The discussion of the Alien series of films and the props used in them is the aim, but if it's got Big Bugs and Big Guns, then they are welcome too!





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Future Concept Pulse Rifle
PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:20 pm 
User avatar

Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Service Number: A01/TQ2.0.42137E1
Country: United States
Will all due respect to Mr. Blomkamp, while it has some good ideas, I don't really like his the new PR design, so I am thinking of designing my own.

I've previously been considering a project called "MagPulse" which would be a Pulse Rifle that has Magpul products adapted for it. This is along the same lines and I may incorporate some of the MagPulse ideas.

Some of my ideas:

- Ambidextrous charging handles (as seen in the video game)
- Magpul-style pistol grip
- QD sling swivel pockets
- Cut the top off the shroud to make a "flat-top" with a rail
- Add a reflex or magnified optical sight
- Semi-auto grenade launcher (maybe based on Remington 1100 or actual SPAS-12)
- Mount side rails for a weapon light and PEQ
- "Sidesaddle" holder for grenades (hat tip to the member here who did it here first)
- Improved buttstock
- Threaded barrel for a suppressor

I have a Spulse on my workbench I'm thinking of doing this conversion on.

If you have other suggestions for improving the functionality and ergonomics of the PR, I'd love to hear them!

_________________
Image

USCM Expeditionary Force - Minnesota Region:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/224001081462511/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Future Concept Pulse Rifle
PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:57 pm 
Moderator & screen used
User avatar

Location: United Kingdom
Service Number: A08/TQ1.0.02136E1
Country: United Kingdom
Erik_MAA wrote:
Will all due respect to Mr. Blomkamp, while it has some good ideas, I don't really like his the new PR design

I'm not sure how new that PR is Erik; Neil first posted images of it in late 2015 I believe.

Harry

A5-PR.jpg
A5-PR.jpg [ 92.71 KiB | Viewed 744 times ]


_________________
Image
http://www.facebook.com/TheHHACA - @TheHHACA
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:31 pm 
User avatar

Location: glasgow uk
Service Number: A12/TQ0.0.52149E1
Country: United Kingdom
the top trail is iconic how about a integrated optic? i would like to see an ambi selector being a south paw myself.

_________________
Reformed Pacifist


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Future Concept Pulse Rifle
PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:42 pm 
User avatar

Location: Wolfsburg Niedersachsen
Service Number: A12/TQ2.0.02132E1
Country: Germany
Did i mis something?
What does the PR look like from Mr Blomkamp?

_________________
Cpl N.Storey A12/TQ2.0.02132E1
MARINE RAIDER


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Future Concept Pulse Rifle
PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 8:06 pm 
User avatar

Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Service Number: A01/TQ2.0.42137E1
Country: United States
Harry Harris wrote:
Erik_MAA wrote:
Will all due respect to Mr. Blomkamp, while it has some good ideas, I don't really like his the new PR design

I'm not sure how new that PR is Erik; Neil first posted images of it in late 2015 I believe.

Harry


Well, it's newer than the 1986 movie guns :lol:

_________________
Image

USCM Expeditionary Force - Minnesota Region:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/224001081462511/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 8:07 pm 
User avatar

Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Service Number: A01/TQ2.0.42137E1
Country: United States
Big Stew wrote:
the top trail is iconic how about a integrated optic? i would like to see an ambi selector being a south paw myself.


An integrated optic, vs a detachable one, is an interesting idea.

I'm picturing something like the setup on the XM8, P90, or F2000.

_________________
Image

USCM Expeditionary Force - Minnesota Region:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/224001081462511/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Future Concept Pulse Rifle
PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:08 pm 

Country: Czech Republic
I'd go a step further (or backward, since this design predates the screen used shrouds) with that integrated optic. What about making something along the lines of G36 with two optical sights in the back of the carry handle/shroud?

Pulse_rifle_blueprint.jpg
Pulse_rifle_blueprint.jpg [ 166.05 KiB | Viewed 807 times ]

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Future Concept Pulse Rifle
PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:14 pm 
User avatar

Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Service Number: A01/TQ2.0.42137E1
Country: United States
M1861 wrote:
I'd go a step further (or backward, since this design predates the screen used shrouds) with that integrated optic. What about making something along the lines of G36 with two optical sights in the back of the carry handle/shroud?


This is interesting, and similar to what I have been thinking about. Although I'm not a fan of multi-level sighting systems, in particular the G36, which looks kind of cumbersome.

I've been sketching something up, I'll try to scan and post it tonight.

_________________
Image

USCM Expeditionary Force - Minnesota Region:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/224001081462511/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Future Concept Pulse Rifle
PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:23 pm 

Country: Czech Republic
Since there are versions of the G36 carry handle with just the magnified sight and no reflex on top of it, that would work just fine. I like the fact that the front of the carry handle is open and allows for the optic to see through instead of just blocking a part of your field of view. The proportions of that old design might need an adjustment or two in order to bring it closer to the actual pulse rifle (not as tall and with a different draft angle of the sides), but I still love that concept.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 14, 2019 9:56 pm 
Mercenary
User avatar

Location: KMS Bismarck
Country: Germany
Just design a “new” weapon instant if puting crap from 2010 on a weapon 200 years in the future...

_________________
“Nothing beats german engineering”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Aug 15, 2019 10:40 am 
Galaxy-hopping garbage man

Country: United Kingdom
Will you also be wearing 5.11 Tacticool High-Speed Low-Drag Operator's clothing, to go with this ultra-tacticool weapon? :lol: :P

Sorry, but half of that stuff really is just useless crap - It's great if you're a civilian shooter who likes wearing baseball caps and sunglasses, but any Colonial Marine will want a weapon that is tough, hard wearing, unbreakable, simple and easy. Any Colonial Marine Corps will want the same, but as cheap as possible. Adding a bunch of Tacticool junk from a mail-order catalogue just won't cut it, and you'll only want a bunch of other stuff later on as fashions change.


The other half of it needs to be put through the 'combat filter' to see if there's any point in implementing:

For example - You just landed on this planet in a big, loud Dropship and drove up to your AO in a blatant APC shaped like a brick, before hopping out to the shouts of a gruff Master Sergeant, and are now bimbling around with big bright torches on your shoulder, weapons that have lit ammo counters and a couple of motion trackers going ping... Everyone in a 30 mile radius will know you're here, so what good is a supressor going to be? Moreover, if stealth is a requirement, why are you walking around in clanky armour and lugging what is effectively a hoofing great thing like a pulse rifle instead of something more lightweight, streamlined and stealthy?

- Ambi cocking handle is pretty pointless IMO, (and the Os of many lefty shooters) unless you can make all the controls ambi.

- Mag fed grenade launcher based on a SPAS-15 would be better and have more ammo (6rnds) than a necessarily-shortened tube-fed model. Would require a redesign of the shroud around the mag well. Extra mags would replace the single rounds held on the webbing straps, taking capacity from 8rnds to 24, or carried in pouches for even greater capacity... and be faster than reloading from a sidesaddle. But with a semi-auto grenade launcher you're then enabling faster expenditure of ammo and bring far greater damage capability to the weapon, which is not always a fantastic idea in a military environment. Fire discipline is still a thing, even in 2179.

- Side rails, top rails, Picatinny rails and all the associated add-ons just make this already big and bulky weapon even bigger, even bulkier and more liable to catch on stuff. Weapon lights, PEQs, Reflex sights, telescopic sights, IR lasers, torches, bayonet lugs and any other tacticool junk in the Gun Lovers catalogue can be designed into the shroud itself.


I am interested to hear how you'd improve the buttstock, though...


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Future Concept Pulse Rifle
PostPosted: Thu Aug 15, 2019 6:14 pm 

Country: Czech Republic
I'd like to see the reasoning behind ambidextrous cocking handle being pointless.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Future Concept Pulse Rifle
PostPosted: Thu Aug 15, 2019 7:36 pm 
User avatar

Location: glasgow uk
Service Number: A12/TQ0.0.52149E1
Country: United Kingdom
Erik_MAA wrote:
M1861 wrote:
I'd go a step further (or backward, since this design predates the screen used shrouds) with that integrated optic. What about making something along the lines of G36 with two optical sights in the back of the carry handle/shroud?


This is interesting, and similar to what I have been thinking about. Although I'm not a fan of multi-level sighting systems, in particular the G36, which looks kind of cumbersome.

I've been sketching something up, I'll try to scan and post it tonight.



i was thinking sort of camera mounted in side the front of the shroud and a screen at the back it would make more sense for the ammo counter to be integrated into that screen as well.

_________________
Reformed Pacifist


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Future Concept Pulse Rifle
PostPosted: Fri Aug 16, 2019 10:29 am 
Galaxy-hopping garbage man

Country: United Kingdom
M1861 wrote:
I'd like to see the reasoning behind ambidextrous cocking handle being pointless.

