General Dynamics in the USA have recently unveiled a new systems called the LWMMG that utilises the .338 Norma Magnum round, positioned between the 7.62mm GPMG and 12.7mm HMG, but based on neither.
The press release says
General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products, a business unit of General Dynamics (NYSE: GD), today unveiled a next-generation Lightweight Medium Machine Gun (LWMMG) at the Joint Armaments Conference in Seattle, Wash.
Identifying an unmet warfighter need, General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products conducted its own research and development program to develop the LWMMG in just over one year. The weapon is designed for low-cost production and for maximum effectiveness at the small unit level, where weight and lethality are decisive factors.
“The LWMMG is an affordable weapon that closes a current operational gap, providing .50 caliber-like firepower in range and effect at the same weight and size of currently fielded 7.62mm machine guns,” said Steve Elgin, vice president and general manager of armament systems for General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products. “Weighing in at 24 pounds and featuring a fully collapsible stock, the LWMMG offers superior mobility and portability in both mounted and dismounted operations.”
General Dynamics’ LWMMG also offers a distinct advantage in both extended and close-in fighting by using the highly efficient .338 Norma Magnum cartridge for increased accuracy and lethality out to 1,700 meters, a distance currently gapped in the operational capabilities of warfighters.
“By employing the larger .338 NM round, the LWMMG delivers twice the range and dramatically increases lethality above the 7.62 round,” said Elgin. “In addition, the LWMMG goes beyond providing suppressive fire and gives warfighters the ability to attack point targets at significantly extended ranges.”
The LWMMG has a firing rate of 500 rounds per minute, a maximum range of 5,642 meters, and is equipped with quick-change barrel technology. In addition to use by dismounted infantry and on ground vehicles, the weapon can be used as the armament system aboard helicopters and littoral craft, providing greater range and effectiveness for those platforms.
“The LWMMG is a well-designed machine gun ideally suited to provide long-range lethality to U.S. and allied forces,” Elgin said.
Interesting.
Click here to read the data sheet and Wikipedia has a good page on the 338 Norma Magnum
There are lots of pluses but ammunition weight might be a problem in the dismounted role and the .338NM isn’t used by anything else we have so it would mean yet another ammunition nature being inserted into the logistics chain.
Is this a solution in search of a problem, a game changer, a piece of equipment that can usefully fill a gap or somewhere in between?
Don’t know if we’d have a use for it, but you can bet your bottom dollar that a savvy old company like GD does not spend a year and $millions reinventing the wheel unless they’ve been tipped the wink by the DoD that there will be a service buyer, and once either the US Army or USMC have bought it, other internationals will line up.
Would be interesting to see if there’s the capability to provide pretty accurate single shot suppressive fire out to 1500m+ – that is something companies cannot do unless they have snipers, which they mostly do, but the snipers are always miles away dressed up like a tree and doing the kitten crawl at 0.02 mph when you want an long range burst and some heavy fire support. I don’t know if this weapon is the one to deliver that single shot accuracy / heavy burst Jekyll and Hyde character, but there may be a need for it.
Presumably it can easily be re-chambered in .338 Lapua, which is a standard nature now.
NAVAIR has been looking for a heavier weapon than the M240 for use on the MV-22 and CH-53. using the 5.56 caliber machineguns in the aerial gunnery role has been found lacking so that’s the market place without the weight penalty of a 50 cal.
That’s the heaviest looking lightweight gun I think I’ve ever seen. Any weight details or did I just miss that like a goon?
… yawn?
@James
I suspect they didn’t really develop it from scratch, GD was the point man for ST Kinetic’s venture into the IAR program, which was a pretty sad failure, but I suspect some of the tech got reused. Compare the general body shape of the gun and the join between the buttstock and the main body of the MG in the 1st picture and the 2nd video (especially the one in the background) with that of the Ultimax 100. A lot of similarities. In fact, it simply looks like a U-100 upsized and chambered for belt loading. Which is a good marketing strategy.
A cynic might ask is the proposed type of ammo within its patent period and if so who owns the patent. MMGs are support not platoon weapons. Proper MMGs don’t need a butt.
Hi James,
Interesting that you positioned it at coy level (I would, too).
RE ” to deliver that single shot accuracy / heavy burst Jekyll and Hyde character, but there may be a need for it”
– Russians have had their platoon support weapon for that for decades, but it has only half of the (claimed) effective range
– on the other hand, in an emergency it can switch to firing the round that the is also used in the rest of the platoon
RE “Presumably it can easily be re-chambered in .338 Lapua, which is a standard nature now”
– would you do that? This round packs 6.5% more efficiently, and has a lower drag factor (I guess the Lapua would still be a preferred choice for snipers; Now, there would still be some in a company, or would such a team become a bn asset?)
Chris B: 24 lb, in the link, at the end of the leading-in article
“Is this a solution in search of a problem…”
It’s a solution for mounted use, the problem being the fact that everything that’s armoured is armoured against 7.62NATO AP at the very least.
This problem calls for an intermediate cartridge between 7.62×51 and 12.7×99.
ACC,
If .338 Lapua is the sniper’s choice, let them have it. All the sniper geeks will have spent years obsessing about it, and it is probably the best answer.
If a .338 LMG is needed for suppressive fire at 1500m, for God’s sake let’s not have a second nature of .338. The QM will go nuts at having to indent for and control two types of nearly identical ammo. As far as I’m concerned, with burst fire it is not accuracy you are after, but the beaten zone and making a shedload of banging and ricochetting noise downrange. For single shot aimed suppressive fire, Lapua is better than anything else in .338, so let’s go with the flow. Real question is can you get both heavy auto AND pretty accurate single shot out of this weapon? If not, GD missed a trick. Might need a barrel change or different optics, but as a support weapon that’s do-able.
As a replacement for the crew-served but especially vehicle mounted .50cal M2 this LWMMG might have a future, if the .50cal gets replaced entirely.
The .338 NM ammo is lighter (in bulk) than the ubiquitous .50cal, and the LWMMG might have a lighter (ring-mount) recoil than the “Ma Deuce” making it more adapatable and an ideal ‘drop-in’ replacement for vehicle and especially helicopter gun mounts.
But vehicles can carry .50cal ammo without penalties so weight is a non-issue in that respect.
But as a (carried) infantry support weapon as a replacement for the 7.62 M240/GPMG – not so much.
Even though the LWMMG screams SOF and undoubtedly some will find their way to the snake-eater community, regular light infantry doesn’t carry .50cal HMGs so the real need for this .338 NM on the platoon/company level is rather moot.
Also, the US Army as prime customer is notoriously conservative re new weapons and ammo (remember those XM-8 /6.8mm projects), so I doubt the LWMMG has any real future.
Then again, Ma Deuce *is* getting really old…
Marcase, the difference in ammo volume is relevant to vehicles. The weights are irrelevant differences.
The reason for why AFVs make much use of 7.62NATO is that they can many times as much belted 7.62 as 12.7.
Well, having done a bit of quick Googling, it appears that the .338 Norma Magnum and .338 Lapua Magnum are based on the same case (.416 Rigby) but the Norma cartridge is shorter. In theory, since rim diameters etc are the same, you could re-chamber all your .338 LM sniper rifles for the Norma cartridge but, due to the longer COAL, you maybe couldn’t re-chamber your LWMMG for the Lapua round.
Considering the fact that the .338 Lapua Magnum is already in service with several countries it makes you wonder why GD picked the Norma cartridge for their new machinegun.
Hi Pete, RE ” you could re-chamber all your .338 LM sniper rifles for the Norma cartridge but, due to the longer COAL, you maybe couldn’t re-chamber your LWMMG for the Lapua round.”
…or have both with the “Remington Modular Sniper Rifle (MSR). This is a switch chambering and barrel sniper rifle that can also fire .338 Lapua Magnum, .300 Winchester Magnum, and 7.62x51mm NATO cartridges.” as Wiki says, but who wants to buy new rifles
What would it do?
In a conventional at it battle you need shit loads of firepower downrage making a nasty beaten zone. We already have weapons that can do that and out at the ranges mentioned in the article how on Earth are you going to know where a canny enemy is?
In an Afghan style conflict there are other systems in use that can provide pin point accuracy out at range (snipers) and can smash it up at longer ranges from sangers or vehicles where weight is no issue.
It seems to fill a gap where really there is no actual gap except in Modern Warfare 3.
We already possess and so do most first world armies a variety of systems at company group level that can provide overlapping fields of fires out to a realistic, likely range.
“currently gapped in the operational capabilities of warfighters.”
Some sick came up into my mouth.
This is sort of what I have been going on about. This new .338NM GPMG has been on an ARRSE thread for a week or so.
I think 7.62×51 is too light for the roles asked of it lately, but jumping to .338 NM or Lapua, may be too heavy(esp the ammo).
I think a 7.62+P is probably the way to go. Though you would have to size it 7.7×52 to stop it being used in old,weak guns.
The wars in Iraq/Afghanistan have reminded the top brass that good small arms are needed. Many are now worn from these conflicts. There may be a window for new small arms & calibres in the 2015-25 period.
If you want to look 40 years ahead, look up the US patents on hybrid cartridge/rail gun machine guns.
Would make for an interesting coax or RWS mount, where you have the fire control, optics and stabilization needed to hit targets 1700m away.
You really won’t get ammo commonality between sniper and MMG ammo. Snipers will always need match-grade rounds. So let them have whatever caliber they want.
“As a replacement for the crew-served but especially vehicle mounted .50cal M2 this LWMMG might have a future”
Not going to happen. Way too many M2s in stock to be replaced easily. Been tried, no dice.
“or have both with the “Remington Modular Sniper Rifle (MSR). This is a switch chambering”
And chucking an entirely new adaptable bolt system into a weapon not designed for it? Sounds like a prescription for trouble. These things arn’t exactly LEGO.
“This problem calls for an intermediate cartridge between 7.62×51 and 12.7×99.”
Go straight to 12.7mm. Problem solved.
“We already possess and so do most first world armies a variety of systems at company group level that can provide overlapping fields of fires out to a realistic, likely range.”
So true. No niche for this poor guy.
.338 came into operation on marksmans rifles specifically introduced because of the conditions in Afganistan. .50 sniper rifles being too heavy and 7.62 being limited at range. You have to wonder where such Afgan specials will fit in once the Afgan operation winds down and we go back to jungle bashing or worrying about urban warefare. Post Afganistan you have to bet that funding priorities will move away from Armies so exotic calibres will probably be restricted to the SF world.
Counterpoint, for debate.
ROE developed from Bosnia via the Gulf to Afghanistan are likely to prove enduring, and applicable to future interventions anywhere else. The lawyers are in their comfort zone. Phil and Observer are correct about existing weapons systems offering overlapping coverage (out to 5+ kms for Infantry company and armoured Squadron integral weapons), BUT, once you get beyond 1000 metres it is all of the HE variety, and that is a problem for ROE. A couple of systems buck this trend – Javelin an example.
So the issue is how do you extend the lethality, yet remain on the side of the ROE? You need precision effects.
(BTW, I’m not making a case for this weapon – I don’t know enough about its’ capabilities. But this is a good thread to hijack).
In addition to the existing sniper pair, strikes me you want something like a guided 40mm grenade as direct fire out to about 2000m, and guided 81 mm mortars along with a laser designator on a small UAV under company control covering the 2000-5000m gap. Impress the lawyers enough with the precision aspect, and you’ll get the tick in the box. Both 40mm grenade and 81mm mortar are small enough to kill the enemy without blowing down the house.
Of course, in the gloves off fight, both systems can revert to the balls out “HE and as much as possible” traditional usage.
Do you think it would be a wise investment for a biggish defence company to make a “Universal Target Designator” – assuming that’ll be a laser on a Picatinny rail – and a set of fuses for common HE ammo types that hunt down the laser speckles? Small fuse for 40mm grenades, big fuses for mortars and artillery shells.
In the few instances where you can’t bring anything but HE down on a target (and even then the 81mm is handy) is it worth lugging this thing around just in case its in the right place at the right time? And surely then a MMG is just as bad a weapon in ROE terms?! And if you want it single shot you’ll need a bloke who is trained to that standard, we could call him a sniper or something.
I just don’t see the utility. If it was completely free in every way and hovered their way into battle with no fuel needed for the power source and had hollywood belts of ammo then cool.
I can’t see the weapon being realistically justifiable. On paper it might sound good, but not in the real world with real logistics and weight issues.
Hi Johnno,
As you say “.50 sniper rifles being too heavy”… for A-stan!
– in urban conditions, at lesser ranges, you can take out guys lurking behind walls
– as you say, SF and police/ c-terrorist future for the lesser calibers
But this new “thingy” could be an optional extra at bn level, being capable of both bursts and sniper shots (?) at a distance
Hi James, why lug the heavy mortar barrel around when you can have one of these in a (disposable) backbag – so quite a few for a half-platoon patrol. 1m accuracy and can loiter for 30 mins
http://ytilaerniereh.com/2011/09/12/the-us-army-has-given-aerovironment-a-5-million-contract-for-a-lethal-backpack-uav-called-the-switchblade-it-is-the-first-announced-order-for-this-type-of-weapon-but-it-has-probably-been-in-the-hand/
This one is better (in the sense of showing the iPad steering and accuracy) though not in production yet
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=qIYZiTqenJs
Problem is there is no money to got out and buy a new machine gun for the British armed forces.
Given the choice between .338 Norma and .338 Lapua Magnum the latter would be the better choice as it is a NATO standard round with production set up. In respect of this particular machine gun it sounds like US special forces want a machine gun that is more portable then the .50cal and harder hitting the the M240.
But back to my initial point the British army fields the FN Minimi, FN MAG/L7 and the .50cal already which gives good reach out to different ranges. Introducing another machine gun in these cash tight times and with the draw down from Afghanistan is rapidly approaching.
The more acute issue for the army post Afghanistan is funding a replacement for the L85A2 IW. I was talking to the bods from Riflecraft a few weeks back (MOD sction 5 dealer) and they have heard on the grapevine that the Army won’t think about that until 2018. My guess is is with the Afghanistan draw down and the upcoming reduction in manpower for the army they will retire the most sh@gged L85A2 and retain the best rifles for as long as possible. I could even see an incremental replacement program with the most deployable of units like the Paras and Commandos getting new rifles first and other regiments slowly being changed over.
Anyhow don’t expect any new machine guns anytime soon.
They as in” the most deployable of units like the Paras” just had a “day out” shooting with the French rifle (OK, it was under the banner of urban combat training, so probably of no significance)
I have no doubt NEXTER will probably tender a FAMAS variant on any IW replacement contest for the British army. I doubt that it would be short listed on the other hand. It is an older design the L85 with a few inerrant flaws like its delayed blow back operation.
The choice appears to be rebuild L85 again or buy new rifle. I have heard some strong arguments for rebuilding the L85 again as it means rifle racks and training facilities can be retained but the practical question is it possible or cost effective to rebuild the remaining rifles for a third time?!
If its buy new rifle then its a matter of unit cost and the ability of a supplier to meet what will be a large contract plus all the ancillery equipment with offset. I doubt the British Army will want an M4 or AK variant so its down to what else is available. Best bets I think are:
HK G36
HK 416
FN 2000
FN SCAR
CZ 805
Beretta ARX-160
Remington ACR
On top of that expect a few wild cards.
Fedaykin,
wild card no 1. The old SLR. I do appreciate that’s the thoughts of an old war horse with his eyes misting up, but as far as I’m concerned, there was bugger all wrong with it. Never ever went wrong on me, you could trust the calibre to put down anything it hit, it was pretty accurate, and it really was not that heavy, nor 4 mags of 20 rounds too much of a burden to carry around. There was also apparently a trick with a matchstick to convert it to full auto, but I never knew what that was. Didn’t need it, really.
On that basis, I’d vote for the FN SCAR in 7.62, with the 5.56 variant for those who have some need not to carry a proper battle fighting rifle about.
Someone recently said there’d been some technical issues with the FN SCAR. I don’t know what they may have been – cheap plastics or poor manufacturing maybe. But we’ve got enough time to sort that out.
….oddly enough, my brother-in-law in Arizona can get a proper old FN SLR for $950 through some American dealer, all legit. Do you think it would be worth it? I’m certainly thinking of it. We spend 3 weeks a year on his ranch in the summer. Could bring back happy old memories, the $950 over a few years becoming peanuts. Hmmm.
(Obviously, the weapon would be registered to him, I’d only be borrowing it, all above board)
Actually if the US hadn’t just put some more orders for M4 in I could see MoD actually going with M4. HK416 and Berretta to expensive sadly. ACR nope. CZ non-AR mag.
Rebuilding SA80 again. I hope not. It may function now (thanks HK) but come on it is getting on a bit.
We need TAVOR. (That opinion subject to change.)
If it has not already been done to death elsewhere on TD, 5.56 or 7.62 for combat troops****? There was once a time where the wounding ability of 5.56 was thought to be a plus, but armies seem to be going away from that now. Must say my heart was always with 7.62.
**** Not much fussed what is best for loggies or gunners. The Andrew can probably cope with 5.56, and the Kevins won’t matter so long as they are only trusted with fully de-activated classroom instructional versions. They wouldn’t notice any difference anyway.
@ James
If I had brother-in-law in Arizona I would be buying an M1 for him to keep in his gun room. Along with a Ruger GP100 4in (.357), Ruger Blackhawk Hunter (.44mag), Ruger Single-Ten, Colt New Frontier (.45 LC)… :)
X,
you misunderstand,
aged late 40s, I don’t want to learn any new weapons. I just want to bring back fond memories with the muscle memory, and to teach my happy little boy and teen-angst-ridden girl some moves on a proper weapon that I can remember and not appear to be an idiot by forgetting. To be honest, my girl is more suited to the knee in the balls style of self defence, and I’m right with her on that. Any young bastard that so much as thinks of treating her in the manner I used to think was not just normal, but part of being a young man is going to have a serious shock. Delivered by her in immediate self defence, and then followed up by me in slow time, with planning and complete abuse of my ability to sit back and plan a really nasty campaign. And yes, that is completely double standards, but you only get one daughter in this life. Mrs J is completely with me on this, and she knows what I’m like.
They both went through pre-qual on a Ruger mini 10/24 or something last year, as all visiting children do in my brother in law’s house. Several hundred .22LRs down range, and eventually some soda cans successfully hit at 50 metres.
It is a Ruger 10/22 in 22lr or a Ruger Mini-14 in .223Rem
@Fedaykin
That’s the problem, it’s not the US SF that requested the weapon. No one did.
@x
TAVOR/SAR 21’s are not really outstanding, it’s a basic rifle that goes bang when you pull the trigger. No fancy stuff and you shouldn’t put in any. After all, you won’t want to buttstoke an enemy only to hear “laser targetting on, airstrike ordered.” *oh shit…*
@James
Think any HE, even the 40mm kind, into a populated area at 1km is a pretty much no-no. It’s the area effect, you can’t tell who else might be around. Like Phil said, 1km RoE? Snipers. Nice idea, but way too late. 1980 would have been the right time for it, and if they knew what they know now.
