RAF & Navy hardware looking quite modern nowadays
Discussion
Mave said:
Evanivitch said:
Mave said:
What is it about the basic machine that you want improved?
130mm smooth bore would be nice.But no way are you going to fit that ammo in a CR2 and I pity the operator that would have to do it.
Yertis said:
What could you do to improve the basic machine which was designed about forty-five years ago? (serious question btw, not being sarky)
Well...IMO..the fantasy list starts below..never was going to happen.
A complete strip down rebuild/rewire for starters not a "targeted" approach
Fact-the engineering authority commented that the wiring must be in excellent shape as there was a paucity of wiring defects being reported-well yes if you move the goalposts whilst pursuing a fixed cost servicing regime....
A lot of peeps go on about the EJ200 conversion BUT the fact that at low level it is a gas guzzler in comparison to the RB199 [something that the converts to the plastic pig ignore] kinda rules that out....
Removing limitations, such as fixed ramps in the intakes, to regain performance.
A comprehensive spares package rework [that actually gets carried out]
One thing that doesn't need improvement [disclaimer-YES there is always something new that is Gucci] is the AV fit. Hell it's even got TCAS [
]The weapon/sensors roll out, then you sit down and read just what it can carry and employ [with TWO crew-members to reduce workload and compliment each other] is astonishing.
The RAF sacrificed the F3 [just when it's capabilities, including SEAD, were at it's zenith] to ensure the AD "fleet" moved to Typhoon platform.
{It was a understandable decision, but the loiter and LL dash capabilities of the F3 complemented with the sheer high altitude performance of the Tiffie would have made an outstanding team for the UKADE}
Now the GR 4 is being notionally sacrificed for Typhoon FGR? BUT we all know it's to pay for the F35b for the RN carriers.
Well when it's ready in 2027.
Maybe...
good job I stopped caring in February
Evanivitch said:
Mave said:
Evanivitch said:
Mave said:
What is it about the basic machine that you want improved?
130mm smooth bore would be nice.But no way are you going to fit that ammo in a CR2 and I pity the operator that would have to do it.
This is interesting, new air defence missile system for the Army, probably replacing the venerable Rapier system which seems to have been around forever.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/british-armys-n...
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/british-armys-n...
tuffer said:
This is interesting, new air defence missile system for the Army, probably replacing the venerable Rapier system which seems to have been around forever.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/british-armys-n...
It's great to see some progress in the Ground Based Air Defence domain that has for obvious reasons been on the back food for the last decade and a half. Properly supported by a well equipped Sky Sabre system (which is somewhat lacking in numbers) it has the potential to be a very capable system.https://www.gov.uk/government/news/british-armys-n...
Ayahuasca said:
Not just FIBUA then but jungle warfare too. You can't see very far in the rainforest.
If the SA80 is so good, why is the SAS normally pictured with the American kit - even in the desert where engagements can happen at long ranges?
I bet they know what colour the boathouse is If the SA80 is so good, why is the SAS normally pictured with the American kit - even in the desert where engagements can happen at long ranges?
Ayahuasca said:
Not just FIBUA then but jungle warfare too. You can't see very far in the rainforest.
If the SA80 is so good, why is the SAS normally pictured with the American kit - even in the desert where engagements can happen at long ranges?
Because there's no SA80 chambered in 7.62 NATO?If the SA80 is so good, why is the SAS normally pictured with the American kit - even in the desert where engagements can happen at long ranges?
Aside from that, using an AR15 platform allows SF operators to have a platform that can be almost infinitely configurable to their mission needs. UGL, sights, longer barrel, folding stock, Gucci designators etc etc
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
Long range performance is s
te.
te.Ginetta G15 Girl said:
Down range performance of the 16" barrel means that the 5,56 round muzzle velocity is too slow.
Too slow for what exactly? At what range does it become ineffective against a human? (Would you consider yourself "lucky I was shot with a 16" barrel, it would have really hurt had it been a 20" barrel") At what range does it become ineffective against L3 plate or a L3a plate?Given that the performance of the L85 is defined as high rate of accurate, rapid fire at ranges up to 300 metres and accurate deliberate fire at longer ranges and effective up to 600m in a section (6 rifles) which implies that 1 in 6 shots would be accurate at 600m. What is the performance of a 5.56mm round fired from a 20" barrel at 600m?
Is the drop off of down range performance with a 16" barrel so great that it would be in effective at 300m? 400m? 500m? 600m?
The people who use the weapon systems to kill the enemy don't really care. Why? Because they have seen the effects of the weapons at the ranges where they are used, and you know what? They still work plenty well enough. Something an infanteer never said; glad I've got this 20" barrel.
