Carbine V Bullpup

[95th Rifleman]

The US army is moving towards the M4 as a standard issue weapon instead of the M16. A shorter weapon, better suited to CQB is the preferred standard given experience in Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm not sure about the USMC but i think they are sticking with the M16A4.

Some other countries (notably the UK, Belgium, France and Australia) have taken the bullpup route, which provides a carbine sized weapon with te barrel (and range) of a full rifle.

The L85A2 has a 20 inch barrel in a weapon that is just under 31 inches long.
The FAMAS is just under 30 inches long with a 19 inch barrel.
The AUG is 31 inches long with a 20 inch barrel.
Finaly the F2000 is 27 inches long with a 15.7 inch barrel.

Compare this to the M4 which is just under 30 inches long with a 14.5 inch barrel.

It's an interetsing and valid point to consider that the future of firearms is the bullpup configuration. FNH have proven with their F2000 that a bullpup weapon can be fully ambidextrous and with bullpup you do not have to sacrifice range and accuracy for CQB ability.

the latest L85A2's are now issude with a combined ACOG/Reflex sight so you can really have an all-purpose weapon.

I'm curious about other's views on this.

[Raellus]

I've heard and read that Bullpup weapons are trickier to reload due to ergonomics. IIRC, this is especially the case when firing from the prone. I have no first-hand experience with this so I wouldn't know. In my mind, the benefits of a bullpup configured weapon outweight the disadvantages but I still have an open mind and am hoping others can shed some light on this issue.

It's also worth noting that both the IDF and the PRC have recently adopted new bullpup rifles for significant parts of their armed forces (the Tavor and the Type 95, respectively). There has to be something to it.

[copeab]

IIRC, bullpup weapons have less accuracy than a rifle with conventional stock and the same barrel length, due to the reduced distance between front and rear sights. However, I don't think this is a disadvantage against carbines, which suffer more compared to a rifle by having a short barrel and, anyway, a bullpup weapon can have a low-magnification sight added to offeset this loss in accuracy.

[HorseSoldier]

A bullpup with irons will have accuracy limitations due to the shorter sight radius, but inclusion of a magnified optic or red dot pretty much levels the playing field in that respect.

[95th Rifleman]

Originally Posted by copeab

IIRC, bullpup weapons have less accuracy than a rifle with conventional stock and the same barrel length, due to the reduced distance between front and rear sights. However, I don't think this is a disadvantage against carbines, which suffer more compared to a rifle by having a short barrel and, anyway, a bullpup weapon can have a low-magnification sight added to offeset this loss in accuracy.

Most bullpup designs have custom optics (SUSAT, swarovski optic and mars sight to name a few) and seem to compare favourably with conventioal desighns.

iron sights\are fast becoming an emergency option as militaries adopt combat sights on all front line weapons.

[Rockwolf66]

Originally Posted by Raellus

I've heard and read that Bullpup weapons are trickier to reload due to ergonomics. IIRC, this is especially the case when firing from the prone. I have no first-hand experience with this so I wouldn't know. In my mind, the benefits of a bullpup configured weapon outweight the disadvantages but I still have an open mind and am hoping others can shed some light on this issue.

In my personal experiance they are alot slower to reload due to the position of the magazine release and the triggers are usually horrible compared to a conventional weapon.

That being said they really don't have a great advantage in CQB for the most part. you clear a building just as fast with a conventional weapon as you do with a bullpup.

Besides I have relatives who have seen combat and have experiance with bullpups with the British Millitary and what they prefer as a rifle. They own conventional rifles even when there are now some interesting bullpups on the market.

[Tegyrius]

Originally Posted by Raellus

I've heard and read that Bullpup weapons are trickier to reload due to ergonomics. IIRC, this is especially the case when firing from the prone. I have no first-hand experience with this so I wouldn't know. In my mind, the benefits of a bullpup configured weapon outweight the disadvantages but I still have an open mind and am hoping others can shed some light on this issue.

The PS90 (civilian P90) is a pain in the ass to reload at any angle. Its ergos really aren't like those of any other weapon. You're actually slipping the mag in between the vertical supports of the optic mount, then rocking it down to lock it in. I imagine it'd get smoother with practice but it's just so damned unintuitive, at least for me. The fact that the mag is top-mounted does seem to make it less annoying to reload prone than other bullpups would seem to be.

Standing, the FS2000 (civilian F2000) is about as fast to reload as an AK, and not nearly as awkward as it looks. Like the AK, you can't just press a button and drop the mag - you need to actuate the release and manually remove the empty. The trick with the FS2k seems to be to slam the release hard on your upstroke as your hand goes to grip the mag, then immediately and vigorously rip the empty out of the well. I didn't have a chance to play with it prone, but I imagine the best manipulation there would be to extend it forward, getting the magazine far enough out from your body that you can acquire a good grip on it.

Speaking from very limited range time. YMMV.

- C.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I think that what's being illustrated here is the need for training on any new weapon you may get. For example, the first military rifle I trained on was the L1A1, the second was the M16A1 and finally the F88 Austeyr (Australian AUG). All three have different magazine releases and while I found the M16 has few competitors for a fast mag release, I was just as fast on the F88 as I was on the L1A1 despite the F88 being a bullpup.
I'd hazard a guess and say that people who have trained on the M16 family would probably find many other rifles to be slower when releasing the magazine simply because the M16 family have a very positive, gravity assisted magazine drop action when most of the others require you to activate the release and manipulate the mag in some manner.

[Rockwolf66]

So I think you are sugesting that people do magazine drills for a while.

Start with the rifle shouldered and have at least a half dozen magazines at waist height in front of you. Start swapping out magazines until you can swap out a magazine and recharge the weapon without looking at the weapon. Then you put on whatever web gear you normally use and start over until you can go through all of your magazines on your kit without looking at the weapon or your kit. Start over kneeling and then prone.

[Legbreaker]

That's exactly right. Train, train train, practise, practise, practise and anyone will be able to change mags and carry out the necessary stoppage drills quickly.
As for accuracy, yes the shorter distance between front and rear sights may indeed have an impact, however we have also already dealt with this topic in an older thread. http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.p...0314#post10314

[Panther Al]

Originally Posted by Tegyrius

The PS90 (civilian P90) is a pain in the ass to reload at any angle. Its ergos really aren't like those of any other weapon. You're actually slipping the mag in between the vertical supports of the optic mount, then rocking it down to lock it in. I imagine it'd get smoother with practice but it's just so damned unintuitive, at least for me. The fact that the mag is top-mounted does seem to make it less annoying to reload prone than other bullpups would seem to be.

*snippage*

- C.

As mentioned elsewhere, training and time does help: In my personal experience, yes: for a short while learning how to reload the P90 series is something of a pain in the rear: you are spot on that the process is so different than any other weapon. But, once you have had time to learn the tricks its not that hard nor significantly slower than any other method. Which isn't that it isn't slower: it is by a little bit. No way to avoid it really, as the fastest way I've found is to point the weapon down while doing so, so bringing it in and out of battery is where the extra time comes from.

[Legbreaker]

With a larger magazine, spending an extra moment or two reloading probably isn't a big problem anyway, especially since you've probably got half a dozen + people around you firing away while you do it anyway.

[HorseSoldier]

Haven't been able to access the original article, but in relation to this discussion it's worth mentioning that apparently a serving member of the SASR has written a critique of the F88 where the solution he advocates is something in a conventional format. See Soldier Systems Daily for link.