A buddy at worked suggested hashing out the utility of a machine pistol. You know, like a Glock 18, a Mac-10 or a Mini-Uzi.
I told him that that topic has been touched on before, a little bit. To whit:
It takes quite a bit of skill to wield a machine pistol effectively. In other words, to make your machine pistol act like a stocked submachine gun. Like a Tommy Gun or a Kriss. If you have that extra skill and really need the ease of carry and concealability in some specific circumstance, THEN you might select a such a tiny bullet hose. A skilled shooter that DIDN'T need the portability but did need pistol caliber sized automatic fire would just carry a regular submachine gun..
(It's like choosing a pistol grip shotgun over a shoulder stocked shotgun. You don't purposely choose the pistol grip unless you absolutely have to. Circumstances where the shotgun being short is more important than the shotgun being easy to use well.)
And the other thing is, there are only a few narrow circumstances where you want or need even a regular sub machine gun for anything. Repelling boarders comes to mind. Suppressing fire in close range small unit tactics. Clearing confined areas of badguys where your Rules of Engagement expects you to probably kill said bad guys, and a short weapon is handy in close quarters. Also, there are good for relatively inexpensive noisemaking (compare to rifle ammo).
In fact, I have very little experience shooting anything full auto, but I have shot twice as much submachine gun as I have shot machine gun. Golly they ARE fun.
Based on that limited experience, and observing other at the same place, I can't see a reason to use expect much of anything effective from a machine pistol. Or a shoulder fired machine gun. If you absolutely need automatic fire you should have a crew served machine gun on a tripod or a bipod of some other mount, and that gun fires rifle sized ammo. Or you should have a submachine gun with a shoulder stock that shoots pistol type ammo. The other kinds seem kinda nigh useless. In my opinion.
I told him that that topic has been touched on before, a little bit. To whit:
It takes quite a bit of skill to wield a machine pistol effectively. In other words, to make your machine pistol act like a stocked submachine gun. Like a Tommy Gun or a Kriss. If you have that extra skill and really need the ease of carry and concealability in some specific circumstance, THEN you might select a such a tiny bullet hose. A skilled shooter that DIDN'T need the portability but did need pistol caliber sized automatic fire would just carry a regular submachine gun..
(It's like choosing a pistol grip shotgun over a shoulder stocked shotgun. You don't purposely choose the pistol grip unless you absolutely have to. Circumstances where the shotgun being short is more important than the shotgun being easy to use well.)
And the other thing is, there are only a few narrow circumstances where you want or need even a regular sub machine gun for anything. Repelling boarders comes to mind. Suppressing fire in close range small unit tactics. Clearing confined areas of badguys where your Rules of Engagement expects you to probably kill said bad guys, and a short weapon is handy in close quarters. Also, there are good for relatively inexpensive noisemaking (compare to rifle ammo).
In fact, I have very little experience shooting anything full auto, but I have shot twice as much submachine gun as I have shot machine gun. Golly they ARE fun.
Based on that limited experience, and observing other at the same place, I can't see a reason to use expect much of anything effective from a machine pistol. Or a shoulder fired machine gun. If you absolutely need automatic fire you should have a crew served machine gun on a tripod or a bipod of some other mount, and that gun fires rifle sized ammo. Or you should have a submachine gun with a shoulder stock that shoots pistol type ammo. The other kinds seem kinda nigh useless. In my opinion.
If I got super-wealthy over night. Like a rich uncle left me millions in his will, I might go through the hassle of obtaining something that shot full auto. But since I have no REAL purpose for that type of weapon, it'd just be a way to pee my money away. In other words, a noisemaker. And even though I was filthy rich, I'd get submachine guns. MAYBE one belt fed crew served machinegun and MAYBE a BAR. But definitely a subbie or two. NOT a pistol subbie.
4 comments:
I really can't think of a single situation where I'd rather have a full-auto pistol w/no stock than either a semiauto pistol or a stocked SMG.
And, yes, I have plenty of trigger time on full-auto Glocks in both 9mm and 10mm.
I'm reminded of a SMG, the American 180, a decade or so ago designed for the Police. It was about the size of a Thompson, with a round horizontal magazine on top like a Lewis Gun. It incorporated a laser sight as well. Caliber: .22LR. Rate of fire: 800rds/min.
I saw a video of it once being used by a small woman. Very controllable and accurate to 75-100yds.
Never took off, but it was interesting.
Crucis: The American 180 also had the disturbing tendency of a double-feed with its .22 LR ammo. Normally that's NOT a big deal, but with rimfire ammo IT IS. One rd. goes in the chamber and one rd. sticks out the port. BOTH FIRE. Yup, my buddy got shot by his own gun.....right through the fleshy part of his middle, somewhat to the right of his belly button. He survived, but got an emergency trip to the hospital, stitches and a cool scar, but NOBODY who knows him WANTS TO SHOOT THAT GUN and I DON'T WANT ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE AMERICAN 180.
All The Best,
Frank W. James
Hell, depending on design, you can get a lot more horsepower out of a controllable design by good engineering than you can by choosing an inadequate load.
Witness the Ultimax LMG. They regularly demonstrtaed it by having petite Singaporean ladies (and I mean petite for Singapore) firing long, controllable bursts.
Since the receiver is long enough that the bolt group never "bottoms out" slamming into the rear of the receiver, the gun doesn't bouncce around as much.
Post a Comment