Nightcrawler
Member
First of all: [EDITED OUT, DELETED, VULGAR SWATH OF OBSCENITIES]. I spent nearly an HOUR crafting a well put-together, hyperlinked, and well-written post on the following subject, only to lose it by pushing the wrong button. ARGH!!!! :banghead: 
So, here I go again. Going to have to remember to save this time. (TFL logged me out automatically.)
Anyway, the concept of the personal defense weapon is this: a compact, lightweight, handy weapon that would give support troops something more useful than a pistol, without the weight and bulk of a standard infantry rifle. The first successfully deployed PDW was, I believe, the trusty old M1 Carbine.
The M1 Carbine, caliber .30. The first practical PDW.
These days, the concept has taken on a slightly different meaning. It is typically seen today as a very compact submachine gun, firing a small bore, high velocity pistol cartridge that can defeat soft body armor (such as flak jackets, police vests, and even kevlar helmets).
The oldest and most established example of this type of weapon comes from Fabrique Nationale. It is, of course, the P90 submachine gun.
FN P90 5.7x28mm Submachine Gun
This weapon fires FN's proprietary 5.7x28mm cartridge. This high velocity bottlenecked round, in it's standard (SS190) format, fires a 31 grain projectile at 2,346 feet per second. Subsonic, hollow point, and castrated non-armor-piercing ammunition (for the US civilian market) is also available.
The P90 features a fifty round magazine, ambidextrious design, and is reportedly very easy to control in burst fire. It's cyclic rate is around 900 rpm. Read more about it at World.Guns.Ru.
In addition to a triple-rail version of this weapon, FN also offers a companion pistol, the Five-Seven.
FN Five-Seven USG Pistol, 5.7x28mm
This pistol features a 20-round magazine and reportedly is lightweight and extremely easy to shoot. Again, World.Guns.Ru has a lot of good info on this weapon.
Apparently, the FN 90/Five-Seven combination are being met with a goodly amount of commercial success. According to THIS THREAD over at the Five-Seven Forum, quite a few American law enforcement agencies are using the weapons.
The other major contender in this strange contest is the MP-7 submachine gun offered by Heckler & Koch.
HK MP-7A1 Submachine Gun, 4.6x30mm
This weapon fires HK's proprietary 4.6x30mm cartridge, which reportedly has similary (or possibly slightly superior) armor penetrating capabilities compared to FN's 5.7x28mm round. This weapon is select fire, features a collapsing stock and a folding foregrip, and utilizes 20 and 40 round magazines.
HK obviously went a different route than FN. Instead of a separate submachine gun and pistol, they chose to create a line of very compact maschinenpistolen that can be fired as a pistol or from the shoulder. If you browse the picture's on HK PRO's MP-7 page, you'll see pictures of a shoulder holster designed to carry their diminutive PDW.
I don't think HK has met with anywhere near the commercial success that FN has in this odd PDW race, but their offering is certainly interesting. According to HK PRO, the 4.6x30mm round offers ballistics superior to the 5.7x28mm.
But while we can debate the merits of one of these systems versus the other, what I'd really like to discuss is the concept itself. How practical, do you all (or should I say, "y'all"? I live in Tennessee now.) think a small bore, high velocity, soft-armor-piercing submachine gun actually is?
How would you rate it compared to competing firearms types? The competitors are, of course, traditional submachine guns. But also how does it compare to shotguns, intermediate-cartridge-firing carbines, super-shorty versions of those carbines (like the PDW version of the XM8, which has a 9" barrel)?
XM8 PDW variant, 5.56x45mm
(As an aside, I don't know that 5.56mm out of a 7-9" barrel offers any significant advantage, ballistically, over either the 5.7x28mm or 4.6x30mm rounds. It would definately have a lot more flash, blast, and noise, as the powder burns up in the air...)
How useful or useless do you think these weapon are for police patrol use? Police SWAT/SRT/HRT use? Military issue? Miltary special operations? Personal defense and private security? (For the latter, let us assume all silly laws were dispensed with and we could own these weapons in their armor-piercing, select-fire originality.)
What do you think are the pros and cons? Do these weapons fill a nice, or are they just a flash in the pan? Will they survive in the long run?
The pros, as I see them, are threefold. First of all, these weapons are very compact and lightweight, a definate plus for anyone whose primary mission is something other than carrying the weapon.
While working security in Qatar, I searched hundreds and hundreds of vehicles, parcels, bags, and personnel. I hauled armbars back and forth, climbed in and out of vehicles, wanded people, and operated assorted equipment. For all of these activities, my 40" long M16-clone always seemed to get in the way. Most any longarm, I think, is cumbersome when having to search the insides of a Chevy Tahoe. I often wished for something more compact. (Though ironically, I more often wished for a FAL.
)
Secondly, these weapons offer very low recoil impulse (a trend the M1 carbine started, I think). This makes them easy to shoot and easy to control on full auto. Moreso than standard subguns I'm told, and certainly moreso than 5.56mm weapons.
Finally, these weapons can, with a pistol-sized cartridge, defeat soft body armor and some kevlar helmets. If your opponents often field flak jackets, police armor, or steel pot/kevlar helmets, this could be a definate plus. Note though that these rounds will NOT defeat level III and IV hard armor that will protect against rifle fire.
However, there are cons. The biggest, and the source of much (futile but interesting) internet debate is the terminal effectiveness of the rounds in question.
Being kind of old fashioned and not really with it (heh), I tend to prefer something more along the lines of, say, .45 Colt. However, I'm not a ballistics expert.
Nonetheless, the debate rages on. Detractors say the rounds wound like a .22 Magnum, and some accounts I've read support that. And let's face it, a 20, 40, and 50 round magazine's advantage is mitigated if each opponent requires five or six hits to drop.
Supporters will counter with ballistics gelatin information, and point to fragmentation and tumbling.
(Though, ballistic gelatin doesn't have sinew or bones. It's more like somebody's gut than a great representation of the human body as a whole, in my opinion.)
Also, when utilizing the civilian-legal jacketed hollow point, wound cavitation could be improved (though at the cost of armor penetration). Mainly, though, supporters say that a small wound through a flak jacket is better than no wound at all. And it is true that 9mm and .45ACP often won't penetrate standard military flak jackets and helmets (though they can sometimes. I've talked to soliders in Iraq that said their 9mm rounds could defeat Interceptor vests without plates in them.)
Also, it's worthwhile to point out that many insist that today's combatitive engagements are at 50 meters and in almost exclusively, and that long ranged weapons aren't really needed. They say that for enemies beyond a hundred meters, artillery, machine guns, and vehicle support is the preferred answer anyway.
This argument is often used to advocate short 5.56mm weapons, but can easily apply to these types of weapons as well. Note this discussion I once started on just that subject.
So, there you have it. The info, the talking points as I see them, and the facts I've been able to compile. What's the word, THR? I'm hoping this will turn into one of those standard reference threads that will be useful in future.
So, here I go again. Going to have to remember to save this time. (TFL logged me out automatically.)
Anyway, the concept of the personal defense weapon is this: a compact, lightweight, handy weapon that would give support troops something more useful than a pistol, without the weight and bulk of a standard infantry rifle. The first successfully deployed PDW was, I believe, the trusty old M1 Carbine.
The M1 Carbine, caliber .30. The first practical PDW.
These days, the concept has taken on a slightly different meaning. It is typically seen today as a very compact submachine gun, firing a small bore, high velocity pistol cartridge that can defeat soft body armor (such as flak jackets, police vests, and even kevlar helmets).
The oldest and most established example of this type of weapon comes from Fabrique Nationale. It is, of course, the P90 submachine gun.
FN P90 5.7x28mm Submachine Gun
This weapon fires FN's proprietary 5.7x28mm cartridge. This high velocity bottlenecked round, in it's standard (SS190) format, fires a 31 grain projectile at 2,346 feet per second. Subsonic, hollow point, and castrated non-armor-piercing ammunition (for the US civilian market) is also available.
The P90 features a fifty round magazine, ambidextrious design, and is reportedly very easy to control in burst fire. It's cyclic rate is around 900 rpm. Read more about it at World.Guns.Ru.
In addition to a triple-rail version of this weapon, FN also offers a companion pistol, the Five-Seven.
FN Five-Seven USG Pistol, 5.7x28mm
This pistol features a 20-round magazine and reportedly is lightweight and extremely easy to shoot. Again, World.Guns.Ru has a lot of good info on this weapon.
Apparently, the FN 90/Five-Seven combination are being met with a goodly amount of commercial success. According to THIS THREAD over at the Five-Seven Forum, quite a few American law enforcement agencies are using the weapons.
The other major contender in this strange contest is the MP-7 submachine gun offered by Heckler & Koch.
HK MP-7A1 Submachine Gun, 4.6x30mm
This weapon fires HK's proprietary 4.6x30mm cartridge, which reportedly has similary (or possibly slightly superior) armor penetrating capabilities compared to FN's 5.7x28mm round. This weapon is select fire, features a collapsing stock and a folding foregrip, and utilizes 20 and 40 round magazines.
HK obviously went a different route than FN. Instead of a separate submachine gun and pistol, they chose to create a line of very compact maschinenpistolen that can be fired as a pistol or from the shoulder. If you browse the picture's on HK PRO's MP-7 page, you'll see pictures of a shoulder holster designed to carry their diminutive PDW.
I don't think HK has met with anywhere near the commercial success that FN has in this odd PDW race, but their offering is certainly interesting. According to HK PRO, the 4.6x30mm round offers ballistics superior to the 5.7x28mm.
But while we can debate the merits of one of these systems versus the other, what I'd really like to discuss is the concept itself. How practical, do you all (or should I say, "y'all"? I live in Tennessee now.) think a small bore, high velocity, soft-armor-piercing submachine gun actually is?
How would you rate it compared to competing firearms types? The competitors are, of course, traditional submachine guns. But also how does it compare to shotguns, intermediate-cartridge-firing carbines, super-shorty versions of those carbines (like the PDW version of the XM8, which has a 9" barrel)?
XM8 PDW variant, 5.56x45mm
(As an aside, I don't know that 5.56mm out of a 7-9" barrel offers any significant advantage, ballistically, over either the 5.7x28mm or 4.6x30mm rounds. It would definately have a lot more flash, blast, and noise, as the powder burns up in the air...)
How useful or useless do you think these weapon are for police patrol use? Police SWAT/SRT/HRT use? Military issue? Miltary special operations? Personal defense and private security? (For the latter, let us assume all silly laws were dispensed with and we could own these weapons in their armor-piercing, select-fire originality.)
What do you think are the pros and cons? Do these weapons fill a nice, or are they just a flash in the pan? Will they survive in the long run?
The pros, as I see them, are threefold. First of all, these weapons are very compact and lightweight, a definate plus for anyone whose primary mission is something other than carrying the weapon.
While working security in Qatar, I searched hundreds and hundreds of vehicles, parcels, bags, and personnel. I hauled armbars back and forth, climbed in and out of vehicles, wanded people, and operated assorted equipment. For all of these activities, my 40" long M16-clone always seemed to get in the way. Most any longarm, I think, is cumbersome when having to search the insides of a Chevy Tahoe. I often wished for something more compact. (Though ironically, I more often wished for a FAL.
)Secondly, these weapons offer very low recoil impulse (a trend the M1 carbine started, I think). This makes them easy to shoot and easy to control on full auto. Moreso than standard subguns I'm told, and certainly moreso than 5.56mm weapons.
Finally, these weapons can, with a pistol-sized cartridge, defeat soft body armor and some kevlar helmets. If your opponents often field flak jackets, police armor, or steel pot/kevlar helmets, this could be a definate plus. Note though that these rounds will NOT defeat level III and IV hard armor that will protect against rifle fire.
However, there are cons. The biggest, and the source of much (futile but interesting) internet debate is the terminal effectiveness of the rounds in question.
Being kind of old fashioned and not really with it (heh), I tend to prefer something more along the lines of, say, .45 Colt. However, I'm not a ballistics expert.
Nonetheless, the debate rages on. Detractors say the rounds wound like a .22 Magnum, and some accounts I've read support that. And let's face it, a 20, 40, and 50 round magazine's advantage is mitigated if each opponent requires five or six hits to drop.
Supporters will counter with ballistics gelatin information, and point to fragmentation and tumbling.
(Though, ballistic gelatin doesn't have sinew or bones. It's more like somebody's gut than a great representation of the human body as a whole, in my opinion.)
Also, when utilizing the civilian-legal jacketed hollow point, wound cavitation could be improved (though at the cost of armor penetration). Mainly, though, supporters say that a small wound through a flak jacket is better than no wound at all. And it is true that 9mm and .45ACP often won't penetrate standard military flak jackets and helmets (though they can sometimes. I've talked to soliders in Iraq that said their 9mm rounds could defeat Interceptor vests without plates in them.)
Also, it's worthwhile to point out that many insist that today's combatitive engagements are at 50 meters and in almost exclusively, and that long ranged weapons aren't really needed. They say that for enemies beyond a hundred meters, artillery, machine guns, and vehicle support is the preferred answer anyway.
This argument is often used to advocate short 5.56mm weapons, but can easily apply to these types of weapons as well. Note this discussion I once started on just that subject.
So, there you have it. The info, the talking points as I see them, and the facts I've been able to compile. What's the word, THR? I'm hoping this will turn into one of those standard reference threads that will be useful in future.
