Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Share

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  Werewolf on Wed Apr 22, 2015 10:31 am

    What Weapons you had personally experience with especially longer periods under combat like environments or at least basic military excercises?

    List the weapons you have fired or used yourself and please share your experience with the rest of us.

    G-36

    A weapon of many things to critizes hated but also loved by quite a few.
    My experience with G-36 is that when zeroed you can hit a group of 10 cm on 300m it does performe well in that regard. I've worked for 1.5 years in logistics (Nachschub) and from experience i know the weapon holds for average of 4 years with few exceptions, the problem comes from the plastic design. As soon there is even a slight crack in the reciever the entire weapon is send back to HK and we recieve a new one. The design is that the barrel is fuzed to the reciever and there are no spare parts to change that, that is an cost issue for Bundeswehr. The Ergonomics of the weapon are to an advantage however i personally dislike the handguard because of a design flaw and from the form of the handguard which is a personal dislike. The problem with the handguard as a design flaw is the weapon overheads and it has raspiration holes on it, but in most situations or for most gunners your hands are either to big so you have to place your fingers near those raspiration/cooling holes so that you can not handle the weapon without gloves or you sacrifice controlibility by holding the weapon less stable, trying to avoid getting your fingers even near the cooling holes. That overheating of course affected the accuracy. Another problem at least as a soldier when you have to clean the weapons after excercises is that the design of the reciever is tight with very sharp plastic notches inside which lead the reciever, several times people have cut themselfs from those notches. The buttstock is very weak and the usual and common practice among soldiers to use the rifle as a ladder to be used to get over a wall or on objects the weight of even 70kg soldier without extra equipment is to much, it constantly breaks the buttstock or most of the time the locking mechanism for the folding buttstock, which slows soldiers down when helping each other over a wall and destroyes the buttstocks.
    In my service in logistics (Nachschieber) i had to clean over 1000 rifles every semester of new cadets, since those little shits were dragged out to courses and lectureships, from that i know that the rifle is a bitch to clean even compared to other designs, except what i know from comrades that had to clean Sig-550 from what they told me the G-36 is far easier to clean, meaning it is the queen bitch of weapons to clean.

    The G-36 sights are nice feature but kind of selfeleminating purpose. The Red Dot sight was invented so soldiers could acquire targets much quicker than with iron sights, but due the small size of the RDS lense you lose this advantage by trying to find the red dot, which can be countered with extense training which in Bundeswehr no one ever gets except you are already in afghanistan. The sights are very nice to have and are very useful a RDS for targets up to 200m, very accurate when zeroed and easy to hit targets even with poor trigger management and a poor stance and shoulder pressure, sometimes even encouraging to loose up the drill you had how to use a weapon correctly with trigger management, shoulder pressure and correct stance. It also has a mini magnifactor of 3 as a scope which is really nice to have for targets at 200m or beyond, the scope has a 1.7m comperision line to figure out how far away a target is the 1.7m comperision line is to aline soldiers to it and take an assumption if he is 200,400 or 600m away, kind of useful but not once it worked for me in excercises or on shooting ranges.

    P-8 (USP-9mm)

    The P-8 is one of my favorite weapons i could fire. The grip is made of plastic which makes it light weight but due the low weight of the grip the reciever and slide feel heavier than they are, making the weapon feel inbalanced but which reflects almost possitive when firing it, due the reciever weight it is faster to align back on its target. The problem i had experienced is that most people had bigger problems with brand new P-8 pistols than with older pistols, the problem here is that the new pistols have a safety switch that is really hard to unlock when using only one thumb, forcing lot of people to use both thumbs (when holding the weapon with right hand and left hand to assist for stability), this makes it to a disadvantage in close quarters. The design itself is robust and i really loved the drill with others to dissamble it and assamble it. The dissambling of the P-8 is the easiest and quickest thing 2.8 seconds, just get the slide release out (which is the part that holds the reciever and grip together) and than just jerk the parts out of the reciever.

    MG-3

    The MG-3 is a beauty and a beast, compared to other 7.62mm it has a higher recoil based on its design. The MG-3 is based on MG-42 which had a 7.92x57mm calibre with higher recoil and due this cartridge the mass breechblock (not sure how the actual english terminology is for that kind of blow backs) was optimized for that bullet, since the 7,62 NATO has less recoil it needed a Recoil razer, which is a barrel part of the rifle.
    The recoil razer jerks inside, whenever the gun is firing and the barrel moves slightly forward and the recoil razer bumps against it so the barrel itself jerks the mass breechblock violantly backwards giving it additional recoil that is needed to move the mass breechblock. After firing more than 50 rounds of it you start that numb feeling on your shoulder with later getting bruises, so it is really recommended to wear a vest when firing it. The weapon itself handles superbly up to 600-800m the grouping spreads but stay close enough to cover a 2-4 men soldiers with short bursts.

    There is a little story to tell, we had a cool OFw (Seargant) that wasn't as strict as most so we had a MG-3 in our group when we had excercise in the field with our blue plastic blank cartridges. We had the excercise to check a village for illegal weapons with locals (which others of us simulated) and they were resistant to let us sniff around. We tried to figure out where weapons could have been hidden and since our comrades were playing the locals they were jerks to us just for giggles, so both sides were getting heated up, since all of us wanted action. After a while we found out someone is locked in the little outhouse (the outhouse a little toilette wasn't part of the simulated buildings) and since our group leader was horrible at arguing with one of the locals elders and he just maneuvered himself in an unending loop of bad arguments so our MG3 gunner was bored and just run up to the outhouse and at this point i have to mention that this door kicker with the MG3, that he was stupid as 10m track across the fields (how we use to say), he only knows one problem solver being a hammer (MG3) in this case he just kicked in the door without a word and then just fired all of his 50 blank rounds into this little toilette house were a Uffz (Corporal i think) was taking a dump. He just cursed and screamed towards all of us, good thing was that it was just a Corporal.

    M-16

    I fired it at JMTC of US base. The ergonomics are very nice, nicely balanced but it was kind of flimsy even compared to our plastic G-36. Soemthing on the inside rattled when you were shaking the weapon.
    Could fire only 20 rounds only so we had not really much time to get used to it or have more time to practice with it.

    M-249.

    My favorite weapon from that day next to Sig550. The M-249 is like a puppy born to be hold in hands and wants to be petted. The design little bit to my dislike but it works and handles well, it is heavier than you might expect from a Mini MG version, it is steady and fires relative accurate, not so accurate like the MG3 what i could observe but i managed to shoot my Expert certificate of foreign weapons. But one thing i hate about americans how they handle the weapons, they drown the weapons in oil and when you than fire the weapons it is a disgusting biting smell which reminds you of oxidized metal and iron dust. Unfortunatley we were not allowed to fire the weapon from Standing position, other jerks that day pissed off the safety personal with ramob actions so they banned it.

