JsARCLIGHT

A "Patriot" is an AR15 cut down to "pistol" form. Patriot is a name brand made by Rocky Mountain Arms between 1988 and 1994. It did not exsist in 1963. In case anyone cares this is what a AR pistol looks like. It has a 7 1/2" barrel and a shortened "pistol buffer" back end. These guns are rare and sadly have the killing power of a Ruger 10/22... they are all bark and no bite.

Woopsy! Had the wrong thing there.

My wife and I have noticed several "errors" in not only this MGS game but the others before this one. They may have done some study on the topics but "book learnin'" is about all they have to show for it. They get a lot of terms and jargon right but a lot of things they have in the game are "hollywood real", meaing they are not "real" real but what people percieve as real. Every movie, game or show having to do with the military or using military things almost always gets a few things wrong... even Saving Private Ryan had a few flubs. Unless the game was made by a bunch of real world commandos you can always count on a few things "not being right"... but a game made by real world commandos would most likely bore or anger most casual players. After all, you are basically playing a "movie" about military things made by non-military people... most of which have most likely never fired a real gun in their lives or served in a real army... but that does not take away from the game, it just shows that this is an "artists' rendering" of a theme and not a hardcore sim. Edit: In effect what I am saying is that this is a game in the end, it is half realism and half hollywood. I'm sure they did certain things like this bullet tumbling just as a "wow-wie" schtick, something to look very impressive or badass on the screen. After all, the player has already suspended disbelief enough just in the premise of the game and on several other elements... they just keep the hits coming to impress and suprise, not neccessarily be true to life.

In that case it might be this little bugger. This is a CAR15, the very first "shorty" M16 made before Vietnam. It was the great granddaddy of the XM177. These weapons still have the same operational function of their bigger counterparts and the AR15 family does not tumble bullets in flight, only after the bullet strikes. The tumbling bullets in MGS3 are artistic license at best and terribly wrong at worst. Not the first time I've seen non-gun / non-military people make a "mistake" like that... either for dramatic effect or because they just did not know how the real weapon works. But enough of this... let's move on to different topics and just leave bullets tumbling in flight in the "does not happen deliberately" with this type of weapon collumn for now.

OK, then it sounds like they took some artistic license to "spice up" the bullet action. Not even a smooth bore weapon would produce end over end travel unless condition #1 was in effect (see my first post for this) of the tumble rule... and even then it would have to be in just the right spot to produce that effect. It's funny really how producing an error like that in a bullet is very difficult, especially doing it over and over again. As for the shorter barrel issue a shorter rifled barrel (as in a handgun or SMG) just does not have the capacity to "spin up" the bullet as much as a longer barrel does. All it really means is the accuracy is much lower as well as the range of the bullet. Speaking from the realm of physics, the forces and concepts at work in a shorter barrel are exactly the same as they are in a longer barrel and in flight tumble would only occur in those strange circomstances stated earlier. Suffice this to say bullets tumbling in flight are not common and almost all of the time are not a desired effect and they actually pose less lethality on average than a nice straight rifled shot.

There is also a good possibility that the game creators took a ton of "artistic license" with that scene to make it more menacing or appear more action packed by giving the bullets a lot of motion. A spiraling bullet in slow motion is not all that interesting and it does not have a good degree of motion on it other than a twist and a very straight path of travel. This is going to be totally ass of me to even suggest this but could you be talking about the spent casings popping out of the action and not the bullets? Casings can spin in all manner of way when that ejector lets go of them.

Um.... oooookaaaaay.... That sounds more or less like the people that made the game don't know how bullets work.

Having not reached that point in the game yet I'm too sure what you are describing... do you mean the bullets fired from the weapon do not have a normal spin or "spiral" to them when they exit the barrel? Pretty much all modern weapons have rifled barrels that force the bullet fired from the weapon to "spiral" like a football in flight (caused by the rifling in the barrel), this stabilizes the bullet and allows it to reach much longer distances with greater accuracy. Olde Tyme muzzle-loaders and flintlocks did not have rifling (thus where we get the term "rifle" for modern longarms) and when they would fire their round bullets the bullet could roll any way it wanted upon exit from the barrel... which led to very short ranges and low accuracy. If the bullets leaving the character's gun tumbled, meaning an erratic trajectory that is definately not a nice clean spiral then that is an undesireable side effect of something being wrong with the weapon. There are three reasons why a bullet tumbles after leaving the barrel: 1) The bullet's base is cockeyed and gas escapes off one side before the other as it leaves the muzzle. 2) Something really unbalanced the bullet as it was going down the bore. After exiting the muzzle, it tumbles. Or 3) The bullet is spinning way too slow as it leaves the muzzle; it won't gyroscopically stablize. Or it's spinning too fast; its natural unbalance creates enough centrifugal force to cause it to tumble. All these situations are bad for bullet performance and all contribute to reduced range and accuracy. Now tumble after impact of the bullet is another story. You heard right about the AK-47 rounds, they have a special cavaty in the nose of the bullet that causes erratic expansion of the round when it hits a soft target which causes the bullet to tumble through the target rather than create a straight clean shot through it. The only way to describe this (without getting too grizzly) is to imagine a bowling pin going into a big cube of jello. If the bowling pin has a strong spiral on it it will just slice cleanly through the jello... but if it tumbles upon impact it hacks and tears it's way through the jello creating a huge gash as it does. So tumbling bullets in flight = bad, tumbling after impact on a target = good (?).

It was my understanding that this "Snake" in MGS3 was not "the" Snake from 1 and 2... isn't he someone else? Mind you I have not played the game much at all, my wife is playing it and I'm playing HL2 so I don't know much of the story of MGS3 to know if the "rumor" that this snake is indeed Big Boss and not "the" Snake from 1 and 2 is true or not. If he is indeed Big Boss then that makes a whole different person from "the" snake and would explain the difference in personality, if one does indeed exsist. And even if "the" Snake is a clone of this man in this game that does not mean they would have identical personalities either. I just confused myself.

The big thing about Wilson Combat AR's are their barrels... but it should be noted that Rock River Arms also stocks and uses Wilson's barrels in their weapons. I myself have not seen a Wilson AR in person yet but from what I hear they are on par with Rock River weapons... just a tad more expensive and finished in that green "armor tuff" (or whatever they call it) finish.

How did you get a true 16:9 widescreen mode? The game does not have one. Or did you just set your TV to stretch the signal? Edit: and no game supports HD... yet. The best you can hope for is 480p Progressive which only like ten games support.

You are still saying the same thing I am. A brand new USA mag costs $10. A used GI mag built by a name brand company like LeSalle or Adventureline costs about $12... when it costs about $20 to $30 new. My point was not price but the make and quality of the magazine. A USA mag is crap, a name brand GI mag is not. Try to sell a blank floorplate mag to an experienced AR shooter and they will turn it down but offer a box of used GI mags and they will gobble them up. Also your story about the Glock versus the 1911 is nonsequitor... it does not say anything about "better built" it just shows that dumping a weapon in the mud and then trying to shoot it is always a hit or miss thing. I know more 1911's that have operational problems than glocks, those things are so fussy and tempermental that most of the time it requires a gunsmith just to get them to work right out of the box. If anything the 1911 is a perfect example of a better made gun not being all the difference. I know people who own Norino 1911s that shoot better than thousand dollar Wlison Combat 1911's. As I keep saying there are always exceptions to the opinions of others, sometimes what one person thinks is "the best" is not the same as what another person thinks. It's all opinion in the end.

First off make sure of the chambering of your weapon. Domestic .223 Remington and 5.56 NATO are actually different rounds and a weapon chambered in .223 Rem cannot handle 5.56 and is considered "dangerous" to operate it in those chambers. Bushy weapons are all 5.56 NATO chamber which allows both to be used. For thsoe who ask the Domestic .223 Remingon and 5.56 NATO round differ in a few key areas, most having to do with powder power and case thickness and size. They are conventionally lumped together because any milspec weapon chambered in 5.56 can eat .223 but not vice versa. As for actual ammo I tend to only shoot SS-109. I get it locally cheap... well... relatively cheap. As far as performance goes our boys in combat use it so I do too . There are lots of flavors of milspec and penetrating ammo out there in 5.56 but for the most part the strength of the cartridge is in it's chambering and design so a hollowpoint or hollow nose just adds a tiny bit to the weapon. Plus splat rounds are useless for hard target penetration (what the weapon is designed to do) so why buy them in my opinion.

Not trying to convert anyone here, Chowser just asked me for my opinion. My true opinion is that when it comes to AR15's I do not fully trust a weapon I did not build myself from a kit. Now I'm not going to fool anyone into thinking I break out a lathe and a CNC machine and turn my own barrels or anything but every weapon I have built myself from a kit has been a spectacular performer... mostly because in the process of building you can personally assure the quality of the parts and the fittings. When it comes to manufactured arms like Bushies and Colts and etc it is all personal opinion... There are of course good ones and bad ones. Just look at the Toynami MPC. My personal opinion is that they are crap as that was my personal experience and the majority of the feedback I hear about them but there are still people out there that like them. I know a lot of people who just love their Hesse guns and their Oly rifles, but they are in the far minority compared to the satisfied Bushy, Rock, DPMS and Colt owners out there. Heck, I even know a guy who has a freaking home-made lower receiver AR15 that is the buggiest piece of crap I have ever seen... but he built it with his own hands and he loves the heck out of it. It's just too bad many gun stores do not have a "test drive" policy on new weapons... another reason I borrow before build and build before buy when possible. EDIT: Also do not forget that like many other weapons the MAGAZINEs you use with your AR15 affect reliability and performance as much if not more than the actual build of the weapon itself. You can have a precision weapon that tests flawlessly but if you jam a POS $10 USA Mag into it you can expect crap results. Military mags and Colt/Namebrand mags are the only way to go. Stay far away from the thermolds or orlites unless they are brand new and avoid any mag that has a blank floorplate.

Bushie's lower parts springs are all milspec but their buffer springs are heavier than stock to reduce the rate of fire. Just about everyone on the market uses milspec lower parts kits and springs with that you are right. That is why I recommend people buy Wolf spring kits for their lowers to replace the milspec springs. I think we have been talking about the same things. As for your hammer the hammer in the Oly is most likely the same hammer that is in the Bushie... unless your lower for some reason has a 9mm hammer installed by mistake. Edit to add: Lower parts and guts tend to not be the big dividing line in AR15's... the upper receiver tends to be the make or break piece of the weapon. The "big four" mentioned above almost always have the best uppers with the best barrels. The cheaper makers tend to skimp on many important things and also tend to have much sloppier barrel mounting. You can slap a Colt or Bushie upper on a Oly lower however and still make a nice weapon... just dump that oly upper in the trash. Hesse on the other hand is pure crap, everything they make is junk... finding an opinion contrary to that is hard.

Wolfs are common nowadays, I can name about ten places online to get them. A while back you could only get them at gunshows but now they are everywhere. As for the slower rate of fire resulting from the weight of the hammer that is not as true as the cheaper buffer and spring Olympic uses. Bushy buffers are heavier with harder springs to reduce rate of fire, the hammer weight is almost inconsequential on the action... it might lower the RPM by about 50 and when you are talking a weapon that on automatic can reach 950 RPM with a loose buffer it is almost unnoticeable in a semi.

For as much as I love my AR's I have to agree with Mech, they are combat weapons. 5.56 ammo superpenetrates... that is what they designed it to do. For plinkin' guns they are great but for home defense they are hazzardous. That is why I have my trusty G21 and my SPAS 12.

Well, the only thing that can really be said is that when it comes to AR15 type rifles brand name matters. The top teir of makers such as Bushy, Colt, Rock River and DPMS can be counted on to be very reliable and well made (provided you maintain them). Colts are usually at the top of the price meter of those four and DPMS and Rock River usually fight for the lowest priced. I myself own one Colt weapon and one Bushmaster, but I built those two myself so they are sort of "special" and cannot be thought of us indicative of "Stock" quality. I have owned a few stock units in my time and I can say that on par Bushmaster is the best with superior fit and finish along with a very methodical "stick to milspec" build. Colt can get crazy with all the modding they have done to their "match target" rifles and finding replacement parts can be a bear at times. DPMS and Rock are solid makes and I know many officers who have those as trunk guns and they swear by them. I guess when it comes to AR15's the rule of thumb is not neccessarily who to buy but who to avoid. Avoid buying an off-brand or cheap brand weapon. Places like Hesse, Olympic, American Arms and the like are nice and all but many of their parts are made from pot metals and lack chrome finishing or quality workmanship. Also if possible (and if you intend to rely on this weapon in life or death situations such as for work) have a qualified gunsmith or custom builder look it over and install some wolf springs and other "reliability" upgrades to make the guts pound a bit harder. It should also be noted that Bushmaster purchased Professional Ordinance and they now own the "Carbon 15" brand of AR15 clone. They are doing some nice things with those weapons, check out their site for more details.

The M16A4 modular weapons system is exactly the same (functionally) as the original M16A2 except that it now has a flat top receiver and forward RIS system. Much like McBride already mentioned it comes in two flavors, the 3 shot burst M16A3 and the full auto M16A4. Generally these weapons were supposed to be issued to the unit sharpshooter or his support man but now it seems they have become a mainstay for many units no matter what their job. For the most part the weapon is just a gussied up M16A2 flat top, that's about it. They sort of cross-bread the M4 into the M16 line and this is what they got.

Supposedly Mother Green just ordered and supplied her boys with tons of M16A4's a while back... Herstal was totally boofed with the order and it took them a while to fill it but it should be in full effect now.

Holy Crap I just now went back and re-read the posts on this page... ValkyrieTestPilot! Dude! MY dad was also 101 in Vietnam during '67 and '69! What unit was your dad in? They might have actually known each other! My father was Sgt. Anderson, squad leader in Bravo 3/187, primary base camp Phuoc Vinh. He was with them in country from late '67 until early '69 when he was "taken out of commission" on operation Nevada Eagle. I know the Screamers were all over the place in Nam (Airmobility tends to do that) but you never know. He said he knew a lot of guys in other units, mostly NCOs and officers though. As for the whole "quiet" issue you are right that it is very hard to disguise the sound of a platoon or two of grunts marauding through the bush with all their gear but the whole "quiet" thing comes into play on ambushes and in listening posts. My dad used to tell me all the time how the first thing he'd tell all the new guys was to tape all their gear... tape every single metal on metal contact point. The last thing you needed when in a hidden spot waiting for the cong to pop up was an unnatural metal on metal sound giving you away. Things like belts for the M60 were generally laid out beforehand and they tried their hardest to keep them stationary and quiet while lying in wait. Most of the ops my father went on (much like your's I'm assuming) were search and destroy (sweep and clear) or fire brigade missions that involved racing into an area and shooting the crap out of everything. Stealth is not neccessary when the cong hear the choppers coming but when they don't know you were there on a setup ambush that extra dose of quiet was all it took sometimes.

I have yet to see a live action giant robot movie that did not come off as total camp mixed with a bag of suck for good measure... and I've seen a lot of them. I don't know what it is, I can't place why they have all sucked outside of poor story and lack of any real desire by the audience to see the cast... well... do things. In my mind even the best efforts will always turn out like Gunhed, G-Saviour, Robot Wars, or Robot Jox... you know... crappy. I think the concept of giant robots, transforming or otherwise, just needs to remain 2D animated. Even the 3D CGI stuff like the new Transformers shows just lose something that the original had. It's easy to blame bad writing, poor acting and terrible editing but in the end those are just further bullet holes in the chassis of an already weak and dubious vehicle that is the giant robot live action movie. Until someone does one "right" I think most people will shy away from them.

Caliber conversion has been a mainstay of our military for quite a while actually. In WW2 they issued conversion kits so field troops could convert their Greaseguns into 9mm to use captured German ammo. Heck, in Vietnam the US specially made our own AK ammo without markings so SOG teams could use captured weapons with "reliable" ammo. As for "captured weapons" most military commands have a standing rule against it... for various obvious reasons. About the only time the use of a captured weapon in combat is "approved" by command is for specops teams. Funny case in point: when out in the field I myself "captured" an AKSU (which involved walking over to a pile of "left behind" weapons, picking it up, testing the action and slinging it over my shoulder and returning to the humvee) and was yelled at by an officer and immediately "relieved" of the weapon. I did not even have any ammo yet for it and it got yanked.

Seeing as this topic just went hopelessly off track from Droids I might as well state this last piece about Tour of Duty. Paint it Black may or may not have "originally" been the "original" theme song for the first season when it "originally" aired on television in 1987, my memory is also somewhat clouded on that... but I can tell you this much: in 1988 they released several episodes from the first season on VHS tape, two epps per tape three tapes total in the US. Seeing as how I was disappointed with the lack of licensed music on the DVD release and I got tired of people trying to tell me that "that was the way the show was then, man" at work I hunted down and bought all three original 1988 released VHS tapes from eBay, from Amazon and one other source. . Now it can be argued that these tapes were mixed and run off using the "season two" introduction but there is no evidence to support that or evidence to go against it. The song Paint it Back IS is opening theme on all three tapes, all of which show first season episodes. All three also have full period music in them including songs by CCR, the Stones, the Doors and others and not the heinous muzak that clutters up the DVD releases. I can also say that when the show entered syndication in the early '90s it retained the "Paint it Black" intro music for all the episodes which then had the cut down syndication intros. The first true appearance of the new muzak and double beginning/ending synth themes was when I last saw it on television on TNT and the History Channel back in about 1999. I have seen several places say that was done due to the loss of the original muscial licenses which carried over to the DVD releases. Out of all of that the only truths that can be gleened are at some point the show gained "Paint it Black" as it's theme song. That song in the intro was so ingrained in everyone's minds that when the DVDs came out almost everyone who had seen the show previously remarked on how the opening theme was different. I remember watching the show from the first episode in 1987 and I was a little thrown off when PiB was not the opening music the next time I saw the show on TNT. So was it the original original theme that ran for the first season when it originally ran on TV and then it changed to PiB for the second season and the first syndication run only to be "changed back" to it's original form? My educated guess as well as almost everyone else I talk to says no... but with no actual factual proof to go either way without someone who originally worked for the show back when it was first cut comming out of the woodwork and positively saying yes or no there is no way to be 100% dead nuts sure. In the end though everyone remembers Paint it Black and not the crappy synthesyser riff intro from :back in the day" and that many memories cannot be that wrong.

(Deja vu from the ToD thread) PAINT it Black