Thread: LSW...the Armys view...

Long silly weapon

south korea is going to be deploying this to the afghan in the new year. 20mm launcher

"The idea is that if the average Jock can't hit with a bullet at 400m (because he can only group to 4" to 6" at 100m, before you start worrying about range and wind and excitement), then you give him a weapon where a miss is as good as a direct hit - namely, a grenade launcher."


Hang on. If the average Jock is getting 6" grouping at 100m, thats over the grouping size for an infantry soldier and he shouldn't be moving on to more interesting shooting. Most of my lads are averaging 3" groups and we're part timers!

BTW Shooting in Army is not helped by some f**kwit not rebuilding ranges when we swapped from Imperial to metric. 100 yards is not 100 metres, at the 400m marked point thats 35 metres short. And the Fig 11 is a shite target! How high is the fig 11? 1.114 metres? And that is supposedly a 6' man charging at you ? Well 6' is 1.8m. So we are teaching people to hit targets that are too short and too close.

Rant over....

[quote="Kitmarlowe"]"The idea is that if the average Jock can't hit with a bullet at 400m (because he can only group to 4" to 6" at 100m, before you start worrying about range and wind and excitement), then you give him a weapon where a miss is as good as a direct hit - namely, a grenade launcher."


Hang on. If the average Jock is getting 6" grouping at 100m, thats over the grouping size for an infantry soldier and he shouldn't be moving on to more interesting shooting. Most of my lads are averaging 3" groups and we're part timers!

BTW Shooting in Army is not helped by some f**kwit not rebuilding ranges when we swapped from Imperial to metric. 100 yards is not 100 metres, at the 400m marked point thats 35 metres short. And the Fig 11 is a shite target! How high is the fig 11? 1.114 metres? And that is supposedly a 6' man charging at you ? Well 6' is 1.8m. So we are teaching people to hit targets that are too short and too close.

Rant over....[/quote

Many ranges are rebuilt in Metric eg. Llansilin which has been shortened to 400m. Kingsbury is still imperial and goes back to 600yds (550 yards)

It's a moot point, if you can group/hit reliably at 365m you won't really be having problems at 400.

A fig 11 represents a man charging not a man standing up waiting to be shot at. In any case, hitting a static fig 12 at 400 ought to be quite within the capability of any rifleman.

Originally Posted by Stonker

Having read (with a good deal of skepticism) a number of Brit Army Review articles bakc in the early '80s, that touted the LSW as the answer to a sharpshooting maiden's prayer - which seemed to me to be acknowledgement of the weapon's manifest inadequacy as a squad fire support weapon, I was intrigued to find (elsewhere on ARRSE) this piece of news:

Originally Posted by Skynet

Non-Subscriber Extract
UK selects 7.62 mm Sharpshooter weapon for Afghan ops
By Andrew White
29 December 2009

The L129A1 will provide UK forces with a sharpshooting capability to combat insurgents out to 800 m (LEI)

UK forces are to receive a semi-automatic 7.62 mm x 51 mm 'sharpshooter' weapon to combat Taliban forces engaging beyond the maximum effective range of the 5.56 mm L85A2 assault rifle.

In a USD2.5 million deal the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) has contracted Law Enforcement International (LEI) to supply 440 LM7 semi-automatic rifles.

The urgent operational requirement follows calls from troops on the ground for a weapon that can be comfortably patrolled with, can be rapidly initiated and provide an increased range for contacts out to 800 m.

To be redesignated the L129A1, the gas-operated weapon carries a 20-round magazine, is 945 mm long and weighs 5 kg. It will be manufactured by Lewis Machine & Tool Company in the United States, with deliveries expected to begin in early 2010.

Features of the weapon include a single-piece upper receiver and free-floating, quick-change barrels available in 305 mm, 406 mm and 508 mm. It has four Picatinny rails with a 540 mm top rail for night vision, thermal and image intensifying optics. Stock options include fixed or retractable versions.
More
http://www.janes.com/news/defence/jd...229_1_n.shtml?

Indicates a recognition that:
(a) 5.56 mm is a good round - but not for all ranges
(b) Belt-fed weapons are not a cure-all (not even 7.62mm belt-fed) - mainly because they cannot be brought to bear fast enough, or with sufficent accuracy.

If I have this right, we'll soon be seeing rifle Sections equipped with:
SA80 ( + UGL )
Minimi
L129A1 (see above)

7.62 semi-auto!

Suggested it will be "one per section"... wonder how long that will last...

