Nightcrawler
Member
There is an endless debate back and forth about what is the ideal compromise between more ammunition and more powerful ammunition. Due to those pesky laws of physics, we can't have both (damn you Isaac Newton!).
It's a compromise. The more powerful your ammunition is, the larger, heavier, and bulkier it is. Whereas a soldier could probably carry comfortably hundreds and hundreds of rounds of .22LR, it wouldn't make a very good service arm.
There are those (and there are many of them) that insist that most engagements take place at 200 meters an in, and that ones at farther ranges than that are a statistical improbability. In any case, they say, if they do occur, the troops need only to call in artillery or air support. Due to the availability of support to modern forces, long-ranged rifle engagements are very rare, they say, not occurring often enough to justify a longer ranged weapon system with its subsequent disadvantages; weight and bulk.
Now, my own opinions aside, I got to thinking. IF this is true, is it possible that even the M4 carbine and similar weapon systems are not the best suited small arm? While I'm sure many of our AR buffs will insist that the M4 carbine is the epitome of small arms design, and that Eugene Stoner is a shining, gleaming man-god for cooking it up, I'm going to think outside the box for a bit.
First, I did some research on weapons that would allow the user to carry even more ammunition. Of course, there would be a range and power sacrifice, but remember, we have artillery for targets that are more than 200-300m away.
My research lead me to the FN P90 submachine gun, and the 5.7x28mm FN SS190 round it fires. Good armor penetration for something so small, and fifty rounds per magazine, but a little too lacking in terminal ballistics, due to the light weight 31gr bullet.
My research also called attention to the .224 Boz round of ammunition, which is a 10mm case necked down to a 5.56mm bullet. It's ballistically superior to FN 5.7mm, and uses readily available 5.56mm bullets to boot. This seems to be a step in the right direction, though if I use my imagination, I can think of a more creative weapon than a converted MP5/10mm.
So, while not necessarily using the .224 Boz round specifically (could be something similar, whatever tickles your fancy), I'm going to think up a weapon system that'll have several advantages. I'll call my round the .22 Nightcrawler. It pushes a 55 grain 5.56mm bullet to roughly 2400 feet per second, depending on barrel length. Effective range would be roughly 200m.
Stealing an idea from FN, I imagine a polymer-framed downward ejecting bullpup. However, instead of having complicated magazines that lay on top of the weapon, a more conventional box magazine would feed into the bottom of the stock. On a weapon this short, the manual of arms troubles that occur with bullpups probably wouldn't be a problem. In any case, a little extra training could deal with it.
Anyway, instead of a conventional box magazine, let's give it a four-column magazine, as seen on the Italian Spectre M4 submachine gun, giving each magazine a 50 round capacity.
It would weigh less than six pounds loaded. It would also feature roller-locking recoil operation, negating the need for any kind of a gas system.
The weapon would feature an ambidextrious cocking handle/bolt release, and the bolt would lock open after the last shot was fired.
The weapon would feature a threaded barrel, and would come standard with a very well designed compensator/muzzle brake/flash hider, to reduce muzzle climb.
The sighting system would be an adjustable tritium dot sight, with a wide objective, allowing for quick target acquisition and not requiring batteries. Additionally, rails would be on the sides of the weapon, allowing the installation of accessories like an infra red laser (for Night Vision use) and tactical lights.
The muzzle attachment could be unscrwed and replaced with a suppressor. Since it uses the same bullets as a 5.56mm rifle, and would easily push them to the same subsonic velocities, the .22NC Carbine would offer the same power and penetration as suppressed/subsonice 5.56mm carbines, but in a smaller, lighter package and offering more ammunition at the user's disposal.
The weapon would feature an ambidextrious safety selector, with SAFE-SEMI-BURST-AUTO available.
To summarize, the operator equipped with the Nightcrawler Advanced Tactical Carbine would have the following at his disposal.
-A short, light carbine. Loaded weight is under six pounds, overall length around 24". Handy for inside of an APC or inside of a building.
-A submachine gun sized weapon with effective ranges out to 200m, capable of penetrating NATO CRISAT armor and kevlar helmets out to that range.
