nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

New rifles for Irish DF-fantasy and/or reality?

Avgas

I know we’re broke as a nation BUT this is not a Walter Mitty post-trust me!

I also know there was some discussion about three years ago, a bit like what I’m proposing here, on: http://forum.irishmilitaryonline.com/showthread.php?t=11151

The conclusion of that discussion seems to be a consensus that there was no great urgency to change from the existing Steyr AUG.

In other words: ‘arraggh sure tisn’t it grand begorrah, so why fix it if tis not broke’ sort of sentiment. We’re great at that in Ireland.

It is one reason why we have NAMA.

So I think its relevant to ask.......

QUESTION A: Anyone know if/when/how/what we are going to get to replace our Austrian made Steyr AUG’s circa 1987-88?

For those who don’t know, details of what we have now can be found at: http://www.military.ie/army/equipment/weapons/inf/steyr/steyr.htm

The AUG was and still is highy regarded. Events have moved on. Today its not necessarily the most obvious contender in the field-although doubtless that point could be argued back and forth.

I seem to remember reading this year or last, somewhere, that they would need replacing but can’t find it now…did I imagine I heard/read this?

Obviously the Dept. of Finance/Misery (DoF) will protest and resist (they always do), but even more so given our current fiscal climate.

Doubtless, their suggestion will be that day-glo pink water pistols from Symths Toys (Euro 2.99 each-value!) would be just as suitable for overseas peacekeeping and bank escorts as the auld AUG. The same people after all wanted to completely abolish the naval service in the late 1960s!

Now, I can see perhaps a valid Aid to Civil Power (ACP) role for water pistols…..

BUT it would be nice to believe if a cash escort gets challenged that we could ‘deter and respond’ to said threat with a suitable piece of kit that won’t jam, fall apart, or have the magazine clip fall out. Or go bang in somebody’s face when aiming because its too old. BTW I’m not alleging here that the existing stock of Steyr have actually become unsafe-I have no knowledge of that…BUT if they are not replaced in time that should surely become an issue?

If any state cannot ensure relevant small arms for its armed forces it cannot guarantee the most basic monopoly of coercive force needed to function as a state.

That is one basic difference between Finland and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Even the Pope/Vactican city makes sure their own private army has modern rifles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Guard#Equipment

He might need them these days.

Also remember that the Garda do not go into parts of Limerick now unless they have some buddies armed with IZUI’s, or the new 4.6x30mm MP7 weapons used by the regional response units.

Unfortunately, we have plenty of disagreeable extremist types on our lovely island who like collecting, and occasionally using, lethal small arms. And I don’t mean the RDF.

That salutary fact was in the past, and remains today, a core threat to our state and security. In the future, such threats could well increase. It is not unthinkable that we could see situations where Irish DF face-off against Islamic fundamentalists or other such irregular forces who have v. effective small arms firepower together with good body armour and seek to do serious harm through suicide IED tactics or something like this. Would 22 year old AUGs be adequate in such situations?

Obviously, I'm thinking that would be more in an overseas context. But you never know....Limerick can be pretty rough at times as well.

So we’re broke…but we’re not that broke right?

My point is we clearly need to procure a new generation of small arms for our DF sooner rather than later.

HOWEVER……what is far from clear is WHAT we can afford, HOW we pay for them, WHAT we buy and WHY (To do WHAT?)

QUESTION B: What sort of spend could we afford and what would it realistically allow us to buy?

Replacement of the entire stock of weapons- say 8,000-10,000 would seem dubious given our lack of the readies.

QUESTION C: Would a supplier (say Steyr or FN or Heckler&Koch) sell them to us on a leasing model where we pay for them a bit up front and spread the cost over say a decade-has that ever been done on a procurement?

I guess what I’m suggesting would be just like buying a laptop from PC WORLD, and maybe there would even be a ‘balloon payment’ at the end? If that sort of ‘sale and lease’ model were a runner then our budget could be something like 10-20 million Euro and an entire generational weapons stock could be replaced say over a three year cycle.

If, as is likely, that sort of financial deal is not available to us, then realistically the most any government over the next few years will tolerate is a much more miserly spend of say 1-3 million euros. If even.

One implication of that kind of financial constraint would be that we would probably have to get much smaller numbers of stuff and phase in replacements over a much longer time frame. Forget getting 8,000 weapons-think more 900 a go.

