Replacement for SUSAT

Discussion in 'Weapons, Equipment & Rations' started by Parky_boy, Sep 6, 2008.

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. Hey guys, I know this has been done to death on previous threads but just wanted to ask something.

    I see on page 7 and 9 of this month's edition of Soldier that they (or in this case the paras) are now using the ACOG (is that how you spell it?) sights in place of the SUSAT out on ops. Now we have all seen the posters with the hedgehog holding the SA80 with the black handguard and picatinny rails but I didn't think they would adopt it so quickly.

    Has anybody on here used this on ops yet?
    What's it like...better or worse?

    [​IMG]
     
  2. The following is based on my UK handling of the ACOG and a conversation with someone who has used both in anger very recently. The ACOG has advantages and disadvantages against the SUSAT.

    The ACOG is marked within the optic with distances allowing the firer to adjust his aim by distance rather than 'dialling up' a range drum. Although a skilled and experienced firer should be able to adjust his point of aim anyway.

    The ACOG has a much finer cross hair allowing the firer to see much more of the target, particularly useful at distance where the SUSAT 'pointer' would cover a target. Or in an environment containing a mixture of civilians and enemy, again the SUSAT sight blocks out a lot of the sight picture.

    The ACOG's I've played with have a red dot sight that can be seen through the optic or over the sights with both eyes open, proper CQB style! That works very well but looks very fragile. The proposed UK model has a guard built up around the red dot but I'm still not convinced, the guard looks a bit Blue Peter to me.

    My biggest concern is robustness and this seems to be a common worry. The red dot assembly in particular looks like it'd last about 5 minutes in real world use.

    I can see great advantages in the ACOG but they're worthless if its smashed to bits!
     
  3. The usual civvy warning applies to the contents of this post:

    I've seen the ACOGs at various trade show and the advantages (or at least the differences) are as follows:
    Wider field of view - at the same magnification, you can see more with an ACOG than a SUSAT
    External adjustment - the ACOG can be adjusted for elevation and windage on the sight itself
    Illuminated reticle - The ACOG uses external light, via a fibre-optic to illuminate the reticle in daylight as well as at night. It is therefore easier to see. Night illumination is via a tritium source, like the SUSAT.
    Reticle choice - there are a number of ACOG models with different crosshairs, triangles or chevrons designating the aim point. The range markings are not generally illuminated. For example, the ACOG on the NLAW has an inverted chevron as the aim point.

    The red dot I've not seen, but I understand that the principle of operation precludes bulky framework although the sight is more robust than it looks. It will still work even if the glass is cracked (although there still needs to be some glass in situ)
     
  4. I had a play with the latest mod of the A2 fitted with ACOG and CQB sight recently on TELIC and you notice the weight loss straight away. The new hand gaurd with picatinny rails actually weighs more than the old plastic one but overall weight is less with the new sight. Any CQB sight is better than the current EBS on SUSAT lets face it!