Irish Army DMR? article about re-introduction of the FN-FAL?

harmoniums

apologies if this is a dup

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/snipers-equipped-with-recordbreaking-rifle-2927099.html

the indo reported last year that the sniper/spotters rifles were being updated to an AI in 338 lapua for the sniper and the spotter was to receive an updated version of the FN-FAL

I'm interested in this FAL, is it one of the new super-accurate DSA rifles?

goldie fish

Its a FAL with a Pitacanny rail, and bipod.

Local-womanizer

There is a bit about the new rifles in Decembers An Cosantoir. The FNs are modified version of those already in stock. The stuff looks impressive!

tac foley

Want one, me.

That apart, I'd like to point out, since I have a reputation as a PITA, that Craig Harrison was NOT a Corporal when he made his outstanding shooting, but a Corporal of Horse [CoH]. This is a rank, peculiar to the Household Cavalry of the BA, that is the equivalent of Sergeant in the rest of the BA.

tac

Maoltuile

tac foley wrote: »

Want one, me.

Me too. Should be a section weapon.

tac foley

You know, of course, about the recent buy of LMT rifles in .308Win/7.62x51 for the 'designated marksman' in the BA' rifle sections?

British adopting AR-10 style sharpshooter rifle
The British Army will be receiving AR-10 style rifles to help them engage the Taliban at distances beyond the range of their 5.56mm L85 rifles. The new L129A1 will be used in a designated marksmen role. Janes reports ...

In a USD2.5 million deal the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) has contracted Law Enforcement International (LEI) to supply 440 LM7 semi-automatic rifles.

...

To be redesignated the L129A1, the gas-operated weapon carries a 20-round magazine, is 945 mm long and weighs 5 kg. It will be manufactured by Lewis Machine & Tool Company in the United States, with deliveries expected to begin in early 2010.

Features of the weapon include a single-piece upper receiver and free-floating, quick-change barrels available in 305 mm, 406 mm and 508 mm. It has four Picatinny rails with a 540 mm top rail for night vision, thermal and image intensifying optics. Stock options include fixed or retractable versions.

I got to shoot one last year and of course, I wanted one of those as well. Since all semi-auto centre-fires are banned here yUK, I'm forced to help my cousin over the way to get one this year.

tac

Maoltuile

tac foley wrote: »

You know, of course, about the recent buy of LMT rifles in .308Win/7.62x51 for the 'designated marksman' in the BA' rifle sections?

Yes, I had heard. How are BA sections in Afghanistan currently organised, does anyone know?

OS119

Maoltuile wrote: »

Yes, I had heard. How are BA sections in Afghanistan currently organised, does anyone know?

depends on the Bn and Coy, but very roughly each 8 man section is split into two four man Fire Teams, one would have 1 7.62mm DMR, 1 5.56MM Minimi, 2 5.56mm L85A2, one or possibly both of which would have a 40mm UBGL, and the other FT would have a GPMG, Minimi and two L85A2, again with one or two UBGL's.

some Bn's/Coy's don't bother with the GPMG's and replace them with a Minimi, some have taken 2 GPMG's in a section.

CO/OC's decision based on how he wants to operate as well as what the enemy is doing: if the enemy is going for long range engagements then its GPMG's and DMR's, of its up close then its Minimi's - as well as whats available...

Maoltuile

OS119 wrote: »

depends on the Bn and Coy, but very roughly each 8 man section is split into two four man Fire Teams, one would have 1 7.62mm DMR, 1 5.56MM Minimi, 2 5.56mm L85A2, one or possibly both of which would have a 40mm UBGL, and the other FT would have a GPMG, Minimi and two L85A2, again with one or two UBGL's.

some Bn's/Coy's don't bother with the GPMG's and replace them with a Minimi, some have taken 2 GPMG's in a section.

CO/OC's decision based on how he wants to operate as well as what the enemy is doing: if the enemy is going for long range engagements then its GPMG's and DMR's, of its up close then its Minimi's - as well as whats available...

Thanks for that. Seems like an awful lot of weight to be carrying, but I'm guessing that they're just copying US practice.

OS119

Maoltuile wrote: »

... I'm guessing that they're just copying US practice.

nope, we found - using the old '6 L85 and 2 LSW' - section that we were being out-gunned by irregular forces in a number of conflicts. PIRA reasonably regularly from 1991 onwards, all the way through the Balkan wars, and the non-initial stages of Iraq and Afghanistan.

in 'conventional' conflict it didn't matter as much because you mainly engaged the enemy with Artillery and airpower and just went to look at the mess as dismounted infantry, but when you get to the infantry-centric phases of conflict, the disparity between what you've got, and what the enemy has got starts to be a big issue.

Maoltuile

OS119 wrote: »

nope, we found - using the old '6 L85 and 2 LSW' - section that we were being out-gunned by irregular forces in a number of conflicts. PIRA reasonably regularly from 1991 onwards, all the way through the Balkan wars, and the non-initial stages of Iraq and Afghanistan.

in 'conventional' conflict it didn't matter as much because you mainly engaged the enemy with Artillery and airpower and just went to look at the mess as dismounted infantry, but when you get to the infantry-centric phases of conflict, the disparity between what you've got, and what the enemy has got starts to be a big issue.

Interesting, thanks. Given how the PDF eventually gets around to copying NATO practice, we'll see how this affects the standard infantry section here over the next few years.

c-90

spliting into two similarly equiped fireteams makes alot more sence as they could switch roles between fsg/manouver very easily allowing far more fluid assaults.

but that makes sence so ireland could never adopt that.:rolleyes:

Maoltuile

c-90 wrote: »

spliting into two similarly equiped fireteams makes alot more sence as they could switch roles between fsg/manouver very easily allowing far more fluid assaults.

but that makes sence so ireland could never adopt that.:rolleyes:

It's interesting.

Unfortunately, no-one currently serving can discuss the Irish SIA here to have a real debate.

tac foley

Maoltuile wrote: »

Thanks for that. Seems like an awful lot of weight to be carrying, but I'm guessing that they're just copying US practice.

Not exactly. We tend to be leaner in equipment - not so many pairs of Ray-Bans, for instance. ;=/

Surprisingly, in spite of a regular diet of nothing but fish and chips, Kit-Kats, roly-poly pudding and burnt custard, the average Tom [infantry soldier] is quite fit.

tac

tac foley

Maoltuile wrote: »

It's interesting.

Unfortunately, no-one currently serving can discuss the Irish SIA here to have a real debate.

That's pretty funny to me. We seem to be able to openly discuss the combat practices of other nations, who are engaged at this very second in open warfare, but not those of the PDF, who are not.

What do you do that the rest of us don't?

Ah, right, you can't answer that.... ;=)

tac

Maoltuile

tac foley wrote: »

That's pretty funny to me. We seem to be able to openly discuss the combat practices of other nations, who are engaged at this very second in open warfare, but not those of the PDF, who are not.

What do you do that the rest of us don't?

Ah, right, you can't answer that.... ;=)

tac

Couldn't before, really (it was usually ignored by the MA, but someone with a grudge could make a complaint and force them to take action). There's a new DF social media policy brought in last year, which has really tightened the screws though.

It's a small country!

tac foley

Ah right, apologies for bringing it up. Won't do it again.

tac