A Special MPi-81 for an Infantry Fighting Vehicle 

Yeah, an awful lot of "we need a gun for this role!" Gun is made. Never gets to the troops that the gun was intended for, or the logistics turn into a fustercluck. So everyone goes back to the basic rifle.

Maybe we can see more of that if the GCA and NFA and all the rest get repealed.

Same man, alot of the central European police SMGs are just so neat to me.

@@anon_y_mousse can only hope... Or at least the closed registry and the import bans.

Can you explain it to me? I understand they wanted armor piercing, but is the very unlikely possibility of Russian paratroopers being able to be felled by a single shot really worth people who in all likelihood never use their gun carry more weight, more expensive guns and ammo? Or does modern armor actually stop multiple or even hundreds of 9mm? Can reserves not be pulled up to actually deal with certainly fewer paratroopers? A cheaply produced polymer 9mm Submachine gun seems so much better as a backup.

Ian Fergusson from the Royal Army Museum would have a stroke, with all the accessorizing going on!

2:27 gun charm included.

Sniper Uzi loadout

When you keep upgrading the first gun you get

When I saw the thumbnail I thought that lug on the barrel was for a bayonet.

Technically, the vehicle is an accessory for the gun.

I agree - Bayonet, scope, bipod, supressor, APC..............

I want an APC accessory that bolts onto my AR.

Austria: What part of "inside" don't you get? Steyr: Hey check out this nifty collapsible buttstock. Austria: Never mind we give up, wait, is that a bayonet lug? Tell us that isn't a bayonet lug!

Imagine also producing a assault riffle that is probably shorter. Which would be the standard firearm anyway.

I've tried both eyes open on a 4x, and that's _weird_ You have this one magnified spot and otherwise normal vision.

@@ScottKenny1978 I tried the same thing on my 22 Lr rifle with a 4x scope! Indeed, the eyes work but my brain has a hard time putting together the complete image

@@bulukacarlos4751 my problem was that I'm strongly right eye dominant, so I got basically all the right eye view and little to no left eye. With a lot of practice I think I could make it work.

@@ScottKenny1978 My brain, on the other hand, is a great short circuit and to some extent it is an "advantage". I am left-handed, but I play billiards as right-handed, for pistol I am left-handed but for rifle ambidextrous. I did the test with both eyes open with a zoom scope set to 2.5x and, although it takes a lot of effort, I can shoot with both eyes open. But with 4x impossible for me.

@@hansblitz7770 i shoot benchrest and lightweight sport rifle competitions with a 30x scope and shoot with both eyes open

Terribly underrated movie.

This one's for Cabbie

You’re duke of New York! You’re A-number-one!

I guess snakes going to have to find a new place to land that glider?

Classic movie - looked like the Duke was duken' the president

Super ultra mega action tactical soldier combat fighter warrior hero

I used to have a toy Tyler like this. Unfortunately it was broken when I got it, so I wasn't able to get it to reciprocate.

@@G58 Also. Even in case of it being lined up correctly on some mount to make the bullets go out of the port, the gas blast from muzzle would be loud and go pinging around the vehicle interior, which again is a metal box. Also all of the burn products would end up inside the vehicle. Tanks had to have barrel evacuators and ventilating fans installed due to the propellant smoke not being good for ones health inside the vehicle. Rifle isn't same level of problem, but still powder smoke gathering inside the troop compartment is not nice. So extend the barrel so it clears well out of the vehicle. The bullet always goes out, the blast always goes out, most of the propelling gasses go out of the vehicle and so on. Some residual burn product ofcourse will come out the back along with the empty case being extracted, but atleast most of the stuff goes out the front well clear of the interior of the vehicle.

It's the same length as a regular MPI without the extended barrel since the extended part is inside the firing port hole, and like Ian said they're fixed into the ports of the vehicle at all times, so the increased length is redundant and doesn't affect its compactness

I love the incredibly uncaring but practical soviet soldiers you get in jokes, gags, and memes.

@@blunderingfool The Germans have a way of making things very slick, hawt, well engineered and overly complicated. The Russians, for all intents and purposes, collectivly decided that "why do all those things when a big rock to the enemies ' head solves the problem?"

Thanks EU for all the BS enforcing on us.

A few years ago he did a book review for "Weapon Mounts for Secondary Armament". It's a thick book containing all sorts of obscure arms. Fascinating book to page through (I bought a copy).

Ian has videos of the M231 Firing Port Weapon, the Stg. 44 Krummlauf and a British Cabin Pressure Flare Pistol.

@@vertigo4236 There was also a machinegun adapted for fortifications, although I can't remember if it was Belgian or French.

I mean im 23 and I prefer the look of guns from the first half of the 20th century so maybe I'm getting old too?

@@jmjedi923 Wooden weapons just like better imho. Modern guns may look cool but beautiful is not a term I'd use for the STG 77.

@Fergus Cole I don't have a 1911 thank you very much I have a luger

*affected

@@andyroberts4387 🤓

Doubt it. Cyclic rate is based on bolt weight for a blowback weapon.

@@ScottKenny1978 no the weight slows down the cyclic rate. The cartridge energy increases it. So potentially the longer barrel would allow more energy to be transferred to the bolt. I say potentially because if the cartridge is already out of the barrel then the energy / gas would be venting out the side and being lost, but I doubt you would want to be blowing that much gas out the side, so I suspect that the weight of the bolt has to be increased so that the bullet has time to exit the barrel before the bolt has moved far enough back.

@@benholroyd5221 while i agree that they may have increased bolt weight to compensate for the longer barrel, I think that would have resulted in little net change to ROF. I was honestly assuming that they used exactly the same bolt and the delay is enough to safely run even with the longer barrel. (Edit) After all, Ian didn't mention anything about the internals being different.

The muzzle is fixed into a ball aperture. The longer barrel gets the necessary space between the (angled) armour-plates at the side of the vehicle and above the track.

this looks like something greg renko's sniper scope guy would use in CoD.

no its a Mausoleum , a cemetary . cool :)

If you want to play a game with one, "Operation Body Count" (yes, THAT game that Civvie11 hates so much) technically has one (labelled in game as "Uzi", which the MPi-81 is technically accurate, being an Austrian Uzi clone). BTW the previous reply is a scam bot - do not respond to it. Been seeing these bots everywhere on YT lately...

You and me both!

not to mention the fact that outside Switzerland in europe, the most known Saurer vehicles are trucks. hefty, robust trucks.

Pu is pronounced like "Poo" (I have to go to poo). ch would be like the x in Mexico (If said in Spanish). Puch also makes a nice Off-Road-Vehicle, but in a collaboration with a bigger German company.

had a puch moped in the 1980s

I'm trying to figure out what the heck you're talking about. There is no CP-30. I'm guessing you're talking about the CMR-30 and CP-33, but neither is an SBR. The CMR-30 is a non-SBR rifle. The PMR-30 is very much a pistol. The CP-33 is also very much a pistol, but one that's easily braced or slung. The P-50 is also easily braced, but it's deliberately designed to use a 2-point sling instead, and is the only one of the three that packs any real punch. The Only SBR that Kel-Tec makes is the integrally-suppressed SUB CQB. They do make a short-barreled _shotgun_ as well.

Nobody has ever liked it up em!

@@darrenbrashaw8409 Don't panic, the church is on fire!

A longer barrel is a positive not a negative once you've *left* the vehicle.

I was thinking of a old action movie. but then it would have been a large scope more fitting for a rifle.

Well it’s a gun made in a country where adoption of new firearms for the military is based on function, not on looks. So no need for it to look pretty.

The regular MPi 81 does not have a bayonet option anyway. That part had to be developed specifically. I can also imagine that the bayonet mechanism is different to the firing port lock. A specialised weapon used inside an APC. Such simple things like the port lock can usually be made without using specified tools or training (not personal experience but my cousin is a mechanic and builds himself a lot of simple metal construct with his lathe). And going on a tengant: From an economic point saving bayonets for the infantry is the wiser choise.

@@chrismath149 I didnt mean that they were provided with one, but if Austria had a bayonet that could fit there

it looks SIMILAR to STANAG mount under an AR barrel ( M16 ) i bet i could fiddle around and get some version of an M16 bayonet to work

@@verrueckteriwan That answer took a long time - didn't pay attention - that's the Austrian Army bayonet - maybe you can figure it out yourself en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock_knife (answer is most likely no since the knife is used for the AUG).

@@chrismath149 Ah, now I see how the locking on the AUG Glock knife works I was expecting something like AR or AK bayonet, or something similar, where you have a back lock that keeps the knife from moving (like a spring lock that has to be pressed to remove it again) so I thought it would make sense to use the block that locks a bayonet in place to also use to lock the gun in a firing port in the apc, but since they use a complete different system, that makes sense now :)

Looks like a dead match for the AUG bayonet lug in form and position, and that would explain the flared muzzle that looks about 22mm, and the height over bore of the scope. Probably the thinking was the other way around - use a fitting that would (in a pinch) allow the standard issue *rifles* to be used as FPW. Now, there are several reasons to prefer a 9x19mm blowback SMG over a 5.56mm bullpup rifle as a FPW (size of both weapon and ammo, sound levels, possibly total propellent gas exhausted into the fighting compartment, etc.), but it would be nice to have the option.

@@geodkyt That would make sense for an APC, have specialized weapons that are kept inside the vehicle and are intended for emergency use by the crew but also make those ports compatible with the common soldier's service weapon, especially since the entire point of an APC is to carry these guys anyway.

At the time, the expectation was that the battlefield was going to be saturated with gas, germs, and/or nukes, so the troops would be fighting from inside the track and not dismounting at all. So it made sense that way. But when nobody even dreams of chemicals or germs, and the troops are all fighting dismounted, FPWs don't make much sense.

@@zoiders in that there are more openings to seal up, and/or a greater rate of air leak out while overpressured. But if there are no firing ports, your infantry cannot fight from the vehicle, they *must* dismount. Firing ports allow your infantry to shoot without having them _and the crew_ all suited up in MOPP gear.

@@zoiders some dude who is in full MOPP? I'm just relaying the design ideas as I know them. The stated reason for FPWs was so that the grunts could shoot while the vehicle was fully sealed for CBRN defense.

Is this a real message?

I wouldn’t have suspected a thing before I saw the hearts. Which I greatly appreciate. It feels good to be loved. But that’s what gave it away. 😉. 🤣🤣🤣