The PDW debate

[Tony Williams]

A new article posted on my website, looking at the argument over ammunition for Personal Defence Weapons: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/PDWs.htm

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)

[Durandal]

A new article posted on my website, looking at the argument over ammunition for Personal Defence Weapons: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/PDWs.htm

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)

Interesting article.

I also think that the manufacturers of the newer PDW rounds had penetration of vehicle side panels as well as body armor. I have always seen the role of the PDW, especially the P90 more as a security weapon for body guards and security than an M1 carbine style replacement sidearm with a little more range.

Now, I know the MP7 is being used in the M1 carbine style roll as a full blown military style sidearm for vehicle crews and officers, so this sort of goes contrary to my view of the weapon.

What is also interesting is the number of PDW/subgun out of Russia that tackle the same issue since the early 90s...a whole slew of them.

Anyways, keep up the good work Anthony.

If I might make one suggestion though...rotate that photo of the rounds with the shadows at the bottom of each cartridge so they are pointing up rather than to the right. It'll be more esthetically pleasing...or edit the shadows out of the image.

[DeltaWhisky58]

I find the whole subject of PDWs interesting, especially in light of our Army having adopted the L22A1 for AFV crews despite the MoD having bought the MP7 for the MoD Police.

I have to admit favouring the MP7 over the P90 which IMO is over complicated, and I do see it as an ideal weapon for AFV/vehicle crews, aircrew, MPs and other troops not requiring a full blown infantry weapon such as the L85A2 or L110A1 in the case of Brits.

I'd certainly rather have an MP7 as my personal weapon than a pistol of any type.

[Royal]

I'd certainly rather have an MP7 as my personal weapon than a pistol of any type.

I'm with you there - other than for concealment and the pistol and Baby K combo rules there.

[tehllama]

Well, on the other side, I think there's a really big question that needs raising about stopping power -- the nemesis of any PDW cartidge. I realize it's not at all what the PDW's are designed for, but I can forsee that a 4.6x30mm SMG/Pistol combination universally issued is going to receive dismal reviews when it comes to bringing down targets in CQC, which, imho, a pistol needs to be capable of.

I already know that brass and penny pinchers are going to try and make this a reality, and while something like the MP7 is a fantastic crew personal weapon, I still think there's a role for a handgun caliber pistol in any case where dismounted fighting in urban terrain is a possibilty -- a possibility that will likely be overlooked to the peril of soldiers on the ground.

[Durandal]

Well, on the other side, I think there's a really big question that needs raising about stopping power -- the nemesis of any PDW cartidge. I realize it's not at all what the PDW's are designed for, but I can forsee that a 4.6x30mm SMG/Pistol combination universally issued is going to receive dismal reviews when it comes to bringing down targets in CQC, which, imho, a pistol needs to be capable of.

I already know that brass and penny pinchers are going to try and make this a reality, and while something like the MP7 is a fantastic crew personal weapon, I still think there's a role for a handgun caliber pistol in any case where dismounted fighting in urban terrain is a possibilty -- a possibility that will likely be overlooked to the peril of soldiers on the ground.

Personally, I think stopping power is overrated. Most people, when they get hit by ANY caliber of small arms fire are not worried about making contact with the person that shot them, be it a .22 LR or a .338 Lapua Mag...

I think the big question is that, IF this is designed for security, like many PDWs are promoted, is there a fear about over penetration?

[Kocur]

Hello everyone!

I have to admit favouring the MP7 over the P90 which IMO is over complicated.

Considering principle of action it is quite contrary ;) . P90 is simple blowback operated, while MP7 is gas operated, in fact its bolt carrier and bolt are quite similar to those of G36, differing in details.

[Catch22]

Hello everyone!

Considering principle of action it is quite contrary ;) . P90 is simple blowback operated, while MP7 is gas operated, in fact its bolt carrier and bolt are quite similar to those of G36, differing in details.

