OMFG, the USMC want the LSW to replace their SAW

Discussion in 'Weapons, Equipment & Rations' started by Mr Happy, Jan 12, 2009.

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. Mr Happy

    Mr Happy LE Moderator

    OK, not quite but…

    DID says: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/IAR-What-IAR-The-USMCs-SAW-Substitution-05240/?utm_campaign=newsletter&utm_source=did&utm_medium=textlink

     
  2. They can have it ! Useless fkn weapon, spent more time as the new guy in the platoon un-jamming the fkr grrrrrrr :evil:
     
  3. I'm surprised HK didn't submit the LSW A2 for this actually..
     
  4. Far too much baggage associated with this weapon I think.
     
  5. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    Political as well as historic.
     
  6. Mr Happy

    Mr Happy LE Moderator

    I was thinking from the tactics side of thing... the whole "belt fed avoids the 30 rounds stoppage" issue that the LSW got slagged for 20 years appears to have been turned on its head for the sakes of quicker reloads and reliability and - of course - less jamming.

    I wonder if our experiences arrive at the same solution?

    I note the USMC 13 man section too..
     
  7. Surely there must have been a study into this already (LSW v Minimi) ? I believe we are procurring a longer barrel for the Minimi (Sp ?) to enhance the accuracy ?
     
  8. Mr Happy

    Mr Happy LE Moderator

    Studies only answer questions that are asked, it would be a brave man that stood up and said "actually, the LSW A2 is cracking, we should bin these Minimi's".
     
  9. I thought there was a move to the 7.62mm Mk48 to replace the SAW (I could be talking complete bollocks though). This featured in an item on "Future Weapons".

    Mk48 vs Mk46

    Anything but the LSW though, surely!
     
  10. I think this was experimented on in the Trenches in 1916-1918. Traditionally, the platoon would hold four sections of 9 pax -a bomber, a gunner, a rifle and a rifle/bomb/GD section. I remember reading in a memoir ( I think it was Sassoon's Memoirs of an Infantry Officer ) that when the trench stalemate was on they used 13 man sections made up of a mix of Lewis gunners, bombers and riflemen.

    When the war of manoeuvre began in earnest in 1918 these 13 man sections were found to be a little unwieldy and they reverted. I don't know when the structure changed to 8 man sections though.
     
  11. What is actually wrong with much the maligned LSW A2?

    It does what it was designed to do, does it not? And a lot more besides.

    It may not be belt fed, but it can offer sustained fire to long distance. I´d imagine it fits right in with the spam request.

    Although, not sure of ANY weapons that fire from BOTH closed and open breaches thoguh.
     
  12. This topic was done ages ago.
     
  13. ugly

    ugly LE Moderator

    I do, 1983 we officially took the two fire team principle on board in UK Infantry Bns. Additional GPMGs were sourced and the 3 man gun group, 5-8 man rifle group ceased to exist! We got to work out recently approved tactics from brecon during that autumns field firing season. As a Bn we had been still deploying under the old orbat on Active edge up until April 1983!
     
  14. The Spams are knocking out a few versions of the M16 with heavy barrels and the ability to fire open/closed bolt dependent on the type of fire selected.
     
  15. A2 LSW isn't maligined A1 lsw is so hated that the LSW a2 suffers as well .
    Its awkward and heavier and doesn't do anything the rifle cant do .