Speedbird_666

After many years of dicking around with various solutions - I settled on a Paintball mask + own design goggle fan. Never fogged and the added face protection has been very useful playing at CQB sites.

Or you could contact them yourself.....🙄

Is the issue the magnification? 1.5x seems readily available here stateside

Might be better off just sticking a Perun Hybrid in it and call it done. Much better unit than the Falcon anyway. I will be selling off my M904G in the next week or two - I'm thinning out my collection and I have a bunch of other M4 platforms that I can use.

Stubby stock plus a couple new LiPos to stick in it (£24 posted for 2 packs from China Hobby Line).

Need to dust off my 3D printer - but my next project is a super-minimalist fixed battery stock for G&G receivers (ARP9 Etc). Designed to hold at least a 2200mAh 11.1v LiPo - some smaller 3000mAh packs should also fit. Length is around the same as stubby length M16 fixed stocks - good for the speedybois and/or smaller statures.

Old carpet works well as a backstop. The Airgun club I'm a member of uses it for their target stands. My local (independant) carpet shop has skips full of the old carpets removed from customer houses. Ask nicely and you have enough for a dozen backstops for free.

You are right. The GB will fit - but a motor will not. Oh well. If I had money I would consider an HPA-specific build negating the need for the GB shell/motor, but that's out of my price range. Finding a long enough length of Picatinny extrusion for the upper rail in the UK is a ballache as well (the front end would be a 38mm Aluminium box extrusion with metal rail segments bolted on) so I will shelve the idea. Had fun putting the model together though.

Pretty much finished the MR-C Model - I luckily came across a couple of official Crye renders of the gun (via the Internet Archive from Crye's own website ) which made me realise that the proportions were wrong. So I basically rebuilt the whole thing again, but I had a lot fun doing so. Seems like the real thing was a very small gun - just over 700mm, which is fixed-stock MP5 territory. @mightyjebus Don't suppose you have a V2 or V3 GB model that I can use to check if it's viable to build the gun? I did model one myself last year - but lost the file.

A few minutes of t'internet searching reveals that it's a bespoke colour called 'Canadian Average Green'. Doesn't seem to be a RAL number for it - but Cerakote 'Noveske Bazooka Green H-189' is supposed to be the closest match (again, no RAL number). Much like H&K with their 'many shades of RAL8000' - there is are colour discrepancies between the stock and other furniture parts. Sources: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?216363-Canadian-C7-furniture https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?215944-Requesting-help-with-a-color-match-from-folks-with-good-eyes

I have been slightly obsessed with the Crye MR-C after the Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter game 'back in the day'. The gun itself was never more than a mockup - but I've always wanted to build one, even sketching out the idea in photoshop ~15 Years ago: I have been learning to use Plasticity 3D recently and I love it - so as a learning exercise I decided to try and build a 3D model of the MR-C based off the very few reference images of the real thing (there are loads of references of the in-game model but they are not particularly accurate) Mockup Pics: WIP Plasticity 3D: Quick and dirty Fusion360 Renders: Still got a fair bit to do - I'm not 100% happy with the grip shape and the mockups didn't have triggers, so I'll have to guess on that. I will also model the Grenade Launcher at some point too. Not sure if I can build it into any kind of functional airsoft gun - it would make a pretty cool wall-hanger.

This. S65 is very decently priced and will do everything you'll ever need for Airsoft batteries. https://www.hobbyrc.co.uk/skyrc-s65-65w-6a-ac-balance-charger

Umm - I don't think it has a dedicated ruler function - I've just use the line tool and the very good snapping system to measure things . The 'CAD for artists' term thrown about means that it'll do a lot of modelling like Fusion (as opposed to software like blender) with enough precision for 3D printing etc, but it's not as engineering focused as Fusion so is missing things like an analytical tools section. Kind of a half way house between the traditional 3D modelling software and CAD. Try it for 30 days, follow a couple of tutorials and see what you think - they don't ask for any details/payment/registration information - it's a straight download from the site - just install and go.