To add: looking at the cut of its jib, hope it doesn't require a girl's name and being sung to at night

Originally Posted by Kitmarlowe

. . . . we are teaching people to hit targets that are too short and too close.

Rant over....

No. We are teaching people tto shoot at targets that are neither cammed, nor concealed. The first challenge is finding the enemy. The fig 11 is not too small - it's too bloody visible. People who run around making like a fig 11 don't very often make it home.

"It's a moot point, if you can group/hit reliably at 365m you won't really be having problems at 400.

A fig 11 represents a man charging not a man standing up waiting to be shot at. In any case, hitting a static fig 12 at 400 ought to be quite within the capability of any rifleman"

That's not the problem. The problem is that we are effectively teaching that a target that is the size of a 12-14 year old at 365m is a man at 400m. Think about it. Think about applying learnt habits of shooting on a range at a target that is only 3' 9" tall on a battlefield against a target that is 5'10" tall or higher.

Originally Posted by BoomShackerLacker

7.62 semi-auto!

Suggested it will be "one per section"... wonder how long that will last...

To add: looking at the cut of its jib, hope it doesn't require a girl's name and being sung to at night

If I read it right, it is being bought as a UOR. So - it will last either:

(a) As long as Ops in AFG, or

(b) Until most of the one-off buy is shagged out.

(whichever is sooner)

If they were to buy a small pool and hand them over on roulement (as they did in NI with Browning .50 HMGs and the M79 40mm gren launcher ) I would not be surprised.

It's just so much easier to do that, than to acknowledge that our pre 9/11, pre-TELIC/HERRICK small arms thinking was largely based on fantasy.

Anyoone out there still serving wanna tell me whether MINIMI is expected to have a 20 - 30 yr service life? Or is that just another expedient - adopted when messy real life intruded on plans written in procurement dreamland?

Originally Posted by gogs007

south korea is going to be deploying this to the afghan in the new year. 20mm launcher

Will they deploy pack mules to carry the ammo, batteries and everything else?

I believe the French are planning something similar with PAPOP

Originally Posted by Kitmarlowe

. . . we are effectively teaching that a target that is the size of a 12-14 year old at 365m is a man at 400m. Think about it. Think about applying learnt habits of shooting on a range at a target that is only 3' 9" tall on a battlefield against a target that is 5'10" tall or higher.

Let's ignore the smple fact that AK47s are already in the hands of (literally) millions of unsympathetic 14 year olds, and concentrate on remembering that smart men/boys of whatever size will camouflage themselves, lie down/hide when under fire, and even dig holes in which to do these things. Did you somehow manage to sleep through that part of basic training?

'Invisible' enemies have been a fact of life since the emergence of smokeless ammo, mag-fed rifles and indirect fire weapons.

If we concentrate on teaching people to shoot at figs 11, we are not prepping them for combat.

Originally Posted by Stonker

Originally Posted by Kitmarlowe

. . . we are effectively teaching that a target that is the size of a 12-14 year old at 365m is a man at 400m. Think about it. Think about applying learnt habits of shooting on a range at a target that is only 3' 9" tall on a battlefield against a target that is 5'10" tall or higher.

Let's ignore the smple fact that AK47s are already in the hands of (literally) millions of unsympathetic 14 year olds, and concentrate on remembering that smart men/boys of whatever size will camouflage themselves, lie down/hide when under fire, and even dig holes in which to do these things. Did you somehow manage to sleep through that part of basic training?

'Invisible' enemies have been a fact of life since the emergence of smokeless ammo, mag-fed rifles and indirect fire weapons.

If we concentrate on teaching people to shoot at figs 11, we are not prepping them for combat.

From what I can gather, fighting through the avarage Afghan compound must be a nightmare, what with the defensive layout, tunnels, minute embrasures and bomb-proof construction

Even things like the IBSR are far from ideal.

all these posters regaling us with stories of ironsight marksmanship in days of yore are you aware we do an apwt a year on ranges and anything else is unscored as its tlftt or lftt.

days on the range going through LF 5-13 are a myth, hopefully the new aosp will address this.

Originally Posted by Pillager

all these posters regaling us with stories of ironsight marksmanship in days of yore are you aware we do an apwt a year on ranges and anything else is unscored as its tlftt or lftt.

days on the range going through LF 5-13 are a myth, hopefully the new aosp will address this.

It was a crying shame the first attempt at AOSP failed to do so. The Shoot-To-Kill regime that preceded it was manifestly inadequate - I'm not sure the Army has had an effective approach to training riflemen for combat since about 1918.