Section Infantry Weapons

Contains threads on British Army equipment of the past, present and future.
mr.fred
Senior Member
Posts: 1468
Joined: 06 May 2015, 22:53
United Kingdom

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by mr.fred »

Whatever small arms we adopt for the British Army, I think it would be important to have the ability to produce the ammunition locally and vital to have more than one source for it.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by Lord Jim »

The Matador 90 is already in use with the British Army as its disposable Anti Structure weapon system, known as the L2A1 ASM. How many have been purchased and how often they are issued I do not know.
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post:
leonard

leonard
Member
Posts: 191
Joined: 21 May 2016, 17:52
Italy

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by leonard »

From the land of Peter Jackson and the same LMT rifle won and was adopted by Estonian Army with all the accessories as their standard rifle. Any info if it is in competition for the Special forces Brigade new rifle

Little J
Member
Posts: 973
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
United Kingdom

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by Little J »

The LMT is definitely a better thought out design than the L119A2, more user friendly, more armourer friendly.

If the L85's (and L119's) get replaced by another 5.56 (and I suspect they will), the LMT would be a good choice.
These users liked the author Little J for the post (total 2):
leonardLord Jim

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by Lord Jim »

Whilst the SF and other small units may get a better 5.56mm weapon, I cannot see the L85A2/A3 being replaced by a weapon of the same calibre. We have had personnel embedded in the US Army's NGSW programme from its beginning, snd fiven we are looking to both lighten the individual Soldiers load and gain accuracy form his or hers shooting, I feel this is where we will eventually end up, though at least waiting for the US Army to iron the bugs out of the M5 and M250 first.
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post:
Mr Carrot

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

NickC wrote: 28 Jan 2022, 17:11 Still think the 6.8x51 over engineered/powerful for infantry round which requires more expensive rifles as having to use short recoil reciprocating barrels
+
Lord Jim wrote: 28 Jan 2022, 23:05 the amazing .388 LMG replacing the L7A2 in the sustained fire role and probably with SF, with the possibility it could replace the old and faithful M2 .50cal in many roles.
I just wonder about these two statements... in the context of the overall (lon) dicussion
Little J wrote: 29 Jan 2022, 22:54 there will be a place for it, just not to replace all that they are currently claiming.
"All" is front line, ie. the ones that have to reclaim the infantry "KM"... how did the Americans turn metric??
Lord Jim wrote: 01 Feb 2022, 00:56 be able to accurately engage and suppress the same targets as well as Light Armoured Vehicles at rages over 1000m with a very portable weapon
is that the amazing .338 then? Not going to be in every mag
Little J wrote: 10 Feb 2022, 22:22 There's only Sig and TV/Beretta (took over from GD), the other one pulled out.
SIG, yes, but I have lost the track as for Beretta now being 'the other'
... oh well, skiing for two months can drop one in an information 'void'
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by Lord Jim »

The .388 Norma Magnum LMG is roughly the weight of the L7 GPMG with far greater range and hitting power. It is already in use with American SF and is likely to gain further users as time goes by and its capabilities are known by more people.

In theory with the a 6.8mm Rifle and Light Machine Gun, the L7 would only be in use in the SF role for the Infantry. The US Army is looking at converting some of its M240 (L7) GPMGs to the new 6.8 cartridge as it is a very good weapon. In this case we could do the same for little cost. Where the .388 LMG would really shine would be on vehicle mountings including RWS as it almost matched the .50 cal in firepower but with considerably less weight, both for the Gun and its ammunition.
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post:
ArmChairCivvy

leonard
Member
Posts: 191
Joined: 21 May 2016, 17:52
Italy

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by leonard »

For comparison purposes everyone else has gone all in with the H&K 416A7 for their special forces example bellow



leonard
Member
Posts: 191
Joined: 21 May 2016, 17:52
Italy

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by leonard »

And the Oscar for the most tacticool in the world go to this JGSDF soldier!!!!!
These users liked the author leonard for the post:
Lord Jim

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by Lord Jim »

leonard wrote: 22 May 2022, 14:57 For comparison purposes everyone else has gone all in with the H&K 416A7 for their special forces example bellow


Whilst the HK 416 has found many users in the SF community, other AR-15 style weapons have also been successful such as the C8 from Colt Canada. The US SF seem to be happy with their M4s that have been adapted to the 6.5mm Creedmoor round, but their M4s are painstakingly worked on and looked after by some of the best Armourers in the US Military.

Little J
Member
Posts: 973
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
United Kingdom

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by Little J »

Think you've got confused a little there, 6.5 CM is similar in size to 7.62x51, no way that's fitting an M4.

Maybe you mean 6mm Arc?

