What is a PDW? Lets discuss (Page 2 of 2)
|
Originally Posted By PieterCoetzee: How'bout you call them CDWs or Civilian Defense Weapons. THEN you can use whatever you think fits your role and wont be accused of using the wrong locker room (sarcasm) I'll keep calling them PDWs because it is by far the best definition of the type of gun we are talking about in the PDW thread, as something more than an EDC handgun and less than a carbine. I'll compromise though. Since you insist a PDW can only be something that fits the NATO request from the 80s that didn't even use the term PDW or lead to an actual contract and issued standard, you can use the term Pedantic Defensive Weapons for your narrow definition, and we will use Personal Defensive Weapons for the guns we're talking about used to actually defend people and everyone can keep using the initials how they see fit. 
|
Originally Posted By Aimless: You're calling each other names at 8 on a sunday in a thread about ancient rome. smiley_freak.gif
|
Originally Posted By ROCK6: D/296 laid out specific requirements for new round and weapons. Compact, with an overall length no greater than an average soldier’s should width (approximately 50cm/20in) Capable of defeating CRISAT-standard soft body armor at 200 meters Better range and accuracy than the 9mm round The shoulder-fired PDW had to weigh less than 3kg/6.6lbs with a magazine capacity of at least 20 rounds The handheld PDW had to weigh less than 1kg/2.2lbs with a magazine capacity of at least 20 rounds Both PDWs had to be compact enough to be carried “hands-free” by a soldier at all times, whether in a vehicle, aircraft cockpit, or when doing their normal job What Makes a PDW a PDW Strip away the brand names and the history, and the PDW reduces to five functional traits: Compact Form Shorter overall length than a standard carbine. Operable in confined spaces like vehicle interiors, stairwells, doorways. Transportable in a bag, case, or on the body without significantly impeding other work. Greater Capability Than a Handgun Longer effective range, improved accuracy through additional contact points, longer sight radius, and higher magazine capacity. Defensive Orientation PDWs are built for reactive engagements. The user’s primary mission is something other than combat and their defensive tool needs to be ready when required without impeding how they move, work, or carry. Rapid Deployment The weapon needs to go from carried to ready faster than a slung carbine allows, and in more situations than a holstered pistol permits Portability and Concealment as Priorities Portability and concealment are intentional design aspects of PDWs, not afterthoughts. A weapons platform that meets the first four criteria but requires a dedicated rifle case is not a PDW. What a PDW is Not A PDW is not a primary combat weapon. It’s not intended to be a standard-issue infantry rifle. Compared to a standard service rifle, a PDW lacks range and terminal performance, but that’s an intentional tradeoff for all the traits listed above. Understanding those trade-offs is much more useful than pretending they don’t exist. PDW or CDW, doesn't matter, it can be what ever you need it to be. It's not a legal term, so GD can't sue you  ROCK6 Great breakdown, IMO. The general requirements come close to what we've talked about in the PDW thread as well, other than "better than 9mm" and "defeating body armor at 200y". Under 20 inches, less than 6.6 lbs and magazine capacity of at least 20 rounds fits most of the stuff actually used as PDWs, from Fluxs to MP5ks to MCX Rattlers. |
Originally Posted By Aimless: You're calling each other names at 8 on a sunday in a thread about ancient rome. smiley_freak.gif
|
Originally Posted By PieterCoetzee: Mine in BOLD Expand the quote for my full comments How'bout you call them CDWs or Civilian Defense Weapons. THEN you can use whatever you think fits your role and wont be accused of using the wrong locker room (sarcasm) And then the common, applicable-to-anyone term can be Personal Defense Weapon. As I am a person, and it's a weapon I choose to defend myself with. ezpz |
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" - Thomas Jefferson
|
Originally Posted By yamahawarrior89: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/372855/1000006720_jpg-3830279.JPG PDW's should be 308  Yes. |
Esstac’s Retarded Social Media Influencer
|
50+ pages of PDW discussion https://www.ar15.com/forums/general/A-mostly-peaceful-election-year-Let-s-talk-PDWs-v2-0/5-2730988/ |
Greatest PDW ad ever: Introducing the Flux Defense Raider 365 |
Brought to you by Carl's Jr.
Joined:
Aug 2026
Posts:
474
EE: 0% (0)
ZAF
|
To answer the question without turning into a circle jerk where everyone presents their favorite implementation, we need to write a performance specification. It needs to define the characteristics of the weapon. Overall size and weight Terminal performance Ballistics Barrier/armor performance For a military arm, the specification needs to consider supply chain: will we introduce a new caliber, or adapt a weapon to an existing caliber? We are defining a weapon that can be carried full time by support troops whose daily tasks might involve driving vehicles and equipment, servicing those machines, aircraft operations, clerical work, anything where a burdensome weapon becomes a liability. Now before everyone gets up in arms, know that I just made up these figures. As a starting point let's go with: The weapon will be capable of shoulder-supported fire A stock can be implemented, of folding, collapsible, or fixed design. This does not exclude bullpup designs Overall length, with stock stowed: 16 inches Weight with full ammunition load: 4 pounds Effective range: 200 m (how do we define this?) Ammunition capacity: not less than 20 rounds Aiming system: iron sights or optics. The aiming system must be demonstrated to the weapon's effective range, including any needed ballistics hold over Accuracy: 1.5 MOA mean radius |
I know I'll never go home.
So set fire to your ships, and past regrets, and be free.
So set fire to your ships, and past regrets, and be free.
Joined:
Aug 2023
Posts:
10308
EE: 0% (0)
NC, USA
|
Originally Posted By 9D1Alpha: So , is "P" for personal , or is it really for personnel ? I've always seen it as "Personal" as is in "individual trooper" ROCK6 |
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" - Thomas Jefferson
|
Is the original specification or solicitation that HK and FN designs fulfilled available? ETA: google thinks it's classified or never publicly published. It provided a link to the trials documentation: https://www.scribd.com/document/726642973/Report-on-Future-PDW-Caliber-Assessment |
I know I'll never go home.
So set fire to your ships, and past regrets, and be free.
So set fire to your ships, and past regrets, and be free.
|
Originally Posted By PieterCoetzee: Of course you will. Now take the male and female off bathroom doors because thats being too precise.  What a lucid and mature rebuttal. |
Originally Posted By Aimless: You're calling each other names at 8 on a sunday in a thread about ancient rome. smiley_freak.gif
|
Originally Posted By ROCK6: I've always seen it as "Personal" as is in "individual trooper" ROCK6 Originally Posted By ROCK6: Originally Posted By 9D1Alpha: So , is "P" for personal , or is it really for personnel ? I've always seen it as "Personal" as is in "individual trooper" ROCK6 The document I just linked uses "personal" |
I know I'll never go home.
So set fire to your ships, and past regrets, and be free.
So set fire to your ships, and past regrets, and be free.
Joined:
Aug 2023
Posts:
10309
EE: 0% (0)
NC, USA
|
Originally Posted By TNC: The document I just linked uses "personal" Originally Posted By TNC: Originally Posted By ROCK6: Originally Posted By 9D1Alpha: So , is "P" for personal , or is it really for personnel ? I've always seen it as "Personal" as is in "individual trooper" ROCK6 The document I just linked uses "personal" That being NATO . If you go to a different organization like DHS , they have room for M4s in somewhat of an "other" categorization. So , one agency/organization can/will vary from one to another. So whatever a PDW is depends on whatever the interpretation is by the adopter. |
|
My humble contribution: Attached File 11.5" 5.56 AR-15 pistol. With the sights folded and the light removed, it fits in an ice fishing case (magazine inserted). The light is stored in a side pouch with a coin to tighten the screw. The sling is secured to the side with two short paracord segments. It doesn't really interfere with operation when it is stowed, and all that's needed to let it loose is to tug on the loose ends of the strings and the sling becomes fully useable. The rest of the paracord wrap helps insulate exposed skin from hot or cold aluminum. The muzzle device is a Simple Threaded Devices linear compensator. I wish that they still made them. I've driven several hours at a time with this at my side. Did that a few times back in 2020. |
The government is just a corporation with a monopoly on violence.
Joined:
Aug 2026
Posts:
476
EE: 0% (0)
ZAF
|
Originally Posted By 74novaman: What a lucid and mature rebuttal. Of course it is, you just dont like what it says. Once you begin to blur language and definitions were do you stop. IF words dont have meaning then we cant communicate. |
|
Originally Posted By PieterCoetzee: Of course it is, you just dont like what it says. Once you begin to blur language and definitions were do you stop. IF words dont have meaning then we cant communicate. The term you're looking for is "where do you stop". Not "were do you stop". As long as we're being extra particular about words having meaning, you should strive to use the correct ones when you attempt to communicate. Either way, deliberately pretending to not understand what someone means when they call a Flux Raider or a Sig Rattler a PDW because it doesn't fit a very narrow definition from a failed NATO trial from 30 years ago is tiresome. Everyone else seems to not struggle with the concept that a PDW means "less than a carbine, more than an EDC" in terms of gun ownership and use. Enjoy being pedantic for the sake of pedantry I suppose. |
Originally Posted By Aimless: You're calling each other names at 8 on a sunday in a thread about ancient rome. smiley_freak.gif
Joined:
Aug 2026
Posts:
477
EE: 0% (0)
ZAF
|
Originally Posted By 74novaman: The term you're looking for is "where do you stop". Not "were do you stop". As long as we're being extra particular about words having meaning, you should strive to use the correct ones when you attempt to communicate. Either way, deliberately pretending to not understand what someone means when they call a Flux Raider or a Sig Rattler a PDW because it doesn't fit a very narrow definition from a failed NATO trial from 30 years ago is tiresome. Everyone else seems to not struggle with the concept that a PDW means "less than a carbine, more than an EDC" in terms of gun ownership and use. Enjoy being pedantic for the sake of pedantry I suppose. Fair enough you caught my typo; but saying a "PDW means "less than a carbine, more than an EDC" leaves out the armor piercing requirement, which was/is a major requirement. I have no problem with SMGs, Honey Badgers, FLUX type weapons. I think they have great value for civilians; but I also suggest that the ability to defeat armor plates remains an important characteristic of a PDW. |
|
Nice. |
|
I don't have a true PDW (by NATO's definition). My 7.5" 300blk with LAW/ARIC folder came pretty close. I don't remember the length when folded, but it might have made it (not sure about ammo performance at 200 yards). My 8" 300blk sans folder is a bit too long to meet the max length. But as far as an HD/SHTF or even a "CDW", it fits the bill for the most part, although I still don't know if it could defeat IIIa soft armor at 200 yards. Maybe (depends on ammo). I know 110gr Vmax at close range makes a mess of IIIA armor....and drags Kevlar fibers with it, and blows a big chunk of rubber out of your backstop. I know 188gr all copper (non-expanding) TUI subs go through IIIA like butter. They barely deform. I know "some" 220gr non-expands subs can (sometimes) make it through IIIA, but I would not depend on it (most didn't). |
110gr V-max - Non circled hole bottom right. Flipped over - Bottom level hole with fibers pulled through.  1" ballistic pad that sat in front of backstop that also had 1" ballistic rubber pad (backstop filled with rubber mulch and is heavy steel). Fiber from the kevlar that got pulled through the first ballistic pad and the chunk it took out of the 2nd rubber backstop it went through.  As an aside, the circles were subsonic shots, the X's were subs that didn't make it through. I tried some more subs later that didn't go through. I was able to retrieve two subs that DID make it through, and I cut out the subs that didn't make it through. The rest that made it through (and the Vmax) are still in the trap. That 188gr TUI is on the far left.  
|
|
Originally Posted By panthermark: I don't have a true PDW (by NATO's definition). My 7.5" 300blk with LAW/ARIC folder came pretty close. I don't remember the length when folded, but it might have made it (not sure about ammo performance at 200 yards). My 8" 300blk sans folder is a bit too long to meet the max length. But as far as an HD/SHTF or even a "CDW", it fits the bill for the most part, although I still don't know if it could defeat IIIa soft armor at 200 yards. Maybe (depends on ammo). I know 110gr Vmax at close range makes a mess of IIIA armor....and drags Kevlar fibers with it, and blows a big chunk of rubber out of your backstop. I know 188gr all copper (non-expanding) TUI subs go through IIIA like butter. They barely deform. I know "some" 220gr non-expands subs can (sometimes) make it through IIIA, but I would not depend on it (most didn't). Folder makes a big difference.  
