Jump to content


Photo

Multicam For The Royal Marines


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,702 posts

Posted 29 June 2020 - 0404 AM

https://www.navalnew...nd-new-uniform/
  • 0

#2 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 58,923 posts

Posted 29 June 2020 - 0407 AM

I like the return to the historical insignia. It always looked smart.

 

Considering 2 year ago the Chancellor was briefing to have them all but disbanded, this is all deeply welcome.


Edited by Stuart Galbraith, 29 June 2020 - 0407 AM.

  • 0

#3 Ssnake

Ssnake

    Virtual Shiva Beast

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 7,572 posts

Posted 29 June 2020 - 0535 AM

I think I'm developing buzzword headache again...


  • 0

#4 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 58,923 posts

Posted 29 June 2020 - 0544 AM

Im all for going back to DPM's. Although it was a somewhat embarrassing match to the deserts the British Army was fighting in since, well forever really.


  • 0

#5 Laser Shark

Laser Shark

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 219 posts

Posted 29 June 2020 - 0549 AM

Short barrel rifles, top of the line gear like Crye uniforms and Ops-Core helmets, and also not a SOF unit… Seems like your Royal Marines Commandos is going down a similar route to our KJK (Coastal Ranger Commando).
 
Lt9dq6Y.jpg
 
https://www.thefirea...9/06/24/913346/
  • 0

#6 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,319 posts

Posted 29 June 2020 - 0815 AM

SBRs are pretty pointless for anyone not using suppressors.


Edited by bojan, 29 June 2020 - 0816 AM.

  • 0

#7 Laser Shark

Laser Shark

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 219 posts

Posted 29 June 2020 - 0836 AM

Eh, they’re also a lot handier for door kickers and room clearers. Takes up less space in vehicles too (also true for bullpups).
  • 0

#8 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,319 posts

Posted 29 June 2020 - 0959 AM

People survived in the vehicles with 16+" barrels, and kicked doors and cleaned houses also. Whole ultra short 5.56mm thing is cargo culting SF, which made that sacrifice due the very specific environment they work in and need for a suppressor use w/o making weapon too bulky. Vast majority of non-SFs don't use suppressors, hence whole point is moot.


  • 0

#9 Laser Shark

Laser Shark

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 219 posts

Posted 29 June 2020 - 1114 AM

People survived in the vehicles with 16+" barrels, and kicked doors and cleaned houses also.

 
They did, but that doesn’t mean that they wouldn’t have preferred a shorter weapon (or a weapon that at least could be made shorter).
 

Whole ultra short 5.56mm thing is cargo culting SF, which made that sacrifice due the very specific environment they work in and need for a suppressor use w/o making weapon too bulky. Vast majority of non-SFs don't use suppressors, hence whole point is moot.

 

Look, all I was saying was that SBRs (with or without suppressors) are preferred by the people who expect to be clearing a lot of rooms. Now KJK do use suppressors (not in this image), and VBSS is also one of their roles, so I guess it makes sense for them to have them. I agree, though, that things may have gotten overboard when the bulk of France’s HK416F order are of the 11’’ variant, and if units like the Pathfinder Platoon and Royal Marines Commandos adopt the C8 CQB variant across the board.


Edited by Laser Shark, 29 June 2020 - 1117 AM.

  • 0

#10 DB

DB

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,702 posts

Posted 30 June 2020 - 0357 AM

Paul Harrell has a recent video with a brief comparison of 20, 16 and 10.5 AR rifles. Main difference at shortish ranges seems to be fragmentation
  • 0

#11 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 12,319 posts

Posted 30 June 2020 - 0427 AM

There is also an issue, mentioned by Larry Vickers that short barrels (shorter than 14.5") and DI don't mix well with automatic fire, which is not gonna show in the civilian testing for obvious reasons.

 

To demonstrate, very abridged results of the 5.56mm tests vs 7.62x39mm and 5.45x39mm:

5.56mm SS109, 7.62x39mm M67, 5.45mm 7N6

 

500mm barrel:

- 5.56 has better barrier and personal protection penetration than 7.62x39 and 5.45

- 5.56 has better wounding ability, 50-70% / 15-25% more destroyed and damaged tissue than 7.62/5.45

 

400mm

- 5.56mm has about same same barrier and personal protection penetration than 7.62x39 and better than 5.45

- Wounding ability is about the same as 5.45mm, about 20-30% better than 7.62x39mm

 

300mm:

- 5.56mm has worse barrier and personal protection penetration than 7.62x39 and about same as 5.45
- 5.56mm has about the same wounding ability as 5.45mm and ~10% worse than 7.62x39mm

 

Single and automatic fire control (all weapons used were AKs, Yugoslavia made 7.62x39 and 5.56, and Soviet made 5.45)

- 5.56mm has 50-60% better control of automatic fire than 7.62x39mm, about 10% worse than 5.45mm

- 5.56mm has 20-30% better control of the single shot fire than 7.62x39mm, and about 5% worse than 5.45mm.

 

 

You can see a significant drop in the wounding ability with 300mm (12") barrels. Shorter than that would be even worse and was not even tested as pointless. Whole point of 5.56mm was it's high velocity and wounding ability deduced from it, and you lose it with short barrels. If you want short barrels, go with something that is less velocity dependant (7.62x39mm or an equivalent).


Edited by bojan, 30 June 2020 - 0427 AM.

  • 0