When talking about rifles shot through are lighter and can use any ammo including AP.
Proposal
Connor Butler
Charles Roberts
True. The only real downside to shoot through is that it can't use HEAT, but that's not an issue here.
Levi Diaz
The only advantage of bullpups is OAL. Every other thing that a bullpup changes is for the worse: balance, trigger weight, malfunction clearing, control operation and general ergos are all worse. There is a theoretical logistics advantage of bullpups for poorfag countries that want one gun to fill two roles, but that's negated by almost every country that adopts a bullpup (I think France and their FAMAS are the one exception) ends up adopting a shorter/longer version of the same gun for different roles anyways.
Jason Sullivan
How?
The trigger will probably be worse, but it doesn't necessarily mean heavier
How? Having to move your hand back a few extra inches compared to standard rifles is really that much effort? And it's not really a matter of effort, it's just training and not being used to it.
Depends on the gun, not really something inherent with the bullpup design, especially not any more now that companies are figuring out all these meme linkages to allow stuff like mag releases and fire selectors to be by the pistol grip like the AR-15. There are standard rifles with shit controls and ergos and bullpups with great controls and ergos.
Right. Fuck off Ian, stop it with this meme, seriously. While some countries that adopt bullpups do also adopt carbine versions or SMGs, these are limited to very, very specific roles, unlike the previous mixture of guns that pretty much every pre-bullpup country had before. Take Britain for example, we used to issue SLRs and Sterlings, with NCOs getting Sterlings and non-machine gunner troops getting SLRs. The SA80 replaced both the Sterling and the SLR, not only simplifying the logistics of having two different weapons, but also the ammo logistics and making the ammo in the squad interchangeable, and no matter how many times Ian McCuckold screeches "ROOOOOOOO, LOOK AT THIS ESOTERIC L22 CARBINE VARIANT THAT IS ONLY USED BY AIRCRAFT CREWS!" will change that.
Ian is a complete fucking retard in this regard, the L22 is not a failure of the SA80 to replace the SMG, since the L22 is not issued in the place of the SMG, it is issued to helicopter crews, artillerymen and that sort of stuff, who would have previously been issued Browning 9mm PISTOLS. An SA80 variant replacing the Browning simplifies logistics of weapons and ammo as mentioned before, without having to give helicopter crewmen 20" barrel rifles in place of their handguns. Ian reeeing about this is almost as autistic if he said "The FAMAS failed because it didn't replace the Mle 1950 pistol".
So the SA80 single-handedly fully replaced both the SLR, the Sterling and additionally, in some roles, even the Browning HP. I don't see how that is a failure, sure the Browning's replacement is a shorter variant, but what do you expect? It's replacing a fucking pistol, and changing a weapon that has 0% parts and ammo interchangeability with the standard rifle to one that has 90+% parts interchangeability AND uses 5.56 is a massive positive, something that could not be done with a standard rifle of the same barrel length.
A bullpup being made into different variants to replace even more weapons that it previously would have been able to is NOT A BAD THING and I don't know why Ian McCommie and his fans think it is. The options are either: Have only a 20" variant, which replaces both battle rifles and SMGs and fits Ian McComrade's esoteric definition of "a successful design" and be stuck with inferior weapon and ammo logistics OR produce a shorter variant as well that further replaces EVEN MORE weapons in different roles that the original design was ever even intended to replace, further simplifying logistics by having much more (but not 100%) compatible parts than before and 100% compatible ammo/mags, but you don't get the approval of some ponytailed faggot youtuber.
tl;dr Bullpups like the SA80 actually successfully do complete their goal of replacing the two battle rifle and SMG roles, the shorter variants are usually replacements for pistols for artillery and helicopter crews, much like the M1 carbine, not failures of the bullpups to replace SMGs.
Only used by SAS/spec ops. 5.56 doesn't suppress too well compared to 9mm, so it's a failure of rifles in general, not bullpups.
Also, like the horsebacked barbarian was explaining, bullpups improve the use of rifle grenades, so OAL is not "the only advantage" like you stated. And even if OAL was "the only advantage", that's a massive deal for 5.56 rifles. OAL was such an issue for you guys that you adopted the M4 to replace the M16, and are now having massive issues with keeping 5.56 above it's velocity threshold for terminal ballistics at range, whereas the marines kept the M16, and are not having any such issues due to having 20" barrels. Bullpups like the AUG, FAMAS and SA80 solved the OAL issue the army was having, while still keeping 20" barrels and effective velocities like the marines.
That's to do with accuracy and armour penetration, not velocity, the L129A1 has a shorter barrel than the SA80, but because it doesn't use .poopoopee, it doesn't matter that it's velocity is lower.
Nathan Cook
Sorry for the autism, but Ian's retardation surrounding the L22 pisses me off to no end, the 20" SA80 DID fully replace the SLR and SMG and was completely successful in that (other than the rifle itself being shit, but hey), the L22 is an ADDITIONAL SA80 replacement for pistols, the SA80 was never intended to replace pistols. I don't see how Ian is blind to this. Or maybe it's just Komrade Kasarda filling his head with anti-bullpup propaganda.
Caleb Hill
Also forgot to mention:
The whole "replace muh battle rifle and SMG" argument regarding bullpups is a moot point anyway, because the whole philosophy of replacing both SMGs and BRs is part of the design philosophy behind fucking ASSAULT RIFLES in general, not fucking bullpups. Hell, you yanks tried doing it with the fucking M14 and the Russians successfully did it with the AK, which replaced both the PPS-43 and the SVT/AVT-40/SKS. Just because the Russians adopted the AKS-74u (which was also intended to replace pistols in the hands of helicopter crews, exactly the same as the L22), doesn't mean that the entire concept of assault rifles is retarded and we should just go back to BRs and SMGs.
God I fucking hate Ian
Sage for fucking tripleposting, Jesus Christ
Juan Howard
Seems pointless, you might as well make the so-called "pirate pistol" used by the SEALS standard issue. No complicated engineering needed for a whole new thing, cheap as hell, standard with 40mm grenades.
Ayden Reed
Holy shit you are actually right.
Brayden Rivera
Now add to this that intermediate cartridges have to be supported by full-powered ones, especially if they are fired from glorified submachineguns. And now the US Army wants to give every squad leader a Sig Sauer P320 for reasons.
All of these could be replaced by a single bullpup and rifle grenades, even without adopting a new cartridge.
Jaxson Nguyen
Wouldn't be an issue if Churchill let us fucking adopt .280 instead of sucking Yankee cock and adopting .30-06 short
But the Russian/British system of having 5.45/5.56 for AR/SMG/BR roles and 7.62x54R/7.62x51 for GPMG and DMR roles is pretty good too, but it only works if you adopt a non-meme round like 5.45 or a rifle with a 20" barrel to take advantage of 5.56