Discussion in 'Weapons, Equipment & Rations' started by MemSec, Jun 11, 2003.

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. The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) has selected the FN Herstal Para Minimi to meet a requirement for a 5.56mm light machine gun...

    This means that a fire team will have:

    1 x L85A2

    1 x L85A2 with 40mm under-barrel grenade launcher

    1 x L86A2

    1 x Minimi

    It does appear that the nearly £90,000,000 we are spending on upgrading the A1s still hasn't convinced the relevant people that they are still up to the standard!

    But at least it means there will be a lot of firepower available............
  2. From what I have heard, the Minimi can only accurately engage targets out to 300m, we still need to surpress targets from up to 600m or even 800m, thus the need to retain the LSW.

  3. Sorry Memsec, I don't see how adding 1 X Minimi to a Fire team means the L85A2 isn't up to the job.  

    The LSW is now more of a long range rifle, which is probably how it should have been employed since day one.

    The Rifle is now better than it was.  £90 million well spent in my view.
  4. The specs for the LSW called for the equivalent of an LMG.  After 20 years, to redefine its use as a long range rifle shows that the original design was not up to the job of a weapon that was supposed to replace the LMG.

    Purely on economic grounds, the research and development costs at Royal Ordnance on the L85 and L86 were in the region of £500,000,000.  Add the costs of all the interim refits to bring them up to AI standard, then add the £90,000,000 to bring them to A2 standard, now add the £75,000,000 the Minimi is costing and you can see that as a taxpayer, it is marginally annoying that my tax does not appear to have been spent wisely.

    I have no real problem with the rifle on the range - but then again I have never had to use it in anger.  

    The LSW on the other hand has always been a strange beast - consistent split groups on automatic being the least of its problems.  On single shot, it is accurate to a good distance - but so was the old 7.62mm LMG and that never had to be replaced by a 'real' LMG.

    I wonder we are going to do with the one rifle per fire team that is being retired (that's nearly 3,000 throughout the infantry) ?  Perhaps the Cadets will get lucky !
  5. Since when has our taxes EVER been spent wisely  ;)

    I think Dogmonkey's comments on the inf board said it got a big thumbs up in the sandpit

    Considering the whole H&S thing that seems to be going on with them at the moment, they probably will get them-minus all working parts.  ;)
  6. Memsec

    There are quite a few other threads about this issue.
    To summarise.
    Minimi - voted excellent, good rate of fire.  Accurate up to 250-350m.
    A2 Rifle - excellent.  Accurate and reliable.
    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 les weight than a GPMG.

    I agree there is now an issue with the number of bayonets in the section but this is being addressed.

  7. Good post DM - sharp and pithy - and to pick up on bayonets.

    Slightly off thread I know, but there is some debate as to whether the infantry really need bayonets. How often on recent operations have they been used as there is a cost and a weight penalty ?

    My view is that they are needed. Reasons - for establishing the right mental attitude when Xing the LoD and what will follow, and for trench and room clearing as a last resort. It is also a mind set. The infantryman has to be able to kill his fellowman. There is no getting away from this. The act of fitting the bayonet to the weapon reminds the infantryman of what he has to do.

    Views ?
  8. Yes to bayonets.  Not only does it create the appropriate mindset for the infantryman, it also reminds the unfortunate on the recieving end of their own mortality.  As such, they may be more inclined to chuck their hands up that bit quicker when faced with some screaming lunatic with a big knife fixed to the end of their rifle.
    Yes to the minimi also.  As a support weapon, if its reliable, has a decent rate of fire, and doesn't have an inbuilt stoppage every 30 rounds it's got to be an improvement.  When can I have one?
  9. Agreed
    Bayonets required for psycological edge, the 'flicking of the switch' into 'not so nice a person' mode.  And as far as I know, none were used in the sand-pit for actual fighting (though there is still an issue of the RLB - rifle launched bayonet).  I know of one instance when someone got quite a nasty surprise of 5.56mm followed shortly after by knife-projectile!
  10. Have only seen the Minimi when working with Swedish soldiers in Kosovo. They (the Swedes) were well impressed, I personally liked the fact that you could use a drum, belt or magazine feed, depending on what you can get your hands on.
    Never fired or used it but seemed like a good bit of kit.
    Once used my bayonet to cut some did quite a good job. ;D
  11. The Minimi should replace the LSW cos the SA80 and LSW are just the exact same thing, just the LSW has a longer barrel and bipod. The FN Minimi can take Magazines and Belts which the LSW cannot.

    As someone said the LSW is just a long range rifle, It give me an idea to convert the LSWs into Sniper Rifles, Maybe convert them
    to 7.62. Could keep the Full Auto capability incase the Sniper gets into a situation where he despiratly needs to defend himself since snipers usually have bolt action rifles

    The AR10, SR25, And HK PSG1/MSG90 are basically Standard Assault Rifles kitted up with sights and Heavier Barrels made to suit the sniping role, Thier TMHs are also similar just made for semi auto fire.
    Same thing should be done with SA80s?
  12. You're missing a lot of points. By only having 5.56m within the section and organic to that platoon (may or may not have gpmgs available) you in theory give the plt sgt and supply chain out to a section the issue of only one type of ammunition rather than two - and interchangeable magazines between the l85 and l86. The LSW does have a bipod and longer barrel, allowing greater accuracy at range (as stated by your post) but also if you're lucky can do the "point and supress" thing the minimi does - abliet with less rounds until you change mag/drum. Although we now have 3 weapons systems within the section what you're suggesting is replacing the LSW (which shares a lot of the internal parts of the sa80, meaning it's easy to replace a firing pin or gas parts etc) for another weapon that does not exist (7.62 sniper that also does auto? semi yes, auto no (waiting to be corrected)).
    Also our minimis (again waiting to be corrected) are designed only to take the drums and not magazines as they're the para version (shortened barrel, bit simplified).
    I played with an American m249 SAW (minimi) before and then on a range, it's a good point and spray but is nowhere near as stable as the lsw - in my opinion.
  13. Ive never fired one but I'm pretty sure I saw a Rock ape with one of the silly yellow BFA mags sticking out the side of a minimi.

    Not that they're anything to go by...

    T C
  14. Think you're right actually. Had a little look around and the para version (short barrel) retains the magazine port and there's some special version like the para version with gucci rails and the port removed to save weight. Obviously HM forces plumped for the para version.
  15. Wait a sec... Does that mean the MOD actually got us somthing good? The capability to take link and magazines?

    I can't believe it...I think I'm going to be sick....

    T C