Where next for PDWs?

[Tony Williams]

I have updated and considerably extended my article on Personal Defence Weapon ammunition, to include the choice of weapons as well. See: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/PDWs.htm

[Kensuke]

I have updated and considerably extended my article on Personal Defence Weapon ammunition, to include the choice of weapons as well. See: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/PDWs.htm

 

Good article.

 

Chinese and Russians were limited to 9x18mm because that was generally considered the best that you could safely get out of a blow-back pistol. It might be worth mentioning that all the new Chinese and Russian designs are recoil operated.

 

USCG issues the Sig P229DAK in .40S&W, but they are a law enforcement unit first, and a military unit second.

 

USMC RECON is one of the last US units that holdout with the 1911A1 (in lightly modified form), and has no desire to switch to 9mm.

 

- John

[Colin]

Considering the old Russian 7.62x25 will pierce a US steel helmet, you would think they would improve that round for both pistol and PDW, which reminds me I need to buy a Norinco Tork ($175.00, $200 with an extra barrel in 9mm)

 

What are the 7.62x25 terminal effects like?

 

 

I just ordered a CX-4 Berretta Storm carbine in .40cal, that's going to be my PDW.

[Tony Williams]

I just ordered a CX-4 Berretta Storm carbine in .40cal, that's going to be my PDW.

I put a magazine through a 9mm version of one of those the other week. Very nice! Particularly well suited to one of those very compact 1x holographic red dot optical sights.

[Colin]

I put a magazine through a 9mm version of one of those the other week. Very nice! Particularly well suited to one of those very compact 1x holographic red dot optical sights.

 

Exactly my plan, also due to a sqiggle bit in the law, I can use 10rd "pistol" mags in it as opposed to the rifle 5rd requirement.

[Kensuke]

Considering the old Russian 7.62x25 will pierce a US steel helmet, you would think they would improve that round for both pistol and PDW, which reminds me I need to buy a Norinco Tork ($175.00, $200 with an extra barrel in 9mm)

 

What are the 7.62x25 terminal effects like?

 

Depends. Russians tended to have differing ammo specifications in the same caliber depending on the weapon type they would be used in. MG loadings were generally considered the hottest. Followed by SMG loadings. And finally, pistol loadings. It is generally considered not a good idea to fire MG loadings from a rifle for instance (I owned a Nagant M44 and had to be careful when I was buying surplus 7.62X54R).

 

From a pistol, the 7.62x25 could get up to about 1500 fps (not too shabby). Whereas from SMG like the PPSh-41 it could go much higher. Lethality was reportedly very good, but when you got thousands of screaming Ivans firing 900rpm from the hip and killing every Nazi-bastard in sight (as many Soviet infantry divisions were equipped to do), terminal ballistics becomes less of a major study issue. It was also considered a major improvement over the hopeless 7.62x38 Nagant.

 

- John

Edited September 4, 2007 by Kensuke

[Luckyorwhat]

7.62x25mm will also penetrate kevlar helmets and armour less than Lv III.

[Slater]

Apparently the US Army is exploring the PDW concept further:

 

 

http://www.fbo.gov/spg/USA/USAMC/DAAE30/W1.../SynopsisR.html

[EchoFiveMike]

From the spec, that's going to be a snub nosed 5.56. S/F....Ken M

[shep854]

From the spec, that's going to be a snub nosed 5.56. S/F....Ken M

 

If that's the case, the muzzle blast should be deadly by itself.

[Kensuke]

Yeah, they learned that lesson with the XM177 "Colt Commando".

 

What's old is now new again.

 

- John

[Tony Williams]

An interesting spec, it's different from what the army guy said not that long ago, when the calibre wasn't specified.

 

Requiring 5.56x45 ammo simplifies the choice a lot, but also raises problems of muzzle blast and recoil in a short, light weapon; not really what you want for soldiers whose primary job, by definition, isn't shooting guns.

 

As things stand, the Tavor C would be my choice. The pic below is from the IWI site. The new US bullpup whose name I forget looks promising, but is very light and would need a lot of testing to be considered as a military arm.

 

[EchoFiveMike]

Blast I can see being an issue, a suppressor would be the proper way to deal with it, but cans add a reliability factor. As for recoil, it's a damned 5.56, they don't have recoil to speak of, reach down and grab hold for God's sake! I've trained 13YO girls that weigh 100lbs soaking wet to shoot the M16 and we used to start jr shooters on the M1 Garand at age 16.

 

The one nice thing about the 5.56 is (potentially) the low cost of ammo for training. Which will largely solve all these perceived issues that cause the unenlightened to suggest solutions in search of problems such as the 4.6x30 and 5.7x28 and other non-sense. S/F....Ken M

[Tony Williams]

Blast I can see being an issue, a suppressor would be the proper way to deal with it, but cans add a reliability factor. As for recoil, it's a damned 5.56, they don't have recoil to speak of, reach down and grab hold for God's sake! I've trained 13YO girls that weigh 100lbs soaking wet to shoot the M16 and we used to start jr shooters on the M1 Garand at age 16.

