OK, so I'm not in the army, but I do work in a fairly pressurised operational environment where we need good kit (and, shockingly, occasionally get it). For example, about six years ago there was a job on our squad where the I.T. and comms we had were shite. A mate of mine (a silver-tongued b@stard) just went up to a very senior officer and said "Guv, this kit is shite. This job is going to come seriously on top if we don't sort it out." An hour later he's off down to a specialist retailer buying some extremely Gucci kit using a company cheque for our team. If only that happened all the time. So, I was reading the debate about the new SA80A2 carbine but didn't comment or ask questions as frankly the level of expertise there was rather daunting (and my own non-operational experience of SA80A1 as a TA infantryman was shocking...and I'm left-handed). I've also seen those Yank websites where people send out body armour, better ammo and kit (etc) to guys in Iraq. Marine snipers posting on web boards "I need a new night scope, my issue one is cr@p" and some NRA people in Florida popping one in the post! Anyhow, the debate seemed to get curtailed by the (arguably) principled stance that you should have the best kit available versus the (arguably) pragmatic stance that you play with the hand your dealt to the best of your ability. We'll have none of this here, it's Fantasy Kit Island. So, I pose the question to you army people: in your trade, be it engineer, infantry, armour or artillery (or anything else) what weapons, comms, clothing, body armour and so on would you choose for your unit if utterly anything was available off the shelf? Be as technical/ spotter-ish as you like, I enjoy a steep learning curve. Cheers, V!