Talk:Rate of fire

Untitled

If chain guns have speeds higher than machine guns (claimed at 1000-1800RPM), then why would it "reach" a mere five rounds per second? That's 300RPM.

Maybe it is supposed to be 50 rounds per second. Uwilldrop 10:30, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

I suspect the problem is an apples-to-oranges comparison. The machine guns referred to there are mostly 5.56 and 7.62mm weapons (e.g. 550 rpm for the M60 machine gun, 1000 for the M249 Squad Automatic Weapon from an M16 magazine). But many chainguns are 20-30mm cannon, which is going to slow them down a lot (e.g. the M242 chaingun, a 25mm weapon with a cyclic rate of 100-200 rpm). All the smaller-caliber chainguns I could find are also multibarrel, which gives them extremely high rates of fire. I think it's probably less confusing if I just remove the chaingun reference there. --Calair 03:26, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Sustained vs effective rate

I think this article has got sustained and effective rate of fire mixed up - the sustained rate of fire is the rate that fire can be "sustained" indefinitely without overheating. This is according to US Army manuals. 216.212.34.23 (talk) 23:56, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Here's a source:

https://www.moore.army.mil/Infantry/DoctrineSupplement/ATP3-21.8/appendix_f/CombatTechniquesofFire/DistributionConcentrationandRateofFire/index.html 216.212.34.23 (talk) 23:57, 10 July 2023 (UTC)