CGF - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: SCAR-L 新用家 [打印本頁]

作者: Paul 時間: 22-7-2010 16:32 標題: SCAR-L 新用家

比利時SWAT

圖片附件: albumlarge3806281.jpg (22-7-2010 16:32, 90.91 KB) / 該附件被下載次數 99
http://wargamehk.com/cgf/attachment.php?aid=106238

圖片附件: albumlarge3806283.jpg (22-7-2010 16:32, 87.38 KB) / 該附件被下載次數 106
http://wargamehk.com/cgf/attachment.php?aid=106239

作者: magicianmax 時間: 22-7-2010 16:41

黑色 …我喜歡

作者: kimkileo 時間: 22-7-2010 16:47

其實仲有波蘭......

作者: 101653 時間: 22-7-2010 16:55

比利時好似係係GEN2果時已經用緊......

作者: Lolanto 時間: 22-7-2010 22:18

引用:

原帖由 Paul 於 22-7-2010 16:32 發表
比利時SWAT

隻狗好英~

作者: 亞爾多 時間: 22-7-2010 22:20

引用:

原帖由 hkncnc 於 22-7-2010 22:18 發表

隻狗好英~

企得仲高過個人

作者: 061084 時間: 22-7-2010 22:40

可惜美軍暫停SCAR-L計畫,得番SCAR-H..........可惜!!!

作者: jn_jona 時間: 22-7-2010 23:17

引用:

原帖由 061084 於 22-7-2010 22:40 發表
可惜美軍暫停SCAR-L計畫,得番SCAR-H..........可惜!!!

緊係唔用la,d美軍成日話5.56x45(m4/m16)係亞富汗山區唔夠stopping power，唔通重用scar-l咩...

作者: Oscarpanzer 時間: 22-7-2010 23:27

引用:

原帖由 jn_jona 於 22-7-2010 11:17 PM 發表

緊係唔用la,d美軍成日話5.56x45(m4/m16)係亞富汗山區唔夠stopping power，唔通重用scar-l咩...

M16同M4SERIES咪一樣用5.56NATO

另外,5.56NATO唔夠STOPPINGＰＯＷＥＲ，可以ＭＫ．２６２
MK.16被人CUT,主要是如果要配備新的武器的話，新產品一定要有絕對性的優勢（或彌補目前的所缺）軍隊才會採用。

[ 本帖最後由 Oscarpanzer 於 22-7-2010 23:35 編輯 ]

作者: Oscarpanzer 時間: 22-7-2010 23:27

http://www.defensereview.com/wil ... e-the-scar-program/

Can the FN MK17 SCAR-H (SCAR-Heavy) 7.62mm Common Receiver and 5.56mm Caliber Conversion Kit Save the SCAR Program?
On July 16, 2010, in Featured, Rifles And Carbines, Special Operations, by David Crane

By Chen Lee a.k.a. “SMGLee”
(Edited by David Crane)
defrev (at) gmail (dot) com

July 16, 2010

Some have said the SCAR is dead (at least the MK16 SCAR-L variant), but from the start of the SCAR program (PDF format document link), its goal has been a receiver that can handle both the 5.56mm NATO (5.56×45mm) and 7.62 NATO (7.62×51mm) cartridges. So, as the various AR manufactures complained, the FN MK16 SCAR-Light (SCAR-L) and FN MK17 SCAR-Heavy (SCAR-H) (PDF format) were born to make the competition more achievable by the industry. As the MK16 SCAR-L won the initial contract, the planned evolution of this weapon was for it to employ a multicaliber single receiver, better know as the “common receiver”. This explains the recent decision to run with the Mk-17 and use a 5.56mm adapter kit/conversion kit for it and to produce a common receiver/multicaliber weapons platform.

The ball for a new combat rifle for SOCOM (USSOCOM) started rolling in the late 90s, and over time, this ball would roll into what would eventually become the the now famous SCAR program (PDF format) on the heels of a solicitation that was released shortly after 9/11, when funding began to pour into SOCOM. From the start, the SCAR weapons concept was to be developed to include a combat rifle and sniper variant in both 5.56mm and 7.62mm calibers. However, once FN Herstal/FNH USA won the contract, and evaluators discovered during one of the test cycles that the MK16, outfitted with with FN’s standard hammer-forged, chrome lined barrel, was capable of shooting 8-inch (8〃) 10-round groups at 800 yard during one of the testing cycle–yes that is ten rounds at 800 yards, all funnelled into an 8〃 group–the idea of developing a 5.56 sniper variant was cancelled. This freed SOCOM up to concentrate on the Mk16, Mk17, and Mk20 SSR (Sniper Support Rifle) with a SCAR-PR (Precision Rifle), or the so called “Shroud” as the DMR (Designated Markman Rifle). So, when SOCOM decided to move the development funding for the the Mk-16 and Mk-17 and roll it into the Mk17 with a common receiver, it was also part of the cycle of development, but that announcement created the appearance of the MK16 program’s cancellation, and resulting reportage with that interpretation (Editor’s Note: DefenseReview does not necessarily agree with the author’s interpretation of recent events. We don’t necessarily disagree, either. We’re just not sure, yet. The fact is, the MK16 SCAR program is effectively cancelled at present, if only temporarily, before the MK17 SCAR common receiver solution is implemented and subsequently adopted in large numbers (if it’s eventually adopted in large numbers. Time will tell.).
Some might say the MK17 platform is too large and heavy for the 5.56mm cartridge. However, the Mk17 utilizes a 7000-series extruded-aluminum (sheet metal) receiver with a monolithic rail system and brace-welds (brace welding). If you make this receiver a common receiver and offer a 5.56mm caliber conversion kit, thus turning the weapon into a 5.56mm platform, you’ve really only added about an inch (1〃) in length to the existing Mk16 receiver (increasing your usable real estate) and a half pound (.5 lbs) in weight, with slightly more plastic on the trigger housing. You’re still running the same barrel and folding/telescoping buttstock configurations as the MK16. The bolt carrier group, of course, must be changed to run the 5.56mm cartridge. So, even though, in the end, a 5.56mm-converted Mk17 weighs a half pound more than the dedicated Mk16 SCAR-L, it’s still a lightweight system, especially compared to the Remington ACR (Advanced Combat Rifle), formerly known as the MagPul Masada in prototype form.

