could be feeding the ammo backwards thus giving you another 40mm or so of barrel length (well actually closer to 80mm) comapred to a "conventional" cased ammunition rifle of the same length.

No need to automatically assume that I've put you in the (whatever this is) ''TKB022 solves all issues brigade''.

Anyway, caseless firearms aren't really my cup of tea so it's all yours, Crookfur. Good luck.

What exactly is the TKB-022 mechanism anyway?

Bloody_Sahara - December 31, 2010 09:59 PM (GMT)
a holy piece of technology gifted to us by our glorious communist leaders

Pres. Kalashnikov - December 31, 2010 10:04 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Concordeia @ Dec 31 2010, 10:48 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 10:47 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 10:29 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 07:23 PM)
QUOTE (Concordeia @ Dec 31 2010, 08:06 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 07:57 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:51 PM)
QUOTE (Pres. Kalashnikov @ Dec 31 2010, 06:34 PM)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 07:17 PM)
Well you could get rid of the whole misleading idea by just saying it has a AR-15 carbine style RIS with controls simialr to that found on the AR-15 series. Saying that its "based" on the M4 implies that there is a AR-15 mechanism hiding in there. Of course decent RIS's are not restricted to Ar-15s.

With a caseless rifle it is all about your mechanism and how you deal with the issue that come with casless action.

From your drawing you obviously don't have room for a conventional bolt so off the top of my head you are likely to be using a steyr ACR falling breach mechanism.

I'm not sure how a short stroke system would give lower impulse than DI unless you are goign down the ultimax cosntant recoil path.

How and why do you have 2 different rate of fire for auto and burst?

On the image if you are goign to have an adjsutable stock cut down by at least half its current length.

Hmm, I think it looks like he has just enough space for a conventional rotating bolt.

Only if it was crammed into the adjsutable stock which while big enough for a return spring/buffer tube won't accomodate the bolt and bolt carrier assembly


Concordeia:

Steyr ACR, rather than AUG: http://world.guns.ru/assault/at/steyr-acr-e.html


The HK G3 used a some what complicated mechanism very different to that used in msot modern assault rifles. The burst mode rate of fire of the G-11 was its true RoF which was heavily reduced for atuoamtic mode. It was a bit complicated but in burst mode the G-11 fired 3 roudns by the time the whole firing mechanism reach the back of the "receiver" but in autoamtic mode only 1 roudn was fired during the mechanism movement. Well that might be a simlification but it works.

HK pro do have a nice article on the G-11:

http://www.hkpro.com/index.php?option=com_...otypes&Itemid=5


The thing is on the HK416 the stock starts immediately after the psitol grip, on this you have the amgazine and some of the mechanism behidn the pistol grip adding another 70-100mm onto the weapon's "length of pull" (the distance btween the rear of the stock and the grip) possibly making the distance too logn to be comfortable.

Concordeia mentioned in the comments before that his gun didn't have a buffer system in the stock so he indeed does have enough room in the stock for the bolt without any fancy TKB022ish system.

But crookfur just said that the stock wouldn't be able to fit the bolt or bolt carrier assembly...unless it can fit? This is getting confusing.

Also, what exactly is a spring/buffer stock?

A buffer spring is a well, spring, found in the stock of some firearms which helps to reduce rate of fire thus allowing more rounds to be put on target. The bolt carrier recoils into a series of buffers, which compress a spring. Spring lets go, bolt carrier is launched back forward (this is what I read in an article, I can be wrong though). Problem is that some of the buffers have so much spring pressure that they cause the bolt carrier to bounce but that's a different story...

Anyway, what crookfur thought was that you had a buffer spring which takes up space and since your stock is so small, the bolt wouldn't have enough room to move. But since you don't have the buffer springs, there is enough room. The general rule of thumb to finding out the space needed for the bolt to cycle back is to put two of your magazines together, back to back.

Totally not where i was going, i was saying that it wouldn't actaully be wide enough for the blocky bolt/bolt carier assembly, it has nothing to do with length or or the positioning of the return spring/buffer. Also please don't lump me in with the TKB022 solves all issues brigade.

Concordeia: The whole joy of using caseless ammo is that you can do things differently. With your original image you CAN actually fit a workable caseless action in without much issue it was just the adjustable bit of the stock was a bit long.

Ideally you shouldn't really be using a "conventional" action at all as msot weapons for caseless and cased telescoped ammunition have used a "traveling chamber" where the chamber/breahc itself does the moving. There are a variety of ways of doign thing this either a simple falling breach/chamber as in the Steyr ACR and PDW-11, a swining chamber as in the LSAT machine gun or even a revolver mechanism as in the LMG-11. All of these system use push through feeding in that the ammunition is pushed forwards or backwards into the breach/chamber which then moves into the firing position.

With your original image you had plenty of room for the ammunition to be pushed forward into the chamber which would then rise to be inline with the barrel. With your new layout you could be feeding the ammo backwards thus giving you another 40mm or so of barrel length (well actually closer to 80mm) comapred to a "conventional" cased ammunition rifle of the same length.

No need to automatically assume that I've put you in the (whatever this is) ''TKB022 solves all issues brigade''.

Anyway, caseless firearms aren't really my cup of tea so it's all yours, Crookfur. Good luck.

What exactly is the TKB-022 mechanism anyway?


The TKB022 was an assault rifle designed by G. A. Korobov made for motorized troops in APCs and the such as well as helicopters.

To achieve this it was made to be as short as possible, so Korobov put the magazine on this gun all the way to the end of the gun.

Since the TKB's magazine is at the end of the gun(literally at the tip of the stock), it uses a vertically sliding breech block with a U-shaped rammer/ectractor, because the movement of the bolt in the TKB022 cannot be used to load, extract and eject.

It has the one of the best barrel length to overall length ratios of any military rifles ever built. That should be a good, brief explanation.

Pres. Kalashnikov - December 31, 2010 10:06 PM (GMT)
Never mind all of that ^, lets go with what bloody sahara said!

Crookfur - December 31, 2010 10:17 PM (GMT)
Please excuse my killing of the quote pyramids.

Pres. Kalashnikov: No sweat and I'm sorry if i've come on a s abit heavy handed.

Concordeia:

As to the internal bullpup thing its pretty much that. I'm trying to find any decent pictures of the LSAT rifle demostrator that show anything of the internals.

The actually drive the whole action you would porbabaly be looking at a short stroke gas piston. and the mechanism would function soemthing along the lines of:

round is fired gas enters gas tap> gas tap pushes the psiton rod> psiton rod pushes on the carrier assembly> carrier assembly moves back and moves the chamber to the lower position> carrier continues backa a bit operating the feed lever/rod that pushes the ammo backwards into the chamber> after coming to a stop pressure from the return spring Concordeia the carrier forward rasing the chamber and then locking it to the barrel.

The TKB-022 was a prototype bullpup assault rifle that had the magazine right at the rear of the weapon, even further back than on the ACR. Several people have come up with best guesses about how it works but nobody knows for sure. It has become the pained defense of all the PMGer's who put magazines in silly places.

Concordeia - December 31, 2010 10:57 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 11:17 PM)
Please excuse my killing of the quote pyramids.

Pres. Kalashnikov: No sweat and I'm sorry if i've come on a s abit heavy handed.

Concordeia:

As to the internal bullpup thing its pretty much that. I'm trying to find any decent pictures of the LSAT rifle demostrator that show anything of the internals.

The actually drive the whole action you would porbabaly be looking at a short stroke gas piston. and the mechanism would function soemthing along the lines of:

round is fired gas enters gas tap> gas tap pushes the psiton rod> psiton rod pushes on the carrier assembly> carrier assembly moves back and moves the chamber to the lower position> carrier continues backa a bit operating the feed lever/rod that pushes the ammo backwards into the chamber> after coming to a stop pressure from the return spring Concordeia the carrier forward rasing the chamber and then locking it to the barrel.

The TKB-022 was a prototype bullpup assault rifle that had the magazine right at the rear of the weapon, even further back than on the ACR. Several people have come up with best guesses about how it works but nobody knows for sure. It has become the pained defense of all the PMGer's who put magazines in silly places.

I take it that I would still be able to include an ejection port in this mechanism in the event that a round gets jammed?

Satirius - December 31, 2010 11:24 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Crookfur @ Dec 31 2010, 11:17 PM)
As to the internal bullpup thing its pretty much that. I'm trying to find any decent pictures of the LSAT rifle demostrator that show anything of the internals.

iirc LSAT rifle was pretty much Steyr ACR-but-conventional

I assume it has a ramp to push the bullets out sideways too

Concordeia - January 1, 2011 12:32 AM (GMT)
It looks like this conventional layout outside bullpup action inside approach may work after all! Check out this article regarding the LSAT rifle: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/06...ht-machine-gun/

QUOTE
The LSAT rifle has just been fired for the first time. It uses a rising chamber with an aft feed, which means that although the 42-round magazine is ahead of the pistol grip, the barrel is actually 4 inches longer than an M4 of the same total length (24.75 inches total with buttstock folded), which takes it half-way to a bullpup.

Satirius - January 1, 2011 04:25 AM (GMT)
Hence my saying that the LSAT rifle is pretty much a Steyr ACR that's not a bullpup.

Concordeia - January 3, 2011 02:49 AM (GMT)
Bump.

Canadai - January 3, 2011 03:20 AM (GMT)
You are electrically igniting ammunition without a case. What is there to jam?Edit:disregard I missed a page

Concordeia - January 8, 2011 07:01 PM (GMT)
Question: Will this rising chamber mechanism allow for an ejection port in the event of a jam, and if so, where would it be ideally located according to the rifle's current layout?

Crookfur - January 8, 2011 07:17 PM (GMT)
Yes, ideally somewhere behind the rising chamber chamber. To clear an unfired round/jam just have the rammer/loading lever have an extra bit of movement when the chargign handle is correctly manipulated. i.e. pull the handle back pas the main stop psoition and the rammer is pushed stright through the chamber psuihing the round out the rear of the chamber and down an ejection slide.

Satirius - January 8, 2011 07:22 PM (GMT)
In its original incarnation the rising breech's ejection port faced downwards as to facilitate full ambidexterity.

but then it was a bullpup anyways

Concordeia - January 8, 2011 07:32 PM (GMT)
I don't think either of those are going to work, because the mechanism is at the very back of the middle section of the rifle. It will need to be ejected from the side(s), I just don't know if that will work with this mechanism.

Satirius - January 8, 2011 08:01 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Concordeia @ Jan 8 2011, 08:32 PM)
I don't think either of those are going to work, because the mechanism is at the very back of the middle section of the rifle. It will need to be ejected from the side(s), I just don't know if that will work with this mechanism.

Crookfur's will, mine won't since mine was a purely informational shitpost that injected an irrelevant amount of trivia.

It can eject from the sides. you just have the rammer push the round back into the rising chamber by pushing on the bullet end(instead of forwards and on the primer end) , and the ejection could be done with a simple ramp behind the chamber when it is at the lowered position.

If I'm right on the speculation I'm spewing this also allows for the ammunition to have no ejector groove at all.




* Hosted for free by InvisionFree