Are SMGs going the way of the dinosaur?
- Thread starter natedog
- Start date
- Status
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Most of the dinosaurs went the way of an asteroid strike down in the Yucatan. I don't think SMGs will suffer from an asteroid strike.
Blackhawk 6
Member
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2003
- Messages
- 439
A large part of this debate seems to center around the damage that the 5.56mm round can do vs. what a subgun round can do if it does not strike a target. While I am sure arguing the pro's and con's of a miss makes the debate fun, it has very little to do with the selection of weapon system among the personnel who use them. Professionals, at least the ones I work with, do not spend a lot of time obsessing over missing their target. They know the capability of their weapon system, take shots that they believe they can make and adhere to Rule #4 (you know, the one about your target, backstop and beyond.) Operational requirements, most notably terminal effects and managability, are what they concern themselves with when selecting the appropriate weapon system. All of this concern about "missing the target" and "down-range hazard" exist for the bureaucrats to worry about.
That having been said, there will always be some bean-counter whose lack of an operational background will prevent his people from being properly equipped. As Jeff White stated earlier "There will always be a small mission profile for a SMG." Sadly, how big or small that mission profile is will depend in large part on how well the chain of command actually understands what goes on at the tip of the spear.
That having been said, there will always be some bean-counter whose lack of an operational background will prevent his people from being properly equipped. As Jeff White stated earlier "There will always be a small mission profile for a SMG." Sadly, how big or small that mission profile is will depend in large part on how well the chain of command actually understands what goes on at the tip of the spear.
Formally, yes. Informally, small pistol-caliber full-automatic weapons which are based on semiautomatic handguns and/or are designed so that they can be used with one hand are often referred to as machine pistols, with the designation "submachine gun" going to larger pistol-caliber full-automatic weapons which are designed more along the lines of being smaller versions of rifles.
mrming
Member
WARNING: uneducated guesses follow.
I know this won't be popular, but it probably fits.
Most combat casualities come about due to heavy ordance, not infantry small arms fire. Air support, artillery, mortars, TOW's, RPGs, heavy machine guns etc... not from SMG's or main issue rifles.
I'm not able to immedately turn up #'s to support my theory. However, if they exist and primary issue weapons (SMG, rifles, handguns, etc) really do account for a small percentage.. its a great place to cut costs, and the effective differences won't readily be noticed. It'd let you keep investment expenses down (ie, your only buying 1 type of firearm in mass..), and shift any disadvantages of it to something thats obviously a perishable good (ammunition).
Times where you can't bring the heavy stuff in.. its probably SF time, or producing low enough fatalities to not make it look like a horrible mistake.
I probably am wrong, but i suspect irrelevance and logistics will keep most forces to 1 weapon system.
I know this won't be popular, but it probably fits.
Most combat casualities come about due to heavy ordance, not infantry small arms fire. Air support, artillery, mortars, TOW's, RPGs, heavy machine guns etc... not from SMG's or main issue rifles.
I'm not able to immedately turn up #'s to support my theory. However, if they exist and primary issue weapons (SMG, rifles, handguns, etc) really do account for a small percentage.. its a great place to cut costs, and the effective differences won't readily be noticed. It'd let you keep investment expenses down (ie, your only buying 1 type of firearm in mass..), and shift any disadvantages of it to something thats obviously a perishable good (ammunition).
Times where you can't bring the heavy stuff in.. its probably SF time, or producing low enough fatalities to not make it look like a horrible mistake.
I probably am wrong, but i suspect irrelevance and logistics will keep most forces to 1 weapon system.
MeekandMild
Member
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2002
- Messages
- 1,877
IMHO they were phased out by their primary users more because the US started sending better arms to the allies but they would have never been phased out if reliance had been entirely on bombed out British and Russian factories.
There will always be SMGs where weak, industrially poor countires are being threatened by stronger neighbors. What is an SMG? At minimum it is a piece of pipe (Sten or M-3) or folded sheet metal (Uzi) with minimal machining. During the arms embargo Rhodesians even made their SMGs with unrifled tube barrels. Imagine trying to shoot a rifle cartridge out of a tube barrel.
SMGs will be continue to be used wherever East Alphabetstan is being threatened by West Alphabetstan and the UN puts up an embargo.
DrDremel
Member
Nightcrawler, You pretty much hit my point of view on the whole issue. Thanks.
artherd
member
Uh, noooo....
Even out of shorter barrels the .223 performs. 8"? come on. 11.5" minimum, 14.5" standard (and 16" being the MINIMUM legal limit for civilians for any SMG/Rifle.)
.223 trupms the .50AE for muzzle energy. Sorry, but the little 'mouse gun' packs a pretty sizeable punch. It may be an 'intermediate' rifle cartridge, but it lays absolute waste to any pistol round. Come on, do you really think your .45 makes over 1200lb/ft at the muzzle? The 'wimpy' .223 does.
Some good points have been made about noise and flash, which the .223 posseses in spades. Suppressors are the cure for this, and a suppressed M4 is in my opinion a generally supior weapon to the MP5 for most law enforcement, and military uses.
