Re: DS: SAW versus APSW versus RFAC

>> Another point of note is that machine guns are not primarily employed
to
>> kill individual soldiers (what ? blasphemy?) but are employed to
>> suppress an enemy position!! That is why they produce a 'cone of
fire'
>> and the pattern the rounds will form on the ground is a 'beaten
zone';
>> generally around 1 m wide and from 40 to 100+ m long (another reason
why
>> MGs are best used in ENFILADE). Heavy Machine Guns are meant to take
out
>> lightly armoured vehicles, lightly fortified postions and definitely
are
>> effective at SUPPRESSING  infantry.
>>
>	  And a last comment; please be a little careful about using the
> 'in WWII.......'  Present day military theorists have recognised that
> there is a great danger in preparing an army to 'fight the last war'.

I was thinking that most infantry "machine gun" type weapons of the
future designed for infantry suppression would be a flechette type
weapon. I imagined that it would fire high density plastic or ceramic
"needles" projected at hypersonic speeds.

This would require a vastly increased fire rate, but much lighter ammo
if the needles are fired individually (one per barrel). This weapon
could even have hundreds of barrels set in a standard dispersion pattern
(or have an adjustable spread).

Or could use a lower fire rate and the same weight if they are fired in
a submunition fashion (one shell produces x number of needles). With
this type of ammo, you could probably set up a deadly boobytrap.

If the needles are sharp enough and the speeds high enough, they should
be able to penetrate light (read anything less than level 1 vehicle)
armor.

--
Brian Bell
brian.bell@axom.com

The Full Thrust Ship Registry
http://www.axom.com/bkb/fthome.html
Dirtside II Site
http://www.axom.com/bkb/ds2main.html
Stargrunt II Site
http://www.axom.com/bkb/sg2.html
Cygnus Eclipsers' Science Fiction Games Page
http://www.axom.com/bkb/scifi_game.html