I get the impression that recruits with no experience of firearms seem to be more recoil sensitive these days, and the guys+gals for whom a PDW is meant won't be getting much range time. Clearly, it will be more of an issue the lighter the gun that is acquired.

[Sailor Lars]

Jati-Matic!

[Chris Werb]

Tony, a 5.56 hardly has noticeable recoil in a bolt action - a gas action ought to have even less perceived recoil.

 

Ken, putting a suppressor, even a wrap around one, on a 5.56 that's meant to be compact is going to significantly add to length, weight and bulk.

[seahawk]

Let us compare some data : weapon/length with stpck folded, weight

 

HK G36C / 2,8 kg / 50 cm

Tavor M / /2,95 kg /59,5 cm

M4 / 3,00kg / 75,7 cm

 

HK MP7 / 1,7kg / 34 cm

 

Around 50cm is surely too long to strap to your leg.

[EchoFiveMike]

Tony, a 5.56 hardly has noticeable recoil in a bolt action - a gas action ought to have even less perceived recoil.

 

Ken, putting a suppressor, even a wrap around one, on a 5.56 that's meant to be compact is going to significantly add to length, weight and bulk.

 

Yeah, but all you really need is something like this:http://www.gem-tech.com/M4-02.html

 

As a guy who humped a M40A3, M9 pistol AND M16A4 rifle everywhere, I am really lacking in sympathy for someone who thinks a 10'ish" suppressed M4 with tele stock is too large. There is a certain minimum size required for effective performance, this is fairly set in stone. All the bullshit cheating around the edges is a waste of time and money compared to sacking up and just doing the right thing the 1st time.

 

We want our people, all of them, to have effective weapons. There are no shortcuts, there is no magic bullet. We could have had this resolved years ago is they just "did the right thing". Of course, most Americans are fat bastards looking for the magic fat burning pill too. S/F.....Ken M

[Slater]

I think the Marines are replacing some M9 pistols with M4 carbines, so for that service at least the M4 seems to be the new PDW.

 

As for the Army, can you rechamber the M1 carbine in 5.56mm?

[Chris Werb]

Yeah, but all you really need is something like this:http://www.gem-tech.com/M4-02.html

 

That is an amazingly small can. About the same size as the SAK I have on my CZ452.

[EchoFiveMike]

I think the Marines are replacing some M9 pistols with M4 carbines, so for that service at least the M4 seems to be the new PDW.

 

As for the Army, can you rechamber the M1 carbine in 5.56mm?

 

USMC plan, as I've been told, is all officers and SNCO's who would have had a T/E M9 will be issued M4's. This is taking some work, as I'm currently issued an M16A2 stock weapon, as our unit's weapons have not been sorted out yet and is an ongoing sore point. If they take my advice, we'll be pure M4 . S/F....Ken M

[Simon Tan]

You know what all thia PDW silliness is going to result in?

1) Hostiles that are not neutralised due to insufficient terminal effect

2) Lots of dead and wounded bystanders because 'pogues' are ripping away in FA when they haven't enough trigger time in SA.

 

The problem isn't the weapon but the whole 'pogue' mindset of 'I don't want a rifle, I'm not a trigger puller'. Guess what, give them a PDW and the same lack of training, and you get the same or (if actually possible) less combat effectiveness and a whole shitload of work for the JAG Corps.

 

If it's worth shooting, it's worth shooting once, the first time.

 

Simon

[seahawk]

I do not see this. A truck driver is pefectly well equipped with a PDW strapped to his leg, so that it will stay with him, even if he gas to leave the truck in a hurry. And tehn the ÜDW goves more firepower and control then a pistol or a rifle left in the burning truck.

[Chris Werb]

My only experience of AR-16 style weapons is of replicas and airsofts, but the receiver and magazine make for an annoyingly bulky package compared to a PDW. The encumbrance level of an AR-15 based solution is going to lead to its being left behind. OTOH I am lead to believe that PDWs are a lot better than pistols at hitting at any kind of distance (I only have experience of the latter but can well believe it).

[Shortround6]

I think that part of the problem is that no one agrees on what a 'PDW' is.

 

Is it really a personal defence weapon?

 

Is it a "RADW"--rear area defence weapon?

 

Is it a "HQDW"-- Headquarters defence weapon?

 

Is it a "CNEDW"--cool new entry/defense weapon or

a "SOADW"--special ops assault/defence weapon?

 

Is it's purpose to double or triple the range at which a "non-rifle" trooper can "HIT" an enemy compared to a pistol or is it's purpose to give the "non-rifle" trooper a weapon that has an effective range of 60-80% that of a rifle?

 

Is the rear area trooper expected to carry the PDW at ALL TIMES or just be a lighter/shorter version of the rifle that will be racked or placed to one side while the trooper does his/her primary job?

 

Without some idea or agreement on what the weapons REAL job is a bunch of studies that already spec the ammuntion to be used seem like a waste of time and money.

Edited September 27, 2007 by Shortround6