-A compact weapon that offers the user 50 rounds per magazine load. A load bearing vest holding six spare magazines, plus one in the weapon, would give the user 350 rounds at his/her disposal.
-A weapon that, when suppressed, is just as capable as a suppressed 5.56mm rifle (using subsonic ammo) in a much smaller package.
-Between the weapon's design, an installed recoil pad, and the compensator muzzle brake, recoil would be very light, allowing for rapid follow up shots.
Ideally, the carbine would be issued in a squad supplemented with machine guns, grenade launchers, and artillery/air support. These weapons would be used against any target that was beyond the range and capability of the Nightcrawler Advanced Tactical Carbine.
So, to those who insist that capacity and low weight is more important than range and power, and that all engagements are short-ranged (or are dealt with by heavier weapons), would such a weapon system, if it could be made to work and be sufficiently reliable, be an adequate infantry arm for a modern force with plenty of support? Why or why not? Keep in mind that every advantage the M4 carbine has over the M14 rifle, the NCATC has over the M4 carbine. Both the weapon and the ammunition are even lighter, and are smaller. The weapon has higher capacity and offers a greater rate of fire. For the same number of magazines, you'd get 140 more rounds over a 5.56mm rifle, for (ideally) about the same amount of weight.
So, if it were available, would you want one? Would you endorse it as a suitable combat weapon for the modern, fast moving, artillery/air intensive battlefield?
Again, this is all Devil's Advocacy. I, personally, would not endorse such a weapon as suitable for the battlefield, for my own reasons.
On the other hand, I sure as hell wouldn't want to get shot with one, even at 200+ meters. And many have said that any round that penetrates deep enough is usually enough to take the Spirit of the Bayonet out of someone. If not, you have fifty rounds at your disposal, so go nuts! Shoot them again and again, if need be! Right? 'Sides, if they're wounded, they may be able to fight for awhile, but they're bleeding, their abilities are decreased, and they're now a burden to their fellow troops, right?
What do you all think?
It's a compromise. The more powerful your ammunition is, the larger, heavier, and bulkier it is. Whereas a soldier could probably carry comfortably hundreds and hundreds of rounds of .22LR, it wouldn't make a very good service arm.
There are those (and there are many of them) that insist that most engagements take place at 200 meters an in, and that ones at farther ranges than that are a statistical improbability. In any case, they say, if they do occur, the troops need only to call in artillery or air support. Due to the availability of support to modern forces, long-ranged rifle engagements are very rare, they say, not occurring often enough to justify a longer ranged weapon system with its subsequent disadvantages; weight and bulk.
Now, my own opinions aside, I got to thinking. IF this is true, is it possible that even the M4 carbine and similar weapon systems are not the best suited small arm? While I'm sure many of our AR buffs will insist that the M4 carbine is the epitome of small arms design, and that Eugene Stoner is a shining, gleaming man-god for cooking it up, I'm going to think outside the box for a bit.
First, I did some research on weapons that would allow the user to carry even more ammunition. Of course, there would be a range and power sacrifice, but remember, we have artillery for targets that are more than 200-300m away.
My research lead me to the FN P90 submachine gun, and the 5.7x28mm FN SS190 round it fires. Good armor penetration for something so small, and fifty rounds per magazine, but a little too lacking in terminal ballistics, due to the light weight 31gr bullet.
My research also called attention to the .224 Boz round of ammunition, which is a 10mm case necked down to a 5.56mm bullet. It's ballistically superior to FN 5.7mm, and uses readily available 5.56mm bullets to boot. This seems to be a step in the right direction, though if I use my imagination, I can think of a more creative weapon than a converted MP5/10mm.
So, while not necessarily using the .224 Boz round specifically (could be something similar, whatever tickles your fancy), I'm going to think up a weapon system that'll have several advantages. I'll call my round the .22 Nightcrawler. It pushes a 55 grain 5.56mm bullet to roughly 2400 feet per second, depending on barrel length. Effective range would be roughly 200m.