Because you're still having to do everything else cack-handed. It makes no difference and no sense in the real world unless, as I already said, you make ALL the controls ambidextrous.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Future Concept Pulse Rifle
PostPosted: Fri Aug 16, 2019 10:59 am 

Country: Czech Republic
But the main advantage of an ambi/swappable cocking handle is not better use by those 5% or so left handed soldiers. It's the ability to reload and/or charge your weapon without juggling it and changing grip (or awkwardly reaching around)
Same goes for fixing stoppages or other malfunctions, being forced to use your dominant hand and to let go of the pistol grip is stupid.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Future Concept Pulse Rifle
PostPosted: Fri Aug 16, 2019 2:50 pm 
Galaxy-hopping garbage man

Country: United Kingdom
M1861 wrote:
But the main advantage of an ambi/swappable cocking handle is not better use by those 5% or so left handed soldiers. It's the ability to reload and/or charge your weapon without juggling it and changing grip (or awkwardly reaching around) Same goes for fixing stoppages or other malfunctions, being forced to use your dominant hand and to let go of the pistol grip is stupid.

So design it properly for the majority right-handers, then, as with the L85 or the FAL.
By definition, the point of anything being 'ambidextrous' is that it can be used/done with either hand equally well.

Incidentally, lefties are between 10 and 15%... and even right-handed soldiers sometimes encounter cack-handed corners that need you to swap hands. If ever there was a time when you needed the weapon to be less awkward, that'd be the one.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 16, 2019 4:34 pm 
User avatar

Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Service Number: A01/TQ2.0.42137E1
Country: United States
Having an abidextrous cocking handle would enable shooters, whether they are right or left handed, to be able to rack the bolt while keeping their shooting hand on the fire control.

Ambi controls also make sense, and could be included in the design. The safety and selector would be easy; the magazine release would be more complicated, might have to redesign it completely.

_________________
Image

USCM Expeditionary Force - Minnesota Region:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/224001081462511/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 16, 2019 5:58 pm 
Galaxy-hopping garbage man

Country: United Kingdom
Erik_MAA wrote:
the magazine release would be more complicated, might have to redesign it completely.

Nah, just mirror it.
All the controls have a pivot pin - Just carry that through the receiver and mirror the interface component, which in this case is a simple lever. In fact, the mag release is probably the easiest of the lot, as there's less likely to be any other working parts in the way.
I personally never found it a problem racking an M1A1/PR with my left hand, and obviously most lefties find it easier.

But to get purely geek-pedantic for a moment..... When would you need to do this and still have a hand on the fire control?
Hicks's instructions to Ripley suggest the weapon has an auto-releasing bolt during reloads, so no need to cock it at that point. The weapon is caseless, but may still suffer a feed jam and need clearing, at which point you'll want your dominant hand off the pistol grip and working to clear the stoppage anyway. Outside of that, you'll be unloading the weapon and extracting a chambered round, ie making safe, so again will have hands off all the shooty parts.

I'm more interested by a totally ambi weapon (a-la FN P90), or perhaps a select/reversible one like the Steyr AUG. I think that, as a high-level military concept, simplifies things and caters to a wider range of people and applications, meaning more meat for the... uhh, I mean, more troops on the ground supporting our efforts!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Aug 16, 2019 7:52 pm 
User avatar

Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Service Number: A01/TQ2.0.42137E1
Country: United States
Looking at it from the perspective of the base weapon - although there may be solutions to these issues in the movie canon.

A Thompson is an open-bolt gun - the bolt is locked to the rear and slams forward when you press the trigger, chambering and firing a round in one motion. I know there is a canon that the PR is electrically fired, but that mechanism presumably would only replace the metal firing pin in the bolt and not the bolt operation itself.

Manual of arms for loading a Thompson is bolt back, magazine in. At that point, the gun is ready to fire (as long as the safety is off, of course). The bolt should stay locked open on the last round so all that needs to be done is simply swap magazines, but sometimes this doesn't happen so locking the bolt back before reloading is a good practice.

As a "safety" measure open bolt guns are sometimes carried with the bolt forward and a magazine loaded. In this state, you have to pull the bolt to the rear before it can be fired.