Bonus point to you. 😁

Fusion 360 is free, but it can be a bitch to use. A lot people will start to use it, get frustrated, then bin off the whole idea of making their models. I am currently learning Plasticity 3D at the moment - a 'CAD for artists' Hard Surface modelling tool. I've been using it for about a week and I am impressed. They do a 30 day trial, and costs $99 USD to buy, but it's so much easier to use than Fusion that I'm actually thinking of paying for it. It's still very new as a product - but theres quite a few videos on youtube to get you started. Lightly inspired by this thread, I knocked this up in under an hour this morning as a bit of a learning exercise - just eyeballing it from google images (yes - it's missing quite a bit of detail but you get the idea). It's also good if you have reference images - this is a WIP project to eventually build in RC (bonus points to anyone who can guess the aircraft) It's also pretty good for low-poly game assets - my son needed a super-quick placeholder RPG model for a Roblox game he's working on - 10mins later it was in the game:

Couldn't you take a cheap supressor and make and angled cut with a chop saw? A bit of krylon - bob's your mother's brother.

The reality is that it'll be lucky if HM Armed forces gets 100,000 units - the R&D and setup/tooling costs alone of a bespoke UK design will run into double-digit millions of pounds - which has to be spread over the production run and factor into the per unit cost - so it's only feasible if there's an export customer. And the SA80 was great a export success....oh wait... Then there's the Civil Servants that will stick their oar in - so any platform designed will be over-budget, under-deliver and only function every other Thursday. Buying 'off the shelf' makes way more sense right now - even if the UK doesn't own or build the design.

In an era where the entirety of the Army and Royal Marines couldn't even fill the seats of Wembley stadium, there is little economic sense to design something new just for UK use. Perhaps if there's an appetite to partner with other nations then it could be more feasible, but design by (multinational) committee will invariably add cost and time to the procurement process. There's little sense in licensing another design for UK production either - the numbers are too low for effective cost savings - any savings will be negated by the start up and tooling costs for such a short production run. FN has manufacturing capability in the UK through the FNHUK subsidiary - but only for FN products.

The second paragraph is me - the bullet points are the Twitter author's view paraphrased. The platform is fine - but it's just a very well made M4. Nothing new. No space-wizard shit-hot unobtanium cool new technology. Just a nicely built M4. The UK already has a similarly-well built M4 already in inventory (albeit in limited numbers) - it's called the Colt Canada/Diemaco L119A1/2 - as used by those special folks and a some RM and RMP units. I think the author is pissed as this selection process (Project HUNTER) for the Rangers/Royal Marines could feed into to the wider Project GRAYBURN to replace the L85 completely in HM Armed Forces use. Buying a fairly standard (but quite cool looking) M4 platform and using existing 5.56 ammunition could be argued as a wasted (once in a generation) opportunity - instead of buying into something with higher lethality and better ballistic performance to defeat modern body armour. I think the author wants something more gucci to align with the US DoD M7 program (i.e. a Sig-based Piston Driven 6.8mm platform). But the KS-1 will work just fine - like the millions of other Direct Impingement 5.56mm M4 guns in use all over the world.

In a nutshell - here are the arguments presented (heavily paraphrased): - not made in the UK - Wrong Calibre (they want 6.5 or 6.8mm) - Not modular enough to re-equip with .300 BLK BCGs and Barrels easily for sneaky sneaky work. - Direct Impingment = Runs too hot for sustained fire (apparently) - Direct Impingment = no good for general infantry as they cannot clean it properly (apparently) - Direct Impingment = crap suppressed performance with excessive gas to user's face (apparently) - Should be a piston gun. Doesn't matter that the US Military have been running these type of guns for that last 50+ years, and will be for decades to come - even with the M7 rollout (if that actually happens).

That's...err...wow....going to be quite a build. I shudder to think of the cost, but it will be most impressive when put together. I'm resisting anything MWS because I can see it'll a big hole that I'll end up pouring my money into... [*cue internal argument to try and justify it to my missus*] - nope - I need to stay well away from joining the TM master race.

Nope. The entire switch setup has actually been patented by ICS. I actually have one on my desk in front of me - belongs to my neighbour after I replaced the one in his L85. I still scratch my head at the mechanics of it - some very clever people at ICS - just wish they used materials other than ABS and potmetal to put it together. If you need me to pull it apart for pictures, let me know.

They are pretty reasonably priced in the UK (£150). Weirdly this vendor say no Mosfet, but everywhere else says that they do have one fitted. https://www.patrolbase.co.uk/arcturus-at-st01-lwt-ar-15-cqb-sport?pv=21428 I've seen a couple of reviews on it now - my stance on the microswitch trigger is softening...slightly