Singapore's defence industry unveiled two new 5.56mm combat rifles

[Reashot Xigwin]

Just...just no. This isn't reddit.

----

Any ideas on who's the intended customer?

Domestic most likely. It's potential export market still not revealed yet.

 

[A1Kaid]

Look, clearly we don't agree on this, and I don't want to fight with you over this. I've already acknowledged that the HK-416 has similarities on the M-16, and yes, it was influenced heavily by the M-16, but it wasn't the HK's predecessor, simply because HK didn't make M-16s, the M-16 was strictly colt's design. It's origins aren't the M-16, "based on/derived from" and "origin" are two different things. I can make a computer based on windows, but that doesn't mean I'm using window's architecture, I could just as easily be using Linux (in fact, Ubuntu is exactly that).

The exact same article on the wiki which you mention says this...



Yes, it was based on the base platform of the M-16, I've never denied this, but to say that it was simply an improved copy of it is really ignoring the facts that it also has it's origins in other platforms.

I also wasn't talking about the M416 and the M-16 when I mentioned the upper and lower receiver, I was talking about the Aug and the BMCR, which don't have the same location for said receivers (similar, not same), a simple visual check shows us that. The BMCR's lower receiver is more forward, while the AUG's lower receiver is more is slightly further back. It only looks the same position because of the barrel length and the odd way the AUG's handle is shaped.

Look, it seems like we're either misunderstanding each other's comments, or not reading them properly, let's just leave it.

I was talking about the Aug and the BMCR, which don't have the same location for said receivers (similar, not same), a simple visual check shows us that.

Actually the lower receiver on the BMCR is in the same area it is found on the Aug, the difference is the Aug's uniform exterior kind of disguises where it's lower receiver is (assuming you didn't know about the fundamentals of the bullpup design), so no not a simple visual check will show you that unless you actually know anything other than that is guesswork.

Also because both the BMCR and Aug are both bullpup designs their lower receivers would be in the same spot as well, considering on every bullpup design the "action" is located in the back as usual. So no the BMCR does not have it's lower receiver "more forward" if that were the case it wouldn't really be a bullpup design.


Bullpup designs such as the Aug and the BMCR have a general design principle that the action be located in the stock, so how is the lower receiver's location relative to the firearm going to vary?

Now you are beginning to argue semantics and that is typical of someone trying to worm their way out of a bad and failed argument.

the M-16 was strictly colt's design.

Wrong, the M-16 designed is derived from Armalite's Ar-15. Armalite sold the rights to Colt it wasn't their design the design was originally owned and actually designed by Eugene Stoner working at Armalite.

Look, clearly we don't agree on this, and I don't want to fight with you over this. I've already acknowledged that the HK-416 has similarities on the M-16, and yes, it was influenced heavily by the M-16, but it wasn't the HK's predecessor, simply because HK didn't make M-16s, the M-16 was strictly colt's design. It's origins aren't the M-16, "based on/derived from" and "origin" are two different things. I can make a computer based on windows, but that doesn't mean I'm using window's architecture, I could just as easily be using Linux (in fact, Ubuntu is exactly that).

Bro, googling isn't going to help you if you don't know have a world of clue about something especially technical matters; it's alright just admit it rather than trying to argue about things you have inadequate knowledge about. Enough.

 

[That Guy]

Actually the lower receiver on the BMCR is in the same area it is found on the Aug, the difference is the Aug's uniform exterior kind of disguises where it's lower receiver is (assuming you didn't know about the fundamentals of the bullpup design), so no not a simple visual check will show you that unless you actually know anything other than that is guesswork.

Also because both the BMCR and Aug are both bullpup designs their lower receivers would be in the same spot as well, considering on every bullpup design the "action" is located in the back as usual. So no the BMCR does not have it's lower receiver "more forward" if that were the case it wouldn't really be a bullpup design.


Bullpup designs such as the Aug and the BMCR have a general design principle that the action be located in the stock, so how is the lower receiver's location relative to the firearm going to vary?

