Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts





I recently had an opportunity to take a look at a PS90.  These are the extended-barrel, semi-auto only version of the FN P90.  Aside from the lengthened barrel, barrel shroud, and modifications to the fire control group, they are identical to P90s.


The P90 was the correct idea at the correct time for FN Herstal.  Prior to its introduction, they had been focused on the BRG-15, a 15.5mm very heavy machine gun:




This potent weapon fired a monstrous 15mm, later 15.5mm round that edged out the 14.5x114mm round for raw power.  The idea, as I understand it, was that Conventional Forces Europe treaty restrictions limited the number of vehicles armed with autocannons that signatory nations could possess.  Heavy machine guns were substantially less restricted.


While the BRG-15 had a number of desirable features, such as selectable dual ammo feed and APDS ammunition, it did not sell, and FNH needed badly a new, hot product.


Enter the P90.  FN had been working on a new type of ammunition for a PDW for some time.  Their initial ammunition concepts had been quite exotic, featuring APDS projectiles fired from a rimfire cartridge case:






FN had grasped that a modern army is mostly support personnel; mechanics, cooks, clerks, etc, and actually only a minority are front-line combat troops.  If they could sell a weapon to arm second-line troops, and if they could get this new class of weapon to be NATO standard, they would be fat and happy once again after all the money they'd wasted on the BRG-15.

H&K thwarted them on the NATO standardization front, but FN did get comfortably back in the black, as the P90 has sold quite well.


The design of the P90 is, shall we say, heavily inspired by the Steyr AUG.




The AUG features a cast aluminum receiver, a polymer stock which houses the trigger, fire control components and magazine well, and a bolt carrier group that slides on two guide rods with internal return springs.


This is the aluminum receiver of the P90:





Here are the telltale porosity marks of casting:





Here is the polymer stock, showing the magazine well and some of the components of the trigger group:




You can also see that there is a seam between the two stock halves; wide enough to admit sunlight in some places.



And here is the back of the stock, showing the hammer pack taken out of it:




Finally, here is the bolt, which rides on twin guide rails with external return springs.  I guess that's a little different:




The P90 is a simple blowback design, which greatly reduces the cost of manufacture because there are no breech locking components that need to be made to tight tolerances or made of high-quality material.  However, this does place some constraints on the ammunition design.


Here are the sockets in the receiver, astride the barrel breech where those rods fit into:




FN wasted hardly any time coming up with something new; they simply put their new 50 round magazine into a straight-blowback AUG, and set about selling it.  There is actually a lot about the design that suggests it was somewhat rushed.  Late in the development of the P90, the ammunition was shortened by a few milimeters.  Instead of completely redesigning the whole gun and magazine:





The magazines simply feature an indentation that fills the space the original, longer rounds used to.


From a production engineering standpoint, the P90 has many admirable features.  It has a minimum of machined features, and the machined parts are very simple shapes.  The receiver is cast with some machining to final dimensions, and the stock is injection molded.  Casting and injection molding are both well-suited to cheap, high-volume production.  Parts that would be machined in other designs, such as the fire control lockwork and hammer, are injection molded in the P90.


The P90 also features a number of parts that are semi-permanently affixed to larger assemblies, and can only be serviced at an armorer level:




The charging handle and the charging handle return spring are looped around the barrel, and are not user-serviceable.




The trigger transfer bar and magazine catch components are sandwiched in-between the two stock halves.


The return springs cannot be de-mounted from the bolt either.  This is actually typical of non-US designs; the degree to which the end-user can service and modify the weapon is limited to basic field stripping.


 I remember being shocked at how fiddly and difficult it was to pull the bolt from the bolt carrier group in a TAR-21, only to find out later, reading the manual, that this is supposed to be an armorer level repair.  Apparently the bolt cannot even be removed from the bolt carrier on the new Cz 805 without tools:



To American shooters, the P90 comes off rather poorly.  It doesn't disassemble as far as they would expect, and it looks very slapped together utilitarian. For FN it was exactly the right design at the right time.  It had wide appeal and could be made in massive quantities cheaply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Colli is steam powered and not Uranium powered Atomovoz?!


Fission used to boil water to turn turbines.




The mechanics of the P90 magazine are interesting, and it seems to work very well.


