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

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