If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#181
|
|||
|
|||
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message ...
In message , Steyr writes I spoke to some Brits in North Belfast last year and they told us that their new rifle was 'complete crap'. I think they were detached from a field gun formation, possibbly Royal Artillery. The Welch Fusilers were in the same area. Spoke to a colour-sergeant from the Royal Irish Rangers a few days ago and he said the L85A2 was, quote, "****ing fantastic as long as you look after it". While like any weapon it's less tolerant of neglect than an AK, it shoots much better and is very reliable with basic (and correct) care. He'd been out using it for real, I assume he had some knowledge of the subject. I have no opinion on the SA80 matter other than to note that I've not actually encountered a favourable review of the weapon from a serving soldier. Talk to a few who have used it. It's interesting how the "it's crap and we hate it" mindset of the early 1990s has changed among soldiers who have (a) used it on operations, (b) seen other weapons used on operations. A group of British soldiers spoke to an American lady about the crisis in North Belfast, I was standing next to the group, I asked the soldier holding the eapon what he thought of it, he said it was "crap". He then remarked to the American lady that he thought her soldiers had a real rifle. His coleagues who ere living out of a Saxon vehicle agreed with the soldier doing the talking. 'I have no opinion on the SA80 matter other than to note that I've not actually encountered a favourable review of the weapon from a serving soldier' As I'm unlikely ever to use one, I've no personal opinion on the matter other than it looks like a ergonomic copy of a 1949 rifle the British contemplated adopting. I'd sooner have a Martini-Henry Mark IV. 'So, Brits had to adopt another design, but this is also another story. There's also some rumors that infamous British SA80 / L85 assault rifle, introduced in 1980s, was based on the EM-2 design. It is not true, since the crappy L85 has nothing in common with EM-2 except for general external "bullpup" layout.' http://world.guns.ru/assault/as59-e.htm |
#182
|
|||
|
|||
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 "Andrew Chaplin" wrote in message ... Blair Maynard wrote: I see the picture. It shows two guys kneeling next to a small hole where it looks like they might have dug a hole (presumably looking for another mine). There is a small blackened area on the left side of the photo in front of them. The blackened area is cut off by the left side of the photo, so I can't see how big it is. There is white tape behind them presumably designating a safe approach to the area. The photo is too close for me to see a crater. A pic of the jeep would help. I don't understand that last comment about trusting the battalion commander and contingent commander. I never questioned their judgement. What is your point? How is this relevant? Are you saying that they would have disobeyed their orders to go to Afghanistan if they thought armored hummvees would save lives? No. They are the ones who ordered the patrol in a soft-skinned vehicle when they had LAV variants available. They would have weighed the risks carefully and judged this sort of patrol warranted under the circumstances. -- Right. These things happen. Soldiers use what they have, which is usually dictated by what their governments are willing to buy. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 8.0 iQA/AwUBP4CL7lBGDfMEdHggEQLpLACggwivkVFHY/Tf5vwBpelY9tuD7hwAoLAX FhD+u2X0a0guH6yfoJB+10dU =LMXI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
#183
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Gord Beaman" ) writes: "Andrew Chaplin" wrote: "Peter Stickney" wrote in message ... The odd thing about this is that the Ferrets in question are quite a bit larger than Dingoes. Aren't they larger than dingoes but smaller than Dingoes? Good one Andrew!... And, as it turns out, accurate as well. FOr some reason, I'd alwauys thought that the Daimler Dingo was smaller than the Ferret. Turns out that the Dingo has a couple of tons on it. I've got to get some of those newfangled Disk Brains - the Drum Brains fade with repeated use. Now, I could tell you about the M8 Grayhound we had for a short while. We tried to register it as a 1943 Ford Convertible, color Green. -- Pete Stickney A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures. -- Daniel Webster |
#184
|
|||
|
|||
In message , lisieux
writes "Paul J. Adam" wrote in message ... Talk to a few who have used it. It's interesting how the "it's crap and we hate it" mindset of the early 1990s has changed among soldiers who have (a) used it on operations, (b) seen other weapons used on operations. A group of British soldiers spoke to an American lady about the crisis in North Belfast, I was standing next to the group, I asked the soldier holding the eapon what he thought of it, he said it was "crap". Had he used it in combat and seen how other forces' weapons performed? He then remarked to the American lady that he thought her soldiers had a real rifle. His coleagues who ere living out of a Saxon vehicle agreed with the soldier doing the talking. An opinion not entirely shared by UK troops currently returning from Afghanistan and Iraq. The US has a serviceable and proven weapon but it hasn't proven to be fault-free or perfect either. Again, I'd be curious about the experience of the troops involved. My most recent contact was with sergeants, colour-sergeants and WO2s recently returned from operational deployments where they had used their rifles in action; and they were solidly positive (and in a few cases rueful that they'd bitched so much in the past) 'I have no opinion on the SA80 matter other than to note that I've not actually encountered a favourable review of the weapon from a serving soldier' Try asking a few more, especially those who have been deployed operationally. As I'm unlikely ever to use one, I've no personal opinion on the matter other than it looks like a ergonomic copy of a 1949 rifle the British contemplated adopting. I'd sooner have a Martini-Henry Mark IV. Your loss: you gain stopping power but lose range and rate of fire. How well do you shoot and reload with 5.56mm ball through your torso? 'So, Brits had to adopt another design, but this is also another story. There's also some rumors that infamous British SA80 / L85 assault rifle, introduced in 1980s, was based on the EM-2 design. It is not true, since the crappy L85 has nothing in common with EM-2 except for general external "bullpup" layout.' http://world.guns.ru/assault/as59-e.htm I think the wording is its own evidence as to veracity, don't you? -- When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite. W S Churchill Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk |
#185
|
|||
|
|||
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message ...
In message , lisieux writes 'So, Brits had to adopt another design, but this is also another story. There's also some rumors that infamous British SA80 / L85 assault rifle, introduced in 1980s, was based on the EM-2 design. It is not true, since the crappy L85 has nothing in common with EM-2 except for general external "bullpup" layout.' http://world.guns.ru/assault/as59-e.htm I think the wording is its own evidence as to veracity, don't you? I'll have to have a word with Max about that I suspect that he wrote it before the successful use of the L85A2 in Iraq. Tony Williams Military gun and ammunition website: http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk Military gun and ammunition discussion forum: http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/ |
#186
|
|||
|
|||
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message ...
'So, Brits had to adopt another design, but this is also another story. There's also some rumors that infamous British SA80 / L85 assault rifle, introduced in 1980s, was based on the EM-2 design. It is not true, since the crappy L85 has nothing in common with EM-2 except for general external "bullpup" layout.' http://world.guns.ru/assault/as59-e.htm I think the wording is its own evidence as to veracity, don't you? The earlier British rifle was potentially a better development product, the 5.56 round was not really the answer and neither was the 7.62 NATO. |
#187
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
---California International Air Show Pics Posted!!!! | Tyson Rininger | Aerobatics | 0 | February 23rd 04 11:51 AM |
TRUCKEE,CA DONNER LAKE 12-03 PICS. @ webshots | TRUCKEE_DONNER_LAKE | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | December 19th 03 04:48 PM |
Aviation Pics | Tyson Rininger | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | November 7th 03 01:04 AM |
b-17C interior pics site | old hoodoo | Military Aviation | 0 | September 15th 03 03:42 AM |
Nam era F-4 pilot pics? | davidG35 | Military Aviation | 2 | August 4th 03 03:44 PM |