|
TEAM GIMMICK FOREVER
|
Originally Posted By PieterCoetzee: Fair enough you caught my typo; but saying a "PDW means "less than a carbine, more than an EDC" leaves out the armor piercing requirement, which was/is a major requirement. So funny thing, the "armor piercing requirement" (CRISAT target) for the 80s PDW contracts were not analogous to any current or future Soviet body armor issued to paratroopers and was functionally there to rule out bids that didn't innovate a new caliber. The "AP requirement" was created by measuring what 124 gr. NATO spec 9mm will penetrate and then increasing the barrier until it would reliably stop 9mm subguns. They asked for better penetration than 9mm, not for a specific target. The CRISAT target requirement was not for armor penetration, per se, just for better penetration of hard barriers in general. They wanted innovation and the only way to force that is to adjust requirements so that current equipment does not fit the definition. Second, the MP7 is considered a classic PDW, and yet its use by Germany was to replace the Uzi, which was mostly in use by specialists in combat formations, not rear-echelon troops. APC drivers, tankers, commandos, MWD-handlers, etc. It was not for rear-echelon troops to fight off Soviet paratroopers by penetrating their body armor. I think you're greatly overestimating the need for something to be AP in order to be a PDW. |
Remember kids, the first rule of gun safety is to have fun.
|
This may not meet the textbook definition of a PDW, but it serves the role of a Personal Defense Weapon for me. Attached File |
"An age of glory passed like a lightning flash. The mandate of heaven passed from you but you didn't see. Times change and power passes. It is the pity of the world."
Song dynasty poet
Song dynasty poet
Joined:
May 2025
Posts:
934
EE: 100% (4)
TX, USA
|
The original concept was to give them more than a 1911 in terms of range, capacity, and ease of hitting the target, but lighter and far more compact than a 10 lb rifle. The submachinegun at the time was a heavy pig, generally not select fire, and not part of the equation. The M1/M2 carbine excelled to the point of being used on the front lines in WWII and Korea in huge numbers. Now pistols are better, submachineguns are smaller, lighter, select fire, and a lot more accurate, and rifles are smaller and lighter. There really isn't a need for a separate PDW anymore given current options. |
|
Originally Posted By Capt-Planet: There's a whole big thread on PDWs here. https://www.ar15.com/forums/General/A-mostly-peaceful-election-year-Let-s-talk-PDWs-v2-0/5-2730988/ As I said in that thread: "To me, the MP7 and VZ61 are PDWs because they're small and don't weigh as much. You can use an oversized holster and wear them. P90, MP5, Uzi, etc are SMGs. PCC would include any of them if an SBR instead of an MG or un-Tapco'ed pistol." |
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" - Thomas Jefferson
|
In the current days I feel a pdw needs to have the capability to stop the majority of possible threats one may encounter. As such it will depend on your AO. For me, this means I want a short capable 5.56 carbine. A concealed handgun is the need it now short range option, but a short 5.56 rifle isn’t far away and is a constant road trip companion. |
|
Originally Posted By PieterCoetzee: I absolutely love my M5KPDW. Its heavy by 2026 standards of SMGs but small enough to carry in a shoulder holster if a bit awkward unless you have your suit tailored for it (you should have seen his eyes...) The mp5k is not great for concealment due to the mag. To run in a shoulder rig, you’re using a 15 round mag. A Glock 19 with the new mecgar steel mag can have 18 rounds in a smaller form factor. Add an Acro or COA and you have a SMG equivalent handgun. |
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants" - Thomas Jefferson
Joined:
Aug 2023
Posts:
10318
EE: 0% (0)
NC, USA
|
Originally Posted By EnablerNo1: In the current days I feel a pdw needs to have the capability to stop the majority of possible threats one may encounter. As such it will depend on your AO. For me, this means I want a short capable 5.56 carbine. A concealed handgun is the need it now short range option, but a short 5.56 rifle isn’t far away and is a constant road trip companion. Those fit the criteria; rear echelon ( home/work) , vehicle crew ( truck gun/travel ) , and special forces ( concealment/portability ...) |
|
I want as small chassis system I can get for the Ruger RXM 9mm with a folder style brace. Concealeable reasonable firepower and stable platform. This should be smaller than new Keltec snub hub. 9mm carrying a lot more ammunition than 300blk or 5.56. Weight is a big consideration for some of us older folks and boomers. Carried with a 17 round magazine and a couple of 24 round magazines should get you out of anything domestic. Looking for a compact chassis and brace reasonable priced. |