• If you were supposed to get an email from the forum but didn't (e.g. to verify your account for registration), email Wes at [email protected] or talk to me on Discord for help. Sometimes the server hits our limit of emails we can send per hour.
  • Get in our Discord chat! Discord.gg/stararmy
  • 📅 July 2024 is YE 46.5 in the RP.

Approved Submission Zen Arms FEAR

This suggestion has been implemented. Votes are no longer accepted.
Looking over the weapon itself, it looks solid, though the grammar in some portions of the article gets choppy and gives the sentences a very abrupt feeling. I suggest you look over that and smooth it out.

Aside from that, and waiting on @Soresu to give it the green light, those are the only issues I see.
 
I'll agree with Cadet's statement regarding the grammar in some spots. But otherwise it has my seal of approval.
 
I love this gun @.@ I plan on purchasing a few of them and one of the EHBR too once they're approved XD
 
A few things.

Moving back on the left side of the weapon above the user's handguard is the rifle's charging handle, jutting less then an inch from the polymer of the rifle's body
Click to expand...

Is this charging handle reversible? Furthermore, a major drawback to having such a small charging handle is that in dire circumstances, it will be difficult for the shooter to actually be able to grab it in one large, gross movement, versus using fine motor skills to actuate a smaller piece of metal such as a charging handle. Furthermore, a larger handle gives the shooter more leverage in case they need to clear a particularly badly stuck case.

. At the end of this barrel rests a large cylinder style flashhider and recoil compensator with two large side notches.
Click to expand...

The entire purpose of a recoil compensator is to redistribute gasses leaving the muzzle as much as possible, which results in a larger flash and report. Having a combination flash hider and muzzle brake would be a case of severe diminishing returns, as the device will not excel in either role. In fact, it would be more beneficial to have a single flash hider so that the shooter does not have a larger risk of losing their night vision when a larger flash produced by a brake goes off, in this case with a bullpup, even closer to their face than normal.

The rifle also employs a side mounted tube ejector system which removes spent cartridges via a port on the front of the weapon.
Click to expand...

How does the system actually work to catch the ejected brass for removal? Does it employ the brass-intercepting polymer tray that the FN2000 uses? Does this mean that an armorer has to deal with another part of a weapon system that can possible fail? Is there an issue with the tube becoming clogged over time with carbon that can cause stoppages?

Loading: The FEAR does not employ a drop free magazine system, rather when the ambidextrous magazine tab behind the magazine well it unlocks the magazine which can then be pulled free.
Click to expand...

Does this mean that the already fairly awkward process, common to bullpups, of reaching towards the shooter's body to drop a magazine is complicated even more by the fact that they must now hold down a magazine release button and manually strip the magazine with the same hand, while under possible fire?

I would like to see these issues addressed before this rifle is considered for approval.
 
1. Extended it to an inch and a half.
2. Opted for a full recoil compensating system alah AK-74.
3. Its effectively the FN2000's system, as far as the failure rate I think we can assume that SARP level powder keeps that way down compared to even modern propellants, but yes it is another bit to worry about but thats true of any additional part you add to a weapon system.
4. Its another addition from the FS/N 2000's design, effectively you depress it when grasping the magazine to remove it. The benefit of this is keeping the system sealed (like with the FS/N2000's gasket design). As far as the complication of the maneuver its just a simple matter of practice. In any event edited the wording somewhat.
 
Arieg said:
4. Its another addition from the FS/N 2000's design, effectively you depress it when grasping the magazine to remove it. The benefit of this is keeping the system sealed (like with the FS/N2000's gasket design). As far as the complication of the maneuver its just a simple matter of practice. In any event edited the wording somewhat.
Click to expand...

It's great to keep a system sealed from outside contamination, but a seal works both ways. Under heavy use, all of that built up carbon stands a much greater chance at staying in the system and jamming it up, leading to more failures. Simply utilizing SARP handwavium with regard to powder is not the best choice because you are dealing with a major waste product that firearms produce that keep them functioning well or badly.

Since writing up an article on SARP gunpowder is too bulky and excessive, a better solution would be to opt out of having such a system, as firearms with conventional exposed magazine wells have gone on along just fine without it. Opting to make a firearm "less susceptible" to something is overengineering it to the point where the user will not be able to easily address the inevitable problem in a swift manner. This applies to the FN2000-style forward ejection port system.

A thing to note is that the FN2000, while advanced, is hardly practical. The only major users of it are Belgian special forces units, and several smaller countries that do not usually field units, so they can afford to have a rifle that is more advanced but less practical.

Furthermore, it is definitely not a matter of practice with the non-drop free magazine system. You can shave off some time when reloading it, but it pales drastically in comparison to other bullpup designs that allow the magazine to drop free. Asking someone to hold a magazine release and strip a magazine with one hand relies far too much on fine motor skills that completely disappear under dire circumstances for the average user.
 
Oh my lawdy, I can only imagine how annoying the ass-end of that trigger guard would be in actual operation. It effectively kills range of movement, and, would actually force an operator to bend their wrist around it in some cases. Worse, the way which the magazine protrudes is going to be a pain in the ass and-then-some in the event of firing prone, ESPECIALLY with that proposed 75-round magazine. I also have my doubts about the robustness of that forward sight.

EDIT: Can it even be called a trigger guard when its protruding from the ass end of the grip? Can it be called a grip guard? I don't even know, its just so awkward.
 
@Arieg

I'm sorry for the long delay, but looking over the various concerns over the rifle, they're all mostly trade-offs of one performance area in favor of another against conventional rifle layouts. Though they go against the norm, it's a matter of preference. The only thing that needs any real fixing would be the ejection system. Some more detail on that feature - a key selling point or rejection point depending on customer - is needed. Simply saying that it catches the spent brass that's ejected and shoves it down a one way polymer tube is good enough.
 
Anyone still have issues with this? I've looked it over and I think it's good enough for canonization.
 
RPG-D RPGfix
Back
Top