    Glock-19

    I very much dislike this weapon till this date. It has a design that actually has something to it for with the safety right on the trigger, meaning it unlocks when you fire, the problem i had with it lika few others is that when squeezing the trigger and safety at the same time it jerks the gun from squeezing. 20 rounds and only 1 round hit the target, i would be swiss cheese if had to use this weapon for self defense.

    SiG-550

    Beauty, to fire, to handle to coz your cheek against its buttstock. A mans weapon, steel reciever and handguard felt just like it should unbreakable and nicely formed for the hand, the buttstock was very firm and felt like you can step on it to raise someone over a wall unlike plastic G-36. When firing it you feel much loader and intenser shock, very powerful for 5.56mm. I only dislike the peep hole sights, i prefer open sights like on MG's or AK's or RDS when there is that option. The design itself is very nice, not really practical with G36 but it already feels like a real weapon and you could smash an orcs skull with it unlike with the G36. It was very accurate despite my lack of practice with the sights. It has an integrated bipod that is verywell fitted in the handguard, a weapon i would choose over G-36 anyday.

    AK-47/74 of Czech arsenal.

    Not much to say to it, they were born for my hands, especially the AK-74, it feels like arms extention, the wooden handguard and stock felt just right, firm, cozy and had good grip to hold and when necessary i would feel safe enough to it in CQC even against a sword (at least i feel like it could be of good use for it Laughing ). The 47 was very nice to shoot in doubletts but you feeled the power behind the 7.62mm and you feeled like the breechblock. The 74 was lovely to controll with its muzzle break and short cartidge it was easy to control, easier than G36. I felt like i could sleep anyday with an 47 in my bed. An assault rifle i would choose anyday over any other. It is fast dissambled and assambled, few parts and you need only one single time to dissamble and assamble it to know how it works.

    Carl Gustaf M96

    The Schweden Mauser, a powerful cartridge and a damn expensive one like i had to figure out, damn 1.5-2 euro per round. I fired it at shooting range with few reservists. The rifle peforms well, but it was an older almost woren out model which sights were not steady, meaning after each shoot you had to move the horizontal allignement back, it was a version with relative modern sights on an older rifle, but the sights were old by themselfs. Powerful cartridge was surely a round you would not want to be fired at you even behind a brick wall. Not much to say there the rounds were expensive and i did not fell like buying more than 10 rounds.



    Please post your experience with list of weapons you have used or served with.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  GarryB on Wed Apr 22, 2015 3:21 pm

    I have never served, but I have quite a few firearms and have used a few others.

    Chinese Type 56S

    In other words an AKM... ideal pig and goat rifle, relatively short though heavier than most bolt action rifles it is nicely balanced with moderate recoil and is lethal enough within about 200m.

    Very simple in design, easy to clean and maintain, and accurate enough over reasonable distances.

    Chinese Type 56

    In other words an SKS, bigger, heavier than the AK, but comfortable to fire with ammo that is cheap and easy to get. Practically a longer barrel AK that is relatively simple in design, though its internal bits are more like an SLR than the AK. No mags to lose and powerful enough against medium game out to 200m or so.

    SLR

    Or should I say semi auto only FN FAL, is large weapon but doesn't really feel that much heavier than an AK. It is very long and nice to use, the fire selector is easily reached with the thumb and the cocking handle is on the left side and retracts when used so it doesn't slap back and forth during firing. Bolt hold open device is manual. Nice powerful round, and I use it against larger animals but not beyond 200m or so... not a limitation of the weapons... a limit of my confidence and eyesight.

    I also own about 8 Mosin Nagant rifles including 91/30 rifles and model 1944 carbines and 1938 carbines. They have fairly firm recoil and use a nice powerful cartridge.

    I have a semi auto Remmington 5 shot semi auto shotgun (12 gauge), and two over and under Russian double barrel shotguns. I have a Russian side by side shotgun too and a 7 shot short barrel pumpaction shotgun from the Phillipines.

    I have several bolt action and semi auto .22lr rifles and also an M4 carbine.

    I also have a rather nice old Swedish made .270 rifle made by a company that now makes lawn mowers... Smile

    I have suppressors on most of my 22s and my AK and I am in the process of getting a suppressor for my SLR and M4 and I am thinking of getting a saiga 12 gauge semi auto with a suppressor too.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Regular
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1955
    Points : 1962
    Join date : 2013-03-10
    Location : Western Hemisphere.. mostly

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  Regular on Thu Apr 23, 2015 4:15 pm

    Thanks for the thread and wonderful post, Werewolf.

    Served in few branches in Lithuanian military for some years. To be honest I couldn't recall so much detail about weapons I used.

    AK-4MT
    A terrible weapon and to be honest only one I have most experience with. Unreliable, even when properly cleaned, imagine how reliable it was after 30 km march through forests and swamps.
    Cleaning process was pain in the arse if changer didn't fix into position. Blank fire was terrible. It got stuck few times in 1 mag. We soldiers had some interesting stuff made to counter all them fricking jams, like small coin or DIY piece of metal stuck in the barrel so gas would escape with bolt.
    I found it to be too long. It wouldn't find it's use in urban battles or forests. It was basically semi auto rifle as automatic fire was unpractical. All I can say if You know how to aim then You will hit the targets You want. It seemed to be more accurate than AKM or M-16, but then again maybe it was experience.
    AKM
    All it can say I had used the ones that were older than my father. Trouble free gun, but couldn't shoot it for shit. Not that I had much practice with it.

    G36/G36KA4
    Amazing rifles, I had little experience with them as I was finishing my service when boys started to get them.
    I didn't like optics on G36 as in winter time they were fogging and to be honest never used the peep one. Fires nice, accurate and feels like sex. I only heard grenadiers complain about front end being way too heavy for them.
    G36KA4 on other hand looked like a peach without those nasty optics, but never had a chance to shoot it. Had in my hands for 2 minutes or so Smile

    M-16A2
    Few shots at the target. Don't remember anything bad or good.

    Had training with MG36, was never allowed to fire full auto. Hated the gun as it feels so outdated. And it is.
    Carried FN MAG for a while. Carried mostly, only shot to get the score to pass.
    Shot various pistols from PM to CZ75. Shot other models after I joined Gun club.
    One thing I know that I learned how to shot properly just when I left army. Smile
    But yeah, I can't recall much about weapons I used and I think I would need to be retrained even to use rifle. Maybe it's my memory

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  Werewolf on Thu Apr 23, 2015 6:42 pm

    The AK-4MT is a license or a copy build of G3?

    The thing is, i was to late in Bundeswehr to have used it, because it was already out of service and sold to warlords across africa but what older comrades said is that it was much more reliable and of course they prefered it over G36 for durability and firepower since over the last 3-4 years the Bundeswehr just like UK,US and France started complaining about bad performance of 5.56mm at the common battle ranges in Afghanistan of 250m+ where they were surprisingly often not lethal when hitting targets and were in a disadvantage against PK and AK's at such distance. Other than it is heavy i haven't heared bad things about it.

