I have updated and considerably extended my article on Personal Defence Weapon ammunition, to include the choice of weapons as well. See: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/PDWs.htm

Good article.

Chinese and Russians were limited to 9x18mm because that was generally considered the best that you could safely get out of a blow-back pistol. It might be worth mentioning that all the new Chinese and Russian designs are recoil operated.

USCG issues the Sig P229DAK in .40S&W, but they are a law enforcement unit first, and a military unit second.

USMC RECON is one of the last US units that holdout with the 1911A1 (in lightly modified form), and has no desire to switch to 9mm.

- John

Considering the old Russian 7.62x25 will pierce a US steel helmet, you would think they would improve that round for both pistol and PDW, which reminds me I need to buy a Norinco Tork ($175.00, $200 with an extra barrel in 9mm)

What are the 7.62x25 terminal effects like?


I just ordered a CX-4 Berretta Storm carbine in .40cal, that's going to be my PDW.

I put a magazine through a 9mm version of one of those the other week. Very nice! Particularly well suited to one of those very compact 1x holographic red dot optical sights.

Exactly my plan, also due to a sqiggle bit in the law, I can use 10rd "pistol" mags in it as opposed to the rifle 5rd requirement.

Depends. Russians tended to have differing ammo specifications in the same caliber depending on the weapon type they would be used in. MG loadings were generally considered the hottest. Followed by SMG loadings. And finally, pistol loadings. It is generally considered not a good idea to fire MG loadings from a rifle for instance (I owned a Nagant M44 and had to be careful when I was buying surplus 7.62X54R).

From a pistol, the 7.62x25 could get up to about 1500 fps (not too shabby). Whereas from SMG like the PPSh-41 it could go much higher. Lethality was reportedly very good, but when you got thousands of screaming Ivans firing 900rpm from the hip and killing every Nazi-bastard in sight (as many Soviet infantry divisions were equipped to do), terminal ballistics becomes less of a major study issue. It was also considered a major improvement over the hopeless 7.62x38 Nagant.

- John

7.62x25mm will also penetrate kevlar helmets and armour less than Lv III.

Apparently the US Army is exploring the PDW concept further:


http://www.fbo.gov/spg/USA/USAMC/DAAE30/W1.../SynopsisR.html

From the spec, that's going to be a snub nosed 5.56. S/F....Ken M

If that's the case, the muzzle blast should be deadly by itself.

Yeah, they learned that lesson with the XM177 "Colt Commando".

What's old is now new again.

- John

An interesting spec, it's different from what the army guy said not that long ago, when the calibre wasn't specified.

Requiring 5.56x45 ammo simplifies the choice a lot, but also raises problems of muzzle blast and recoil in a short, light weapon; not really what you want for soldiers whose primary job, by definition, isn't shooting guns.

As things stand, the Tavor C would be my choice. The pic below is from the IWI site. The new US bullpup whose name I forget looks promising, but is very light and would need a lot of testing to be considered as a military arm.

Blast I can see being an issue, a suppressor would be the proper way to deal with it, but cans add a reliability factor. As for recoil, it's a damned 5.56, they don't have recoil to speak of, reach down and grab hold for God's sake! I've trained 13YO girls that weigh 100lbs soaking wet to shoot the M16 and we used to start jr shooters on the M1 Garand at age 16.

The one nice thing about the 5.56 is (potentially) the low cost of ammo for training. Which will largely solve all these perceived issues that cause the unenlightened to suggest solutions in search of problems such as the 4.6x30 and 5.7x28 and other non-sense. S/F....Ken M

I get the impression that recruits with no experience of firearms seem to be more recoil sensitive these days, and the guys+gals for whom a PDW is meant won't be getting much range time. Clearly, it will be more of an issue the lighter the gun that is acquired.

Jati-Matic!

Tony, a 5.56 hardly has noticeable recoil in a bolt action - a gas action ought to have even less perceived recoil.

Ken, putting a suppressor, even a wrap around one, on a 5.56 that's meant to be compact is going to significantly add to length, weight and bulk.

Let us compare some data : weapon/length with stpck folded, weight

HK G36C / 2,8 kg / 50 cm
Tavor M / /2,95 kg /59,5 cm
M4 / 3,00kg / 75,7 cm

HK MP7 / 1,7kg / 34 cm

Around 50cm is surely too long to strap to your leg.

Yeah, but all you really need is something like this:http://www.gem-tech.com/M4-02.html

As a guy who humped a M40A3, M9 pistol AND M16A4 rifle everywhere, I am really lacking in sympathy for someone who thinks a 10'ish" suppressed M4 with tele stock is too large. There is a certain minimum size required for effective performance, this is fairly set in stone. All the bullshit cheating around the edges is a waste of time and money compared to sacking up and just doing the right thing the 1st time.

