The Army take to the streets of London....
Discussion
98elise said:
Here she is getting "fed up" with someones who believes themselves to be an expert...who actually turns out to be an expert.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
KarlMac said:
Amazing.
Walt of the highest order.
WTF? Unlike most on here, she's been there and done it, on the front line. Walt of the highest order.
Her tone often reflects exasperation with some on here who peddle military bulls
t. She can be abrasive and abrupt and in that thread appears to have had out of date info, but she's about as far from being a 'walt' as it's possible to get. Have a word.
donutsina911 said:
WTF? Unlike most on here, she's been there and done it, on the front line.
Her tone often reflects exasperation with some on here who peddle military bullst. She can be abrasive and abrupt and in that thread appears to have had out of date info, but she's about as far from being a 'walt' as it's possible to get.
Have a word.
Absolutely no excuse. None whatsoever.Her tone often reflects exasperation with some on here who peddle military bulls
t. She can be abrasive and abrupt and in that thread appears to have had out of date info, but she's about as far from being a 'walt' as it's possible to get. Have a word.
That she comes across as a walt to the uninitiated serves to emphasise the disservice she does herself.
Edited by iphonedyou on Thursday 25th May 15:35
Rovinghawk said:
If you want to get one then just follow the squaddies around & wait for enough bits to fall off to make one.
Only one thing has fallen off my A2 in 11yrs... So you'll be following a long time... Not sure who GG15G is, but I agree with the sentiment above... If you see yourself as an angry, snarky individual, you'll not only be seen as one but the organisation as a whole takes a hit.
It'll be Ball munition for green Army.
Edited by Havoc856-S on Thursday 25th May 14:52
Well I'm pleased to say I didn't understand 80% of what was being discussed here.
But it did remind me of one time I stepped into a pub in Glasgow just as the mood was getting loud and tense.
I neither understood what was being said, or why people were so angry, but realised there was only a small 'window of opportunity' to escape unhurt.
But it did remind me of one time I stepped into a pub in Glasgow just as the mood was getting loud and tense.
I neither understood what was being said, or why people were so angry, but realised there was only a small 'window of opportunity' to escape unhurt.
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
It's a cut down, ie Carbine version of the Canadian built version of the AR-15.
IE it's essentially the equivalent of the M4.
Either way, it fires the 5.56 x 45mm NATO round (in exactly the same way as does the L85A2) that TTMonkey refers to as the "SA80".
So TTMonkey is all sorts of upset about BRITMIL being on the streets with L85A2 (owing to the ammunition) but not L119A1/2.
Ergo he is a fking hypocrite.
You must be a hoot at parties.IE it's essentially the equivalent of the M4.
Either way, it fires the 5.56 x 45mm NATO round (in exactly the same way as does the L85A2) that TTMonkey refers to as the "SA80".
So TTMonkey is all sorts of upset about BRITMIL being on the streets with L85A2 (owing to the ammunition) but not L119A1/2.
Ergo he is a f
king hypocrite.
Thatch said:
Well I'm pleased to say I didn't understand 80% of what was being discussed here.
But it did remind me of one time I stepped into a pub in Glasgow just as the mood was getting loud and tense.
I neither understood what was being said, or why people were so angry, but realised there was only a small 'window of opportunity' to escape unhurt.
Wasn't just me then But it did remind me of one time I stepped into a pub in Glasgow just as the mood was getting loud and tense.
I neither understood what was being said, or why people were so angry, but realised there was only a small 'window of opportunity' to escape unhurt.
TTmonkey said:
The Police should be policing, not guarding, should they not?
And using the army has another flaw... the troops deployed today were carrying assault rifles that are too powerful to use in an area potentially full of civilians. A round from an sa80 could do a lot of unintentional damage after passing through or just missing a target.
A round from our previous infantry rifle the 7.62 calire FN FAL (our SLR aka L1A1) would indeed have gone through brick walls after passing through its target. However iirc (at the risk of being shot down by GG15G) the 5.56mm round used in the AR and SA80 family of weapons (!) tends to break up in its target and doesn't have the same force to smash through walls. F=MA and all that. And using the army has another flaw... the troops deployed today were carrying assault rifles that are too powerful to use in an area potentially full of civilians. A round from an sa80 could do a lot of unintentional damage after passing through or just missing a target.
There was a story the other day that the US military is considering going to 7.62mm as they are finding that it takes two or three shots from their M-16 (and derivative family of weapons) to put someone down.
The benefit of 5.56 over 7.62 is that for a given weight an infantryperson (!) can carry a greater number of rounds and automatic fire is more viable. At 7.62 the same weight means fewer rounds, and only semi-automatic fire was possible (in the UK version of the FAL).