    Airbornewolf
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 338
    Points : 400
    Join date : 2014-02-05
    Location : netherlands

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  Airbornewolf on Thu Apr 23, 2015 9:04 pm

    served almost 10 years in the dutch millitary, primarily airborne.

    Diemaco C7A1.

    its an okay weapon. its not terribly heavy and its Elcan Optic makes accurate shooting an cakewalk. not bad to clean altough it got a few places in its breach that are a pain in the ass to properly clean that actually do influence the bolt closing the breach.

    like most M-16 fammily member's its got a few details that definatly will cause jamming. the magazines are "advertised" to hold 30 rounds, but try loading an fully loaded 30 round mag in your Diemaco and chances are likely it will jam in the breach. so we always use 29 in our mags, in the airborne it was an unrwitten rule to always use "contact-magazines". so two magazines double taped to eachother for quick reloads. the fact the dutch millitary uses re-usable plastic magazines both got its drawbacks and uses. problem with plastic is that it gets scratches and dents over time that might prevent it from locking right in place over time. this does not happen with the metal m-16 magazines.
    after Afghanistan all of us returned home trading with foreign troops one of our "plastic" mags against two or three steel ones. so we had mixed types of magazines.

    Diemaco/colt

    the most recent rifle of the dutch millitary, its recognisable by its desert/black tones and desert butstock. but a more accurate name for it would be "frankenstein".

    what they did with this one is taking the top of the rifle manufactured by Colt, that holds the breach and the barrel and combine that with the lower half of the magazine holder,stock and handgrip of Diemaco. does it actually work?, yes. but it needs rubbers around the weapon's pins and in the stock to make sure the parts keep aligned. because appearantly both Colt and Diemaco do not produce their weapon parts to fit cross-manufacturers.

    the reason the dutch goverment did this?. pure money. Diemaco originally is an dutch licensed weapon but it was sold to Canada and the Dutch Goverment still has an agreement for discount from Diemaco. so to safe money they took the lower half of the rifle on discount from Diemaco and the RIS barrel from Colt. resulting in an weapon that now needs rubbers to prevent freedom of movement in its parts, including lower and upper parts of the weapon. brilliant.....

    but sure, granted you dont actually lose the rubbers in cleaning the weapon in the field or they dont dry out in the desert....it shoots fine. but take out the rubbers and you get jam after jam and your bullets go everywhere.

    Minimi SMG

    not an bad weapon, it can take both belt-fed and steel m-16 magazines. its just the dutch government opted again for an cheap deal and bought sub-standard parts for the weapon. in Afghanistan the parts could not take prolonged firing and would expand to a point the bolt simply would get stuck in the breach. it took a quick deal with the Belgiums to get an freight of their bolts to Afghanistan to replace our own and the weapon worked fine for a while. but then the Barrel started to explode with some guys, again. substandard parts. the barrels could not take more than 2000 shots as later discovered by weapon specialists. developing fractures and eventually leading to failure aka blowing up. its an miracle none of the guys got harmed.

    but after all the cheapskate defects where removed it worked like an charm!. its not my favourite machinegun, but in CQB its an must-have. and with paratroop drops its an ready-to-go machinegun on landing. its a bit of a shame its range and power is limited by the 5.56 MM round. but still, i got no bad opinion of it as long its fitted with the quality parts as it should have.

    M.A.G machine gun.

    its the EU version of the M240, this weapon was in my first deployment about 40% of the time the weapon i was using. its an bitch to haul around on long marches and it seriously lacks an comfortable carrying strap. but with some spunges and army tape and you can make it comfy enough to haul around.
    its not an weapon you get up and lay down easily, but for that it makes up in firepower and range with its 7.62 rounds. i mostly used it with this flip-on scope that also was used with the Minimi machinegun. it has this gas regulator on the front where the army handbook keeps hammering on the "perfect setting" i on the other hand quickly figured out if you just set the gas handle to almost "closed" the thing's rate of fire is maximum and never jams. all you get is some more recoil but i never minded that. physically im an big guy and 100 kilo, it did not bother me.
    also, the army likes to see you exchange barrels after firing two full belts of ammo. and truthfully, in real life i never did it and i never seen anyone else do it.

    M2HB .50 Call machine gun

    THIS is my favourite weapon!. i primarily used it fitted to the tower of an Patria APC in Afghanistan. you have to use brute force operating it but the pleasure you get out of it is just any guys wet dream. this weapon has no ilnesses or diseases and for good reason its around for like 70 years now with no replacement for it. if this weapon jams then you either are a serious moron or the weapon got damaged by enemy weapons fire. otherwise this thing keeps going. 2 kilometer range and when ancored down to an armoured vehicle's firing turret it shoots scary accurate. not to mention the damage this thing does to vehicles and human beings. and the sound of ejecting shells bouncing off the vehicles armour and seeing tracers and rounds plowing trough targets is something i never forget. usually you have 100 round belts for this weapon, but it took a couple of 40 MM AGL ammo boxes to the repair guys and they welded it together so i could combine 3x 100 round .50 belts so i didnt need to reload after 100 rounds and had 300 to go in case of contact. it was love on first sight when i was send to the weapons school for training on this weapon and i grew out to be the unappointed "specialist" in this weapon of my company.

    i still got to write down some. Glock 17, FN FAL, AT-4, PZF-3, Accuracy International, SPIKE ATGM, LAW 66. but ill be back later when i got some more time to write.

    TheArmenian
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1511
    Points : 1674
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  TheArmenian on Thu Apr 23, 2015 9:18 pm

    I have used and fired many firearms in my lifetime.
    I will write my opinion about the ones I own.
    Where I am, one cannot have automatic firearms. But semis are allowed.

    SKS (Russian)
    Very nice shooting rifle. Not much recoil, but there is a bit of barrel raise at every shot (can live with it). Very reliable carbine.
    I don't use it for hunting or sharpshooting. I can hit man sized targets at 100 m easily. I have not tried at ranges beyond that.

    Tokarev SVT
    Nice rifle but I don't use it much. Powerfull cartridge but not much recoil thanks to semi-auto action and hefty weight. Nice shooting but disassembling/reassembling and cleaning is a chore tough. That's why I prefer to use the SKS.

    Los-7 Bolt action rifle (Russian)
    This is my little secret. This Izmash made civilian rifle uses the same barrel as the SV-98 sniper rifle.
    Extremely accurate. I am an average shooter and I consistently get bullseye hits at 100m without a scope. I get decent results at 300 m too. Since all of my shooting is at ranges less than that, I never bothered to put a scope on it. All my buddies offer me to buy this gun. I always say no (politely)

    Mosin Carbine
    Same 7.62 x 54 round as my SVT. But it kicks like a mule. I keep it only for its historical value.

