We want TAVOR!

[C@RN!VORE]

Ok team, member, and everybody around, check out this lovley weapon, israeli type, and tell me, do you want another crapy mp5 or stinky m4, or this asskicking assault rifle?!

[Nerf Herder]

IMI Tavor TAR-21

http://world.guns.ru/assault/tavor-tar.jpg
Tavor TAR-21 (basic version)

http://world.guns.ru/assault/tavor-ctar.jpg
Tavor CTAR-21 (compact version)

http://world.guns.ru/assault/tavor-mtar.jpg
Tavor MTAR-21 (micro version)


Caliber: 5.56mm NATO
Action: Gas operated, rotating bolt
Overall length: 720mm
Barrel length: 460mm
Weigth: 2.8kg emty, 3.63kg w. full magazine & sling
Magazine capacity: 20 or 30 rds
Rate of fire: 750 - 900 rpm


Israel Military Industries is launching the new family of the TAVOR assault rifles. The weapon is offered in four configurations: The basic design - the T.A.R-21 Tavor Assault Rifle. A sharp-shooting configuration (STAR-21, with biupod and heavy barrel) is offered as a squad weapon. For commando, airborne, paratroopers and special rescue units, as well as tank crews, a short Tavor assault rifle (CTAR-21, lenght 640 mm, barrel 380 mm) is offered. Micro T.A.R (MTAR-21, lenght 480 mm, barrel 250 mm) is specially configured for security forces and special missions. Tavor uses the proven, compact Bull pup design, which was optimized to best match the ergonomics and mission requirements of the modern warrior, providing natural handling, intuitive aiming from all firing positions and improved hit accuracy. Accuracy and target acquisition is enhanced, by the use of accurate aiming, through the use of an integral reflex optical reflective sight, which projects the aiming point on the center of the sight. Tavor has an attachment for additional sighting devices, such as a 3rd generation night vision sight, which can be installed with no zeroing.



In other words I like it.

Credit for pics and text goes to the wonderful runner of Modern Firearms over at:

http://world.guns.ru/assault/as30-e.htm

[DarkBls]

Bah, It doesn't worth a FAMAS ;)

But maybe they are cheaper ?

[Nerf Herder]

I personally trust the israelis for their firearms more then French arms companies. ;) Although the FAMAS is a nice rifle.

[DarkBls]

I cannot say anything about the israelian firearms.


Gryph... Shakken, HELP !!! :D

[Luminuis]

Some IMI guns:

IMI/Magnum Research DE
IMI Uzi (all variants)
IMI Tavor (all variants)
IMI Galil (all variants)

There are more as well, I happen to have lost my link to a good IMI Info site, so I can't think of them

All but the DE are Incredibly good guns, however, I don't like the Tavor, It is fururistic, but not widespread yet, I personally do not want the Tavor if it throws something else that is more widespread or commonplace out, I don't want INF to turn into a Mod with nothing but Little known or little used guns.

[Nerf Herder]

I don't want any guns thrown out. But I would like to see the Tavor in. Of course without the crazy color scheme. I think a nice flat black would suit it well. And it's NOT futuristic. It just looks that way. Rejecting a gun because it looks futuristic is one of the reasons I hate the US Military. They're very stupid about guns needing to not look futuristic. Which is why we wasted money on M-14s before switching to the M-16s. And also the reason the M-16s faults didn't get discovered and remedied before we went into combat with them. Since if they'd been smart we would've ended up with AR-18 style ARs instead since they're more reliable.

IMI is pretty well known for making good guns. And the Desert Eagle isn't a bad gun it's just not meant for combat. I repeat not meant for combat so don't think of it as a combat pistol. You don't hear people complaining about the Colt Anaconda. It's not a good combat gun either.

[HanD_of_DarKNesS]

I'd be interested in seeing the Tavor as well (if not the Galil), though the specific version of the Tavor which would be implemented would ahev to depend on demand within the game. There are already at leat 6 ARs and 6 SMGs planned. I'd personally be interested in the MTAR (Micro Tavor) variant, being a 5.56mm weapon with a 9.8" barrel, yet only 18.9" long. Here are the prcs:

Calibre: 5.56x45mm NATO
Overall Length: 480 mm (18.9 inches)
Barrel Length: 250 mm (9.8 inches)
Weight: 2.4 kg (5.3 lbs) empty
rate of Fire: 750-900 rpm

As far as a good resource site for Tavor info, the best is IMI themselves. Check their Tavor - Bull Pup Assault Rifle page (http://www.imi-israel.com/imi/doa_iis.dll/Serve/item/English/1.1.2.12.2.5.html).

As far as the US rejecting guns by reason of "looking futuristic", I'd have to argue with that statement, as the OICW looks as futuristic as any other weapon I can think of.

[ShakKen]

From what I hear the TAVOR is not in military service. The Israelis didn't want it because it was too expensive and it's optic system was flawed somehow.

According to a friend of mine in Gevatayim, the Israeli military has made a new contract with Colt for even more M4 carbines.

Looks like the Israelis themselves prefer their stinky M4s=P

[The_Fur]

Nerf, isn't that the same reason why the G11 almost killed H&K? Because the design was "too radical", same with the JSF. Some people need to get their head out of their asses.

[Dr.Dase]

The Tavor isn't used by the Israeli because they don't want bullpups, and they get US weapons dirt cheap, they get some kind of support money, that they only can spend on US weapons etc. Smart, ey? :)

They're apparently thinking about using Tavors for their "Designated Marksmen" kind of semi-snipers, half regular infantry, half snipers, kinda like the M16 with ACOG in Infiltration :) Now, they use the Car-15 with scope, but the short barrel isn't all that good for accuracy, so they think about equiping marksmen with a short weapon with long barrel, because they usually don't have to change shoulders like other troops in CQB.

[Nerf Herder]

That's one of the main reasons they use US weapons. We "protect" them, and in doing so we pretty much tell them what to use.

Surplus of M-16A1s when we upgraded to M-16A2s? Sell them to the Israelis. Got a surplus of M4s? Sell them to the Israelis.

It's kind of stupid. I think most countries should stick with a homebased firearms company.

[C@RN!VORE]

The money that we get from the americans is for "only american" products.
In other words, they give us money(that is a serios help) but they dont let us used it in other things, withc arent american.
thats the reason the Army doesnt use the Tavor fot the IDF regulers-why to spent money on a weapon when you get lots of m-16 almost free?
Thats one of the reason we stoped the production of the plane "lavy", but thats another story.
I want that Tavor or the Sar 21 and i dont give a dam it looks futuristic or not spread over like the ak-47.
i mean, you placed the De , and i dont think that it is well used, who the hell will want to walk aroung with a cannon as a side arm?!
here is pic of the Sar 21, A MUST HAVE WEAPON!, i can almost we myself shooting bots with it....hehehe

[ShakKen]

SAR-21 is a nice gun. Only thing I don't quite like about it is the fire selector is located in the stock like the SA-80.