Hej Kocurze :-)

Ok, but for the end user principle of action is less important than the effects. So consider general operation as well. And there P90 sucks somewhat as I see it. Anybody here got experience on stoppage drill with it? Maybe some Cypriots or Belgians?

[Kocur]

Hej Kocurze :-)

Ok, but for the end user principle of action is less important than the effects. So consider general operation as well.


Oh, I agree :) Its just me - Im internals guy ;)

[DeltaWhisky58]

Hello everyone!

Considering principle of action it is quite contrary ;) . P90 is simple blowback operated, while MP7 is gas operated, in fact its bolt carrier and bolt are quite similar to those of G36, differing in details.

Just take a look at the magazine and feed mechanism of the P90 and then tell me it's not over-complicated. Turning the rounds through 90° before feeding!

[Kocur]

Yup, sounds bad, but there are no additional moving parts in the magazine (compared to usual one) to achieve that! And once the round is aligned with barrel in the magazine lips, everything else works like usual.

[bluffcove]

Still sounds like a lot of "Ifs" and "buts." to attain a very similair result.

[Hispeed1]

The FN P90 strips down to like 5 parts. It feels very ergonomic. The MP-7 feels weird in my hand. Don't get me wrong, H&K is a very good firearms manufacturer. U.S. Secret Service is using P90's.

[Hydro]

This may seem like a bit of a weird concern, but what I personally dislike about the P90 is the apparent inability to visually check the chamber due to the downward ejection. This isn't so much a concern with unloading the weapon, as I presume you can see through the magazine port, however could this be a concern regarding stoppages?

[bluffcove]

It might well strip to five parts but there are certainly more than five moving parts in it!

Im making assumpitions but i presume that SS operators dont subject their individual weapons to the bashing that drivers do in the field for weeks on end.

[DeltaWhisky58]

I'd be prepared to put money on the P90 not lasting too well under field conditions.

OK, we know it has been adopted by various specialist agencies and CT teams etc. - usually in relatively small numbers, but has anyone been daft enough to adopt the P90 where it will actually be worked hard in hard conditions.

I've always been impressed by FN weapons, so many of which have proved themselves beyond compare - FAL, MAG58, Hi-Power etc. - but have they gone a step too far with the P90 and it's 5.56mm stablemate?

[bluffcove]

Rifles that do work well in the field (in terms of maintenance not accuracy). Are generally simple with working parts designed to very loose tolerances.
the P-90 isnt exactly simple. and its tolerances are amazingly finite. Not the sort of thing to throw in a side bin or a turret. or bounce around the floor of a vehicle day in day out for the duration of a tour.

[dacanadianbomb]

The PDW issue is very interesting in my eyes.
I cant quite wrap my head around the whole concept of making a requirement that the Rifle/SMG/Pistol has to be easier to handle and fire, due to the lack of training time.
To me as a outsider with no .mil experience, this seems like a policy falicy .
Modify the weapon to mask the mistake.Any troop with inadequate weapons training will not use their weapon efficiently.
If your support troops are working in the same AO as your combat troops, why wouldnt they require a weapon with ballistic capabilities and reach equal to the fighting troops ?

Possibly the requirements where built on a vision where there would be clearly defined front lines , instead of like Iraq where the battlefield is everywhere.

If you are going to need a weapon for support troops,and you think that a SMG in a pistol caliber is not within the neccessary specs, why would you try to use a intermediate solution?.Why not then immediately step up to a 5,56 cartridge ?.My logic makes me think that ...If you cant accurately reach the target you'r never going to overpenetrate it.

Or am I simple not seeing the bigger picture because I just have never been a soldier and am not an experienced shooter?

[Vandervahn]

I still believe that the P90 just doesnt fulfill the requirements of a PDW... yes, it is smaller and lighter than most assault rifles, but it still is a hindrance to carry around. Additionally the magazines are too bulky to be stored without getting in the way, apart from their reported tendency to jam upon falling to the ground.