A big part of this is probably the ammunition itself.  Each cartridge case of 5.7x28mm is coated in very slippery teflon, which allows it to extract cleanly.  This also means that it slides nicely along the turntable ramp in the magazine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...
  • 3 months later...
  • 1 year later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By Beer
      I haven't found an appropriate thread where to put some interesting rare stuff related to WW2 development, be it industrial one or makeshift field modifications. 
      Let's start with two things. The first one is a relatively recently found rarity from Swedish archives - a drawing of ČKD/BMM V8H-Sv tank. The drawing and a letter was found by WoT enthusiasts in Swedish archives in 2014 (the original announcement and the drawing source is here). The drawing is from a message dated 8th September 1941. One of the reasons why this drawing was not known before may be that the Czech archives were partially destroyed by floods in 2002. Anyway it is an export modification of the V-8-H tank accepted into Czechoslovak service as ST vz.39 but never produced due to the cancelation of all orders after Münich 1938 (for the same reason negotiations about licence production in Britain failed). Also later attempt to sell the tank to Romania failed due to BMM being fully busy with Wehrmacht priority orders. The negotiations with Sweden about licence production of V8H-Sv lasted till 1942, at least in May 1942 Swedish commission was present in Prague for negotiations. The tank differed compared to the base ST vz.39 in thicker armor with different front hull shape (armor 60 mm @ 30° on the hull front and also 60 mm on the turret; all sides were 40 mm thick). The tank was heavier (20 tons) and had the LT vz.38 style suspension with probably even larger wheels. The engine was still the same Praga NR V8 (240-250 Hp per source). The armament was unchanged with 47 mm Škoda A11 gun and two vz.37 HMG. The commander's cupola was of the simple small rotating type similar to those used on AH-IV-Sv tankettes. It is known that the Swedes officially asked to arm the tank with 75 mm gun, replace the engine with Volvo V12 and adding third HMG to the back of the turret. In the end the Swedes decided to prefer their own Strv/m42. 

      Source of the drawing
      The second is makeshift field modification found on Balkans. It appears Ustasha forces (and possibly some SS anti-partizan units) used several Italian M15/42 medium tanks with turrets from Pz.38(t). There are several photos of such hybrids but little more is known. On one photo it is possible to see Ustasha registration number U.O. 139.

      Few more photos of such hybrid.
      It appears that the source of all those photos to be found on the internet is this book, Armoured units of the Axis forces in southeastern Europe in WW2 by Dinko Predoevic. 
    • By pizza654
      Hi as most of you know who are in the gun community a bunch of AR 70/90 kits came into the country and theirs still no barrels or receivers in production. Since I cant find anything I decided that I'm just going to make my own barrel and I've found the measurements from a guy on reddit who lives in Italy. 
      As I was getting the measurements a curiosity ran through my head, how do you mathematically figure out the proper diameter of the gas port hole for the gas block in the barrel?
      Much help will be appreciated! 
    • By tastethecake
      Found this instructional manual on screw machine (think of it as all mechanical CNC machine that takes forever to tool up) setup, and it got me thinking about how much of a lost art running one of these things is. CNC lathes and machines in general are obviously much easier to set up but they still cannot match the potential of a multiple spindle screw machine that can spit out parts like nobody's business (they can come quite close however). 

      Another topic of conversation that fascinates me is the concept of the multiple spindle milling machine, at first glance it seems like an inelegant solution to the problem of increasing mill production, but that's just me. Does anyone have any idea if form tools were ever used to cut the outer profile of parts in one pass on these machines? 

      Perhaps I am looking at this from the wrong way however,  once production becomes so important that you need to improve the output of a screw machine, it might be best to look at other options (die casting, stamping, etc.).

      One last note, I wanted to see what people think of stamping sheet metal gears. Is this just a novelty thing someone does for their CAD portfolio or something actually viable?

      More sources below...
      How many spindles are really necessary?
      Running a multiple spindle machine in a small part run world
    • By Curly_
      This came up in a recent discussion I had with a friend over Discord, concerning a hypothetical near-peer conflict (particularly in an urban environment). My friend is of the belief that in such a conflict there isn't no reason to field any small arms (not just service rifles or light machine guns) in anything larger than something like 5.56 NATO, the rationale being that a.) you can carry more of it compared something like 6.5 Creedmoor or 7.62 NATO, b.) you're mostly going to be using it suppressing the enemy so that you can drop high explosives on their heads, and c.) since most combat takes place under 300 meters the extra range would be unnecessary. Is there any merit to this line of thinking? What cases can be made for using more powerful, longer ranged cartridges in SDMRs and (tripod or vehicle mounted) machine guns?
  • Create New...