Go Back   Computer Forums > Welcome To Computer Forums .org > Social Lounge | Off Topic
Click Here to Login
Join Computer forums Today


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-02-2005, 02:27 AM   #51
BSOD
 
Giancarlo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,788
Send a message via AIM to Giancarlo
Default Re: war talk gian

Quote:
Originally Posted by matt
yes are eqiupment sucks but thats down to our sucky goverment building it cheaply not our forces, also we use the SA80 which is a bloody great weopon
Yep. The SA80 was the one that jams all the time.

http://world.guns.ru/assault/as22-e.htm

"In conclusion, I cant say I know what went wrong when the SA-80 was made, the design in theory would appear to be of near kalashnikov simplicity, maybe it is all the fault of the famous British trade unions? For a modern assault rifle, the SA-80 is uncomfortable to carry (especially concerning the position of the cocking handle and its desire to slip into bruising your arm on long tabs), the rifle is too heavy for its size (it even has a weight in the forward hand guard to balance the weapon), and its reliability and general durability are sub-standard to an alarming degree. I have had the mis-pleasure of seeing people breaking off warn top covers and seeing trigger mechanism housing pins falling out near at will. On the other side of things the rifle is marvellously accurate on the range, and so long as it is kept near 100% clean and well oiled it will perform well. However everybody other than the MoD seem to realise that keeping a rifle perfectly clean when in a muddy trench for extended periods of time when it is pissing it down with rain drops the size of hamsters heads isn't exactly practical, the rifle 556 is hardly of kalashnikov quality. Back to the other hand, the various sights for the rifle are all durable and of high quality (I have never heard of a SUSAT getting broken), maybe those chaps at Enfield were making a target rifle after all? In my opinion, although the SA-80 is not as bad as some make it out to be, it is in Britains best interest to replace it with a real rifle asap, maybe keeping the SUSAT's and bayonets. The reason it has gone down so poorly with those who have to use it is probably due to comparing it with the previous issue SLR, whereas the SLR was a lion, the SA-80 is a cockroach (an annoying bugger which you cant get rid of). I would hate to think how our casualties might have looked if we had adopted the SA-80 before the Falklands conflict of 82."

Oh that SA-80. Cumbersome, clunky, cheap.. made with plastic parts that break.
__________________

Giancarlo is offline  
Old 02-02-2005, 02:29 AM   #52
Golden Master
 
135791's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: No
Posts: 5,427
Send a message via MSN to 135791
Default Re: war talk gian

LMAO FFS READ MY POSTS PROPERLY

i have said so many times already our goverment sucks, to save money the contract for our weopons go to the cheapest producer and thus they suck, the weopon made properly is great but they way the goverment sort it makes it suck and break, maybe if you shared the oil money we could get a better producer
__________________

135791 is offline  
Old 02-02-2005, 02:31 AM   #53
BSOD
 
Giancarlo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,788
Send a message via AIM to Giancarlo
Default Re: war talk gian

Quote:
Originally Posted by matt
LMAO FFS READ MY POSTS PROPERLY

i have said so many times already our goverment sucks, to save money the contract for our weopons go to the cheapest producer and thus they suck, the weopon made properly is great but they way the goverment sort it makes it suck and break, maybe if you shared the oil money we could get a better producer
You're a liar. You just said the SA-80 was a great weapon, and I just proved otherwise. The SA-80 if it gets wet craps out. The weapon even if made right, craps out in bad conditions.

Shared the oil money? Don't be idiotic. The oil revenues in Iraq goes to the Iraqi government (hence why the Iraq government is spending $2.2 bn for weapons this year).
Giancarlo is offline  
Old 02-02-2005, 02:34 AM   #54
Golden Master
 
135791's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: No
Posts: 5,427
Send a message via MSN to 135791
Default Re: war talk gian

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giancarlo
You're a liar. You just said the SA-80 was a great weapon, and I just proved otherwise. The SA-80 if it gets wet craps out. The weapon even if made right, craps out in bad conditions.

Shared the oil money? Don't be idiotic. The oil revenues in Iraq goes to the Iraqi government (hence why the Iraq government is spending $2.2 bn for weapons this year).
yes the SA80 is a great weopon when built properly

*cough* and we all no that the americans have a good part of the oil*
135791 is offline  
Old 02-02-2005, 02:36 AM   #55
BSOD
 
Giancarlo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,788
Send a message via AIM to Giancarlo
Default Re: war talk gian

Quote:
Originally Posted by matt
yes the SA80 is a great weopon when built properly

*cough* and we all no that the americans have a good part of the oil*
keep repeating that.. doesn't make it true. Even if it is built properly, it still craps out in bad conditions.

we all know that the americans have a good part of the oil? can you bloody f--king prove it for once? I can't stand you people who hate America so much you keep screaming about the same crap over and over again and never back it up ever.
Giancarlo is offline  
Old 02-02-2005, 02:37 AM   #56
Golden Master
 
135791's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: No
Posts: 5,427
Send a message via MSN to 135791
Default Re: war talk gian

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giancarlo
keep repeating that.. doesn't make it true. Even if it is built properly, it still craps out in bad conditions.

we all know that the americans have a good part of the oil? can you bloody f--king prove it for once? I can't stand you people who hate America so much you keep screaming about the same crap over and over again and never back it up ever.
i will back it up but later, its morning here and i have school in a min
try using a SA80 before you comment on it
135791 is offline  
Old 02-02-2005, 02:39 AM   #57
BSOD
 
Giancarlo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,788
Send a message via AIM to Giancarlo
Default Re: war talk gian

you can't back it up because no evidence exists for the claims.

Try using an SA-80.. no thanks.. I don't want to have something crap out like that. It craps out in variable weather conditions. I provided evidence, you didn't. So simply: You're wrong, i'm right.
Giancarlo is offline  
Old 02-02-2005, 02:41 AM   #58
Golden Master
 
135791's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: No
Posts: 5,427
Send a message via MSN to 135791
Default Re: war talk gian

LMAO you wish gian
back this up is very very easy but pitty i have to go now, ill be back maybe if i can get on in R.E

lmao your SA80 evidence is crap, your basing it on a cheapy version.

anyway what are you lot still using m16?
135791 is offline  
Old 02-02-2005, 02:41 AM   #59
Golden Master
 
alvino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 19,967
Send a message via AIM to alvino
Default Re: war talk gian

I like the M4A1, M60, M249 SAW and M2 Browning. All very fine pieces of weaponry.
alvino is offline  
Old 02-02-2005, 02:42 AM   #60
Golden Master
 
alvino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 19,967
Send a message via AIM to alvino
Default Re: war talk gian

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giancarlo
Yep. The SA80 was the one that jams all the time.

http://world.guns.ru/assault/as22-e.htm

"In conclusion, I cant say I know what went wrong when the SA-80 was made, the design in theory would appear to be of near kalashnikov simplicity, maybe it is all the fault of the famous British trade unions? For a modern assault rifle, the SA-80 is uncomfortable to carry (especially concerning the position of the cocking handle and its desire to slip into bruising your arm on long tabs), the rifle is too heavy for its size (it even has a weight in the forward hand guard to balance the weapon), and its reliability and general durability are sub-standard to an alarming degree. I have had the mis-pleasure of seeing people breaking off warn top covers and seeing trigger mechanism housing pins falling out near at will. On the other side of things the rifle is marvellously accurate on the range, and so long as it is kept near 100% clean and well oiled it will perform well. However everybody other than the MoD seem to realise that keeping a rifle perfectly clean when in a muddy trench for extended periods of time when it is pissing it down with rain drops the size of hamsters heads isn't exactly practical, the rifle 556 is hardly of kalashnikov quality. Back to the other hand, the various sights for the rifle are all durable and of high quality (I have never heard of a SUSAT getting broken), maybe those chaps at Enfield were making a target rifle after all? In my opinion, although the SA-80 is not as bad as some make it out to be, it is in Britains best interest to replace it with a real rifle asap, maybe keeping the SUSAT's and bayonets. The reason it has gone down so poorly with those who have to use it is probably due to comparing it with the previous issue SLR, whereas the SLR was a lion, the SA-80 is a cockroach (an annoying bugger which you cant get rid of). I would hate to think how our casualties might have looked if we had adopted the SA-80 before the Falklands conflict of 82."

Oh that SA-80. Cumbersome, clunky, cheap.. made with plastic parts that break.
Well you have to give them some credit for actually using the "Bullpup" configuration...
__________________

alvino is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0