German "Heckler & Koch" presented a series of new products at the exhibition "EnforceTac"

A small but very eventful and novelty exhibition EnforceTac usually takes place as a prologue to the exhibition IWAOutClassics in the German Nuremberg. Products for security officials, including military and police, are presented on EnforceTac. This year, the exhibition attracted the attention of products of a well-known company. Heckler & Kochreports the site http://www.all4shooters.com.

The company has demonstrated a number of new products that have expanded the line of military products. We are talking about the modernization of a number of models that are already actively used by various kinds of power structures.

Heckler & Koch is a German company operating in the arms market since 1948. Today it has several overseas representations, including offices in France, Great Britain and the USA. The company's motto has not changed for decades: "No compromises!"
At EnforceTac, the company presented an updated personal weapon for self defense MP7-A2. This is an upgrade from the previous version of MP7-A1.

The 4,6x30 mm HK submachine gun was demonstrated, which was intended for fire support of infantrymen in close combat conditions. The submachine gun was presented as an effective weapon for special forces and the military. The folding front handle is “removed” from the weapon, which made it possible to add additional straps. The front handle of the weapon could become a hindrance when placing it in a holster, which was probably taken into account by the manufacturer.

An updated version of the A3 rifle G28 manufacturers also delighted visitors to the exhibition. Now the weapon has become a little lighter, which allows you to spend less effort when moving with a rifle to long distances. The A3 rifle is also positioned as a weapon to support infantry in close combat conditions.

German manufacturers Heckler & Koch used the allocated exhibition space and to display the model HK-169.

This is the third generation of the proven AG36 grenade launcher from the same company. The lineup started with HK-69 and went through the GLM variant. The weapon uses a side-folding butt with an adjustment function. It is made in the style of G36. There is a possibility of using additional accessories due to several Picatinny MIL-STD-1913 slats. The weapon has a double-action firing mechanism and manual safety device.

HK-169 tilts sideways. Allows the use of different types of ammunition: both lethal and non-lethal options. There is also a shortened version that can be integrated with assault rifles. A smaller arm cannon can open either to the left or to the right.

Another new product from this company is the 7.62x51mm NATO machine gun - MG5.

An early version of it is known as the HK-121. Structurally, it is very similar to the MG4 model, made for 5,56x45mm caliber. It is planned that the MG5 version will be exported to several countries around the world under the license of the German Heckler & Koch.

Comments

[erased]

submachine gun 4,6 x 30 mm HK

In fact, close combat is distinguished, among other things, by the extreme importance of hitting a target with a minimum number of shots and visual observation of this defeat. This is achieved by bullets of relatively large caliber and with high energy. These are cartridges of caliber 7,62 and higher. And here the caliber is matched by the unfinished G11 rifle with a caliber of 4,7. What is the stopping effect of this cartridge? And penetration? Judging by the clearly not pistol length of the cartridge case, the energy is not bad, but how much does it give? The body can also be sewn with a needle, but will the enemy immediately feel this needle in the heat of battle?
Outwardly, everything is worked out, smoothed, finished. But after all, the G36 was also outwardly flawless, however, it was actually abandoned. So let's look at a beautiful product and wait for the results of practical use.

[albanian]

Mp7 was positioned as a self-defense weapon of the same vehicle crews - the minimum size with the ability to break through military body armor, in fact a pistol replacement, here, as far as I know, it is one of the best in its class. And the stopping effect there is not so important, as a rule, they do not shoot single from the PDV.
The G36 is a relatively cheap assault rifle, replaced by the 416 and 417e Hecklers. In general, hecklers do very high-quality things, most of which, in terms of reliability, can only be surpassed by our Kalash. And the "consumer" qualities are among the best on the market. Another thing is that good things are relatively expensive, so the same 41st model of an assault rifle, due to its high cost, did not deserve popularity.

[bazilio]

Quote: erased

In fact, close combat is distinguished, among other things, by the extreme importance of hitting a target with a minimum number of shots and visual observation of this defeat.