We want our people, all of them, to have effective weapons. There are no shortcuts, there is no magic bullet. We could have had this resolved years ago is they just "did the right thing". Of course, most Americans are fat bastards looking for the magic fat burning pill too. S/F.....Ken M

I think the Marines are replacing some M9 pistols with M4 carbines, so for that service at least the M4 seems to be the new PDW.

As for the Army, can you rechamber the M1 carbine in 5.56mm?

That is an amazingly small can. About the same size as the SAK I have on my CZ452.

USMC plan, as I've been told, is all officers and SNCO's who would have had a T/E M9 will be issued M4's. This is taking some work, as I'm currently issued an M16A2 stock weapon, as our unit's weapons have not been sorted out yet and is an ongoing sore point. If they take my advice, we'll be pure M4 . S/F....Ken M

You know what all thia PDW silliness is going to result in?
1) Hostiles that are not neutralised due to insufficient terminal effect
2) Lots of dead and wounded bystanders because 'pogues' are ripping away in FA when they haven't enough trigger time in SA.

The problem isn't the weapon but the whole 'pogue' mindset of 'I don't want a rifle, I'm not a trigger puller'. Guess what, give them a PDW and the same lack of training, and you get the same or (if actually possible) less combat effectiveness and a whole shitload of work for the JAG Corps.

If it's worth shooting, it's worth shooting once, the first time.

Simon

I do not see this. A truck driver is pefectly well equipped with a PDW strapped to his leg, so that it will stay with him, even if he gas to leave the truck in a hurry. And tehn the ÜDW goves more firepower and control then a pistol or a rifle left in the burning truck.

My only experience of AR-16 style weapons is of replicas and airsofts, but the receiver and magazine make for an annoyingly bulky package compared to a PDW. The encumbrance level of an AR-15 based solution is going to lead to its being left behind. OTOH I am lead to believe that PDWs are a lot better than pistols at hitting at any kind of distance (I only have experience of the latter but can well believe it).

I think that part of the problem is that no one agrees on what a 'PDW' is.

Is it really a personal defence weapon?

Is it a "RADW"--rear area defence weapon?

Is it a "HQDW"-- Headquarters defence weapon?

Is it a "CNEDW"--cool new entry/defense weapon or
a "SOADW"--special ops assault/defence weapon?

Is it's purpose to double or triple the range at which a "non-rifle" trooper can "HIT" an enemy compared to a pistol or is it's purpose to give the "non-rifle" trooper a weapon that has an effective range of 60-80% that of a rifle?

Is the rear area trooper expected to carry the PDW at ALL TIMES or just be a lighter/shorter version of the rifle that will be racked or placed to one side while the trooper does his/her primary job?

Without some idea or agreement on what the weapons REAL job is a bunch of studies that already spec the ammuntion to be used seem like a waste of time and money.

Thankfully up here in the Great White North talk of the PDW nonsense has tapered off with the exception of a few staff officers, who for the most part are being ignored. There is not a single situation in combat where a handgun or PDW will out perfrom the currently issued C7A2 or C8 family of weapons, thankfully this has been hoisted onboard by those with the cheque books.
The argument that REMFs find the issued service weapons inconveniant, or too long or bulky has been voiced here as well but has been pretty much a moot point since the invention of the sling.
Training is not an issue as every member deployed must attain a passing grade on their Personal Weapons Test including a CQB shooting qualification and follow on training is conducted while in the theatre of operations.

Our attempt at a home grown PDW was a C8 Carbine with a 5.7 inch barrel,which required a supressor to be mounted due to excessive muzzle flash and blast (go figure!!) when the supressor was mounted the weapons barrel length was increased to approx 10 inches or so, bringing it back to the level of the C8/C8A2 with a 14.5 inch barrel but without the ability to fire C77 (SS109) ammunition effecively due to the decreased velocity due to the shortened barrel.



Is there some niche that the PDW can fill, perhaps but one wonders if a 5.56 Carbine would still be a better choice

Just go back to the M1 carbine, with a modern, folding stock.

I thought the best PDW was the Podbyrin 9.2 mm. Ask Arnold Schwarzeneger about that

Cut down a standard rifle or go bull pup;

H&K G36C, an FN F2000, or bull pup a AK-47. Mount a wide 1x holographic optic. Add a tac sling.

PDW will – in form I understand the term currently to mean – work when you can get a pistol or hybrid round to work as well as 7.62x39 or SS109 at any effective range.

Even better, how about an 7.62 x 39 mm AK-104? It's about .64 kg / 1.4 pounds heavier, but does have a more robust round. Give everyone else a AK-103.

How short is the barrel? Would the muzzle blast with 7.62x39 be much greater than a "full-size" version?

The .30 carbine round has, despite rumor, proven to be effective as a defensive cartridge. It seemed to fall short when use as a battle rifle round was attempted, or used on full-auto by undertrained troops. With modern loadings, it could be very effective. Tony W?

.30 Carbine requires a JSP or JHP type bullet to perform. FMJ doesn't yaw early and doesn't frag because it doesn't go fast enough and the bullet isn't a spitzer type. You will have to shoot Jihad Joe a lot before he decides to claim his reward. It's OK if you get to use all that stuff that makes the JAG squirm.......

The problem is NOT the weapon. It is the pogue mindset. Giving a pogue a bullet hose is just stupid. If you can't get hits with a full sized carbine, you're gonna have more problems scrunched up around a PDW. Just having the PDW doesn't make the user any less incompetent despite what all the ads suggest.

Roll in tree hugging with poguery and you get stuff like lead free micro-bullets that don't frag and leave 0.17 wound tracks in people. All issued to a clerk who fires 50 rounds a year, prone on a 25m square range in semi only.

I'd rather issue them a .22LR pistol and 1000 rounds of ammo to practice with.

Simon

Israilis have an updated one that seems to be just what your looking for; see if I can google it.

HEZI SM-1; bullpup-ed M1 carbine with synthetic stock.

check http://www.advancedcombat.com/military/sm1.html

You're up against basic human nature. If something is cumbersome it tends to get left behind. I definitely find this with optics and cameras as well as shooting gear. As for the need for automatic fire, sometimes, early in an engagement you would surely want to put down a lot of fire just to prevent the enemy from closing or delivering effective fire. Once you've suppressed him you can switch to single shot fire. There aren't always going to be lots of civilians immediately behind the bad guy.

I had that in mind, just couldn't remember the details. Thanks.

Exactly, for vehicle driver (be it tank or truck) a PDW strapped to the leg, is a perfect option. It is not good for the whole crew though, it is just ggod for troops for are very unlikely to do any shooting while doing their mainjob. It is also nice for the guys in the under armor command posts. Also very nice for the guys servicing helicopters.

If its much heavier or bulkier than a pistol, it's going to be taken off inside the vehicle or in the office and treated more or less the same as a long gun. Might as well give them a carbine anyway.

You can somewhat quickly access and present a handgun from behind the wheel, and use it too, with one hand while doing something else even. Carbine? Larger pistol with collapsing stock that ejects cases forward would be nice. 300mm seems too large though.

Precisely. Undisciplined fucks will do Stupid Shit™ regardless of the hardware you give them. Might as well give them effective hardware, so the useful ones can do something while the pogues huddle in the fetal position and cry.

Also, in the USMC, we expect our trucks drivers and other CSS elements to close with and destroy the enemy when they make contact. I believe the Army is making this a fundamental part of their ethos as well. As such, they're going to need real guns. Joe the Mechanic can work on trucks with a pistol strapped to his leg but he's going to need a real gun to pull his guard shift/patrol/run snap CP's/counterattack when the savages come through the wire/etc. S/F.....Ken M

If it's much heavier or bigger than a pistol, your chances of hitting anything one handed more than a couple of feet away are about nil. Doing so while moving or distracted by doing something else simultaneously, even with a pistol, is pure bad Hollywood.

Give the soldier a weapon that will actually protect him against bad guys more than ten meters away and teach him how to use it.

I wasn't channeling John Woo, just listing advantages, which when taken in combination are standard movie fare. In many cramped circumstances 2-handed presentation is not possible. Maybe there's situations where guys would be taken by surprise, say if the assailant didn't overtly appear to be hostile until he got real close, then while standing in line or sitting in a vehicle quick deployment of a weapon would be beneficial. To take it a step further, this isn't exactly pure PDW stuff, but if you have a slung rifle said assailant(s) could interfere with it's deployment, while if you have a compact weapon you could use your weak hand to gain distance or distract, or even interfere with them deploying their weapon.

Similarly it would be good practice to try and move the vehicle regarding the threat, and with auto transmissions presenting a PDW at the same time would be good sense.

Also I believe modern interpretation of what 'heavy' is for a handgun is not taking into account full human capabilities, but merely comparing light guns to other light guns. I've got an XD-9 and a a 5" Redhawk, there are differences in mass, but both can be fired 1-handed with ease. Even PGO shotguns, while unwieldy and horribly balanced, can be pointed by standard human specimens. My calculations suggest many small SMGs weigh about the same as a .44 revolver, but appear better balanced and produce less recoil.

As a Gun commander I was issued with a SMG, which considering all of my other duties made my life easier than a FNC1. Mind you as Artillery in the cold war, the poop had really hit the fan if we were using our small arms. Generally in defence of the gun position or in a ambush of our battery on the move. The SMG was very easy to use from the cab of a truck and I found it was decently accurate.