IMO it is nothing else than a regular SMG with dedicated armor piercing ammunition. I also think that the very high line-of-sight, which gets even higher when the (allegedly not very good) standard aimpoint is replaced with a rail+optic, is not very favourable for a weapon that has to be used at <200m, and in direct defense to a threat to one´s life.

The SS190 might have the better ballistic features, but when we are evaluating PDW concepts we also have to think about how it is used, and that is as backup weapon to troops that usually perform a very different task. As such I think the pistol-on-steroids concept like the the MP7 or SAAB-Bofors CBJ is a better approach because they can be carried without much more effort than a regular pistol. To put it simply: the P90 is an extraordinary compact weapon - but the MP7 "isnt there" unless you need it ;) .... the possibility to carry the pistol-like PDWs on the man in almost all situations is a definitive requirement for the whole issue. Another thing to think about is that Bullpups are generally less than optimal to be used from, lets say, the hatches of a destroyed tank.

Lastly, I think that the MP7 has already more or less proven its superiority as a PDW, as it has already been deployed to regular units less than 4 years after its introduction with various more groups voicing interest in the weapon, while the P90 with a developmental lead of 15 years still is (and mostly likely will remain) only a toy for the high-speed D3lt4-faction.





Originally Posted by DeltaWhisky58
I have to admit favouring the MP7 over the P90 which IMO is over complicated.

Hello everyone!

Considering principle of action it is quite contrary ;) . P90 is simple blowback operated, while MP7 is gas operated, in fact its bolt carrier and bolt are quite similar to those of G36, differing in details.
But like almost all bullpups the P90 is "remote controlled", meaning that there is no direct connection between the trigger/safety and the action in the buttstock.

[Durandal]

I'd be prepared to put money on the P90 not lasting too well under field conditions.

OK, we know it has been adopted by various specialist agencies and CT teams etc. - usually in relatively small numbers, but has anyone been daft enough to adopt the P90 where it will actually be worked hard in hard conditions.

I've always been impressed by FN weapons, so many of which have proved themselves beyond compare - FAL, MAG58, Hi-Power etc. - but have they gone a step too far with the P90 and it's 5.56mm stablemate?

x2 on the harsh conditions.

And, let's be honest, less weapons means less ammo, and simply increasing your logistical footprint.

[DeltaWhisky58]

OK, cards on the table here - I've never handled the P90 or its 5.56mm stablemate for real, but I did handle an airsoft replica - IMO is was bulky, clumsy, uncomfortable and I didn't like the handling - but that is purely a personal view.

The MP7 - and I admit bias here - is well designed/laid out, points well, balances well and is IMO the more sensible option in every was, especially because of its versatility and compact nature.

I repeat my earlier view - the major weak point of the P90 system is the ridiculous magazine design, why reinvent the wheel - or rather why incorporate a wheel!

[Durandal]

I have handled an P90 and its amazing how heavy they are...unloaded. 50 rounds 5.7 is not light either.

[Kocur]

It might well strip to five parts but there are certainly more than five moving parts in it!

Apart from trigger mech parts, P90 has one moving part, i.e. bolt, and that is the beauty of blowback principle of action (not that there are no cons about it!).
In MP7, again without trigger mech, you would find moving: piston, bolt carrier and bolt, as it is gas operated, locked weapon.

P90 designers took approach of blowback operation for its ultimate
simplicity, but as it is bolt inertia only, that keeps case in the chamber from moving back too much until pressure dropps, bolt has to be quite heavy and large, which also affects dimensions and weight of receiver.

MP7 designers goal apparently was low weight, so they used locked operation approach, where bolt is rigidly locked behind barrel to keep case in the chamber, so its weight is irrelevant, but OTOH it takes more parts to operate the weapon.
Also since MP7 designers decided to use AR-18-like bolt carrier/bolt design, it stripps like those of M16, i.e. you will have separated bolt carrier, bolt, operating pin, firing pin and firing pin retaining pin (lol).

In result P90 is larger and heavier than MP7, but the latter is more complicated and, technically speaking, more expensive to produce. But since todays gas operated designs are very reliable and by nature are lighter than blowback ones I prefer MP7 design, since PDWs are supposed to be SECONDARY weapon, i.e. as unnoticeable for operator as possible until used. I wonder what is actual cost of both?


But like almost all bullpups the P90 is "remote controlled", meaning that there is no direct connection between the trigger/safety and the action in the buttstock.

True, but that may be just a rod or preferably (to prevent any binding) a U-crossection bar between trigger before grip and lever acting like trigger in trigger mech module/compartment.

[DeltaWhisky58]

Surely there is no point in discussing the simplicity of the P90's action without also covering the rather odd and complex feed mechanism.

How could anything as heavy/cumbersom as the P90 be carried "un-noticed" - it can't be holstered unlike the MP7 and is much, much bulkier.

[Little J]

Tony, good article. Is that picture of the 4.6, 5.7, 9mm to scale? If so will add it to my collection (good for reference).

[Kocur]

Surely there is no point in discussing the simplicity of the P90's action without also covering the rather odd and complex feed mechanism.

Odd - yes, perhaps. Complex - not, as there is no "wheel" or any other moving part in the magazine operated by the bolt. Its just shape of the ramp under lips, that makes rounds rotate about 90deg under pressure of magazine spring. It can be seen in the video http://www2.deviant.org/~deviant/artv-57family-clip.mpg (http://www2.deviant.org/~deviant/artv-57family-clip.mpg)from 2:54 on.
(Link from http://fivesevenforum.com/forums/archive/index.php?t-367.html)

[JoaMei]

Hello everyone!

Considering principle of action it is quite contrary ;) . P90 is simple blowback operated, while MP7 is gas operated, in fact its bolt carrier and bolt are quite similar to those of G36, differing in details.

Its amazing that people always mention the P90 when talking about PDWs. It is a nice tactical submachine gun but does not fulfill any of the main requirements:

-It cant be carried like a Pistol.

-It cant be fired one handed like a pistol.

The P90 is NOT a PDW, even while FN tries to convince its customers to believe the opposite.
They call it PDW since the MP7 is on the Market...

[Doug97]

OK, cards on the table here - I've never handled the P90 or its 5.56mm stablemate for real, but I did handle an airsoft replica - IMO is was bulky, clumsy, uncomfortable and I didn't like the handling - but that is purely a personal view.
You can get an airsoft F2000?

Doesn't the advanced feed machanism mean you get 50 rounds per mag ... quite useful when the stopping power of the round is low?

[Adam Wilhelm]

They call it PDW since the MP7 is on the Market...

No, the P90 was out years before the MP7.

[JoaMei]

No, the P90 was out years before the MP7.

I never said something else... :cantbeli:

I said they call it a "PDW" since the MP7 has hit the Market. And the P90 has none of the features of a PDW.

[Vandervahn]

No, the P90 was out years before the MP7.
Lets highlight the important bit of JoaMei´s post:


Originally Posted by JoaMei
They call it PDW since the MP7 is on the Market...

Of course the P90 is older. In fact it is even older than the (NATO-) concept of a PDW. But FN was quick to promote the P90 as a PDW while in fact it was developed as a tactical armour-piercing SMG. It is compact to be easy to handle in a firefight, not to be carried around by officers, vehicle crews or engineers.

I however think that "PDW" characterisation by FN has been around longer than the MP7.


Edit: Oops, too slow.

[Kocur]

Hello everyone!

Considering principle of action it is quite contrary ;-) . P90 is simple blowback operated, while MP7 is gas operated, in fact its bolt carrier and bolt are quite similar to those of G36, differing in details.
Its amazing that people always mention the P90 when talking about PDWs. It is a nice tactical submachine gun but does not fulfill any of the main requirements:

-It cant be carried like a Pistol.

-It cant be fired one handed like a pistol.

The P90 is NOT a PDW, even while FN tries to convince its customers to believe the opposite.
They call it PDW since the MP7 is on the Market...

woot I wonder why did you quote me instead of Tony's article? ;)


I said they call it a "PDW" since the MP7 has hit the Market. And the P90 has none of the features of a PDW.

Well in 1993 NATO's "Ad-Hoc PDW Working Group" required two weapons: a pistol AND a smg. The latter was to weight less than 3kg, have 20+ rounds and be carried without use of hands, not to mention CRISAT plate penetration at 150m. The weapon to be fired and carried like pistol was to be, well, the PDW pistol, not PDW smg.
Lets see now: P90 does penetrate said target, weights 2,68kg empty and 3kg with 50rds magazine and seems to me carring it without use of hands is doable. So using PDW name for P90 is valid in light of the NATO requirement, even if not by other (private?) definitons.

[bluffcove]

Ive been misquoted.

[DeltaWhisky58]

Surely the original term "PDW" came from Heckler & Koch before even the MP7 was on the scene - the original "PDW" was a version of the MP5k


You can get an airsoft F2000?

Doesn't the advanced feed machanism mean you get 50 rounds per mag ... quite useful when the stopping power of the round is low?

I don't know, my handling experience was with an airsoft P90 - the shape is of course very similar. surely an airsoft is and airsoft apart from the shape.

As for the magazine - 50 rds is fine, but only if the feed system is reliable, I've read of many problems with the complicated P90 magazine system. I wouldn't want to trust it in field conditions - OK when guarding Da Prez, but that doesn't happen much out in the boonies for days on end does it?

[Adam Wilhelm]

Surely the original term "PDW" came from Heckler & Koch before even the MP7 was on the scene - the original "PDW" was a version of the MP5k


Your´re right, my bad.

However...


Quote from Guns.ru
The HK MP-7 Personal Defence Weapon (PDW) is a member of a brand new class of small arms, called Personal Defence Weapons. The PDWs are intended, as name implies, to be a defensive sidearms for second-line troops, vehicle crews and other military personnel who normally not issued with assault rifles. Previously, these troops were issued with pistols or submachine guns, but proliferation of body armour in recent years made those guns ineffective. The first firearm, intended as PDW and offered in that class was belgian-made P-90 by FN

[Tim Nice But Dim]

A new article posted on my website, looking at the argument over ammunition for Personal Defence Weapons: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/PDWs.htm

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)

That's a great website you've got Tony, thanks.

[JoaMei]

Your´re right, my bad.

However...

I disagree with the guns.ru comment too, the P90 is a good armor piercing tactical SMG, but still in no way a PDW.

[DeltaWhisky58]

Surely the original term "PDW" came from Heckler & Koch before even the MP7 was on the scene - the original "PDW" was a version of the MP5k


Your´re right, my bad.

However...


Quote from Guns.ru
The HK MP-7 Personal Defence Weapon (PDW) is a member of a brand new class of small arms, called Personal Defence Weapons. The PDWs are intended, as name implies, to be a defensive sidearms for second-line troops, vehicle crews and other military personnel who normally not issued with assault rifles. Previously, these troops were issued with pistols or submachine guns, but proliferation of body armour in recent years made those guns ineffective. The first firearm, intended as PDW and offered in that class was belgian-made P-90 by FN

Not quite ... ... The term "PDW" definitely originated with H&K way before FN's P90 ... ...



The PDW/MP7
Newest Innovation
Cal. 4.6mm x 30

http://www.hkpro.com/pdwmain.jpg



It goes without saying that the engineers at HK are not content to rest on their laurels. There is much under development whose information will only be released to the public perhaps years from now. Latest to become from HK, and first seen here in detail is the "PDW." PDW stands for 'Personal Defense Weapon.' This unfortunately is going to be a bit confusing for the student of HK, because this is the third firearm by HK to have 'PDW''as either all or part of its name. The others are: MP5K-PDW (http://www.hkpro.com/mp5k.htm), and the prototype G11 PDW. (http://www.hkpro.com/g11pdw.htm)

What appears upon first look to be a weapon design to compete with the FN series P90 in 5.7mm x 28, the PDW promises to be a huge improvement on that system. Though no one could fault the engineers at Fabrique Nationale for their vision, the P90 has one reported serious flaw. If you drop a partially loaded magazine, or the gun with a partially loaded magazine, rounds will go flying, get disoriented in the magazine and seriously jam the mechanism.

The heavy use of polymer again shows the design direction that the HK engineers are taking. With a conventional 20 round magazine in the pistol grip or an optional 40 round magazine that extends below the gun, one of the most amazing aspects of the gun is its size, or lack thereof. It is only slightly larger than a SOCOM pistol!

Sporting a retractable shoulder stock and a very small heads up display sight reminiscent of the Eotech/Bushnell Holosight, the PDW also has a T-shaped cocking handle somewhat like the M16 series.

HKPro website on MP7 PDW (http://www.hkpro.com/pdw.htm)

[Adam Wilhelm]

Ok ok... you b*stards... i surrender. :)

[DeltaWhisky58]

You are clearly a gentleman Sir - I will stand down my second, and will no longer need to challenge you to PDWs at dawn! ;-)

[Adam Wilhelm]

Gentlemen... draw your PDW! p-)

[Kocur]

I disagree with the guns.ru comment too, the P90 is a good armor piercing tactical SMG, but still in no way a PDW.

Well, P90 is a PDW according to NATO. What is a PDW according to you? For its just a matter of definition that one uses, nothing more.

[DeltaWhisky58]

Surely any weapon that is intended solely for the defense of the user, and not for offensive action could be considered to be a PDW. If NATO choses to classify the FN P90 as a PDW who are we to argue?

When is a PDW not a PDW - when it is used offensively, surely?

... ... when the P90 is used by the USSS, it is a PDW - a Presidential Defensive Weapon

[JoaMei]

I'll try and dig it out but i have a photo somewere of USSS CAT/ERT using a mix of P90s & mp5s so maybe they have a level of personal choice, also would the Micro UZI be counted as a PDW ?

The Micro UZI fits in general to the PDW concept but lacks the armor piercing.

[Kocur]

Shouldnt we limit discussion to the weapons chambered for rounds of pistol-like muzzle energy but advanced anti personal armour capabilities, i.e. leaving aside weapons chambered for classic pistol rounds...? I mean considering subject of Tony's article, which is not about small smgs, like MP5K or Micro Uzi?

[Hydro]

Micro Uzi could very well be classed as a PDW as it seems to be rather limited in offensive application.

[DeltaWhisky58]

There are clearly other weapons also in this category - the H&K MP5kPDW; Steyr TMP/B&T MP9; BXP; PM-63; PM-94; Uzis various and even toe Vz.61 Skorpion to name but a few.

All are compact SMGs which fit into the PDW role - some have modern ammo with a penetrative capability, some do not, some are new, some bo way back, but all fit into the Personal Defence Weapon role to a greater or smaller degree.

This is a debate which could go on ad infinitum without resolution ... ... woot

[Hydro]

This is a debate which could go on ad infinitum without resolution ... ... woot


MP.Net in a nutshell :)

[Vandervahn]

Dont forget that an important difference of the PDW definition is the capapbility to penetrate body armor at 150m !

[DeltaWhisky58]

Dont forget that an important difference of the PDW definition is the capapbility to penetrate body armor at 150m !

The NATO definition, yes - but not THE definition.

[Tony Williams]

Tony, good article. Is that picture of the 4.6, 5.7, 9mm to scale? If so will add it to my collection (good for reference).

Yes it is. You may wish to note that the 5.7mm round is the AP loading.

FWIW I have handled (but not fired) the MP7 and the P90 one after the other. I entirely agree that the MP7 is more easily carried, although still a lot bulkier than a pistol. However, I found the P90 to be much more comfortable to hold and aim (that fat, rounded stock makes for a nice cheek weld). It looks tail-heavy, but in fact balances nicely on the pistol grip. It is also instantly ready to fire, without the need to extend the stock and pull down the forward handgrip. I'm not saying that one is better than the other, just that they have different pros and cons.

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)

[ClydeFrog]

From speaking to people in the BW and outside that have fired the MP7 the common consensus is "it's good, but stick with the MP5"... but then that's not really a comparable weapon.

The big problem with the PDW can be seen in this very thread: Everyone has his own definition...

[bluffcove]

Newbury is guarded by guys with MP7's they made the decision to move over from MP5's a few years ago.

[DeltaWhisky58]

Newbury is guarded by guys with MP7's they made the decision to move over from MP5's a few years ago.

I assume from this that "Newbury" is actually Aldermaston. This establishment is guarded by MoD Police, who officially adopted the MP7 last year. They did not however completely move over from the MP5 which in fact they still use alongside the MP7, but for different roles.

Pix of MoD-plod with MP7 (http://www.defenceimagedatabase.mod.uk/fotoweb/Grid.fwx?archiveId=5004&SF_LASTSEARCH=&SF_FIELD1_GROUP=1&SF_GROUP1_BOOLEAN=and&SF_FIELD1_MATCHTYPE=all&SF_FIELD1=MP7&SF_GROUP1_FIELD=)

Pix of MoD-Plod with MP5 (http://www.defenceimagedatabase.mod.uk/fotoweb/Grid.fwx?archiveId=5004&SF_LASTSEARCH=MP7&SF_FIELD1_GROUP=1&SF_GROUP1_BOOLEAN=and&SF_FIELD1=mp5&SF_SEARCHINRESULT=0)

MoD Police adopt a New Generation firearm (http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/DC3C0C9D-2561-4889-9738-628F644462C0/0/TT122MP7.pdf)

[bluffcove]

They have made it single shot, not even Semi automatic, what a joke!

My mate works at Aldermarston (not Mod Plod) but lives in Newbury, Im not that Au fait with Britains Nuclear deterrent and presumed they were close enough to be one and the same location.

[DeltaWhisky58]

They have made it single shot, not even Semi automatic, what a joke!


They mean semi-auto only, not actually single shot - most UK Police (incl. MoD-Plod) H&K weapons are restricted to semi-auto, MP5; G36; HK33; MP7 etc.

[akmarksman]

OK, cards on the table here - I've never handled the P90 or its 5.56mm stablemate for real, but I did handle an airsoft replica - IMO is was bulky, clumsy, uncomfortable and I didn't like the handling - but that is purely a personal view.

The MP7 - and I admit bias here - is well designed/laid out, points well, balances well and is IMO the more sensible option in every was, especially because of its versatility and compact nature.

I repeat my earlier view - the major weak point of the P90 system is the ridiculous magazine design, why reinvent the wheel - or rather why incorporate a wheel!

I'll agree with you on the MP7 handling..it seems more like a oversized pistol..so those that were trained in the handing of the M9 beretta..might handle the MP7 under stress better.The gas piston operation seems more reliable and we're not talking 1,000yd accuracy here...but i think in certain situations(armored insurgents) a couple of head pops would take them down while having the stock and folding foregrip deployed in a CQB/Courtyard instance..

[DeltaWhisky58]

I'll agree with you on the MP7 handling..it seems more like a oversized pistol..so those that were trained in the handing of the M9 beretta..might handle the MP7 under stress better.The gas piston operation seems more reliable and we're not talking 1,000yd accuracy here...but i think in certain situations(armored insurgents) a couple of head pops would take them down while having the stock and folding foregrip deployed in a CQB/Courtyard instance..

Yes, plus the added advantage/knock-down effect of a well aimed burst as and when necessary, plus the ability to use various sighting options.