I was observing the different situations the many of you use your weapons, from CQB to mid range, long range and all in between. So recently I had an idea about a weapon addition that may be as beneficial as swapping uppers from a 10.5" entry weapon to say an 18" for long range, without needing to carry an additional upper or utilizing a longer weapon initially such as a 14.5" to somewhat make up the gap.
Perhaps if there was a section of barrel that could be attached to the end of the 10.5" to bring it up to 18" or even 20", essentially just an additional section of rifled barrel, as I have dubbed the “Range Extender,” that could be screwed on or quick attached within seconds to extend the rifle to long range capabilities, and while not in use, the “Range Extender” would just be slid into and stored securely and conveniently in the lower portion of the handrail, under the barrel. Not adding much more than a suppressor in the realm of weight.
Carrying an entry weapon such as a MK18, after clearing a structure you have to pursue a target outside that takes up a fortified position at distances beyond 500-600 meters. Instead of having to lug around another upper or chancing a shot the weapon wasn’t designed for, you simply pull out the “range extender,” flip down a 3x magnifier or flip the switch on your SpecterDR and you’re ready to rock and roll in seconds… or the situation in reverse, long to short… (pretending for this hypothetical the attachment is no problem)
I understand there are issues with mounting the rifled “Range Extender” such as muzzle devices, getting the rifling to match up exactly and so on, however these issues can be resolved down the road, so just for now, what do you think of the initial idea?
Theoretically wouldn’t the gas system have to be brought into consideration?
Thats an interesting concept.
It sounds like a simpler solution to what the LMT MRP offers.
Hmmm, it would maybe require maybe a buffer and the use of a gas buster… That’s what I think at least. Buuut… I dunno. Sounds like a concept that’s partly reasonable. Could be bad too.
The biggest problem I can think of (assuming all other functional issues were sorted, however unlikely that may be) is that your point of impact would shift, most likely very significantly. I doubt this shift would be accurately repeatable. Just that alone would render such an idea mostly useless for saving time because you would have to rezero, where as with another upper you could have an optic already mounted to the other upper and zero’d for it.
At that point a bullpup weapon platform seems like a better solution anyhow.
I think the priority considered in this idea is lightening the load of the warfighter as well as not taking up space.
The optics could just be notched to fit the POI change. An example being that people who have many rifles and few optics mark down the zero of each rifle with their optic so they can generally swap.
Sure, it’s not super accurate, but these aren’t snipers.
I’m just throwing my own to cents in. I also personally think that the POI shift is a major constraint to the idea and personally would carry the separate uppers with their own optics zeroed to perfection.
There are a couple of serious practical problems. First the alignment would have to be near perfect to keep from seriously affecting accuracy. Second the attachment would have to be very rigid for the same reason. You might say, the devil is in the details. Nearly a century ago General Hatcher documented experiments where very slight imperfections were made at various points of the barrel. The muzzle was by far the most sensitive location for impact on accuracy. Even small imperfections will cause a substantial degradation in accuracy.
I think what you are essentially after is a bull pup; long barrel but short overall length. Some designs are better than others and a lot of people have mixed feelings on the subject. Personally I’ve fired all of 30 rounds through one so my experience with them is virtually nil. A few of our allies have adopted them and there are a wide variety available stateside.
I think you are looking at this from the wrong position.
A civilian shooter has no duty to pursue and I can’t think of many situations where it’s in their best interest to do so, especially against an enemy 5-600 meters out. A civilian shooter is most often acting solo in defense of self and others.
LE and Military are typically the ones who would have such a duty to pursue in defense of self, civilians, or to accomplish a mission. They usually respond to such threats in multi-shooter units, allowing for these other shooters to be armed with multiple weapons systems. Military typically have shooters with breaching/cqb capability, designated marksman, heavy gunners, etc to cover scenarios like you mention. LE first responders are typically armed with a pistol and long arm designed for closer quarters. Barricaded suspects, long range threats, etc would be dealt with by specialized SWAT/SRT units after a perimeter had been secured by the first responders.
There just doesn’t seem to be a role (that I can conceive of) that would require a solo shooter to be able to quickly adapt a single weapon from cqb to extended range.
There is no tactical need for one individual shooter to switch barrel lengths mid-mission. Proper planning based on METT-TC will allow for the most advantageous distribution of weapons systems in the ground tactical plan / scheme of maneuver. Support / Assault teams etc. etc etc.
The ability to switch upper receivers w/ already attached and zeroed optics (or to switch entire weapons systems) PRE-mission is enough.
The whole notion of an individual clearing a room with a 10.5 inch barrel, then needing to switch barrels for overwatch on a rooftop may be appealing to that bald guy who hosts Future Weapons, but is not necessary or practical in the contemporary operating environment. It’s about planning, and at the most basic level, teamwork. Nobody is going Rambo doing it alone.
Theoretically possible, but practically it is unnecessary and cost prohibitive.
Considering that the only losses one really sees with short barrels is a loss of velocity, I would rather take the expense that will be necessary to achieve such tight tolerances and precision machining and just train people to learn how to hit stuff at longer ranges with good ammo.
I think the best concept is to do something like a suppressor. Have a device that has a quick attach that helps boost velocity by keeping the pressure higher for a longer time.
I appreciate the responses everyone contributed. It’s just a simple “hmm wonder if that could work” type of idea, based more so on if its possible than if its really 100% necessary.
new innovations come from bouncing outlandish ideas around until one really happens to stick… like jumping out of an airplane with a few square yards of silk tied to your back… or making 600lbs of balsa wood and metal float on air
Innovation is good but not with the AR. You will have scorn, ire and calumnies heaped like hot coals upon your head if you even suggest the AR can be improved. It can’t be improved because it is perfect and perfection cannot be improved. To suggest otherwise is heresy. Picatinny rails and carbines not withstanding.
Seriously, the black powder gunsmiths do this after a fashion. It’s called a “false muzzle” and is used to facilitate loading. It’s aligned with dowel pins but not held by anything but gravity.
