Replacement for SAW?
-
The Ultimax series of SAW have serve SAF for a long time already. I have personally fired the SAW MK2/3 before and i am surprised at the relatively low recoil and high accuracy. The weapon itself is also relatively light for an auto weapon,it uses the same 5.56 rounds like the SAR21,the magazine can also be shared. In short it is very beneficial to us. However it came to my knowledge that the SAR21 series of weapons also include a SAW version. My question is how does this new version compare with the one alraedy in service? Thanks.
-
How does one compare when it doesn't even get a chance to get fielded?
That's right, boys and girls, It's not accepted by MINDEF yet. Let ST do their marketing but if its not good enough, it'll not take over the Ultimax SAW. -
SAR21 for the replacement of the Ultimax as the LMG would be a mistake.This was shown by what happened when the British fielded the SA80 SAW version.30 rounds/magazine to provide covering fire is not practical at all...The weapon can zap out all the rounds in like 5secs...
Perhaps they could make the already effective Ultimax 100 more efficient with the inclusion of a reflex sight or something. -
Hi Specops. I do agree with you to some extent that the British move to use the SA80 SAW variant was a bad idea, but I believe that the SA80 was an inherently flawed weapon to begin with. Even with extensive modifications, the stock SA80 performs much better today, but remains problematic and unreliable compared to other bullpup rifles.
That said, the flaw of the SA80 SAW variant was not strictly due to its 30 round magazine, since the Ultimax itself is usually used with a 30 round mag as well. Many argue that the ultimax may be used with a 100 round mag, but neglect to mention that filling these 100 round mags require heavy machinery due to the powerful springs in the drums, which makes it difficult to do out in the field.
I am not in support of the Ultimax being phased out. But then, it does have its drawbacks, with the drum issue being one of them. I admit the argument isn't straightforward tho. For one thing, one reasonable way round it is to modify the ultimax so that it can be belt-fed (easier said than done), but one has to admit there are certain advantages with a 100 round drum that a loose box with a belt of rounds won't have.
My 2 cents worth. -
I agree with the fact that the Ultimax flaw lies in it being either box fed or 100-rounds drum fed.Belt-fed weapons though can hold easily like 200 rounds,but it may be entangled with the vegetation or may get caught by fixtures when the SAW gunner is doing FIBUA.Besides,a drum mag though difficult to reload does have its advantages in the sense that I would say it is almost tangle free,and that it will take a lesser time to reload the weapon compared with using belt-fed ammunition,which seems to be more cumbersome during the reloading phase.
However,just to side-track alittle,there are C-mags for M16 right?But does the SAF use those?And if used,who will be using them?The normal riflemen or the SAW gunner who will then be armed with an M16?Although I do agree that the SAF SAW gunners usually use the standard M16 box magazine, but doesn't it defeat the purpose as the SAW gunners will zap out the entire magazine of round in a blink of an eye.
However,we must bear in mind that,in the platoon level operations,there is a GPMG support team which uses the FN MAG GMPG which fires from belts of 7.62mm ammunition.And if the GPMG is fitted with a bipod,it makes the weapon more mobile and provides more firepower due to its calibre and higher rate of fire.Thus,the need for a belt-fed SAW in the section level is removed due to the availability of the GPMG which is belt-fed to provide additional firepower.
But surely,SAF will have a small amount of most types of weapons in the world for our Spec Ops forces to operate with.If the need is there,perhaps the SAF could consider a weapon along the lines of the IDF Negev or FN M249 Minimi,both are belt-fed and combat proven. -
The Ultimax 30 rnd magazine is not compatible with the standard M16 magazine. M16 magazines has only 1 magazine catch hole where the SAW magazine has 2.usually is Ultimax magzine is compatible with M16 weapons more likely.
The SAW gunner will carry 3.0 contact rate on him for a attack.which translate to another 8 magazine in a fieldpack carried by him.