@ACC
No, no blind shooting through walls, absolutely no. You think this is CoD??!! “Cop kills kid through random discharge of firearm”. God, the press will kill the government.
It was the .22LR with iron sights, apparently bought from Walmart for cheap as chips – you have to love America for the consumer culture. I’m not sure a 7 and 12 year old are quite ready for .223. This year we may get Oli moving up a calibre, but only if she wants to. My little boy needs more muscle bulk before he can stand the recoil of a .223, but sod it, he’s only 7 now. First gun I ever fired was a .22 sub-cal conversion on an SLR, and I was in Cadets at that point.
Oli’s quite good at the knee in the balls trick though, and also the “Gone with the Wind” face slap that her mother taught her. Not much used it seems, but fairly shocking when delivered with a screech to alert any adults present. I wish they banned these school dances though – as she’s even more gorgeous than her mother, every boy wants to dance with her.
@ James
Heaven help you when she hits 15. lol
@ Observer
Think of it this way. Look the British soldier has had a rifle diet of unbranded baked beans (read SA80). If we put them on a diet of sirloin (read HK416 or ARX-160) they would choke. No we need to feed them branded baked beans. The TAVOR fits the bill exactly. I like simple things that go bang. :)
As I said my opinion is subject to change. My preference is for ARX-160. Too expensive and possibly a bit too trick. If we go the AR-15 the options are limitless. HK416 yes. But a carefully selected blend of AR options, perhaps using one of specialist AR builders to provide a prototype may be the way to go. There is a deep pool of small arms expertise in the British Army; a “SA80” should never happen. I don’t like the idea of the rifle being a cheap system. A premium AR15 comes in at about $1500 and add $500 for optics you are looking at $2000. The UK needs about 100,000 so we are looking at a bill of £200million; I always convert defence dollars into pounds one for one. Two F35s? Two thirds of a T26? (Don’t laugh at the back.) A C-17 with leather seats?
How does the SAR-21 really run young sir? Don’t be shy share…
@ James re parenting
Not really the place to comment on parenting. But over 10 years involved with cadets I saw all sorts of parenting. The worst was the father who let his son do what he wanted to the daughters of others and yet his own daughter lived the life of nun. Two abortions and a suicide attempt between 16 to 18 makes me think he was getting it wrong with her. Tread a careful path. Teenage girls are like expensive foreign sports cars; great until something goes wrong and then it can be very expensive.
Is there no topic we don’t cover here? :)
Coming up, “Knit that teapot cosey!!!” and it will make a man of you.
X,
problem is, I never realised that night of conception (dunno, got a funny shiver down my spine I’d never had before, thought to myself even on the vinegar strokes “this one’s a bit special”) that I’d be getting a girl who would one day turn into a 1967 Maserati or whatever your analogy leads to. I was actually hoping for a boy to teach rugby to, and who could then join some non-girly regiment and largely replicate my life.
Shit happens. She is however sent by God, and by God she is a devilish little angel. Utterly bloody drop dead gorgeous, and she’s only 12 (fathers can say that sort of thing that would have others under suspicion of nasty things). Twists me round her little finger endlessly. Pretty brainy too. She gets all of that from her mother. My role in her life is to be the one she runs to when her life is a bit wonky, and to have the big open wallet. Earlier this weekend she informed me of the new laptop she wants me to buy – a jaw / floor moment, and I’m still sorting out the bills for her pony’s barbed wire gash and stitches.
I am truly grateful for what God delivered, if a bit apprehensive and also suspicious it’s his revenge on me for all of my serial abuses of gentlemanly conduct. But you have to play the cards you are given.
@ x
CZ-805 can use AR mag, like the G36 the magazine housing is changed over. It might also be the right price for the treasury. I know there are many an old war horse who would love to see a modern SLR variant but nobody makes them in the numbers required and I think the Army itself would regard it as a retrograde step. I know people really push for the M4 but it is a flawed rifle and a retrograde step as well.
My personal choice would be the Beretta ARX-160 but as others have rightly pointed out price could well be a sticking point…then again if the order is big enough its amazing what manufacturers can pull out of the bag on unit price. HK and FN always have a good chance but I wonder if unit price again would be a sticking point with the same caveat with the Beretta if the order is big enough price can be driven down.
As for TAVOR I can see the attraction, small bullpup at apparently a reasonable price…there is just one rather big problem! Its just not politically acceptable, whilst the UK does buy from Israel in respect of defence it tends to be small procurement of very high tec electronics that goes under the radar of the press. A massive procurement of assault rifles would send the left wing press berserk…remember Javelin was not the armies first choice when it comes to a MILAN replacement they wanted an Israeli SPIKE variant. The just couldn’t get around the politics of such a purchase.
Anyhow maybe its getting to be the time that Think Defence does an article or series on the problems of an IW replacement now the A-Stan draw down is coming up.
I have 2 daughters, well
One complete idot sevant dingbat.
—– And
One psycho bitch queen fiend who from the pit of hell.
Both of whome will kill me the day they bring home some poor sap of a fella… I will die laughing at the poor sap.
Daughters- I give you the advice my old Gypsy Grandfather gave ne 30 years ago.
If your having kids, have boys not girls, then you only have one prick to worry about, not thousands…..
I like the comment about fash cars very aposite.
Actually we use to say about the Psycho bitch quen form hell, that she severely restricted our movements asa family.
Under SALT 1 we had to give the soviets 14 days notice if we went out of county…
Top AR-15 for $2000? call it MSRP (Price) $4995
And fits nicely into our headlined matter: http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2010/12/21/noreen-bad-news-338-lapua-semi-auto-ar-style-rifle/
(Not that we need 100.000 of those)
@ Fedaykin
I plumped for M4 more on economic grounds. If the US are buying so many thousands we tack our order on to theirs. Base M4 is still better than SA80. But you are right it is flawed.
I like the Beretta too. It is wizard. Super ergonomics. Field stripping simple. It is a good system it offers UK armed forces so many options. The one size fits all system doesn’t work.
SLR? “Night at the Legion” time. Sorry. The arguments it can reach out to 8nm and kill armoured elephants do nothing for me. In most scenarios (deserts to one side) how often can you see out beyond 400m before there is cover? 300m? 200m? You can’t shoot something you can’t see. Weight of fire outweighs out right reach. Rounds carried outweighs out right hitting power. Whatever that the latter is supposedly as young Philip will point out.
As for TAVOR. We wouldn’t get them to build it. We would just buy the “design” and use over seas aid money to get the Indians to build them for us…….. ;)
@ ACC
Somebody like say JP Enterprises will build a rifle for $1500 that will piss all over SA80 spec’s wise.
Heck even a cheap Smith and Wesson Sporter would be better screwed together than the original SA80.
I think a buy of 100,000 is reasonable.
@ James re equine vets
On the whole are mercenary barstewards; money doesn’t buy competence either. It does pay to shop around. Sometimes the old boy network doesn’t work. Just because everybody on the yard or your hunt uses a certain practice doesn’t mean squat. Next time when yours has a small injury try somebody else it could save you a fortune in the future.
Post and rail can cost a small fortune too.
Personally I think horses are dumb. I prefer fowl or small parrots.
Is there no subject this blog doesn’t cover? :)
X,
re deserts and intervisibility.
Thing is, we’ve been mostly fighting in deserts the last 20 odd years, and all the likely future hotspots seem to be deserts. So the ability to reach out a couple of hundred yards further seems quite useful.
Not sure about armoured elephants (there’s always HESH for them, that will please Mr Fred), but with an SLR you can always crunch it down on a Paddy’s skull if he gets a bit boisterous during a perfectly calm, reasonable and within the law 4 am house raid. Paddy normally falls down the stairs rapidly on those occasions. Try that with an SA80 and it will likely fall to pieces in your hands.
@ James
Well I suppose the RLI loved their FALs. But if you read about their bush war they weren’t tremendously good shots.
I think the 5.56 is here to stay. For a while at least. It is too good a compromise. The only way we will change is if the US change.
A properly constructed 5.56 rifle should be more than adequate for skull bashing. There are such things as forged and milled uppers and receivers. Not every rifle uses pressings…
X,
hence why I think FN SCAR is probably well worth looking into, if we can get beyond whatever technical issues it may have***. Versions in 5.56 and 7.62, but exactly the same training, about 90% parts commonality.
*** alleged – I don’t know if they really exist. If they do, it’s probably only quality control or quality of components. FN having been making rifles for donkey’s, so they are hardly going to turn out a design dog.
I am particularly impressed with the side-folding stock, which means you’ll be able to get a man-sized 7.62 into a sneaky-sized recce wagon. I am also agog as to what the Drill Sergeants in the Household Division are going to make of it. They were pretty pissed off with SA80 needing little vinyl covers for the sight area, so Lord knows how they are going to deal with a folding butt.
I’m not really sure if much has changed in terms of rifles has it?
– Bullpup,
– Bayonet mount,
– 5.56mm,
– Reliability,
– Lightweight,
– Mounting for sights,
Done.
@ James
SCAR is well designed and well built rifle. It is just too expensive. It has never really though done more than an AR-10 system could do nor is a qualitatively better than 416 in .223 And that is why the US Army is still buying M4 and the USMC still buying M16. That is the problem I was referring to in that other thread. Think of it as a Betamax rifle. Also in the dingier corners of the web some who have used it and have experience of the rifle question this aura of uber-reliability; but to question SCAR for some verges on heresy. It seems to be too reliable. As I said there are wide variety of options on the AR platform that can answer many of the UKLF rifle needs. For example don’t our SF and the Pathfinders use Colt C7?
“How does the SAR-21 really run young sir?”
50/50 with my old M-4. The M-4 is handier, especially with a retracted stock, but the TAR/SAR aquires the target faster due to the single plane optics (no foresight/rear apeture alignment).
No bayonet though, which was one of my worries. I console myself with the thought that 1) bayonet combat is rare and 2) My specific unit runs with a machette clipped to the side of the field pack. If push comes to shove, reach back and pull for 1 foot of blunt edged blackened blade. That should do the trick. The other units have to be content with buttstroking the bastard.
More stuff later, lunch hour’s almost over.
Re:40mm at 1km
On more considered thought, there IS a 40mm round that would be very useful in MOUT, MV Teargas. Sniper in a room with inhabited rooms next to him? One round of teargas. Let’s see him cry and shoot at the same time. Wrong room? Apologise after the people in there stop crying. I’ve been wondering if AP rounds could have some teargas built in as well, the 40mm HEAT penetration for armour is pathetic (1-2 cm), if you can slip some gas into an APC or a bunker, you might not kill it, but you might end up forcing an evacuation. But this is just theory, need more info on practicality.
Small arms.
The technology is about as mature as its going to get.
And we are after a combat rifle useful in combat and not a rifle for use at Bisley.
We just need reliability, easy maintenance, accessory rails and half decent erganomics. This is a general purpose assault rifle, nothing else. It does not have to be suitable for SF, it does not need 3 magazine release catches to knock against kit and drop the mag off.
It just needs to be robust, useful and relatively accurate.
There are a number of possibilities out there. Let’s just buy the cheapest. Doesn’t matter if its bullpup or whatever. I’d prefer bullpup but it shouldn’t happen if it impacts on the other requirements.
Small arms really should be a simple aquisition process. Even designing one should be easy since there are only so many ways to skin a cat. I am sure a bull pup HK416 could easily be made, it’s simply a matter of engineering.
If there is a fuss over the SA80 replacement I’ll be annoyed.
@ Phil said “it’s simply a matter of engineering”
:) It always is……….
My point about the C7 and SF is that it ain’t £3000 rifle. Quite the reverse actually it is slightly cheaper than the bog-standard Colt built equivalent rifle. It is an example of that rarity, a good procurement choice. The Canadians, submarines to one side, have a good-ish track record with their equipment purchases. Your friends the Danes use C7; a nation who make wise procurement decisions. As do the Dutch and Norwegians both countries with who we have close defence relationships.
There should be no reason why SA80’s replacement should cause a ripple. SIG replaced Hi-Power without anybody beyond the defence realm noticing. But I don’t think it will happen. A £200million 100,000 unit procurement won’t slip by unnoticed. There will be calls for it be built here etc. etc. and so on. If it is crap it will be a poor decision by the administration who signed it off where ever it is built etc. etc. and so on. I think if it means getting a good deal we should forego ideals like a bullpup layout.
Picture of a Cloggie with a C7.
http://cdn5.thefirearmsblog.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/attachment-tm-tfb.jpg
Most of the modern assault rifles these days, internally, are almost exactly the same. The ARX 160 does some neat things but strip out the bolt carrier assembly and it looks almost exactly like M16s, SA80, HK416 etc
Just buy whatever, the SAA instructors will still talk bollocks about its origins and reduce confidence in it anyway.
X,
Sigs replaced Browning Hi-Powers? I never knew (really). Does this mean that soldiers no longer have to throw their personal pistols at the enemy to have any kinetic effect?
I thought Brownings were like the rock of ages – just sort of there, forever, whether they work or not. Particularly the .30s. I’ve got photographs of my grandfather on the MTB he commanded in WW2 with a Browning .30 mounted on a bridge wing, my old man in a rock built sangar with a Browning .30 on a tripod in Cyprus while fighting EOKA, and me firing a Browning .30 from a Ferret. Separated by nearly 60 years, same old ironmongery. It could be said we’ve had our money’s worth out of them though.
Blimey, the Dutch militaries got the right idea. And I aint talking about the gun. But yeah, MoD shouldn’t be able to arse this one up, surely…
I wonder what can be done, if anything, to reduce part count? Or maybe, I dunno, split the weapon into enclosed assemblies that can just be interchanged when duff.
@James
“Sigs replaced Browning Hi-Powers? I never knew (really).”
We used them to arm the Afghan Local Police recruits.
http://www.imagebam.com/image/085ad1193994884
@ James
The end of a great British tradition of throwing your side arm instead of firing it. Tossed properly a Webley revolver was like a boomerang. True.
@ Chris B
It isn’t a question of reducing parts. More of the quality of the parts and how they are blended.
To the untutored eye these look the same,
http://www.lmtstore.com/complete-weapon-systems-firearms-guns/cqb-mrp-defender-model-piston-16.html
http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_785513_-1_757785_757784_757784_ProductDisplayErr
But they are different.
X,
Private Bill Speakman VC had the right idea. After running out of grenades, he threw empty beer bottles and tins of compo cheese at the enemy. Far more effective than a Browning Hi-Power.
I was singularly unimpressed with the 9mm round, in my case fired from SMG. Yes, you can kill a pheasant on Bulford ranges with a SMG, but you can’t penetrate a standard black jerrycan at 40 paces. It bounces off. The SMG is – to my knowledge – more lethal when fitted with a bayonet than when fully loaded. The bayonet was the only saving grace of the weapon, but for some reason the bayonet was not much issued.
It isn’t the round itself more the way it is loaded. Enough decent powder, the right bullet (not necessarily some super duper hollow point), and it will be effective.
RE “It isn’t a question of reducing parts. More of the quality of the parts and how they are blended.”
– also about tolerances. Modern precision machinery tempts to go for tight tolerances. The opposite example is is the AK-47 and its western relatives: very loose, and it takes a lot to make it jam
Well, I was rather thinking of a bit of both. More wiggle room (tolerance) and trying to reduce the number of fiddly bits if possible. There’s some clever buggers out there, maybe they can invent some sort of new camm or something that does the work of three levers? We can but dream.
There is nothing that can be removed from the DI AR15. They are already quite simple. I think the 5.56 will still be with us 50 years from now.
Perhaps a caseless 6mm round? Perhaps. I don’t know.
Then the simple answer is to not base it on the AR15. I’m only saying this on the proviso of whether there is a chance to make the weapon easier to manufacture and more reliable, easier to maintain in the field.
Tolerances translate into accuracy. You need some degree of accuracy. It’s all well and good having a rattling AK47 but shooting straight is still an important thing even when the weapon is much more likely to be used to suppress than engage individuals. And you can’t disregard the morale component: which professional soldier wants a gat that can’t shoot very straight. It’s an instinctive no no.
Most assault rifles seem to have the reliability down as good as its likely to get. And the most complex parts tend to be the trigger mechanism housing which has all the sears and little springs. The rest of the assault rifles are pretty robust lumps of metal or cams being guided along rails. As long as you have good QC is there much in the modern generation of assault rifles? They’re nearly all basically the same.
Is the consensus that AR-15 and the later models from all sorts of companies is as good as it gets, or at least good enough? Therefore it is merely a matter of quality of build, and unit price?
I tried the French FAMAS, way back in the early 80s when the UK still had SLR as the standard rifle. I was quite impressed by the 3 round burst mechanism. In the space of time it took for the 3 rounds, the gun did not climb much at all, so they were reasonably accurate at least at shortish ranges. Put it on full auto and it was very different, unless you were trying to shoot down something in the sky. I also quite liked the folding bipod and the integrated spike bayonet.
Turned out to be quite useful experience – in 1995 in Sarajevo we had a bit of a scare getting Gen Janvier from the airport to the city centre. One of his bodyguards got hit in the upper forearm and dropped his weapon onto the floor of the UN G-Wagon. It was not difficult to pick it up and do a “Beirut unload” through the window while Drives got us the f*ck out of there rapido, although I would not claim they were all aimed single shots in accordance with the British Army’s Yellow Card ;).
@ Chris B
The AR15 is a known quantity. Trying another design leaves you open to all sorts of risks. Money will still be tight in 2018. I can’t see anything coming along to usurp the AR in just 6 years.
One of the problems we Singaporeans and the Israelis highlighted during TAR/SAR development was the AR15’s DI system. It choked up to easily and led to jams. The AK uses a short stroke piston which improved reliability. Other problem was the aluminium mag. Lips bent too easily.
Problem 1:
AR15 DI system chokes up easily. 5.56mm gives good accuracy.
AK47 Short Stroke Piston very reliable. 7.62S gives poor accuracy.
Solution?
A short stroke piston system chambered in 5.56.
Accuracy and reliability. We hope. Check back in 20 years when the guns are worn down.
A linear problem solving solution.
Problem 2: Aluminium STANAG M-16 mag lips bend to easily, leading to bad feeding.
Solution:
Plastic translucent mags. Though they did overdo the AK influence and made the feed system a mini-AK banana clip and AK style back catch, which is not STANAG. Might be a bit of a booboo there in case of coalition interfacing or needing to bum mags from the 2nd line troops still using M-16s. Oh well. Lets wait and see if their SAR21 Mk2 is any better.
Long story short.
Kill the damn DI system.
The AK is known. All you really want is approximate accuracy, the ability to suppress, not neccessarily sniper accuracy.
@ Observer
One of the better piston AR’s.
http://www.adcorindustries.com/wordpress/index.php/products/
@Chris
5.56mm DMR ammo is your friend. :P
Do you see anything wrong with a short stroke system firing 5.56 marksman ammo?
@x
It’s .. I won’t say a con, more like.. it’s marketing. Most of what they bunged on the site is intrinsic in all short stroke systems. P-rails can be fitted to any rifle, not only the B.E.A.R.
Found this on the YouTubes,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNEnxohyYBY&feature=related
Here’s a short history from the early 50s to the point that Observer started from (for the Singaporean-Israeli development)
– the other branch (that the Israelis got their Galil from) ran until 1998, ceasing production as exports were not pursued
http://www.strikehold.net/2010/01/18/an-airsoft-rk95/
– apologies that the nutshell description is under airsoft
@x
Interesting.
I take it that you like the idea of short stroke 5.56 too?
I’m actually wondering if “impulse averaging” can handle 7.62 NATO. Might be worth an experiment for a new GPMG or Battle Rifle.
Observer,
I would think that in Singapore the light nature of the round, in the thick foliage, would be counted as a disadvantage?
“firing 5.56 marksman ammo?” or any 5.56
No you dont need sniper accuracy, but you need very decent accuracy. I believe strongly in the strength of the morale component of combat power: give blokes rattly rifles that don’t shoot particularly straight and they’re going to feel pretty rotten. We can’t fight human nature, yes the weapon will expend 95% of its ammo suppressing, but that’s not how it feels to the average Tom. Like boots and scoff, you can get away with cheap both but spend a bit more and the effects are tangible. Even if it seems to make little sense in pure utilitarian terms.
@ACC
Vegetation? :P
@ Observer,
As much as I would like to see part count go down, short stroke has basically proven itself superior to DI. Didn’t the Yanks do some tests a few years ago where the HK416 and FN SCAR came in as 1 and 2, or was it 2 and 3, in terms of stoppages? I think having a little room in the internal tolerance to accomodate ambient temperature changes and the odd bit of small debris is acceptable, providing the rounds can still be used in a suppressive manner out to about 500m.
What was that .45 ACP sub machine gun that someone built, the one where the bolt assembly recoils back and down into the handgrip (or was it behind the magazine well)?
Of course now I’m well and truly shitting on my earlier argument about low part count.
@ Phil,
I think it was Gabe… somebody whose name eludes me right now, who was pretty confident in the AK’s accuracy, describing complaints against it as just a lack of shooting technique!
Gabe Suarez
@ Observer
Yes I prefer it. The Adcor solves the problems especially the weight. Keeping heat and fouling away from the bolt group has got to be a good idea in an AR15. Keeping the oil cool will preserve its performance. Keeping “dirt” levels down can only be good to in an AR system. So it is a win, win.
Phil,
quite right.
Also importantly, the boys and girls – especially of non-combat units – need to spend much more quality time with their weapons. My AGC(SPS) Chief Clerk was dreadful at this – held it as though it was going to bite him, and one of the LCpl clerks didn’t realise she had to put the SA80 into her shoulder to fire it properly. Honestly. It was a bit of a surprise for the staff branch when I ordered 3 days of proper military training (you know, CFTs, camping out, field firing, night patrols, bayonets on dead pigs, and an 80 mile march from Minehead to Dartmouth), but what was more surprising for me was that none of them apart from the combat unit officers were really very clued up at all in terms of being a proper soldier.
That was quite a fun Monday. Everyone turned up to work in the HQ as per normal expecting a normal week, I gave them 3 hours to go home and come back with kit for 3 days of proper soldiering, then took them out in a 4 tonner and Landrover for a gentle 15 miler on Salisbury Plain before we deployed to Minehead to basher up on the cliffs. Honestly, you should have heard the whinging. It only got worse at 1900 when I told them there were another 48 hours to go, when they’d thought my madness would only last for the daylight hours. However, by the end, they all confessed to enjoying it. The 3 SO2s also proved themselves in my eyes, although that was not so necessary.
@Chris B
I think with the AK it is made by so many places, and with very different levels of QC and precision, and they are in such a varied condition and in such a varied number of models that I am sure some shoot beautifully and others will hit the bloke stood behind you.
We had some brand spanking new AK47s that were to be issued to the ALP. Brand new, straight out of the box complete with their accessories and dodgy tins of ammunition that you opened with a tin opener. But anyway, they felt like air rifles. The wooden furniture had the same feel as a cheap Chinese air rifle and they just felt nasty. A lot of us had a good bit of fun playing with them and nobody could get a good grouping with the things even two of the snipers much to everyone’s deep joy and mirth.
@ James
How much range time do you think a soldier should have?
Do you think there would be any benefit to every body going to the range once a month and shooting 100 rounds? Full bore no small bore stuff. Just pulling stuff out of the air.
That would cost, post 2015, about £100million a year.
Range time.
Its a qualitative rather than a quantitative thing. I’d rather the blokes spent less time on the range but did quality shoots and got good coaching and have plenty of time per session.
There’s a massive difference between getting to practise and become one with the rifle as it were, zeroing and doing varied shoots and angrily smashing 50 blokes through an APWT serial in an afternoon.
@Phil
Does the APWT have a component where you have a short run, then a shoot? It’s surprisingly hard to shoot while hyperventilating.
X,
oddly, I think time just spent with the weapon is pretty valuable. Just handling it, hefting it, learning to be never more than 20 inches from it. It may seem strange, but if every soldier in barracks carried around an unloaded weapon as a matter of routine, familiarity would naturally grow, and it would not cost £100 million a year.
I also think that all PT sessions should be with a weapon. Always thought that from the days when I was a young Troop Leader. Used to get the Armoury opened up so we could all collect our weapons at 0700, return them at 0900. There’s bugger all point in going for daily gentle jogs at a constant pace in a group – you can do that sort of inefficient PT in your own time, if you want. Instead, go in a straight line from A to B as a squad, at varying paces, sometimes carrying people, other times fording or swimming rivers, climbing walls or fences, and always with your weapon.
Apparently, I was an “interesting” Troop Leader, but I never had any shortage of the boys wanting to be in my Troop. I did have an old nanny of a Squadron Sergeant Major request to be re-assigned when I was first appointed a Squadron Leader, and I was very happy to tell the CO that I entirely supported his wish. Got by with a decent young Troop Sergeant who was on double acting rank, and did a better job than the old nanny would have done.
@Observer
Trying to remember.
No, no running in the APWT or ACMT as its called now. But that’s just the basic qualification and there are shoots that require one round say standing, another prone in a few seconds.
Other shoots require a bit of huff and puff like the ISBR range and so on and there are various competition / skill at arms shoots that require some hundred metre sprints etc. The shooting possibilities are very varied.
Observer,
i’m not current with today’s specific tests, but there have always been a range of shooting tests involving running and shooting. Normally called “March and Shoot” over 8-15 miles in full kit, but there are also the Infantry Combat Fitness Test (ICFT) over 3 miles in fighting order, and the Assault Course in fighting order onto a 25 metre firing point. So yes, it’s pretty normal.
Or falling plate shoots where you mong the brief and shoot the opposing teams plates – happened to a friend…
@ Phil,
I can’t verify what size plates he’s shooting at, but an interesting watch none the less;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSuAPjw2Jgw
Just to be clear, I’m not advocating we adopt the AK-47 as our new service rifle. Just think the design of it is headed in the right direction with the short stroke piston (the one lifted out of the HK416 would do nicely) and some wiggle room in the internals wouldn’t do too much harm.
Phil said “Its a qualitative rather than a quantitative thing. I’d rather the blokes spent less time on the range but did quality shoots and got good coaching and have plenty of time per session.”
That is more what I am on about. I said 100 rounds because that is a good day’s shooting. It was more of a convenient measure. I see no value in shooting .22lr systems.
Being an infantry man is a skilled trade. But if clerks can’t shoot you could start to ask why are these posts are “uniformed”? It isn’t as straightforward as that but it does make me wonder.
It is easy for us “armchair” staff officers to talk about kit. But I wonder how much could be done to improve “defence”, if there are improvements to be made, by the implementation of schemes or re-organisation. I think such things will probably be beyond the ken of us non-professionals. But if say a dedicated afternoon shooting for all soldiers (beyond those in combat obviously) improves the “quality” of our forces I wonder what else could be done?
I am sure James will agree when I say it is down to the leaders of a unit how much range time people get generally speaking.
And also, in today’s army, and in the run up to deployments or big exercises, some folks are enablers and just do not have the time to shoot as much as others.
Now the Yanks have the Soldier Readiness Programme, which I believe, and stress believe as I’ve just heard it from friends, is an agency that sorts out the pre-deployment training and gumpf that goes with getting ready to go away, all the manpower intensive stuff like medicals, vaccinations, the enormous amount of paper work, kit issue and so forth. I don’t know how well it works.
I know in this mans Army clerks especially can be getting beasted all the time on pay and paperwork and tracking documents and personnel as they move all over the country and indeed the world as the unit comes to readiness.
It’s all supposed to be done as part of a risk assessment though. And everyone has to meet the basic standards, although even then a CO can take someone “at risk” for certain reasons. For example the fat surgeon who can’t pass a PFT but will save 40 soldiers lives in the BSN operating theatre.
Is there a mandatory amount of certain work that Infantry have to do, e.g. x amount of night navigation exercises per month, y amount of nights spent camping per month etc, or is it just a “organise it yourselves until you get to the next exercise” sort of thing.
Actually I just looked it up the SRP thing does only basic Reserve Training and Mobilisation Centre stuff like basic document checks and medicals. Although I am sure in a 700 man infantry battalion that still takes far longer than one might think to get done.
@Phil
“you mong the brief and shoot the opposing teams plates”
Happens very often. Miscounted plates etc. Had one time on the range where one plate failed to pop up. Total chaos, mass crossfiring. Hilarious :)
@James
Rifle PT. Those were the days. lol. They stopped it after a series of accidents. Guys with their rifles over (or on after 60 min) their heads would turn around and accidentally buttstroke the guy next to them in the head. :P Or lose their grip/trip and fall and you end up with a wild rifle on the loose, often with the same results as the buttstroke (concussion, fracture, missing teeth etc). Thinking back, it was almost like a comedy act, other than the fact that we were too numb to pay attention properly.
There was also group log PT, where 10 people would play with a 10 foot long log. (Or be played by the log…) Run, hold overhead, toss and grab, alternating shoulder toss and grab. Same problem with the rifles. Too many concussions.
Those were the days. Never again though, hell no.
@ James
5.56 costs a £1 round. 100 rounds per soldier multiplied by 82,000 soldiers multiplied by 12 months comes in at £98,400,000 I rounded it up to £100million for costs. concur with what you say, but the rifle needs to be shot.
I wonder if there is any value in a soldier being issued a rifle and that rifle is their’s throughout their career. With RFID etc. it wouldn’t be that hard to administer?
@Chris B
Every bloke does MATTs once a year but that is about it. There are Collective Training standards (CT) and I believe units have to meet these standards at certain points in the readiness cycle. I don’t know the details of these standards but CT3 is platoon / troop level operations. And I believe there are OPTAG evaluations when you’re going away but they mandate standards rather than do x number of days doing this etc
I do believe, and James will correct me, that units are just given standards to meet and its almost entirely up to the chain of command how this is done on a day to day basis. The British Army seems to give a massive amount of independence to its leaders.
One rifle per man. Nice idea but administrative nightmare as 700 rifles all come up for inspection at different times or whatever other things the armourers do in their caged and dark domains all day.
And I can’t really see the point, its just a lump of metal, you report deficiencies and bits broken off and then they are all pretty much the same.
Most units assign you a butt number but if you move out of the unit the rifle stays in that units armoury. The other problem would be rifles flying all around the country as people trickle posted everywhere. Some units however, especially TA units, don’t hold full establishments of rifles. A massive pain in the bastard arse when you’ve zeroed your rifle for a competition and some lazy bastard of a QM issues it to someone else for a poxy LF3 and screws the zero around. Absolutely infuriating.
For James when he writes to the Secretary of State pleading for the return of SLR.
DSA manufacture new FALs,
http://www.dsarms.com/FAL-SA58%20Rifles/products/8/
@ Phil
Yes I know training is the responsibility of the various tiers of command. And I appreciate any task performed multiplied by the number in formation could bring about scale problems.
What I am wondering is “we” armchair staff officers spend billions each day here on our nuclear powered stealth tanks. But I wonder if there instead of spending a £100million or £50million on kit that money could be spent on a programme, beyond training or supplementary to it, that would benefit the forces, in this instance the Army as a whole. Take you trade. Would their be any benefit all soldiers having a compulsory “battlefield first aid” coaching session once a month? I am struggling to articulate my thoughts…
@Phil
Tough luck. Shit happens.
@X
One pound per round?? How the hell did that happen? No way a round would cost more that 10-50p unless you were talking about special ammo. If you paid more than that, you got cheated.
Repetitive training is something the Army has a gold medal in.
MATT lessons are usually done to utter death. When nobody can think of anything else to do some boring MATT lesson gets rolled out.
I think leave the system as it is. Meddle to much and you start to undermine good leaders and micro-manage. I like the current way, soldier x must be able to do a,b,c by 30 June 2012 and so as part of a company, in your own time, carry on.
@ Phil
Yes I know how the Army look after small arms. And I know how the TA does it too. Hence what I said about RFID.
And I am familiar with what the RN calls Task Books too.
No I am on about something on a macro scale beyond normal training. Leave it. I can’t my words out. Too busy listening to the TT. :)
“The British Army seems to give a massive amount of independence to its leaders.”
— Which can only be a good thing in the long run if history is to teach us anything.
How does RFID stop rifles going missing? And how do they get moved with the bloke when he gets posted? He’s not allowed to move it on its own with or without RFID. You’d spend most of your transport budget driving rifles around the country.
@ x
“No I am on about something on a macro scale beyond normal training. Leave it. I can’t my words out. Too busy listening to the TT”
Sounds like you’re trying to say ‘more money for more training, especially the complicated/important stuff that we don’t train all that much now’?
Not to mention if you moved men AND rifles around, you now have 2 variables in your ORBAT, men and weapons. If you only moved men around, you can be sure that at least your unit is up to standard in terms of weapons. Not to mention some units DON’T use standard weapons. So what are you going to do with your rifle when they toss you a SAW or a sniper rifle? Send back by return post?
@ Observer
I am using a reputable source. Actually it is 10 years out of date. But when it comes to HMG spending I believe. The other week there was an article here about how a NHS hospital was buying pizza bases for £17 a piece.
A quick scan on the web. Federal’s American Eagle comes in at 50c per round.
@ Chris B
As I said we easily spend here millions on hardware. I just wondered if some of those millions could be spent on the system at the heart of the system.
Anyway racing is about to start…..
X,
what’s with needing to write to SofS? You just take the IPT Leader and CO ITDU out to lunch (separately, so they don’t twig), let them make the case and adjust the rules to suit your company’s offering. Get the contract in and booked while under the radar. It helps if you were all in the same Regiment together and one of you married the other’s sister. Don’t you know how defence BD works?
Writing to SofS is a mark of desperation. If you have to do that, you know the P45 is incoming. Or if you are the CEO of BAE Systems, it is the only thing to do when despite the lunching and marrying of each other’s sisters, your products are so fucking crap that they have been rejected by every escalating stage of selection. Witness CVF, which Thales won fair and square, but somehow BAE end up priming a Thales design.
.338 offer more range than the 7.62NATO but its still an anti-personnel round.
7.62 not not fit, bring on the anti-materiel .50 cal – M2s, Barrett rifle
RE: Realistic training. OK, I’m just a civvy but what about an army sports event based on combat skills?
http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/battlesport.html
Sections complete within their regiments, etc, then the best compete with other unit winners?
Do you realise who you’ve just linked to?!
Anyway, the Army likes a competition at the drop of a hat. Competitions for everything. Inter platoon comps, company comps, battalion march and shoots, skill at arms meets, patrol competitions etc not to mention sports where I doubt there is another organisation so supportive of it.
So the Army spends a lot of time and money on competitions. Good units run them all the time for almost anything the mad officers can conceive of.
A short piece on Adcor BEAR from the American Rifleman.
http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/adcor-bear-review/
At current exchange rates it is about £1400. Add say £500 for something like an AimPoint and there is still change from £2000.
The only use I can see for the .338 Norma Magnum is if it replaces an existing calibre. If the .338 Norma Magnum can’t replace 12.7mm, can it replace the 7.62mm NATO for machine guns/sniper rifles? Would the extra range and stopping power be worth the change? Or would the extra ammo weight/volume preclude that?
Don’t forget the preexisting stock of hundreds of thousands of rounds of 7.62 in storage at army depots compared to the 0 rounds of .338.
@ Observer – I was including them in the cost of changing over. New ammo, new weapons, new training, etc. Does the benefits of the new calibre outweigh this cost and the extra weight/volume of the new rounds. If it doesn’t then I don’t really see the need for it.
A common round for both machine guns, sniper rifles and assault rifles would have the benefit of making logistics simpler if the round was also capable of performing those roles but as far as I can tell no one expects the .338 Norma Magnum round to be used in assault rifles :)
RE ” preexisting stock of hundreds of thousands of rounds of 7.62 ”
– millions?
“in storage at army depots compared to the 0 rounds of .338.”
– tens of thousands at least [but of the different kind]
Hi GJ, in “A common round for both machine guns, sniper rifles and assault rifles would have the benefit of making logistics simpler”
that list (too wide a spread for commonality) is there room for a platoon support/ patrol (half-platoon support)/ counter sniper rifle?
I am always thinking about the SVD type of heavy-to-lug-around beast, with the virtue that while SVD performs best when using target grade ammunition, however standard (PKM/PKT = MG, in their case 7.62×54-mm rimmed) rounds may also be fired.
– the machine guns firing the same round as assault rifles seem to be best used in teams that need high mobility, but may need to employ the high rate of fire, without much, if any, gain in effective reach
How many country’s armed forces actually use the .338?
As I think has been touched upon, there doesn’t seem room for this between 7.62 and 12.7mm.
I wonder whether GD is trying to position itself for the possibility of the US Army switching calibers at the end of their IW contest, and taking on an intermediate IW and light MG round.
Might a .338 MG fit better into that context? 6.5/.338/.50 perhaps.
@ ACC – I should have been more specific – I was thinking of DMR’s rather than true sniper weapons as they will nearly always use match ammo and often different calibre from the standard infantry. You’re also right about the machineguns using the same ammo as assault rifles only providing increased ROF.
Essentially I was thinking about something like the old 7mm round for the EM-2 which Tony Williams used to champion on these threads. Usable in assault rifles and a GPMG type weapon. An assault rifle, using similar ammo, could become a DMR with a heavier barrel/bi-pod/better sight?
Hi GJ,
yeah, I know that is the bridge (DMR), but there is another way:
MG firing the AR round:
– fast firing, but accurate
– gun weight 8.5 kg, but belt cassettes of only 100 rounds, add 2.2 kg
– theoretically fires over a thousand per minute, but with changes comes down to 400-500
– the whole idea is to have mobile groups that carry and share all ammo
MG firing the long round
– slower, but used with main units that can afford logistics for different calibers
– 750 theoretically, brought down to 250 with belt changes (even though bigger belts, twice as many rounds, but also heavier… becomes a two-man operation)
And then you have snipers, assigned separately
Hi Observer,
Just for one type of sniper rifle… too many of them to try to summarise, the vote here seems to be overwhelmingly for the .338
Armenia: AWM – Used by snipers and special forces.[citation needed]
Bangladesh: AWM – .338 Lapua Magnum (Bangladesh Army Sniper Team)[12]
Germany: AWM-F (Designated G22) – .300 Winchester Magnum[13][14]
Indonesia: AWM is used by the Komando Pasukan Katak (Kopaska) tactical diver group and Komando Pasukan Khusus (Kopassus) special forces group[15]
Italy: AWM – .338 Lapua Magnum is used by the 9th Parachute Assault Regiment “Col Moschin”[16]
Republic of Korea: AWM – .338 Lapua Magnum.[citation needed]
Malaysia: AWSM – .338 Lapua Magnum is used by the Pasukan Gerakan Khas (PGK) of the Royal Malaysia Police.[citation needed]
Netherlands: AWM-F – .338 Lapua Magnum[17][18]
Norway: AWM – .338 Lapua Magnum. Used by snipers and special forces.[citation needed]
Poland: AWM-F – .338 Lapua Magnum round; GROM[19]; 1 Pułk Specjalny Komandosów[20]
Russia: AWM-F – .338 Lapua Magnum used by the Alpha Group counter-terrorism unit[21][22]
United Kingdom: AWM – .338 Lapua Magnum[23]
Belgium: AWM – .338 Lapua Magnum[24]
Not clear for Indonesia [this is from Wiki] and Germany may have made their choice based on what else was in use before the .338 appeared on the scene
– or did you mean in any other way than for long range accuracy?
Bring back the MG 42 I say.
If so many (of the MG42s) had not been surrendered in Yugoslavia, and then sold to Algeria for hard cash, the French would never have lost
…
ACC…
You ever tried firing a MG before?
1000 rpm is “Woo, I’m an AA gun, I fill the sky with lead” territory. The M-16 is 900 rpm auto, and the spread on that is the size of a basketball at 15m. For 3 seconds. Then you’re empty. And the other guy’s armed.
No. Hell no way 1000 rpm.
PS: You’re carrying the ammo :P
“MG firing the AR round:”
Been around for 30 years. It’s called a SAW.
Hi Observer, that “PS: You’re carrying the ammo ” was the thrust of my comment at 22:37
– may be you are referring to the .338; I was wondering about your question: who uses it in general? Or, who uses it for “serial fire”?
@GJ
“An assault rifle, using similar ammo, could become a DMR with a heavier barrel/bi-pod/better sight?”
That’s what the US does with their M-4. 3x scope + 5.56 ER DMR ammo is good to 800m single shot from what they claim. Changing all 5.56 to DMR’s going to cost though, small increase per round, but you’re talking millions of them here. Might be worth it if you got the $.
@ACC
I meant who uses it in general. Yes, it’s in stock, but I don’t really see them actually using the stuff, most of it in the field is still 5.56, 7.62 and 0.5cal.
I was never much good at music, or rhythm. I dance like I’m marching (but my old Colour Sergeant at Sandbags, the totally brilliant Colour Sergeant Jackson MM Scots Guards was quite approving of my marching).
However, I used to be really good at the “killing bursts”, which are a matter of rhythm and absolutely a dedication to despatching as many of the Queen’s enemies as possible in as few rounds as possible. It’s getting the balance right in between firing balls out, and the heat of the barrel, and the beaten zone, and the natural pattern of human reaction, and the physical “jump” and “settle” of a MG on auto when in a coaxial mount. The RAC Gunnery School in Lulworth teaches it as 5-5-5-10-20-10-5-5-5, with 2 second pauses to let everything settle down, and to make fine corrections. Honestly, it’s like a fine concerto when it’s done right.
Hi Observer, Yes “most of it in the field is still 5.56, 7.62 and 0.5cal”
– one shot, one kill?
Funnily enough in the country where the Lapua comes from, they also use the 0.5 cal Barrett
– folding stock, presumably the only user with that mod
– it is the combat engineers, to detonate located mines!
@ James,
That “The RAC Gunnery School in Lulworth teaches it as 5-5-5-10-20-10-5-5-5, with 2 second pauses to let everything settle down” is a nice
280 per minute
– of course, if you have a feed from within the vehicle, the impact of belt changes fades away
The funny thing about that LMG I was talking about was that dual feed was insisted on: belt normally, but a facility to take AR mags in an emergency
– and when the mags did not have stiff enough a spring to feed the rate of fire, the top brass insisted that the spring is made stiffer
– then they could not find anyone strong enough to fill the mags to the limit!
ACC,
I used to know a lovely old feller who was a Chindit veteran. Sadly died a couple of years back – I was proud to be asked to carry his coffin with the sons of his mates from the Chindits. He commanded the MG platoon of his battalion on both raids, and ammo was in short supply. He made his gunners fire in 3 round bursts from their Bren guns as an economy measure, but found it worked well. Shortly after the war, he commanded the MG school at the School of Infantry and introduced that as a technique. Of course, with the advent of belt-fed MGs, other patterns were possible, but he firmly believed the 3 round burst was best for the infantry squad MG.
“He made his gunners fire in 3 round bursts from their Bren guns as an economy measure, but found it worked well. Shortly after the war, he commanded the MG school at the School of Infantry and introduced that as a technique. Of course, with the advent of belt-fed MGs, other patterns were possible, but he firmly believed the 3 round burst was best for the infantry squad MG.”
— Ahh, must sleep. That aside, I remember reading that “them” came to same conclusion about very short bursts from the Bren, after operations in Italy (as well as a preference for zee German MP.40, chaffed of course)
@James
I’ve heard some armour guys describe the sound of 25mm/0.5cal/7.62mm/5.56mm firing all at once as an orchestra. Think they’re right, there is a strange sort of beauty to it.
I thought the 3 shot burst was standard for SAWs? It has always reminded me of the start of the opening song to “The Lone Ranger”.
@ACC
7.62mm/0.5cal isn’t one shot, one kill? One of my friends in uni once had one of his cadets hit by a ricochet 7.62. It hit from the side and delaminated his entire back, as in the whole of his back pealed off. Still alive though, suffocated to death as his lungs were pretty much screwed.
I always understood even the Germans with their 1200 rpm MG 42, taught the ‘short bursts’ technique???
Why was the 7.62 ricochetting? Negligent discharge? Or are uni’ bar fights in Singapore on a whole different level? What’s the story?
Observer,
I’m struggling to think why any vehicle commander would want all natures firing at once. Last ditch repelling of a mass zombie attack, maybe, but does that sort of situation often occur in Singapore? Crikey, even during a Battle Group attack, you are normally only firing 120mm and 7.62mm. I don’t think the software in Challenger even allows you to fire both main armament and coax at the same time.
@brian 18.46,Might a .338 MG fit better into that context? 6.5/.338/.50 perhaps. or even 6.5/.338/14.5. I’ve noticed the 14.5mm creeping in on other stuff, when i had hardly never come across it when wearing green.
although thanks to this site i was introduced to the awesome gepard gp6 12.7mm anti material bullpup rifle, makes me have a sex wee that does!!!
@x
Ricochet. Covering fire for a training assault, one round hit a half buried rock and went way to one side of the line of fire, right into the flanking element.
@James
Live firing practice. Annual thing, mixed vehicles, MBTs, IFVs and APCs (old M113s, which is where the 5.56 comes from, the 5.56 SAW and 7.62 GPMG on the rear hatch). Tanks face straight on, APCs face to the side with the turret cranked 90 degrees, hatch mounted weapons fixed facing to the side.
Those M-113s are like cockroaches. Everywhere and they just seem to go on and on and on.
As for zombies, who knows. After all, old ChiCom doctrine WAS human waves remember? :)
@ paul g
http://www.anzioironworks.com/MAG-FED-20MM-RIFLE.htm
TMI dude, TMI. :)
Observer,
after 1941 and the lessons learned, I’m assuming all Singaporean defence planning is now oriented to the landward north? You’ve probably got that covered then.
Next time, Tojo’s arriving on a JAL 747 straight into Changi on a scheduled service. Cunning, the Japs.
Not sure if you can get it in Singapore, but the BBC iPlayer recently had a brilliant 90 minute documentary on 2 British men who contrived to betray both our countries with selling naval aviation expertise to Japan inter-war, and thus enabled both Pearl Harbour and the capture of Singapore. This was one of them: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Forbes-Sempill,_19th_Lord_Sempill. The BBC programme is called “The Fall of Singapore: The Great Betrayal”. I had never even heard of this before – it is quite literally jaw-dropping.
Bastards.
James, perhaps you should let the Phoenix Think Tank know so they can add it to the list of UK naval aviation milestones and contributions :)
right 10 mins on the naughtystep mr TD!!!!
@x i was thinking of the about the denel 20mm as well as gepard (gepard much better due to barrel stored away when patrolling0. As the denel can barrel change from 20mm to 14.5 in under a minute and also use a 12.7mm (half inch) for training
TD
LOL in fact ROFL
@ Paul G
There are a few 20mm rifles out there I think. That is the first one that popped up.
@James
Think BBC is getting desperate to sell documentries? Every one must be some grand expose or world shaking discovery of how the ancients control gravity.
Anyway, that was tecnical info or general goals, not specific battleplans. I doubt Percy ever sent his unit despositions to the UK. It helps, yes, but the fact was that the cupboard was bare in the first place, excabated by the fact that the British’s most experienced jungle unit discovered that the Japs brought tanks the hard way. Patrick Heenan’s backstab was probably worse. Maybe.
@The rest
Guys, you want it, you lug it. :P And the ammo.
Betrayal apart, the Japanese were quick to learn from the British (or, actually: how did the details carry so quickly?)
