| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:AA-12: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
(→Service use?: new section) |
||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
I think the point of full-auto is not solely to make it fire as fast as possible but to alleviate the need to having to press the trigger multiple times. While you're putting effort into firing something as fast as possible in auto-mode you just have to hold down the trigger once and all is taken care of. [[User:Brasco|Brasco]] 09:09, 14 May 2011 (CDT) | I think the point of full-auto is not solely to make it fire as fast as possible but to alleviate the need to having to press the trigger multiple times. While you're putting effort into firing something as fast as possible in auto-mode you just have to hold down the trigger once and all is taken care of. [[User:Brasco|Brasco]] 09:09, 14 May 2011 (CDT) | ||
== Service use? == | |||
Are there any units in the U.S. Armed Forces that are currently using this shotgun? Whether it's for the common infantryman on the frontlines or the elite special forces soldier who goes deep into enemy territory? --[[User:ThatoneguyJosh|ThatoneguyJosh]] 05:09, 1 March 2012 (CST) | |||
Revision as of 11:09, 1 March 2012
Designed 1972?
Has this only been developed recently cuz it's appearing in some new movies.
The original version (The first picture on the page) was developed 1972, but the ones that are usually used in movies (Second picture) was only made available in 2005. Acora 23:51, 15 July 2010 (UTC) Yup the AA-12 was origionally designed in 1972. Aside from a couple of rather buggy prototypes it was stuck is development hell for a few decades before MPS got ahold of the patents for the design. They fed the design into a modern computer 3D drafting program and worked well over 200 design flaws out of the weapon and you get the modern AA-12.
- Actually, the current version of the AA-12 (the one that you see regularly in movies) is a slightly modified derivative of the AA-12 that was introduced in the mid-1980s (I have the Gun Digest Book of Assault Weapons from 1986, and they test-fired an AA-12 that looks almost identical). The AA-12 is really an old design; I find it strange that it took so long for the AA-12 to become such a trendy weapon to have in movies and FPS games. -MT2008 17:16, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Was it that episode of FutureWeapons that brought it all this attention? I remember seeing that episode, having never heard of the AA-12 before, and then suddenly, it was everywhere. --funkychinaman 05:15, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- Well, the S&W Model 29 was around for years before Dirty Harry was made, but it wasn't neat or trendy or whatever 'til DH was released. Some guns are neat and all that right away but I guess other ones just take time to be cool and stuff. Bah. StanTheMan 00:56, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- Who exactly manufactures this? Have been looking on the net for an official website but, so far, cannot find jack. Anyone? --Charon68 10:54, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
- Atchisson, I think. At least they used to. That's One Angry Duck
It sure ain't pretty
I know I know it's a combat/tactical shotgun. But god bless it's ugly. --Jcordell 04:40, 6 March 2011 (MSK)
- Truly though have any small arms in the last 50-60 years have any aesthetic value? Compare the nice wooden stock and oiled leather sling of the M1 Garand to the plastic and nylon of the M-16. Exigencies of war I suppose.--Charon68 09:10, 6 March 2011 (MSK)
I guess so. I own a couple Glocks and I can't deny they work. But I collect old blue steel revolvers with nice wooden grips. Okay and to be honest I take the wood grips off when I go to the range and replace them with black rubber grips. But still.....--Jcordell 12:06, 28 March 2011 (CDT)
- 50-60 years includes the VSS Vintorez, and there are wood-furnished FALs out there. I think the main point is that the USAS-12 exists and looks a lot less like the horrible offspring of a confused shotgun and a paintball gun. That said, there are much, much stupider designs out there. Vangelis 09:27, 6 March 2011 (MSK)
Well from what I've heard about the "PHSER", they still are trying to make it smaller and to actually work like a Phaser from Star Trek. Would be cool if that even happened. Excalibur01 09:40, 6 March 2011 (MSK)
- From what I've heard about it, it's a low-power laser dazzler that only blinds temporarily, a bit like an aimable flashbang. Strikes me as one of those things that sounds good in "Future Soldier" presentations but would be hideously impractical in actual use, like those daft micro-missiles from the new Ghost Recon game. Vangelis 10:22, 6 March 2011 (MSK)
The idea is nice. The objective of Law Enforcement is not to shoot on sight of a criminals. It is to arrest him so that the full extent of the law can happen. It would be a nice tool to have a phaser from Star Trek and set to stun. It would reduce accidental death by gun to almost nothing unless you set yours to kill. Excalibur01 10:25, 6 March 2011 (MSK)
Full Auto pretty useless
Has anyone noticed how 'slow' the full auto rate of fire is? Could be the springs, but every LIVE AA-12 I've seen fired, well hell, I can out fire the shotgun in semi auto (granted I have a really fast trigger finger). The USAS-12 has a faster rate of fire (at least in real life). MoviePropMaster2008 16:16, 3 May 2011 (CDT)
I think the point of full-auto is not solely to make it fire as fast as possible but to alleviate the need to having to press the trigger multiple times. While you're putting effort into firing something as fast as possible in auto-mode you just have to hold down the trigger once and all is taken care of. Brasco 09:09, 14 May 2011 (CDT)
Service use?
Are there any units in the U.S. Armed Forces that are currently using this shotgun? Whether it's for the common infantryman on the frontlines or the elite special forces soldier who goes deep into enemy territory? --ThatoneguyJosh 05:09, 1 March 2012 (CST)