The other thing a cocking handle is used for is clearing malfunctions. The first thing you have to do when an open bolt gun malfunctions is pull the bolt to the rear so it can lock open. If you don't, when you pull the magazine out the bolt may slam forward on a live round, causing the gun to fire unintentionally. With new users this is a very common error on open bolt guns.

So the cocking handle may be used more often that one would think.

Even if for some reason this was a closed bolt gun (US made semi-auto Thompsons are closed bolt, for example - all open bolt guns in the US are considered machine guns) you would still need to run the cocking handle to chamber a round before firing, and to clear malfunctions.

As for being able to use the cocking handle off-hand, many training organizations advocate being able to run the cocking handle with the gun shouldered or otherwise oriented towards the threat and hand on the fire control. The logic here is you can get back on target after reloading or clearing a malfunction.

In the film, Hicks demonstrates reloading by pointing the muzzle up and reloading from that position, which some trainers like (it's called "workspacing" - the idea is to get the gun up in your field of vision so you can see if anything is wrong with it, such as a malfunction). Many trainers don't like it because it obstructs your view of potential threats, takes your gun off target, and makes your gun easier for someone to take away from you.

Sure, you could design a completely new weapons system, but the scope of my project is an evolution of the existing PR. Take a look at how the M16a1 has evolved into the M4 and M16A4. Or the evolution of the SA80 to the L85A2.

The Pulse Rifle was designed based in part on what we knew about weapons and shooting methods in 1986. If it were 40 years later, and the USCM had experienced similar innovations, how might that change the PR design?

I may be overthinking it, but let's be honest, overthinking is a big part of fandom, right?

In addition to being an Aliens fan, I'm also a gun guy. I've been a firearms trainer for over 30 years and do a lot of shooting, and I'm interested in gun design. So this little project idea works for me on multiple levels.

I've even seriously considered building a live-fire Pulse Rifle. The only thing really holding that up is the cost.

_________________
Image

USCM Expeditionary Force - Minnesota Region:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/224001081462511/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2019 10:51 am 
Galaxy-hopping garbage man

Country: United Kingdom
Erik_MAA wrote:
So the cocking handle may be used more often that one would think.

I have made no argument for removing the cocking handle. Even caseless rounds need a bolt.
My question is, "When would you need to do this and still have a hand on the fire control?"

Erik_MAA wrote:
As for being able to use the cocking handle off-hand, many training organizations advocate being able to run the cocking handle with the gun shouldered or otherwise oriented towards the threat and hand on the fire control. The logic here is you can get back on target after reloading or clearing a malfunction.

Again, current tacticool fashion trends, rather than any real reason. This logic ignores the possibility of various weapon failures or mishandles resulting in a negligent discharge and the killing of an innocent target. Weapon safety is of paramount importance in a military environment.

Erik_MAA wrote:
Many trainers don't like it because it obstructs your view of potential threats, takes your gun off target, and makes your gun easier for someone to take away from you.

Which sounds great if you're pretending to be John Wick and hefting a nice, lightweight MP5...
I would like to see these trainers heft a fully-firing Hero version of the Pulse Rifle and keep that in the shoulder during a reload. These things aren't light.
Then again, if they all spend as much time in the gym as they do posting tacticool videos online, they'll heft that PR as if it were made of foam. Judging from the typical ripped bods bulging through their 5.11 Stalker Tacticool polo shirts, odds are high.

Erik_MAA wrote:
Or the evolution of the SA80 to the L85A2.

The SA80 is the weapon family. The L85 is the particular model.

Erik_MAA wrote:
The Pulse Rifle was designed based in part on what we knew about weapons and shooting methods in 1986.

So I guess nobody knew anything about shooting back then... ?

Erik_MAA wrote:
If it were 40 years later, and the USCM had experienced similar innovations, how might that change the PR design?

Depends what is deemed operationally necessary and a justifiable expenditure for the expected return. They won't want to change much, if they can help it. Better to retrofit existing PRs with mods that do not significantly alter the general design.
This includes slapping picatinny rails everywhere with stuff tacked on, as it means you'll also have to spend more money replacing packing cases, storage containers, weapons racks and APC rifle brackets, as well as redesigning the training, supply and logistics around all these extra parts, more ammo, spare batteries, webbing pouches, and a lot more than most people realise. It's never as simple as slapping something on because it looks cool...

Erik_MAA wrote:
I may be overthinking it, but let's be honest, overthinking is a big part of fandom, right?