Gun doesn't have ANY lefty provisions though, and the optic is not replaceable. But it's a damned good optic at that. Finally a 1.5-2X sight with aperture emergency sights=)

[C@RN!VORE]

How the hell i make the team to listen to me and to place this weapon in the armory?????

Hello team? are you there?!
We want Sar 21 or the Tavor!

[poaw]

ShakKen is a member of the team.

[Nerf Herder]

He's the guy that kind of determines what guns go in. I know the Tavor isn't wide spread but I'd like to see it in sometime down the road.

I'd be willing to let the DE go (which if you knew me would seem like blasphemy coming from me) in order to use the Tavor.

[Luminuis]

So france should keep the FAMAS for itself?


So Israelis should only use IMI guns? They use M4s and M16s because we GAVE them to them and they smiled happily and went about their merry way, never complaining a DAMN BIT!

So Russian should stick to using AKs?

What about countries that lack a gun company? Like Cuba, I don't know of any Cuban Arms Corporation or any such thing, they use Soviet AKs and love them, just like we love M16s, and the same way the Israelis love their M4s and M16s, And if I am not totally mistaken, name some countries that use american guns, then try to name a company that works in that area with a feasible replacement to our american guns, and also, it would hurt the gun industry greatly if everywhere stopped buying american guns,

Also, Japan uses alot of out equipment now, if I am not totally off target, don't they use M16s the same way they use F-15s and F-16s we gave them?

Hmmm. All of our closest allies use our guns, or all of them I can think of. What does that tell you about American guns? Can they suck THAT much? And still be widespread?

[Nerf Herder]

Japan and Israel use our guns because we essentially force them too. The AR-15 series sucks when it comes to desert environments. The main reasons I say all places should have their own firearms is because you never know when you might have trouble importing guns from another place. Due to a blockade or the like. And I was in know way ragging on US firearms. I have a real affinity for the AR series of rifles.

Edit: Rage outburst needed to be fixed. Sorry.

[jaunty]

Beretta make a nice rifle.

Whether it be the AR70 or AR70/90, its a higher price alternative to an AR-15.

Only thing is that on the AR70, the cocking handle is the only thing connecting the gas piston to the bolt carrier.. so if the handle were to be knocked off, broken, or something of that nature, you'd find yourself in a world of s<u></u>hit.

[Persuter]

Actually, in terms of countries that should or should not have their own weapons factories:

Israel probably shouldn't, since after all, if they stop receiving massive military and political aid from the United States, they'll cease to exist within a few years anyway. Though they have a good military, they are over a thousand miles from any friendly country, and there are several large and fairly rich countries that are more than willing to go to war with them. On the other hand, Israel is getting that massive aid, so why not spend it on weapons? "You can't have too many tanks to blow up hotels, too many helicopters to fire missiles at crowded streets, or too many guns to fire into crowds indiscriminately" is the IDF's motto!

[Rowley]

All of our closest allies use our guns
Oh yeah? Not a single European (except Netherlands who uses Canadian Diemaco) country uses M16's or any other US firearms. In fact you use our weapons (Beretta, SAW, SIG-Sauer), and how come that a rabidly patriotic country like US does that? Because European guns are, and have always been, better! Even the main armament on your M1 Abrams is designed by German Rheinmetall.

[Dr.Dase]

European guns are surely not better just like that....it's the fact that we have companies like Fabrique National, Heckler & Koch, Beretta, SIG etc.....

In the USA, there isn't a need for lots of arms companies, because they only need one rifle, in Europe, every country wants it's own weapons, or at least was, when these companies were founded.

[Rowley]

European guns are surely not better just like that....
Sure! Its the fact that European manufacturing in general (whether its cars, furniture, clockworks or whatever) is simply better than on the other side of the ocean.

[C@RN!VORE]

"You can't have too many tanks to blow up hotels, too many helicopters to fire missiles at crowded streets, or too many guns to fire into crowds indiscriminately" is the IDF's motto!

Listen *******, i bet that you are one of those stupid people that watch cnn and think that this is reality-well it isnt!
If you knew what was going on in here you would never post that stupid replay of yours.
and just to inform you, today two 14 year old kids were kidnaped and murdered by stones by phalestinians.
Ant have you herd about the baby that was shot by a phalastinian sniper???, im sure not,
so dont bul**** me about shooting civilian ok!?

This ISN'T the topic of this post, the question is about the Tavor, will it be in the game or not?

[unixman]

"If you knew what was going on in here you would never post that stupid replay of yours.
and just to inform you, today two 14 year old kids were kidnaped and murdered by stones by phalestinians.
Ant have you herd about the baby that was shot by a phalastinian sniper???, im sure not,
so dont bul**** me about shooting civilian ok!?"

-- C@RN!VORE

Propaganda, propaganda, and more propaganda! Also, somebody needs to learn to spell.

Okay, now that I've addressed that. :-D

I think I would rather have another MP5 and the M4 both, so there!

[Rowley]

Also, somebody needs to learn to spell
Can you speak other languages except your mommy's, Unixman? I doubt it.
I bet mr. C@RN!VORE can! I would guess 3 or more!
But then again, you being american, i bet it never dawned on you that other languages are spoken in the world. (and american-english sounds ****e anyway when compared to real english, you even cant speak yer own tongue properly.)

[Snakeye]

C@RN!VORE calm down; this seems to have been a one timer, and sometimes they only come up to disturb the mostly civilized discussion climate over here - though some of them also make sensible posts.

I heard about the two 14-year-olds being killed, it was in the news here yesterday, but we also get many reports about Palestinian teenagers and even babies being killed by Israeli soldiers, tanks and helicopters. It is my impression, that there are more Palestinians killed than Israelis, though it's possible it just looks that way in the news.

IMO there is no sense in blameing the other side for killing some kids while the own side does that too; that way the violence in Middle East won't end, but as it looks it isn't supposed to end anyway.
The main problem is, that after WWII the Israelis took over the territory of the Palestinians(I won't start any discussion wheter or not the Israelis belonged there hundreds of years ago, that's not the root of nowadays problems) and since then led many wars to expand their territories. Now Israel is surrounded by more or less hostile countries, which use terrorism as their prime mean of attack. So the Israelis make military operations targeted against terrorists mainly, which sooner or later have to hit civilians too; that's a good excuse for more terroristic activites, which lead to more anti-terrorist operations, which lead to...I suppose that's the problem, and blameing the opposite side to be responsible for all and everything doesn't help - on the contrary, it makes the situation even worse.

enough of that..

About the TAR21 being added to INF:
I suppose not within the next months. Though the team always comes up with surprises and there are always rumors about weapons being added(G36C was such a surprise and there were some rumors about the AUG - though Gryphon and ShakKen hate it..), so wait and see and enjoy the weapons we already have and the ones we're getting..

Snakeye :D

[Snakeye]

And Rowley is right. I've seen worse grammar and spelling by some US members. In fact most of those, who don't have English as native language make (grammatically) better posts than many of the US, especially those who think they have to write how they talk..