    TOZ-99
    This Tula-made 22 caliber is my plinking gun. Very reliable and accurate for my fun shooting.

    flamming_python
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3182
    Points : 3310
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  flamming_python on Thu Apr 23, 2015 10:27 pm

    Served in the Russian Navy as a conscript, and was in the British cadets too for a few years back when I lived in Britain.

    AK-74

    Nice, robust weapon, very quick to dissassemble and re-assemble (I've seen an entire partial dissassembly in 7 seconds), straightforward to clean; can be done thoroughly in well under an hour. All the parts it dissasembles to are nice and solid - you won't be at risk of losing any small details or anything like that. The only thing is getting the cleaning kit out from the slot in the butt of the weapon. If you don't do it right, your finger will get trapped by the lid.
    The weapon is more than accurate enough; you would have to train long and hard at shooting before being in a position to complain about the AK-74s 'lack of accuracy' - namely when you're the type of shooter can consistently pull off nice groups at +300m w/o sights; then you'll have the right to complain. Otherwise; it's just your own bent hands, lungs and eyes that are responsible.
    The butt is solid. Would do nice damage if you trounced someone with it.
    Everything is quite nice and ergonomic about it; whether holding it into your shoulder, or by the handguard, having it on a strap at your back, reloading the magazine, switching firing mode, etc... there's no operation that puts your limbs into an uncomfortable position, no parts that sticks out uncomfortably into you, and nothing that requires too much force to do. It's not heavy for an assault rifle either.
    Adjusting the rear sight vertically on the weapon is straight-forward; the default setting is П - which is equivalent to about 300-400m or so; you'll rarely need to change that as it's the best all-round range for combat but if you do, there are settings from 100-1000m. Adjusting the sight horizontaly requires a tool, can only be done on the front sight and in any case you wouldn't want to play around with it unless you have special equipment for zeroing the weapon and know what you're doing.
    The weapon is not at all bulky, nothing shakes when carried about, and reasonably light as I mentioned already. When using the strap and carrying your weapon on the back of your shoulder - it's a good idea to leave some slack in the strap. This enables a nice little manuever - where you use your right hand (the right shoulder being where the strap is) to grab the butt of the weapon and snatch it forward; with your left hand catching the grip as it flies up. It's almost silent and you'll be ready to fire in 1 second, if you practise it a little.
    The standard AK-74s can't take sights, albeit a variant of it has latches on the side for sight-attachment - but that we didn't have those variants; just the standard ones.

    The best feature about it IMO - is its 3-in-1 combination of a dust-cover, fire-selector and safety catch - all in one lever. Genius design idea, really.
    The worst - well nothing really, but I do say that on balance, I slightly prefer a bullpup configuration to the classic one.

    RPK-74

    Never got the chance to fire it; but I did get the chance to examine it on more than one occassion.
    It's a lot like the AK-74; with a few things that visually differentiate it - the barrel is somewhat longer, and it has a bipod-mount. The magazine fitted to it is not always a curved, extra-capacity one so don't rely on that hallmark when trying to pick out an RPK from an AK at a glance. Matter of fact; the RPK we had in our armory didn't come with any of the extra-capacity magazines at all.
    Nevertheless though it's more than readily distinguishable just by the barrel and bipod.
    Closer inspection will reveal the iron sight to differ from the AK-74s sight. As a matter of fact; it's more sophisticated. Whereas the AK-74 rear sight is adjustable only on the vertical plane - the RPKs sight is adjustable on both the vertical and horizontal plane; which can be used to account for windage, handy for long-range machine-gunning I'd imagine.
    The longer barrel confers onto the weapon a slightly higher muzzle velocity, and I would assume that it's slightly more accurate than the AK-74 at longer ranges too. Don't know if there's a sight for the weapon though.
    Its louder when firing than the AK-74 is, and the noise is nice and distinct too; quite a mean ripping noise actually.
    The RPK is not appreciably more heavy than the AK-74, despite its longer barrel and bipod. At least, I didn't really feel a difference.
    However, while it's not significantly heavier - it is noticeably more bulky. I wouldn't think that it would be possible to whip it out as quickly as with the AK by grabbing it by the butt when holstered over your shoulder; or bring it up to bear even from a shouldered position or when cradled in your arms with the strap over your neck. The longer barrel will make it more cumbersome in tighter quarters too. Another thing is that the bipod has a predispondancy to lower down when you level the weapon - sometimes that might be welcome, sometimes not, especially as it makes noise.
    So yes, while it looks a lot like an AK-74, it doesn't handle in exactly the same way - it's support role of a squad machine-gun is evident.

    Best feature - the firing noise and the nice little iron sight
    Worst feature - the bipod slipping down, albeit that could be argued to be a valuable feature too

    SA-80

    I only got to handle the cadet version (the L98A2) - which is like the full version except that it's semi-automatic only; the gas recoil mechanism is disabled and one has to cock the rifle manually before every shot. In connection with that, the cocking handle is enlarged and has a plastic cover over it, for ease of use (you'll be using it a lot).
    Other than that it's much like the real McCoy.
    The rifle is not difficult to dissasemble, like the AK-74 it doesn't really have any parts that will easily get lost. However it is a little more time-consuming, pressing in some of the screws can get a little uncomfortable over time. Cleaning it was fun; primarily because it has a rope-rod pulley thing to clean the barrel; liked it better than the straight rod used with the AK-74.
    Don't really remember the sights.
    It has a reputation as an accurate weapon although I never fired at large enough distances to be able to tell the difference, and even if I had - my shooting skills are nothing amazing.
    It's an ergonomic enough weapon; but there are more outlying bits and bobs that are more liable to get caught on something than with the AK series; and indeed I do recall that that the SA-80 got caught on my webbing on a couple of occassions. I don't remember its weight, but it's a little more bulky in general compared to the AK; if I had it on a strap than I can't imagine swinging it with as much finesse or speed as is possible with the AK.
    The SA-80 has a carrying handle and it fulfills its role well - the trouble is that when it comes to the AK; you don't even consider something like that as neccessery; it's just so easy and natural to grip the AK-74 by its handguard.. but you can't say the same for the SA-80 and the weapon is not balanced for it, so a carrying handle seems like a neccessity.
    The damn weapon jams all the time. All the bloody time. Albeit it's worse in the cadet version I'm sure, because of the manual cocking - but I heard of reliability problems with the fully-auto SA-80s too; more so for the older L85A1 version. I know it's a cliche - but my AK-74 never even jammed once. I don't remember a thing about the stoppage drills for the AK-74 because I never had to practise them. 10 years after I last used the SA-80 though, I still remember the basics of the stoppage drills for the weapon.
    The weapon has a dust-cover which has to be manually put on after using the weapon, failure to do so means it could get clogged up. Used to always forget to do that. With the AK-74 it's impossible to forget, as the dust-cover is also the safety-catch.
    The bullpup design means that it's easy to take out a magazine and slot one in using only one hand, while the other hand is on the trigger and holding the rifle in place against your shoulder. Replacing a magazine really requires the action of both hands on the AK-74; I suppose it can done with one but it will be pretty cumbersome and slow.