Yes, but within the confines of the established environment - In this case, a budget-conscious military in a corporation-dominated world of tendered contracts and lowest bidders.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Future Concept Pulse Rifle
PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2019 1:21 pm 

Country: Czech Republic
Why would you need to have your hand on the fire control? Gun balance with modern rifles (because holding something like M41A by the front grip for a reload or clearing of a malfunction is awkward at best), access to controls other than the trigger (bolt release, magazine release...) - there are multiple valid reasons for the option to operate the cocking handle by your non-dominant hand. Slapping "tacticool" on things and concepts you disagree with does not invalidate them.

Negligent discharges and other weapon malfunctions are a moot point, since every competent shooter (military or civilian) knows that you need to have the weapon pointed in a safe direction even when clearing a malfunction or doing anything else.

The design features that forced the right handed operations of all controls (bolt, safety, mag release etc.) on early self-loading military rifles are a thing of the past. While I can't imagine doing a left hand reload or malfunction clear on a Garand or M14, look at the FAL and its variants or the G3: centre of gravity much closer to the pistol grip, charging handle on the left and ejection port on the right.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Future Concept Pulse Rifle
PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2019 2:37 pm 
Galaxy-hopping garbage man

Country: United Kingdom
M1861 wrote:
Why would you need to have your hand on the fire control? Gun balance with modern rifles (because holding something like M41A by the front grip for a reload or clearing of a malfunction is awkward at best),

In actual fact, your off-hand will generally be just forward of the magazine well, as that's the usual balance point of full-weight Pulse Rifles... especially if you're keeping it up in the shoulder during a reload, for some reason.

M1861 wrote:
access to controls other than the trigger (bolt release, magazine release...) - there are multiple valid reasons for the option to operate the cocking handle by your non-dominant hand.

You're using this handle to open the breach on a live weapon - There are absolutely NO reasons (valid or otherwise) for having your dominant hand anywhere near the other controls during this operation.

Again, I ask - When would you ever need to change the fire rate, or take off the safety, while operating the cocking handle?

M1861 wrote:
Slapping "tacticool" on things and concepts you disagree with does not invalidate them.

Actually, it does. That's the point of the "slap". It's an assertion of invalidity.
Tacticool = Fashion over function.

M1861 wrote:
Negligent discharges and other weapon malfunctions are a moot point, since every competent shooter (military or civilian) knows that you need to have the weapon pointed in a safe direction even when clearing a malfunction or doing anything else.

Ah, but you're in combat, supposedly keeping your weapon shouldered, on target and pointed at a threat, though...

M1861 wrote:
While I can't imagine doing a left hand reload or malfunction clear on a Garand or M14, look at the FAL and its variants or the G3: centre of gravity much closer to the pistol grip, charging handle on the left and ejection port on the right.

Yes, I'm very familiar with those.
You still don't need to access the mag release or safety catch while operating the bolt on any of them, though.....


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Future Concept Pulse Rifle
PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2019 3:29 pm 

Country: Czech Republic
You keep building up strawmen that you can then demolish without actually addressing the points. A "conversation" along those lines is not productive, nor is it going to convince anyone who doesn't already share your point of view. I'm not going to take part in that.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Future Concept Pulse Rifle
PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2019 4:07 pm 
Galaxy-hopping garbage man

Country: United Kingdom
M1861 wrote:
You keep building up strawmen that you can then demolish without actually addressing the points.

In order to play that card with any validity, you have to explain how my responses are a logical fallacy. You can't just Fallacy-Drop and fuck off, since that is itself a fallacy.
Moreover, I have asked a very specific question in response to the various assertions, which still has not actually been answered, so don't talk to me about Strawmen.

M1861 wrote:
A "conversation" along those lines is not productive, nor is it going to convince anyone who doesn't already share your point of view. I'm not going to take part in that.

Flawed assumption - I'm not trying to convince anyone of my perspective and I don't believe anyone cares that much about it, either. If someone wants to do something according to their own ideas, they will. No words from a stranger on a forum will do anything to sway that.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 19, 2019 6:17 pm 
User avatar

Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Service Number: A01/TQ2.0.42137E1
Country: United States
I started this thread for suggestions about improvements to the M41A design that were consistent with a future in the Aliens world.

If you want to argue with me or each other, or don't think my project has any merit, this thread probably isn't for you.

Mods, I have what I need and you can lock this.

_________________
Image

USCM Expeditionary Force - Minnesota Region:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/224001081462511/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next



You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: