LSW, LMG and 60mm to go

ugly

LE
Moderator
#42
#44
You're deviating from my points in a poor attempt at looking clever. Go sound off somewhere else.
Now that you've explained what you're saying, I see what you're getting at. I'm not trying to look clever or deviate, I'm just hammering my favourite hobby horse...

As it stands, the LMG costs the army money during basic training because recruits go on a bespoke 1 week range package to Warcop, involving additional transport, feeding, accomodation and LSA costs. Not to mention man hours in camp itself. Plus the additional ammo expenditure and the rest.
My point is that the 1-week "Gunnery" range package should / will still happen if the LMG is sacked, it should just take place using the LSW instead. All subsequent tactical training then takes place with LSW instead of LMG. You don't get rid of the need for "Gunnery training" by deleting the LMG, unless we've decided that there are only riflemen in every section - you still need someone in each fireteam able to provide effects at range, and you still need to train all of your recruits in section weapons and their employment.

It's great if you can put sharpshooter / Lt Role GPMG training alongside, but that rather depends on the eventual mix of weapons in the rifle section (I'm assuming you don't currently teach the recruits about platoon weapons, just section weapons)
 

MrBane

LE
Moderator
Kit Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#45
GPMG was a surprisingly accurate weapon if used correctly. Often it wasn't.

The LMG was equally as good, and you'd often find the GPMG gunner swapping out for the LMG when doing lighter, faster raids on enemy compounds, etc, for that flexibility of role and movement you couldn't get with the GPMG.

We should keep the capabilities, madness to ditch the LMG.

Maaaaaaaaaaaadness.

Also can hand on heart say I have never fired the LSW without it jamming at least once and usually quite significantly. I recall one exercise where three LSW's in a row all jammed and had to be packed off to the armourer to sort. Firing pins were fucked on them or something.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#46
Also can hand on heart say I have never fired the LSW without it jamming at least once and usually quite significantly. I recall one exercise where three LSW's in a row all jammed and had to be packed off to the armourer to sort. Firing pins were fucked on them or something.
Might that have more to do with the hatred of it and therefore even less care, attention and preparation going into getting the weapon ready for firing?
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#48
Wiki says it was:
"
For a time, the primary use of the LSW shifted to that of a marksman's weapon within many infantry sections, capable of providing precision fire at ranges of over 600 m;[37] however, it was replaced in this role by the Rifle, 7.62 mm L129A1.[38] The role of a light support weapon is instead filled by the L110A2 Light Machine Gun FN Minimi, which is a belt fed weapon with a quick-change barrel.

The L86A1 was upgraded to the L86A2 at the same time as L85A1 rifles were upgraded to L85A2 standards, undergoing the same set of modifications."
Source: SA80 - Wikipedia
 
#49
My prediction: They will bin the LMG and then bring in the Sharpshooter, give it 2 years then they'll claim it's not feasible to have 7.62 & 5.56 in the section (another old issue) then they'll bin that as well. The LSW's will be dusted off and given a quick pull through before being reintroduced as the new concept in section fire power.......
 

MrBane

LE
Moderator
Kit Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#50
Might that have more to do with the hatred of it and therefore even less care, attention and preparation going into getting the weapon ready for firing?
How dare you sir. As if I would!

Besides, it's quite an effort to **** the firing pins, and each one, I remember clearly as it was an Ex where we were OPFOR for some TA knobbers, only made it through about two mags before jamming.

Never had that issue with the L2A2 or A1 for that matter.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#51
How dare you sir. As if I would!

Besides, it's quite an effort to **** the firing pins, and each one, I remember clearly as it was an Ex where we were OPFOR for some TA knobbers, only made it through about two mags before jamming.

Never had that issue with the L2A2 or A1 for that matter.
If that was the A2 version then they should have been backloaded/reported on and a proper investigation to find out why a weapon only used rarely is already fucked after only a few years issue (for issue read stored in armoury and hated).
 
#52
Also can hand on heart say I have never fired the LSW without it jamming at least once and usually quite significantly.
I refer Sir to these posts by the esteemed @dogmonkey, fresh back from operational employment of the then-new L86A2 on TELIC 1 (fifteen years ago...)

Regarding accuracy...

"LSW A2 - excellent suppressive to 800m. And by suppressive I do not mean loads of splash landing randomly around your fire trench and making a noise. I mean suppressive by way of bloke next to you pops his head up and gets a smoking third eye. You going to stick your head up now? And with the LSW you can do this with considerably less weight than a GPMG."

Regarding reliability...

"Prior to crossing, we had the ITDU out to 'train the trainer' on the new kit. They were at pains to ensure that we didn't ditch the LSW. Just as well we didn't. The LSWs were excellent weapons which allowed engagements at much longer ranges. The minimis were used to good effect from FSp locs within their shorter range when a large volume of fire was required. Both A2 variants worked exceptionally well and were totally reliable. The desert cleaning regime was not onerous, and when doused in oil there were virtually no stoppages, and none were reported in 3 weeks of fighting which had any serious repercussions. The troops' confidence in the weapon system is now justifiably high. "
 

MrBane

LE
Moderator
Kit Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#53
I refer Sir to these posts by the esteemed @dogmonkey, fresh back from operational employment of the then-new L86A2 on TELIC 1 (fifteen years ago...)

Regarding accuracy...

"LSW A2 - excellent suppressive to 800m. And by suppressive I do not mean loads of splash landing randomly around your fire trench and making a noise. I mean suppressive by way of bloke next to you pops his head up and gets a smoking third eye. You going to stick your head up now? And with the LSW you can do this with considerably less weight than a GPMG."

Regarding reliability...

"Prior to crossing, we had the ITDU out to 'train the trainer' on the new kit. They were at pains to ensure that we didn't ditch the LSW. Just as well we didn't. The LSWs were excellent weapons which allowed engagements at much longer ranges. The minimis were used to good effect from FSp locs within their shorter range when a large volume of fire was required. Both A2 variants worked exceptionally well and were totally reliable. The desert cleaning regime was not onerous, and when doused in oil there were virtually no stoppages, and none were reported in 3 weeks of fighting which had any serious repercussions. The troops' confidence in the weapon system is now justifiably high. "
Good post - it may be that the three successive systems I had from Bovington armoury were neglected and in poor repair, but they tarnished the weapon for me forever more, alas.

The ITDU should be doing more of that sort of engagement with the end user, seems like it made a difference there.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#54
Good post - it may be that the three successive systems I had from Bovington armoury were neglected and in poor repair, but they tarnished the weapon for me forever more, alas.

The ITDU should be doing more of that sort of engagement with the end user, seems like it made a difference there.
Once a bad impression is made its not easy to correct it
 
#55
How dare you sir. As if I would!

Besides, it's quite an effort to **** the firing pins, and each one, I remember clearly as it was an Ex where we were OPFOR for some TA knobbers, only made it through about two mags before jamming.

Never had that issue with the L2A2 or A1 for that matter.
Using the firing pin to clean the breech with flannelette? would have nothing to do with it….or using it as a toothpick…Don't suppose the mags had damages either.
 
#57
#59
Don't suppose the mags had damages either.
Just the third one. You know, two mags done and then repeated stoppages... Of course, now you've got two empty mags and a (third) nearly-full one, so you pick up a different LSW, insert your nearly-full magazine, and b*gger me, if it doesn't have stoppages straight away! :rolleyes:

Every single time I took magazines out of the armoury, I did a quick look along the feed lips. If they weren't parallel and straight, hand them back as damaged (normally it was fairly easy to spot). If you hear someone say "every other round was jamming", then only one of the feed lips is f**ked.

This was quite common with the aluminium RO magazines for the A1, especially if people put them into their webbing and sat on the ammo pouches / dropped it / hurled it around. Twats. Oh, and to those who say "but that's what you do to belt order", ask yourself whether you'd do the same to a grenade / your personal set of binos / glasses / Jetboil / etc. And then consider whether your magazines are a teeny bit more valuable to your continued survival than a cooker.

I never got our arms storesmen / NCOs to the point where they checked the magazines (for damage, not just cleanliness) alongside rifles before handback. Or the cleaning kits, for that matter. They just dumped all of them into the big pile, and next time out you got a different set of ancillaries (normally with the delight that was "Cool! a brand new chamber brush that I can ruin in two minutes because I don't know any better, and because the CQMS is too lazy/forgot to demand and hand out scotchbrite / flannelette!"). Grump.

AR Magazines: Separating the Good From the Bad | S.W.A.T. Magazine
 
#60
I refer Sir to these posts by the esteemed @dogmonkey, fresh back from operational employment of the then-new L86A2 on TELIC 1 (fifteen years ago...)

Regarding accuracy...

"LSW A2 - excellent suppressive to 800m. And by suppressive I do not mean loads of splash landing randomly around your fire trench and making a noise. I mean suppressive by way of bloke next to you pops his head up and gets a smoking third eye. You going to stick your head up now? And with the LSW you can do this with considerably less weight than a GPMG."

Regarding reliability...

"Prior to crossing, we had the ITDU out to 'train the trainer' on the new kit. They were at pains to ensure that we didn't ditch the LSW. Just as well we didn't. The LSWs were excellent weapons which allowed engagements at much longer ranges. The minimis were used to good effect from FSp locs within their shorter range when a large volume of fire was required. Both A2 variants worked exceptionally well and were totally reliable. The desert cleaning regime was not onerous, and when doused in oil there were virtually no stoppages, and none were reported in 3 weeks of fighting which had any serious repercussions. The troops' confidence in the weapon system is now justifiably high. "
Following the above reports, was there much research into what energy the UK issue 5.56rd actually has at 600-800m out of the LSW?
In the hands of your average rifleman, would be the expected degree of accuracy/grouping at those ranges be it single shot or burst?
 

Similar threads

Top