You don't learn that on your SA(B) 90 (or RAF equivalent) or SAA course though.
Evanivitch said:
Because there's no SA80 chambered in 7.62 NATO?
Aside from that, using an AR15 platform allows SF operators to have a platform that can be almost infinitely configurable to their mission needs. UGL, sights, longer barrel, folding stock, Gucci designators etc etc
also despite looking like 'just another m16 ' do you genuinely think they aren't bespoke and where stock parts are used chosen by the suppler or the organisations themselves to be the ones that most suited to the need in terms of tolerances etc Aside from that, using an AR15 platform allows SF operators to have a platform that can be almost infinitely configurable to their mission needs. UGL, sights, longer barrel, folding stock, Gucci designators etc etc
Edited by In Arduis Fouette on Sunday 3rd June 20:42
Evanivitch said:
Ayahuasca said:
Not just FIBUA then but jungle warfare too. You can't see very far in the rainforest.
If the SA80 is so good, why is the SAS normally pictured with the American kit - even in the desert where engagements can happen at long ranges?
Because there's no SA80 chambered in 7.62 NATO?If the SA80 is so good, why is the SAS normally pictured with the American kit - even in the desert where engagements can happen at long ranges?
Aside from that, using an AR15 platform allows SF operators to have a platform that can be almost infinitely configurable to their mission needs. UGL, sights, longer barrel, folding stock, Gucci designators etc etc
He looks to have iron sights on that though, so is presumably less worried about accuracy at range, I'd guess one reason is for reliability without as maintenance as an SA80 needs.
stevesingo said:
Something an infanteer never said; glad I've got this 20" barrel.
They certainly don't seem that keen on the LSW.RizzoTheRat said:
Is that 7.62 in the photo though? Magazine doesn't look deep enough. Besides the folding stock all the other things you mention are available on SA80 variants, although I'm not sure if the UGL can be fitted on the longer barrelled LSW.
He looks to have iron sights on that though, so is presumably less worried about accuracy at range, I'd guess one reason is for reliability without as maintenance as an SA80 needs.
I'm not a small arms spotter, but I also wasn't taking the photo as the crux of his argument either.He looks to have iron sights on that though, so is presumably less worried about accuracy at range, I'd guess one reason is for reliability without as maintenance as an SA80 needs.
Shooting 7.62 also trades number of rounds for greater punch. Perhaps something the operators were willing to trade.
The argument on calibre already rages.Most armies now have a designated Marksman using an assault rifle chambered for NATO 7.62. We've gone for the L129A1. Most now reckon the 5.56 designed for European warfare does not cover the job. Most reckon something in the 6mm bracket will replace the 5.56mm but nobody is moving fast despite the German debacle with the H&K G36.
Edited by telecat on Tuesday 29th May 09:40
telecat said:
The argument on calibre already rages.Most armies now have a designated Marksman using an assault rifle chambered for NATO 7.62. We've gone for the L129A1. Most now reckon the 5.56 designed for European warfare does not cover the job. Most reckon something in the 6mm bracket will replace the 5.56mm but nobody is moving fast despite the German debacle with the H&K G36.
For as long as we deem one weapon suitable for all scenarios it will always be an issue.Edited by telecat on Tuesday 29th May 09:40
We'll wait until the Americans decide and then follow suit.
shouldbworking said:
RizzoTheRat said:
They certainly don't seem that keen on the LSW.
I don't think anyone would ever complain about the accuracy of it. Ergonomics and weight balance when carrying it though.. yes complain away.then add the ergo / balance factors
From an airforce (personal) perspective the SA80 is an extremely accurate weapon but it is heavy compared to its rivals and I personally find it’s balance awkward in anything but the prone position. I am a techie and I’m not even close to being the best shot in the world so my opinions no doubt matter not.
It’s easy to operate and drills are straight forward to carry out and even cleaning isn’t too bad. Wasn’t surprised to see we will all end up with an AS3. Too much money invested, no other weapon is head and shoulders better or cheaper in the long run it seems. Plenty of upgrades were brought in over the AS2s life including the little tripod/forward grip and it is far better than the AS1 we started off with. Just a shame it still seems to jam frequently, particularly for our infantry brethren. Still it’s had far more success than our new respirator...
It’s easy to operate and drills are straight forward to carry out and even cleaning isn’t too bad. Wasn’t surprised to see we will all end up with an AS3. Too much money invested, no other weapon is head and shoulders better or cheaper in the long run it seems. Plenty of upgrades were brought in over the AS2s life including the little tripod/forward grip and it is far better than the AS1 we started off with. Just a shame it still seems to jam frequently, particularly for our infantry brethren. Still it’s had far more success than our new respirator...
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff