Liberal politician embarrasses self in "gun quote"

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-15-2016, 03:47 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: The pressurised gas, cycling the system.

The operator.

[Rotobeast]

(06-15-2016, 03:49 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The operator.

Ok...yep.
And... (I assume a follow-up is planned).

[SteelCitySouth]

(06-15-2016, 03:47 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: The pressurised gas, cycling the system.

nah...All semi auto cycling is faster that can physically be done.  The true limiting factor is on your hand and smells like poop.  Really...Roto.  Get it out of there and wash it.  

[Rotobeast]

(06-15-2016, 03:53 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: nah...All semi auto cycling is faster that can physically be done.  The true limiting factor is on your hand and smells like poop.  Really...Roto.  Get it out of there and wash it.  

I'm just trying to release the pressure you built up.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

Here's the deal.  The politician in the clip is quoting factual information, but he is using the information in a misleading way.  He is a politician and politicians are liars by definition.

The cyclic rate of fire for the M4 and M16A2 listed in the TM are 700-970 rpm and 700-900 rpm, respectively.  That's an estimate of how many times the rifle can cycle through all 8 steps in the firing cycle under ideal conditions without any stoppages in fantasyland.  I don't know why they put that information in there because it's not like the cyclic rate for a 240B.

Next he compared the cyclic rate for an AR-15 to the (implied) max effective rate for a Glock.  That's a false comparison.  The max effective rate for the M4 and M16A2 is 45 rpm.  Why?  Because that is how many rounds a skilled marksman can aim, fire, re-aim, fire, etc in one minute.  A rate of 45 rpm equals 1.33 seconds per round to aim and fire.  The effective rate of fire for any semi-auto is going to be roughly the same because it depends upon the operator's skill level.  Now if the operator isn't aiming and just squeezing the trigger as fast as he can they could get off more rounds, but that's not effective fire.

So the politician's statement isn't embarrassing as much as it is misleading.  Imagine that.

[Rotobeast]

(06-15-2016, 04:20 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Here's the deal.  The politician in the clip is quoting factual information, but he is using the information in a misleading way.  He is a politician and politicians are liars by definition.

The cyclic rate of fire for the M4 and M16A2 listed in the TM are 700-970 rpm and 700-900 rpm, respectively.  That's an estimate of how many times the rifle can cycle through all 8 steps in the firing cycle under ideal conditions without any stoppages in fantasyland.  I don't know why they put that information in there because it's not like the cyclic rate for a 240B.

Next he compared the cyclic rate for an AR-15 to the (implied) max effective rate for a Glock.  That's a false comparison.  The max effective rate for the M4 and M16A2 is 45 rpm.  Why?  Because that is how many rounds a skilled marksman can aim, fire, re-aim, fire, etc in one minute.  A rate of 45 rpm equals 1.33 seconds per round to aim and fire.  The effective rate of fire for any semi-auto is going to be roughly the same because it depends upon the operator's skill level.  Now if the operator isn't aiming and just squeezing the trigger as fast as he can they could get off more rounds, but that's not effective fire.

So the politician's statement isn't embarrassing as much as it is misleading.  Imagine that.

Got it.
The politician is not taking into affect the muzzle rise and returning on target and merely speaking of utopian performance.
Your other point concerning cyclic rate is that it's dependant on the operator's training.
(thumb over bore/control, ect..)

[SteelCitySouth]

(06-15-2016, 04:29 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: Got it.
The politician is not taking into affect the muzzle rise and returning on target and merely speaking of utopian performance.
Your other point  concerning cyclic rate is that it's dependant on the operator's training.
(thumb over bore/control, ect..)

Also how fast your finger is............

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-15-2016, 04:29 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: Got it.
The politician is not taking into affect the muzzle rise and returning on target and merely speaking of utopian performance.
Your other point  concerning cyclic rate is that it's dependant on the operator's training.
(thumb over bore/control, ect..)

The cyclic rate for an M4 or M16A2 is just an estimate based upon how long it takes for one firing cycle . . .in fantasyland.  Unless you have a 700 rnd magazine.

The cyclic rate for a 240B is actually how many rounds it can fire in one minute . . . for realz.

The effective rate for an AR-15 and any of the Glock semi-autos are going to be roughly the same based upon how fast the operator can acquire the target and fire.  You're effective rate of fire my be slightly faster or slower than mine based upon your skill level.  But, that might be a difference of 10 rnds or less per minute.  Not a difference of 600 rpm.