– after Taranto, they modified the torpedoes with a sort of a flipper mechanism in the back… Pearl Harbour had always been though to be so shallow that torpedoes would not make it back to surface, after the initial drop
RE “thus enabled both Pearl Harbour” from James’s documentary reference, – it was a truely well researched story
We will be blaming Liddell Hart for the fall of France next…..
X,
if you can get hold of a copy, and you have time, try to read Gen Heinz Guderian’s “Panzer Leader” – he was exactly the sort of Panzer Commander the German’s needed. I did a battlefield tour of the Sedan area on the northern end of the Maginot line along with a couple of very good historians (led by Richard Holmes – he was a wonderful guide), and what Guderian did in that area was breath-taking.
It was a pretty one-sided victory, but there were some individual moments that reflected well on the French. The battle of Stonne was a good example – that was where the French had concentrated their most effective tanks, and the Germans could not kill them. One French tank took over 140 hits in a 3 day period, and was responsible for taking out a dozen German tanks by itself. The village of Stonne changed hands 17 times in the same 3 days. Must have been quite some battle.
@ James
Well it was LH who did all the spade work on all arms “battle group” / brigades for the German generals. (And the Soviets up to a point if it wasn’t for Stalin and his purge.) It was frightening how far ahead the Army was in “modern warfare” in the 1920s only to have their arses handed to them in 1940 having seemingly taken much of the new thinking to heart. (The Depression and lack of funds considered.)
I think French successes can be attributed to the quality of their tanks which were larger, better armed, better armoured, and well built. German tanks were small, under gunned, and under amoured. Of course it was the manner in which they were employed that made the difference. The Allies saw them as subsidiary to the infantry (more or less) where of course for the German’s it was the reverse.
@ James,
You ought to try “Panzer Tactics: German Small-unit Armor Tactics in World War II,” by Wolfgang Schneider. Very much a tactical level book with some excellent pictures and plenty of diagrams included from German tactical handbooks. Covers the lot in great detail from recce to command to training etc.
Also give Rommels Infantry Attacks a whirl. Helps a lot to explain how he became the type of commander that he did, very much shaped by his WW1 experiences.
Getting back to the .338 MG, Tony Williams on the firearms blog says” the gun is not based on FN MAG/M240 but on the XM806. It uses the same soft recoil technology.”
Firing rate 500 rpm. Lethal accuracy to 1700 m.
“the gun is not based on FN MAG/M240 but on the XM806”
And encounters the same problems :)
Other places reported the ROF as 260 RPM, wonder if they cut and pasted the XM-806’s stats over thinking it’s more or less the same weapon.
If we want to buy British, I see the Manroy site is touting their 7.62 Para commando machine gun. A lightweight FN MAG clone.
No we should be Israeli,
http://www.israel-weapon.com/?catid=%7B19D5D496-ADA9-4A2E-BD7C-69B598FE4002%7D
Negev is super.
John Hartley,
I see it still has the world’s most difficult to clean gas regulator. The sort of gas regulator that clogs up with crap at a high rate of knots, and that can only be effectively cleaned by dumping it into half a can of coke for 30 minutes to loosen off the carbon, and that every gunnery school in the British Army explicitly tell you not to do as the coke pits the chrome.
Apparently, the gas regulator is the most required spare part ordered by Armourers through the QM(Tech) of any Regiment, because despite strict injunctions not to immerse them in Coca Cola, it happens. Can’t think why….
Also a bit of a marketing gush. “Para Commando”, oh yes that ticks some sexy sounding boxes. Probably more effective than saying “shorter barrel so the beaten zone is the size of an English county”. How the hell are you meant to do ranging bursts when some rounds hit the deck at 150 yards, and some at 900 yards?
James
Seems everyone is jumping on the lightweight 7.62 GPMG, so why not Manroy? The name would not be my choice either. Still, they could have called it the naked skimpy version, so it could have been worse.
John,
it has Picatinny rails! Wooooh-hoooo! Let’s buy 20,000!
Never mind the fact that basic physics means that a short barrel basically turn it into a heavy SMG. Apart from the gas regulator, I really struggle to see what’s wrong with the tried and tested Gimpy. At the cost of a couple of kilos less weight, I’d rather have an accurate GPMG than an over-sized SMG. If you want to save weight, go 5.56 and still have better lethality over a 10 round burst at 400 yards than 7.62 being chucked all over the place.
James
The Manroy LW (there just renamed it) still has a 21.3″ barrel, so not as bad as the 16 & 18″ barrels you see on other 7.62 weapons nowadays.
John,
can’t speak for those other short barrels – maybe Manroy are not being quite as ridiculous as their competitors. Sound pretty stupid to me to go that short. It’s like taking to the grouse moor with a sawn-off shotgun – you’d look ridiculous, and couldn’t hit a barn door at 10 yards.
Apart from the inherent loss of accuracy (in marketing speak, “increased beaten zone”, or in lawyer-speak “there’s no way we’re clearing that for peacekeeping use under modern ROE”), the heat problem is going to get a lot worse, so increased need for barrel changes.
Does anyone recall the film “Predator”? I saw it on an aeroplane. OK, Hollywood nonsense, but I was quite taken with the stabilised MG carried by one of the characters, and I’ve seen as everyone has those stabilised TV cameras at sports events. Any idea if that would work for real?
My knowledge of Newton stops with the ability to say that he had 3 laws, not actually in knowing what those laws are. So it may be a physical impossibility.
http://www.steadicam.com/
@ James re Steadicam and Newton
No. Have you heard of “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction”? And you have fired a GPMG haven’t you? And you did notice that the GPMG was attached to 7.5 tons of little tank? Or if it was a SF it sat on a big heavy tripod that on soft ground dug itself in? Well then….. :)
No we need the Negev. It works in the rain. It goes bang. It is tacticool. Well tacticool.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KI2sMWyMjN0
James
The FNH USA MK-48 Mod 1 7.62 has a 18.8″ barrel. So Manroy at 21.3″ is quite good by comparison.
X,
I was thinking more of a “soaking up” recoil suppressor. Anyway, you can’t get down and dirty in the mud with those steady-rigs, so it would fail that test at least.
Not sure what to make of the Negev. Sounds Gucci, but honestly that pair need to sort out their pairs F&M. Did you notice they both ran out of ammo at the same time? Shocking demo. Also, there was no-one sneaking around the side to kill the targets with a bayonet, and without that, you haven’t got a good tall tale to embellish back in the NAAFI bar.
@ James
I have spoken with my rabbi. Killing paper targets with a bayonet isn’t kosher. Being Israeli they would probably prefer to finish the target off with a grenade or an armoured brigade.
The Negev would be a better buy than the 7.62 Minimi.
X,
cousin of mine ran a jungle range for his Ghurka battalion’s annual junior NCO cadre shortly after he was commissioned and posted in. Two things he got wrong: he tried to make an improvised SF kit with a lashed up tripod of logs, and naturally it fell over and started spraying in a generally unsafe direction just when the CO and Bde Comd were visiting, and secondly, not having been sufficiently “Ghurka-ised” he hadn’t planned on every single private soldier drawing his kukri and doing the last 5 yards balls out with death in his heart, to impress the watching CO. It was a matter of pride for them to be able to chop lumps off the Figure 11s, no matter how many holes they’d put in them beforehand.
And why not? :)
At times I am guilty of forgetting that this defence business isn’t very savoury.
X,
yes.
I remember on the Joint Staff Course we did three weeks in the first term of introducing the other services to each other. Lots of opportunity for one-upmanship, and it was taken with great seriousness. So we went to sea for a week with the Andrew, walked around a sub, and tried to keep a straight face while they did their gunnery practice. We spent a week with the Kevins visiting radar stations and listening to Engineering Officers talking about loggy crap and engine servicing (plus got to fly in Tucanos – that was quite Biggles), and then the Andrew and the Kevins came to play on Salisbury Plain. Oh what fun. Pick the muddiest bit you can. The Warminster demo BG also did an amazing demo of a BG attack, with all of us sitting in a row of 4 tonners with the canvas up (it helped that it was raining heavily – adds to the atmosphere), and the 4 tonners were positioned as the enemy trenches, so the whole BG attack was coming in to us. Maximum use of the entire year’s supply of blanks, the boys dolled up in all of the cam they could cut down, and a final bayonet charge and literally jumping onto the wagons screaming, firing on full auto only a couple of feet away. The Andrew and the Kevins went a bit quiet on that one. Even the token Royals thought it was a good effort.
@ James
I was going to make a very poor joke about subs (a sub-lieutenant RN) and submarines (never ever shortened to sub.) But I could only find a picture of one HRH Sub-Lt Wales, RN. But I did find this which is a lot more interesting……
http://www.desura.com/groups/female-soldier-lovers-group/images/colombian-female-marine#gallerylist
X,
with the title of that internet link, I am frightened to click on it…
What’s wrong with walking all over a junior member of the Andrew? Is that not what they are there for?
We did spend some time on one of those black ships that somewhat terrifyingly deliberately sinks itself and then by some miracle of technology comes back up again. I can’t think of anything worse – you’ve got a Captain RN, whose job spec appears to be to crash the Queen’s boats into any passing London Bridge or Australian island or sand bank off Skye, and then you give him command of something that has no windscreen or headlights, and ask him to steer by dead reckoning using a chart that Captain Cook dreamt up 200 years ago.
I do slightly jest on all of this. My mother – who it appears was a bit of a goer in her youth – was seriously considering becoming the better half of an officer of the USS Thresher (she’d been asked, was having a think about it). Now there was a tragedy.
@X
Looks good. Now which one of the current government’s relatives are you going to sell to pay for it? :P
http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2012/05/16/338-nm-lightweight-medium-machine-gun-lwmmg/