Some have noted that the Mk17 has experienced short-stroking problems when fired off-hand or if the weapon wasn’t held in a secure fashion. This is true, but no one ever explained the reason for this. The current crop of standard-issue 7.62×51mm ammo within the inventory (like M80 ball, utilizing a 147gr bullet) wasn’t designed to shoot in a 13.5-inch (13.5〃) or 16-inch (16〃) barrel. so a program to develop a 7.62mm NATO round that will support and optimize the SCAR/Mk17 platform was started, called SOST (Special Operations Science and Technology). The SOST program initially yielded a .308 Win. round that weighed in at 135gr (remember, the standard M80 ball round weighs 147gr) and it was also down-loaded to ease some of the complaints coming in that a lightweight (but of course too heavy as a 5.56mm rifle) Mk17 was recoiling too hard. This new ammo wasn’t really field-tested thoroughly before being deployed with the Mk17 into unit evaluation and combat. This bit of misstep caused the rumors to run amok about how unreliable the MK17 has been, especially when fired off-hand, and not securely from the shoulder. But I have personnally witnessed an operator firing standard M80 7.62mm NATO ball ammo through a MK17 while holding only the pistol grip and vertical foregrip with the gun out to the side. The weapon shot fine, magazine after magazine. So, stories about the Mk17 short-stroking seem troubling only until one knows the whole story behind it.

So, is the FN MK16 SCAR-L dead? NO (Editor’s Note: Both the Defense Review editorial staff and Kit Up! maintain the opposing position: that the MK16 has indeed been effectively cancelled, at least for the indefinite future). Many operators want the FN MK17 SCAR-H battle rifle/carbine/SBR (Short Barreled Rifle) as a new capability for the warfighter in the 7.62mm/.308 trim, not as a replacement capability for the already-proven (battle-proven) Colt M4/M4A1 Carbine and MK18 MOD 0/ M4 CQBR (Close Quarters Battle Receiver) SBR 5.56mm/.223 Rem. systems. The Mk17 will introduce a new capability that SOCOM warfighter hasn’t had, to date: a modern 7.62mm/.308 battle rifle/carbine/SBR that’s lightweight, modular (with hot-swappable barrels), reliable, and accurate. Is Mk-16 better than the M4/M4A1? NO. The Mk16 does not provide a measurable or significant increase in combat capability or any lethality advantage over the M4/M4A1 carbine/rifle platform, so many operators have asked the following question: Why replace a good-capability weapon system with a proven track record and a high degree/level of end-user satisfaction, a weapon that has benefited from continued, long-term product improvement and evolution cycles over the past 20 years, with a brand new, unproven weapon system (FN MK16 SCAR-L) that does not really provide any real increase in combat performance?

Remember, the Colt M4/M4A1 Carbine platform came out around the late 1980s, and continued product development and improvements over the past twenty years made it one of the most capable and reliable 5.56mm weapons in the world. So, the redirection of funding to the MK17 7.62mm platform was inevitable. SOCOM will therefore be taking two of the best combat rifles into the Global War on Terror (GWOT) for the foreseeable future: the famed M4/M4A1 and the new kid on the block, the Mk17. The question is, will the M4/M4A1 be replaced someday by the SCAR? The answer is most likely YES! The M4/M4A1 will be replaced not because the Mk17 with the 5.56mm conversion kit is more reliable, or because it performs better (it doesn’t), no sir. The MK17 multicaibler weapons platform will most likely replace the M4/M4A1 because some bean counter in Washington will eventually figure out he does not have to buy a new M4 or M4A1 Carbine in order to shoot 5.56mm ammo at the enemy. He can instead just buy a 5.56mm conversion kit for the MK17 at 1/4 of the cost of the M4/M4A1, and the Mk-17 will be able to shoot the same 5.56mm ammo (62gr M855A1 “Green Ammo”, 77gr MK262 MOD 1, 70gr 5.56 Optimized a.k.a. “Brown Tip” ammo with Barnes solid copper Triple-Shock (TM) X Bullet a.k.a. TSX Bullet technology, 62gr MK318 MOD 0 SOST, you name it). The M4/M4A1 AR platform weapons will not be replaced because of their performance capabilities or lack thereof. They will ultimately be replaced because of the allmighty dollar! That’s it. The FN MK17 5.56mm conversion kit will simply be more cost-effective, i.e. cheeper…and that, ladies and gentlemen will be that.

[ 本帖最後由 Oscarpanzer 於 22-7-2010 23:36 編輯 ]

作者: jackieyue 時間: 22-7-2010 23:31

引用:

原帖由 jn_jona 於 22/7/2010 23:17 發表

緊係唔用la,d美軍成日話5.56x45(m4/m16)係亞富汗山區唔夠stopping power，唔通重用scar-l咩...

其實最重要係好多美軍比scar打斷手指骨...

作者: Oscarpanzer 時間: 22-7-2010 23:34

引用:

原帖由 jackieyue 於 22-7-2010 11:31 PM 發表

其實最重要係好多美軍比scar打斷手指骨...

