jamesteo320
New Member
have anybody heard of the shrike 5.56 advanced weapons system.
does it come with a bipod?
does it come with a bipod?
http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,14632,Soldiertech_Shrike,,00.html
Happy cleaning! (As long as they didn't use HK's revised M16 action.)
Something else #1:
Reading those old posts below - there is a difference between an assault rifle and a battle rifle. The FN Mk16/17 is a modular system that can fulfill both requirements. (Like the old Stoner).
Something else #2:
Does anyone know why the HK416/17 lost to the FN in the SCAR competition?
I once read a very interesting article printed back in the early 1960s which attempted to justify why the US Army had adopted the traditionally designed M14 rifle without a pistol grip, while the rest of the NATO was adopting the FN-FAL and similar rifles, with pistol grips. What was particularly ironic was that within a few years the US Army was adopting the M16, which was not only a substantially smaller calibre but it also had a pistol grip. Military forces are just as subject to fashion, as anybody else in my experience.
jamesteo320
New Member
What about the singapore SAR 21 assault rifle?
Hawkins2k4
New Member
Well there're a couple reasons, 1. It is a patented European design and 2. BUY American still stands, and although the SCAR is a Belgian design FN has a factory in the US, in South Carolina. These are a couple reasons my friends and I have come up with in our own discussions anyways.
Personally I prefer the design with the cartridge in front of the trigger. I find it easier to reload and sight with a longer barrel. Also somebody mentioned tradition, definetly a factor, it just FEELS natural. Also another reason could be the fact that although many experts and soldiers disagree, myself and others I know find the bullpup harder to control in its burst and full auto modes. part of this is because the weapon is so compact that your hamds are too close together, in fact if you look at the original bullpup style model, (the bullpup, go figure), the foregrip is so close to the trigger guard that it feels like the old thompson subs of the 30's and 40's which were notoriously inaccurate and hard to control for this reason, among others.
My final reason is that the US tries to make their weapon systems as user friendly as possible so that they can spend the least amount of time training their men in how to use the weapons. Any veteran of the US forces in that served in recent history will tell you that a lot of their training time was not spent on accurate single shot firing, it spread out, mostly over learning how to provide suppressing fire and instead of one shot one kill you learned to send a two or three round burst at you target accurately at range. which as I said, is very difficult to do with the bullpup model.
I would greatly change this opinion if I were needed a really good close quarters weapon, the bullpup and especially the FAMAS weapons would be on my list over an m16, m4 or even the SCAR, but for that matter so would the HK MP5, a good old fashioned G3SAS or G3KA4, and the german models would probably win out against anything the French or British put on the shelves (especially the French, they don't exactly have a good reputation in world military history :nutkick )
Hawkins2k4
New Member
I know how it stacks up, it's a disgrace. It is innacurate and wild at best. Oh yah, and a B**** to clean. What they need to do is give it a folding stock and a vertical foregrip and market it as a submachine gun, not an assault rifle.
In terms of singapore's sar 21, I have actually had the pleasure of firing one full auto, I like it, very accurate if you have a storng hand on the foregrip and not let it get away from you. Semi auto it is like a dream, the only thing they could have done differently was add a couple more inches between the trigger and the foregrip to give the shooter a little bit more leverage, but after all, you shout have no need to lay down full auto fire in a combat situation with an assault rifle, thats what the support element is for. one more thing they could have changed was the trigger guard, I was standing beside my buddy when he fired by accident, his middle finger hit the trigger, and the gun went off. I have known him for years, we served together in the canadian forces, and he's never been unsafe, so I know it was a freak accident, the problem is that we were trained to keep our finger out of the trigger guard until we were readt to fire, but hat is nearly impossible on some of these rearcartridge weapons.
SCAR looks to be a well thought out design,giving the operator a very flexible weopon.Its not unlike the 1960,s Stoner in concept. Would be a sought after rifle for any combat unit!
I must admit I am another who is not 'turned on' by a bullpup design. Maybe its because I've never actually used one and my idea of an assault rifle is based on the M16 (well actually the civilian AR15!). I do like the appearance of the SCAR which to me looks like an assault rifle should look. :ar15 But that's just me!
BTW here's another link with more photos and specs:
http://world.guns.ru/assault/as70-e.htm
Cheers
BTW here's another link with more photos and specs:
http://world.guns.ru/assault/as70-e.htm
Cheers