Replacement for SAW?
-
Originally posted by one-niner: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 ?
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.
Blackhawk battle enhanced m-16 mag pouch....holds 6 m-16 mags....
3 pouches...equals to 18 mags.... -
In true fact, most of the time magzine feed is more effective when you are fighting on the move.Originally posted by duajia:I still don't understand the need for it to be belt fed.
However there are time when Saw is deploy to be defensive or ambush type of mission which does not need much movement , and the mission require substain type of shooting. Belt is advantage as you don't need to stop to change magzine, also a buddy can alway link the belt to another ammo belt without u needing to stop firing. -
There are advantages and disadvantages to using both magazine feed and belts.....
I think the mother of all SAWs would be one which can accept BOTH belted and magazine feed rounds. Think about it.... the SAW gunner could use magazine feed during mobile assaults for greater mobility and switch to belted ammo while doing defence for greater firepower.
I don't suppose there are any weapons which can accept both magazines and ammo belts.... are there? -
The FN Minimi/M249 and the Korean copies of this SAW, as well as the Israeli SAW can fire from both belts and M16 type magazines.Originally posted by fudgester:There are advantages and disadvantages to using both magazine feed and belts.....
I think the mother of all SAWs would be one which can accept BOTH belted and magazine feed rounds. Think about it.... the SAW gunner could use magazine feed during mobile assaults for greater mobility and switch to belted ammo while doing defence for greater firepower.
I don't suppose there are any weapons which can accept both magazines and ammo belts.... are there?
Israeli Negev SAW with belt ammo in ammo bag
Israeli Negev SAW with M16 magazine[/url] -
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.,
who talk about 1.5 contact rate and who teach you about SAW rate 
put in backpack 
might as well put in the bunk locker. Dun use the words STANDARD unless you are very sure of it.
Unit dun always issue loader to SAW gunner or at PL level, and even so they dun really have the opportunity to used it at all as blanks cannot be fully loaded into the DRUM MAG, that is why your unit never 'REALLY' use DRUM MAG.
will be 3 X DRUM MAG and 9 X 30 RDS MAG.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.
Spring in the drum mag dun work well to due to poor maintenance simple as that.Originally posted by Temujin: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 Joshua1975:if really need to change, just change to the para version. it really too long for BUA.
-
I am glad that it is not in use as I will not argue about the spring, it's in the AAR of a foreign army about the drum magazine.
The keyword here is just the word "drum magazine".
HTH. -
We are talking about fire power in SAF in a section level.
Take a look at the norm SAF Inf. section now, if not all most of the weapon use are all home made weapon.
Key word HOME MADE and it had and has proven SAW works very well in other armies.
Those who really used it knows the accuracy that SAW has. (aim short burst) and even with suppressive fire, hitting rates is above 87%. -
Wow... ok.... I didn't know that such a SAW existed.....Originally posted by bcoy:The FN Minimi/M249 and the Korean copies of this SAW, as well as the Israeli SAW can fire from both belts and M16 type magazines.
Israeli Negev SAW with belt ammo in ammo bag
Israeli Negev SAW with M16 magazine[/url]
But comparing the other system specs (weight, length, recoil, etc), how does the Negev fare against the Ultimax? -
well...its not abt designing a new SAW...the Ultimax is the best in its class...to make it perfect...just make it able to accept belts.......
-
I have no experience using the FN Minimi/M249 or the Negev - but all SAWs using the combo belt/magazine feed are more heavy than the Ultimax 100.Originally posted by fudgester:Wow... ok.... I didn't know that such a SAW existed.....
But comparing the other system specs (weight, length, recoil, etc), how does the Negev fare against the Ultimax? -
Keep the Ultimax. Mod the SAR-21 mags and the Ultimax to fit each other. Keep the 100-rd mag. Design a pounch for the new LBV to carry the 100-rd mags.
We don't need a LMG (i.e. a belt-fed automatic weapon) for the SAW role. An automatic rifle (i.e. a magazine-fed automatic weapon) like the Ultimax is fine.
Remember, we work in closed terrain. When we do the section quick assualt, it's not going to be a 3-400m flank, it'll be 150-200m usually. 100-rds is enuf if the SAW gunner does it right.
I think the current SAW is very ideal. Why get a heavier weapon to do this? Carry more ammo instead. -
The mother of all SAWs would then be one which has all the positive aspects of the Ultimax (light weight, high accuracy, low recoil) with the ability to accept both magazines and belted ammo (just like the Negev).
Until such a weapon can be designed and manufactured, I suggest sticking to the good ol' Ultimax. -
I think the Ultimax is good for our local use..but we should a mix of para versions as well...folding stock and all...it would help for Cdos, scouts, etc. A second improvement would be to mount picatinny rails on it so that the SAW gunner has the same magnification as the rifleman, considering they all carry SAR-21 now...what do u guys think?
-
REPLACEMENT FOR THE SAW!!!!!!!ITS OUT!!!
-
guess the fact that the 100 round drums arent used is becos it needs a tool to insert ammo into the drums...so for training's sake...the normal 30 round magazine is used....btw...have u ever seen an M16 using an ultimax drum?...it looks damn one of a kind sia...just like a tommy...Originally posted by fudgester:The mother of all SAWs would then be one which has all the positive aspects of the Ultimax (light weight, high accuracy, low recoil) with the ability to accept both magazines and belted ammo (just like the Negev).
Until such a weapon can be designed and manufactured, I suggest sticking to the good ol' Ultimax. -
Uhh, sidestep, the drum would not fit an M16 - the M16's magazine housing is too deep.Originally posted by sidestep1984:guess the fact that the 100 round drums arent used is becos it needs a tool to insert ammo into the drums...so for training's sake...the normal 30 round magazine is used....btw...have u ever seen an M16 using an ultimax drum?...it looks damn one of a kind sia...just like a tommy... -
Personally, I don't see any point in going belt-fed. Sure, the Ultimax's 100-round drum needs to be loaded by machine, but then again, would you want to link 100 5.56 rounds into a belt? Besides, I managed to squeeze about 65 rounds into the drum mag before the spring became too stiff to take in any more.
On top of that, with belts, the links translate to extra weight that you have to hump through the boonies.
Overall, if there was one improvement that I would like to see on an Ultimax, it would be a rifle-style handgrip instead of the front pistol grip - the pistol grip makes it a bugger to control, especially while firing and charging. -
hehe...okok..sori i guess....it just looks the same i guess..my wrong...maybe its a diff drum.....Originally posted by Gedanken:Uhh, sidestep, the drum would not fit an M16 - the M16's magazine housing is too deep. -
Well, being belt-fed is an advantage when you're doing defence. While that may translate to an overall heavier weapon, you're not going to do much moving anyway when you're doing defence, reinforcement drill notwithstanding.Originally posted by Gedanken:Personally, I don't see any point in going belt-fed. Sure, the Ultimax's 100-round drum needs to be loaded by machine, but then again, would you want to link 100 5.56 rounds into a belt? Besides, I managed to squeeze about 65 rounds into the drum mag before the spring became too stiff to take in any more.
On top of that, with belts, the links translate to extra weight that you have to hump through the boonies.
Overall, if there was one improvement that I would like to see on an Ultimax, it would be a rifle-style handgrip instead of the front pistol grip - the pistol grip makes it a bugger to control, especially while firing and charging.
Unless, of course, your objective is being overrun and you need to make a break for it.
That's why I suggested that the mother of all SAWs would be one which can incorporate the advantages of the Ultimax with the dual-feed capability of the Negev. -
Certainly there is the need for such a weapon, but that weapon is the GPMG instead of the SAW. The entire idea of the SAW is something that is a lot more mobile (read lighter) than a GPMG, but that can maintain a higher rate of fire than a rifle.Originally posted by fudgester:Well, being belt-fed is an advantage when you're doing defence. While that may translate to an overall heavier weapon, you're not going to do much moving anyway when you're doing defence, reinforcement drill notwithstanding.
Unless, of course, your objective is being overrun and you need to make a break for it.
That's why I suggested that the mother of all SAWs would be one which can incorporate the advantages of the Ultimax with the dual-feed capability of the Negev. -
dbl post sorry
-
hmm ...some times it just boils down to the dictum .."Less is more"
question, what was the original idea of developing a weapon that could deliver a higher rate of fire than a ordinary M16, AK-47 rifle ? it should be light, easy to use, deliver the supposed rate of fire it has to and gets the job done.
It might be overkill to incooperate the belt fed feature and the magazine feature..
Sometimes i wish designers could just return to the drawing board and just sit down and think what they wish for a weapon that could complement the sections firepower and such...Forms follow function.
lastly..this is my personal thought, u can flame me only ON this point, i don't really fancy all the picatinny rail sights...with extra LAD, torch light, forward grip etc... bigger optical scope. i see those american troops attach soo much stuff on their weapons, reminds me of ATEC where u have to fit the MILES laser module along with the LAD and all that..rather clumsy right ?
okay ...i still like the SAW with its 30 rnd Magazine. =) light effective and deadly ...
Oh yeah ..Happy Chinese Lunar New Yr !! hope u guys are having fun in singapore .. i am shivering in the winter in summer weather Down Under !! .!!! -
Why need a picatinny rail when the SAW is for use for supression fire at auto?
Really waste of money to put a optical sight on it.
Some suggestion I believe is quite good, modified it to to be belt feed as well as well as able to use SAR-21 magazine.
Change the current butt to a foldable butt so during close quarter and moving in thick jungle , it will be less likely to be entangled with the vegetation.
But one thing I want to ask is, anyone here actually know that a SAR-21 SAW version is actually inferior to the Ultimax 100?
Becos if it not inferior, then using it will help in spare commonality and ease of training etc.
And of course it will most probably cheaper than modifiying the Ultimax100 to at least accept the SAR-21 magazine. -
The picatinny rail can be used to mount night vision optical sights . Our section NVGs cannot be mounted on any of our light arms including the SAR21? Despite some units testing helmet mounted sights, which is helpfull in the dark - but how do you prone and aim your weapon with a helmet mounted NVG sight? It would be great if optical sights can be used on the weapons as an option.Originally posted by gary1910:Why need a picatinny rail when the SAW is for use for supression fire at auto?
Really waste of money to put a optical sight on it.
Some suggestion I believe is quite good, modified it to to be belt feed as well as well as able to use SAR-21 magazine.
Change the current butt to a foldable butt so during close quarter and moving in thick jungle , it will be less likely to be entangled with the vegetation.
But one thing I want to ask is, anyone here actually know that a SAR-21 SAW version is actually inferior to the Ultimax 100?
Becos if it not inferior, then using it will help in spare commonality and ease of training etc.
And of course it will most probably cheaper than modifiying the Ultimax100 to at least accept the SAR-21 magazine.
SAR 21 SAW may or may not be inferior - I don't know. But looking the British experience of using a magazine fed weapon for support in Iraq does raise some questions. (Yes, the SA80 series had its fair share of problems and only uses 30 round magazines) They have selected the para version of the FN Minimi as their new SAW (fires from belts and mags).
The Brit infantry section now has 2 SAWs, 2 SA80 LSW as sharpshooters(!), 2 SA80A2 with GLs, and 2 SA80A2. Currently only China would be using a bullpup SAW.
The Germans did not select the G36 SAW version (uses drum mags) - and instead are using the HK MG43 for their sections (fires from 5.56mm belts only). Our neighbours Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philipines have the FN Minimi/M249 in their sections.
As for the Ultimax 100 - maybe keep it. Come up with a new Mark 4 version - with the picatinny rails (at the very least for our foreign customers), folding butt, newer drum mags (get or copy from others), allow it to accept the same mags as the SAR21 (or other mags for foreign customers), improved bipods/fore grip, and improve the general quality of the product. Perhaps our left handers can use the Ultimax instead of the SAR21.
Happy Chinese New Year!