    Best feature - the bullpup design and the release catch at the back which makes the action spring forward with a satisfying recoil.
    Worst feature - the jamming.

    Bayonet-knife

    Not a firearm, but often you won't be issued bullets, won't be issued a firearm, or will be issued live bullets but your primary mag slotted into your weapon will be full of blank rounds.
    In which case, you may have to rely on your bayonet.
    The bayonet-knife fits snuggly on over the muzzle break-compensator of the AK-74. It's a strong fit, the bayonet won't be going anywhere.
    As befitting its role, it has a spear point and transforms the AK-74 into a spear, but it also has a sharpened edge so it can be comfortably used as a combat knife too. It's very stabby, can be used to punch holes in food cans in no time, or brutally murder lemmings as a couple of the more sadistic a-holes in our barracks found themselves doing.
    When sheathed, the bayonet is secured into the sheath with a little leather strap that prevents its unsheathing. It can be slipped on and off silently.
    The bayonet has a hole in the middle, which can be used to slot the bayonet over the sheath; forming a sort of scissor-instrument and allowing the bayonet-knife to be used as a wire-cutter.
    Dunno if its balanced for throwing; don't have those skills and never bothered to practise at it.

    I've handled a few other guns in my time - .22 rifles and various types of shotguns; however I don't remember their models/makes, so I can't really say anything on this subject.


    Last edited by flamming_python on Fri Apr 24, 2015 12:15 am; edited 1 time in total

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  Werewolf on Thu Apr 23, 2015 10:36 pm

    Stories about jamming weapons, i can recall a few jammings with G-36 one was really a wondersome. We had one of our excercises in the field and had a scenario where we were ambushed from a little hill so we had to lay down supress fire with almost no cover and when i started firing in bursts the 3rd burst jammed.

    When i looked in the chamber there were two rounds entering and blocking each other to the chamber round. The first round wasn't ejected after firing, the case was still holded by the carrier and the second round just smashed its way inside the round chamber, deforming the case and having a bad scratch on the surface inside. I needed a damn stick to beat both the rounds out of there, they were pretty tight jammed, pretty bad situation to have such a nasty jam on your weapon in a firefight, good thing was just simulation.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9432
    Points : 9924
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  George1 on Thu Apr 23, 2015 11:03 pm

    G3A3, maybe the worst rifle for armies

    cheesfactory
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 46
    Points : 46
    Join date : 2015-01-01

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  cheesfactory on Fri Apr 24, 2015 12:33 am

    Serbian M70AB and M92. Has never failed us, whether in the Balkans or anywhere else. Highest precision is not everything, reliability already. My absolute favorite rifles during my working time.

    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1504
    Points : 1540
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  Zivo on Fri Apr 24, 2015 12:48 am

    Numerous AR-15's From cheap carbines, to high-end customs. I spent a lot of time on the Colt CAR A3 HBAR, It's a good target rifle, easy to handle, and accurate. Generally I like the AR-15, but I've handled some real POS models over the years. You get what you pay for.

    Numerous AK clones, AKM's and 74's Russian models are nice, Chinese models are nice, everything else is a shot in the dark.

    Armalite AR-30A1 In .338 lapua.

    Benelli m1014 Got a bit of range time with it. Quality shotgun, but I don't like the blowback cycling action. Despite lots of praise from numerous users, it can jam by simply holding it "wrong" due to dependence on recoil for cycling. So it's kind of challenging to shoot from awkward positions.

    Vepr-12 12-gauge semi automatic shotgun. IMO this is probably the best assault shotgun in production right now. It's rugged, well built, gas operated, and has detachable box magazines ranging from 2 to 12 round capacity and even 20 round drum mags. The Vepr-12 is my go-to home defense weapon.

    Mosin Nagant Everyone should own one. It has lots of good features, but it has one problem that stems from the readily available surplus ammo most people use... sometimes you pull the trigger, and nothing. Misfires are always fun to deal with. The Mosin Nagant's make me wish SVD's were available in the US.  cry

    Winchester model 1894. An American classic. I love the 1894. They're beautiful, rugged, and easy to shoot.


    I've shot a lot of handguns, in numerous calibers. Glocks, 1911's, revolvers new and old. The most ridiculous was the .50 Desert Eagle. Accurate, hard hitting, but absolutely horrible handling.  On top of that, the ejected brass often flies strait back and hits you in the face. Make sure to wear goggles if you ever have the opportunity to shoot one.  pwnd

    jhelb
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 418
    Points : 482
    Join date : 2015-04-04
    Location : Previously: Belarus Currently: A Small Island No One Cares About

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  jhelb on Fri Apr 24, 2015 12:49 pm

    Firearms are banned in the UK. I do not own any firearm myself,however I have used the Sig P226 9mm and Glock 17 in shooting ranges across the US.

    Sig P226 9mm: The SIG P226 is a traditional DA/SA semi-automatic pistol. It scores very high on accuracy , comfort and ergonomics. For some users the initial DA shot maybe a little too difficult to master. There is a grain of truth in this because the user will have to get used to the unparalleled hammer drop location and the DA/SA functions of the SIG plus get accustomed to the slightly heavier weight of the SIG .

    Glock 17: It is very easy to use and has a rugged design. The gun has less than 30 parts total.If one hasn't used the Glock 17 before he may find the grip angle somewhat creepy . It scores well on accuracy but is not as good as the Sig.The Glock has the same short trigger pull for each shot.

    Airbornewolf
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 338
    Points : 400
    Join date : 2014-02-05
    Location : netherlands

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  Airbornewolf on Fri Apr 24, 2015 11:16 pm

    second part of my post on this thread,

    Glock 17

    main sidearm in the dutch millitary. regular army infantry do not carry it as an sidearm. mostly officers and medics. however during Afghanistan the Army Glocks where pooled and given out as sidearm to the airborne.

    its an easy to use and maintain weapon. nothing bad i can say about it, however the uncontrolled shot incidents with these things is amazing. because it has no real safety feature a lot of people have a habit to squeeze one off while its loaded. because of this stupidity among troops...note: mostly officers it became more or less an standard drill to keep the weapon semi-loaded as its called. meaning we had the magazine placed but not chambered. even if it was just for us to feel safe among officers and MP's Wink.

    FN FAL

    it was the main assault rifle of the dutch millitary before i entered service. however during the first dutch deployment to Afghanistan it was shipped together with us.

    it was an rather big rifle, in that regard the M-16/Diemaco is much more manouvrable. but we took the FN FAL for its range, stopping power and accuracy. our company used its own budget to equip them with an 3.5 scope and turn it into our own DMR. since the dutch airborne has nothing bridging between the Diemaco and the Accuracy International.

    granted, i did not found it an easy weapon to quickly manouvre with like i do with an Diemaco or even an Minimi for that matter. but it really shoots an accurate 7.62 mm down range at 800 meters and beyond. and while technically not allowed, we stripped down the AP rounds out of our 7.62 MM machinegun ammo and filled the FAL's mag's full of them. during Overwatch missions or firing at vehicles racing down an vehicle check point you knew the rounds would not deflect off its car's front but actually would kill the driver or any other target behind light cover. the FAL was our own M-14 substitute out there.

    AT-4

    supposedly an Recoilless 84 MM anti tank rocket. altough "recoiless" is debatable. anyone that's fammiliar with this thing remembers their first black eye when first firing this AT rocket for real. including me.

    i had my fair share of misfires as well. not really a pleasant feeling knowing you pressed its primer off and it didnt ignite its engine. first keeping it downrange for a minute and then laying it down like its a piece of porselain and just GTFO and call in the bomb guys.

    but it was already quickly discovered these AT-4 CS "confined Space" where not able to defeat modern soviet/russian MBT's and at best just would piss off the crew. instead i got trained to score an mobility kill, attempt an top-down attack in urban area's or advice the group sargeant on what i could or could not do to enemy armour depending on type of vehicle to be engaged. at best i carried two of these and my Diemaco C7 A1.

    PZF-3

    this AT system got adopted in the dutch airborne around 2007, and why they didnt do it sooner to replace the AT-4 is beyond me. propably money again. the PZF-3 features an double-firing mechanism, adjustable warhead detonation and re-usable firing unit. seriously, the manufacturer gaurantees this rocket leave's the tube when the trigger is pulled and the system is absolutely asshole-proof. you remove the rubber protective cap from the firing caps, click in on an AK-47 style way your firing unit. shoulder it and click down its grip and switch down the safety and you are ready to fire. as simple as that, also. you can click on your firing and aiming unit in advance of course. the folded in grip protects the safety as well during transport.

    i got trained in both the basic firing unit and Dynarange. witch is its computer and laser assisted firing unit thats designed to even take on low-flying helicopters. but during weapon school the instructor quickly burst that dream by mentioning most tanks including T-90's has warning systems against being Lazed and we should forget about ever using that feature and instead rely on basic aiming techniques for scoring hits.

    the dutch purchased the PZF-3 IT and PZF-3 Bunkerfaust. the first containing an tandem shaped charge warhead and the bunkerfaust as its name suggest designed against fortified installations.

    im sure there are other effective good AT weapons, but the PZF-3 while being like 7 kilo to haul around and its armour penetration is a serious threat to armour and an comfort to know to its operator because of its designed fail-safes. if i had to pick one i definatly take the PZF-3 into the field.

    Spike ATGM

    this thing turned out to be an dissapointment in the field when our guys tried it out in Afghanistan. some of you might heard of it, labeled as some sort of holy grail in top-down guided AT systems.

    while designed by the isreali's this thing is seriously a piece of crap. here's why, the missile was field tested in Germany in perfect conditions, meaning an normal temperature of 20 degrees, overcast, clear visibility, single target in the field with hot engine.

    and here are the conditions where we tested it out in Afghanistan. desert, middle of the day, glaring sun. 40 degrees celsius, multiple hot rocks in the target area. target type: large shipping container.

    the missile locked the shipping container, fired and shot up to the sky but as it came down it could no longer find its target, it did actually headed to its initial shipping container target at first but because this hot rock seemed to move from the missile's sensor perspective it took the rock as the target and corrected its flight path smashing 100 meters next to the shipping container. we tried an second one, same result, as soon the missile tried to re-accuire its target it couldnt find its designated target and slammed far away of its target.

    unless the dutch army intends to use this on the arctic or in perfect weather conditions this thing is a lemon. if an tank fires its IR-smoke chances are the missile will go for the detonating canisters instead of its locked target. if i bought this system i'd sue the isreali's for selling me an piece of crap system.






    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1504
    Points : 1540
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  Zivo on Fri Apr 24, 2015 11:25 pm

    Airbornewolf wrote:

    Spike ATGM

    this thing turned out to be an dissapointment in the field when our guys tried it out in Afghanistan. some of you might heard of it, labeled as some sort of holy grail in top-down guided AT systems.

    while designed by the isreali's this thing is seriously a piece of crap. here's why, the missile was field tested in Germany in perfect conditions, meaning an normal temperature of 20 degrees, overcast, clear visibility, single target in the field with hot engine.

    and here are the conditions where we tested it out in Afghanistan. desert, middle of the day, glaring sun. 40 degrees celsius, multiple hot rocks in the target area. target type: large shipping container.

    the missile locked the shipping container, fired and shot up to the sky but as it came down it could no longer find its target, it did actually headed to its initial shipping container target at first but because this hot rock seemed to move from the missile's sensor perspective it took the rock as the target and corrected its flight path smashing 100 meters next to the shipping container. we tried an second one, same result, as soon the missile tried to re-accuire its target it couldnt find its designated target and slammed far away of its target.

    unless the dutch army intends to use this on the arctic or in perfect weather conditions this thing is a lemon. if an tank fires its IR-smoke chances are the missile will go for the detonating canisters instead of its locked target. if i bought this system i'd sue the isreali's for selling me an piece of crap system.


    Interesting. That is one of the hypothetical problems with imaging infrared seekers. Did you witness the testing firsthand?

    Airbornewolf
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 338
    Points : 400
    Join date : 2014-02-05
    Location : netherlands

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  Airbornewolf on Fri Apr 24, 2015 11:42 pm

    Zivo wrote:
    Airbornewolf wrote:

    Spike ATGM

    this thing turned out to be an dissapointment in the field when our guys tried it out in Afghanistan. some of you might heard of it, labeled as some sort of holy grail in top-down guided AT systems.

    while designed by the isreali's this thing is seriously a piece of crap. here's why, the missile was field tested in Germany in perfect conditions, meaning an normal temperature of 20 degrees, overcast, clear visibility, single target in the field with hot engine.

    and here are the conditions where we tested it out in Afghanistan. desert, middle of the day, glaring sun. 40 degrees celsius, multiple hot rocks in the target area. target type: large shipping container.

    the missile locked the shipping container, fired and shot up to the sky but as it came down it could no longer find its target, it did actually headed to its initial shipping container target at first but because this hot rock seemed to move from the missile's sensor perspective it took the rock as the target and corrected its flight path smashing 100 meters next to the shipping container. we tried an second one, same result, as soon the missile tried to re-accuire its target it couldnt find its designated target and slammed far away of its target.

    unless the dutch army intends to use this on the arctic or in perfect weather conditions this thing is a lemon. if an tank fires its IR-smoke chances are the missile will go for the detonating canisters instead of its locked target. if i bought this system i'd sue the isreali's for selling me an piece of crap system.


