m107 recoil crazy unrealistic in game

[bootleg soldier 2]

So why should anyone else need a gun?,

And i'm sorry that was a cheap shot i know it's not like that everywhere i apologise.

ACtually, the right to bear arms was written into the Constitution should the need ever arise to overthrow the government and install a new one.  

Remind me to move even further away if that happens LOL

[INNOCENT&CLUELESS 0]

found the video, there is a M82 in it so you can see the "non-recoil"

[Second 0]

Second, you ain't wrong.

But the truth is also, that there will be always a lag of simulation.

- Why do i reload all the time with the same speed?

- Why dont i run out of blood if i am wounded?

- Why is there no need drink and eat .. or to sleep, after hour of fighting?

- Why dont my weapons stops working from time to time.. why ... and so on, and on ..

Ridiculously, crazy recoils are a bad compromise, to gain realism.

Well... Yes, your right in this... I'm quilty in being fanboy (once again ). That was quite lousy way to defend M107's big recoil, as there are bigger holes to fill. I rest my case...

... Second is leaving the building as LOOSER

[Heavy Metal 0]

If you knew Britain well you would know that selling guns in this country would be an utter disaster, as unfortunately we are are not as sensible as some northern Europeans and a Saturday night on the town would turn into a complete free for all, you think i over state this but to our shame it's true, if you had a drinking culture like ours you would never go out if you thought people were taking guns with them, it's sad but thats Britain            

Edit- yes it seems a strangely muted gun conversation but as i say each to their own and i wish you the best of luck with it all, just don't get broken into though else those guns may get free and into the wrong hands, mind you, you have gun stores so they don't need to i suppose

Best regards

Bootleg

I have a safe. The gun stores have safes too (a requirment). Unfortunately, everybody does not have one.

[celery 8]

found the video, there is a M82 in it so you can see the "non-recoil"

Youtube doesn't count!

[Dwarden 1125]

still nice video which shows effect of firing such caliber weapon in small room

can't wait for ACE or other mod to implement this

[TheReddog 0]

The recoil in ArmA frankly is ****ed, a rifle recoils straight back into your shoulder. It doesn't bounce up and down as if your arms are made of bungee cord. It basically eliminates any sort of semi accurate rapid fire and what's more frustrating is that the AI isn't handicapped by it at all and will happily throw rapid and somewhat accurate fire at you.

It's especially ridiculous on the AK74.

[TheVoodoo 0]

The recoil in ArmA frankly is ****ed, a rifle recoils straight back into your shoulder. It doesn't bounce up and down as if your arms are made of bungee cord. It basically eliminates any sort of semi accurate rapid fire and what's more frustrating is that the AI isn't handicapped by it at all and will happily throw rapid and somewhat accurate fire at you.

It's especially ridiculous on the AK74.

*agree*

[ShrubMiK 0]

So a large amount of energy is imparted to your shoulder and there is *no* tendency for anything to pivot?

That seems like one strong shoulder (and connected body) to me!

[bravo 6 0]

found the video, there is a M82 in it so you can see the "non-recoil"

someone is not reading the posted posts..

video was already mentioned..

[l mandrake 9]

Interesting that the room fills up with dust after just 2 shots, presumably obscuring vision and betraying the sniper's location to the enemy... I would never have thought of that.

OT: Thanks for this link, best laugh I have had this week.... amazing that anyone would believe this corrupt, partisan, pseudo-academic bullshit

Look up the verified stats on per capita gun deaths per country and see exactly where the right to bear arms has left you (here's a clue, the US even beats Brasil). Hey I'm sure it was necessary to help ward off tyranny back in the day, but now there's simply no excuse.

Quote[/b] ] In Science we have a saying: Correlation does not equal casuation.

Perhaps you might find things are not as you have been led to believe if you read this:

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html

[max power 21]

Quote[/b] ]n game US weapons have better accuracy and longer AI distance of fire

real effective fire range for M4 is about 350 meters in game 400

real effective fire range of AK74 is 500 m, but in game 400

Uhh...no.

The 74 is a decided improvement over the 7.62 AKM but it will not outrange the M-4 due to the M-4's greater inherent accuracy, more accurate ammo and better sights. I have fired both weapons at over 500M in real life and the 74's sights are a real limitation over the M-4's peep sights.

A 74 with good ammo is a 2-3 moa weapon. the M-4 with good ammo is a 1-2 moa weapon. Unless you are using a magnifying optic, the notch sights will not allow you to approach this on the 74.

If someone would make a camera that would mount to a 1913 milstd rail, I could get you some definitive muzzle climb values for given ranges and given shooting positions with different weapons. I could co-witness the camera with a laser and you could measure defelction.

An important point to be made is you will have far less muzzle rise firing from a solid prone position than firing from a standing position.

akm

Assessment: 6.2 inches @ 100 yards.

Dispersion Angle: .0983754 degrees / 1.7489 NATO mils

ak-74

Assessment: N/A

Dispersion Angle: .0395144 degrees / .702478 NATO mils

M16A1

Assessment: 2.0 inches @ 100 yards

Dispersion Angle: .031831 degrees / .565855 NATO mils

M16A2

Assessment: 17.55 inches @ 400 yards

Dispersion Angle: .0698293 degrees / 1.24141 NATO mils

M16A2 Carbine (Model 723)

-closest thing I could find

Assessment: N/A

Dispersion Angle: .065453 degrees / 1.23636 NATO mils

Not to mention the poor terminal performance of the m4 carbine due to the shorter muzzle...

edit:

I'm willing to wager that those minute differences in some of those entries are not statistically significant, and if a number of data points were taken they would be found to be the same. The precision of those measurements is a little on the wishful thinking side.

[Heavy Metal 0]

The M-4 does not have the poor terminal performance you think it does. That has been way greatly exaggerated.

[TheReddog 0]

So a large amount of energy is imparted to your shoulder and there is *no* tendency for anything to pivot?

That seems like one strong shoulder (and connected body) to me!

Yes there is pivot caused by the backwards recoil movement which is why you get muzzle climb, I never said there was none. However the rifle does not slowly bob up, then down and then up again like in Arma. Recoil happens in one short sharp movement and a practiced shooter corrects it (ie. returns to point of aim) almost subconsciously. It is not so bad on the US weapons but the opfor weapons recoil animation is just atrocious.

Across the board on the assault rifles recoil is also a bit strong too, these are rifles firing intermediate cartridges not traditional full power cartridges like 7.62x51 NATO, 7.62x54R, 7.92x57 Mauser etc.

[max power 21]

The M-4 does not have the poor terminal performance you think it does. That has been way greatly exaggerated.

Well, the m855 is going to fragment only out to about 50 meters fired out of a 14.5 inch barrel, compared to 150 meters fired from a 20 inch barrel.

Quote[/b] ]

From http://www.ammo-oracle.com/body.htm#m193orm855

Q. I heard that M855 has had serious stopping problems in Afghanistan, and earlier in Somalia. Is this true?

It's possible, yes.

Though early M855 experiments showed the round fragments well in the lab, more recent testing has been showing inconsistent fragmentation. Partially because of the complex construction of the round, M855 has widely-variable yaw performance, often not yawing at all through 7-8" or even 10" of tissue. Testing has shown large batch-to-batch differences in yaw performance even from the same manufacturer, and given the number of plants manufacturing SS-109-type bullets, fragmentation performance is very difficult to predict. This is complicated by the low velocity implicit in using M855 out of the short barreled M4 platform.

Interesting, few of these reports seem to be coming from troops 20" or SAW platforms. It would seem that the additional velocity from the longer barrel provides adequate usable fragmentation range for M855 in the majority of cases. From shorter barrels, such as the M4's 14.5" barrel, M855's fragmentation range varies from as much as 90m to as little as 10m, which frequently isn't enough range.

From Dr. Roberts:

"Combat operations the past few months have again highlighted terminal performance deficiencies with 5.56x45mm 62 gr. M855 FMJ. These problems have primarily been manifested as inadequate incapacitation of enemy forces despite their being hit multiple times by M855 bullets. These failures appear to be associated with the bullets exiting the body of the enemy soldier without yawing or fragmenting. This failure to yaw and fragment can be caused by reduced impact velocities as when fired from short barrel weapons or when the range increases. It can also occur when the bullets pass through only minimal tissue, such as a limb or the chest of a thin, malnourished individual, as the bullet may exit the body before it has a chance to yaw and fragment. In addition, bullets of the SS109/M855 type are manufactured by many countries in numerous production plants. Although all SS109/M855 types must be 62 gr. FMJ bullets constructed with a steel penetrator in the nose, the composition, thickness, and relative weights of the jackets, penetrators, and cores are quite variable, as are the types and position of the cannelures. Because of the significant differences in construction between bullets within the SS109/M855 category, terminal performance is quite variable—with differences noted in yaw, fragmentation, and penetration depths. Luke Haag’s papers in the AFTE Journal (33(1):11-28, Winter 2001) describe this problem."

And those proponents of the 6.5mm grendel round would have you believe the same thing. They were pretty quick to jump on the band wagon! Unfortunately, you can't trust science from a salesman.

[Heavy Metal 0]

I have read the ammo-oracle for years now. Ever hear of AR15.com? And you dispersions figures are shot groupings, not measuring dispersion on auto fire. Even at that I don not think their conclusions are necessairly representative. Go to arfcom and checkl out Molon's work. Also, frag itself is not everything. 7N6 does not frag at all. There are other loading becomeing more and more commonplace. How does MK262 Mod1 do?

Ask some of the vets at arfcom or go to M4carbine.net and ask Kevin B about his firsthand experiences.

[max power 21]

I have read the ammo-oracle for years now. Ever hear of AR15.com? And you dispersions figures are shot groupings, not measuring dispersion on auto fire. Even at that I don not think their conclusions are necessairly representative. Go to arfcom and checkl out Molon's work. Also, frag itself is not everything. 7N6 does not frag at all. There are other loading becomeing more and more commonplace. How does MK262 Mod1 do?

Ask some of the vets at arfcom or go to M4carbine.net and ask Kevin B about his firsthand experiences.

I was on ar15.com earlier today when I was researching my post.

The above figures were arrived at as follows:

Quote[/b] ]

Assessment: This is a firing test of the weapon, normally from the rest position unless otherwise stated. The measurement of the group size is from edge to edge of the bullets' holes, normally of a three to five shot group at a given range.

...

Where the Assessment of a weapon was not available from an actual firing test, the probably group size was calculated considering the type of weapon, sights, sight radius, and type of fire. Weapons where the assessment was calculated are indicated by the word "Assessment" being absent...

Furthermore, if the group was generated by full auto fire, it's mentioned in the assessment. For instance, the assessments of the M11 was generated on full auto. We can assume that these assessments were generated with semi auto fire from a supported/resting position.

The author of this book is Kevin Dockery. He was in the united states army and was the armourer for the president's guard. He's a consultant for publications in the special forces and firearms fields.

I don't really care to base any kind of actual number on the stories that veterans tell. Their accounts are not more reliable than actual tests. Because something happened at some point in time doesn't mean it's likely to happen, that it's the rule, or anything else.

I agree that fragmentation isn't everything. Penetration is.. however, the fragmentation when combined with penetration is going to cause a lot of damage, whereas the 6mm hole left by a non-fragmenting .223 is going to cause little damage. Hits in the brain with anything is pretty much going to mean instant unconciousness or incapacitation. Hits in centre mass.... fragmentation is going to help you a lot.

[Heavy Metal 0]

A non-fragmenting 5.56 still yaws. And the testing you describe does not tell us what load was being fired and how many examples of each weapon was sampled. A link back to the original study would also be nice.

The terminal ballistic issue you mention is largely a product of anecdote so anecdotal evidence to the contrary is entirely acceptible. Gel tests, the scientific tests you describe which are documented by Brou and Tat in ammo-oracle support the 5.56 as being better than the few repeated 'horror' stories support.

Incidentally, I found bullet fragemnts in an eight inch diameter water filled plastic juice jug I shot yesterday evening with Guat M-193 from a 16 inch barrel.

[max power 21]

A non-fragmenting 5.56 still yaws. And the testing you describe does not tell us what load was being fired and how many examples of each weapon was sampled. A link back to the original study would also be nice.

The terminal ballistic issue you mention is largely a product of anecdote so anecdotal evidence to the contrary is entirely acceptible. Gel tests, the scientific tests you describe which are documented by Brou and Tat in ammo-oracle support the 5.56 as being better than the few repeated 'horror' stories support.

Incidentally, I found bullet fragemnts in an eight inch diameter water filled plastic juice jug I shot yesterday evening with Guat M-193 from a 16 inch barrel.

m885 for the m16a2s. The book is 'compendium of modern firearms'.

You don't fight anecdote with anecdote, man. It's never acceptible to use anecdotes to prove or disprove something. You use them to figure out how to start a study, not AS a study.