Discussion in 'Infantry' started by emptyeye, Nov 25, 2005.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
Is this the final solution? looks weighty..and you have to still carry mags/ammo etc
Whatever happened to KISS?
Wasn't this issued to the elite regiment Starship Troopers?
Actually I quite like it. Get wrid of all the HE parts of it and just leave the 5.56 bit and your left with something resembling an HK solution! Lets face it, your never going to get issued HE rounds, not at an individual level, or your going to have servere restrictions on use!
My wife's farts !!!
And the bottle opener is located where?
38" of Toledo steel and a willing mount.
Actually..it will be in service soon
Not likely, some of the feild trials where great.
The rifle part has no sights so when detatched you can' aim it.
The rest of it weight a ton.
Its also very complicated
IIRC: someone said:
"The only way of Killing an enemy with this hting, is to throw it out of an airplane over enemy lines. If it hits one of them on hteh ead it will kill them, if htey try to pick it up the'll strain them selves. If they try to carry it to the front line they'll die of exaustion. If they do make it to the front line, then they'll drive them selves crazy trying ot fire the dam thing."
Or words ot that effect.
It's ment to replace the M203 in US service. However hte Dury's still out, It might even be as bad as the L85 as for us. ALthough the airbursting automattic grenade launcher Is a tasty idea.
the all singing all danceing grenade laucher thingy looks cool
but the 5.56mm bit has a really short barrel so you get the same gee whiz my "m4 does'nt make rag heads fall over" effect.
it was crap in ghost recon it will be even worse in real life
It'd work better the other way round, with the 20mm bit underneath. That way the rifle would have the necessary stopping power without losing too much accuracy with the grenade launcher. Still weigh a ton mind, but probably less than an SA80 with UGL.
Not quite. The US decided that there was no way that they could get the beast light enough to be acceptable. So they cancelled the combined programme, but continued with the individual carbine and grenade launcher elements.
The carbine bit became the XM8, which has now been cancelled as well, in favour of a competition, which in turn has been put on hold whilst the US services make up their minds about exactly what their requirements are.
The grenade launcher bit has become the XM25, a very gucci (and expensive) self-loading grenade launcher with a fire control system and airburst fuzing. This actually looks quite promising, only nobody has quite explained exactly how a marble-sized grenade is supposed to be effective. Apparently the lethal distance is so pathetic that anyone in a helmet and body armour more than a few paces away will be entirely unharmed. I saw some video where the spams tested the thing by bursting balloons!
Meanwhile the Brits with their 'old fashioned' single-shot 40mm UGL are pretty well armed. I gather that not everyone over there is that convinced by the XM25 and they have bought a number of UGLs from H&K as well.
All this just goes to show that we should never follow the latest fashions from the other side of the pond.
Wonder how much it weighs......
Weight: ca 5.5 kg empty; ca 6.8 kg loaded
as opposed to 5 kg for your SA-80,loaded with Sight. (IthinkI'mnotsuresodontshootme.)
And actually, I checked, here's what they'd to say about the SA-80:
In conclusion, I cant say I know what went wrong when the SA-80 was made, the design in theory would appear to be of near kalashnikov simplicity, maybe it is all the fault of the famous British trade unions? For a modern assault rifle, the SA-80 is uncomfortable to carry (especially concerning the position of the cocking handle and its desire to slip into bruising your arm on long tabs), the rifle is too heavy for its size (it even has a weight in the forward hand guard to balance the weapon), and its reliability and general durability are sub-standard to an alarming degree. I have had the mis-pleasure of seeing people breaking off warn top covers and seeing trigger mechanism housing pins falling out near at will. On the other side of things the rifle is marvellously accurate on the range, and so long as it is kept near 100% clean and well oiled it will perform well. However everybody other than the MoD seem to realise that keeping a rifle perfectly clean when in a muddy trench for extended periods of time when it is pissing it down with rain drops the size of hamsters heads isn't exactly practical, the rifle 556 is hardly of kalashnikov quality. Back to the other hand, the various sights for the rifle are all durable and of high quality (I have never heard of a SUSAT getting broken), maybe those chaps at Enfield were making a target rifle after all? In my opinion, although the SA-80 is not as bad as some make it out to be, it is in Britains best interest to replace it with a real rifle asap, maybe keeping the SUSAT's and bayonets. The reason it has gone down so poorly with those who have to use it is probably due to comparing it with the previous issue SLR, whereas the SLR was a lion, the SA-80 is a cockroach (an annoying bugger which you cant get rid of). I would hate to think how our casualties might have looked if we had adopted the SA-80 before the Falklands conflict of 82.
And for when the Aussies get techical:
And yes, spaces are on back order.
10 kg, errr might as well walk around with a Minimi. And I thought the first time I handled one of the cadet SA-80's it was heavy, now its normal its just the first time you pick up a gun that isnt a air rifle.
Separate names with a comma.