Note that suppressors do not have to entirely conceal the act of the shooting here. The rounds are still (very) supersonic, and there is a fair ammount of noise made. It is reduced from deafening, to merely a decent noise indoors however.
If we are talking about a role in which true suppression of the entire event is in order, this means SUBSONIC ammunition, and for that I want a .45 (Mk23 SOCOM with suppressor please.) pistol. This is a very rare occurance and need however.
Nightcrawler
Member
Not quite. They're actually both right around 1,200 foot-pounds of kinetic energy.
At very short range, though, my bet would be on the .50AE if I had to pick one for a one shot stop. Yeah, fragmentation is super and all, but a 0.50" projectile that also expands and has enough velocity to easily penetrate all the way through a human has a lot going for it.
Question, then: Do those AR-pistols (like the Professional Ordnance and Olympic Arms) recoil as much as a Desert Eagle .50? I don't think they do. The .50AE AR-15 conversions are known to recoil a lot more. (Much heavier bullet...325 grains vs. 55-77 grains....)
Tony Williams
Member
Nightcrawler
Member
Source?
Are any militaries actually issuing the FN P90 submachine gun? Hard to imagine the round being a NATO standard if no NATO member adopts it.
Are any militaries actually issuing the FN P90 submachine gun? Hard to imagine the round being a NATO standard if no NATO member adopts it.
Joe Demko
Member
Lots of dinosaurs were quadrupeds and, therefore, wouldn't be able to operate an SMG. Some of the bipeds, those in the velociraptor size range might be able to handle one, but I think that big claw might get in the way. T. Rex would be doubly handicapped. His arms are too weak to carry any but the lightest weapons and too short to allow him to shoulder a weapon and form a proper sight picture. Archeopterix is also poorly set up to handle an SMG, though he might be able to grip a grenade by the husk.
Tony Williams
Member
The source was a series of email messages sent to me, with various contributors. I can forward them to you if you wish.
I understand that around 90,000 P90s have been sold, mostly to special forces. The NATO competition wasn't to select the gun, only the ammo.
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and Discussion forum
I understand that around 90,000 P90s have been sold, mostly to special forces. The NATO competition wasn't to select the gun, only the ammo.
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and Discussion forum
Tony Williams wrote;
That seems like extremely high production. Any idea who bought these in any quantity?
Personally, I don't see the utility of the PDW in 5.7x28 considering it's terrible terminal ballistics. I know the US Army is issuing M4s to helicopter crews in Iraq to give them aditional firepower if forced down. I don't know if that policy has also caused the 160th SOAR to recall the MP5s they used to issue in that role.
Jeff
That seems like extremely high production. Any idea who bought these in any quantity?
Personally, I don't see the utility of the PDW in 5.7x28 considering it's terrible terminal ballistics. I know the US Army is issuing M4s to helicopter crews in Iraq to give them aditional firepower if forced down. I don't know if that policy has also caused the 160th SOAR to recall the MP5s they used to issue in that role.
Jeff
Nightcrawler
Member
Well I simply assumed that the P90 would be adopted by a NATO member if the SS190 round became a NATO standard, since the P90 submachine gun and the Five-Seven pistol are the only two firearms in production that actually use that round. *shrug*
90,000
Wow
That does seem like a very large number. Not that this has anything to do with it, but I was just reading today that the Army ordered 80,000 Aimpoints a couple years ago. Rumor had it that they wanted to equip every GI with an optic. That makes it hard to imagine they purchased 90,000 of those pea shooters.
Wow
That does seem like a very large number. Not that this has anything to do with it, but I was just reading today that the Army ordered 80,000 Aimpoints a couple years ago. Rumor had it that they wanted to equip every GI with an optic. That makes it hard to imagine they purchased 90,000 of those pea shooters.
Nightcrawler
Member
I seriously doubt OUR military has purchased any P90s in quantity; perhaps a few for testing, and perhaps some of the sneaky guys have used them, though.
There are a lot of other NATO countries, though. Does anybody know for sure if the P90 is a standard weapon in any military?
There are a lot of other NATO countries, though. Does anybody know for sure if the P90 is a standard weapon in any military?
Hkmp5sd
Member
I'd be more than happy to purchase one of their P90s, if someone would convince the government that I'm relatively trustworthy, I don't break the law and Ted Kennedy has still killed more people than I have.
Nightcrawler
Member
And who the heck is Ken Hackathorne?
That sounds awful fast to me.
Using factory 55 grain ammo, I am only able to top 3000 fps with a 20" barrel.
62 grain bullet out of a 14" M4 ?
I am sure it is possible, but I doubt it is within SAMMI specs for pressure.
Ken Hackathorn is a gun magazine writer. He is often seen in advertisements for Wilson Combat. I am sure he has done bigger and better things, but I don't know any more than that.
Using factory 55 grain ammo, I am only able to top 3000 fps with a 20" barrel.
62 grain bullet out of a 14" M4 ?
I am sure it is possible, but I doubt it is within SAMMI specs for pressure.
