Ergonomics Adaptation In Firearms

[Maverick]

How very true it can be Kit.  I remember when I was in the RAAF, my SLR was that old it was a joke to be honest.  The front sight was loose and the armourers only believed there was something wrong when the thing was sideways across the sight block!  Fast forward to a new unit and new SLR & I was routinely dropping targets at 400+ yards.

Those old target rifles we used were sad tho, especially when I was used to firing the SLR in the cadets too!

Regards,

Mav

[dy031101]

Remington has a version of their Model 597 .22LR sporting rifle extensively modified with ergonomics of the AR (compare to the baseline model in the bottom picture).

Which makes me wonder...... has anyone thought of basing such a modification on a bolt action?  

[Aircav]

My average was 98 and that was using the Martini or as Vickers. 

[Aircav]

Regarding target type weapons, I remember using a target rifle at my cadet unit back in the 70s.  It was a single shot bolt action .22 with a pinhole target sight.  Having previously used the L1A1 (FN FAL) on a routine basis with the cadets, the sighting system was horrendous in comparision to what I was used to. 

Mav,

That describes a No. 8 exactly. The standard pinhole sights were way under the class of the rest of the weapon, but with a good set of Parker-Hales mounted it could shoot 1" groups at 50 yards on a good day, and with someone who knew what they were doing behind the trigger of course. 

The main thing wrong with the backsight on the No8 was the aperture was to large.

[Maverick]

Dy,

Whilst not exactly a conversion you mentioned, the DeLisle carbine (a bolt action, .45cal silenced rifle) came in both full stocked and folding stock/pistol grip variations.  I've also seen tricked up sniper conversions with AR like qualities.  Beyond that, in a more modern sense, I don't see anyone proposing a bolt-action AR conversion mainly because convention dictates that an AR configured weapon is by its nature semi or full auto.  That's not to say it couldn't be done. 

Regards,

Mav

[saintkatanalegacy]

automat korobov - standard infantry rifle : heavily modified for ergonomics, AK-107 style balancer(arranged horizontally), shells are ejected downwards(adjacent to the cheek rest), internal parts can be modified to accommodate high caliber ammo for anti-material role

note: this is also my first ever vector drawing other than logos

[Maverick]

SKL,

Nifty drawing there, very workmanlike indeed.

Two problems I would consider however.  If the 'balancer' is a muzzle compensator, you'd have that force exerted on the horizontal plane, not the vertical so the weapon would still 'rise' when firing, particularly in burst or auto fire modes.  Secondly, a heavier calibre for the anti-materiel role would make the weapon rather uncomfortable to operate due to recoil, muzzle blast and other issues.  Barret's .50cal bullpup (M95?) has a fairly long barrel even though it is a bullpup design.

Please don't take offence to these observations, they are, after all, only my opinion on the matter.

Regards,

Mav

[rickshaw]

The AK-107 "balancer" consists of a rod, rather like the gas piston which goes forward, out of the weapon's front to literally balance the rearward movement of the gas piston and bolt carrier.  Apparently improves accuracy considerably and counter-balances that rearward movement, resulting in a decreased muzzle climb.  When combined with a muzzle compensator in the style of the AK-74, it markedly reduces muzzle climb.  Its just one of the many gimmicks weapons designers in the fUSSR came up with to improve accuracy during burst/fully automatic fire.

My main concern with SKL's design is that there is no real trigger guard.  Always been one of my major concerns with the Steyr AUG and the SAR-21.  While I recognise the idea is to make the weapon more easily useable with NBC gloves, I'm still worried about the safety aspect.   The other concern I have with it is the extreme rearward placement of the magazine.  While again, I recognise Korobov's ingenuity to put it there, its too far rearward and too close to the firer's body to be easily manipulated.  The downward ejection might also represent a problem with hot brass down the firer's shirt front (don't laugh, I used to get hot brass from the L1a1 SLR occasionally dropping down my shirt front.  It bloody hurts! )

[saintkatanalegacy]

SKL,

Nifty drawing there, very workmanlike indeed.

Two problems I would consider however.  If the 'balancer' is a muzzle compensator, you'd have that force exerted on the horizontal plane, not the vertical so the weapon would still 'rise' when firing, particularly in burst or auto fire modes.  Secondly, a heavier calibre for the anti-materiel role would make the weapon rather uncomfortable to operate due to recoil, muzzle blast and other issues.  Barret's .50cal bullpup (M95?) has a fairly long barrel even though it is a bullpup design.

Please don't take offence to these observations, they are, after all, only my opinion on the matter.

Regards,

Mav

well, it's not the balancer per se that's arranged horizontally but the mechanism since I figured if the mechanism was arranged vertically the internal parts won't work for something that's meant to eject the shells downward. the balancing rod is still above the muzzle though... just the cranks being and gears arranged horizontally <.<

as for the high caliber rounds, cyborg spetsnaz was on my mind

[Maverick]

Thanks for the info on the AK-107's internals.  I certainly wasn't aware of that system.  I'd still think that if it were a high-powered weapon, the muzzle blast would be excessive, however, regardless of internal mechanisms that controlled rise and recoil.

I also think Brian has a point regarding the trigger guard.  Whilst the AUG & SAR-21 have full, if large, triggerguards, the design would be a shade unsafe as anything could depress the trigger if it slipped up there.

Mind you, anti-materiel rounds for cyborg spetznaz sound just the ticket!    Heck, you could give them 20mm cannons and they'd hang on without a prob if Hollywood is to believed.

Regards,

Mav

[dy031101]

I heard that an American company has come up with a version of their re-engineered AUG that has a variety of calibres including 7.62mm x 39......

Sounds neat...... I wonder if there exists a company or gunsmith that does custom barrels for anyone inspired by the Tabuk DMR and wanting to make a counterpart for the bullpup......

[rickshaw]

I heard that an American company has come up with a version of their re-engineered AUG that has a variety of calibres including 7.62mm x 39......

Only problem is that is simply an M16 action dressed up in a Steyr style stock with all the associated problems with the Llungmann gas system.  It even has the bolt assist still, which should not be necessary if the return spring is strong enough to force the bolt carrier forward and definitely not needed if there isn't the usual level of carbon residue that one associates with the M16 action.   I'd be interested to see the contortions required to use it actually.

Sounds neat...... I wonder if there exists a company or gunsmith that does custom barrels for anyone inspired by the Tabuk DMR and wanting to make a counterpart for the bullpup......

The Tribal Area of NW Pakistan.  They can do anything you want there for you - for a price.

[Maverick]

Donny,

I'm not surprised that the US have calibre conversions for the AUG.  There's pretty much the same for any firearm over there.  As for DMR type AUGs, Steyr produced a long barrelled HBAR version complete with optics rail & scope when they were first introduced that was marketed (and serves in some armies) as an LMG.  They also produce a similar weapon, the HBAR-T as a DMR weapon for the Austrian military.

It does, however, seem like reinventing the wheel if the weapon isn't a simple conversion of the AUG & rather an M16 action in a Steyr stock as Brian alluded to, but then again, that happens a bit too.

Regards,

Mav

[dy031101]

Only problem is that is simply an M16 action dressed up in a Steyr style stock with all the associated problems with the Llungmann gas system.  It even has the bolt assist still, which should not be necessary if the return spring is strong enough to force the bolt carrier forward and definitely not needed if there isn't the usual level of carbon residue that one associates with the M16 action.

Well incorporating demestic features into a foreign-based gun is a different way of doing Ergonomics Adaptations from what I mentioned- I wonder how it compares with other guns like that (such as Khaybar KH2002 from Iran)?

The Tribal Area of NW Pakistan.  They can do anything you want there for you - for a price.

The Tribal Area might be less than accessible to foreign gun enthusiasts- someone in North America maybe?

I'm not surprised that the US have calibre conversions for the AUG.  There's pretty much the same for any firearm over there.  As for DMR type AUGs, Steyr produced a long barrelled HBAR version complete with optics rail & scope when they were first introduced that was marketed (and serves in some armies) as an LMG.  They also produce a similar weapon, the HBAR-T as a DMR weapon for the Austrian military.

I'd think that someone would be interested in a "M16 action in AUG shell and chambered for 7.62mm x 39 cartridge" built to match the Austrian HBAR-T configuration.  There have been quite a number of companies that sell DMR-type M16s and FAL-clones......

EDIT: Thanks, Henry Yeh, for the reminder.

[Maverick]

I like the idea of a M1943 based DMR weapon, rather than a 5.56mm one.  The round doesn't have enough in it to effectively engage a longer ranges IMO, whilst the Soviet round can reach out without having too harsh a recoil impulse such as a 7.62mm NATO round.  Unfortunately, though, there's the issue of supply logistics and the marksman having different ammo to his squadmates, which negates the advantages.

Regards,

Mav