NationStates Jolt Archive

For many years the all new Combined Combat Arm or CCA-1 has been in development and has underwent excruciating testing and trials by The Phoenix Military.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v293/grunt74/NS1/Firearms/CombinedArm.png
The CCA-1 is actually three weapons in one. There is a top mounted, side fed Sub-Machine Gun or PDW with a short barrel and it can be chambered in 4.6mm H&K, 5.7x28mm, 9mm Parabellum, 9mm Marakov, 9mm IMI, .357 SIG, .40 S&W, 10mm Auto, or .45 ACP.
Then there is a Bullpup Battle Rifle with a mid-mounted barrel which can be chambered in .450 Phoenix .338 Lapua Magnum .300 Winchester Magnum, .30-06 Springfield, 7.62mm NATO or 7.92mm Mauser.
Finally, there is underside mounted Grenade Launcher or Shotgun which can be chambered in 40mm, 30mm, 25mm, 20mm grenade, or 12, 10, or 8 gauge shotgun. All three weapons operate from the same trigger, but there is a familiar and simple selector switch to change which weapon the trigger will activate. For a limited time only, we are selling these to the public in the above listed caliber options. Of course the CCA-1 features a small rail system on top of the fixed iron sight and can accept a number of after market accessories, but a dual function red visible/ infra red invisible laser aiming module is built in.


Name: CCA-1
Designed by: Phoenix Dynamix
Caliber:Various (Default .450, 10mm and 30mm)
Action: SMG Full Auto, Bullpup semi-auto GL Single
Total Weight: ~10 lbs empty (in 30mm, 4.6mm 7.62mm NATO configuration)
Range: 800 meters(Bullpup) 300 meters(SMG) 175 meters(GL or Shotgun)
Rate Of Fire: 800 rounds per minute cyclic(SMG) variable semi-automatic(bullpup)
Capacity 30 round magazine (smg) 25 round magazine(bullpup) 1 in chamber + 1 in slide or multi-shot belt(gl)
Price $3,000
Specify calibers on order.



Notice:
This post is considered a RP thread and is only semi-open
Members of ACTO, The Sovereign League and CoS please do not post in this thread.

Gatawan Armament Ministry

The empire wishes to purchase 100,000 units of the 5.7x28mm, 7.92mm and would like for half of the order to be equiped with 40mm GL, and the other half to be fitted with 12 gauge shotgun variants..money will be wired upon approval.

OCC: Wouldn't three full weapons be heavier than ten pounds? Also, wouldnt it be hard for troops to carry all the ammo for three different guns when you normally carry 12 mags?

Gatawan Armament Ministry

The empire wishes to purchase 100,000 units of the 5.7x28mm, 7.92mm and would like for half of the order to be equiped with 40mm GL, and the other half to be fitted with 12 gauge shotgun variants..money will be wired upon approval.

Order confirmed.



OCC: Wouldn't three full weapons be heavier than ten pounds? Also, wouldnt it be hard for troops to carry all the ammo for three different guns when you normally carry 12 mags?

Depends on what caliber and ammo you are using, if you have belted grenades or single are utilizing the full 30 round mags or just 10 round or even 5 round

And no it wouldn't be hard. Many Regular troops already carry assault rifle and grenade ammunition and some soldiers even carry pistols or submachine guns in addition to their primary weapons.

I would like to inquire about this weapon's penetration ability.

As I see, the weapon can either fill the role of a submachine gun or a rifle. For the pistol-caliber rounds, are they capable of defeating Kevlar-equivalent body armor? Also, does the barrel of the gun portion of the weapon have any cooling issues?

Lastly, is it possible to configure the weapon so that the gun is either the submchine gun or the rifle? In other words, how "modular" is it? The full weapon is very versatile and flexible, and it has much potential for special-operations troops, but I wonder if it's too complicated for the simple line soldiers.

OCC: Wouldn't three full weapons be heavier than ten pounds?
Significantly heavier, actually. For example, the OICW weighs 15 loaded, and it's just a 20mm GL with integral 5.56mm rifle. Upping the calibre on both and throwing on a SMG to boot would probably put it up to at least twenty.


And no it wouldn't be hard. Many Regular troops already carry assault rifle and grenade ammunition and some soldiers even carry pistols or submachine guns in addition to their primary weapons.
Yes, and grenadiers usually carry significantly less magazines for their rifle than a rifleman, and you rarely carry much extra ammo for your sidearm. Anyway, what's the point of having an attached SMG? I mean, the usual reason to use an SMG is that it's small, and can be used in tight spaces, or concealed easily. A meter long SMG is rather useless.

The bullpup's barrel has had no known heating issues due to the low rate of fire and preference of semi-auto function

The weapon is not modular at all.(except for the rail attachments)

The basic unloaded weapon weighs 10lbs, and it does not include as much action as the OICW, according to my rough calculations, a M4, glock 18 and M203 glued together weigh 9.7lbs empty, this weapon uses advanced construction techniques (and doesn't use separate grips or triggers) to keep the weight at or around 10lbs.

Penetration depends on caliber ordered and actual ammunition chosen by end user. For example 5x28mm AP would have excellent penetration against body armor while 9mm hollow point penetration would be negligible.

This weapon is not being advertised as a service rifle, but instead as a specialty weapon.

The reason for having an SMG is not because its small. It is rapid firing and fires rounds which are more effective at close range. In situations where the weapon's operator would certainly not want to be firing full size rifle cartridges like .30-06 or .450 Phoenix(indoors, at close range, from the center axis relock position), the value of the integrated SMG (Or PDW if desired )is indisputable.

Bump

The basic unloaded weapon weighs 10lbs, and it does not include as much action as the OICW, according to my rough calculations, a M4, glock 18 and M203 glued together weigh 9.7lbs empty, this weapon uses advanced construction techniques (and doesn't use separate grips or triggers) to keep the weight at or around 10lbs.
Yes, but you're using heavier calibres than an M4 and a Glock 18: Your .45 is twice the diameter of 5.56 NATO and probably at least ten times the mass. So, a better comparison would be gluing together an M82, an MP5/10 and an M203, for a total weight of about 37 pounds, minus a couple for cutting off the stock and a couple triggers ("advanced construction" is a bit of a cop out, as companies ALREADY manufacture these things to be as light as possible).

The reason for having an SMG is not because its small. It is rapid firing and fires rounds which are more effective at close range. In situations where the weapon's operator would certainly not want to be firing full size rifle cartridges like .30-06 or .450 Phoenix(indoors, at close range, from the hip), the value of the integrated SMG (Or PDW if desired )is indisputable.
I'd hardly call rifle rounds "less effective" at close range. If anything, they're more effective, with far higher energy than a pistol cartridge. There'll be small problems with over-penetration, but lethality and effectiveness against armored targets are much better: A soldier wearing Type III or IV body armor will only suffer some bruises from 9mm fire even at point blank, while repeated hits from 7.62 NATO will succeed in actually taking them down.

.450 is not .50
comparing .450 Phoenix to .50 BMG is like comparing 7.62 soviet to .338 Lapua Magnum


You don't want a slow-firing large caliber weapon at close range because you can not have the same fast firing rate, and even if you have a comparable rate of fire, you control the recoil, conversely you don't want to use a sub machine gun to pick off targets at 500 meters. If you want armor penetration you can use 4.6mm or 5.7x28mm and have even better penetration that the rifle, but with loss of knock down power. An example would be using a mix of armor piercing and hollow point 9mm Makarov rounds for a decent trade off. But that's why its offered in so many different calibers, so that the customers can find the balance that they want.


The weight is arguable but it doesn't matter in the long run, since its definitely under 20lbs loaded.


South Lizasauria your order for 900,000 is confirmed and has been shipped and no refunds are available :P

Actually it is a pretty good analogy. .338 Lapua's diameter is about 1.27mm larger and is 31mm longer than 7.62 Russian and .50 BMG's diameter is 1.01mm larger and 24mm longer than .450 Phoenix

Even so, that's not going to lighten the gun very much. Since it's an automatic weapon and not a lighter semi-auto, it'd be a better match to the new XM312 than the M82, which weighs 42 pounds. Since the .45 Phoenix is about 60% of the size of the .50 BMG, we'll be generous and shave that 42 down to 25.2 pounds. Since you still need the stock to be designed for the largest weapon, it's kinda hard to shave that down any further, especially given that it's a bleeding edge weapon that the US army isn't even fielding yet.

Then you'd have to slap on probably another five pounds or so for your fast rate of fire (twice that of the XM312, in fact), giving us a total of 30.2 pounds.

Then throw on a 5.5 pound MP5, and halve the weight for using only the action and barrel, but throw on another pound for increasing the weight of the thing's barrel to increase accuracy (you ARE squeezing another 100 meters out of an SMG here, sacrifices have to be made). That adds on 3.75 pounds, for a total of 33.95 pounds.

Finally, we tack on the M203's 3 pounds, which we won't fiddle with due to the fact that the thing's pretty much all weapon anyway, for a grand total of 36.95 pounds, unloaded. Now granted, this was playing hard and fast, but the measurements given are rather generous, especially the initial estimate (which barely puts you over the weight of an M60).

The rate of fire listed for the burst function, which if you notice was removed before I posted (actually the rof was copy pasted from the original AR-22) and basically meaningless now since its a semi-auto only firearm.

The range obviously varies again if you are using 4.6mm or 5.7mm the range is going to be high while 9mm rounds are going to have a much shorter range

The grenade launcher is 10mm smaller than the m203 and doesn't use a pump/slide action just a simple underside loaded chamber so maybe its 2.8lbs

In response to your criticisms I will change the rpm for the semi auto only section of the weapon which was a mistake anyway.

The base battle rifle is certainly not in any way, action, barrel, anything else comparable to even half of an XM312. The XM312 has /would have a much heavier barrel and muzzle break, a huge and heavy bolt and more complex action, a belt feeding system and that big gray thing around it.

In fact it would not even be comparable to the M249
if you want to compare it to something heavy, maybe, just maybe you can get away with comparing it to an m1 garand

You made a semi-auto only firearm, for the military? Do I even want to know WHY? I can understand select fire Safe-Semi-Burst, but Semi only? Lets totally remove the "assault" from the "assault rifle" portion of this weapon, and leave us with an upjumped hunting rifle, a machine pistol, and a grenade launcher.

Also, this thing would be bitchingly heavy. Like, BITCHINGLY heavy. "Hey I'm carrying a 30 pound Barrett and then some" heavy. I mean, there are 3 guns. Even a 20 pound rifle is too much I'd say. Lose the GL, lose the hunting rifle. Lose the entire concept. Forever.

Try losing the attitude.


It has a semi auto battle rifle
and a full auto sub machine gun or personal defense weapon
and a grenade launcher
If that doesn't seem useful to you or your nation, you need not purchase it.

Future comparisons of the battle rifle section to a loaded .50 caliber sniper rifle will be ignored.