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by Lord Jim »

Sorry you are right, the weapon I have seen is more based on the AR-10 than the AR-15. Saying that the US Army SF are still using version of the M4 though these are tailored to their requirements, some of which filtered down to the rest of the Army. Dropping the three round burst and regaining full auto for one.

Little J
Member
Posts: 973
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
United Kingdom

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by Little J »

Still room for 5.56 & 300 blackout...

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/202 ... -contract/
These users liked the author Little J for the post:
Lord Jim

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Little J wrote: 23 May 2022, 22:58 Still room for 5.56 & 300 blackout...
Within the PDW type of range 300 definitively a w(k)inn(ll)er.

Why 5.56 too? Easy to replenish the ammo. Or can take more rounds in the mag?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Little J
Member
Posts: 973
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
United Kingdom

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by Little J »

Sorry, lame attempt at humour aimed at those who believe that 6.8 is the be all / end all...
These users liked the author Little J for the post:
ArmChairCivvy

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by Lord Jim »

I do not think 6.8mm is the be all and end all but with the US adopting this calibre of ammunition chances are it will eventually become the ANTO standard even if better rouind are out there. Just look at the adoption of 7.62x51mm, a round that was really too powerful for assault weapons but the US Army wanted their calibre adopted and we were forced to adopt it at the expense of what could have been a far superior round. The 6.8mm is not compatible with weapons such as the M4 or HK416, but weapons chambered for teh 7.62x51mm round may possibly be converted.

The British Army will need a new rifle to be introduced by 2030, and the 6.8mm round is very compatible with its idea of using accuracy rather than weight of fire to suppress an enemy at ranges up to 600m an beyond. Any weapon adopted with the new round would also negate the need for a DMR and the Automatic Rifle would satisfy the possible desire for a LMG allowing the tried and tested L7 to be used primarily as a SF weapon, possibly converted to the new round.

It will be interesting to see if our SF adopt the new rounds for compatibility with US SF, as this would give the UK some further insight into the new round, aboe and beyond what it has already learned from having personnel embedded in the NGSW programme from its beginning. IF we do follow this route I can see it being gradual over a five to eight year period with the Infantry first and then other units following, taking into account any essons learned by the former.
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post:
leonard

leonard
Member
Posts: 191
Joined: 21 May 2016, 17:52
Italy

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by leonard »

In the meantime for what was uber marketed as the ultimate rifle from a glorious line of products things are going not so great

leonard
Member
Posts: 191
Joined: 21 May 2016, 17:52
Italy

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by leonard »

With an interest from comparing the history of the two rifles bellow i have a question.
Is it true that at the time when H&K was under British Aerospace control that was intense lobbying campaign for the adoption of the G36 by the British Army even in limited numbers for special forces use ??????

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by Lord Jim »

Unfortunately our eyes were focused mainly in acquiring US Defence Contractors at the expense of European holdings. How mush would BAeS have made if they had held onto H&K?! Regarding the G36, at the time it was being looked at the Army was deciding as to whether it sould modernise and retain theL85 or buy a totally nw gun, and the G36 showed promise and we cheap for a H&K product, at least that is what I remember. It will be interesting to see who wins the Contract to replace the Bundeswehr's G35 rifle by the end of the decade and could it be a G28 in the new 6.8mm hot round?
These users liked the author Lord Jim for the post:
leonard

leonard
Member
Posts: 191
Joined: 21 May 2016, 17:52
Italy

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by leonard »

From the battlefield of Ukraine today same lessons are being learned very very fast like the very important use of this weapon.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by Lord Jim »

Wasn't there an off route mine developed using the LAW-80 back in the day? There are calls for the scaterable anti tank mine layers such as the one we had using the Stormer chassis to be brought back. Should be a simple idea to develop a Boxer Module with that option. Give them to the Royal Engineers as additional modules which they can use when needed and when not they can use the Specialist Engineering module instead.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by Tempest414 »

If we were to have such system it would need to do two important thing map the scatter plot and GPS point it so it could be cleared up latter

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by Lord Jim »

These systems, the Bundeswehr has a similar system which thay are looking at bringing back into service, are for rapidly laying a blocking AT minefield in a matter of a few minutes. The launchers lay a pretty organised pattern and this could be logged for future clear up, but we are talking full on peer level conflict and clearing up said minefield will not be a very high priority.

leonard
Member
Posts: 191
Joined: 21 May 2016, 17:52
Italy

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by leonard »

If anyone have though that bullpup rifles were a thing of the past look who is showing up in more and more numbers among ather rifles in Ukraine
These users liked the author leonard for the post:
Jimpa

leonard
Member
Posts: 191
Joined: 21 May 2016, 17:52
Italy

Re: Section Infantry Weapons

Post by leonard »

A more clear and new photo of the FN F2000 bullpup rifles just delivered to this Ukrainian combatant

Post Reply