BAR is being inaccurately portrayed, I think
 

I just read a book that was written by a Marine who served in the Pacific. in it he stated some interesting facts about the BAR. Due to the gas action on the gun, it actually pulled forward when firing: a reverse kick. He even went as far as saying that an unsuspecting operator of the gun ran the risk of doing a forward flip/fall if he wasn't prepared. I'll admit I haven't done further research yet, but this seems to be a major oversight.

Would it be possible to mod the BAR to have an accurate negative kick?

who cares?

Obviously Rocket cares Rimmel, so STFU.

Try posting this in the Maps, Mods & Skins forum if you haven't already. It sounds interesting. Keep us posted on any more info you come across.

It would be interesting to find out if it could be modded.GR swordfight:

Actually I'd post it in offtopic or history

But back to the topic, the Marines actually modified theres. This could have caused the problem with it 'jumping foward'. But it still did jump foward a little. If you ever look at the bars in the filed, Soliders often fired them a point down to the ground just a little, so when they jumped foward they'd point more straight. Also notice how the mono-pods were more 'skid feet' rather than 'spike feet'.

The BAR is a pretty typical gas-operated automatic rifle - it kicks back, but not quite as hard as a bolt action of the same caliber (30'06, in this case). Basically, whoever wrote that book is full of shit. I've fired a BAR, and it kicks up and back hard enough that it's difficult to keep it pointed at a distant target in rapid fire - the MoHAA BAR is pretty close, IMO.

It'd be pretty goddamn difficult to get any gun using a cartridge that size to "pull" instead of "kick" (even if it wieghs 19 lbs), and I'd imagine that the army would reject such a weapon out of hand, anyway. And think of the sheer rediculousness of fitting a gun that "recoils" forward with a shoulder stock - it would need a strap to keep it stuck to you, if anything.

Cheers,

Pman

I'm gonna have to disagree wit ya Bob! I have a book on weapons of all caliber, about 300 pgs+. The bar you might have fired, could have been a more recent version or a recopy. Like I said in my previouse post, why would the tri-pod legs be pointed more foward, if it kicked back?

I've never shot a gun with rearward pointing bipod legs - they're there for support, not to reduce recoil. You absorb recoil with your body, not with the ground.

The BAR I fired was all original parts, except the trigger/sear assembly which was modified to make it semi-auto only. That had no impact on the gas-piston action, which Rocket implies is responsible for the "pull". I suppose someone expecting the same kick that a Garand or Springfield '03 delivers might in fact jerk forward in anticipation of recoil when firing (I have a tendancy to do this when I pick up a .22 cal rifle after firing my 8mm Mauser all day), but it's certainly not any mechanical feature of the gun causing it.

Edit: Just found this! Tell me if that looks like "pull" ;)

http://members.ozemail.com.au/~mickay/bar.htm

Cheers!

Panzerman

Probably be best to find more than one source that says the BAR pulled you forward when fired, as that would defy one of the most fundamental laws of mechanics.

If it is true eek: , then that would be awfully weird in the game. All the more reason to just stick to a bolt action.

i doubt it would move forward. That video looked awesome! What I have read about them is that the barrel can melt if it is fired too much
mb

panzerman that video kicked ass....that chick was baddass.

I am behind you Panzerman! I have also fired one and there was no reverse recoil. And the bipod legs are not for recoil.

(On Subject) It couldnt be modded to "pull" w/o the SDK........

do we run like a dumbest thread of the year award here ?

We could. What day should we hold the cerimony? and who will make the SIG medal to be worn by the few and proud?