Steyr Upgrade

RedWolfCQB

neilled wrote: »

Even when modified for use left handed, the position of the charging handle does not change.

Yeah could you not turn the gun horizontal with your left hand and pull it with your right?

Midnight Oil

neilled wrote: »

Even when modified for use left handed, the position of the charging handle does not change.

Magazines are charged.

Weapons are cocked

RedWolfCQB

STG-556 (AUG Clone) Shooting "weak side" --> http://youtu.be/HB2gxxOMp2E

The way he uses his hand at the end, its says in the description you can buy aftermarket shell deflectors to do this.
BTW it looks like such a toy compared to the original!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midnight Oil
Magazines are charged.

Weapons are cocked
Sorry could you explain what you mean to a poor civi?

davetherave

You pull back the cocking handle to cock the rifle.
You charge/bomb-up a magazine by placing rounds in said magazine.

Manic Moran

Midnight Oil wrote: »

Magazines are charged.

Weapons are cocked

Not necessarily.



Steyr's manual uses the term 'cocking handle', but SIG's uses 'charging handle.'

Unless there is a distinction I am not aware of, the terms are interchangeable.

OMARS_COMING_

Whats up with the weapon the way it is? Is an upgrade needed that much?

Midnight Oil

Manic Moran wrote: »

Not necessarily.

Steyr's manual uses the term 'cocking handle', but SIG's uses 'charging handle.'

Unless there is a distinction I am not aware of, the terms are interchangeable.

When was the last time you cocked a magazine

neilled

Midnight Oil wrote: »

Magazines are charged.

Weapons are cocked

I do know what its called, just felt it would be easier to use the term the poster had used rather than confuse them. Cocking a magazine on the other hand.... sounds potentially painful :eek:!

Ref whats wrong with the rifle - technology has marched onwards. The design is now been around since 1977 and in service with the df since 1988 with no changes.

Since then, small arms technology has marched on. Optical sights have improved from the basic 1.5 x of the steyr to much more advanced designs, mountings for laser pointers and torches have become the norm in NATO armies - in essence modularity for specific missions is now the norm rather than taping a maglite onto the side of your rifle when conducting urban ops. With the A1 there's a limit to what you can do as the weapon now stands and the DF are now simply updating the rifle to meet future challenges.

It should be pointed out however, that robust plastic magazines and optics for everyone have been standard in the PDF since 1988 - proving how far ahead of its time the AUG was.

Our nearest neighbours press office has recently been bragging about the vertical foregrips and plastic emags that it has recently bought at the cost of millions through Urgent Operational Requirement purchases - the DF has had them for all members of the PDF for over two decades and with the reserve for over a decade, and if your not deployed operationally, you can expect to be carrying a weapon with an Iron sight.

This is an incremental upgrade and nothing near as radical as what the Aussies are doing with their EF-88/F-90 programme.

RedWolfCQB

IS there actually an upgrade in the pipeline? Even just rails instead of the standard scope.

goldie fish

RedWolfCQB wrote: »

IS there actually an upgrade in the pipeline? Even just rails instead of the standard scope.

Yes. Specs and requirements were all over E Tenders.

RedWolfCQB

goldie fish wrote: »

Yes. Specs and requirements were all over E Tenders.

Any idea of when they will be in service?

KickstartHeart

OMARS_COMING_ wrote: »

Whats up with the weapon the way it is? Is an upgrade needed that much?

Going on what soldiers say, the sights are not great. Upgrading the rifle with a picatinny RIS would mean that sights + other equipment would be interchangeable. A cheap upgrade that makes the weapon far more adaptable for different roles.

DipStick McSwindler

This post has been deleted.

Praetorian Saighdiuir

goldie fish wrote: »

Yes. Specs and requirements were all over E Tenders.

I was talking to a CQ on Monday that deals with tenders, he blatently told me that there is NO money in the pot for a weapon upgrade. The civies are pretty much "in charge" of the budget, they are very much about money forcasts and not interested in what we need. The tenders must have come back fairly expensive.

KickstartHeart wrote: »

Going on what soldiers say, the sights are not great. Upgrading the rifle with a picatinny RIS would mean that sights + other equipment would be interchangeable. A cheap upgrade that makes the weapon far more adaptable for different roles.

I have never had a problem with the sights, obviously technology has come a long way since we first got them, but they have worked out fine for me anyway.

senordingdong

It wasn't me! wrote: »

The Defence Forces one were ordered with the ejection port on the left sealed up though. They are not ambidextrous.

But why did they do that?
Could there really have been that much of a saving to be made or was it just an oversight?

Donny5

senordingdong wrote: »

But why did they do that?
Could there really have been that much of a saving to be made or was it just an oversight?

They, like many armies, just decided that all their soldiers would shoot right-handed and that's that.

amurph0

senordingdong wrote: »

Could there really have been that much of a saving to be made

Yes.

Less training needed and less parts.

It also avoids accidents. For example if someone accidentally fires a left-handed steyr from their right shoulder and burns their face.

There's no need for left handed steyrs. I'm left handed and I find it very comfortable firing from my right shoulder.

KickstartHeart

benwavner wrote: »

I was talking to a CQ on Monday that deals with tenders, he blatently told me that there is NO money in the pot for a weapon upgrade. The civies are pretty much "in charge" of the budget, they are very much about money forcasts and not interested in what we need. The tenders must have come back fairly expensive.

Didn't the Minister say in the Dail a while back that funds had been allocated for a "rifle upgrade" though!?

senordingdong

amurph0 wrote: »

I'm left handed and I find it very comfortable firing from my right shoulder.

That's what I was wondering.

neilled

senordingdong wrote: »

But why did they do that?
Could there really have been that much of a saving to be made or was it just an oversight?

Basically extra parts required (and therefor costs increase) - you need spare bolts for the 10% or so that will be left handed and you need the cheekpiece covers. Of course plain old pig iron "there's one way to do it" no doubt had an impact was well!

The Aug optic was born of trying to increase the firing rate of a conscript army who wouldn't get huge amount of time with a weapon. It allowed faster target acqusition and the principle is that if you get the man sized target in the ring at 300m, you'll drop the enemy, rather than waiting to get the "perfect" shot with cross hairs etc. Its not designed to get precision shots, its designed to increase the rate of fire - particularly relevant if you were going to be engaging the massed hordes of the warsaw pact.

There was a specific amount allocated for the upgrade of the steyr over the next financial year - not enough to do a mass upgrade, but to begin an incremental upgrade over a period of time.

Benwaver - the funding has been allocated in the financial estimates, however I wouldn't be surprised if efforts had been made to stall it. Those familiar with DF history will remember that the Department of finance repeatedly stalled DF attempts to buy the venerable vickers machine gun in the aftermath of independence, repeatedly stating that "further trials were needed" on the few weapons that had been bought in an effort to prevent the purchase. This was the same vickers that mowed down millions during WWI and soldiered on right up to the congo.

Donny5

neilled wrote: »

The Aug optic was born of trying to increase the firing rate of a conscript army who wouldn't get huge amount of time with a weapon. It allowed faster target acqusition and the principle is that if you get the man sized target in the ring at 300m, you'll drop the enemy, rather than waiting to get the "perfect" shot with cross hairs etc. Its not designed to get precision shots, its designed to increase the rate of fire - particularly relevant if you were going to be engaging the massed hordes of the warsaw pact.

Although that probably is true, there's no reason you can't get precision shots inside the effective range of the SS109 round with an aperture inside a cross hair. I certainly prefer it to the SUSAT, anyway.

Midnight Oil

amurph0 wrote: »

There's no need for left handed steyrs. I'm left handed and I find it very comfortable firing from my right shoulder.

The issue is not being left handed. I am also a lefty. The issue is which is your master eye, 90 odd % of the population have their right eye as their master eye, I think more so than are right handed

Praetorian Saighdiuir

KickstartHeart wrote: »

Didn't the Minister say in the Dail a while back that funds had been allocated for a "rifle upgrade" though!?

You could be right but as recent as Monday, the word from the man that works with tenders says the civies are not allocating any money for a weapon upgrade.

The minister may step in and "over rule" the decision. But I doubt it.

It wasn't me!

Eye/hand dominance is a relatively complex issue. Take someone who's never shot before, who has an eye dominance issue, I'll probably get them to shoot right handed if I can. If they just cannot get used to it, then there's an issue and they shoot lefty. The issue arises with someone like me, who's shot lefty all his life, fires tens of thousands of rounds a year left-handed, who has a strongly dominant left eye (although am right handed!). Now, I can certainly shoot right handed, and have always shot pistols right handed, but it's certainly not as comfortable or natural for me, and there's a lifetime of muscle memory to overcome to fire rifles or shotguns right-handed, and I have to keep my left eye firmly closed.

jimmycrackcorm

Why would money be spent on upgrading guns that won't be fired? By all means, upgrade the few guns necessary for soldiers being sent on UN missions but otherwise it seems to be a feelgood exercise.

goldie fish

benwavner wrote: »

You could be right but as recent as Monday, the word from the man that works with tenders says the civies are not allocating any money for a weapon upgrade.

The minister may step in and "over rule" the decision. But I doubt it.

The minister is a civvy, he has publicly announced the money is there. 6000 rifles to be modified.

Praetorian Saighdiuir

goldie fish wrote: »

The minister is a civvy, he has publicly announced the money is there. 6000 rifles to be modified.

Correct he is a civvy. I am talking about the civvies in DOD/DOF that are in control of the budget.

I hope we do get them modified, but as I have stated earlier in the thread, a guy in the know who deals with defence procurement has face to face told me that we are NOT getting a weapon upgrade, what happens next year or the year after who knows. but as of last Monday we are not getting one in the near future.

Thats that.

Of course he could be straight out lying for the craic, but he would have no reason to.

goldie fish

benwavner wrote: »

Correct he is a civvy. I am talking about the civvies in DOD/DOF that are in control of the budget.

I hope we do get them modified, but as I have stated earlier in the thread, a guy in the know who deals with defence procurement has face to face told me that we are NOT getting a weapon upgrade, what happens next year or the year after who knows. but as of last Monday we are not getting one in the near future.

Thats that.

Of course he could be straight out lying for the craic, but he would have no reason to.

He's a Quartermaster you say? If so he doesn't deal with procurement. He'd want to be a captain or above.

Praetorian Saighdiuir

goldie fish wrote: »

He's a Quartermaster you say? If so he doesn't deal with procurement. He'd want to be a captain or above.

He does deal with procurement, along with a Col and a Comdt. He is the SNCO in his office who does the donkey work, meetings, costings, spending forecasts. There are NCO's that work in the office and handle the mundane work.

Im not saying he makes the decisions or has any say in the matters, but he works in the office and is privy to all the information.

Im not looking for a "who knows better" argument with you, im just simply stating that:

"A guy I know, who works in procurement, has knowledge that there is no weapon upgrade in the near future".

I can also tell you that the Gallil and Colt M16 or variant were considered as a replacement before an upgrade was sought. Apparently a buy 1 get 1 free was offered on the M16.

KickstartHeart

benwavner wrote: »

He does deal with procurement, along with a Col and a Comdt. He is the SNCO in his office who does the donkey work, meetings, costings, spending forecasts. There are NCO's that work in the office and handle the mundane work.

Im not saying he makes the decisions or has any say in the matters, but he works in the office and is privy to all the information.

Im not looking for a "who knows better" argument with you, im just simply stating that:

"A guy I know, who works in procurement, has knowledge that there is no weapon upgrade in the near future".

I can also tell you that the Gallil and Colt M16 or variant were considered as a replacement before an upgrade was sought. Apparently a buy 1 get 1 free was offered on the M16.

Hard to know whats going to happen in the next few years so. Do they need to replace the Steyr AUG A1? I'm not exactly a weapons expert but it seams to be a fine rifle. I'm looking from opinions from soldiers and reservists here. Is there anything that would suggest that the Steyr isn't up for the job?