Stealing an idea from FN, I imagine a polymer-framed downward ejecting bullpup. However, instead of having complicated magazines that lay on top of the weapon, a more conventional box magazine would feed into the bottom of the stock. On a weapon this short, the manual of arms troubles that occur with bullpups probably wouldn't be a problem. In any case, a little extra training could deal with it.
Anyway, instead of a conventional box magazine, let's give it a four-column magazine, as seen on the Italian Spectre M4 submachine gun, giving each magazine a 50 round capacity.
It would weigh less than six pounds loaded. It would also feature roller-locking recoil operation, negating the need for any kind of a gas system.
The weapon would feature an ambidextrious cocking handle/bolt release, and the bolt would lock open after the last shot was fired.
The weapon would feature a threaded barrel, and would come standard with a very well designed compensator/muzzle brake/flash hider, to reduce muzzle climb.
The sighting system would be an adjustable tritium dot sight, with a wide objective, allowing for quick target acquisition and not requiring batteries. Additionally, rails would be on the sides of the weapon, allowing the installation of accessories like an infra red laser (for Night Vision use) and tactical lights.
The muzzle attachment could be unscrwed and replaced with a suppressor. Since it uses the same bullets as a 5.56mm rifle, and would easily push them to the same subsonic velocities, the .22NC Carbine would offer the same power and penetration as suppressed/subsonice 5.56mm carbines, but in a smaller, lighter package and offering more ammunition at the user's disposal.
The weapon would feature an ambidextrious safety selector, with SAFE-SEMI-BURST-AUTO available.
To summarize, the operator equipped with the Nightcrawler Advanced Tactical Carbine would have the following at his disposal.
-A short, light carbine. Loaded weight is under six pounds, overall length around 24". Handy for inside of an APC or inside of a building.
-A submachine gun sized weapon with effective ranges out to 200m, capable of penetrating NATO CRISAT armor and kevlar helmets out to that range.
-A compact weapon that offers the user 50 rounds per magazine load. A load bearing vest holding six spare magazines, plus one in the weapon, would give the user 350 rounds at his/her disposal.
-A weapon that, when suppressed, is just as capable as a suppressed 5.56mm rifle (using subsonic ammo) in a much smaller package.
-Between the weapon's design, an installed recoil pad, and the compensator muzzle brake, recoil would be very light, allowing for rapid follow up shots.
Ideally, the carbine would be issued in a squad supplemented with machine guns, grenade launchers, and artillery/air support. These weapons would be used against any target that was beyond the range and capability of the Nightcrawler Advanced Tactical Carbine.
So, to those who insist that capacity and low weight is more important than range and power, and that all engagements are short-ranged (or are dealt with by heavier weapons), would such a weapon system, if it could be made to work and be sufficiently reliable, be an adequate infantry arm for a modern force with plenty of support? Why or why not? Keep in mind that every advantage the M4 carbine has over the M14 rifle, the NCATC has over the M4 carbine. Both the weapon and the ammunition are even lighter, and are smaller. The weapon has higher capacity and offers a greater rate of fire. For the same number of magazines, you'd get 140 more rounds over a 5.56mm rifle, for (ideally) about the same amount of weight.
So, if it were available, would you want one? Would you endorse it as a suitable combat weapon for the modern, fast moving, artillery/air intensive battlefield?
Again, this is all Devil's Advocacy. I, personally, would not endorse such a weapon as suitable for the battlefield, for my own reasons.
On the other hand, I sure as hell wouldn't want to get shot with one, even at 200+ meters. And many have said that any round that penetrates deep enough is usually enough to take the Spirit of the Bayonet out of someone. If not, you have fifty rounds at your disposal, so go nuts! Shoot them again and again, if need be! Right? 'Sides, if they're wounded, they may be able to fight for awhile, but they're bleeding, their abilities are decreased, and they're now a burden to their fellow troops, right?
What do you all think?
I would definitely welcome improvements with open arms... I appreciate that you remembered us Southpaws in your design. It cost me $135 just to get my AR up to speed in that department. I know that people "work around" the AR's right-hand only controls all the time, but I want the same "index finger mag release" that everyone else has. In today's PC environment, those of who are "Right hand impaired" need to be catered to just like everyone else 