Snakeye :D

[Luminuis]

Excuse me, but why did the IDF do all those things? Because the PLO sent Bus Bombs down Crowded streets to kill Isarelis? Why does the IDF shoot at Palestinians, because they throw rocks at the IDF, the IDF also tends to shoot rubber bullets, and do they Palestinians stop? Not that I've seen. And Excuse me if I am totally incorrect in my geography, but Europe is over 1,000 miles from Israel? and Egypt is the same? I didn't think Egypt was against the Israelis, I guess I might be wrong, and if you think the neigboring countries of israel are large then you're wrong, and is Lebanon masivley rich? If so I'
d liek to know what it is rich in, I'd also like to know the GDPs and GNPs for the countries neighboring Israel, and maybe the literacy rates.


I'm sorry, but I myself am a Zionist, and I must state that I STRONGLY disagree with wat you said Persuter.

[Snakeye]

Wonderful, that's exactly the attitude I meant:
Why does the IDF shoot at Palestinians, because they throw rocks at the IDF
I don't think this leads anywhere, but to more violence. Apart from that I think(my personal opinion) that fireing 5.56mm rounds at people throwing stones is a very lame excuse, there have to be other ways.

The main problem Israel will get sooner or later with such a policy, is that more and more countries will be against such policy, which could lead to political consequences - here in Austria we got boycotted for electing a government, which consists of two parties, and one of them has a few right-wing politicians in it. Now if this is a reason to boycot a country, I suppose the prolonged use of violence might be a reason too. But then Austria is not Israel, we were on the loser side of WWII..

Snakeye :D

[Nerf Herder]

Rocks can be as deadly as guns. Think about it. 100 people are screaming insults at you and pelting you with rocks. It hurts, and who knows when one of them may throw a molotov or pull a gun from under a jacket.

Those of us sitting back in cushy chairs at our computers shouldn't be deciding the fate of people who in general have nothing to do with us.

I personally respect the Israelis and the IDF. They've defended themselves from several attacks from foreigners. And the time they invaded Egypt. Guess why that was? The french and english governments wanted them too. All three started that then Eisenhower had NATO comdemn the actions.

And don't start this "You americans blah blah blah" bull. There are stupid people in any country anywhere. No matter how nice and peaceful the rest of the people are. I'm an American and personally I rather like it.


The POINT of this topic was to discuss the Tavor TAR-21 on it's own merits. The rest of this stuff is just stupid politics that have no need to be discussed here.

I would like to see the TAR-21 in game eventually. I think it'd make a different addition to the game.

[Rowley]

we were on the loser side of WWII
and this fact, my friend, still has EXTREMELY huge consequences in our world...
ahh, the topic, yes i would like to see Tavor in INF.

[Snakeye]

I know rocks can be deadly - the two Israeli teens were killed with stones and rocks(if I'm informed correctly, which I usually doubt, I don't believe what the news say..), but there have to be better ways than rifle rounds; I mean tear-gas etc proved to be quite successful against unprotected, and I suppose when someone throws stones, he doesn't have a gas-mask.

I too have the greatest respect for the IDF, they are among the best in the world, but that doesn't mean everything they do is right (anyone remember the Wehrmacht??) and shooting into populated areas with tanks and rockets doesn't seem a good anti-terrorist measure to me.

And if I might add, the IDF WERE the foreigner in 1947(or was it 1948??). That the NATO/Western countries supported their wars is obvious - M60 tanks, Centurions etc weren't built in Israel(though heavily modified there).

Snakeye :D

PS: Just read that again, and want to clarify:
I do NOT compare the IDF to the Wehrmacht (or any Nazi organisation); I just wanted to point out that an excellent military force doesn't always do the right things..

[DeadeyeDan[ToA]]

"Not a single European (except Netherlands who uses Canadian Diemaco) country uses M16's or any other US firearms."

IIRC, the SAS uses M4s. Just in case you didn't know, the SAS is British, and arguably the best special operations group in the world.

[Nerf Herder]

I personally want to see an M4 in. I just want the Tavor TAR-21 as well.

[Luminuis]

The more guns the merrier, give us an M4, and an M4 Spec-Ops edition! (that is so awesome, so many damn attachments, scope, laser, flashlight...ehehehe!)


And how about a big shoulde rmounted RL while we're at it?

[DarkBls]

The more guns the merrier

I agree :D

[Luminuis]

And how about the M60, a G8 and a Steyr AUG-HBAR! (all SAW/GPMG)

And now some SMGS...:
FN P90 5.7x28mm

FN P90-SD 5.7x28mm

HK 53A3 5.56x45mm

HK MP5/10 10x25mm

HK MP5/10-SD 10x25mm

HK MP5/40 .40 S&W

HK MP5/40-SD .40 S&W

HK MP5A4 9x19mm

HK MP5K-PDW 9x19mm

HK MP5K-PDW-SD 9x19mm

HK MP5SD5 9x19mm

HK PDW 4.6x30mm

HK UMP45 .45 ACP

HK UMP45-SD .45 ACP

IMI Uzi 9x19mm

IMI Tavor Micro 5.56x45mm

VZ61 Skorpion 7.65x17mm

Z-M LR300 M/L 5.56x45mm

And also some ARs:Kalashnikov AK-47 7.62x39mm

Kalashnikov AKM 7.62x39mm

Kalashnikov AKS-74 5.45x39mm

Beretta AR70/90 5.56x45mm

CIS SAR21 5.56x45mm

Colt M16A2 5.56x45mm

Colt M4A1 5.56x45mm

Colt M4A1 SOPMOD 5.56x45mm

Colt M4A1-SP 5.56x45mm

Colt M4A1-SD .300 Whisper

Diemaco C7A1 5.56x45mm

Enfield L85A1 5.56x45mm

FA MAS G2 5.56x45mm

HK G11K3 4.92x34mm

HK G36/7 7.62x51mm

HK G36K 5.56x45mm

HK G3A3 7.62x51mm

HK G3KA4 7.62x51mm

IMI Tavor 5.56x45mm

KAC SR25K-SP "Widow Maker" 7.62x51mm

KAC SR25K-SD "Widow Maker" .338 Whisper

M14 7.62x51mm

SIG 551-SWAT 5.56x45mm

Steyr ACR 5.56mm Flechette

Steyr AUG A2 5.56x45mm

Steyr AUG A2-SP 5.56x45mm

Vektor CR21 5.56x45mm

Z-M LR300 SR 5.56x45mm

and how about some more shotties?:

Franchi SPAS-12 12 Gauge

Franchi SPAS-15 12 Gauge

Neostead NS2000 12 Gauge

Pancor Jackhammer 12 Gauge

And for all those Snipers:

Accuracy Int. L96A1 7.62x51mm

Accuracy Int. AWS-SP 7.62x51mm

Acc. Int. AWM - Super Magnum .338 Lapua Mag

Barrett M82A1 12.7x99mm

Dragunov SVD 7.62x54mmR

Remington M700 AWR 7mm Remington Magnum

Steyr Scout 7.62x51mm

T.C.I. M89-SP 7.62x51mm

Walther WA2000 .300 Win Mag

And now all thos handgun freaks!:
Beretta 92FS 9x19mm

Beretta 92FS-SD 9x19mm

Beretta Cougar 8045F .45 ACP

Colt M1911A1 .45 ACP

CZ 100B 9x19mm

FN FiveseveN 5.7x28mm

FN FiveseveN-SD 5.7x28mm

FN GP35 (HP) 9x19mm

Glock 18C 9x19mm

Glock 20 10x25mm

Glock 20-SD 10x25mm

Glock 31 .357SIG

HK Mark 23 .45 ACP

HK Mark 23-SD .45 ACP

HK USP .40 S&W

HK USP-SD .40 S&W

MRI Desert Eagle .357 Magnum

MRI Desert Eagle .50 AE

S&W Sigma 40E .40 S&W

SIG P220 .45 ACP

SIG P226 .40 S&W

Revolvers

Taurus Raging Bull .454 Casull




Sorry for any repitions of guns already on the armory list, I just copied this off my friends CT site.

[Luminuis]

Here's a better list on a different friends site:

Primary weapons.


22LR
Sturm Ruger 10/22 (Sniper Rifle)
7.65mm
SKORPION
SKORPION/SD
5.7x28mm
FN P90 ver2
FN P90/SD ver2
9mm
HK MP5-PWD ver2.0
HK MP5-PDW/SD
HK MP5A4 ver2.0
HK MP5A4/SD
HK MP5A2 Sure-Fire
HK MP5SD5 ver2.0
IMI UZI ver2.0
IMI UZI/SD Wood Stock
Colt M16 9mmSMG
M45 Swedish-K SMG ver2.0
M45 Swedish-K SMG/SD
Bizon SMG
S&M M76 SMG
Beretta M12S SMG
Colt M635 SMG
M635/SD Beretta
WALTHER MPK
AUG-9mm SMG
L2A3
L34A1SD
INGRAM M11(MAC11)
HK MP5K
HK MP5SD4
HK MP5SD6
HK MP5A4/SD Tactical
HK MP5SD 1977
HK MP5A3

9mmx18
KILN SMG
10mm
H&K MP10A2 ver2.0
H&K MP10A2/SD ver2.0
45ACP
H&K UMP ver2.0
H&K UMP/SD ver2.0
M1A1 SMG
9mmx39VSS
9-A-91 SMG
5.56x45mm
Colt M16A2 ver2.0
Colt M16+M203 ver3
Colt M4A1 ver2.0
Colt M4A1/SD ver2.0
Colt M4A1+Beta C-MAG
Colt M4A1 Master Key
HK G36K ver3
STEYR AUG ver2.0
SIG 551SWAT ver2.0
FA-MAS F1 ver2.0
GALIL-ARM ver2.0
GALIL-SAR ver2.0
GALIL-MAR
Sturm Ruger Mini14 ver2.0
FN FNC ver2.0
AR18
H&K 53
STONER 63A
FN MINIMI ver2.0
M249-PARA ver2.0
Colt XM177E2
Z-M Weapon LR300ML
M4A1 SOP-MOD
M4A1/SD SOP-MOD
M4A1 with M203
TYPE 89Rifle
Stoner XM23Rifle
SIG551Rifle
SA80 Carbine
RUGER AC-556 RIFLE
DAEWOO K2 ASSAULT RIFLE
Bushmaster SMG
Bushmaster/SD SMG
HK33E
HK33E SG-1
M16A1 20roundsType
M16A1 30roundsType
AK5
G36
STONER SR-16
HK GR2S Rifle
SR88A
SCS70/90
M16A3
HK G36C CARBINE

5.45mm
Kalashnikov AK74 ver2.0
AK74+Grenade Launcher
AKS74U Krinkov ver2.0
7.62x39mm
Kalashnikov AK47S ver2.0
Kalashnikov AK47 ver2.0
Kalashnikov AK47M
Kalashnikov RPK
Type86 Rifle
SAKO M90
TYPE56 Rifle

7.62x51mm
H&K G3A3 ver2.0
HK G3A3/SD
H&K G3A3 Grenade Launcher
H&K G3 SG-1
FN FAL ver2.0
M14 ver2.0
STONER SR-25 (Sniper Rifles)
STONER SR-25/SD(Sniper Rifles)
H&K PSG-1(Sniper Rifles)
M60 ver2
M60E3 ver2.0
FN MAG
M134 MINI GUN ver2.0
H&K MSG90(Sniper Rifles)
L96A1(Sniper Rifles)
Mauser M93 (Sniper Rifles)
TYPE 64Rifle
PGM UR-COMMANDO2 SNIPER RIFLE
PGM UR-COMMANDO2 SNIPER RIFLE/SD
M24 SNIPER RIFLE
HK MC51 SMG
M21 SNIPER RIFLE
AW Covert

30-06
M1 Garand
BAR
7.62x54mm
DRAGUNOV
300 Winchester
WA2000(Sniper Rifles)
4.73X33mm(Caseless)
H&K G11 K2
50 Browning
BARRET M95(Sniper Rifles)
12g Shotguns
Ithaca M37
Benelli M1
Benelli M4
SPAS12
Street Sweeper
USAS12
M870
BENELLI M3

40mmGrenade
M79 ver2.0
MGL-MK1


Secondary or backup weapons:




K-BAR U.S.M.C Knife
STRIDER Combat Knife
22LR
Sturm Ruger Mk2/SD
5.7x28mm
FN Five-Seven ver2.0
FN Five-Seven/SD ver2.0
38SP
S&W M36 Chiefs Special
New Nanbu Pistol
S&W M10
380ACP
Beretta84F
9mm
Beretta 92FS ver2.0
Beretta 92FS/SD ver2.0
Beretta 92FS INOX ver2.0
Double 92F INOX ver2.0
Beretta 93R
Beretta 93R/SD
SIG226 ver2
WALTHER P99
Cz75 ver2.0
Browning Hi-PowerMk3 ver2
Glock17 ver2.0
H&K P7M13
Luger P08
Walther P38
Mauser M1916Mauser
M1932+Stock/Holster
Mini UZI/SD ver2.0
STEYR TMP/SD ver2
STEYER TMP
Beretta92F Brigadier Elite
SIG P210
UZI-Pistol
IMI Jericho941

9mmx18
Makarov
Stechkin (APS)
Stechkin+Stock (APS)
Stechkin/SD (APB)
0.40
Cz100
Glock35
H&K USP40 ver2.0
H&K USP40/SD ver2.0
7.62mmx25
Tokarev
45ACP
H&K Mk23 ver2.0
H&K Mk23/SD ver2.0
M1911A1
FBI-SP
Beretta M8045 ver2
M3 Grease Gun SMG
S&W M6405
357 Magnum
Colt PYTHON ver3
Colt King Cobra
S&W M19(Combat Magnum)
MATEBA M2006
Desert Eagle
Colt ANACONDA/Camo with Scope
44 Magnum
S&W M29 ver2
44 AUTO MAG
Ruger Super BlackHawk
454 Casull
TAURAS Raging Bull
12g Shotguns
Thunder Five
Ithaca M37S
4.6x30mm
H&K PDW ver2.0
5.56x45mm
Rocky Mountain Patriot Pistol
7.62x51mm
Lone Eagle
Others
Master Key ShotGun
M203 Grenade Launcher
M203 Grenade Launcher
AK Grenade Launcher
H&K79 Grenade Launcher

[Luminuis]

Originally posted by Gabriel
The more guns the merrier


Well, I wasn't KIDDING!