That would have to mean units going overseas or on bank jobs would probably get any new rifles/weapons going….but perhaps many entire Coys and other units would be still going around with 22+ year old weapons that must be getting harder to keep going or safe. In fact, if we go that way then many units could end up with 30 year old Steyrs. As for the poor old RDF…they may well end up using Steyrs until the cows come home (or till the 2030s to be precise). After all we’ve been there before with the .303s.

Not good. BUT maybe such a scenario would not be the end of the world?

Oh, and from a financial bean-counting perspective if we come at this procurement with very small change it must load the odds heavily in favour of a simple replacement of the existing Steyr AUG with……….the Steyr AUG model 2010! See: http://www.steyr-mannlicher.com/military-and-law-enforcement/steyr-aug-a3/

Logistically and training wise that would make sense if perhaps V. BORING.

Can I make 2 suggestions at this stage to get a discussion/mild row going?

1. If we do opt to simply augment our stocks of Steyr AUGs with more ‘newbie’ Steyr AUGs could we not maybe add some capability by buying a few of the AUG light support weapon variants as well? I know that there were some reliability issues raised about the larger capacity mags but I’m assuming these have been/could be sorted? These would not be used as light machine guns but rather as precision light support weapon with night sights for the 300-600m range zone. There is some evidence that the UK’s, finally improved, LSWs perform and suppress better than basic rifles or even their LMGs.

2. Maybe we should be really radical. Time to think outside the box and accept who and what we are as regards our DF and national capabilities and needs. Why not admit that the the entire 5.56mm ‘assault rifle’ concept is today a much less relevant solution (especially for us) and instead we might procure a suite of personal small arms, comprising a related family of pistols, personal defence weapons (PDWs), grenades with projectors and sniper systems, together with optics?

After all in many tactical situations it may well not be rifle type fires which are decisive, but rather grenade and/or GPMG type fires, some of which could be even laid indirectly from behind cover. You could even pitch the tender document so that a supplier must offer a tactically balanced suite of small arms (not just rifles) so that they would have to offer us ready made and costed ‘packages’ of afore mentioned items which should have some ‘commonality’ in the jargon.

What might this look like?

Maybe taking 3 million euro as our (fantasy) budget, we could see a balanced spend of....
40% on new H&K MP7 PDWs (see http://www.futurefirepower.com/the-heckler-and-koch-mp7-the-sub-machine-gun-video-of-hks-future);
20% on new and crucially lighter 7.62mm GPMGs as well as a few more 7.62mm sniper rifles;
Remaining 30% of funding split evenly between a grenade system (most likely 40x19mm) and some nice new optics….

I freely admit the quantities of kit we could procure under this model might be very small –a few hundred systems at a time. However, if it were repeated every year OR more realistically, if there was a regular tender put out every three years for small arms packages….then slowly we could modernize and improve over time….and it would arguably make more sense in matching the need for improved capabilities in small arms with changing operational needs/likely scenarios under pretty savage financial constraints which will be with us for at least the next half-decade..if not much longer.

Penny for your thoughts. And please…. no posts about Walter Mitty neutron phasers or somesuch.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

iceage

I'm sure I saw somewhere HK were tinkering with a 6.8mm on the G36 platform. So maybe the rumours of the 416 or the 417 chambered for the new round have a basis as well. Bloody expensive I'm sure and seems as the Country is broke...

As to a lighter LMG in a 7.62 NATO, bring back the Bren! Shame they couldn't belt feed it.

OS119

Avgas wrote: »

I agree Irish sections seem okay..certainly better than some other armies....however, there should be no grounds for complacency...

i would suggest that real, current combat experience against a non-state actor indicates that an Irish Infantry section is actually woefully 'under-gunned'. the BA isn't putting a belt-fed weapon into every four-man fire team and a 7.62mm DMR into every section because its bored and has too much money sloshing around...

sorry, 8 5.56 rifles, two UBGL's and a GPMG don't cut the mustard anymore - the IA is very lucky it didn't get into something it couldn't fight its way out of in Chad.

.22 Lover

OS119 wrote: »

IA is very lucky it didn't get into something it couldn't fight its way out of in Chad.

Please explane.

Burnt

.22 Lover wrote: »

Please explane.

The "rebels" in Chad as well as many of the groups wandering over
and back the Chad/Sudan boarder are backed by the Sudanese state.

The Sudanese have plenty of heavy kit to go round, not necessarily
the most modern, lots of cold war era armour etc... but they are
attemping to modernise (with chinese backing?) and there is their
own indigenous arms industry.

If they had decided to stir the pot; through one of their puppets or
otherwise, it would not have been easy going for IA when it came
to firepower.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudan_Armed_Forces

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Industry_Corporation

Captain Chaos

iceage wrote: »

I'm sure I saw somewhere HK were tinkering with a 6.8mm on the G36 platform. So maybe the rumours of the 416 or the 417 chambered for the new round have a basis as well. Bloody expensive I'm sure and seems as the Country is broke...

Steyr Arms are supposed to be testing the AUG A3 in 6.8spc with STANAG mags after it's popularity of AUG A3 sales in the states. If anything the A3 seems to be the way to go, the ARW have them and used them in Chad. When the A1s start to ware out there could be deal done to get some upgrade kits to bring the A1s and 2s to A3 standard.

HK are still working the kinks out of the 416s and 417s, there have barrel warping issues and the gas piston freezing in extreme cold, requiring a round to be chambered at all times in cold climates.

Fionn

i'm sorta old school but - i'd prefer 30 rounds of 7.62 ball instead of 60 rounds of 5.56 any day!!
heavier but
lots more stopping power and penetration - high velocity etc. is great but if someone is trying to kill you - well you want to kill them first whatever they're hiding behind!

.22 Lover

All the old FN FAL's are stored as a national resurve so we havent left the 7.62x51 zone yet.

arybvtcw0eolkf

.22 Lover wrote: »

All the old FN FAL's are stored as a national resurve so we havent left the 7.6251 zone yet.

I doubt that as most were U/S in their last few years of service.

.22 Lover

The U.S never used the FAL?

concussion

U/S = Unservice-able ie broken

.22 Lover

Sorry for that ive never seen that abbreviation before.We must have something left for a national resurve!!!!

time lord

Tessa Damp Elm wrote: »

I doubt that as most were U/S in their last few years of service.

They still have them. In storage. Some want rid of them and some say a reserve is a good idea. What % are crap i dont know but its not a significant number.

.22 Lover

It's still better then nothing at all.

punchdrunk

we have War Reserve Stock of steyrs,they are untouched weapons stored for emergency,these won't be issued unless there is a war so will probably stay unused until the rifle leaves service

Avgas

In so far as Avgas is ever happy…I’m happy enough with the way discussion is going as there are some interesting points being made which suggest sort of agreement on some things……maybe

But in case that sounds like I’m ready to be all reasonable any time soon, please consider some words of wisdom from a man who really wasn’t that wise actually.

“There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we now know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. These are things we do not know we don’t know.”
—United States Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld

How can such Zen like insight help our discussion here comrades?

Known Knowns: 5.56mm stinks of bad compromise

The 5.56mm round is simply not a great compromise. A good discussion about the defects of 5.56mm can be found here: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/btbjdw.pdf
Notice that in that article the authors point out that range is an issue….something I had assumed in earlier posts to be a situation where the majority of fights were within 300m. In fact they reveal that 50% of combats in Astan are between 300-900m!

OS119 also nicely listed the defects-although I’ll not get sidetracked into a mystical discussion about his references to ‘stopping power’ as distinct from penetration, because…life is too short. If we remember the Goldilocks story…some of the bowls were too hot, some were too cold, and only one was just right. Well the 5.56mm is not light enough to do what old 9x19mm and 4.6 or 5.7 now do from 0-100m, and yet not big enough to replace 7.62x51…out to anything up to 300m and beyond, and that rd itself is probably outside the Goldilocks zone anyhow. Now the talk is of 6.5 and 6.8mm…but hey…we’ve been there before! Prior to WW1 there were many rifles issued in 6.5x55mm Mauser caliber-indeed it was a popular Swedish hunting rifle rd, and migrated to Swedish, Norwegian and Danish military service by the 1890s. See http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Historic%20MGs.htm. The same site also has a good discussion on terminal effectiveness of various rds. http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/terminal.htm

But my point is that we’ve been here before with 6.5 type rds. It was even loaded in automatic Madsen primordial LMGs, and Italians (6.5x52 rimmed) and Japs also issued it as a 6.5x50 semi rimmed.

Guess what? By the 1920s there was systematic whinging and bitching that it lacked ‘stopping power’. Japs decided to adopt the British .303 more or less with a few tweaks before WW2. The Swedes did stay with their odd but effective 6.5x55m till the 1960s and even developed a semi-auto rifle the AG-42, sort of a Swedish Granard. But they ditched it and went with 7.62mm HK G3s from the 1960s on and later they simply had to accept the tide of 5.56mm rds in the 1980s as well….my point being?

THERE IS NO IDEAL RIFLE ROUND…(GOLDILOCKS WAS A FAIRY TALE!) AND WHO CARES REALLY BECAUSE POLITICS AND ECONOMICS DECIDE MUCH OF THIS AND RIFLES RDS ARE NOT DECIDERS IN LAND BATTLE –GPMGs, Rockets/ATGW/LAAWs, Mortars and even SMGs have proven AS decisive or even MORE SO.

Conclusion= it is as at least as important to procure the above shopping list as much as new rifles, if not more so.

Known unknowns; back to 7.62mm?
So given that a shift to 6.8 and 6.5 is so well…iffy…..and given that it may not even please the ‘stopping power’ brigade….why not just return to 7.62mm…maybe its actually happening before our eyes…incrementally…but we don’t spot the trend? For a starters, in any serious firefight, most armies want a lighter GPMG or want to keep the standard one (French seem a bit of an exception here..but correct/destroy me on this pt.). The ‘LMG’ crowd are of course out there…but nasty barrel wear issues, and a lack of range compared to the GPMG, speak against it. Moreover, if a GPMGmini can be competitive in terms of weight then why bother with an LMG? As for a marksman rifle…something in 7.62 seems more appropriate if admittedly clunky. I see people in various posts are nostalgic for the Brute FN FAL…Maybe they are stored up in Gormanstown along with the Voting machines. Its a toss up over which are more lethal now. But H&K will sell you a perfectly nice SCAR rifle in either 7.62x51 or x39mm if you really want a 7.62mm AR rifle. And I’ve banged on enough about the MK40 0 GPMGmini……how about that…
So I’m thinking……why not a “retro section” with basically all 7.62mm weapons (1 GPMG mini, 2x Marksman 7.62mm, 2x7.62mm SCARs with UGLs, and 2x bog standard SCARs). Yes…its really quite mad…but why not…carry a bit less ammo for the rifles and rather more for the grenades and GPMGmini….. (I’ve left out SRAAW type stuff just for clarity). Would it be much worse than fancy 6.8mm weapons that may or may not ever emerge? Would it be more lethal/effective than a section mostly packing 5.56mm AUGs….as OS119 pointed out?

Unknown unknowns: Today’s 5.56mm problem may be more complex

But it remains unclear whether 5.56mm can be redeemed. With the rise of modern optics becoming standard in Iraq and Astan for most US forces, one should assume some kind of rise in accuracy and lethality and a pick-up in distances that troops can engage as well. I’ve not seen any literature on this however, but instead plenty of the usual stuff that faults the 5.56m. However, much of that may be specific to the M4 carbine variant which is so popular because it ‘rocks’ and is compact. Trouble is the barrel is too short to give the proper spin to get the rd to have desired effects. So if barrels were made longer…. Terminal effects improved? I was struck by what Manic said in an earlier post that he thought anyone decent could use a 5.56mm weapon quite effectively beyond 300m (in direct opposition to what I was ranting). The orthodoxy, in part based on much earlier data generated from Nam, and even Korea and earlier, is that nobody in a real serious combat can hit much beyond 200m. But what if the systematic add-on of better optics/night vision/lasers, etc. has actually changed the game a bit? That could mean that 5.56mm does not suck as bad as many like to think? Our own AUG is a part of this generational trend with its integrated 1.5 mag sight. AUG3 would bring this further…..meaning better? Except….. some critics say the extra weight of all the add-ons (torches, dazzlers) has further reduced the accurate handling and targeting of the weapons at range…. So like I say…this means we’re in the land of ‘unknown unknowns’.
Now…where does that leave us?

.22 Lover

Finally someone elese who understands how crap the M4 was and still is compaired to the superior M16 with excilent accuracy compaired to any carbine sure the M4 is short but that what makes it such a bad weapion beacause it just dosent work with the current AR gas impingment design another reason why some bulpups are better beacause they can keep the 20 inch barrel with out the length.When will the American's learn you cant just shorten a long rifle's barrel then expect it to work.:mad:

time lord

punchdrunk wrote: »

we have War Reserve Stock of steyrs,they are untouched weapons stored for emergency,these won't be issued unless there is a war so will probably stay unused until the rifle leaves service

Sombody may have told you this but it is not correct. There is no untouched store of Steyrs. There is no policy of a war reserve either, a good idea I think but it has not being written, asked for or implimented.
they did have a large no. of 303's but these were sold to a buyer in Canada if memory serves me. The only surplus stock in any great number are the f.N.'s.

.22 Lover

So there is a ''sort of resurve'' That is they are usable as a resurve if push comes to shove?

time lord

.22 Lover wrote: »

So there is a ''sort of resurve'' That is they are usable as a resurve if push comes to shove?

Yes there is a reserve but not of Steyrs. The "reserve" is that they still have them the F.N.s that is. They were not kept though in case of national emergency. There has never being a decision to get rid of them.
The idea of a reserve for unforseen circumstances is in my opinion a good one but they were not kept for this purpose more they were put into storage in the early ninties and time has moved on and they are still present.
Getting sidetracked here better leave thread to o.p. steerage.

Avgas

REACHING A CONCLUSION ON THIS THREAD-WHAT HAVE WE/I LEARNED?

Can I suggest at this stage a few conclusions could be tentatively drawn from my original somewhat naïve questions and your ocasionally high firepower replies?

1. Ireland does not seem to have a clear plan on when and how to replace the stock of Steyr AUGs bought in 1987-88.
2. That does not mean they are unsafe-the DF appear to be keeping them on the go just fine.
3. The Steyr is popular and most want to keep it or something like it (HK416s being a likely suspect).
4. Nonetheless, it seems clear from experience in Astan and Iraq that the 5.56mm round is becoming less popular within western armies because its lack of range and ‘stopping power’.
5. Ireland is a hostage to others as regards small arms options=we produce no small arms ourselves and must choose carefully from options provided by others. Realistically the US and NATO are slow and reluctant to change calibres, making it seem likely that 5.56mm will remain the focus for next decade at least, with 7.62mm also an important calibre.
6. The holy grail of a single calibre-say in 5.56mm-being issued to troops is further away today than it was in the 1980s. Most infantry teams in Iraq and Astan are carrying a mix of 5.56mm and 7.62mm rifle and machine gun rds, 9mm pistol rds and 40mm grenade weapons (just to name the main ones). Even where in theory ammunition can be shared, it rarely is: American Minmi light machine gunners can use ordinary rifle magazines rather than belts, but this expedient apparently causes stoppages!
7. One reason why the holy grail of a single ammunition class for infantry (5.56mm) has never been achieved is because infantry require a toolbox of diverse weapons which are mutually supporting. And just like a toolbox they need to be able to mix and match different weapons for different situations. The TOOLBOX CONCEPT is important for procurement because it draws vital attention to the need to procure more than just replacement rifles. That has been the core message of this thread-from OP to here.
8. One simple way to make 5.56mm effective is make sure barrel length is long enough and NOT copy the US adoption of M4 carbines.
9. Interestingly, the Aussies are more or less keeping their Steyrs and augmenting their capabilities by adding mainly OPTICS and more and better 40mm systems.
10. The most obvious course of action for us (remember that our cost constraints are so much more savage than AUZ) would be a phased but systematic kit rebuild of our existing AUGs with added OPTICS and 40mm systems improvements where we can. Rebuilds are not unknown-that is what the British army did with their entire stock of SA80s….making a poor rifle quite good.
11. Another option might be some kind of co-operation with the Australian project-but this is more speculative?
12. If our AUG stocks were modernized to AUG3 standard in phased quantities over a few years it would be an improvement. However, it may not go far enough. It would just replace one tool in the TOOLBOX.
13. For even if our AUGs were replaced this way our existing infantry sections lack two or three essentials which most other armies have issued to their sections/platoons-a genuine light machine gun, a designated marksman’s rifle, and/or a light support weapon. These missing weapons reduce the effectiveness and therefore the safety of Irish troops.
14. We have improved our GPMG stocks in the last 2 years. No doubt. BUT we could arguably go further and issue much lighther MGs such as the Mk48 O/1 series as the US army and USMC have. An alternative choice would be a 5.56mm LMG such as the Minimi as standard section issue, with perhaps an advantage that two of these lighther weapons could be issued to the section rather than 1 GPMG as is the norm today (or 1 Minimi and 1 GPMG).
15. We have 40mm UGL systems, but we should keep evolving that platform for more and better UGLs and crucially the projectiles we issue can be evolved as well.
16. Serious consideration should be given to a stand alone 40mm MGL to augment the section…at least in certain cases.
17. A proper designated marksman weapon and/or a LSW for sections and plts with a very good sight would seem a real capability enhancer. We do not currently have such. Presumably it would have to be a Steyr AUG product if we’re keeping with Steyrs and 5.56m. In this guise it would be more a LSW rather than a designated marksman’s weapon. An alternative choice would be a heavier rifle in 7.62mm such as the HK 417
18. The suggestion made in the OP, of a radical weight saving shift to a PDW, so that MORE 7.62mm and 40mm ammunition and weapons could be carried, is TOTALLY rejected, esp. by professionals/users, on this thread. Its obvious for that reason alone it will never happen (although there will be some PDWs in the armoury). The radical weight saving agenda through a PDW then should probably be ditched as a ‘side trackin’ idea. The weight saving, if its going to be found at all, will have to be found somewhere else.
19. If anything, there was interest in going heavier, and having more 7.62mm weapons given over to the section (a GPMG for sure, or maybe a lighther GPMG, and a heavy 7.62mm designated marksman rifle as well). Note; this ‘heavy metal’ option would add weight and logistical complexity and cost. For all these reasons it probably won’t happen.
20. SRAAW exists and is issued-2 cheers for that! Yet complacency on that score should be avoided by a focus on the variants that permit firing within cover and where warheads are optimized for FIBUA rather than classic AT.
21. We should explore and investigate different ways of deploying our sections and platoons that reflect the type of ACP/PK roles we’re likely to get caught up in. While we can, do and should learn some lessons from armies such as those of Israel or USA, who are engaged in high intensity COIN and require a full spectrum war fighting capability as well, we should also note that we may have to develop tactics, doctrine and training which reflects much more the importance of low-intensity PK and ACP missions, where restraint in the use of force is more central (and challenging). In particular having an integral non-lethal weapon capability at section level would seem vital for us in this light. Hence the focus on a 40mm MGL system with good training/doctrine for dual use lethal/non lethal roles.

That's all we have time for tonight folks.

Avgas

FINE

coach23

just a possible solution to one of your points the designated marksmen you had in your section set up. if as one of the posters above said FN's just sitting idle these rifles are 7.62 and very accurate why not stick a scope mount and scope on it and dish it out as a designated marksman option? they also have select fire option so if the **** hit the fan and range wasnt an option they'd still be very useful in close range fire fight too. if the equipment is already there why spend a fortune on a new rifle when there's already one there save money buy some scopes alot of people will remember how to use it so retraining the trainers wont be too rough either

iceage

Bring back the SLR!!!! YES.

redknightmanila

i have fired both the fn and the styer .

in the end of the day a gun is a weapon that is made to kill people . at what stage does it lose that ability . the styer is still a very capable weapon and i do not think it needs changing .

what ever money the defence forces has , is best spent on other equipment .

Manic Moran

.22 Lover wrote: »

Finally someone elese who understands how crap the M4 was and still is compaired to the superior M16 with excilent accuracy compaired to any carbine sure the M4 is short but that what makes it such a bad weapion beacause it just dosent work with the current AR gas impingment design another reason why some bulpups are better beacause they can keep the 20 inch barrel with out the length.When will the American's learn you cant just shorten a long rifle's barrel then expect it to work.:mad:

The DI is not the problem with the M4, it's the short barrel resulting in lower muzzle velocity, thus a shorter range before the fragmentation effects cease. As far as accuracy goes, it's surprisingly good for a carbine: Our Squad Designated Marksmen were hitting man-sized targets at 600m using iron sights.

NTM

.22 Lover

How about the A2 and A4's?

Locust

Donny5 wrote: »

...most contacts in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have been inside the 200m range...

I'm not sure about Iraq - thats mostly build up area contacts.

In Afghanistan - what i've heard from folks over there (BA)
That they are being fired upon by Talbian forces with 7.62 from AK, RPK, PK machine guns and SVD & older bolt action rifles from distances of 700 - 900metres+ massing the rounds on target

Taliban know that the 5.56 western forces carry can't touch them at that range. Which is why there was such a push for 7.62 in that new hk417 (brit model they are using) and of course the old .50cal seems to be a good solution too.

Afghanistan is one war fought over large distances and mountainous terrain. The next conflict Irish troops are delpoyed in could be fought mostly in built up areas like a major city for all we know, nice and close. Ireland needs a rifle that can adapt from close quarters to open range fighting and i think they have that.

MP7 was thought of for close quarters, fighting out of vehicles and specialist jobs etc... I think it was for behind the front line units like logistics, air crews and tank crews etc... to combat enemy special forces who had penetrated the front lines and were wreaking havoc on logistical units etc... Its no assault rifle but the 4.6 will go right through you and keep on whizzing, which is a consideration in built up fighting.

All fantasy of course but I think infantry sections should have hk416's or g36's and training more in 7.62 with say hk417 rifles that can be used to return fire quickly in a patrol and reach out to someone.
And logistical, mechanised, naval and air units should have mp7's.

Or perhaps ask HK really really nicely if they would consider (for free) revamping the Steyr AUGS like they did witht he SA80? (wait thats not gonna happen!)
Failing that lets buy a load of AK-101,103,104 series brand new rifles off the Russians!

Manic Moran

.22 Lover wrote: »

How about the A2 and A4's?

We didn't have any in our unit, though I did see some carried by Marines and Loggies.

Of note when it comes to long range accuracy is the number of 5.56mm/.223 ARs which partake in the centrefire competitions at Camp Perry. The basic design really is sound.

That they are being fired upon by Talbian forces with 7.62 from AK, RPK, PK machine guns and SVD & older bolt action rifles from distances of 700 - 900metres+ massing the rounds on target

The saving grace is that they can't hit anything either. Actually, at that range, they can barely see on average: Afghan eyesight is notably poor that if you get away from your vehicle, you're quite likely to be impossible for them to see.

NTM

AbusesToilets

Manic Moran wrote: »

We didn't have any in our unit, though I did see some carried by Marines and Loggies.

Of note when it comes to long range accuracy is the number of 5.56mm/.223 ARs which partake in the centrefire competitions at Camp Perry. The basic design really is sound.

The saving grace is that they can't hit anything either. Actually, at that range, they can barely see on average: Afghan eyesight is notably poor that if you get away from your vehicle, you're quite likely to be impossible for them to see.

NTM

While that's generally true, it's not something to be taken for granted. Plenty of instances of troops being pinned down and picked off by accurate, ranged shooting.

As for the eye sight, I would hold that the opposite is true. Plenty of times that Afghan eyes have spotted things that are only revealed under glass to western eyes.

Locust

Manic Moran wrote: »

The saving grace is that they can't hit anything either. NTM

They are using techniques taught to them passed on from special forces decades ago... how many 7.62 rounds can 10 - 15 men put down in a minute or two? They don't have to be particularly accurate as most soviet 7.62 rifles (i.e. the AK) arent at that range, they aren't aiming at single men at that distance - rather a rough 50 metre square area roughly where they see your patrol is through a spyglass.
All they have to do is mass the fire on that area there from 700 - 900 metres safe from 5.56's
They don't have to be aiming to hit you centre mass. The idea is that a group of 10-15 of them all firing at once being following the lead of a commander, put down consistent semi auto fire assisted with fixed belt fed weapons - they can rain down enough lead on your position in that time to saturate the patrol's area and the hope is they'll hit, wound or destroy something before running off into the hills. Wastes a lot of ammo a lot of stray rounds but it works especially in open areas with little cover.

JaymzN

Manic, I'd like to hear your thoughts on non-ambidextrous rifles. In particular, the Irish Defence Forces decision to forgo the available lefty ejection port on all the Steyr's they purchased.

Why get rid of what was provided in the design of the weapon?
Why deny a recruit the option to begin using a weapon in a way that feels natural to him?

Sure, the Brits enforce right-handed shooting but if we look at other countries using the Steyr AUG, like Australia and New Zealand, we see plenty of happy lefties. Main reason I'm asking is because any lefties I've spoken to in the US Military have laughed at the thought of not being able to shoot naturally.