As a firearms museum curator, an Ex-Australian army Cadet and a passionate enthusiast of all manner of military hardware and vehicles from all eras, I've developed a vast knowledge and understanding on all of these topics.

My hobbies include gun-smithing and shooting. If you ask me the specifications and qualities of any firearm, I'm almost certain that I can explain in great detail- in regards to the technical aspects of the weapon, the tactical application and correct historical information behind it's development, manufacture and use.

I've also a passion for video games. I'm offering my expert advice (either paid of with a modest profit share) to anyone considering developing a project involving military hardware. Getting technical aspects of military firearms or vehicles wrong in a strategy or shooter game can spoil the suspension of disbelief. Why not get an accurate opinion for the weapons in your game?


Nathan Pleli
nathanpleli@hotmail.com

wow... that is actually an amazing service for designers that most people would completely over look. Im not working on a military based game right now so i dont really need it, but i just thought it was interesting.

Sounds awesome.

Just to test your knowledge, what is M16 and what is it's history?

The history of the M16 is long , so I'll try to keep this short.

In 1957 the US Army requested the Armalite division of the Fairchild Aircraft Corp to develop a .22 caliber, select fire, light weight rifle that is capable of penertrating a standard issue combat helmet at 500m. The great Eugene Stoner (a designer at Armalite at the time) using the AR10 rifle(which he designed) as a base design, he began to design and develop this rifle. What he came up with was the AR15 which was released in .223 remington (5.56x45mm).

In 1958 the rifle was issued to the US army for testing, results shown accuracy and reliability problems. 1959 the rights for the design of the AR15 were sold to Colt firearms manufacturing company. 1960 Eugene leaves Armalite and joins Colt. the same year the rifle was demonstrated to the USAF, which later placed an order for 8000 rifles. 1962 The US DOD ARPA purcases 1000 rifles for field trials in south Vietnam, reports about this "black-rifle" were postive. 1963 Colt recieves contracts for 85,000 rifles from the US army (which called it the XM16E1) and a further 19,000 from the USAF. The XM16E1 differed from the AR15/M16 by having an additional device, the so called "forward assist", which was used to manually push the bolt group in place in the case of jams.
1964. US Air Forces officially adopted new rifle as M16. Same year US Army adopted the XM16E1 as a limited standard rifle, to fill the niche between discontinued 7.62mm M14 rifle and the forthcoming SPIW system (which never got past the prototype and trial stages).

1967. US Army adopted the XM16E1 rifle as a standard "US Rifle, 5.56mm, M16A1", on 28 February 1967.

1965 - 1967. Field reports from Vietnam began to look much more pessimistic. M16 rifles, issued to US troops in the Vietnam, severely jammed in combat, resulting in numerous casualties. There were some causes for malfunction. First of all, during the introduction of the new rifle and its ammunition into the service, US Army replaced originally specified Dupont IMR powder with standard ball powder, used in 7.62x51mm NATO ammunition. The ball powder produced much more fouling, that quickly jammed the actions of the M16 unless the gun was cleared well and often. This pitifully combined with the fact that the initial M16 rifles were promoted by the Colt as "low maintenance", so, for the sake of economy, no cleaning supplies were procured for new M16 rifles, and no weapon care training was conducted for the troops. As a result, soldiers did not know how to clean their M16s, and had no provisions for cleaning, and thing soon turned bad. To add the trouble, the ball powders also had a different pressure curve, so they produced higher pressures at the gas port, giving the rise to the rate of fire, and, thus, decreasing accuracy and increasing parts wear.

1967 - 1970. The deficiencies discovered in previous years began do dissolve. 5.56mm ammunition was now loaded using different powders that produce much less residue in the action of the gun. The barrel, chamber and bolt of the rifles were chrome-lined to improve corrosion resistance. Cleaning kits were procured and issued to troops, and a special training programs were developed and conducted ever since. Earliest cleaning kits could be carried separate from rifle only, but since circa 1970 all M16A1 rifles were manufactured with the containment cavity in the buttstock, that held the cleaning kit. At the same time (circa 1970) the new 30 rounds magazines were introduced into service instead of the original 20 rounds ones, to equal Soviet and Chinese AK-47 assault rifles, which had 30-rounds magazines from the very beginning.

The M16 and its variants are still being manufactured and used by many countries.
M16A1
caliber 5.56x45mm M193
action gas operated, rotating bolt
length 980mm
weight(unloaded) 2.90kg
Magazine 20-30rnds STANAG and numerous other magazines.
cyclic rate of fire approx 750 rounds per minute
muzzle velocity approx 945m/s
Max. effective range appox 500m

As a note the when the M16 was used in vietnam most troops never loaded the magazines fully they always left one or two rounds out for reliability reasons.

Personaly the M16 is a good rifle, but It lacks stopping power (especially out at longer distances) and it feels too light to be a real battle rifle.

Most Australian soldiers in vietnam prefered using the 7.62 L1A1 (SLR) instead of the M16, due to the exellent stopping and penetrating power of the 7.62mm round and the reliabilty of the rifle.

I could keep going, but there is alot of history and info about the M16 and its variants and It would take me a day or two to tell you about it.


Enjoy.

Failed!

Definately know your stuff tho!

What do you mean by "Failed!"?

That IS the really short version of the M16's history, lol.

Thanks mate.

Interesting topic.

As you have military experience, what dou you personally thing about
the reality in combat games?

Especially, how realistic are the actual damages caused by weapons.

Most games have something like "Hitpoints" at a certain amount,
that increases during the game, and can be instantly refilled by medipacks.
Now that is unrealistic of course.

The other extreme are situations, where the soldier gets
killed instantly by one shot.
Its this realistic? I mean a headshot between the eyes of course, but how about bodyshots, and shots to the limbs.

How much damage can a soldier sustain. And how long does it take
for him to be rendered unable to react.
Is there a timedelay, where the soldier can shoot back, even when hit badly.
Should the soldier, even when leathally woulded, still have like 10 seconds to fully fight back, before dying?

What would you suggest to make comabt simulatons more realistic, in
terms of "real life" injuries caused by projectiles.

(and also, how long does a soldier needs time to refocus, when
turning around with the weapon. I think games take that a bit
too easy.)

I am interested what are the most important values of weapons(like range or firepower),especially for games.
If you could answer this, it would be nice.
I think the community will have a good base to start their one military game.

This is really hard to answer. But I'll try.

The damage a weapon inflicts depends on a lot of things like the characteristics of the ammunition, impact angle, the weapon it self, distance, weather conditions and if the weapons is firing through cover (even small plants and grass effect bullet flight and stopping power).


Most of the time soldiers when they get hit (if the bullet does'nt kill them first) usally go into shock and pass out and or die if not treated. The effect varies from person to person.

Also it depends if any vital organs get hit, if they are hemoraging and also if the person has had a surge of adrenalin (which dulls pain).

A freind of mine has been shot in the shoulder, he said it was a cross between being hit with a sledge hammer and being stabbed by a red hot spike. After being hit you would be lucky just to be able to speak let alone shoot back. Getting minor wounds (like bullet grazes and light surface sharpnel wounds) you might be able fight back, but it would be difficult to aim because of the pain.

grenades, mines, rockets and sachet charges are a different story, most grenade have a kill radius of 15m and wounding radius of 30m. Also the pressure wave can shatter teeth and bones, burst ear drums and in larger explosions suck the air out of your lungs.

to answer the question about refocusing when turning around, its easy: grab a broom stick, hold it like a rifle, aim down it and try turning around and bring it back to aim. And you should get a rough time estamate.


It is really hard to answer questions about wounds and being able to shoot back when wounded, because there is to many variables.

I hope you found this info usefull.

This is also a hard question to answer.

There is a lot of variables when it comes to weapons values, like if you are using it in an urban environment,jungle, desert, ect. Or if you are going to be in an open area or close-quarters. Also depends what you are using the weapon for.

for example: If I was doing reconnaissance in the jungle.

I would want a weapon that is light weight, short, with not too much stuff sticking out, that won't jam or fill up with mud easily and will fire alot of lead down-range in a short amount of time.


That info would give me a rough outline what would be best to use.

I hope this answers your question