Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Firearm Discussion' started by Pandaz3, May 2, 2016.
Well they are looking at the idea anyway
Having carried 1/2 of a M2 50 cal on a 10 mile march once I applaud the effort and authorize the US Government to use my tax money to develop and field the lightweight 50 Cal.
From what I see the new .50 is much lighter, more compact, easier to field strip and service/repair, and has a slower rate of fire! Sounds like a good idea to me, except the rate of fire. Maybe they should come up with a switch or something to change the rate on the go! One setting to provide accurate fire discipline, and one setting to Rock and Roll.
They've been discussing a new or alternative weapon to the M2 for a very long time.
At one point they played with the idea of a system that changed from what was essentially an M2 to a MK19.
I think they built one in 2009. I don't know if it worked.
One thing is for sure, that M2 is going to be very difficult to replace.
Back in the 1960's someone developed the M-85 .50 cal gun and stuck it into the M-60 tank. What a POS, it did not work reliably and parts were constantly breaking which is why the Abrams tank has a Browning M-2. If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
Why mess with a good thing! If it aint broke, dont mess with it. The M2 A-1 was a good up grade that fixed head space and timing and that kept them running a lot longer, plus it kept idiots from "tuning" the timing key and blowing them up! I could see making it lighter weight, but is the weight really a problem with the M2 in the first place?
Its not a problem when mounted on a tank. If you have to carry one up the side of a hill with its tripod , T&E, Spare barrel bag and a thousand rounds or so of ammo then sure, the weight becomes a issue.
I never had to pack one very far, so I hear ya on that!
Kinda like revamping the 1911, why screw up what works. Knowing the govt they will make it prone to failures and be over budget by billions like the F35
I'm from a different place on the M2 then many of you, The M2 WAS our primary weapon system! I do wish it was lighter, and I do wish it had a faster rate of fire. The mini gun was too fast and burned through ammo and didn't have the hitting power or effective range we needed. We also tried the GE CAL-50 and it worked great, but it was even heavier then the M-2 and if it got bent, you were really screwed! It's going to be interesting to see what they come up with to replace Ol Guts and Glory with!
If all they do is substitute titanium for steel, and don't change the design, I would go for that. Rate of fire is fine as it is, faster just burns up barrels and ammo (really heavy bulky ammo). JMB designs are timeless and still work, ask gaston glock, most of his pistol is rehashed JMB designs.
It should be simple enough to redesign. All it needs to be able to do is have the white surrender flag come out of the barrel every time the trigger is pulled!?!?!?!?
John Kerry's dream . . .
He served in Vietnam don't you know!?!?!?!