[Rotobeast]

(06-15-2016, 04:34 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Also how fast your finger is............

I didn't put 'etc" there for "Electroconvulsive therapy".
Biznatch...

[Rotobeast]

(06-15-2016, 04:37 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: The cyclic rate for an M4 or M16A2 is just an estimate based upon how long it takes for one firing cycle . . .in fantasyland.  Unless you have a 700 rnd magazine.

The cyclic rate for a 240B is actually how many rounds it can fire in one minute . . . for realz.

The effective rate for an AR-15 and any of the Glock semi-autos are going to be roughly the same based upon how fast the operator can acquire the target and fire.  You're effective rate of fire my be slightly faster or slower than mine based upon your skill level.  But, that might be a difference of 10 rnds or less per minute.  Not a difference of 600 rpm.

You had this ready for bfine last night, didn't you ?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-15-2016, 04:43 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: You had this ready for bfine last night, didn't you ?

I prefer to guide someone on a journey of self discovery rather than spoon feed 'em.

[*bfine32*]

(06-15-2016, 05:10 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I prefer to guide someone on a journey of self discovery rather than spoon feed 'em.

Me too.

Recently someone thought they were going to school me on rates of fire and asked me about something called "cyclical". I helped him on his journey.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-15-2016, 05:29 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Me too.

Recently someone thought they were going to school me on rates of fire and asked me about something called "cyclical". I helped him on his journey.

Yeah, you told me to "goggle" it because you were too afraid to answer the question.

If you had answered the questions you should have been able to figure it out on your own that he was comparing a cyclic rate to an effective rate.

[BmorePat87]

(06-15-2016, 05:29 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Me too.

Recently someone thought they were going to school me on rates of fire and asked me about something called "cyclical". I helped him on his journey.

Hopefully he didn't double down on his misuse of that word and claim that he was in fact using the right word. Hopefully he had the grace to admit his error and move on.

[*bfine32*]

(06-15-2016, 05:36 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Yeah, you told me to "goggle" it because you were too afraid to answer the question.

Yes, I was afraid to answer the question.

All this talk of cyclical rate of fire had me thinking I was picking a fight outside of my weight class.

But thanks for your assistance on the journey; it was amusing, if not educational.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-15-2016, 05:41 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Hopefully he didn't double down on his misuse of that word and claim that he was in fact using the right word. Hopefully he had the grace to admit his error and move on.

(06-15-2016, 12:39 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: It's a simple question, what are the rates of fire?  If anyone can google it then why do you seem to be having so much trouble giving me the answer?  "Cyclical" is the same as "goggle," an error.  I am giving you my comments on his claim beginning with establishing the rates of fire.  It is important to establish the rates of fire to make a comparison like he did.  Rates of fire are Skill Level 1 stuff.  A rifleman with mosquito wings should be able to regurgitate the rates of fire for me.

[*bfine32*]

(06-15-2016, 05:41 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: Hopefully he didn't double down on his misuse of that word and claim that he was in fact using the right word. Hopefully he had the grace to admit his error and move on.

Yes. He was full of grace.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-15-2016, 05:44 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Yes, I was afraid to answer the question.

All this talk of cyclical rate of fire had me thinking I was picking a fight outside of my weight class.

But thanks for your assistance on the journey; it was amusing, if not educational.

You said anyone could google the answer.  So what was the problem?

[*bfine32*]

(06-15-2016, 05:45 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I bolded the wrong sentence

Bold the sentence before that one to show your grace.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(06-15-2016, 05:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Bold the sentence before that one to show your grace.

(06-15-2016, 12:39 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: It's a simple question, what are the rates of fire?  If anyone can google it then why do you seem to be having so much trouble giving me the answer?  "Cyclical" is the same as "goggle," an error.  I am giving you my comments on his claim beginning with establishing the rates of fire.  It is important to establish the rates of fire to make a comparison like he did.  Rates of fire are Skill Level 1 stuff.  A rifleman with mosquito wings should be able to regurgitate the rates of fire for me.

I'm still wondering the same thing.

Alright, obviously you're not going to answer the cyclic rate of fire for a M4 or M16A2.  So what is so embarrassing about quoting the cyclic rate listed in a TM?