Duplex ammo

>>33360046
That looks extremely inaccurate.
I also wouldn't trust lake city not to fuck it up massively.

>>33360046
doesn't work well on long range

1st buet goes through air: loses speed
2nd bullet follows the first but there is no air resistance so it goes faster than the 1st and buttfucks him.
Both bullets tumble in air.
It sucks.

>>33360046
I'm only interested in accurate rifles and cartridges. This belongs to neither of those concepts.
I'll pass.

>>33360062
who cares about accuracy, most of the time you're just spraying lead down range anyways

File: tumblr_no7kfguLLf1r9khx4o2_1280.jpg (55KB, 1077x325px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 1077x325px

>>33360062
Inaccuracy is sort of the point. Each bullet wll disperse, giving a higher theoretical hit probability. The idea was to burst-fire these, putting twice as many bullets in the air as a contemporary 7.62NATO or .30-06 rifle per trigger pull. The project that developed it eventually gave way to the M16, which was supposed to be a stopgap until the SPIW flechette rifle went into production, but it never did. Same idea surfaced again in the Advanced Combat Rifle program, in Colt's entrant (pic related), which itself was competing with the famed "hyperburst" function on the G11 and the flechette-firing AAI and Steyr entrants.

>>33360284
>Inaccuracy is sort of the point.
And that's why the project was stupid and failed miserably.

>>33360507
Damn, too bad those professional firearms engineers didn't have you there to tell them better!

>>33360173
Could a solution to that be having a bit of gunpowder in between of the bullets?

>>33360507
>>33360284
Inaccuracy was not the point, hit probability was.

>>33360507
>we shouldn't try new things that challenge conventional thinking
t. this guy

>>33360907
But what if... and, hear me out here, we teach marksmanship instead of providing an easier way to sling more lead downrange?

>>33361226
You aren't thinking like a government.

>>33360890
That would just cause all kinds of pressure fuckery and likely cause back pressure on the second bullet. A standard barrel would possibly become a pipe bomb.

>>33361226
Why not both?

>>33361319
I said only a bit.

>>33361226
>who the hell needs these new automatic rifles? how about we just teach the soldiers to aim better

>>33361226
>lets make machine-guns semi-auto

>>33361500
Automatic rifles have been shown to be statistically less effective than semi-auto rifles.

Their only purpose is in close range engagements against body armor.

>>33361759
Please provide links to your statistics.

>>33360046
Duplex ammo, when your ammo can't even trust itself.

>>33361759
>Close range engagements against body armor

You mean like urban warfare? You know, the sort of warfare we get involved in a lot?

>>33361500
>>33361920
>>33362023
Good fucking god. There are actually people on this board who think that automatic fire from rifles is ever used to actually engage targets.

I... I just dont fucking know anymore.

>>33360173

Except that didn't happen

>>33362150
The 1980s never died anon.

Large amounts of soft tissue damage at close range. Now if only I had a picture of dugan ashley with a M-10 winking in vaporwave.