Long Term Rifle Decisions

[Brother in Arms]

In my opinion the MILGOV would use the M16 series until they ran out then they would use the M14 until those ran out then they would use the M1 until those ran out (although .30-06 ammo would be harder to find in military storage then 5.56 or 7.62)...I don't think they would start up weapon production simply because its just too dificult espensive resource and time constraining. The Military even in the 1980's had 10000's of M16A1,M16a2 rifle and thousands more M14's in storage. Infact you can go to anniston depot today as a civillian join the CMP and buy an M1 .30-06 for $500 they still haven't ran out of those yet... So my feeling is they would use the m16 series rifle as long as possible. And supplement with older weapons as needed.

[Mohoender]

I don't think they would start up weapon production simply because its just too dificult espensive resource and time constraining.

Why do you think it so difficult Tribal groups in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Africa are making their own copies of many rifles. Production will drop along with quality but why would it cease Pre-nukes rifles will be reliable, post-nuke rifles will kill you from time to time.

[Legbreaker]

This is true, however they've been doing it for years while the rest of the world generally don't have the knowledge or the tools.
I think (and could well be wrong) that the barrel is likely the hardest part to fabricate, specifically the rifling. Smoothbores such as shotguns should be relatively simple affairs and likely to make a bit of a comeback in the decade after the war.

Long term though (over a decade) anything is possible and really depends on how much the region in question has recovered. My guess is that from about 2010-2015 whole new designs will see the light of day, completely different to what we are seeing now IRL. Generally they're likely to be a lot simpler and use materials more in common to mid 20th century designs. Aluminium for example requires a LOT of energy to work (electricity specifically) so it is unlikely to be seen in early 21st century designs.

[Mohoender]

This is true, however they've been doing it for years while the rest of the world generally don't have the knowledge or the tools.

Good point, I didn't think of that.

[95th Rifleman]

The first rifle was made in the 15th century, the first real military application was in the early 19th.

The first true machine gun was made in 1884 (Gatling was earlier but Hiram Maxim made the first truly automatic MG).

Post-nuke America will still have at least 19th century technology. They won't be blasted into the stone age. Sure weapons will become much cruder, less shiny but essentilay they will be weapons desighned to make the other guy stop breathing.

When you get down to it, the Human race has a singular talent for developing methods of killing each other. This will not change post-exchange and I doubt rifles and automatic weapons will disappear. They may become a bit rarer, allot cruder but it's not exactly dificult to develop since the concept is already proven and the science is known. All you have to do is adapt it to available technology.

Look at the Sten SMG for a classic example of what ypu can do with a scrapyard and some time.

[Legbreaker]

The average person in the late 20th century had little to no practical technical or mechanical knowledge, unlike the 19th and early 20th century. How many office workers, computer techs, sales girls or cafe workers know anything about fixing their own car, let alone building a useful weapon or even growing a field of corn
There are still a few people with the ability of course, but as a percentage of the total population, it's significantly less than a hundred years before.

[Mohoender]

At the time of T2K, you could find at least one person with these kind of knowledges in about every village. That must come from outstanding French superiority, LOL.

[Targan]

At the time of T2K, you could find at least one person with these kind of knowledges in about every village. That must come from outstanding French superiority, LOL.

If by village you mean country town or rural community you'd be right, in France and here and no doubt the USA. But Leg is talking about the vast majority of the population who live cozy suburban lives in big cities. Most of them wouldn't know sh*t from clay when it comes to useful survival skills let alone how to maintain a firearm or service a vehicle.

Well maybe our American urban-dweller friends would have a good chance of knowing how to maintain firearms

[Legbreaker]

That's right. Here in Australia about 80% of the population live in cities and have rarely left the concrete jungle let alone been out into the bush and handled a firearm. My understanding is that in other countries, in particular the older and more urban Europe, this percentage is likely to be even higher.
Here in Australia you can go for hundreds of kilometres before reaching the next settlement of more than half a dozen people. In Europe I believe that's more like hundreds of metres and (in comparison) not a real rural area.

[Mohoender]

You are right of course but not entirely when it comes to Europe. Of course it is true for the vast majority of city dwellers but many people own small businesses and you'll be surprised of the various skills (and small corresponding businesses) you would find. At least this would be true for France, Belgium, Italy, Portugal... (I'm not so sure about other countries but I would expect this to be the case in many european cities). Then, the Twilight war would have occured 20 years ago and it means that plenty of elder people would still have interesting skills.

[copeab]

If by village you mean country town or rural community you'd be right, in France and here and no doubt the USA. But Leg is talking about the vast majority of the population who live cozy suburban lives in big cities. Most of them wouldn't know sh*t from clay when it comes to useful survival skills let alone how to maintain a firearm or service a vehicle.

And most of them are dead in 2000, from radiation, disease, starvation or violence related to one of those three.

[Legbreaker]

It's quite likely technical skills will be in short supply giving way to the more important hunting, scrounging and foraging type skill sets instead.
There's unlikely to be a lot of spare time for anyone to learn, let alone teach the engineering type skills that aren't needed on a day to day survival basis.

[Mohoender]

Leg, I don't know how it went in your place but I know how it went here and in Vermont. The economical crisis stroke us in 2008. Six month later, the number of people fixing their car all by themselves had gone from 1 occasionally to 10 regularly. People who had not been in the field for their entire life have started growing their own food when they had a garden. People threw things away, they stopped and store things again ( although it might not last)

Myself, not having one single skill in fixing household machinery, I learned how to fix the washing machine (about 12 hours: 10 to understand how it works, 1.55 hours to understand what didn't work, 5 minutes to fix it (No choice, I had no money to fix it at the moment).

And I know by my friends living in Vermont that many people they knew and had lost their job returned to the land they owned and farm it.

Barter will develop also and skills will be traded as goods.

You forget about necessity and if its obvious that skills will be in short supply for whatever reason (dicease, radiations...) they will survive. In many areas, among limited population, you'll find plenty of skills. Some, of course, will jump at each other throats but other will collaborate (It is the bases behind Twilight). However, I would rather live in Queens than in the wealthy neighborhood of Manhattan.

You don't need engineering type skills to survive on a daily bases.

[Legbreaker]

You don't need engineering type skills to survive on a daily bases.

That's exactly my point. There won't be a lot of call for the more technical skills such as fabrication of new weapons when the average person is struggling to get enough calories every day.
People may develop some mechanical skills (such as fixing their car), but the ability to operate highly technical machinery to make precision engineered items isn't going to be happening.

[95th Rifleman]

That's exactly my point. There won't be a lot of call for the more technical skills such as fabrication of new weapons when the average person is struggling to get enough calories every day.
People may develop some mechanical skills (such as fixing their car), but the ability to operate highly technical machinery to make precision engineered items isn't going to be happening.

The point I was trying to make is you DON'T need precision engineering to make reliable, automatic firearms. When you look at the old WW1 stuff they where big, basic and worked. Sure the modern toys are high-tech, precison stuff made to exacting tolerances but it's not a requirement.

I pointed to the Sten gun as an example, that thing is a damn scrapyard gun but it's reliable, effective and it works.

In the 20th/21st centuries everyone has a level of education (in the west at least) that far exceeds that of the 19th but people assume we have become more stupid Even your avrage dumb-ass American, college drop-out has a higher standard of education than your average person back in the days when machine guns where being invented.

The principle are known, the technology is proven and all you have to do is get together enough people who know the basics, a bit of trial and error with all the crap left behind post-exchange and you CAN put together a semi-automatic weapon within a month. Once you've done that it's a matter of time before you can produce fully automatic, basic weapons.