Comments by "" (@neutronalchemist3241) on "UPDATE on 6.8mm NGSW from Army Major Ottmar" video.

@mutilator97 The FAMAS had never been hated by the soldiers, and the French would have happily adopted an improved FAMAS had them still had a small arms manufacturer in France. The AUG had been in service for decades in Austria and Australia without any hate(significantly the Australians took a look at the L85 and adopted the AUG, so, instead of adopting a bad bullpup, they adopted a good one, for that time). Bullpups can be made instantly ambidextrous now (since when Beretta introduced an instantly switchable ejection in the ARX160. Infact many immediately said "why not use it in a bullpup?"), and the GD design is. The swappable ejection doesn't make the ARX160 any less reliable. If there is something all the users of that AR agree with is the complete reliability. Not to say, it's actually Beretta that manufactures the GD gun. I'm not really a fan of bullpups but, for those particular requirements (.270 Win performances from an AR sized gun) they have advantages.
2
The goal was .270 Win performances, and there is a reason there is only one semiauto rifle in .270 Win in current production. It's not an intermediate caliber.
1
Textron design seems complicate and hard-recoiling. General Dynamics' design, other than being simpler, in full auto seems to have less recoin than the Textron one in semiauto.
1
None of those ammo is caseless.
1
30-06 is obsolete. Too big and heavy for its performances. Already the .308 Win had better performances in a smaller package.
1
Mind that General Dynamic's rifle is made by Beretta. GD came up with the general working principle and basic design, Beretta solved the hergonomy and other minor issues.
1
GD design is instantly ambidextrous.
1
@nucphyschem1 I guess you missed the ejection port on both sides then. You can watch the video at 1:11 for a leftie shooting it. https://taskandpurpose.com/military-tech/army-next-generation-squad-weapon-training-video/
1
SIG is too conventional. One of the goal of the competition is to eliminate brass, and it still uses brass. Then ammos have to be stored, and mixing brass with steel tend to be a bad idea due to galvanic corrosion. Textron design is a mess. I'm not a fan of bullpups, but much of their problems had been sorted out (IE now they can be made instantly ambidextrous). Users, even of old generations ones (Austrians, Australians, Brits...), used them for decades and are generally not unhappy with them (some had been unhappy with the particular model, but not with the concept), and several armies selected bullpups recently (Israel, Croatia, Belgium...).
1
@mutilator97 Sorry but that's not true. No 90% (or 50%, or 30% for that matter) of militaries that adopted bullpups "swiftly un-adopted shortly after". Bullpups adopted by militaries had generally been used for decades, or are still used. The Brits hating the first generation L85 has little to do with it being a bullpup and most to do with it being crap, and it was crap not because it was a bullpup, but because it had been designed by people that had never designed a firearm before. After H&K solved its main issues (not even H&K could solve all of them, it would have required a new rifle, IE it could not be made ambidextrous) the Brits are quite happy with the L85A2 and A3. Taking the first gen L85 as an example for all the bullpups is like taking the INSAS as an example for all the conventional designs. General Dynamic bid seems to have by far the best ammo (all the advantages of the other two, without any of their disadvantages). The operating mechanism is similar to that of SIG (both gas-assisted recoil operation) and being a bullpup comes with several advantages (longer barrel means more muzzle speed with less recoil and less barrel wear, and infact the developers had been adamant that their goal was to use the minimum load to obtain the prescribed performaces).
1
GD rifle is instantly ambidextrous. It can eject both sides.
1