New Small Arms For The Teams?................

hookyh

Lantern Swinger
Heard a couple of buzzes lately about the SPO (Sorry, FP Teams) getting a new primary weapon, both rumours coming from fairly senior, reliable sources. The two weapons mentioned were the Heckler & Koch MP7 (Same as the MOD Plod) and the Diemaco C7/C8 as used by SF troops.

Realising this could well be another load of old cobblers, does anyone have any 'Gen' on these snippet's of info? Can't say i've seen anything official anywhere, but if there's any truth in it, it would be very interesting in terms of how serious the mob is in using us........
 

WarMonger

War Hero
It wouldnt surprise me if they were, there has always been an issue with regard to using an SA80 below decks due to the calibre of round and potential collaterral damage of equipment etc, a nine mm round whilst larger has less velocity so may be more appropriate. However on the upper deck I would rather have the SA80 far better weapon when considering threats inboard and outboard!
 

dubaipusser

Lantern Swinger
Since one of the primary roles for GSSR (as I understand it) is FP on RFA or Charter vessels don't you need something more akin to the kit used by the Boarding Teams up in the NAG?

Most teams have a number of physical response alternatives when a rifle discharge may create additional ship safety concerns (particularly on RFA tankers for example).

These include weapons such as 9mm pistols and shotguns which do not produce a significant muzzle flash (though on a non-gas-free tanker the thought of ANY muzzle flash is too horrible to contemplate), nor do the rounds have sufficient kinetic energy to puncture a metal hold (much more relevant).

If the thinking ref your weaponry is moving to a weapon more suitable for CQB/internal use (which I am personally a bit dubious about) shouldn't someone be looking into the nature of the specific environment that you might find yourselves in (ie possible hazardous cargoes on RFA or merchant vessels)?

Just a thought.
 

mazza_magoo

Lantern Swinger
Reservist-Monkey said:
Interesting concept, but I suspect there are a lot of people further up the food chain who would get first refusal.

If this were true (and i suspect it's not) i believe that any decision of this type would be more likely to be based around the role of it's user and the selected weapons environment / suitability for use, than position on the food chain.

You having a poke at us GSSR's again RM? :lol:
 

hookyh

Lantern Swinger
Cheers for all the replies so far folks1

It's a weird one i know, but the two sources i got the info. from are not your average punter's swinging a line, otherwise i wouldn't have even contemplated puttingthis up on here.

Agree totally about the C7, but the C8 or the MP7 would be blinding if it is true. The one really big thing for me if it is gen. is that maybe, just maybe we are going to get the support we need from above at last, not just making constant demands for higher and higher levels of professionalism of us without actually giving us the kit and training to do so, as opposed to trawling through the same old tired stuff we've been doing for the last year or so.

COMMARRES note please. We're not all newbies who've only been in a couple of years.

If you want us to do the job properly we need: helmets, armour, webbing the right weaponry for the job, i.e. CQB weapons and 9mm for all, not to mention roping, boarding and CQB training, not just constant 100m range work. If you want us to be serious, let's get serious. Many of us are experienced, keen and capable, so let us do the job right. (End of rant!).

Thoughts anyone?
 

Tartan_Terrier

Badgeman
If you do get the C8, let's hope you get issued Aimpoints as well. Fantastic for quick target aquisition once you get used to having both eyes open.
 

dubaipusser

Lantern Swinger
hookyh said:
Cheers for all the replies so far folks1

If you want us to do the job properly we need: helmets, armour, webbing the right weaponry for the job, i.e. CQB weapons and 9mm for all, not to mention roping, boarding and CQB training, not just constant 100m range work. If you want us to be serious, let's get serious. Many of us are experienced, keen and capable, so let us do the job right. (End of rant!).

Thoughts anyone?

Why do you need roping, boarding and CQB training when your principal role is Force Protection to RFA and Chartered Merchant vessels?

The primary task will be to ensure that you keep unwelcome elements AWAY from the vessels not try and remove them FROM vessels - we already have CT units trained to do that.

Not wishing to pour cold water on enthusiasm but 'let's keep it in context'.
 
Top