ＨＯＷ？
ＣＯＵＬＤ　ＥＸＰＬＡＩＮ　ＩＮ　ＤＥＴＡＩＬＳ？

作者: 101653 時間: 22-7-2010 23:34

引用:

原帖由 jn_jona 於 22-7-2010 23:17 發表

緊係唔用la,d美軍成日話5.56x45(m4/m16)係亞富汗山區唔夠stopping power，唔通重用scar-l咩...

.308唔見得StoppingPower強好多
只係貫穿力比.223優秀
擊中樹枝等障礙物仍能保持彈道
而且.223有個非常劣勢的地方
就係粒子彈一過300米就食哂屎

作者: 101653 時間: 22-7-2010 23:35

引用:

原帖由 Oscarpanzer 於 22-7-2010 23:27 發表

M16同M4SERIES咪一樣用5.56NATO
另外,5.56NATO唔夠STOPPINGＰＯＷＥＲ，可以ＭＫ．２６２
MK.16被人CUT,主要是如果要配備新的武器的話，新產品一定要有絕對性的優勢（或彌補目前的所缺）軍隊才會採用。

唔洗錢?

作者: 101653 時間: 22-7-2010 23:36

引用:

原帖由 Oscarpanzer 於 22-7-2010 23:34 發表

ＨＯＷ？
ＣＯＵＬＤ　ＥＸＰＬＡＩＮ　ＩＮ　ＤＥＴＡＩＬＳ？

條bolt杆......

作者: jackieyue 時間: 22-7-2010 23:41

引用:

原帖由 Oscarpanzer 於 22/7/2010 23:34 發表

ＨＯＷ？
ＣＯＵＬＤ　ＥＸＰＬＡＩＮ　ＩＮ　ＤＥＴＡＩＬＳ？

自己諗...

上次L場game我都比佢打到...好彩隻匣冇乜氣...冇力...打落黎先至唔痛...

作者: Oscarpanzer 時間: 22-7-2010 23:43

引用:

原帖由 101653 於 22-7-2010 11:35 PM 發表

唔洗錢?

唔通又走去換口徑？？
美軍引入ｍｋ．２６２已經一段時間，ａｔ　ｌｅａｓｔ　ｂｅｔｔｅｒ　ｔｈａｎ　ｎｏｔｈｉｎｇ

作者: 101653 時間: 22-7-2010 23:46

引用:

原帖由 Oscarpanzer 於 22-7-2010 23:43 發表

唔通又走去換口徑？？
美軍引入ｍｋ．２６２已經一段時間，ａｔ　ｌｅａｓｔ　ｂｅｔｔｅｒ　ｔｈａｎ　ｎｏｔｈｉｎｇ

唔好玩啦
引入唔等於廣泛應用
美國已經成日偷雞囉番D倉底貨出黎用
又MEU又M14又MK18咁
買新玩具試下玩兩下比一兩支部隊用
唔等於引入就要全部換哂囉

作者: Oscarpanzer 時間: 22-7-2010 23:50

引用:

原帖由 101653 於 22-7-2010 11:46 PM 發表

唔好玩啦
引入唔等於廣泛應用
美國已經成日偷雞囉番D倉底貨出黎用
又MEU又M14又MK18咁
買新玩具試下玩兩下比一兩支部隊用
唔等於引入就要全部換哂囉

我無話引入等於廣泛應用

只不過話用新彈藥，係現時較實際的做法
用倉底貨，最終目的係省錢

[ 本帖最後由 Oscarpanzer 於 22-7-2010 23:53 編輯 ]

作者: 101653 時間: 22-7-2010 23:55

引用:

原帖由 Oscarpanzer 於 22-7-2010 23:50 發表

我無話引入等於廣泛應用
只不過話用新彈藥，係現時較實際的做法

都係果幾句

唔洗錢?
量產唔洗花時間?
廠果面可以一次過交到咁多貨?

由於全世界都有防彈衣
再加上後座力的控制技術提高
美國果邊E家慢慢引入番D打7.62既槍

一個治標方法同一個治本方法
你選邊樣?

再舉多個例
你有把弓你覺得射極都唔夠遠唔夠威力
你不斷改良D箭 , 的而且確比以前遠左大力左
但點解唔索性換把弩呢?

[ 本帖最後由 101653 於 23-7-2010 00:12 編輯 ]

作者: 亞爾多 時間: 22-7-2010 23:57

引用:

原帖由 jackieyue 於 22-7-2010 23:41 發表

自己諗...

上次L場game我都比佢打到...好彩隻匣冇乜氣...冇力...打落黎先至唔痛...

唔加棍仔既後果

作者: 101653 時間: 22-7-2010 23:58

引用:

原帖由 亞爾多 於 22-7-2010 23:57 發表

唔加棍仔既後果

錯
通常係爆扣雞果隻手
因為要隊個安全制

作者: horenhim 時間: 23-7-2010 00:00

REPOST左, DEL

[ 本帖最後由 horenhim 於 23-7-2010 16:03 編輯 ]

作者: 亞爾多 時間: 23-7-2010 00:08

引用:

原帖由 101653 於 22-7-2010 23:58 發表

錯
通常係爆扣雞果隻手
因為要隊個安全制

安全制同佢距離好遠架
諗唔明添

作者: Oscarpanzer 時間: 23-7-2010 00:10

引用:

原帖由 101653 於 22-7-2010 11:55 PM 發表

由於全世界都有防彈衣
再加上後座力的控制技術提高
美國果邊E家慢慢引入番D打7.62既槍

一個治標方法同一個治本方法
你選邊樣?

問題所謂治本方法最終都係有局限性，不同彈藥係不同情況先可以發揮最佳效能
就算比你用新口徑，又如何？到時，咪一樣有人話ＧＯ　ＢＡＣＫ　ＴＯ　５．５６ＮＡＴＯ
而且用新口徑仲貴，一來好難清倉庫貨，二來又要俾一大＄＄＄去ＦＩＸ　ＬＯＧＩＳＴＩＣＳ
http://www.militaryphotos.net/fo ... tandard-round/page9

ＢＹ　ＴＨＥ　ＷＡＹ　，ＳＴＨ　ＦＲＯＭ　ＭＡＧＦＵＬ　ＦＯＲ　ＳＣＡＲ

[ 本帖最後由 Oscarpanzer 於 23-7-2010 00:16 編輯 ]

作者: horenhim 時間: 23-7-2010 00:11

http://www.fnherstal.com/index.php?id=640
Belgium-based firearms manufacturer FN Herstal hereby refutes theallegations recently found on the web that USSOCOM abandoned the 5.56version of the SCAR® rifle and
reconfirms USSOCOM's decision to acquire the full FN SCAR® family of weapons, including the 5.56mm rifle.

用定唔用? 真係一個謎

[ 本帖最後由 horenhim 於 23-7-2010 00:20 編輯 ]

作者: 101653 時間: 23-7-2010 00:16

引用:

原帖由 亞爾多 於 23-7-2010 00:08 發表

安全制同佢距離好遠架
諗唔明添

通常隻手指公會Standby係個安全制位準備轉單發連發
而美國佬手指公亦比較長 , 所以唔記得縮番手 , 一開槍就......

而且佢地就算唔用棍仔就咁揸落支槍度
就咁手指公伸前 , 隻手指頭都長過個bolt杆位
就算比佢boltback番轉頭果度力擊中 , 都未至於會斷手指骨

作者: Oscarpanzer 時間: 23-7-2010 00:17

引用:

原帖由 horenhim 於 23-7-2010 12:11 AM 發表
 http://www.fnherstal.com/index.php?id=640
Belgium-based firearms manufacturer FN Herstal hereby refutes theallegations recently found on the web that USSOCOM abandoned the 5.56version of the SCAR ...

ＮＯＴ　ＴＨＡＴ　ＥＡＲＬＹ　ＯＮＬＹ

作者: Sophi_hk 時間: 23-7-2010 00:17

引用:

原帖由 Oscarpanzer 於 23-7-2010 00:10 發表

問題所謂治本方法最終都係有局限性，不同彈藥係不同情況先可以發揮最佳效能
http://www.militaryphotos.net/fo ... tandard-round/page9

ＢＹ　ＴＨＥ　ＷＡ ...

效能還效能,實際使用上還有好多考慮
除左錢,training,後勤又有排搞
這篇blog都好值得參考
http://blog.163.com/gunworld@126 ... 283201041095420526/

作者: 101653 時間: 23-7-2010 00:17

引用:

原帖由 Oscarpanzer 於 23-7-2010 00:10 發表

問題所謂治本方法最終都係有局限性，不同彈藥係不同情況先可以發揮最佳效能
就算比你用新口徑，又如何？到時，咪一樣有人話ＧＯ　ＢＡＣＫ　ＴＯ　５．５６ＮＡＴＯ
而且用新口徑仲貴，一來好難清倉庫貨，二來又 ...

用7.62點樣會仲貴?
貴得過一粒mk262?
你認真? 諗清楚d?

作者: jackieyue 時間: 23-7-2010 00:19

引用:

原帖由 101653 於 23/7/2010 00:16 發表

通常隻手指公會Standby係個安全制位準備轉單發連發
而美國佬手指公亦比較長 , 所以唔記得縮番手 , 一開槍就......

而且佢地就算唔用棍仔就咁揸落支槍度
就咁手指公伸前 , 隻手指頭都長過個bolt杆位
就 ...

美國佬手太大喇...

歐洲人or亞洲人用可能會少d呢個清況...

作者: Oscarpanzer 時間: 23-7-2010 00:19

引用:

原帖由 101653 於 23-7-2010 12:17 AM 發表

用7.62點樣會仲貴?
貴得過一粒mk262?
你認真? 諗清楚d?

７．６２ＮＡＴＯ in field for over 50years　何來會”新”呢？

I thought you're talking about 6.5and 6.8,my bad

[ 本帖最後由 Oscarpanzer 於 23-7-2010 00:21 編輯 ]

作者: 101653 時間: 23-7-2010 00:22

引用:

原帖由 Oscarpanzer 於 23-7-2010 00:19 發表

７．６２ＮＡＴＯ　何來會”新”呢？
I thought you're talking about 6.5and 6.8,my bad

冇人叫你用新野wo
所以美國佬咪囉番D倉底貨出黎囉
囉番MEU出黎就話9MM打人唔死
囉番M14出黎亦都係話M4打人唔死
當然錢亦係一個重要問題
但主要原因係.223根本做唔到佢要既野

就係咁簡單

ps. 係前面都有提過

你有把弓你覺得射極都唔夠遠唔夠威力
你不斷改良D箭 , 的而且確比以前遠左大力左
但點解唔索性換把弩呢?

作者: horenhim 時間: 23-7-2010 00:24

引用:

原帖由 Oscarpanzer 於 23-7-2010 00:17 發表

ＮＯＴ　ＴＨＡＴ　ＥＡＲＬＹ　ＯＮＬＹ

小弟有感大大神機妙算, 可否指教一下小弟SCAR-L在美軍是否窮途末路

作者: 亞爾多 時間: 23-7-2010 00:24

引用:

原帖由 101653 於 23-7-2010 00:16 發表

通常隻手指公會Standby係個安全制位準備轉單發連發
而美國佬手指公亦比較長 , 所以唔記得縮番手 , 一開槍就......

而且佢地就算唔用棍仔就咁揸落支槍度
就咁手指公伸前 , 隻手指頭都長過個bolt杆位
就 ...

咁我又無留意美國佬手指有幾長......
對一個亞洲人黎講實在好難想像手指公長到比bolt杆撞到

作者: Oscarpanzer 時間: 23-7-2010 00:25

引用:

原帖由 101653 於 23-7-2010 12:22 AM 發表

冇人叫你用新野wo
所以美國佬咪囉番D倉底貨出黎囉
囉番MEU出黎就話9MM打人唔死
囉番M14出黎亦都係話M4打人唔死
當然錢亦係一個重要問題
但主要原因係.223根本做唔到佢要既野

就係咁簡單

問題當初玩小口徑，係因為根本７．６２ＮＡＴＯ太大一個步兵唔會有太多ＡＭＭＯ，加上且有幾多人可以打得準，都成問題
所以先以量取勝

作者: 101653 時間: 23-7-2010 00:26

引用:

原帖由 horenhim 於 23-7-2010 00:24 發表

小弟有感大大神機妙算, 可否指教一下小弟SCAR-L在美軍是否窮途末路

唔可以話收左皮
只係唔會再買入
而試用的部隊會繼續用到殘

作者: Oscarpanzer 時間: 23-7-2010 00:27

引用:

原帖由 horenhim 於 23-7-2010 12:24 AM 發表

小弟有感大大神機妙算, 可否指教一下小弟SCAR-L在美軍是否窮途末路

I'm not大大,all what I ahd said before was written in the passage which I have quoted from SMGLEE
SCAR-L will not be in field officaly that early,they just want to spend more time with the M4 and MK.18

[ 本帖最後由 Oscarpanzer 於 23-7-2010 00:31 編輯 ]

作者: 101653 時間: 23-7-2010 00:29

引用:

原帖由 Oscarpanzer 於 23-7-2010 00:25 發表

問題當初玩小口徑，係因為根本７．６２ＮＡＴＯ太大一個步兵唔會有太多ＡＭＭＯ，加上且有幾多人可以打得準，都成問題
所以先以量取勝

對住葉繼歡咪係囉

你試下對住件防彈衣
一塊level3A都收你皮喇

作者: horenhim 時間: 23-7-2010 00:33

引用:

原帖由 Oscarpanzer 於 23-7-2010 00:27 發表

I'm not大大,all what I ahd said before was written in the passage which I have quoted from SMGLEE
SCAR-L will be in field officaly that early,they just want to spend more time with the M4 and MK.18

我都係quote FN官方澄清咋wor
無須激動

作者: sam524 時間: 23-7-2010 00:35

引用:

原帖由 101653 於 23-7-2010 00:29 發表

對住葉繼歡咪係囉

你試下對住件防彈衣
一塊level3A都收你皮喇

7.62點都好過5.56...
5.56可以收皮...
恐怖份子都有銀買防彈衣...
5.56又打唔穿...
但係米佬又比7.62射死唔知幾多人wor...

作者: Oscarpanzer 時間: 23-7-2010 00:36 標題: 回覆 40# 的帖子

總之根據ＳＭＧＬＥＥ的說法，ＦＮ　ＳＣＡＲ－Ｌ係唔會咁早上場

作者: 101653 時間: 23-7-2010 00:39

引用:

原帖由 sam524 於 23-7-2010 00:35 發表

7.62點都好過5.56...
5.56可以收皮...
恐怖份子都有銀買防彈衣...
5.56又打唔穿...
但係米佬又比7.62射死唔知幾多人wor...

我當然係講緊5.56打唔穿防彈衣啦
所以換番7.62必成氣候

[ 本帖最後由 101653 於 23-7-2010 00:40 編輯 ]

作者: sam524 時間: 23-7-2010 00:40

引用:

原帖由 101653 於 23-7-2010 00:39 發表

我當然係講緊5.56打唔穿防彈衣啦
所以換番7.62必成氣候

所以咪叫5.56收皮lor...
.50時代來臨...
7.62都唔玩...

作者: 101653 時間: 23-7-2010 00:47

引用:

原帖由 sam524 於 23-7-2010 00:40 發表

所以咪叫5.56收皮lor...
.50時代來臨...
7.62都唔玩...

咁.50又實在太重型
兩粒7.62可以打死一個甲板人
冇乜需要去到.50既

反而E家D狙擊槍就係咁玩D新穎少少既口徑例如.408咁
博D美國傻仔買黎玩

作者: jn_jona 時間: 23-7-2010 01:29

引用:

原帖由 Oscarpanzer 於 23-7-2010 00:36 發表
總之根據ＳＭＧＬＥＥ的說法，ＦＮ　ＳＣＡＲ－Ｌ係唔會咁早上場

上左la,75th ranger用過，2010年頭

作者: jn_jona 時間: 23-7-2010 01:40

其實1粒7.62x51都係around　5蚊hkd,咩mk262可能成幾十蚊粒，
美軍又用得多子彈,例子有美軍越戰果時殺1個enemy用幾多彈，
子彈錢都真係幾和味，都係用7.62低同arm用
但係過多幾年，美國可能唔打‘探你班‘，打城市or woodland,
7.62又用唔著，
不如唔好整新槍，整新kit好過la

作者: 101653 時間: 23-7-2010 02:39

引用:

原帖由 jn_jona 於 23-7-2010 01:40 發表
其實1粒7.62x51都係around　5蚊hkd,咩mk262可能成幾十蚊粒，
美軍又用得多子彈,例子有美軍越戰果時殺1個enemy用幾多彈，
子彈錢都真係幾和味，都係用7.62低同arm用
但係過多幾年，美國可能唔打‘探你班‘，打城市 ...

冇辦法架 (現時)
E家D防彈衣及防彈甲板越黎越平同埋易買到
你諗下連塔利班都有
佢遲D打乜野係冇甲著架?
所以轉口徑係遲早既事

與其轉D新口徑買過D新槍
不如囉番D倉底貨打番D舊口徑而又做到佢理想既效果
已經係最經濟既做法

作者: 101653 時間: 23-7-2010 02:46

引用:

原帖由 Oscarpanzer 於 23-7-2010 00:25 發表

問題當初玩小口徑，係因為根本７．６２ＮＡＴＯ太大一個步兵唔會有太多ＡＭＭＯ，加上且有幾多人可以打得準，都成問題
所以先以量取勝

補充一點
請問你GET唔GET到個問題所在?
話知你粒MK262講到曉飛上太空
咪又係一粒.223

E家係.223打敵人唔死阿
打唔死人就即係美軍會比人打死阿
仲同你慢慢磨.223? 前線果班友仔博緊命架
除非.223可以打穿甲 , 如果唔係都已經冇乜發展空間

[ 本帖最後由 101653 於 23-7-2010 02:47 編輯 ]

作者: Oscarpanzer 時間: 23-7-2010 08:58

引用:

原帖由 101653 於 23-7-2010 02:46 AM 發表

請問你GET唔GET到個問題所在?
話知你粒MK262講到曉飛上太空
咪又係一粒.223

E家係.223打敵人唔死阿
打唔死人就即係美軍會比人打死阿
仲同你慢慢磨.223? 前線果班友仔博緊命架
除非.223可以打穿甲 , 如果唔係都已經冇乜發展空間

你唔好當7.62NATO萬能,FN SCAR-H又唔會取代M16/M4
7.62NATO最終都係有重量問題,如果全面用返7.62NATO即係走回頭路,,
而且現代infantry裝備已經重量多過以前好多
仲有目前7.62步槍的用途以DMR為主,目前大把人仲用緊5.56NATO
另外,仲有另一個問題,有幾多人有高hit rate?
小口徑彈藥已經出現40年,連前USSR都玩埋,證明小口徑優勢
當年7.62nato有咩問題已經清楚
子彈的發揮最佳效能都要DEPEND ON槍管長短
所以將MK.262這類型子彈大量配發,先係實質SOLUTION
何謂無研究空間?科技日新月異,UNLESS你係神,你可以肯定無NEW MATERIAL去更新5.56NATO?
US ARMY已經研究M855A1,則USMC研究MK.318

[ 本帖最後由 Oscarpanzer 於 23-7-2010 09:37 編輯 ]

作者: Oscarpanzer 時間: 23-7-2010 09:24 標題: New U.S. Army 5.56 Rounds Head to Afghanistan

New U.S. Army 5.56 Rounds Head to Afghanistan

By Scott R. Gourley in Land Forces under Defense Technology, Featured, News with 3 comments
New U.S. Army 5.56 Rounds Head to Afghanistan

On June 23, 2010, U.S. Army representatives announced that they had started shipping that service’s new 5.56mm cartridge, designated the M855A1 Enhanced Performance Round, to support warfighters in Afghanistan.

The new M855A1 round, which will replace the current M855 5.56mm cartridge that has been used by U.S. troops since the early 1980s, is sometimes referred to as “green ammo” since it contains an environmentally friendly projectile that reportedly eliminates up to 2,000 tons of lead from the manufacturing process each year.

The Army launched the M855A1 program in September 2005 as a Congressionally mandated initiative to replace the lead core M855 cartridge. In addition, the program focused efforts on developing a new round that would address what service planners dubbed “perceived shortcomings” with the current M855 used in short barreled weapons like the M4.

According to program participants, the program team, comprised of Project Manager, Maneuver Ammunition Systems (PM-MAS), Army Research Laboratory (ARL), U.S. Army Armaments Research Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC), and ATK team members, evaluated more than 20 potential projectile designs before moving forward with a three-piece, reverse-jacket bullet design incorporating a hardened steel penetrator and lead-free slug.

While Army representatives highlight ballistic test results for the new M855A1 cartridge that showed “improved performance over M855 at both long and short ranges, and across an array of target sets,” the round raised eyebrows following recent reports that the Marine Corps dropped plans to field the M855A1 in favor of fielding the special operations’ MK 318 Mod 0 for Marines in Afghanistan.

The M855A1 uses a reverse-jacketed copper projectile with a hardened steel tip and contains no lead. Courtesy photo via U.S. Army.

In announcing the late June 2010 shipment of the M855A1 round to Army warfighters, service representatives highlighted “a number of significant enhancements not found in the current round. These include improved hard target capability, more dependable, consistent performance at all distances, improved accuracy, reduced muzzle flash and a higher velocity.”

“During testing the M855A1 performed better than current 7.62mm ball ammunition against certain types of targets, blurring the performance differences that previously separated the two rounds,” the announcement read, and continued, “The projectile incorporates these improvements without adding weight or requiring additional training.”

Describing the projectile as “the best general purpose 5.56mm round ever produced,” Lt. Col. Jeffrey K. Woods, M855A1 product manager, characterized the fielding as ”the most significant advancement in general purpose small caliber ammunition in decades.”

U.S. Army Project Manager, Maneuver Ammunition Systems Chris Grassano called the fielding “the culmination of an Army enterprise effort by a number of organizations, particularly the Army Research Laboratory, Armament Research Development and Engineering Center, Program Executive Office for Ammunition and the Joint Munitions Command.

“The Army utilized advanced science, modeling and analysis to produce the best 5.56mm round possible for the warfighter,” he said.

The M855A1 is tailored for use in the M4 weapon system, but is also credited with “vastly” improving the performance of the M16 and M249 families of weapons.

Pointing to “more than one million” M855A1 rounds fired during testing to date, program representatives noted that the new cartridge recently completed the limited rate initial production (LRIP) phase and is beginning the follow-on full rate production phase where they plan to procure more than 200 million rounds over the next 12-15 months.

Soldiers in Afghanistan will begin using the M855A1 in the summer of 2010.

http://theyearindefense.com/land ... head-to-afghanistan

[ 本帖最後由 Oscarpanzer 於 23-7-2010 09:25 編輯 ]

作者: 101653 時間: 23-7-2010 10:33

引用:

原帖由 Oscarpanzer 於 23-7-2010 08:58 發表

你唔好當7.62NATO萬能,FN SCAR-H又唔會取代M16/M4
7.62NATO最終都係有重量問題,如果全面用返7.62NATO即係走回頭路,,
而且現代infantry裝備已經重量多過以前好多
仲有目前7.62步槍的用途以DMR為主,目前大把人仲用 ...

.223如果真係做到.308既效果
而又繼承.223既優勢
傻既都選.223啦
問題係E家美國佬呻粒子彈打唔死人丫MA
明唔明咩叫打唔死人? 佢唔死我死阿

冇錯科技係日新月異 , 只會向前唔會倒退
但你有冇諗過問題? 進步都有分慢同快
你粒.223越研發得精良 , 意味住將會越進步得慢
如果番番轉頭睇 , E家槍械設計方面技術比以前好 , 後座力控制方面亦相對優秀
現時可見既真係以低廉既成本走番回頭路而做到佢地想要既效果
當然主流線打.223既M4/M16唔會變 , 打唔死既繼續打唔死 , 但都冇乜可能大量使用MK262

作者: horenhim 時間: 23-7-2010 16:18

http://blog.163.com/gunworld@126/blog/static/122144283201041095420526/
轉自槍炮世界/裝備與生存

一隻子彈走天下很難吧...

作者: horenhim 時間: 24-7-2010 18:54

http://www.gun-world.net/usa/r/scar/prd.htm
槍砲世界有更新, 有提及對MK16前途的推論

作者: AK-47 時間: 24-7-2010 21:09

好型有殺氣x!!

作者: MG-42 時間: 27-7-2010 01:25

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: MG-42 時間: 27-7-2010 01:45

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: chiu1991 時間: 27-7-2010 01:49

黑色令仔D 我覺得,,,,

作者: jn_jona 時間: 27-7-2010 13:59

引用:

原帖由 MG-42 於 27-7-2010 01:45 發表

老實講.. 係美佬咁白痴用M4用5.56打山... 人地說明書講X明5.56最盡打到400m冇力

之後又嘈話打唔死人.. 美佬係識槍唔X洗用曬249,M9,Scar,240,AT-4 呢D歐洲野啦... 出槍唔掂,用槍又唔X識重傻到尋找萬用彈藥. ...

等等先,你話5.56只打到400m?
m16a4個有效射程去到500m bo
而且500m後都重有力wo

作者: 龜霸助刺 時間: 28-7-2010 02:03

引用:

原帖由 jn_jona 於 27-7-2010 13:59 發表

等等先,你話5.56只打到400m?
m16a4個有效射程去到500m bo
而且500m後都重有力wo

I think "MG42" mean 5.56只打到400m = 5.56打到400m後冇力打唔穿Soft甲防彈衣+防彈板

而且500m後都重有力wo [/quote] but not = 打到500m後重有力打穿Soft甲防彈衣+防彈板

作者: 101653 時間: 28-7-2010 02:18

引用:

原帖由 jn_jona 於 27-7-2010 13:59 發表

等等先,你話5.56只打到400m?
m16a4個有效射程去到500m bo
而且500m後都重有力wo

睇槍之餘
仲要睇彈藥
所謂既有效射程
唔等於實際射程

有效射程M4都做到600米
但係唔好唔記得美國用緊既SS109
打超過300米已經收緊皮
就算比你射到600米都唔知粒彈飛左去邊
更何況點為之有力? 你講既係殺傷力? 衝擊力? 定還是貫通力?
至於MK262? 講牙? 最多咪派比SpecialForce&Sniper? 你估真係唔洗錢大量公發?

作者: 龜霸助刺 時間: 28-7-2010 02:19

引用:

原帖由 Oscarpanzer 於 23-7-2010 08:58 發表

你唔好當7.62NATO萬能,FN SCAR-H又唔會取代M16/M4
7.62NATO最終都係有重量問題,如果全面用返7.62NATO即係走回頭路,,
而且現代infantry裝備已經重量多過以前好多
仲有目前7.62步槍的用途以DMR為主,目前大把人仲用 ...

........agree some parts of what you say...so thats why "they" use MP7 cause of lightly "重量問題" and more powerful to kill armor guy in there.....

.....7.62NATO not萬能 but in there use 7.62 more better than 5.56 cause if you had saw "inside of Green Berets you will know why. In Iraqi fighting zone always over 500m...

Just discuses not fighting

[ 本帖最後由龜霸助刺於 28-7-2010 02:26 編輯 ]

作者: 101653 時間: 28-7-2010 02:21

引用:

原帖由 MG-42 於 27-7-2010 01:25 發表

比喻前你可知到..

射箭是用弓發力... 射槍是用彈藥發射

槍械層面子彈係好重要
同時弓箭方面支箭的重量分佈亦好重要

作者: 101653 時間: 28-7-2010 02:27

引用:

原帖由 MG-42 於 27-7-2010 01:45 發表

老實講.. 係美佬咁白痴用M4用5.56打山... 人地說明書講X明5.56最盡打到400m冇力

之後又嘈話打唔死人.. 美佬係識槍唔X洗用曬249,M9,Scar,240,AT-4 呢D歐洲野啦... 出槍唔掂,用槍又唔X識重傻到尋找萬用彈藥. ...

