what is the diference between light Mg's and assault rifles, when the assault rifles do the same with same amo
139613
For the most part, light machine guns have a higher rate of fire than rifles.  For instance, the SAW fires the same 5.56 mm round as the M16, but has a higher rate of fire and, of course, the ability to fire liniked ammo from higher capacity drums.  Add to this better controlability and, in this case, fully automatic fire.  \nBeing able to fire the same cartridge does not mean a rifle is equal to a machine gun- they both have specific roles and the pros and cons associated with them.
21291
if it is semi-auto then it is not "technically" an ak-47 even though for all practical purposes it is one just not fully auto.  thus it is treated exactly as any normal long rifle is, which means you do not have to do anything special at all.  just buy it and move on.
204885
The US Army is actually making the transition from the M-16 to the M-4 which is a variation of the M-16.  Both rifles are produced by Colt Manufacturing and Fabrique Nationale Manufacturing Inc.
476055
If you load a 308 and a 30-06 with the same bullet and the same muzzle velocity, the ballistics will be identical. The 30-06 can handle heavier (and therefore longer) bullets due to the tighter twist rate on the barrel. This means that for longer distances, the 30-06 - with heavier bullets - will drop less than a .308, which pretty much tops out at a 175-grain bullet. \n\nLess drop means less chance you wound your deer rather than kill it, so if you're hunting at close range it's all pretty much the same but if you're in an open plain taking a long shot I'd go 30-06.
784734
Bound's hubby here:\n\nThose numbers reflect the number of 100s of meters for elevation for the "issued" cartridge. These are "ball park" figures, since rifles and ammunition have a certain degree of latitude in production tolerances, but those numbers, when using the appropriate "service ammo" WILL put you on paper!
94522
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.moderated/browse_thread/thread/4740e994cec144cf/619cf5676294a2a5?lnk=st&q=why+is+lt+general+higher+than+maj+general&rnum=1&hl=en#619cf5676294a2a5    this should help
1168855
depends on which modle you are looking at.  standard barrels have tappered areas under the handguard.  that is to lighten the barrel, so when you are holding it on target it does not feel to muzzel heavy.  if the tappered area is in front of the sight it is a M4 style and is to attach a granade launcher to it.\n\nI am a colt factory certified armour for the M16/AR15's
391271
Yes. The M16A1 had a "fully automatic" setting. One difference when the new M16A2 came out was that fully auto setting had been replaced by "burst", which will let the weapon fire a three-round burst at a time.
814627
The UTG is a longer lasting rifle, as in it maintains it's FPS...forever, basically. But the Super 9 starts with an incredible FPS, but wears down over a year or two. Hope this helps.\n\nEDIT: Replacing internals can often cost more than a new rifle, however, so if you're going to airsoft for more than a year, go with UTG, if it's just a phase, go for Super 9.
1011554
Assault rifles have selective fire (semi-auto, three round burst, and full-auto). The military M-16, AK-47, M-4.  Magazine fed\n\nSub-machine guns are full auto weapons that fire pistol ammo. Thompson or Tommie gun, MP-5\n\nThen there is the machine pistol which is a full auto pistol.  The Glock 18, \n\nThere are light machine guns such as the Squad automatic weapon (the gun that Zarqawi was trying to fire in that video) and the M-60.  They are full auto, belt fed.\n\nMachine guns are generally considered to heavy to shoot with out a tripod or being mounted on a vehicle the browning .50 cal for instance.\n\n"Long guns" are mainly deer rifles, the Barrett's .50 cal, and shot guns.  Long guns is really a slang tern rather than a classification.  The civilian versions of M-16 (AR-15) ect would fall under this category because with out the BATF stamp civilians can only own the semi-auto versions
1164266
The M-16 and the M-4 are basically the same weapon, the M-4 being a carbine, having a shorter barrel and stock. This allows for better control and quickness in CQB (close quarters battle, room clearing, etc.), while the M-16 offers greater range and accuracy.\n\nThe recoil on the M-16 and the M-4 is almost nil, and allow you to come back on target fairly quick. The recoil spring in the M-16 is almost 18" long, and absorbs the bolt carrier very well. \n\nAs far as one being better than the other, that is determined solely by the mission. A regular infantry unit would carry M-16's, while a unit going into an urban combat situation would carry M-4's.
