You guys and your shitty old rifles. its 2010, my lar15 would annihilate you in any encounter.
They're both retardedly accurate and (now HK overhauled the L85A1 to A2 standard and made it actually work) pretty decent rifles, but yeah, I seem to recall the L85 being a bit heavy. That said, the F88SA1 weighs in at 4.3kg unloaded (more than my No.4 and not much different to an SLR), and it's pretty comfy to handle and shoot. It's well-balanced I guess. The weight comes from the fuckoff huge block of solid steel that is the receiver... you could drive a tank over it.
The EM-2 is way better than the L85 though and although they look similar they operate very, very differently. The .280 round was also a shit-ton more potent than the 5.56 and was what the SLR was originally designed around; when America threw a hissy fit and forced NATO to standardise on 7.62x51 (the US military stubbornly sticking to obsolete tech and doctrines? No way!) the SLR could be easily converted, the EM-2 couldn't. It's one of the main reasons I fucking hate the decisionmakers in the US, and it gypped the Poms out of an amazing piece of kit. At least they then adopted the SLR, which went on to become one of the greatest rifles ever designed (as with most FN work). I can only imagine how godlike it would've been if it had stayed .280. Of course, the US was (and to a large extent, still is) a big fucking baby about adopting foreign designs (read: why they never employed Sherman Fireflies on any grand scale like they should have), so they went with the M14... a tarted-up target rifle. It's good at that, but it was a fucking terrible weapon to fight with.
Enough blubbering about past stupidity, here's some content:
An SMLE from every year SAF Lithgow made them except 1937
Yes. That is an MG42.
SO MANY MGS
FG42 Type 2. Are you jealous yet? You should be.
MG34
A fraction of their collection of Enfields
PPSh41, AK-47, EM-2 ()
FNC, StG44
You can probably tell from how comfy I look holding the Steyr that it's an integral part of my job
The Owen gun, an Australian invention and arguably the single most reliable weapon of WWII. It beat the two main Tommy gun variants, the M55 Riesing (sp?), and the Sten by an order of magnitude in reliability testing. It fired after they filled it with river mud. Never underestimate guns designed in suburban backyards.
The previous generation of digs' best mate, the L1A1 SLR
Miniature of a fuckoff statue we put up in France after WWI. For those who can't tell, it's a digger bayonetting the German eagle. Apparently the Jerries didn't take too kindly to this, and trashed the statue when they invaded in 1940; from what I recall we then put another up after WWII, but this time of a dig carrying his wounded mate. Don't quote me on that though, that may have been another statue entirely.
HEY, we're REALLY good at making messes.
It's mainly the US Army that's the problem. While the USAF was gladly taking orders of Spitfires and Mosquitoes (largely for aerial recce), the Army point-blank refused to employ the Sherman Firefly. They couldn't give a shit how many tankers' lives it would save or how many Tigers it would knock out, they absolutely would not allow a foreign gun in their tanks. The 17pdr was essentially a British 88 and it was the closest weapon the Allies had to the aforementioned until the Pershing turned up almost too late for the party. After the war, .280 was looking to be a real winner and what would become the EU were all in for using it. Two phenominal rifles had been designed around it (the EM-2 and what would later become the FAL). American brass, however, was too profoundly dumb to realise that full-size rifles were obsolete and stubbornly refused to standardise on these fuckin' upstart limey moon bullets. Churchill couldn't risk a bitchfight with the US at that point (Britain was in an absolute shit state after the war, and remained so for decades - they were still rationing for quite a while), so he had to cave. NATO standardised on 7.62x51 and while the FAL was easily updated to chamber the larger round, the EM-2 could not be. It was scrapped after only 57 or so examples were made. By the way, before America's hissyfit, it had been accepted into service as the Rifle, Automatic, No.9 Mk.1. So much for that. Nearly everyone in Europe (and many other countries around the world) realise what a remarkable piece of kit the FAL is and adopt it without a second thought. The US refuses once again to adopt a foreign rifle, and after essentially rigging the trials by throwing all kinds of fucking retarded (and obsolete) requirements in, such as the necessity for stripper clip reloading ability, it selected a magazine-fed, slightly modified M1 (which, by the way, had always been touted as AMERICA'S MIRACLE GUN despite Garand being a Canadian). It was heavy, not very ergonomic, and had a rather odd stripping process. The SLR (which I can vouch for personally) handles nicely, is remarkably light for its size and is easy to strip.
Fast forward a grand total of one decade, and Vietnam shows the American brass that fuck, full powered rifles should've gone the way of WWII and ended in the 40s. Colt rushes out an updated Armalite design which, while pretty nice in theory, isn't exactly suited to combat yet (much less in the jungle). The Army is still hellbent on being retarded, and deliberately try to sabotage the program so they can keep their M14s. The M16 is extremely unreliable, requires frequent maintenance, and is issued without any of the tools needed for the aforementioned. Scores of US troops are found dead, their M16s broken open over their laps as they were trying to clear obstructions or other jams. Eventually this kicks everyone into gear, and a series of design revisions and the issuing of cleaning kits and handbooks sees the M16 become the fairly reliable and relatively well-liked rifle it is today. The biggest remaining complaint is that 5.56 is underpowered, which would've been a fucking non-issue if the US had just swallowed their goddamned pride and adopted the .280, which had far superior ballistics and terminal effect.
Yes, America does now use foreign equipment, but it's still retarded. The decision to adopt the M9 was political as all fuck, because that thing is huge, easily filled with crap thanks to its open slide, and heavy. As a civvie pistol, it's nice. As a military sidearm, it's a fucking shitstorm. If they had any sense, they'd have adopted the BHP.
Also JMB was a fucking genius okay, you can't blame me for loving everything he ever made. At the same time, America hasn't really produced anything I'd lord over anything else since. The AR is okay but about as over-hyped as anything can be. The ACR is nice but the US military procurement system being what it is, I can't see it entering widespread use any time soon. The British still make the most accurate rifles, the Russians the most reliable gear, and the Belgians the best machine guns (Germany hasn't had a really good one since the MG42/MG3).
There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)
Bookmarks