M134 VS Dragon M-50

The .50 because:
You don't need 6000 rpm
It does everything the 7.62 does

>>34343969
The one that doesn't require the vehicle to be powered in order to use it.

>>34344162
this
also a question
how reliable are m134s? with dust and such...

File: maxresdefault (11).jpg (150KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 1280x720px

>>34343969
How about a 30mm cannon?

>>34344193

Gatling-type weapons are extremely reliable because their loading, firing, and ejection is powered by an external electrical source rather than the force of the bullet exploding.

If you have a misfire or a jam, the gun just continues to cycle and ejects it automatically before you even knew anything happened.

They also have stupidly low rates of failures to begin with for the same reason.

>>34344266

thats smaller than 30mm probs 20

>>34343969
The .50 if I'm fighting other vehicles, the minigun if I'm exclusively fighting infantry.

>>34344366
It's actually the same 30mm used on the Apache.

>>34344266

want want want want

>>34343969
50 cal.
M134 requires electricity(how fucking dumb is that? The Russians have a gas powered 7.62x54r mini gun why can't we?).

>>34344606
Gas powered miniguns are more failure prone due to the added complexity of the gas management systems and create significantly more vibration when fired, which is one of the last things you want when you mount it on a vehicle.

>>34344266
Thats a cannon, not a machine gun

File: tyson jethus cwithe.jpg (45KB, 640x824px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 640x824px

>>34344266
>>34344282

>>34344804

Its considered a machine gun, due to its rate of fire.

>>34344606
The Russian guns usually do as much damage to the vehicle as the target.

>>34344312
to add onto your previous point, the feeding and extracting systems are all mechanically timed and with proper maintenance will nearly never misfeed. If one did have a gun bore foul they often have the option of simply running a gun bore clear command to clear the obstruction.

>>34344606
hydraulic drive systems are heavy and leak prone. pneumatics are heavy and although reliable require lengthy recharging times of up to 10 minutes. electric is highly reliable if you have good power access and is significantly lighter.

File: 1329578391[1].jpg (52KB, 700x435px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 700x435px

>>34343969
>M-50
>M134
Why not both?

>>34345420

this powers my war boner

If I was going to pick a thing to get to shoot this might be one of them, out of single man operated weapons of course.

>>34345143
>Its considered a machine gun, due to its rate of fire.
It's classified as a cannon and referred to as a chain gun.
The US military does not use rate of fire as a determining characteristic for classification of a gun. Bore, mounting/use and cycling/loading system are the only characteristics involved in the classification of a gun.
The M61 Vulcan has one of the highest rates of fire of any military weapon in the world and it's still a rotary cannon.

>>34345420

Fucking
This

I came here to post this, and you beat me to it, Anon.

File: 1471665585203.png (991KB, 1600x1333px) Image search: [Google]

991KB, 1600x1333px

>>34345477
>war boner

>>34344139

>you don't need 6000 RPM

fuck you, i won't do what you tell me

>>34343969
I'd take the fifty with Raufoss ammo and no tracers because they work both ways. 7.62 can't punch through much while .50 is considerably better.

Fun food for thought. Self and bros shot a .50 BMG rifle into a row of one cubic foot boxes packed with sand and it didn't come out the back, it went barely beyond the second box.

Now I fucking appreciate sand bags! Try your favorite weapon on packed dry sand and see how it does.

Quad fifties went on gun trucks in Nam for good reasons, reliability and redundancy.

>>34345420
GAU19

Problem solved.