It is true, but if we talk about pistol ammunition, which also use PP, then you just need to rely on multiple hits. In 1986, the FBI adopted a number of multi-shot pistols and recommended that its agents rely on guaranteed hit of the target with several hits.

Quote: erased

These are cartridges of caliber 7,62 and higher. And here the caliber is matched by the unfinished G11 rifle with a caliber of 4,7. What is the stopping effect of this cartridge? And penetration?

OPD in the common sense is not high, but the penetration ability of Pts is good, namely reliable penetration of 20 layers of Kevlar and 1.5mm titanium armor plate at a distance of up to 150 meters.

Quote: erased

Judging by the clearly not pistol length of the cartridge case, the energy is not bad, but how much does it give? The body can also be sewn with a needle, but will the enemy immediately feel this needle in the heat of battle?

The cartridge was created under the PDV-self-defense weapon for the military. The key factor was the defense against the goals of the protected BZ. The stake was placed on armor-piercing and in this case the smaller the caliber the better.

[Rex]

And here the caliber is matched by the unfinished G11 rifle with a caliber of 4,7. What is the stopping effect of this cartridge? And penetration?
Penetration there is achieved by a high initial speed and bullet design.
For me, this whole story with the MP-7, like the P90, is a desire to increase sales with the help of a new "toy". The advantages of these barrels are not so great.
The same thing can be solved simply with armor-piercing 9x19.

[Vend]

In the upper photo, it is very similar to a drill

[An60]

Co-development with Bosh?

[Elk]

The same thing can be solved simply with armor-piercing 9x19.

At distances up to 50m. But this cartridge is for another class of weapons, the effectiveness of which extends over distances up to 200m. In addition, that is 4,6x30, which is 5,7x28 percent, 25 lighter than 9x19.

[bazilio]

Quote: Rex

The same thing can be solved simply with armor-piercing 9x19

I think the same thing can be solved with what 7n21 but at a range of up to 30-40 meters (data is given that 7n21 breaks through the BZ with anti-shatter armor at a distance of up to 30 m.)

[alex-cn]

Again beautifully licked products with dubious army prospects

[Zigmars]

Immediately remembered the fate of the G-11.

[opus]

Quote: Zigmars

Immediately remembered the fate of the G-11.

These are different things.
-----------------------
And fate ...
Americans bought a license, Lightweight Small Arms Technologies.

and while the composite (plastic) sleeve wins, however:
In August 2013, AAI Corporation entered into a contract worth $ 2.050.000 to continue the development of parts of the LSAT program. Part of the contract is the manufacture of 5,56 mm case-free prototype ammunition for testing. All on the basis of DM11.

And the Germans, besides Heckler und Koch GMBh, and the ammunition manufacturer Dynamit-Nobel AG are working hard, these are:
Mauser Werke / IWEKA or Diehl, Vollmer Maschinenfabrik.

[Aqela]

Cartoons are cool! Yours !!! Just like in the "Ice Age"! They would have inserted the orcs from "Shrek-2" here!
Only one BUT - but in fact how such a confused boperipass supply system works when dusting, blowing, freezing, freezing?

[alex-cn]

The G11 is a slightly different matter. It was a fundamentally different ideology of weapons. It simply cannot yet be implemented due to the lack of technology. Here, just another "ironing out the burrs" on the already known, but not very popular weapon.

[opus]

Quote: alex-cn

It simply cannot be implemented yet due to the lack of technology

It is embodied ... and for a long time already:
shop hunting rifle,produced since the beginning of the nineties Austrian company Voere rifle VEC-91 design Hubert Usel (Hubert Usel)

VOERE caseless cartridge 5.7x26 mm

===============================
In the late sixties, the famous American company Smith & Wesson launched the 9-mm SW 76 submachine gun, which was a more or less exact copy of the Swedish Carl Gustaf M / 45 submachine gun. On the basis of SW 76, a curious 9-mm submachine gun was created, firing a cartridgeless case.

========================
they will fight this:
1. The sleeve has a significant mass - up to 2/3 of the mass of the entire cartridge. Refusal to use a shell, or at least a decrease in its mass, significantly reduces the weight of a portable ammunition.
2. The manufacture of sleeves requires considerable resources, including the use of such strategic material as copper (in most countries brass sleeves are used), and even when using steel sleeves, the consumption of steel for volumes required in case of war is very significant.
3. Delays in firing associated with the extraction (or rather, not extraction) of the spent sleeve occupy a very significant place in the list of troubles that occur during firing, especially from automatic weapons.

[albanian]

http://army.armor.kiev.ua/hist/bezgilz.shtml - первая ссылка в гугле о проблемах безгильзовых патрон.

The first of these is the reliability of obturation. In conventional weapons, at the moment of firing, the cartridge case expands the powder of gases, tightly adjoins the walls of the breech and does not allow breakthrough of powder gases in the direction of the shooter. No shutter by itself is able to provide such a reliable obturation as a sleeve. In the 19th century, only the invention of a metal sleeve ensured the transition to breech-loading weapons.

The second problem is the rather high hygroscopicity of any powder and the need to protect the powder charge from moisture, chemical aggressiveness of the environment (in particular from oxidation by atmospheric oxygen) and from mechanical damage. The liner resolved this issue very reliably. In caseless ammunition, it is necessary to impart mechanical and chemical resistance to the charge itself or to cover it with a protective layer, which should burn without residue at the time of the shot.

The third problem is that it is necessary to solve the dual task of complete and rapid ignition of the charge from the capsule and the absolute non-flammability of the charge in contact with the breech walls heated from previous shots.

None of these issues have been properly resolved to date. The shutter did not become easier due to the fact that he had to take on the functions previously performed by the sleeve. The weight of the ammunition did not become less due to the fact that it was necessary to solve the issue of protecting the charge from chemical and mechanical influences in a different way from the cartridge case. The third problem is solved even worse than the two previous ones.

I agree that the future is without sleeveless ammunition, but without significant investments in the development of this industry, it will not come soon. And why they don’t give money, the question is interesting, on the one hand they say that there are no materials satisfying the requirements, on the other hand, that creating weapons for these ammunition is difficult. But the fact remains that until now there has not been a caseless complex that would surpass conventional analogs in its operational characteristics and be adopted by the state, all that is either test samples or a small series.

[Elk]

The first of these is the reliability of obturation.

It is completely resolved. As early as the 19th century, the vast majority of artillery guns had a saber loading. Massively cartridge guns began to spread only in the 90s. Shooting systems also acquired fairly reliable obturation systems and were widely used. Moreover, until now, some large-caliber guns have a shotgun loading.

The second problem is the rather high hygroscopicity of any powder and the need to protect the powder charge from moisture, chemical aggressiveness of the environment (in particular from oxidation by atmospheric oxygen) and from mechanical damage.

This problem also has a satisfactory solution.

The third problem is that it is necessary to solve the dual task of complete and rapid ignition of the charge from the capsule and the absolute non-flammability of the charge in contact with the breech walls heated from previous shots.

There are also solutions to this problem.
But another conversation is that:

But the fact remains that until now there has not been a caseless complex that would surpass conventional analogs in its operational characteristics and be adopted by the state, all that is either test samples or a small series.

That is the whole answer. I’ll tell you more, to create something radically more effective than modern small arms (by modern I mean units from the 50s) on the basis of modern materials and technologies is simply physically unrealistic.
Accordingly, research is underway, something will be improved, but a breakthrough such as the invention of the capsule, the mass introduction of a rifle or the replacement of smokeless powder with smokeless is not expected.

[Lopatov]

Quote: Elk

Accordingly, research is underway, something will be improved, but a breakthrough such as the invention of the capsule, the mass introduction of a rifle or the replacement of smokeless powder with smokeless is not expected.

Electrothermochemical.
At least capsule ignition is already available.

[Elk]

At least capsule ignition is already available.

It has been available for about 150 years and is actively used. The question is not how to ignite and what to ignite. The question is what to make the trunk of.
In order to radically increase the efficiency of small arms, it is necessary to raise the initial speed at least twice, to 2000 m / s, and to a maximum of 7000 m / s. But the trouble is, at the same time there are such terrible loads on materials that even the best steel begins to flow.

[albanian]

It seems to me a promising variant of a cassette of several types of liquid mixtures, two types of liquids, when mixed and supplied, for example, electricity, ignite and give an impulse for the next portion / acceleration of the projectile. While the other \ others form the projectile itself. In principle, such a scheme can already be assembled, but its effectiveness will be far from desired. In theory, there are a lot of opportunities to reduce / remove recoil and seriously increase ammunition in the liquid circuit, up to adjusting the density of the propelling body, etc. For the rapid solidification of the propellant, one can assume the use of oxidation. Designing a reliable and effective "bolt" group I see as a more difficult, but not impossible, task.
What would you like to get with these actions? At a minimum, an increase in portable ammunition, improved stability / accuracy of hits, and a faster bullet speed. In the future, you can come up with a lot of things ...
This is an example of fantasy on the development of the direction.

[Elk]

It seems promising to me the option of a cartridge of several types of liquid mixtures, when two types of liquids are mixed and supplied, for example, electricity, they ignite and give an impulse for the receipt of the next portion / acceleration of the projectile.

The first units on ZhMV appeared during the Second World War. It seems - everything is great! It can be very conveniently stored, can be dispensed and, indeed, as you write, you can feed the LMV during the shot. But here a "BUT" crept up. First, there are quite serious problems with the safety of LMW storage. When using monergols, the substance itself is a rather powerful and far from always stable explosive; when using diergols, one of the components is usually very aggressive. Alas, this is almost impossible to avoid. Secondly, the mechanisms for feeding LMW turn out to be very complex, and not so much constructively as technologically. Moreover, if it is quite simple to implement them in artillery systems (especially at the present stage of development), then for small arms it is almost a piece of jewelry. Third, the efficiency gains do not pay off the costs. And most importantly, the need to create a completely new segment of the chemical industry. All this requires more than serious costs, but at the end we get a rather modest increase in efficiency. So, according to my humble observations, the problem of systems on the LMV was solved by the mid-80s, both in our country and in the west, but having estimated the pros and cons, everything was simply classified and put on the far shelf.

For rapid solidification of the propellant, the use of oxidation can be suggested.

Honestly, I did not understand the essence of the phrase.

In theory, the ability to reduce / remove returns

In theory, it cannot be removed, it can only be compensated for, as in dynamo-reactive systems. You see, the law of conservation of momentum has not been canceled, and therefore the recoil momentum can be "stretched", thereby reducing the peak loads, or can be shifted in time until the projectile leaves the barrel.

[albanian]

Thank you for the detailed answer.

Quote: Elk

Firstly, quite serious problems with the safety of storage of iron ore.

Here I think there’s no place to go, in any case, the storage of ammunition is associated with risks.

Secondly, the mechanisms for supplying iron ore are very complex, and not so much constructively as technologically.

And here, both new materials, including plastics, and new production methods can come to the rescue, the same 3D printing is gradually gaining momentum.
As for the chemical industry, I see this question in an integrated approach - when the developments of the chemical industry in one way or another will require a corresponding modernization of capacities in similar directions, so to speak, diversification of consumption.

For rapid solidification of the propellant, the use of oxidation can be suggested.
Honestly, I did not understand the essence of the phrase.

Then I came up with options for the quick hardening of the propellant itself (the creation of a hard shell) using rapid oxidation. For example, for the stability of forms of non-Newtonian fluids or other variants of a projectile.

[Elk]

Here I think there’s no place to go, in any case, the storage of ammunition is associated with risks.

More or less safe schemes for the production of pyroxylin and nitroglycerin were worked out by the mid-80s of the 19th century. Now think about it, while the population density of Europe was about the same as the European part of Russia, but now imagine that a plant exploded somewhere in Samara ...

And here, both new materials, including plastics, and new production methods can come to the rescue, the same 3D printing is gradually gaining momentum.

They will not come, because there are NO fundamentally new materials ...
That's when a heat-treated alloy steel part is printed on a 3D printer, and then we'll talk.

Then I came up with options for the quick hardening of the propellant itself (the creation of a hard shell) using rapid oxidation.

But why?

[albanian]

Explosions in factories, although they have a state of emergency, have much less consequences than in warehouses; in factories, safety measures preclude mass detonations.
About 3D printers - it is of course not available right now, but I don’t think that these are realities of the immediate future, and by the medium term plastics / polymers capable of replacing steel are likely to appear, as well as effective methods for their manufacture.

Then I came up with options for the quick hardening of the propellant itself (the creation of a hard shell) using rapid oxidation.

But why?

At least to combine all components in one container and reduce the amount of ammunition occupied, but this seems to me even more fantastic assumptions.

As far as I got acquainted with the current situation on the press, they are now being actively developed for tanks, artillery and automatic cannons as a replacement for powder charges, so you will see and it comes to personal weapons.

[Elk]

At least to combine all components in one container and reduce the amount of ammunition occupied, but this seems to me even more fantastic assumptions.

So the advantage of LMW is precisely that it is liquid. That is, it can be poured into a vessel of any shape.

As far as I got acquainted with the current situation on the press, they are now being actively developed for tanks,

No one is actively developing them now. The reasons are indicated above.

[alex-cn]

Yes, in non-automatic weapons this ammunition was offered as early as 94-95, precisely, moreover, in hunting weapons. But in the automatic, despite a large number of developments, it is still not there. First of all, due to problems with self-ignition during heating.

[riegel]

A good reliable weapon, has no analogues in the world, the best in its class.

[Russian phoenix]

Quote: riegele

A good reliable weapon, has no analogues in the world, the best in its class.

Give a list of the compared.
Otherwise, your post, about nothing.

[luiswoo]

FN P90 under 5.7x28 is not an analog? The only thing he concedes is that he has a more expensive cartridge.

[Falcon]

Quote: Russian phoenix

A good reliable weapon, has no analogues in the world, the best in its class.

Are you talking about Ak-47 or about Ak-74?

[Russian phoenix]

Quote: Falcon

Are you talking about Ak-47 or about Ak-74?

You are quoting not MY comment, but a comment riegel, therefore, EXISTINGLY, there will be no answer to your survey.

[16112014nk]

Futuristic design! Some may buy it!

[Prank]

Quote: 16112014nk

Futuristic design! Some may buy it!

Yeah. A clear overabundance of plank picnic strips, clearly hints that these are soundly made tsatskas with show-offs.

[gross kaput]

Quote: Stalker

A clear overabundance of picatinny slats,

Can you motivate the "excess"? Or so just blurted out something to blurt out?

[Prank]

Quote: gross kaput

Can you motivate the "excess"?

on which PP a lot of slats, it is not clear. especially in return for the front hand.
Well, a tactical flashlight, well, even a laser pointer to a couple, what else?
maybe a player and an iPhone, a first aid kit and a compass?
so in a fleeting battle, and close combat is just that, and the abundance of smart devices is the right way to the Other World.

Quote: gross kaput

or so just blurted out something to blurt out?

what are you talking about?

[gross kaput]

Quote: Stalker

and which PP a lot of slats,

Well, where is the pile? quite standard placement of short strips on the sides and bottom.

Quote: Stalker

Well, a tactical flashlight, well, even a laser pointer to a couple, what else?

Handle - lower bar, lantern and LTC right and left, upper collimator

Quote: Stalker

maybe a player and an iPhone, a first aid kit and a compass?

Have you really seen what planks yet? Well, for those especially gifted - the side and lower strips are quick-detachable - each with two screws - i.e. they don’t need the owner, he simply removes them or doesn’t put them, and by the way this is a characteristic feature of the German approach - they make the strips not requiring strict positioning (side, bottom) removable, unlike the Americans with their RIS and RAS systems where the strips are not removable and close with magnifying size overlays.

Quote: Stalker

what are you talking about?

It is about you — knowledge is not enough to say something about real merits or not prosperity — but to say what hunting is.

[bmv04636]

And does it even shoot non-defective? not like the old ones with fake postmark and with the remark of experts already on 370 pages

[tchoni]

I don't even know how to relate to the article. More like an advertising poster rather than an article. "Here we have released" ...
But what they improved, what fundamentally new properties they gave to the weapon ... it is not clear.
So, we can only guess that the reason for using a 4,6x30 mm cartridge in the support PP was the desire to increase the bullet penetration ability by personal protective equipment. And so it or not ... alas, I don’t know ...
In general, I would like something more detailed.

[gross kaput]

A shorter gutter can be opened both to the left and to the right.
Maybe I'm missing something, but judging by the photo, he can recline only to the left.

[Massik]

What a fashionable grenade launcher both from below and from above. It is planned to put on the upper bar Eotech or Akog it seems, moreover with a passive night lamp paired, or maybe some kind of 20-fold Lupold ??? Otherwise, why is it so long? On the lower flashlight, laser pointer and grip-bipod go to stripping . Yeah, you can’t argue against fashion, there would be enough fixed open sights, a small piece of a bar under strong optics and a seat for a handle on the bottom with two bolts - if it’s so unbearable with a grenade launcher to fight. The adjustable cheek, folding butt and almost around the bar, is it a sniper rifle ???

[gross kaput]

Quote: Marssik

Yeah, you can’t argue against fashion, there would be enough fixed open sights, a small piece of a bar for strong optics and a seat for a handle on the bottom with two bolts

Yes, crap is clear why they are being driven - he wrapped the pipe with adhesive tape to a tree and shoot! It never occurred to you that with this design the top already has a long and straight back and it is much more logical and technologically more complete to make the bar with removable sights than to mock cunning garbage with the front sight and a whole and a piece of the bar in four slots in the middle. Yes, and the bar under the trunk - if the place allows it - well, someone will prefer the handle closer, someone further, and someone will generally remove in this case the installation of such a bar is not an end in itself for the sake of which the design of the border has been changed, but just rational use of free space. Well, you probably would be most acceptable, would that be such an option? Not any superfluous slats and thieves butt, healthy full minimalism, so to speak

[Massik]

GP 25 is acceptable to me, nothing superfluous and without any kind of permits allows you to throw a grenade over 200m, at least through the 5th floor. If the spatial imagination is at least a little developed, then no problem.

It never occurred to you that with this design the top already has a long and straight back and it is much more logical and technologically more complete to make the bar with removable sights than to mock cunning garbage with the front sight and a whole and a piece of the bar in four slots in the middle.

And why the need it ??? pieces so as not to occupy an extra place to fasten not fate? Answer a simple question? What do you put on this bar?)))

Yes, and the bar under the trunk - if the place allows it - well, someone will prefer the handle closer, someone further, and someone will generally remove in this case the installation of such a bar is not an end in itself for the sake of which the design of the border has been changed, but just rational use of free space.

Ohhh that is, you imagine yourself in an assault with a sort of shtukentsiyu, which is then aiming at 100 meters ??? What is the point of suddenly removing this from the machine, sticking a sort of buttstock with trims, then setting which aiming threads and starting to shoot ??? As I understand it, this is an attempt to compete with the Swiss B + T GL-06, which was originally created by an independent weapon and in terms of rationality of execution in times higher.

[Russian phoenix]

Quote: Marssik

GP 25 is acceptable to me, nothing superfluous and without any kind of permits allows you to throw a grenade over 200m, at least through the 5th floor. If the spatial imagination is at least a little developed, then no problem.

+ Naturally practice, and skill.

[Russian phoenix]

Germans, "Heckler & Koch" ... Yes, with our Russian ingenuity, do you know where we saw them?

[gross kaput]

Quote: Marssik

GP 25 is acceptable to me, nothing superfluous and without any kind allows you to throw a grenade over 200m

And why did they suddenly develop a "brass knuckle" directly? The same GP-30 just attached to the poker without any cunning plans and, unlike the Americans / Deutsche, is absolutely not suitable for use with a machine gun because it was welded to the poker tightly? Or a "pencil case"? that's exactly where Doychev's troubles rest - the aluminum barrel and trigger from the hunter's signal

[gross kaput]

Quote: Marssik

I understand this is an attempt to compete with the Swiss B + T GL-06

So no, they didn’t understand correctly, the Swiss was created first for the police, and such transformers have been around for a long time, the same Americans have long had the M203 STAND-ALONE put a poker with a butt and a handle for suspending the standard M-203. A similar poker has the SKAR EGLM. Yes, and Deutsche themselves have a similar stray to AG36.

Quote: Marssik

? What do you put on this bar?)))

You don’t need to think in terms of the GP-25 or Dyakonov’s grenade launcher, say so long ago, the development of 40 mm grenades with programmable detonators is underway, the Jews are already doing these things in series, already long ago there are optoelectronic sighting modules with laser rangefinders and other tricky guts that automatically calculate the excess that for grenades with a steep trajectory, it’s very important, but to hang all this on a rifle with a grenade launcher is not very convenient, but on a poker like that.

[tchoni]

Quote: Marssik

Ohhh that is, you imagine yourself in an assault with a sort of shtukentsiyu, which is then aiming at 100 meters ???

I can’t imagine in the assault
But as "to leave over the fence" - very much even. It is much more convenient when the machine hangs behind the back (or on the chest) and does not interfere. Yes, and a machine gun without a grenade launcher is a little more convenient to twist than with it.

[Massik]

But as "to leave over the fence" - very much even. It is much more convenient when the machine hangs behind the back (or on the chest) and does not interfere. Yes, and a machine gun without a grenade launcher is a little more convenient to twist than with it.

Yeah, and then the enemy protrudes from the flank and you frantically clutch at the machine gun, throwing this advanced stuccion under your feet, your happiness will not get a few holes in the body during this time. Isn’t it easier to hang the same GM 94 behind your back?)))

[Lopatov]

Quote: Marssik

Otherwise, why is it so long?

Sight with laser rangefinder and ballistic computer. To carry this on a rifle with a grenade launcher is difficult. But in the version of "under-launch" - the very thing.

[Massik]

Quote: Spade

Sight with laser rangefinder and ballistic computer. To carry this on a rifle with a grenade launcher is difficult. But in the version of "under-launch" - the very thing.

The meaning of this on the "under-runner" ??? Except as an ersatz replacement of the normal multi-charge is not to be seen. 150 meters, further along the squares where no calculator is needed, 2 dozen grenades for training are 10 times cheaper than such a thing. Okay, at least 300-400 m, but so ...

[gross kaput]

Quote: Marssik

The meaning of this is on the "sub-launcher"

Are you talking about "brass knuckles"? or about the "pencil case"?

Quote: Marssik

Except as ersatz replacement

Yes, that's just not an ersatz but just a replacement, a smart grenade + electronics will allow you to solve the same problems that 6 is a charging fool with much less weight and ammunition consumption.
Well, as it were, for general development - the maximum flight range of the M406 is about 400 meters, and so in order to really use a grenade launcher at similar ranges, electronics are needed.

Quote: Marssik

150 meters, further along the areas where no calculator is needed

Yes, a tree stump, and then "join the bayonets!" and STUFFING! so what do you think is correct? or is it still better to cover the foe with one or two shots without any shooting in the squares?