Now you are beginning to argue semantics and that is typical of someone trying to worm their way out of a bad and failed argument.



Wrong, the M-16 designed is derived from Armalite's Ar-15. Armalite sold the rights to Colt it wasn't their design the design was originally owned and actually designed by Eugene Stoner working at Armalite.





Bro, googling isn't going to help you if you don't know have a world of clue about something especially technical matters; it's alright just admit it rather than trying to argue about things you have inadequate knowledge about. Enough.

Look, half of what I know isn't from google, it's from learning at a gun range, so don't ridicule me. I have already said my gun knowledge is weak, so there is nothing for me to admit.

By the way, it doesn't matter if Armalite originally owned the rights to the design, they lost those rights when Colt bought the design, so yes, I was right when I said that it was Colt's design. You don't say the previous owner to your house has the right to enter it, because he owned it, the world doesn't work that way. I also disagree on what you're defining as a bull-pup, considering that there are many examples of bull-pups that defy your definition of it, simple example is the F-2000. Simply putting up a picture doesn't automatically make you right.

I wasn't arguing semantics, I don't even think you understand what that word even means. I understand trying to tell me I'm wrong, but to do it so in such a ridiculing manner is something I won't tolerate. You've lost a lot of respect in my eyes today.

I can't be bothered to argue anymore, you win. I give up.

Domestic most likely. It's potential export market still not revealed yet.

Any news of a civilian variant?

 

[Yzd Khalifa]

It looks a bit odd

 

[Informant]

Wow. Much rifle. Very bullet.

It looks a bit odd

Must be the butt stock hinge. And the weird penis kinda grip.

 

[farhan_9909]

what the hell is wrong with POF.Despite them in the field for more than 60years now.they have not manufactured a single indigenous rifle.

i mean it took pof decades to bring a slightly modified variant of G3 and is in this field for 6 decades now.

I don't know what is wrong with our country

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

what the hell is wrong with POF.Despite them in the field for more than 60years now.they have not manufactured a single indigenous rifle.

i mean it took pof decades to bring a slightly modified variant of G3 and is in this field for 6 decades now.

I don't know what is wrong with our country

Corruption...lack of vision... to name a few..

I liked this one... even though it was based on a G-3:

 

[MilSpec]

Corruption...lack of vision... to name a few..

I liked this one... even though it was based on a G-3:


View attachment 18016

I always thought PoF had bigger fish to fry and battle rifles were low on priority... They have done a very good job with mortars, tank and arty shells, Precision and dumb munitions, Tank barrels etc.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

I always thought PoF had bigger fish to fry and battle rifles were low on priority... They have done a very good job with mortars, tank and arty shells, Precision and dumb munitions, Tank barrels etc.

you dont know the half bro.. corruption killed/froze alot of awesome projects...

Also POF produces ammo,small arms etc.. its HIT (Heavy Industries Taxila) that deals with the heavy stuff.

 

[MilSpec]

you dont know the half bro.. corruption killed/froze alot of awesome projects...

Also POF produces ammo,small arms etc.. its HIT (Heavy Industries Taxila) that deals with the heavy stuff.

You guys have good local talent in gunsmithing, I wonder why doesn't Pof leverage that for exports.

I have had brief conversions on Darra guns with @RescueRanger and @Irfan Baloch, the government should try and utilize the local talent of dara adam khel to produce guns for PoF, if not for military consumption, just purely for export, Some of the engraving work and craftsmanship is mindblowing. I would be more than happy to pay for some art work that goes bang...

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

You guys have good local talent in gunsmithing, I wonder why doesn't Pof leverage that for exports.

I have had brief conversions on Darra guns with @RescueRanger and @Irfan Baloch, the government should try and utilize the local talent of dara adam khel to produce guns for PoF, if not for military consumption, just purely for export, Some of the engraving work and craftsmanship is mindblowing. I would be more than happy to pay for some art work that goes bang...

Just a few Armoured vehicles frozen:

Redirect Notice

And these are just the ones we know about.