good future gat??

Discussion in 'Weapons, Equipment & Rations' started by Steamywindow, Dec 2, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. For the description, it appears to be a cross between a Steyr AUG, and M16, and an AK-47/Galil. It also appears to be easily convertible to eject from whichever side the soldier desires, although obviously not in the heat of combat.
  2. Have a look on Heckler and Koch's site, the HK416 looks quite tasty
  3. The blurb seems to concentrate on good ergonomics, accuracy, reliability and the rather groovy sight unit.

    SUSAT- like sighting, flick a switch and it's a red dot laser thingy, no need to look through the sight at short ranges for accurate shots. Fully compatable with the night vision gear, no need to zero when attaching a night sight.

    Costs 'hundreds of dollars'

    Doesn't say if it will stag on for you and clean your boots....
  4. Handled but not fired the Tavor. Build quality was a bit gash really, more fisher price than H&K.
  5. The Germans usually get these sort of things right, and here's what they use;


    SUSAT(ish) bottom sight and Red-dot top sight for quick aquisition. Very light, uses the same UGL and tactical light as the A2, 5.56mm and apparently quite reliable.

    US forces are trialling its younger brother the XM8, which looks funkier but is essentially the same rifle.



    Seems as though the A2 will be in service until 2012-15 (proposed), but if the spams like it I'm sure that it will feature on the test panel for a replacement when the time comes.


  6. Variations on a theme:


    Not that many parts, so cleaning/maintenance should be a breeze.


    Illustration of the integrated weaponsight.

  7. I really dont understand why there isn't a direct US/UK weapon integration. Seeing as now and (most likely) in future operations the US and the UK will be working close together, integration would mean that there would be no sudden parts / ammunition shortage if the situation ever arose.

    Seeing as the UGL and the Tac lights cost the MoD a fair amount of money, it would seem like a good idea to adopt a weapons platform that would allow previous procurements such as these to be integrated with a fair amount of ease.

  8. Cos the Yanks won't adopt a bullpup and the Brits won't ditch the SA-80? One of the original ideas with NATO IIRC was that wpns would be standardised, but too many countries (particularly the US) have or had a Not Invented Here approach:

    Just for general interest for anorak wearers like myself. during the Cold War, Nato countries 1st NATO rifles were:

    Belgium - FAL
    Canada - FAL variant
    Denmark - G3
    France - MAS49/56 (in 7.5x54 French),withdraws in 1966 from the integrated command and all foreign NATO forces leave France
    Iceland - no army
    Italy - Beretta BM59 (modified Garand)
    Luxembourg - FAL
    Netherlands - FAL
    Norway - G3
    Portugal - FAL, G3 & AR-10
    United Kingdom - FAL variant
    United States - M14 (modified Garand)
    Greece - G3
    Turkey - G3
    Germany - FAL initially, then G3
    Spain - CETME (forerunner of G3)
  9. Xm8 binned .It would be better off going to industry say"Build us a squaddy proof rifle that kills people " And then trial what they come up with .
  10. What, you mean the old-fashioned way? Unthinkable! 8)
  11. Because UK and US doctrine is different. Do you want the UK to conduct its infantry operations like the spams? No? Thought not.

    Seriously though, we follow US fashions at our peril.

    Back in the late forties the UK developed the revolutionary 0.280" (7mm) round and EM2 rifle to fire it. However the spams bullied us into adopting a 'proper' full power 0.30" round and we gave in. However the US realised the error of their ways only a few years later and adopted the M16 by 1965. Not being rich like the spams, we had to stick with the SLR for another 20 years.

    The UK often gets slated for the huge amount spent on the SA80, but believe me, it's chicken feed compared to the vast sums that the US have wasted on small arms research over the years, from the abortive SPIW programme in the 60s, to the hugely expensive ACR programme in the 80's and the even more costly OICW programme in the 90's. When they realised that this wasn't going to work, they decided that a 'quick win' was called for with the XM8. And now that's been binned, whilst they toy with the idea of a HK416 upgrade or perhaps decide to hold a competition.

    Follow the US? A really bad move!
  12. Cos the Yanks won't adopt a bullpup ?

    Curious why? What is their objection? Have used M16 briefly and just seemed too akward compared to what I was used to? Are bullpup's less reliable as a rule?
  13. Bullpups are typically easier to Patrol with and hold as they normally have the center of gravity near the pistol grip so no tired left arm if you havent got a sling. But as far as accuracy goes i hear it aint as good. Something to do with where the movement of the working parts takes place. However i could be talking utter sh1t as this information was passed on to me by a "canadian" about 4 years ago.