[Massik]

Well, as it were, for general development - the maximum flight range of the M406 is about 400 meters, and so in order to really use a grenade launcher at similar ranges, electronics are needed.

Have you even shot with GP? Fig, you hold the required angle in your hands, in order to throw a grenade 400 meters into the 1.5x 1 window, no matter what advanced sight you have, not to mention the spread of such a short barrel. "General development" is also for me ...

Yes, a tree stump, and then "join the bayonets!" and STUFFING! so what do you think is correct? or is it still better to cover the foe with one or two shots without any shooting in the squares?

Such a foolish foe will wait until you take into account the ballistics, until you figure out where the wind is blowing from and where - after all, we are talking about "shooting at 400 meters" you are our expert. If your foe has at least MGL, you will feel happiness when one of the 6 released "stupid" grenades or a burst of "oak" AGS 17 flies to you.

[gross kaput]

Quote: Marssik

to throw a grenade at 400 meters into a 1.5x 1 window,

That is, from MGL or RG6 you do it easy?

Quote: Marssik

you are our expert

Well, excuse me, who studied what, at least, unlike you, I don’t confuse the round with the soft, and at least a little bit interested in the subject before giving out my extremely professional reasoning.
For starters, you would become familiar with the Israeli, quite serial MPRS systems, you would have, by the way, intended for use with the M-203 and the ancient M-79, or with the American SAGM program.
And so on your part, one sheer balabolstvo on the topic

Quote: Marssik

If the foe has at least MGL, you will feel happiness when one of 6 released "stupid" grenades or a burst of "oak" AGS 17

And not a single serious argument.

[Massik]

Everything is clear with you, even reluctant to argue with a person who has no practice

[gross kaput]

Yes, there’s no reason to argue that - you’re our guru - with a GP, a fly flies in 100 steps Well, as it were, some experience with GP-25 is still available from military service
And from this experience I can judge the RGM "brass knuckles" - according to your "under-grenade launcher" - I will not lie to shoot, but I had the opportunity to twist and click in the early 2000s in the "Novaya village". Well Duc, in my purely not professional opinion - forgive a grenade from 400m into the window, I never threw it’s much more convenient to use than a bunch of AK + GP - but cool specialists have their own views.
But this is so lyric - I'll tell you more simply - our "vovans" - who ordered the first Chechen development of the RGM from experience, the American marines with their M203 STAND-ALONE, or juices with EGLM don't care deeply about your highly professional opinion - just like the guys from HuK who were blinded subject of dispute - I wonder why it would be?
In general, it is very interesting to watch the flight of your thoughts - at first you found fault only on the bar and when it turned out that the bar has a logical meaning, it suddenly turned out that the grenade launcher sucks and squalor
PS I am always pinned by such persons in near-arms forums - as soon as it turns out that the opponent knows more of them, they start yelling that he is a theorist, but they are pure practices, therefore, they know how to know the theory for them, but they shot from this thing
PS tell me a respected practitioner, did you at least shoot from the RGM or, at worst, held it in your hands? but it turns out a classic version - "I myself have not read Sozhenitsyn ..."

[MRomanovich]

Quote: tchoni

I don't even know how to relate to the article. More like an advertising poster rather than an article. "Here we have released" ...
But what they improved, what fundamentally new properties they gave to the weapon ... it is not clear.
So, we can only guess that the reason for using a 4,6x30 mm cartridge in the support PP was the desire to increase the bullet's penetration ability by personal protective equipment. And so or not ... alas, I don’t know ... request
In general, I would like something more detailed.

according to the available information and the pictures presented on the network, there is no fundamentally new one, only one cosmetics. I agree about the need for a more detailed review.

Quote: alex-cn

Again beautifully licked products with dubious army prospects

early modifications of the mentioned trunks have long been given way to life in the armies of different countries, many have long walked in hot spots. therefore, the prospects for the updated options are pretty good.

[clansman]

SVT and AK-47 will be better and cheaper