Edit | Leave a Comment | Favorite
More Like This: (Beta Temporary Feature)
User Comments:
Oppai_chan commented at 2022-07-08 21:23:29 » #2727211
Man-portable, squad or platoon-level automatic grenade launchers are an underrated concept. I'm surprised that only the PRC seems to have taken this weapon role seriously by producing, adopting, and exporting such AGLs (all of the above designs except the XM109).
1 Points
Flag
Man-portable, squad or platoon-level automatic grenade launchers are an underrated concept. I'm surprised that only the PRC seems to have taken this weapon role seriously by producing, adopting, and exporting such AGLs (all of the above designs except the XM109).
1 Points
Flag
LivingCorpse commented at 2022-07-08 21:40:18 » #2727214
Geez, and I thought it was insane that America didn't make it's 20mm firing XM 109 a bullpup, here China has two airburt grenade rifles that fire 35mm and 40mm grenades. I don't blame them for copying, an anti-material rifle that can fire grenades is useful, but at least make it more compact, weigh less and have better weight distribution.
1 Points
Flag
Geez, and I thought it was insane that America didn't make it's 20mm firing XM 109 a bullpup, here China has two airburt grenade rifles that fire 35mm and 40mm grenades. I don't blame them for copying, an anti-material rifle that can fire grenades is useful, but at least make it more compact, weigh less and have better weight distribution.
1 Points
Flag
LivingCorpse commented at 2022-07-08 21:43:02 » #2727217
@Oppal Chan
I know right? I'm still angry the XM25 CDTE got killed by bureaucracy. Airburst grenade launchers won't replace normal grenade launchers but be a nice compliment to them, filling the space between traditional launchers and automatic grenade launchers.
1 Points
Flag
@Oppal Chan
I know right? I'm still angry the XM25 CDTE got killed by bureaucracy. Airburst grenade launchers won't replace normal grenade launchers but be a nice compliment to them, filling the space between traditional launchers and automatic grenade launchers.
1 Points
Flag
Oppai_chan commented at 2022-07-09 00:56:14 » #2727248
These Chinese grenade launchers predate the XM109 (as with the QLZ-87) and/or don't share any mechanics (the XM109 is short recoil operated; the QLZ-87 and QLB-06 use gas impingement, and the QLU-11 and LG5 use advanced primer ignition blowback), so they can't be copies. The only thing they share with the XM109 is the general concept.
As far as why they didn't make them bullpups to improve weight distribution, I can think of a few reasons.
First, compactness and better weight distribution is nice, but that is not a priority for the weapon's role, which is to maximize firepower in a package of "acceptable" mobility. These grenade launchers are meant to be fired from a bipod as a support weapon (like a machine gun), not from the shoulder as a personal weapon (like an assault rifle). I have yet to see a successful bullpup GPMG, and I don't expect to see a bullpup AGL any time soon for similar reasons.
Second, a bullpup layout would make for awkward ergonomics. Drum magazines are effectively mandatory for automatic grenade launchers, since they are more compact than an inconveniently long stick magazine (note that the XM109 is the only weapon here using a stick magazine, because its rounds are only 25mm). A drum would get in the way of the shooter's arm, preventing an in-line grip, and instead forcing an angled grip. This would not only be uncomfortable, but could cause the user wrist injury as the weapon recoils.
Third, recoil would be too violent in a bullpup design. A conventional layout gives more space and time for the bolt to decelerate before going forwards again—with a long enough receiver, the bolt may even be stopped entirely by the spring and not touch the rear of the receiver (the "constant recoil" principle), making for a smooth action. In contrast, a bullpup would need a very stiff recoil spring to cycle the bolt in its shorter length, and the bolt is practically guaranteed to slam into the back of the receiver, which would make for unpleasant shooting.
Fourth, a bullpup layout is just too short for the internal mechanics of these grenade launchers. They need that entire length for the recoil spring and for the bolt to reciprocate. Take note of how incredibly long the receiver cutouts are for the fixed charging handles—the bolts are that long, and they need at least that much space behind them to move back and forth. These AGLs are already as compact as they can practically be.
So, to conclude, I believe these weapons are well designed for the role they are intended to fulfill.
2 Points
Flag
LivingCorpse said:
Geez, and I thought it was insane that America didn't make it's 20mm firing XM 109 a bullpup, here China has two airburt grenade rifles that fire 35mm and 40mm grenades. I don't blame them for copying, an anti-material rifle that can fire grenades is useful, but at least make it more compact, weigh less and have better weight distribution.