What a load of horseshit. Presenting and engaging a target while driving is definitely a highly advanced capability. Unless the target is in the actual cab of the vehicle, there is no way to focus on the road and still engage. Pure Hollywood BS. Drivers drive, shooters shoot. Drivers shoot when they can drive no more. Only a cocksucker would draw his handgun and have it in hand while trying to drive.....great way to either lose control of the vehicle, the gun or both. Tell me who taught you this shit so I know never to listen to anything else from them.

PDWs, by pogues for pogues.

Simon

...Not. SAS, a former pilot over at the GSPO, told that even the stubby-shorty AKS-74U was too much to take with you into the cockpit of Mi-24 helis and most combat aircraft as there was no space for it inside. Also, there was quite often no time to grab it in the case of an emergency bailout. So they preferred the biggest weapon they could strap to themselves and carry at all times. In the case of the Soviet army it is the APS machinepistol, and it was nice to have around, but they felt it was not ALL that much to get warm and fuzzy about. I'm sure they would be more pleased with something like the HK MP7 - at least he said that the concept sounds nice to him. Similar with tank crews.

Mechanics in units that were involved in combat action, too, say they wished for a weapon to strap to the leg that had more firepower than a pistol, for the simple reason that you just can't comfortably work on a vehicle's innards with a rifle or carbine strapped to your back.

Still I agree with you that the pistol rule of only using the pistol to fight your way to your rifle should apply to PDWs as well...

A handgun is what you carry when you're not really in a position to carry anything else. Take all the effort and money and train, train, train. The most unhelpful feature on a PDW is a happy switch. You have a limited amount of ammo on hand (usually no more than 3 sticks) and burst fire is going to take you black in a hurry.

I'm prety farkin' surprised top hear that they have trouble hauling shit in a Hind since it has a troop compartment. It's difficult to stow a weapon in the cockpit admittedly as they are the usual wretchedly tight and cluttered. Put the long gun in the back.

As long as CSS troops adopt the mentality that force protection is someone else's problem, they'll see value in a PDW. When they get shot at and blown up a lot, they'll be asking for crew-serves and more.

Simon

I don't think I'm explaining clearly here, or you are reading between lines that aren't there.It's better to move than be stationary target, and it's better to shoot back than not. If you're stuck in traffic it's better to simply step on a pedal and see where you go than to sit there and get what's coming to you, this is really not debatable. And firing from a vehicle at a close-range assailant isn't really a debate topic either. I'm curious which you would choose not to do, either shoot or move, and why? In regards to PDWs and their suggested uses and users so far, what scenarios for use were you visualizing?

A PDW is something for soldiers which primary role means that a rifle is hard to carry and disturbing their normal job.

That can be all kind of vehicle drivers. pilots, support personal, mechanics, ammo loaders or non combat engineers. You can strap the MP7 quite comfortable to your leg and have both hands free to work with, while you have a weapon that still is good up to 100m, which is much more then you can ever hope to reach with a pistol.

A weapon in the troop compartment is like no weapon at all, if you crash landed the bird. You don´t want to search something in the bird, you want to get away from it as quickly as possible.

As a driver, your priority is to get the vehicle out of the kill zone. Under fire, with damage, that's going to take all your attention and then some. Having a gun in your hand while trying to do this would be....stupid. The only situation in which you might have to draw a gun and shoot at someone while driving is if they are IN the vehicle. At which point the PDW in a thigh rig is next to fraggin useless becuase it's so difficult to get into play. Pistols are the only real option.

When you are done driving, either because you are off the X or because your vehicle is immobilized, that is the time to go for your gun, as you prepare to dismount. You now have both hands free to unbuckle, grab the carbine in the wheel well etc.

The pogue mindset sez, I am a clerk, driver, etc. and fighting is not my job, so I should not have to carry anything that gets in the way of filling forms etc. Well, those days are gone, at least in militaries that fight. CSS has to be able to provide it's own force protection and that encompasses both equipment and procedure. It means working out how to keep your weapons and battle rattle readily available in case of contact with the enemy. That's not just your rifle, it's also your body armor, k-pot, comms, ammo,IFAK, hydration...... If you can't be assed to manage your rifle, how the fuck are you going to manage everything else?

They've been peddling PDWs to pilots since the Bushmaster Arm Gun. Guess what, the pilot is either going to carry a handgun, the next thing up from being unarmed, or he's going to have a carbine somewhere behind the seat like the Kiowa Warriors and Little Birds. The PDW is neither chicken nor fowl.

Simon

Simon, you might want to switch to decaf.

OT, but, is one of the the pistol's original roles to shoot your own troops in order to enforce the chain of commannd?