Why did SAF switch from SAR21 from M16
-
it is designed to be ambidextrous but shoot on right side only.Originally posted by ak2:Good evening guys, just wondering any left hander out there? is SAR21 user friendly for left hander?
tks guys
the built-in deflector "slope" is not 100% effective and i am not sure if the right side of the butt has kevlar plate.
So if kevlar is absent they don't let you shoot left hand.
AFAIK they want you to shoot right hand only. But not sure if there are units out there that allows left hadn shooting. -
untill now i have seen none used left hand. actually im a leftie, i used my right hand to shoot with sar21 it is quite user friendlyOriginally posted by Ponders:it is designed to be ambidextrous but shoot on right side only.
the built-in deflector "slope" is not 100% effective and i am not sure if the right side of the butt has kevlar plate.
So if kevlar is absent they don't let you shoot left hand.
AFAIK they want you to shoot right hand only. But not sure if there are units out there that allows left hadn shooting. -
Well, it can be shot by left handers since it doesn't take much training to be comfortable with shooting from the right shoulder.Originally posted by ak2:Good evening guys, just wondering any left hander out there? is SAR21 user friendly for left hander?
tks guys
But the rifle is obviously not designed to be shot from the left shoulder since the round extracts on the right side of the rifle.
Another of the rifle's design flaw. You see, in other countries where joining the army is a career and the army can select who it wants in the army, this is not a problem as you can simply reject people who have a lazy right eye.
In singapore, where you are conscripted and where the infantry is seen as a dumping ground, this design flaw is going to affect the operational effectiveness of soldiers.
Specially designed for our requirements?! 21st century design?! The rifle doesn't look very 21st century now does it?
Sigh... -
i thought they made a deflector for SAR-21?
-
Sorry, saw the SAW-Gimpy discussion and someone mentioning that the SAW is not meant for sustained firing.
If the SAW is not meant for sustained firing, then what the heck is it for?
I don't blame the SEALs for selecting the minimi version of the m249 over the our Ultimax 100. They got ONE thing right... the guy with the Squad or Section automatic weapon, BETTER have a weapon that is capable of laying down fire at a rapid but sustained rate. Hence they belt fed design of the M249 was more desireable than the 30round mag, or the 100 round drum.
I can see the point in US fighting doctrines... u want to do fire and movement, u better have fire superiority. Meaning you are laying down more lead on the enemy than they are at you. What kinda fire superiority would u have with ur 2 SAW gunners having to reload every 30-100 rounds?
2ndly, from what i understand... it is a b!tch trying to load those 100 round drums. Special tools and equipments need to be used. More equipment = more logistics, more parts failing, more things to consider. 30 round mags for a SAW just doesn't cut it. Neither does labor intensive 100 round drums.
IMO, if STK doesn't have a better solution to the SAW, it would be better off that we upgrade our SAW gunners with M249s or maybe the para version of it. -
The SAW is meant for sustained firing, but in a movement setting within a section.Originally posted by Shotgun:Sorry, saw the SAW-Gimpy discussion and someone mentioning that the SAW is not meant for sustained firing.
If the SAW is not meant for sustained firing, then what the heck is it for?
I don't blame the SEALs for selecting the minimi version of the m249 over the our Ultimax 100. They got ONE thing right... the guy with the Squad or Section automatic weapon, BETTER have a weapon that is capable of laying down fire at a rapid but sustained rate. Hence they belt fed design of the M249 was more desireable than the 30round mag, or the 100 round drum.
I can see the point in US fighting doctrines... u want to do fire and movement, u better have fire superiority. Meaning you are laying down more lead on the enemy than they are at you. What kinda fire superiority would u have with ur 2 SAW gunners having to reload every 30-100 rounds?
2ndly, from what i understand... it is a b!tch trying to load those 100 round drums. Special tools and equipments need to be used. More equipment = more logistics, more parts failing, more things to consider. 30 round mags for a SAW just doesn't cut it. Neither does labor intensive 100 round drums.
IMO, if STK doesn't have a better solution to the SAW, it would be better off that we upgrade our SAW gunners with M249s or maybe the para version of it.
The M249 can do that, and also provide makeshift cover fire for a platoon strength if used in a pair.Versatility won the day.
But our SAW is better for a FIBUA setup. -
I wonder does the latest prototype of SAR21 ratify all those bad issues like iron sight. Btw, isit all bullpup extract rounds from the right?
-
Almost all bullpup rifles extract rounds from the right - however, some bullpups like the TAR21, FAMAS and certain models of the AUG allows shooters to change the extraction port cover from one side to the other.Originally posted by equlus84:I wonder does the latest prototype of SAR21 ratify all those bad issues like iron sight. Btw, isit all bullpup extract rounds from the right?
Only the FN2000 extracts out from the front through a tube - allowing shots from both shoulders. -
Ya. I think that is very important in a conscript army. And as someone mentioned, there is only protection for your face in the event of a chamber explosion if you shoot from your right shoulder.
In addition, I wonder why our optical sights seem to be so fragile (hearsay from this forum). I have never heard of the British Army's SUSAT being so fragile. -
for a true sustained fire role, the MG is mounted on the tripod, with spare barrels beside it, and the neccessary ammo ... you see that in static defence scenarios. that is when you can "zua" an area from a click away ... I agree with your point about fire superiority, but then again, most of us are not seals, we won't be taking on an objective an 8-man seal squad would have, unless we have numbers superiority as well ... infantry tactics are somewhat different from specialized SUTs ... the only time were this may be a universal point is perhaps during retrograde movements.Originally posted by Shotgun:Sorry, saw the SAW-Gimpy discussion and someone mentioning that the SAW is not meant for sustained firing.
If the SAW is not meant for sustained firing, then what the heck is it for?
I don't blame the SEALs for selecting the minimi version of the m249 over the our Ultimax 100. They got ONE thing right... the guy with the Squad or Section automatic weapon, BETTER have a weapon that is capable of laying down fire at a rapid but sustained rate. Hence they belt fed design of the M249 was more desireable than the 30round mag, or the 100 round drum.
I can see the point in US fighting doctrines... u want to do fire and movement, u better have fire superiority. Meaning you are laying down more lead on the enemy than they are at you. What kinda fire superiority would u have with ur 2 SAW gunners having to reload every 30-100 rounds?
2ndly, from what i understand... it is a b!tch trying to load those 100 round drums. Special tools and equipments need to be used. More equipment = more logistics, more parts failing, more things to consider. 30 round mags for a SAW just doesn't cut it. Neither does labor intensive 100 round drums.
IMO, if STK doesn't have a better solution to the SAW, it would be better off that we upgrade our SAW gunners with M249s or maybe the para version of it.
Yes, I heard it's a bitch trying to load the 100 rounds drums too, though i never had to chance, the only time I've ever seen those drums was at an overseas training base, but the thing is, more equipment doesn't neccessary mean more logistics, let's think of the ammo situation again shall we ? in the old M16/SAW/M203 section, there' only one type of mag, interchangable among them, one type of ammo, linkless 5.56mm, finito ! ... let's look at the MINIMI/ M16 or SAR/M203 section, what do you need ? still one type of mag, but two different types of ammunition ! linked and linkless 5.56 ... what happens in an emergency then ? ... when you need to interchange ammo among the weapons ? you can unlink a link of course, but to make a link ? ...
of course, the MINIMI can accept stenag mags as well, some would note, but this feature is absent from the para versions, and tech specs says the rate of fire is even higher than before, cos there's no link weight to slow it down ! "burp !" damm ! it's empty again ! ... so ammo compatability is an important consideration.
One thing i really like about the saw is the weight, you can swing it around like an assault rifle with no probs at all ... an important point for the rather scrawny Singaporean trooper, anyone handled the full sized MINIMI before ? big heavy mother ... it's like handling a shortened MG, which is it ... perhaps the average US Marine can swing it around like an assault rifle ... but for the average SAF chap ? ... *lubs chin ...
fire-superiority is an important thing to have of course, but logistics and physical considerations are important as well, big sized chaps e.g. US marines can strap on 12-16 mags plus grenades galore, or wear 2 boxes of linked ammo on their vests and then some ... but we can't ... one may think at the end of 2 years one is pretty fit, that's true ... but for the average reservist uncle that makes up the bulk of our fighting men ? ... to reiterate my point about battle calculus again, the possibility of accomplishing the mission and taking an objective is not just a function of fire-superiority alone, it is easy to be sucked in by this single idea and neglect other aspects, physical considertions, logistics, etc. there is a limit on the amount of ammo chaps our size can carry, that's why we're always taught to conserve our ammo ...
I was taught that we had the saw because the M-16's firing rate is too fast to cover an area effectively, and wastes too much ammo, that's why the SAW, with it's slower cyclic rate, was introduced, and I believe most chaps would agree with me that with the gas selector set to low, a 30 (okie, more like 25 rounds ...
) mag can be quite okie, eh ? ...
that said ... I think the SAW does need an update ... but my money definitely won't be on a heavier, bulkier, linked weapon ... -
I checked out the FN2000. Wow. It really does extract from the front of the rifle!
Amazing. However, would this not add to the chance of IA? I imagine there a some kind of tube leading from the chamber at the back to the front. Surely that will get stuck either with carbon or dirt at some point?
Whatever, I think it is amazing. -
I fully agree that the new SAW should not be bulkier. But i do feel that a linked weapon, would be more effective in achieving fire superiority. The drum would have been fine IF it wasn't hard to load. The Beta-C mags would be good, IF they were reliable. So far, only the belt has proved to be more effective for sustained rate.Originally posted by Fatum:for a true sustained fire role, the MG is mounted on the tripod, with spare barrels beside it, and the neccessary ammo ... you see that in static defence scenarios. that is when you can "zua" an area from a click away ... I agree with your point about fire superiority, but then again, most of us are not seals, we won't be taking on an objective an 8-man seal squad would have, unless we have numbers superiority as well ... infantry tactics are somewhat different from specialized SUTs ... the only time were this may be a universal point is perhaps during retrograde movements.
Yes, I heard it's a bitch trying to load the 100 rounds drums too, though i never had to chance, the only time I've ever seen those drums was at an overseas training base, but the thing is, more equipment doesn't neccessary mean more logistics, let's think of the ammo situation again shall we ? in the old M16/SAW/M203 section, there' only one type of mag, interchangable among them, one type of ammo, linkless 5.56mm, finito ! ... let's look at the MINIMI/ M16 or SAR/M203 section, what do you need ? still one type of mag, but two different types of ammunition ! linked and linkless 5.56 ... what happens in an emergency then ? ... when you need to interchange ammo among the weapons ? you can unlink a link of course, but to make a link ? ... of course, the MINIMI can accept stenag mags as well, some would note, but this feature is absent from the para versions, and tech specs says the rate of fire is even higher than before, cos there's no link weight to slow it down ! "burp !" damm ! it's empty again ! ... so ammo compatability is an important consideration.
One thing i really like about the saw is the weight, you can swing it around like an assault rifle with no probs at all ... an important point for the rather scrawny Singaporean trooper, anyone handled the full sized MINIMI before ? big heavy mother ... it's like handling a shortened MG, which is it ... perhaps the average US Marine can swing it around like an assault rifle ... but for the average SAF chap ? ... *lubs chin ...
fire-superiority is an important thing to have of course, but logistics and physical considerations are important as well, big sized chaps e.g. US marines can strap on 12-16 mags plus grenades galore, or wear 2 boxes of linked ammo on their vests and then some ... but we can't ... one may think at the end of 2 years one is pretty fit, that's true ... but for the average reservist uncle that makes up the bulk of our fighting men ? ... to reiterate my point about battle calculus again, the possibility of accomplishing the mission and taking an objective is not just a function of fire-superiority alone, it is easy to be sucked in by this single idea and neglect other aspects, physical considertions, logistics, etc. there is a limit on the amount of ammo chaps our size can carry, that's why we're always taught to conserve our ammo ...
I was taught that we had the saw because the M-16's firing rate is too fast to cover an area effectively, and wastes too much ammo, that's why the SAW, with it's slower cyclic rate, was introduced, and I believe most chaps would agree with me that with the gas selector set to low, a 30 (okie, more like 25 rounds ...) mag can be quite okie, eh ? ...
that said ... I think the SAW does need an update ... but my money definitely won't be on a heavier, bulkier, linked weapon ...
The M-16 is not just too fast. It's barrel is too light for sustained fire. Rounds fired from the automatic M-16 would literally jump up!
I wouldn't say I am totally advocating the M249 or mk46. Tho the mk46 is infact the lightest of the series, just that it cant accept mags. Another reason why the m249 series isn't the ideal replacement is what u have said, too heavy n bulky, besides that, the 249 is quite an old design too.
I would feel the best SAW would be one that is -
1. Ergonomically designed, (well balanced for the user to support the weight easily.
2. Belt -fed - / Unless they can come up with a better n reliable solution to the drum or Beta-C. -> backup ability to load mags would be optional?
3. Limited weight. We won't want something that weighs 9kg. Anything under 6.5kg would be nice. Bearing in mind that if the weapon is ergonomically designed, 6.5kg won't be too bad. - I bet the proposed SAR-21/m203 combo fully loaded would almost be 6kg loaded also lor. -
i wont be surprised if STK is coming up with something.
It would be magnificent if they had a Metal Storm type SAW.