[poaw]

I want the SAR-21 instead of the AUG.

[Luminuis]

You're missing the point poaw, why not have BOTH of them in there?

[HanD_of_DarKNesS]

The team has already stated that there is a selection of weapons they have planned for implementation by 3.0 in addition to those listed in the Armoury (of which we only have about half).

That being the case, I say we wait and see what they have planned. Suggestions are quite welcome, but let's not get too riled up adding more weapons to the list, when half the weapons on the list aren't even in-game yet.

[ShakKen]

'SD' is NOT a valid abbreviation for a suppressed weapon. The only gun that has the abbreviation SD is the MP5SD series with the integral suppressor. If you mount a screw on suppressor on an MP5, that does NOT make it an MP5SD. Nor does it make any other weapon as such. It's fallout from Rainbow 6.

And before anyone says there is an M9-SD, I know there is. But this doesn't refer to the gun, it's the suppressor itself.

The MAC 11 and the M11 are also two differant guns.

[Snakeye]

Take all that weapons in, and I'll need an hour of loadout choosing before playing five minutes of INF. Apart from that there has to be someone to model, skin and code the weapon, and that usually takes some time. I don't know if there can be anything like too much weapons, but that list comes close to this.

ShakKen:
What's the difference between an MAC11 and an M11? Always thougt MAC was the designation of the initial manufacturer and Ingram called it M10 or so.(I'm sure this is complete BS)

Snakeye :D

[ShakKen]

The weapon is more correctly referred to as the Ingram M10. As it was Gordon Ingram who designed the weapon. The first company to manufacture it was Military Armament Corp, who produced it as the MAC-10. Half a dozen other companies made theirs under the designation M10 or(Ingram Model-10) which is what Ingram intended. The MAC-11 is a compact M10 that fires .380ACP manufactured by MAC(obviously). This gun is nearly identical to the M10 save for the fact it looks like a miniature of the original gun in contrast.

The M11 is based on the M10, but it has a narrower, and longer frame. The factory L-stock on the M10 was changed to a Y-stock for the M11. The M11 also has a flatter cocking handle with no groove in the center. First manufactured by Cobray if I'm not mistaken.

http://www.mac10.org/macpix/m109profile.jpg
M10/9

http://www.mac10.org/macpix/m11mac380.jpg
MAC11

http://www.mac10.org/macpix/macswdm11905.jpg
M11/9

[Snakeye]

Yep, looks different..

But would have fitted better in that other post with the MAC10 discussion..

Snakeye :D

[DarkBls]

the SAS is British, and arguably the best special operations group in the world.

Humm, we can discuss that ;)

[Reefslayer]

Getting a bit political here!
Commenting on something as complex as the troubles in the middle east is dodgy ground as far as I'm concerned. Especially given the high passions that are bound to come out. We lost site of the original purpose of the thread !
Looks like IMI make some fine weaponry. I like to see weapons that are in general service with the main armies around the world (bring on the FAMAS hehe.) That SAR 21 does look tempting though...

[C@RN!VORE]

Well, i just want to close this political thing.
The crisis started about 8-7 month and at the beging there were crowd of people throwing stones at the soldiers.
By direct order the IDF soldiers used gas and rubber bullets, and belive me that its true, cous if we were truly using tanks and chopers(im talking about the first month) many civilianswere dead now.
but NOWDAYS there are NO stones!
the Phalestinians use the Tanzim, the "police" and thier force 17(a commando units) so its realy not childrens with stones-uts soldiers with guns, mortars and Anty tank rockets.
I hate to wake up in the morning and to see and horible newspaper, people are killing from BOTH sides and no one is happy with that, i can promise you!
I hope this is the end of this cous the real topic is about the Tavor and not politcs, thats why we have offtopic, right?
im just hoping that this weapon will find its way to the armory, the sooner the better.

[Snakeye]

I didn't believe it was kids with stones vs IDF. I still do believe there are many civilians killed on both sides, the Palestinians by rockets from helicopters and the Israelis by acts of terrorism. I only hope that the crisis will calm down as soon as possible, and that serius peace talks take place again.

Enough of politics..

I too like the TAR21 from the looks, though I don't know what it's worth in real combat, but that's the problem with most new rifles.
I don't know if I really want one in INF, in fact I'd rather have an AUG, simply because it's the AR of the army of my country (Austria). I don't think it's the best AR ever designed, but somehow I just don't get the troubles Australia and other countries have with it, since I never heard any Austrian soldier complain about jams, ADs or similar (I know many who served, since in Austria we have military service for every man, except he isn't fit for military service, which is my excuse..).

>awaiting flame from other members

Snakeye :D

[poaw]

Screw the AUG with it's crappy backup iron sights, and it's lack of a shroud over the barrel.

This is the only weapon we need with intregal 1.5X scope.

[Luminuis]

Prefer the AUG over the Tavor,


And I appologize for not editing those, my friend did that as a list of guns for his mod in RS, and there is such a thing as SD, A SD gun is a gun with SubSonic ammo(like .308 Whisper) and also a Supressor, a supressor or subsonic alone is supressed.


And also, IT WAS A JOKE, I would LOVE to see tha many guns in INF, but the mod is already 40mbs that would bring it up to strike force size! without the map packs too!

[Snakeye]

WOW, didn't expect to find anyone over here with a positive image of the AUG. I suppose the AUG has such a bad reputation over here, because..

- the Australians keep having ADs and so..

- usually the only AUG fans are newbies/one-timers asking for one because CS/Serpentine/TO or so have one..

Also it seems to be unpopular among the INF team itself.

I personally wouldn't want to carry one into combat for personal reasons(I dislike bullpups, I prefer weapons with a trigger group -> the Austrian version doesn't have one), but if I had to take a bullpup, AUG would be second choice after FAMAS.

The newer desings just aren't tested enough IMO. The AUG is in service since 1977 - and in Austria there are no problems with it; you can believe this part, since the military doesn't have a very supportive press over here(has something to do with WWII and popular military-sceptic politicians) so the Austrian army can't afford any bad news about ADs; if the AUG was unsafe, we would have replaced it long ago..

Snakeye :D

[Luminuis]

I like the AUG because it's not a BAD bullpup, for a bullpup, I also prefer guns with trigger groups but if I ws forced to take a bullpup it would be FAMAS first and then if I couldn't get one of those probably an AUG,


I don't see what's wrong with the AUG, mainly because there isn't much that can be, the designs good, it's solidly built, and the ammo isn't the kind that bounces off your forehead.

[Snakeye]

Yep solidly built is right. I read they drove over a AUG with a heavy truck once; the rifle was still in a condition good enough to be fired without the risk of harm to the user - though I think the scope was broken..

Snakeye :D

[Luminuis]

Oh and who said the Iron sights sucked too? What does the M16 have? what do almost all guns have? that's right, Iron Diopter Sights, and yeah, I heard about that too :D How cool is that! I wanna see an OICW driven over by a heavy truck (cruch squish splat) HAHA!

[Nerf Herder]

The M-16 doesn't use Diopter sights.

[Luminuis]

Really? it doesn't have Iron sights? *will have to go look at his, does so*




*returns* Hmm, I dunno, if you say so. But Ig uess you're right Nerf, sorry aobut that, I've been a bit out of it today..

[Dr.Dase]

What? I'm pretty sure the AR15 series uses diopter sights! At least evey one i've seen, if it wasn't a diopter, how would you explain the sight being so close to your eye, it's in the carrying handle, and if you would have a standard slit type sight, you wouldn't be able to hit ****, look at other weapons with these sights, most common the AK47 series, the sights are like halfway down the rifle, not next to your eye....

This might just be me mistaken, since i'm swedish, and it might be the names i'm confusing, but i'm sure the M16 has diopter sights.

[jaunty]

Do you know what a dipoter sight is?

These are diopters from various HK weapons. (bonus points to Shakken if he can tell me which sights are from what type of weapon)

http://www.hkpro.com/sights1.jpg
http://www.hkpro.com/sights2.jpg
http://www.hkpro.com/sights3.jpg
http://www.hkpro.com/sights4.jpg


This is the view through a Diopter sight.

http://www.hkpro.com/sights5.jpg


Show me a milspec AR-15 with any of these on it and i'll make you a millionaire.

EDIT: For a little more information (bugger all actualy) go to http://www.hkpro.com/sights.htm

[poaw]

. Rejecting a gun because it looks futuristic is one of the reasons I hate the US Military. They're very stupid about guns needing to not look futuristic. Which is why we wasted money on M-14s before switching to the M-16s.

IIRC The M16 hadn't even been invented when the M14 entered service, so it would be quite difficult to equip it's forces with a weapon that didn't exist.
At any rate, what do you mean by they have a rule about weapons not looking futuristic? This looks pretty futuristic.

[ShakKen]

The first and second pic shows a HK rifle diopter. Most probably a G3 or HK33 series rifles.

The third pic shows a HK machinegun aperture off a HK21 or similar.

The fourth pic is the subgun diopter off an MP5.

Only thing wrong with HK sights is you need a screwdriver to adjust windage, and the fork tool to adjust elevation.

poaw: Welding a VCR to an M4 is not what I'd call 'futuristic'.

[Rowley]

The M16 hadn't even been invented when the M14 entered service, so it would be quite difficult to equip it's forces with a weapon that didn't exist.
You are wrong here, ArmaLite developed AR-10 (essentially M16, only in 7,62NATO) in 1955. In 1957 US military put out the specs for the new assault rifle: max. weight 6 lbs and ballistic properties equal to .30 cal up to 300 yards. One year later this was upped to 500 yards. ArmaLite responded with AR-15 in new caliber: 222 Rem. Special, the name was later changed to 223 Remington. In march 1958 the gun was tested successfully but the military adopted M14 few months later. ArmaLite lost interest in AR15 and sold the licence to Colt. We all know what happened few years later...

[Rowley]

IIRC, the SAS uses M4s. Just in case you didn't know, the SAS is British, and arguably the best special operations group in the world.
I was talking about European countries and by that i mean their ARMED FORCES. Standard assault rifle of British Army is SA80. Special commando types like SAS use a wide variety of weapons, they even use AK's if the situation requires that.

[ShakKen]

The SAS prefer the colt commando actually.

[DeadeyeDan[ToA]]

Well if you meant "standard assault rifle for the entire armed forces," you should have said so. Saying "Not a single European (except Netherlands who uses Canadian Diemaco) country uses M16's or any other US firearms." just isn't correct.

And if American weapons are so bad, why does the SAS have a history of using them? 1911s, Garands, Thompsons, Brownings, Barretts, Remingtons, and at least 3 M16 varients. Keep in mind that they've used these while purposely avoiding some poorer made British guns, like the Sten and SA80 (FYI, they only use the SA80 when disguised as regular troops).

[The_Fur]

except Netherlands who uses Canadian Diemaco
? sorry, is Diemaco another weord for the C7? because last I checked that was what our military used as it's main weapon.

[poaw]

Yes it is Fur.

The Canadian have this thing about designing their own weapons. (IE, They don't):)

[Luminuis]

Diemaco=M-16


LOL.


What a rip off.

[The_Fur]

The c7 is an improved m16. It's better quality then the US built stuff that's why we chose it.

[Nerf Herder]

C7 IS an M-16. The US has flat out given them M16s quite often. There is no improving involved. The difference is the C7A1 is what's in service and it still has FA in the trigger group. Where as the US version M16A2 is semi/3rd burst only.

[Snakeye]

According to a very reliable source, there is indeed a difference betwen C7 and M16A2 (OK, I admit, the source is JA2, so don't believe this until Gryphon or ShakKen say so..):

The C7 has some kind of plate that better deflects the ejected rounds, so lefties won't get them into their face. There are said to be some other differences, but don't ask me what - I'm not even sure about the first one..

Snakeye :D

[Nerf Herder]

From what I can tell from checking the Diemaco site and other places there is very little difference. A few cosmetic changes. Diemaco probably offers better deals and since Semi/FA is the regular trigger group for the C7 more countries would pick it up. The US is kinda odd in having Semi/3rdBurst.

[ShakKen]

Deimaco collaborated with Colt in the development of the M16A2.

The C7 is built domestically in Canada.

[Luminuis]

So? It's an M16 with a few slight modifications and a Made In Canada sticker.

[jaunty]

Yes, it is.

But its Canadian, so I like it more already :)

There are also domestic models of the M4 and Minimi made. Called the C8 and C9 respectivly.

[HanD_of_DarKNesS]

Canada ROCKS!!! (look at my avatar :D )

Yeah, I was actually looking at the Canadian Forces website recently and was interested to see that all the Diemaco weapons we use are all renamed (possibly slightyly modified) versions of other weapons (such as the M16 and M249). I'd like to see them design a weapon from scratch, but that's doubtful.

Canadian Forces (http://www.army.dnd.ca/home/index_e.html)
Diemaco (http://www.diemaco.com/)

From the info on the Canadian Forces site, the C7A1 we use here are all flat-top recievers with a mounted scope.

[Nerf Herder]

Yeah. Some people don't like the AR family's iron sights.

[Dr.Dase]

But the M16 series sights are quite similar, right? Anyone got any pics of them?

[The_Fur]

M16 uses iron sights, our c7's (well for the marines anyway) are all equiped with scopes.

[Dr.Dase]

And what is iron sights? i thought they were just the standard sights on the weapon, as opposed to scopes etc.

This is the problem with languages, i don't know what these things are called in english :)

[The_Fur]

iron sights are the standard sights built into the rifle, in Infiltration when you don't use a scope or aimpoint you are using the iron sights.

[ShakKen]

'Open sights', might be a less confusing term to use.

[HanD_of_DarKNesS]

This is the standard C7A1 as the Canadian Forces (and others) use them, with a scope as standard issue:
http://www.army.dnd.ca/images/photoimages/photofull/72.jpg

This as opposed to the typical open sights (which you can see by aiming with the M16A2 in INF without the ACOG scope attached).

[Nerf Herder]

My question is why bother having the front part come up if you're not going to use it?

[ShakKen]

Because Westerners love to be inneficient ;)

[poaw]

Because, incase of CQB, they would like to atleast pretend they still have open sights. :)

PS Pretending is fun.

[Dr.Dase]

Yeah, but what about the M16 iron sights make these non diopter sights?!? Correct me if im wrong, but isn't a diopter sight a small hole close to your eye, and a post at the far end of the weapon?

[ShakKen]

Diopters are double rings

While in a normal post and aperture sight, you simply point the post at what you want to shoot, with a diopter, you frame the rings as evenly as you can to ensure the rounds go dead center.

http://www.hkpro.com/sights5.jpg

[Dr.Dase]

Aha, so that's the difference, thanks for the help :)

Well then, what do you call the M16 type sights, with a ring and post? Except for calling them iron sights i mean :)

[ShakKen]

The unnabreviated version: dual aperture rear sight, click adjustable for windage and elevation, post frontsight between protective ears, rotation adjustable for elevation.

[C@RN!VORE]

How the hell this topic, that was talking about the Tavor and how much we want this weapon(right guys?) became a Iron sights topic?
its really strange how quick a topic could change in here

[Luminuis]

Get used to it C@RN.

[Nerf Herder]

It happens. Besides the Tavor suggestion was settled a while ago I thought. It came across to me as "probably not anytime soon if at all". So maybe if they get far enough along and their weapons modelers get bored we'll see one.

[poaw]

Didn't ShakKen say something about the TAVOR having a flaw in it's optics?

I think the SAR-21 would be a better choice, it can fit most anything you'd want to put on it, and it even has decent backup iron sights. :)

[Luminuis]

The SAR-21 has a flaw in it too, I'd have to look it up, I prefer something tried and true, perhaps the G-36k? The Steyr Aug is a Bullpup, Why not it instead?

[poaw]

Because the Steyr AUG sucks.

BTW could you please look up the flaw in the SAR-21 for me?

[Luminuis]

Why don't you, and then look up why the AUG sucks for me. :D

If you're so Enamored with it, then you tell me.


I don't know of any real problems with the AUG, if it's maintained and cared for.

[poaw]

It has poor backup sights, it lacks a shroud over the barrel, it doesn't have trigger grouping per se you have to just pull the trigger lightly, if you put the magazines in certain chemicals they melt, and the Australian Army has problems with ADs, it's lower weight makes it less controllable when firing burst, you have to remove it from a firing position to reload.

[ShakKen]

Backup sights? What backup sights? You mean those turdly little cubes that Steyr sticks on top of the Swarovski? I always thought those were for scratching my back :rollseyes:

[jaunty]

Thats what thats for? I thought it was for scratching my nuts when I couldn't be bothered reaching down.

The AUG is also @$$-heavy, which doesn't help the muzzle rise at all.

[The_Fur]

so basically the aug sucks and looks fugly (especially compared to weapons like the TAR-21 and SAR-21

[Nerf Herder]

Optics are something people have differing opinions on what is good, and they can generally be replaced.

[Antikryzt]

TAVOR...let's have it! From the research I just did about it, one of them sure is needed in INF. I suggest that if *any* bullpup weapon is going to be implemented, we should stay away from that crispy overdone AUG, for INF is "cutting edge," no? If it comes to the point where we have a full arsenal to choose from, of course people should have the wide choice from even among the bullpups, just make tavor our first one. Now where's that uzi?

[C@RN!VORE]

More israeli weapon please!
lets start with the Uzi and then well have the tavor!

[Trak]

Originally posted by Nerf Herder
The main reasons I say all places should have their own firearms is because you never know when you might have trouble importing guns from another place

I disagree, I think that Allied nations should keep as many common weapons as possible. Otherwise if we run into a serious situation we ( allied nations ) could suffer severe setbacks due to logistical problems. Parts, maintence equipment/ routines, and ammunition should be standardized on the basic infantry level so that supplies can go where they are needed when they are needed as quickly as possible.

[Nerf Herder]

I said nothing about varying ammunition. And sometimes allies don't stay allies.

[Hannibal1]

starting at the most recent:
"I disagree, I think that Allied nations should keep as many common weapons as possible. Otherwise if we run into a serious situation we ( allied nations ) could suffer severe setbacks due to logistical problems. Parts, maintence equipment/ routines, and ammunition should be standardized on the basic infantry level so that supplies can go where they are needed when they are needed as quickly as possible."

There's no arguing with this point. One big flaw of NATO, as i saw it, was that they refused to standardize weapons, ammunition, and equipment, creating a potential theatre-wide logistical disaster.

"poaw: Welding a VCR to an M4 is not what I'd call 'futuristic'."
hehe, my thoughts exactly. However, he has a valid point if you look at the plans for the OICW and such.

About the United States' allies using U.S. made assault weapons: Many of America's allies do not use the same weapons. I don't think the allies that use American rifles do so because of any superiority in quality, but because the situation which exists makes it convinient to make do with American guns.

Recent news in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict(this is not an opinion): Israel has bombed a Palestinian-populated area in retaliation for a suicide bombing carried out by a Palestinian which was in turn meant to be retaliation for the killing for five practically defenseless palestinian police in a remote guard station(actually, it was a tin shack). I just wanted to point that chain of events out because it clearly shows the stupidity of both the Israelis and the Palestinians.

[Trak]

"I just wanted to point that chain of events out because it clearly shows the stupidity of both the Israelis and the Palestinians."

/political rant on/

I agree with that on a basic level. On another level this stuff is way beyond stupidity. It is almost like a hereditary animosity now. I honestly don't think that they will ever have peace because it has been going on for way too long ( I seem to remember something about the jawbone of an ass ) and there is too much blood between them. These people have always been at each others throats and there seems to be no end in sight.

\political rant off\

"There's no arguing with this point. One big flaw of NATO, as i saw it, was that they refused to standardize weapons, ammunition, and equipment, creating a potential theatre-wide logistical disaster."

Yep, Warsaw would have kicked NATO's butt on this level, probably costing us heavily in an extended engagement. I also believe that NATO's reliance on overly complicated weapons and technical systems ( at least the US ones ) would have caused problems too. Our stuff probably would not perform well in an extended egagement. Any one remember the problems our M16's had in Vietnam? That is because the M16 field strips into over fifteen parts with the smallest part ( the firing pin ) being easily misplaced/damaged. Also it only took a small amount of debris to cause the weapon to jam completely. The AK 47 on the other hand field strips into about seven peices, is brutally simple in its design and can operate reliably with a bucket of mud inside of it. This pretty much illustrates the differences between American and Russian gear across the board.

[Nerf Herder]

We all used the same ammunition. That's why there is 5.56NATO 7.62NATO 9mmNATO....get my point? The variation in the weapons was because each country needed a different type of gun. Or are you going to tell me the the Netherlands need a gun that's good for the desert?

And you're wrong that is not the reason the M-16 had problems in Vietnam. There were a few reasons we had problems.

1.) No cleaning kits were issued and the troops were told that M-16s were "self-cleaning" weapons.

2.) The chamber was not chromed so that allowed it to deteriorate faster.

3.)The military switched to lower quality gun powder which caused excessive fouling.

The AK was also notoriously inaccurate, and had the trouble of the safety making a loud "click" which ruined some ambushes. That's not to say that the AK is a bad gun it's just not great.

[Puncher]

There are a few additional problems with the first M16 version:

1) The flash hider was open in front, which could cause it to hang on grass, brush, small branches and similar. The M16A1 has a more normal flash hider which is closed in front.

2) The ejection port was always open so the bolt was completely exposed to the elements (weather, dust), which in addition to the high susceptibility to dirt, could cause fouling. The M16A1 has a cover over the ejection port.

3) The gas tapped from the barrel is directly forced back into the bolt to operate it, which means the smoke and schmuck of the powder is also directed back into the bolt, which causes it to become quite dirty after prolonged shooting. This is still the same, even with the M16A2. The G36, for example, stores the gas in a small metal "bulb" in the front, and then lets the gas back to the bolt. That means that only the bulb can get dirty, but the bolt stays completely clean (even after thousands of rounds fired without cleaning).

4) If the gun gets a bit dirty and the bolt doesn't lock properly, there is no practical way to quickly force the bolt. The M16A1 has a handle on the sidew for you to ram the bolt closed. As an interesting sideline: In CS this handle is pulled to work the bolt, instead of the T-handle behind the carrying handle.

5) Ammunition was being used at a horrendous rate. The M16A1 has a reduced theoretical rate of fire (about 100 to 200 rounds per minute lower), while the M16A2 has the 3-round burst instead of the full auto setting.

[Trak]

"And you're wrong that is not the reason the M-16 had problems in Vietnam."

So tell me Nerf Herder, how am I wrong? I know for a fact that many M16's failed to function in Vietnam because they were reassembled wrong or damaged after a feildstripping. What you stated is just more problems with the M16, I don't see how what you mentioned invalidates my statement.

[Nerf Herder]

It's very possible that that occured. However, the majority of the time they didn't even fieldstrip the guns because they thought they were self-cleaning. So there was no reason to open them up. The things I mentioned were what caused the majority of the breaks.

And puncher the G36 uses a system derived from the newer AR-18 system. If the army had been a little smarter we probably would have ended up with AR-18s instead of AR-15s.

[Hannibal1]

"The variation in the weapons was because each country needed a different type of gun. Or are you going to tell me the the Netherlands need a gun that's good for the desert? "

The idea of NATO was that each country would contribute to fighting on a cohesive front, instead of each country trying to defend only its own territory. Thus, troops from the Netherlands wouldn't necessarily be fighting in the Netherlands which is exactly why the whole alliance needed a standard weapon to simplify the logistics that is coming from every country, but only going to one front.

[C@RN!VORE]

Well my friend, you should check your your source of information.
We DON'T attack villages or houses of civilian wit no reason.
The last airstrike was against Phalastinains police forces and mortar facility.
I myself against this attack, cous i think it miss the point of hitting the people that responsible to the killing of innocent people, that went to the mall to make their weekend shopping.
i see a war coming, a big war, and after that, when new leaders will take the place of the current leaders, which cant take the brave disition of peace proses.
I think the two nations need to fell a war, to realize that peace is the only way to live.
It sound terrible, and i hope im wrong, but the way things are going right now, this is only thing i see.

Btw-WE WANT TAVOR!!!!

[Hannibal1]

I can barely understand what you're saying Carnivore, but here goes...
"Well my friend, you should check your your source of information."

My source is a major American newspaper called The Washington Post. You can argue with them if you think they're guilty of false reporting.

[Trak]

Most of the adult males in my family at the time of Vietnam volunteered for service. I have heard all of them at one time or another complain about what a crappy weapon the M16 was and how it was a pain in the ass to feild strip it properly ie put it back together in a cleaner working condition. Maybe because they weren't stupid hippy draftees but southern guys who grew up around guns that they weren't dumb enough to believe this whole 'self cleaning' routine. I would never believe that myself because I have grown up around firearms. That self cleaning thing is about as true as a 'self cleaning' oven. I am not saying that the military didn't make this claim, I am just saying that if they did they were making a huge mistake that cost alot of people there lives.

[Dr.Dase]

What i've heard of the M16 in Vietnam, the major problem was that the weapon hadn't been tested with field ammunition. It was tested with a better, less fouling powder that expanded faster but gave a lower gas pressure in total. The standard issue ammunition used by troops expanded slower, and had higher gas pressure in total. This made the brass cartridge expand, as they do when fired, but with the standard powder, the high gas pressure made the cartridge keep expanded when the gas reached the action thingy (don't know the name in english, you know, where the gas is extracted to cycle the action) and thus the friction between the cartridge and chamber was way too high, and the extractor either tore through the cartridge base or jump the slit altogether. But the bolt was still moving back as supposed to, and stripped a round from the magazine, and tried to ram it in, but just stuck on the cartridge already in the chamber. Then, the unlucky trooper had to extract the magazine, cycle the bolt to drop the unspent round stuck, and use the cleaning rod to ram the spent cartridge out of the chamber. Repeat as necessary :)

Another thing that also caused the cartridges to stick in the chamber, was a small mismatch between the original Armalite rifles and the Colt rifles. It seems like the Colt rifles were simply copied of the Armalite, and the chamber had a miniscule change in diameter, not much, but still enough to make the cartridge stick even more.

This was remedied by chroming the chamber, but gave birth to another problem, the cartridge was extracted to easy, and the bolt went back too fast, and wore the back of the reciever down, and had to be fixed with additional recoil absorbers.

Note, this is only what i've read, don't know if any of it is true, or just bogus, but it makes sense......