連支槍都未搞好
成日研究新子彈
到頭來話子彈廢
成日話打人唔死
跟住又放棄唔用
然後兜個圈換槍
換新槍又話嫌貴

作者: 101653 時間: 28-7-2010 02:40

引用:

原帖由 龜霸助刺 於 28-7-2010 02:03 發表

I think "MG42" mean 5.56只打到400m = 5.56打到400m後冇力打唔穿Soft甲防彈衣+防彈板

而且500m後都重有力wo but not = 打到500m後重有力打穿Soft甲防彈衣+防彈板

.223不嬲都唔係幾穿到單兵防彈夾板架啦
M995穿甲彈係300米測試最盡都係打入5-6mm的鋼板
望下你件Vest入面果塊假狗玩具板幾厚?
一半都未穿到你想塊野碎? 本身粒子彈既衝擊力又唔係太高
想話打碎塊野仲想粒子彈有力殺埋個人?
幾槍先打碎塊野 , 又補多幾槍先打到個人斷氣 , 食得屎啦

[ 本帖最後由 101653 於 28-7-2010 02:54 編輯 ]

作者: jn_jona 時間: 28-7-2010 14:29

引用:

原帖由 101653 於 28-7-2010 02:18 發表

睇槍之餘
仲要睇彈藥
所謂既有效射程
唔等於實際射程

有效射程M4都做到600米
但係唔好唔記得美國用緊既SS109
打超過300米已經收緊皮
就算比你射到600米都唔知粒彈飛左去邊
更何況點為之有力? 你講既係殺 ...

真係?!
http://www.civiliangunner.com/m16a4
美軍以14.5吋短槍管的M4系列戰鬥時會發覺交火的距離超過槍械的300米有效殺傷射程而力有不逮，這時候20吋長槍管M16系列超過500米的殺傷射程就成為部隊們的最愛了。

作者: 101653 時間: 28-7-2010 15:03

引用:

原帖由 jn_jona 於 28-7-2010 14:29 發表

真係?!
http://www.civiliangunner.com/m16a4
美軍以14.5吋短槍管的M4系列戰鬥時會發覺交火的距離超過槍械的300米有效殺傷射程而力有不逮，這時候20吋長槍管M16系列超過500米的殺傷射程就成為部隊們的最愛了。

你明唔明咩野叫做 "冇得選" ?
M4&M16兩支比你選打山區遠射 , 我夠知M16好好用啦

有效射程黎講M4&M16官方都係話600M , 實際呢?
另外點為之殺傷射程? 子彈打到某個米數仲可以保持咩野速度&威力飛行先叫殺傷射程?
仲有你又有冇睇過M16的重量? 仲有彈道分佈? 呢個測試應該係冇風向等其他要素影響的 , 比你打over500米你打得中個人嗎?

[ 本帖最後由 101653 於 28-7-2010 15:06 編輯 ]

作者: MG-42 時間: 28-7-2010 23:17

提示: 作者被禁止或刪除內容自動屏蔽

作者: jn_jona 時間: 29-7-2010 00:20

引用:

原帖由 MG-42 於 28-7-2010 23:17 發表

其實數據上20吋管既初速及威力只係比14.5吋高20%左右... 你覺得聲稱可打遠200米既水份有幾高?

有幾多水份說留比d美軍計la,但係枝槍係02年開左波之後先用，既係知到m4無料到，
佢地針對e個問題去test m16a4，當然有計數同實驗la,高20﹪＝卅＝完全將初速及威力x(1+20%)，可能多過，可能少過
物理野我唔係知太多....
M16A4為美國軍方除M4/M4A1卡賓槍外裝備海軍陸戰隊及部份陸軍前線作戰部隊的標準突擊步槍，雖然美國陸軍及海軍陸戰隊不約而同於1990年代中後期宣佈將使用中的M16A2換裝成可安裝各式輔助戰鬥裝備的模組化M4/M4A1卡賓槍系列，但到了2002年中後期海軍陸戰隊根據其他作戰部隊於阿富汗的戰鬥報告，再經過海軍陸戰隊兩年來的嚴格測試及激烈的評價性能後由陸戰隊司令於 MarinesCorp Times宣佈以M16A4取代M4系列換裝餘下的M16A2。

作者: 101653 時間: 29-7-2010 04:13

引用:

原帖由 jn_jona 於 29-7-2010 00:20 發表

有幾多水份說留比d美軍計la,但係枝槍係02年開左波之後先用，既係知到m4無料到，
佢地針對e個問題去test m16a4，當然有計數同實驗la,高20﹪＝卅＝完全將初速及威力x(1+20%)，可能多過，可能少過
物理野我唔係知太 ...

1) 段文copy出黎都冇用
2) 我同意MG42師兄認為段文既水份高
3) 都係果句 "點為之殺傷射程?" 係咁易爆缸都算傷害既一種wo

其實呢D沒有實質數據的文章 , 係報紙都有可能睇到
可唔可信黎講 , 個人認為實在冇乜公信力 , 分分鐘美國係咪真係咁講都未知
反而睇到既係 , 好多測試報告中都講SS109的殺傷力不足&彈道分佈不準 , 本身粒子彈最大平均初速係922m/s
而M16的官方數據居然可以去到948m/s , 就憑區區一條20吋管? 當然事實冇話唔得 , 但問題佢又係唔係用SS109黎試呢?
雖然我未聽過20%呢樣野 , 但係20吋管又係咪真係可以比14.5吋管增加120焦耳呢? 而呢度又係咪可以將300米既所謂 "殺傷射程" 增加到500米以上呢?

歡迎光臨 CGF (http://wargamehk.com/cgf/)