应@can168的意见聊聊全自动

CADET

大家可以聊聊打全自动和slide fire的心得，我打的第一次全自动是HK33K，然后是M16A2，AK47可是给我留下了不好的第一印象（那后坐力）。

windex

幾年前玩兩代德國MP的筆記

The first gun he got me was the MP5. It feels smaller but heavier than I'd expect. I planned to shoot a couple of rounds in semi first just to get the feel, but the coach placed the selector in full happiness and told me to try 3 round bursts first. With the target at about 7 yards, aimed head shots were too easy. The difficulty of doing controlled 3-round bursts was not as much as I imagined. Of course, a big part of it comes from the MP5 itself, as I would realize later.

During the shoot, the coach controlled my pace. After finishing the first magazine of 25 rounds in short bursts, he then told me to aim at the center of mass and do longer, 6~8 round bursts. That's when controllability becomes an issue. In my first couple of long bursts, I did not shoulder the weapon properly and it started slipping. Even with proper position and posture, it was no longer possible to get the same tight groups as 3-round bursts.

The real rock 'n roll happened on my last magazine, when the coach told me to open up. I think I managed to keep all the rounds within the silhouette, but that's about it. I can clearly see why real operators don't open up in most tactical situations.

Even though the MP5 was well-used, the MP40 they have felt like a clunker in comparison. The coach told me to place my support hand between the magwell and the trigger, instead of holding the magazine like I saw in movies. He said that the gun would jam if I do that.

This MP40 is my first-ever experience with a gun that fires with bolt open. The coach run me through the same regimen, also with 4 magazines. Despite having gotten my feet wet with automatic weapons, I shot worse with the MP40. Head shots at the same distance was iffy. I could feel the bolt moving back and forth, and that undoubtedly affected accuracy to an extent. The rate of fire was also perceivably slower than the MP5.

It is not really fair to compare two firearms designed and made decades apart, but I think the MP5 is a much better gun. Superior bolt design gave the MP5 better accuracy and controllability. Better ergonomics did not hurt either. Having said so, I can see that MP40 did exactly what it was made to do - spraying bullets - and did it rather well. By the way, the keyholes were formed when the target paper was folded by the muzzle blast.

===...===...===

靶場出租的 MP40 給我的第一印象是歷經滄桑．不過超過一甲子以前生產的槍，又經過戰火洗禮和靶場槍客摧殘，還打得響已經不錯．接過槍我原本以為應該用左手握住彈匣進口，但是靶場教練說因為此槍磨損嚴重，射擊時碰觸彈匣的話容易卡彈，所以要我像一般步槍一樣扶著槍身．後來發現這個姿勢較不自然，兩手前後太過於接近也不容易控制全自動射擊．

MP40 的缺口式照門打過德軍老槍者都不陌生．由於靶紙只掛在區區七碼外，我沒留意照門射距位置就開打．這是我第一次使用開膛擊發的槍枝，感覺上扣下扳機到子彈射出的反應時間較長．另一個特點是可以明顯感受到槍機的前後活動．看技術資料 MP40 有一分鐘 500 發的射速，實際操作時感覺沒這麼快，每發子彈上膛擊發的過程都分的清楚．只要有點射擊經驗想控制N發點放並不困難，經過練習打單發應該都可做到．

精度而言 MP40 先天設計就不強調這一點，後天條件槍枝狀況加上持槍姿勢不佳而更加不利．雖然 9mm 子彈後座力不算大， 我三發點放勉強可以爆頭，打五六發以上就難以控制．最後一兩梭打爽的更是因為靶紙被槍口氣體吹動，彈孔到處都是．雖說如此還是可以體會 MP40 具有旺盛火力， 短兵相接時對敵軍而言是個可怕的武器．

SemperFortis

机枪:
固定在turret上的m2hb打过single unit和并联的。 后者比较难控制，左右如果不是同时开火，枪会往一个方向转。枪很旧而且没有前瞄，所以只能靠tracer瞄准，真想打到400码外的小船还是要靠运气。

M60, 立姿打过，比想象中的容易控制。枪很重，但因为结构紧凑重心也平衡，很容易抵肩。

M240, 人机比M60差很多。 握把很靠后，照门也靠后，枪托也很长，抵肩，左手托护木的同时就无法瞄准； 如果你抵肩，瞄准，左手就只能托着抛壳窗---它是下抛壳的，除非你身高在6'2"以上。 我5'11", 不能立姿抵肩射击。

M16A3, M4, Mk18, 后座太容易控制了。即便是最轻的mk18. 当时我还不懂thumb over bore这种技术。

Sanye

Re

jawcn

unless the full auto rifle is mounted or you fight it in CQB... full auto is useless if you want to hit something....

turbopascal

jawcn 发表于 2013-7-29 22:09
unless the full auto rifle is mounted or you fight it in CQB... full auto is useless if you want to  ...

CQB?

goubeibei

turbopascal 发表于 2013-7-30 05:05
CQB?

Close quarters battle