The MAIN practical issue with troops guarding stuff is that they are not trained for the job. A maroon beret and an automatic weapon may look intimidating, but all they have is a deterrent effect. It is not as if a standard section attack, with screaming, smoke, covering fire and bayonets would be much good at stopping a terrorist in central London.
Ayahuasca said:
The MAIN practical issue with troops guarding stuff is that they are not trained for the job. A maroon beret and an automatic weapon may look intimidating, but all they have is a deterrent effect. It is not as if a standard section attack, with screaming, smoke, covering fire and bayonets would be much good at stopping a terrorist in central London.
No idea about the Army but in the RM for the last 5+ years there's been a big change in close quarter weapons training. It's so in depth and structured where before it was just paid lip service too and the SOPs would change depending on who was teaching you.I do get that the situation may be alien to some current military personnel, which could lead to nervously being trigger happy/reluctant.
Ayahuasca said:
The MAIN practical issue with troops guarding stuff is that they are not trained for the job. A maroon beret and an automatic weapon may look intimidating, but all they have is a deterrent effect. It is not as if a standard section attack, with screaming, smoke, covering fire and bayonets would be much good at stopping a terrorist in central London.
Some might say there are certain regiments that are only trained to do this 
I don't disagree with the point you're making, but let's not forget that many serving soldiers have done plenty of this stuff for real before - supporting the Civil Power in Northern Ireland over the best part of 40 years kind of counts!
Did a very brief exercise at Copehill Down many moons ago and I'm sure the stuff going on there more recently is still a relevant experience for the squaddies deployed this week. More to the point, I'd hope that 'guarding stuff' is in section 1, para 1, volume 1 of the British Army Field Manual!
dai1983 said:
Ayahuasca said:
The MAIN practical issue with troops guarding stuff is that they are not trained for the job. A maroon beret and an automatic weapon may look intimidating, but all they have is a deterrent effect. It is not as if a standard section attack, with screaming, smoke, covering fire and bayonets would be much good at stopping a terrorist in central London.
No idea about the Army but in the RM for the last 5+ years there's been a big change in close quarter weapons training. It's so in depth and structured where before it was just paid lip service too and the SOPs would change depending on who was teaching you.I do get that the situation may be alien to some current military personnel, which could lead to nervously being trigger happy/reluctant.
Same for NI training.
Ayahuasca said:
A round from our previous infantry rifle the 7.62 calire FN FAL (our SLR aka L1A1) would indeed have gone through brick walls after passing through its target. However iirc (at the risk of being shot down by GG15G) the 5.56mm round used in the AR and SA80 family of weapons (!) tends to break up in its target and doesn't have the same force to smash through walls. F=MA and all that.
There was a story the other day that the US military is considering going to 7.62mm as they are finding that it takes two or three shots from their M-16 (and derivative family of weapons) to put someone down.
The benefit of 5.56 over 7.62 is that for a given weight an infantryperson (!) can carry a greater number of rounds and automatic fire is more viable. At 7.62 the same weight means fewer rounds, and only semi-automatic fire was possible (in the UK version of the FAL).
The MAIN practical issue with troops guarding stuff is that they are not trained for the job. A maroon beret and an automatic weapon may look intimidating, but all they have is a deterrent effect. It is not as if a standard section attack, with screaming, smoke, covering fire and bayonets would be much good at stopping a terrorist in central London.
I'm not sure that's strictly correct, but happy to be, well corrected! My understanding is that the 5.56mm round is very effective, it's just that it requires a certain barrel length/rifling for it to perform optimally. As soon as you start blatting it out of carbines with sub-optimal barrel lengths its effective range is much reduced. As for firing on automatic with a personal weapon, my infrantry experience is about 15 years out of date, but I can't recall it ever being a correct course of action, even when clearing rooms for FIBUA. Closest it ever got was putting say 3 shots in quick succession into cupboards etc where people might be hiding.There was a story the other day that the US military is considering going to 7.62mm as they are finding that it takes two or three shots from their M-16 (and derivative family of weapons) to put someone down.
The benefit of 5.56 over 7.62 is that for a given weight an infantryperson (!) can carry a greater number of rounds and automatic fire is more viable. At 7.62 the same weight means fewer rounds, and only semi-automatic fire was possible (in the UK version of the FAL).
The MAIN practical issue with troops guarding stuff is that they are not trained for the job. A maroon beret and an automatic weapon may look intimidating, but all they have is a deterrent effect. It is not as if a standard section attack, with screaming, smoke, covering fire and bayonets would be much good at stopping a terrorist in central London.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff