Scope on a bullpup?

[Ramjam]

If I remember rightly but don't quote me on this the main idea behind a bullpup design was to shorten the overall length of the weapon while not decreasing the length of the barrel (by much) to help with urban combat and the cramped space inside a apc.

Thus accuracy should be the same as a normal non-bullpup rifle and if used with a scope the general accuracy should be increased. That's the reason why most militaries are now issuing scopes as standard equipment.

I've fired the L85A1 on a range with SUSAT and iron sights every year for my APWT and never had a problem passing it.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Ramjam

If I remember rightly but don't quote me on this the main idea behind a bullpup design was to shorten the overall length of the weapon while not decreasing the length of the barrel (by much) to help with urban combat and the cramped space inside a apc.

Thus accuracy should be the same as a normal non-bullpup rifle and if used with a scope the general accuracy should be increased. That's the reason why most militaries are now issuing scopes as standard equipment.

What you are talking about is inherent accuracy, and you are correct in saying that two rifles of the same calibre that are both semi-auto/auto and have the same length barrel will have similar accuracy.

What Paul was talking about was sighting accuracy, and he is correct too. The further the distance between the front and rear sights, in theory the more accurate the weapon. Paul was also correct in saying that the reduced sighting radius on a bullpup would be negated for sighting accuracy by using a scaope.

[JimmyRay73]

I had a whole big explanantion planned out, but Targan said it better...

[Rapparee]

On the Steyr AUG A1 we have an optical sight that magnifies 1.5x I believe. Its a pretty shit sight but better then nothing. We're confident to 300m with it and we generally say if we're firing as a section, we'd hit past 600m. Before anyone comments on our accuracy, I'm a reservist, and a medic to boot . When the situation calls for my marksmanship to be exemplary, we're in the shit!:L

We have an Emergency Battle Sight on top of the optical one in case it gets smashed. The iron sights are abit high up though and awkward to use, if you hit to 200m with them, you're doing good. I was personally happy with 150m!

[perardua]

Originally Posted by Rapparee

We're confident to 300m with it and we generally say if we're firing as a section, we'd hit past 600m.

Same as the L85 then. The Annual Combat Marksmanship Test, introduced in the last couple of years to replace the APWT, has us firing at targets up to 400m in the prone, and requires every round at 400m to be a hit in order to pass, at least for the infantry standard (don't know if it's different for arms shooting to other standards). Admittedly they give you nice long 15 second exposures to do it in. Last time I did a section defence shoot we were happily knocking down targets exposed for less time up to about 600m.

The emergency battle sight on the SUSAT is next to useless for decent shooting, it's a very simple metal foresight and rear sight which is supposedly matched to the centre of the SUSAT. The ACOG which is replacing the SUSAT has a red-dot sight on the top as an EBS and for close range shooting, which am told is much better (the RAF Regiment has been slow getting them compared to the Army and Royal Marines, so I haven't had hands on with it yet).