Ken Hackathorn is a gun magazine writer. He is often seen in advertisements for Wilson Combat. I am sure he has done bigger and better things, but I don't know any more than that.
Blackhawk 6
Member
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2003
- Messages
- 439
Ken Hackathorn is a highly regarded firearms traininer. He was a Special Forces Operator in Vietnam and one of the founders of both IPSC and IDPA.
Tony Williams
Member
P90
Ouch - my memory failed dismally. On checking, I've found that it isn't 90,000 P90s that have been sold, but 17,000. The penalties of age and decrepitude
Apologies to all for misleading you.
Anyway, what follows is the item I posted on my board a couple of months ago. Since then, I have been told that there has been a European news report stating that the 5.7mm has won the contest, although I haven't seen it:
"An interesting article in November's 'Military Technology' magazine concerning the battle raging over selection of a NATO Personal Defence Weapon cartridge to replace the 9x19, which is too easily stopped by body armour.
The contenders are FN's 5.7x28, as used in the P90 PDW and FiveSeven pistol, and Heckler & Koch's 4.6x30, as used in their MP7. It is important to note that this is not a competition between the weapons, but only the cartridges. If the 4.6x30 wins then FN will probably rebarrel its weapons for this cartridge (although for technical reasons HK's MP7 apparently can't be rebarrelled for 5.7x28).
The PDW is intended to provide 'personal protection in last resort situations where the user is directly endangered by the enemy (up to 50m) and/or provide close protection as the last line of defence in combat (up to 150m).' The bullet must also penetrate a NATO CRISAT target (1.6mm titanium plate plus 20 layers of Kevlar) to provide effective suppression fire at up to 200m.
The two cartridges have the following specifications:
5.7x28 = 1.8g bullet at 823 m/s, giving 609j muzzle energy
4.6x30 = 1.7g at 736 m/s giving 460j ME.
However, part-way through the trials HK upped the performance of their round to produce the 'Ultimate Combat' version, which fires a 2.0g bullet at 690 m/s for 476j. This can penetrate the CRISAT target at 300m.
Full information about the results of several test stages carried out by various organisations has not been revealed, but the strong impression is given that the 5.7mm was generally winning, but due to fierce protests from HK the tests kept being rerun in different ways. The revised 4.6mm loading did very well but was apparently ruled out for technical reasons. So far no decision, and possibly no decision will be reached.
As a matter of interest, FN have sold around 17,000 P90s, but generally to special forces rather than as the intended PDW. The MP7 looks more like a conventional (if rather large) pistol, with a butt magazine, but is extended to the rear to include a telescoping stock. It appears to be more compact than the P90.
Is this the beginning of the end for the military use of the 9x19?"
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion
forum
Ouch - my memory failed dismally. On checking, I've found that it isn't 90,000 P90s that have been sold, but 17,000. The penalties of age and decrepitude
Apologies to all for misleading you.Anyway, what follows is the item I posted on my board a couple of months ago. Since then, I have been told that there has been a European news report stating that the 5.7mm has won the contest, although I haven't seen it:
"An interesting article in November's 'Military Technology' magazine concerning the battle raging over selection of a NATO Personal Defence Weapon cartridge to replace the 9x19, which is too easily stopped by body armour.
The contenders are FN's 5.7x28, as used in the P90 PDW and FiveSeven pistol, and Heckler & Koch's 4.6x30, as used in their MP7. It is important to note that this is not a competition between the weapons, but only the cartridges. If the 4.6x30 wins then FN will probably rebarrel its weapons for this cartridge (although for technical reasons HK's MP7 apparently can't be rebarrelled for 5.7x28).
The PDW is intended to provide 'personal protection in last resort situations where the user is directly endangered by the enemy (up to 50m) and/or provide close protection as the last line of defence in combat (up to 150m).' The bullet must also penetrate a NATO CRISAT target (1.6mm titanium plate plus 20 layers of Kevlar) to provide effective suppression fire at up to 200m.
The two cartridges have the following specifications:
5.7x28 = 1.8g bullet at 823 m/s, giving 609j muzzle energy
4.6x30 = 1.7g at 736 m/s giving 460j ME.
However, part-way through the trials HK upped the performance of their round to produce the 'Ultimate Combat' version, which fires a 2.0g bullet at 690 m/s for 476j. This can penetrate the CRISAT target at 300m.
Full information about the results of several test stages carried out by various organisations has not been revealed, but the strong impression is given that the 5.7mm was generally winning, but due to fierce protests from HK the tests kept being rerun in different ways. The revised 4.6mm loading did very well but was apparently ruled out for technical reasons. So far no decision, and possibly no decision will be reached.
As a matter of interest, FN have sold around 17,000 P90s, but generally to special forces rather than as the intended PDW. The MP7 looks more like a conventional (if rather large) pistol, with a butt magazine, but is extended to the rear to include a telescoping stock. It appears to be more compact than the P90.
Is this the beginning of the end for the military use of the 9x19?"
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion
forum
- Status