The SAW is a gd weapon in terms in low recoil and accuracy. One of the 101st Airborne guys described the guy has feather weight LMG with the accuracy of a M16 . They hammered 30 rnd magazines into the Fig 10 targets.
The need for a belt fed SAW is dependent on the type of mission profile that the soldiers are using. SOF of course need the high rate of fire due to their limited operators in each team.
Infantry and Guards units fight as part of a larger unit, so hence the mobility is more important.
Don't forget, our SAF switched to the SBO harness 10 yrs or so back, they dumped the jungle belt and the SAW gunner ammo pouches with it. -
the 30 rd magazine is used more often related more to security of the rounds than any thong else.
can somedody tell me how are you going to move silently towards the enemy? abelt shaking in that alu case will lose you your element of surprise. -
errr the ultimax is also battle proven, being used by rebels hahaha. Anyway M16 magazine cannot be used by ultimax, but ultimax can be use by m16, all we need now is a belt fed modificationOriginally posted by SpecOps87:I agree with the fact that the Ultimax flaw lies in it being either box fed or 100-rounds drum fed.Belt-fed weapons though can hold easily like 200 rounds,but it may be entangled with the vegetation or may get caught by fixtures when the SAW gunner is doing FIBUA.Besides,a drum mag though difficult to reload does have its advantages in the sense that I would say it is almost tangle free,and that it will take a lesser time to reload the weapon compared with using belt-fed ammunition,which seems to be more cumbersome during the reloading phase.
However,just to side-track alittle,there are C-mags for M16 right?But does the SAF use those?And if used,who will be using them?The normal riflemen or the SAW gunner who will then be armed with an M16?Although I do agree that the SAF SAW gunners usually use the standard M16 box magazine, but doesn't it defeat the purpose as the SAW gunners will zap out the entire magazine of round in a blink of an eye.
However,we must bear in mind that,in the platoon level operations,there is a GPMG support team which uses the FN MAG GMPG which fires from belts of 7.62mm ammunition.And if the GPMG is fitted with a bipod,it makes the weapon more mobile and provides more firepower due to its calibre and higher rate of fire.Thus,the need for a belt-fed SAW in the section level is removed due to the availability of the GPMG which is belt-fed to provide additional firepower.
But surely,SAF will have a small amount of most types of weapons in the world for our Spec Ops forces to operate with.If the need is there,perhaps the SAF could consider a weapon along the lines of the IDF Negev or FN M249 Minimi,both are belt-fed and combat proven. -
The ultimax 100 is one of the finest machine gun ever build, think it is a very wrong move to replace it , hope to see improvement on it .Originally posted by SpecOps87:I agree with the fact that the Ultimax flaw lies in it being either box fed or 100-rounds drum fed.Belt-fed weapons though can hold easily like 200 rounds,but it may be entangled with the vegetation or may get caught by fixtures when the SAW gunner is doing FIBUA.Besides,a drum mag though difficult to reload does have its advantages in the sense that I would say it is almost tangle free,and that it will take a lesser time to reload the weapon compared with using belt-fed ammunition,which seems to be more cumbersome during the reloading phase.
However,just to side-track alittle,there are C-mags for M16 right?But does the SAF use those?And if used,who will be using them?The normal riflemen or the SAW gunner who will then be armed with an M16?Although I do agree that the SAF SAW gunners usually use the standard M16 box magazine, but doesn't it defeat the purpose as the SAW gunners will zap out the entire magazine of round in a blink of an eye.
However,we must bear in mind that,in the platoon level operations,there is a GPMG support team which uses the FN MAG GMPG which fires from belts of 7.62mm ammunition.And if the GPMG is fitted with a bipod,it makes the weapon more mobile and provides more firepower due to its calibre and higher rate of fire.Thus,the need for a belt-fed SAW in the section level is removed due to the availability of the GPMG which is belt-fed to provide additional firepower.
But surely,SAF will have a small amount of most types of weapons in the world for our Spec Ops forces to operate with.If the need is there,perhaps the SAF could consider a weapon along the lines of the IDF Negev or FN M249 Minimi,both are belt-fed and combat proven.
There alway been wrong concept of ultimax 100 performance by ordinary SAF troops, as they are alway using it blanks, the problem is there is nothing wrong with the weapons, but the blanks being issues. The blanks issues cannot even support auto firing for M16 thus it will alway jam when use on Ultimax 100. This cause the negative views.
In real life, it beat the other light machine guns like FN M249 Minimi , on its weight, little or no recoil, handle with a single hand, the most acurate and have one of the longest range.
Yes some folks view that without belt feed, it is a disadvantage. But as a light machine gun that is so controllable & acurate with so little recoil, it sort of have the advantages of hitting the target with light control brusts. Thus even with a 30 round magazine, it is more effective with control burst then a belt feed 100 round belt on other machine guns. Remember it is the gun that hit the target with the less rolls that is good, not something that shoot the whole belt area target as it is harder to control. Thus it is this point that make it so endearing to the special forces. -
Never was a fan of the SAR21 ever since I first saw it. Probably will never even grow to like using it so I'll lend my support to retaining the Ultimax100 as our SAW. I only wished they let us retain our Carbines instead of forcing this lousy replacement to the BRC.
-
SAF is making a big mistake if it's going to replace the Ultimax with anything else....
As it is, defence reviewers and soldiers alike have been singing the praises of the Ultimax 100. Lightweight (the lightest SAW in the world in fact), low recoil, high accuracy...... I am really sceptical about any other SAW which can really outperform it.
Sure, its one flaw is its inability to take ammo belts.... but this makes for a really mobile assault weapon. While a 100-round drum mag can never match a 250-round ammo belt in terms of firepower, try to imagine lugging it around with an ammo belt sticking out of it. Pretty unwieldy, rite?
Bottom line... if it ain't broke, don't fix it. -
i think ammo belts can be kept in bags/containers like done by the M249Originally posted by fudgester:SAF is making a big mistake if it's going to replace the Ultimax with anything else....
As it is, defence reviewers and soldiers alike have been singing the praises of the Ultimax 100. Lightweight (the lightest SAW in the world in fact), low recoil, high accuracy...... I am really sceptical about any other SAW which can really outperform it.
Sure, its one flaw is its inability to take ammo belts.... but this makes for a really mobile assault weapon. While a 100-round drum mag can never match a 250-round ammo belt in terms of firepower, try to imagine lugging it around with an ammo belt sticking out of it. Pretty unwieldy, rite?
Bottom line... if it ain't broke, don't fix it. -
Originally posted by one-niner:... ... ...
The SAW gunner will carry 3.0 contact rate on him for a attack.which translate to another 8 magazine in a fieldpack carried by him.
... ... ...
which army you from 
-
Yeah... but I think it'll still be somewhat more cumbersome than a drum mag.Originally posted by sidestep1984:i think ammo belts can be kept in bags/containers like done by the M249
Of course.... there are two sides to the coin.... It'll also be more cumbersome to load the rounds into the drum mag in the first place. -
if really need to change, just change to the para version. it really too long for BUA.
-
The C-mag and SAW drum have the problem of jamming.
The main flaw of the Ultimax 100 is it not being able to be belt feed.
How fast can you give fire support changing your 30 round magazine in a firefight compared to belt feed.
Scrap the Ultimax 100 or modify it for belt feed or get the Minimi M249. -
*crosses fingers*...Originally posted by Temujin:The C-mag and SAW drum have the problem of jamming.
The main flaw of the Ultimax 100 is it not being able to be belt feed.
How fast can you give fire support changing your 30 round magazine in a firefight compared to belt feed.
Scrap the Ultimax 100 or modify it for belt feed or get the Minimi M249.
Dear God....
Please make the Ultimax 100 able to use belt feed.... -
I still don't understand the need for it to be belt fed.Originally posted by sidestep1984:*crosses fingers*...
Dear God....
Please make the Ultimax 100 able to use belt feed.... -
where else..the gd old SAF, the SAW gunner don't just carry 1.5 contact , IE filling up his SBO with magazines only, during OPs , he has another 8 magzine in his backpack.Thats the standard load for a SAW gunner. unless my unit extra want to be garang ask the SAW gunners to carry extra magazines.,Originally posted by Joshua1975: which army you from -
I concur, used to be 2 drum(100 rounds/drum) magazine plus the 8 magazine(8 x 30 = 240 rounds) for infantry.Originally posted by one-niner:where else..the gd old SAF, the SAW gunner don't just carry 1.5 contact , IE filling up his SBO with magazines only, during OPs , he has another 8 magzine in his backpack.Thats the standard load for a SAW gunner. unless my unit extra want to be garang ask the SAW gunners to carry extra magazines.,
The spring on the drum was a no go just like the C-Mag.
Different units have different SOP and contact rate.
HTH. -
ermm the drum are not being used anymore. the gunner has to carry 16 magzines on him ...Originally posted by Temujin:I concur, used to be 2 drum(100 rounds/drum) magazine plus the 8 magazine(8 x 30 = 240 rounds) for infantry.
The spring on the drum was a no go just like the C-Mag.
Different units have different SOP and contact rate.
HTH. -
I stress the word used to carry.Originally posted by one-niner:ermm the drum are not being used anymore. the gunner has to carry 16 magzines on him ...
That is why I mentioned about the spring on the 100 rounds drum magazine and the change to the 30 rounds SAW mag and the disuse of the drum. -
Originally posted by Temujin:
sorry ... too busy reading my coding then switch to forum..haha.....pretty funny site especially during ATEC, when my SAW gunners were lugging soo many magazines and firing...taking out from bags..hmm sometimes i really wonder deep down if really got war and the enemy sees us carrying all these magazines all over the shop, will they die laughing or what man ...
I stress the word [b]used to carry.
That is why I mentioned about the spring on the 100 rounds drum magazine and the change to the 30 rounds SAW mag and the disuse of the drum.[/b]
-
That's why we need a belt feed SAW. The magazine change for a support weapon is ridiculous.Originally posted by one-niner:sorry ... too busy reading my coding then switch to forum..haha.....pretty funny site especially during ATEC, when my SAW gunners were lugging soo many magazines and firing...taking out from bags..hmm sometimes i really wonder deep down if really got war and the enemy sees us carrying all these magazines all over the shop, will they die laughing or what man ... -
it could be due to some logistical or serious hindsight by our SAF top ppl in the past aye ? But the drum magazine was used before also right ? Just curious ..how big,heavy troublesome is the machine or tools used to feed the rnds into the drum magazine ?Originally posted by Temujin:That's why we need a belt feed SAW. The magazine change for a support weapon is ridiculous.
Everyone is going belt belt belt..one thing to consider, is using a belt fed SAW going to be lighter ? I mean the mechanisms needed for the belt fed and extraction. If the Mini and Negev weapons were belt fed as well, chances of the mechanisms of a GPMP based feeding tray and extraction system has to be in place.
Maybe the designers designed the weapon for portability and ease of use.Stripping and maintening the SAW is so simple, just removing the butt and taking out the bolt assembly
There will always be its detractors of a belt fed and magazine fed weapon always..on the bright side..the SAW with a 30 rnd magazine is light.Maybe with the new SBO, the SAW gunners might get dedicated pounhes for holding all 16 magazines on him. I don't really like the idea of sloshing ard a 100 rnd box in humid conditions, the sound of clanking rnds can be heard from afar. my unit's SOP is to lay the ammo boxes with old sandbags to reduce the clanking.