1005291
"Surplus Ammo" is usually a term used for military ammo.   223 Remington is not a military round so there will not be surplus.  If you have a AR-15 or other gun of this type that you are trying to get ammo for then some are rated for the military version of 223.   This would be 5.56 X 45 mm.  The 5.56 mm is actually the same size except for a couple of differences.  One is the case wall is thicker on these rounds to handle higher pressures of the hotter loads.  And the second is just that they have a higher chamber pressure.   If your guns barrel is stamped in the 5.56 mm caliber and can handle them then look on WWW.midwayusa.com web site and they have Olympic Rifle ammo in 5.56 mm for 149.99 and that is the standard military M193 55 gr fmj.   Midway USA also carries a large amount of different 223 rem. shells.  i shoot large amounts of the American Eagle rounds they are accurate and very cheap.  They are made by Federal .  I hope this info has helped out and maybe saved you from putting high pressure military ammo in a gun not rated for it.
697271
they're both the same gun! That's what the ;) is for, right? You thought we would be riddled by the different names!
612560
This should help.\n\nhttp://world.guns.ru/assault/as00-e.htm\n\nAnd to lonely_dove04, it's not just officers that carry the M9. I'm a tanker, and for us, the M9 is the standard personal weapon for officers and enlisted soldiers.
94214
If nothing else, it is an interesting question.\n\nMost weapons wouldnt behave all that different, however, you may have to use them more carefully on Mars.\n\nMars only has about 1/3 the gravity on Earth and only about 1/100 th of the air pressure [I use the term "air" pressure to mean the atmospheric pressure, not necesarily air].\n\nBullets would be able to go farther due to the reduced gravity and reduced air pressure (less air resistance).  You would be able to shoot an arrow much further for the same reason.\nA sword would feel lighter in your hands, making it easier to wield.\n\n\nEDIT:\n-Rodri-, how so?  Why would the recoil be stronger?\nWhen firing a gun, the recoil is due to Newton's third law and the law of conservation of momentum.  How would less gravity effect the recoil?\nThe only thing I could think of would be that the acceleration of the bullet while in the chamber would be greater as the net force is greater since their is less air pressure for the bullet to be accelerated into.  I think this might be neglible though due to the extreamly short time the bullet in the barrel and the tiny mass the bullet has anyway.\n\n\njojo21,\nthe propellant used in most all guns and ammunition already has the Oxygen chemically added in the powder.  The classic example of this is gun powder, or gun powder-like propellants used today in amminition.  There is an oxidizer in the chemical (such as KNO3) that will supply all the Oxygen needed for the reaction.  Virtually nothing is needed from the surrounding "air".
821414
The bullet's vertical motion is governed by the vertical forces only and not governed by horizontal and vice versa.\nIn each case the bullet's vertical motion is governed by gravity acting on itself. The gravity force gives an acceleration of 9.81 met/sec squared. Both have the same distance to go through and both have a initial vertical velocity of 0. Therefore they both reach at the same time, neglecting air friction.
892295
...the term "better" is very subjective; no doubt each has its strengths and weaknesses.  Judging strictly by the calibre rounds used, I would suspect (not having fired either) that the AK-47 has more power and the AK-74 is more accurate.  \n\nAs far as durability goes though, it would probably be tough to beat the AK-47.  It's quite a feat that a weapon designed in 1947 is still the assault rifle of choice for the majority of the world.\n\nAlso, I'm not sure but I think the AK-74 might be classified as a submachinegun whereas the AK-47 is an assault rifle.  If that's true, the 74 was designed for close-quarters.