Geez, and I thought it was insane that America didn't make it's 20mm firing XM 109 a bullpup, here China has two airburt grenade rifles that fire 35mm and 40mm grenades. I don't blame them for copying, an anti-material rifle that can fire grenades is useful, but at least make it more compact, weigh less and have better weight distribution.
These Chinese grenade launchers predate the XM109 (as with the QLZ-87) and/or don't share any mechanics (the XM109 is short recoil operated; the QLZ-87 and QLB-06 use gas impingement, and the QLU-11 and LG5 use advanced primer ignition blowback), so they can't be copies. The only thing they share with the XM109 is the general concept.
As far as why they didn't make them bullpups to improve weight distribution, I can think of a few reasons.
First, compactness and better weight distribution is nice, but that is not a priority for the weapon's role, which is to maximize firepower in a package of "acceptable" mobility. These grenade launchers are meant to be fired from a bipod as a support weapon (like a machine gun), not from the shoulder as a personal weapon (like an assault rifle). I have yet to see a successful bullpup GPMG, and I don't expect to see a bullpup AGL any time soon for similar reasons.
Second, a bullpup layout would make for awkward ergonomics. Drum magazines are effectively mandatory for automatic grenade launchers, since they are more compact than an inconveniently long stick magazine (note that the XM109 is the only weapon here using a stick magazine, because its rounds are only 25mm). A drum would get in the way of the shooter's arm, preventing an in-line grip, and instead forcing an angled grip. This would not only be uncomfortable, but could cause the user wrist injury as the weapon recoils.
Third, recoil would be too violent in a bullpup design. A conventional layout gives more space and time for the bolt to decelerate before going forwards again—with a long enough receiver, the bolt may even be stopped entirely by the spring and not touch the rear of the receiver (the "constant recoil" principle), making for a smooth action. In contrast, a bullpup would need a very stiff recoil spring to cycle the bolt in its shorter length, and the bolt is practically guaranteed to slam into the back of the receiver, which would make for unpleasant shooting.
Fourth, a bullpup layout is just too short for the internal mechanics of these grenade launchers. They need that entire length for the recoil spring and for the bolt to reciprocate. Take note of how incredibly long the receiver cutouts are for the fixed charging handles—the bolts are that long, and they need at least that much space behind them to move back and forth. These AGLs are already as compact as they can practically be.
So, to conclude, I believe these weapons are well designed for the role they are intended to fulfill.
2 Points
Flag
LivingCorpse commented at 2022-07-09 07:04:32 » #2727300
According to Wikipedia, the LG5 and QLU-11's designs were inspired by the Barrett XM109.
0 Points
Flag
According to Wikipedia, the LG5 and QLU-11's designs were inspired by the Barrett XM109.
0 Points
Flag
LivingCorpse commented at 2022-07-09 07:16:33 » #2727307
The points you gave make a lot of sense on why bullpups normally don't work for these, but I say give it decade or two, coilguns will make it work with little to no recoil. And if they can figure out magnetic rifling to give the grenades spin, that should also increase their range.
The future is here.
0 Points
Flag
The points you gave make a lot of sense on why bullpups normally don't work for these, but I say give it decade or two, coilguns will make it work with little to no recoil. And if they can figure out magnetic rifling to give the grenades spin, that should also increase their range.
The future is here.
0 Points
Flag
Womenslayer69 commented at 2022-07-10 01:29:00 » #2727506
I wouldn't call 20 years "now"
1 Points
Flag
I wouldn't call 20 years "now"
1 Points
Flag
LivingCorpse commented at 2022-07-10 01:55:08 » #2727512
20 years isn't really that long. We already have a commercial shoulder fire coilgun that are pretty much electronic muskets. In 10 or 20 years we'll probably have capacitors that allow it to fire with a machinegun rate of fire. Heck in 30 years we might finally have plasma guns.
Technology moves fast but the biggest changes seem to also happen in increments of decades or half decades.
Now I admit I have a bias for bullpups. I see them as the future. Are they the end all be all? No but in a lot of cases a bullpup is prefect.
1 Points
Flag
20 years isn't really that long. We already have a commercial shoulder fire coilgun that are pretty much electronic muskets. In 10 or 20 years we'll probably have capacitors that allow it to fire with a machinegun rate of fire. Heck in 30 years we might finally have plasma guns.
Technology moves fast but the biggest changes seem to also happen in increments of decades or half decades.
Now I admit I have a bias for bullpups. I see them as the future. Are they the end all be all? No but in a lot of cases a bullpup is prefect.
1 Points
Flag
1
