new gun

C

cujo

Guest
here's a question, just out of interest does any1 know if the rm's are going to hav a new choice in weapon any time soon, i don't know why, *text deleted*'e never held or seen one but for some odd reason i *text deleted* like the SA80, & was wondering if they wer gna change it 2 something better like one of the newly developed cool ones shown on 'future weapons' on the discovery channel?
 
C

cujo

Guest
*text deleted*, well i wudnt know, im sure there a gd gun but ther's better ones out there, kinda obsessed with the m4 at the moment, playing cod4 2 much i guess
 

jim87spencer

Valuable Contributor
Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Posts
351
Reaction score
2
SA80 is the design but there are different types, RM use L85A1... and its one of the most accurate rifles.
Rifles with magazines behind the trigger are better.. i remember reading why, but i cant remember... i think its got something to do with it traveling further down the barrel...

Anyway, it could be worse, we could be using a FAMAS.
 

PoyserRM

Valuable Contributor
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Posts
241
Reaction score
0
i love the SA80a2, i fired a few rounds at a day with the marines once and there was just somethin about it where i just couldnt put it down *text deleted*
 
C

cujo

Guest
*text deleted*, imagine if we used AK47's , that wud just b embarrising
 

Commando Kennedy

Valuable Contributor
Joined
Mar 17, 2008
Posts
201
Reaction score
0
mate AK47's are the most reliable weapon known to man..n if one of them rounds hit u, *text deleted* fu*ked..7.62mm..same as the GPMG..AK's are beasty shame them joe dakis have to use them for terrorism!..but i like the SA80a2..pretty reliable ive been told..Mp5 wud be better Yeahhh Boyy!
 

jim87spencer

Valuable Contributor
Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Posts
351
Reaction score
2
After successfully completing recruit training, marines should undergo surgery to have a bionic arm fitted with built in GAU-8... one day perhaps... one day
 

JMH

Valuable Contributor
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Posts
448
Reaction score
0
I personally don't like the sa80, i'm sure it's reliable and accurate but it's not practical for close quarters, i've never been a fan of the bullpup design.
 

Stacka

Army Commando
Joined
Mar 2, 2008
Posts
1,083
Reaction score
2
Of course it is, that's what it was designed for. Everybody slates the SA80, but all the Marines I've met say its a quality weapon!

Oh, and I dont think we will be getting a whole new gun, but the SA80A3 is coming into service soon (I THINK)

The A3 wont actually be any different, only holding a larger round and with a more acurate set of sights, maybe a horizontal handle for close quarter combat, but its still a sa80. Heckler and Koch have been doing a full revison for 2 years.
 

JMH

Valuable Contributor
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Posts
448
Reaction score
0
What i mean by it not being practical for close quarters is the fact that if you were to go round a left corner you have to expose your body first because you can't hold it let handed, i've also spoke to ex service men about it and they too say its a quality weapon but that's it's downfall.
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Posts
26
Reaction score
0
How is it possible to hold an opinion on which weapon is superior whithout having expierience of both?

I think the bloke in predator with the minigun looked cool. Can I have one of them?
 
S

Sotiris

Guest
Has anyone ever tried to strip and clean the A2???

I don't know about you lads but any weapon that comes with a bloody tool kit is not to be trusted!

I remember my old G3A3. The only things you needed to clean it were a rod and a rag. That was it. You could strip it down and put it together with nothing but your hands. I could hit targets the size of a human head at 300 metres with iron sights.

I was speaking to one of the corporals in our Company (OTC), says he hates the weapon, much prefers the old SLR. Which in fact, is extremely similar to the G3A3.

Robust, reliable, simple, accurate. These are the qualities all standard firearms should have.

While any weapon handling drill becomes simple with practise I still think there are far too many moving parts and procedures with the A2. The fact that you have to throw your left arm over your right just to cock the bloody thing takes the piss.

You can also judge the effectiveness of a weapon on how many versions they've had to release. They're already planning an A3, so what does that tell you about the initial design!!?

The MOD should have taken the hint the first time round when everyone was complaining about the A1. Ditch it, sell it off and start again. For gods sake just buy off the wall from the states. So much cheaper! Would make combined operations with the Yanks a little simpler as well.
 

JMH

Valuable Contributor
Joined
Jul 31, 2008
Posts
448
Reaction score
0
Sotiris i couldn't agree more with you. As reliable or accurate as it may be, there are better weapons.
 
S

Sotiris

Guest
Thanks for that Stoker.

See now, what (also) worries me is that the A2 is equipped with SUSAT.

What this means to me is that (correct me if I'm wrong please...I'm sure you will) soldiers arn't trained for iron sights anymore. This has a very specific technique and is invaluable to all soldiers...I believe.

Imagine your weapon goes dry, or malfunctions in a FIBUA contact. You haven't got time to get our your tool kit, sit down and strip your weapon or you have no more ammo. Considering all the enemy are using 7x62 your weapon is incompatible. You pick up an AK47 or G3A3, both used extensively in the Middle East (obviously), and guess what? You're having a little difficulty in lining up the sights.

In addition, if you drop your weapon and break the SUSAT you've got to clear the room as they use tritium (I think that what it is) to help with low light amplification. This stuff is nasty, do not inhale!!

If the A2 is effective to 500 metres...well...the G3 is effective to 400 with iron sights!! And you don't have to worry about dropping it, getting it wet or sandy.

You get my point.

Either way, the best person to be speaking to regarding this matter is RMRO who's probably been on operations with it.
 

jim87spencer

Valuable Contributor
Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Posts
351
Reaction score
2
What i mean by it not being practical for close quarters is the fact that if you were to go round a left corner you have to expose your body first because you can't hold it let handed, i've also spoke to ex service men about it and they too say its a quality weapon but that's it's downfall.

The only thing you have exposed if you were to poke yourself around a left corner holding a rifle left handed is your face... so if somethings going to hit you, its going to be a lot worse, amirite?..
 

New Threads

Top