Why not just give every soldier a .22lr minigun? NATO statistics show that more bullets downrange is better then bigger bullets, that's why they switched from .45ACP to 9mm for pistols. Miniguns are normally heavy but one built for .22lr would weigh only as much as a rifle. Plus the bullet size for .22lr nearly matches 5.56mm, that's why you can convert AR-15s to fire it. Even though a single .22lr bullet lacks stopping power, if you're able to fire 10 of them in the time it takes for a regular rifle to fire 1 you're more likely to score a critical hit.
>>62087443How is the ballistical curve of the .22lr round compared to a .223 round?How would ensure the target acquisition with a minigun? With an Auspex like the Stormtroopers of 40k?Also seems like a huge logistical strain going from ~120+ rounds of ammo to 4k per soldier.
>>620874585.56 round is 3,200 feet/second and .22lr is 1,240 feet/second. As for logistics, keep in mind that .22lr is much smaller then 5.56. Since it's rimfire, it would probably be easy for a machine to sort them, you could ship them out like bulk peanuts and feed them into belts in the field using a sorting machine.
>>62087443the better question is why doesn't nato have a billion huge capacity 5.7 submachine guns
>>62087443going by your logic, we might as well be using 2mm kolibri22lr can be easily armored against, but 5.56 goes through tons of shit, simple as that
>>62087443Probably fine for suppressive fire or room clearing(if you increase the case dimensions a bit to shove more powder in to increase the range a bit) but you need something with a bit more effective range than 140 meters for most military applications, since the range of most engagements is between 300 and 500 meters.
>>62087443The real question is why the Microgun didn't take off.
>>62087443if projectile size, speed, range, and penetration doesn't matter and it's just "more projectiles down range wins gunfights then" NATO should simply switch to airsoft.
.22lr is so feeble that it would be possible to issue armor with total coverage armor. Not a great situation for a military rifle cartridge.Plus the range of .22lr is so anemic compared to even 5.56 that hitting anything is going to be a struggle outside of urban/CQC distances.
issue these. way more light projectiles down range per second.
Problems you'd run into:>weapons system too heavy, to combat overheating>can't penetrate targets>extreme bullet arc>ammo carry weight increases>lose the power to single fire, enemy always shoots you first,>friendly fire, because nobody can hear anything>opfor just starts using movable cover
>>62087443>NATO statistics show that more bullets downrange is better then bigger bulletsfuck off nigger
>>62087443Because 22lr has dogshit ballistics, penetration and reliability.
>>62087443
>>62087443>giving a marine something with that many moving partslmaolol
>>62089111>high speed chasesgod I'd love to see one of these things being used to bring down a speeding car.
>>62089111>riot controlO_O
>>62089224>Just spray some niggas with 1200 rpm lol
>>62089255
>>62089111>.22>anti-sniper
>>62089224>fill entire drum with 220 rounds of ratshot>disperse crowdYes.
>>62089111I need a brace of these forward mounted on my car for use on the roadways. Maybe one on the hood and one on the roof so I can engage shitboxes and megatrucks.
>>62089208.22 Metal Storm
>>62087443>Muh NATO statisticsBig guns > Small guns.Simple as.
>>62089208imagine getting your dick jammed in the 22.lr minigun
>>62089288funny but 22ratshot does not have the power to cycle, every autoloader ive ever put it into it doesnt even move the slide.as far as 22.lr machineguns go I think you probably even need considerably higher powder ratio than some off the shelf bulk junk, cci minimum to make them run consistantly
>>62090716just occured to me that you could actually do that with the 22 chaingun considering itt doesnt need the blowback to operate
>>62087458Targeters, not auspex
>>62087443How much does the clip hold?
>>62087443Solid brass .17 mach 2 or .17 HMR.
>>62087523>.22lr is 1,240 feet/second>he doesn't know
>>62087613this, p90 is peak performance
>>620919351,700-1,240=100 fpsA measly extra 100 feet per second is nothing.
>>62092131Uhh...check your calculations anon.
>>62087613>>62092003Because it really is quite weak compared to something like anything in 5.56 and the capacity doesn't make up for the reduced range and terminal effectiveness.I like the P90, I like high cap mags, I like low recoil, and I like ambidextrous bullpups, but the P90 is for non-combat troops to spray bullets as they run away. Now a forward ejecting bullpup rifle in 5.56 without a long turn bolt and carrier and with an attached automatic grenade launcher would be pretty damn sweet, but that will probably never happen.