    Interesting. That is one of the hypothetical problems with imaging infrared seekers. Did you witness the testing firsthand?

    yes, the system has no trouble identifying the object when there is an horizon and depth of field to get an lock. but it goes haywire when it returns nose-down to earth and suddenly it does not know anymore what its target is when the ground is hot and guaranteed when there is hot clutter around like debri or rocks that emit heat. the missile also does not communicate with its launcher after firing, and pardon my sarcasm here. "because of the next-gen feature to fire it off and let the rocket find an target of opportunity" it either slams down blind or follows the hottest object in the target's area. its why us AT-guys tought this weapon would be easily mislead by fired IR-pods by tanks. definitely would not go for that enemy tank, not to mention one that's in position with an cold engine.

    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1504
    Points : 1540
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  Zivo on Sat Apr 25, 2015 12:02 am

    Airbornewolf wrote:
    Zivo wrote:



    Interesting. That is one of the hypothetical problems with imaging infrared seekers. Did you witness the testing firsthand?

    yes, the system has no trouble identifying the object when there is an horizon and depth of field to get an lock. but it goes haywire when it returns nose-down to earth and suddenly it does not know anymore what its target is when the ground is hot and guaranteed when there is hot clutter around like debri or rocks that emit heat. the missile also does not communicate with its launcher after firing, and pardon my sarcasm here. "because of the next-gen feature to fire it off and let the rocket find an target of opportunity"  it either slams down blind or follows the hottest object in the target's area. its why us AT-guys tought this weapon would be easily mislead by fired IR-pods by tanks. definitely would not go for that enemy tank, not to mention one that's in position with an cold engine.

    I'm almost horrified by that.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5390
    Points : 5639
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Apr 25, 2015 9:46 am

    Airbornewolf wrote:
    Zivo wrote:
    Airbornewolf wrote:

    Spike ATGM

    this thing turned out to be an dissapointment in the field when our guys tried it out in Afghanistan. some of you might heard of it, labeled as some sort of holy grail in top-down guided AT systems.

    while designed by the isreali's this thing is seriously a piece of crap. here's why, the missile was field tested in Germany in perfect conditions, meaning an normal temperature of 20 degrees, overcast, clear visibility, single target in the field with hot engine.

    and here are the conditions where we tested it out in Afghanistan. desert, middle of the day, glaring sun. 40 degrees celsius, multiple hot rocks in the target area. target type: large shipping container.

    the missile locked the shipping container, fired and shot up to the sky but as it came down it could no longer find its target, it did actually headed to its initial shipping container target at first but because this hot rock seemed to move from the missile's sensor perspective it took the rock as the target and corrected its flight path smashing 100 meters next to the shipping container. we tried an second one, same result, as soon the missile tried to re-accuire its target it couldnt find its designated target and slammed far away of its target.

    unless the dutch army intends to use this on the arctic or in perfect weather conditions this thing is a lemon. if an tank fires its IR-smoke chances are the missile will go for the detonating canisters instead of its locked target. if i bought this system i'd sue the isreali's for selling me an piece of crap system.


    Interesting. That is one of the hypothetical problems with imaging infrared seekers. Did you witness the testing firsthand?

    yes, the system has no trouble identifying the object when there is an horizon and depth of field to get an lock. but it goes haywire when it returns nose-down to earth and suddenly it does not know anymore what its target is when the ground is hot and guaranteed when there is hot clutter around like debri or rocks that emit heat. the missile also does not communicate with its launcher after firing, and pardon my sarcasm here. "because of the next-gen feature to fire it off and let the rocket find an target of opportunity"  it either slams down blind or follows the hottest object in the target's area. its why us AT-guys tought this weapon would be easily mislead by fired IR-pods by tanks. definitely would not go for that enemy tank, not to mention one that's in position with an cold engine.

    Thanks for sharing that information with us.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  GarryB on Sat Apr 25, 2015 2:50 pm

    Keep in mind there are IR and there is IIR.

    A thermal forward looking IR sight (FLIR) looks in the IR spectrum and is fairly simple and therefore not too expensive.

    An IIR seeker like the AIM-9X or Morfei has a thermal sight but also a small computer that contains a library of 3D images of targets... at launch the missile is given the general location of the target and when launched it starts looking for that target... when it spots IR signatures it analyses the IR shape and compares it with the 3D IR images of real world targets and determines what is a target and what is a hot rock or sun reflected in a puddle of water.

    Keep in mind that most thermal sights have problems in 40 degree heat as human targets are in that temperature range, so unlike those police helicopter videos where the person is glowing white and the rest of the ground is dark so the humans stand out... when the ground is 40 degrees you are looking for the white glowing person on the white glowing background... needle in a haystack.

    Note the Brimstone does the same as an IIR missile but uses MMW radar and MMW radar signatures of targets to find and attack targets.

    Of course for all its sophistication the Metis-M1 can do a similar job at a fraction of the cost.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    VeeTee
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 13
    Points : 18
    Join date : 2015-04-25
    Location : finland

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  VeeTee on Sat Apr 25, 2015 10:24 pm

    Not in combat, but:

    Finnish AK variants (RK-62 and RK95):
    Lots of opinions around for both of these, your basic AK-based 7.62 infantry weapon. The older ones have probably had thousands upon thousands of shots fired, still in service.
    Easy to service, easy to aim and shoot, a bit on the heavy side and could always be improved. As far as I know no other military actually uses these. I think some places might have bought small batches.
    Main difference to AKs are different rear sights and the shaping of the trigger. 95 is the improved version of the 62, which was designed with the demands of the 60s combat in mind. I wouldn't mind seeing a new rifle being introduced.

    Finnish light machine gun (KVKK):
    Has a massively bad rep for no reason. Extremely fast rate of fire, fires the same ammunition as the RKs. Slowly being replaced with PKMs. Needs more service and maintenance than a PKM, but nothing unmanageable.

    Russian-made PKM:
    If anything, a heavy but enjoyable and easy to shoot machine gun. More firepower than the KVKK. Interestingly enough, more trouble (jams, misfeeds) with these than with the KVKK. This is probably because the ones I've used were brand spanking new from some warehouse somewhere.
    Didn't really like practice rounds, the PKMs.

    Pratice rocket LAW:
    Basically a variant of M72 LAW, that fired a solid projectile rather than an explosive rocket. I can't remember if I actually hit anything, only got the opportunity to fire it once. It was a fun experience, nevertheless. Also interesting how you barely feel a thing firing one, where as the guys next to you feel and hear a massive boom. Carried a load of unshootable practice versions around, they were light and pretty harmless, but started to annoy the heck out of everyone after a few hours. I think I actually got rope burn on my neck from the strap of one after a sweaty day.

    Glock something or other FX practice pistol:
    A bit of an interesting experience, thing fired simu..nition or somesuch. I'd never had any experience with pistols before, and regulations say I have to be trained to use one before being allowed to shoot. Training consisted of 3 questions and me answering yes to all of them. "You know how to point?" "You know how to squeeze a trigger?" "You know trigger disclipine?" Didn't really go by the book, but I totally outgunned the guy who was my opponent. Very Happy

    This and your usual hand grenades, mines, explosives and whatnot.

    cheesfactory
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 46
    Points : 46
    Join date : 2015-01-01

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  cheesfactory on Sun Apr 26, 2015 12:23 am

    Zolja M-80:  Light and effectively weapon for offensiv/defensiv action against infantry and cars. Was realy popular in my unit, readily accessible for use in ambush. I have six pieces fired in under a minute. Very old simple system, but accurately up to ca 120m. Never forget a tree (ca 40cm) hit on ca 100m.

    Osa M-79:  I use M-79 two time in action. I can only tell good. Two perfect hits on a fortifided trenche, verry powerfull and effectiv, ca 300m. And once a failed shoot on a T-55, ca 300m. Too nervous because the tank was moving fast in my direction. In training accurately up to 450m.

    Praga M53: A bad ass fighting machine against infantry, armed cars, fotifided trenches, houses etc. Huge fire-power in montain and forrest area and amazing accurat, when you have a good gunner. Unfortunately very weak armor...


    Last edited by cheesfactory on Sun Apr 26, 2015 1:52 am; edited 1 time in total

    VladimirSahin
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 359
    Points : 379
    Join date : 2013-11-29
    Age : 25
    Location : Some redneck state in the US.

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  VladimirSahin on Sun Apr 26, 2015 1:07 am

    AK-74M- 400 meters accurate hits, Great feeling when shooting.
    GP-25 200-250 meters okeyish hits
    RPG-16-I forgot distance but I know i hit first time and 2nd was miss.
    PKM-200 meters
    SVD
    AKS-74U spray randomly into range so I don't know how I did.
    PMM makarov
    KPVT-A few shots into hill during new years celebration, In the BRDM it looks cool through the optical sight seeing the big impacts.

    And about it from memory... I was assigned to weapons training for a while so I got to shoot alot in Pskov. Memory fades away I have a huge nostalgic feeling for my old unit.I'm sure got ex soldiers on here who feel the same...




    cheesfactory
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 46
    Points : 46
    Join date : 2015-01-01

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  cheesfactory on Tue Apr 28, 2015 10:14 pm

    VladimirSahin wrote:
    GP-25 200-250 meters okeyish hits

    And about it from memory... I was assigned to weapons training for a while so I got to shoot alot in Pskov. Memory fades away I have a huge nostalgic feeling for my old unit.I'm sure got ex soldiers on here who feel the same...


    Very nice experiences VladimirSahin.

    Something like the GP-25 i have very missed. We had very often use various rifle grenades, really very powerfull effect, but very cumbersome. Were you satisfied with the GP-25? Easy to handle? Fast use?

    And yes, the nostagic feeling for the people with whom you have gone through this times is still very large. I think thats normal, in my opinion.
    You can write me pm, if it does not fit in the thread.

    VladimirSahin
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 359
    Points : 379
    Join date : 2013-11-29
    Age : 25
    Location : Some redneck state in the US.

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  VladimirSahin on Wed Apr 29, 2015 11:47 pm

    cheesfactory wrote:
    VladimirSahin wrote:
    GP-25 200-250 meters okeyish hits

    And about it from memory... I was assigned to weapons training for a while so I got to shoot alot in Pskov. Memory fades away I have a huge nostalgic feeling for my old unit.I'm sure got ex soldiers on here who feel the same...


    Very nice experiences VladimirSahin.

    Something like the GP-25 i have very missed. We had very often use various rifle grenades, really very powerfull effect, but very cumbersome. Were you satisfied with the GP-25? Easy to handle? Fast use?  

    And yes, the nostagic feeling for the people with whom you have gone through this times is still very large. I think thats normal, in my opinion.
    You can write me pm, if it does not fit in the thread.

    GP-25 was nice and our training ground was long, I would shoot it by getting a feel for where it would land and it was pretty good. And sure lets PM you send me it and lets talk about our service.

    d_taddei2
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 736
    Points : 896
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    reply

    Post  d_taddei2 on Thu Apr 30, 2015 5:14 am

    Being ex British Army, and i travel the world firing various weapons heres a quick list of some of the weapons ive fired.

    SA-80 - a piece of crap, in desert conditions stoppages every 20-30 rounds, although ive been told this was fixed with the SA-80A2 however some friends who are still in have said it has only improved slightly.

    LSW- (same as above)

    9mm Browning HP- nothing special basic 9mm pistol easy to operate and strip although its unable to penetrate a wet army blanket from 20m

    GPMG- good reliable MMG

    other weapons ive fired

    M-79 grenade launcher pretty accurate and no recoil was so ever. (fired in Cambodia with Cambodian army)

    RPG-2 this was disasterous nobody should use these as the charges are all knackered now. (fired in Cambodia with Cambodian army)

    PKM - not much different to GPMG good reliable weapon. (fired in Cambodia with Cambodian army)

    AKM- not the most accurate assault rifle but reliable these can take some serious abuse, the IRA use to bury these in mud/bogs and in rivers and pull them out after months and fire them and sometimes without even cleaning them or sometimes they just gave them a pull through. (fired in Cambodia with Cambodian army)

    M4- accurate, relaible, pretty boring to fire. (fired in Ukraine)

    AK-74 - accurate, reliable, and not much recoil good weapon. (fired in Ukraine)

    Mosin Nagant carbine- fun to fire, a bit of kick to it. (fired in Ukraine)

    SVD- reliable with a powerful kick you wouldnt want to fire this without it being in the shoulder properly. (fired in Ukraine)

    Makarov- small pistol good for concealment, fairly accurate, did have a few stoppages. (Poland and Moldova)

    Tokarev TT- ive fired a few of these and even got the honor of firing one that was used in the liberation of Berlin**, reliable pistol easy to strip and fairly accurate. (fired in Poland and Moldova**)

    Glock-17 - accurate and reliable, this is a great pistol and would be happy use this again, ive also used this with the following attachments Stock, front pistol grip, and with a 20 round mag**. (fired in Poland, Latvia in soviet bunker, Moldova**)

    Fort-12 - Ukrainian 9mm pistol nothing special (fired in Ukraine)

    Uzi- fairly accurate and fairly reliable. (fired in Latvia in soviet bunker)

    M60 MMG- pretty much the same as a GPMG nothing special (fired in Vietnam)

    M30 browning MMG- as far as MMG go in terms of accuracy this isnt that great, the pistol grip and trigger isn't in a good position and lacks control due to this. (fired in Vietnam)

    ive also fired various pump action shotguns and including automatic magazine fed and various civilian rifles like Marlin, and a .38 revlover but cant remember the make/model. Ive got pics if required.




    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  GarryB on Thu Apr 30, 2015 12:12 pm

    Didn't you fire an RPG-7 too?


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Sponsored content

    Re: Your experience with fire arms in military or shooting ranges

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 4:59 pm


      Current date/time is Tue Dec 06, 2016 4:59 pm