FFS FR_Trooper!!!!!! What are you doing ya fekkin numbnut! Remove yourself to the C*ocks and N*bbers thread immediately!!!!

Last edited by Doogonk on Wed Oct 28, 2009 12:35 pm; edited 1 time in total

You are easily the stupidest mong I have been made aware of this week (epic considering I've been reading newspaper articles about the increase in Down's Syndrome sufferers).

Suppose it all depends on which 7.62mm round they're talking about - if they even understand the difference!

They have a choice - For instance... OA dons anorak

7.62 x 39 M1943 as used in AK47/AKMS/RPD, etc; okay up to 300 metres, then forget any serious attempt at marksmanship. The PS bullet has a mild steel core which can often be seen printing a perfect profile in targets even at close range, suggesting that they may break up on leaving the muzzle - depends on the manufacturer. Still hurts, though!

7,62 x 54R (Rimmed) - (1930 Type 'D' bullet) as used in PKM/Dragunov and various older MMGs, a highly effective and accurate round out to 900 metres and beyond.

7.62 x 51 (Nato), highly effective and accurate round out to normal combat ranges with a rifle and equals the 7.62 x 54R as an MG round out to 900 metres and beyond.

Then, of course, just to sow a little confusion in the journalistic mind, we can add the 7.62 Tokarev, 7.62 x 25 (Model 30), which is, of course, a PISTOL round!

Stows anorak away for another day

Yes. I'm sure the lads in Helmand, already hideously overburdened, would appreciate carrying 300 rds. of 7.62mm weighing 18lbs in addition to a slightly heavier weapon, as opposed to the much lighter 5.56mm equivalent (weight of ammo anyone?), and anyone who thinks 5.56 will not penetrate a car-door (at battle ranges anyway)is a c*** and should STFU! In CQB and at ranges under 300m there is simply no comparison between say, an AK47 and an SLR/M14, the latter are at a real disadvantage IMHO.

Now this is just an exercise in thought,Because there is no logistical or financial way it would ever go ahead.....but just for discussions sake.

Is there some other direction that they need to be thinking in terms of small arms rather than sticking to just a few developed calibres?....some kind of evolution or lateral thinking.

Would the 4.7mm caseless round that H&K developed be a effective round in this conflict in AFG? It appeared to be incredibly accurate and did some silly speed like 3000ft per second,but was possibly less lethal per round.....however the rifle was designed to fire 3 round bursts at normal single round accuracy.

Or dare I say it,Modified rounds?...obviously ignoring the Geneva convention bleeding hearts,because the Taliban always adhere to those rules dont they.....increased lethality rounds or even mixed magazine loadouts,like full metal jacket and soft point alternate loading....some sort of out of the box thinking?

www.militaryfactory.co...arms_id=77

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...6_Koch_G11

...absolutely , just beat me to it

Odo

It must be very, very difficult for someone fighting for their life to know whether a round is hitting, or not. You would guess that most cases of 1,000 ft lbs of energy going into somebody and it having no effect would actually be cases of 1,000 ft lbs not going into somebody.

The muzzle energy figures (though) for 5.56 vs 7.62 NATO are obviously even more in favour of the 7.62 in the real world because it sheds energy much more slowly.

You would think that some cadavers (or pigs) and a range would settle the issue as regards the effects on humans.

Last edited by gobbyidiot on Wed Oct 28, 2009 1:19 pm; edited 1 time in total

Give me an SA80 and stand Mr Drummond 300m away... and we will put his claims to the test... utter bull****

Really thanks, I never knew that, nor have I seen those photos before.

Or, we are lousy shots. Quantity is a sort of quality. now where have heard that one before.

Will always think of the soldier at Hue that blew off a mag over the wall without looking.
Not a soldier, a civilian in uniform.

That's not even remotely funny

I had the unpleasant experience of having my completely round-less unit undergo an attack by the designated 'enemy', who were possessed of blanks, thunderflashes, the works. Needless to say, the enemy just laughed at our vicious shouting and I had several guys seriously wondering where they could find some live ammo. Not at all good for morale and made a mockery of the whole thing. Retaining a sense of humour was usually my one and only positive attribute, but even I was wandering around with a snarl that wouldn't have been out of place on a tiger with a toothache.

A simple shout of FIX SWORDS would have made them reconsider.

I was sorely tempted to turn a blind eye to using the other end of the SLR, but we were outnumbered and I needed my guys back on duty the next day.

Put 400 hk417 in stores in bastion. if they all get taken for use, buy some more.

Basically, give the soldiers the option and let them decide. OK, it costs money, but surely gordon brown wouldn't try and pennypinch on defence while we are at war!

Watch what you're saying because someone might think you're being serious instead of sarcastic

I have never fired a rifle in anger!..I always ensured I was full of bonhomie smiling and cracking a joke as I let one fly.

I presume you missed the target?

Castle Street is only a couple of hundred yards long as I remember.

True but before they built the West link road you could pop one right up through Divis street to the bottom of the Falls road from check point at the junction of Queen Street Castle street

What about the 7mm as used for the EM2?

[quote=wiki]The following comparisons are excerpts from a manual published by the "Small Arms Group Armament Design Establishment" from the Ministry of Supply

Results in order of .280 | .303 | .30/06

Bullet weight 139 gr/9.0 g | 174 gr/11.3 g | 166 gr/10.8 g
Muzzle velocity 2,500 ft/s/760 m/s | 2,456 ft/s/749 m/s | 2,770 ft/s/840 m/s
Timber penetration at 2,000 yards (2,000 m) 2.9 in/74 mm | 2.4 in/61 mm | 1.6 in/41 mm
Timber penetration at 100 yards (100 m) 45 in/110 cm | 42 in/110 cm | 47 in/120 cm
Range for penetration of airborne type steel helmet 1,000 yd/910 m | 900 yd/820 m | 1,600 yd/1,500 m
Vertex height for 600-yard (500 m) range 3.3 ft/1.0 m | 3.1 ft/0.94 m | 3 ft/0.91 m
Recoil energy per round 7.4 ft·lbf/10.0 J with EM-2 11 ft·lbf/15 J with No.4 Rifle 14.4 ft·lbf/19.5 J with the Garand

From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.280_British

Last edited by chocolate_frog on Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:16 pm; edited 1 time in total